Jason Ross

Nevermind. Signed with LAD.

Scott trains at Tread (Tyler Zombro). Might also be a bit of a reason the Cubs are breaking their normal RP protocol here.

I dont know about you, but if given the choice to be told the truth of something with a common, normal name, and someone with the name Ding Dong or Sammy Sofa, I know what I'm picking. "Hello, my name is Dr. Ding Dong. We are sorry to inform you that we will have to amputate your leg..." Sounds way better than Dr. Chris.

Yeah, I've thought about this as well. As much as I don't love Rea, it does allow the Cubs options as the year goes. Horton or Brown or Birdsell could super force action there, or you could jump on a guy at the deadline.

Caissie's defense is much better than youre giving it credit for. He's got a legitimately plus arm and the athleticism isn't bad. Might he DH down the road? Sure. I don't particularly think it's imminent. But between the two, I'm choosing Caissie, myself. More on that, later. Don't want to give all of my secrets away. Regardless, while you can envision a world where both can find time, there also comes a time when we have to ask the best usage of prospects. Alcantara's best usage is likely in center. And with Busch at 1b, Happ here for at least another 2 years, PCA here for 5...you have to wonder if the best usage for an OFer in the system (with other prospects who could also work as a COF in due time, or other draft picks backfilling some spots) isn't to use combinations of "Shaw or Triantos" and "Caissie or Alcantara" to create a player that the system is more or less missing. It's also a numbers game. I love our prospects, but we shouldn't expect them all to be a thing. Moving some for more established players may create a risk of trading the guys who do become regulars but it also mitigates your risk of having your entire future hinged on players you may or may not ever establish themselves, too. There's a push and pull of it.

Yeah. These grow on me more and more.

Ive been surprised as well to see him not be mentioned more. He feels like the guy the Cubs would be more willing to move and others should likely covet. AX Phil has him as very likely to get anothet option year as well (and he's usually spot on for those valuations). Youd think someone would be super enthused with him. Ive kind of viewed the team as pretty damn high on Caissie (just based on how they've moved him) and I guess I struggle to see a future with both as definitely finding a home in a Cubs OF with PCA. But maybe I'm just missing this and they viewed both as the future. Which is probably a good thing and somewhat of a bad thing (with how the Cubs are more tight pocketed than I think remains necessary the prospect hugging is a bit of a bug and a feature).

Just before the Cubs Convention is slated to kick off, and well into Thursday night, the Chicago Cubs dropped a surprise - no, it's not an extension with Kyle Tucker or anything crazy - but a new alternate uniform designed to replace their Wrigleyville City Connect uniforms...but are they any good? I'll get this out of the way at the top - I'm not someone who thinks the Chicago Cubs need an alternate look. The Cubs are one of the more classically dressed teams to begin with, and they could easily get away with pinstripes at home and their road grays only. That said, we must understand that uniform culture currently suggests all teams have multiple looks. For as much as I think City Connect looks are mostly superfluous, the Chicago Cubs will not shy away from these opportunities to have a wider variety of merchandise available to be purchased with alternate looks. Last night, they added a new uniform to the lineup while retiring another - the Wrigleyville City Connect (worn exclusively at home and on Fridays), which will leave the rotation in 2025. The first thing that stands out with their new uniform is that it is primarily powder blue. While many may remember the 1970s powder blue and pinstripe look the team used on the road, people may not know that 1941 the Chicago Cubs became the first MLB team to use a powder blue uniform. The team has a history in the color, even if they're not always remembered for it. Nike and the Cubs will use "uniform speak" to claim that the uniform is for the cities' history with the musical genre of Blues, but truthfully, I think this uniform has more to do with the team's history in powder blue than anything. I also don't think it should be lost that the light/powder blue and red motif is akin to the city's beloved flag. The logo on the breast is also a callback to the team's past - with the logo evoking that of the Chicago Federals (also known as the Chicago Whales), who played three seasons from 1913-1916 and were Wrigley Field's original team. Sporting an old wishbone C, it does just enough to be unique and new (completed with a six-point star in the logo, also a clear nod to the Chicago city flag), but not enough that it's difficult to tell that it's a wink and a nod to the history of baseball in Chicago. So, while it can't be called a "throw" back, it's certainly veering into "faux" back territory (a fictitious throwback) Paired with the powder blue top, the cap has a distinctive white panel on the front and uses the same Cubs logo from the chest. However, the hat is more "Cubs Royal" blue than powder, giving the team a double-blue look in areas. The name on the back, as well, will be royal, while the numbers will be red. If we're thinking about uniform design across sports, I think there are some general rules that most (if not all) good sets follow; They are generally of simple design They do not chase perceived current trends They evoke the team who's wearing them (think of this as "I don't need to ask who's playing") Most of the best-dressed teams in sports follow these guidelines, regardless of their specific sports. Why do the New York Yankees, the Chicago Bears, the Pittsburgh Steelers, the Michigan Wolverines, and the Detroit Red Wings always look good? They follow those rules. Teams consistently bouncing between looks (such as the Jacksonville Jaguars) generally don't follow those rules. Most teams, recently, who have released a clunker of a set almost always fall back on a throwback to revert and fix the errors in their ways. City Connect, in particular, has difficulty falling into the third category (the Boston Red Sox in yellow feels like a crime). The good news for the Cubs? I think these hit almost every one of these guidelines. They're mostly simple and don't overcomplicate things with too much going on. They don't chase current trends; instead, they use pieces from their history, and because they're using nods to their history, they will consistently look like the Cubs, whether they're wearing these or their pinstripes at home. It's why, generally speaking, I really like this set. They have a clean look and add small wrinkles to the set as a whole. If you like anything about the Montreal Expos (and I'll admit to having a really soft spot for them), you'll probably be excited as well, as they have a bit of an "Expo" vibe. They're a fine take on a powder blue look overall, even if some of the "uniform speak" Nike puts out about them being about Blues music feels...forced. If there's something I'm less of a fan of, I wish the hat was different. The logo on the hat feels cluttered and is too reliant on letters. A rule of thumb with full words on a hat - you can't read them from afar, and they become jumbled at that point, losing their effectiveness. A simpler logo, for example, maybe the Cubs bear with the bat, would have looked better, even if it wasn't identical to the chest logo. It would, however, be more legible from far away and would have stuck to the theme of "fauxback." I also think the name on the back may be a bit hard to read, as these will be in the royal-outlined-in-white instead of sticking with red, though that might be a "wait until you see them on the field" type of thing. Again, the Cubs don't need this uniform - it's superfluous. But if the Cubs are going to introduce an alternative look, they could do far worse than this. They have been confirmed to be used for "select home homes," I assume they'll just directly replace the Wrigleyville look on Friday afternoon games. Those old City Connect uniforms felt drab - these feel bright. They should look good on a Friday afternoon under the sun. So, while I don't need this uniform, they should be fun, and most importantly, they'll still look like the Cubs. Solid B from me. What do you think of the Cubs' new alternate uniforms? Do you like them? Hate them? What would you change? Let us know in the comments below! View full article

Im a pretty big uniform dork. Ive been reading Paul Lukas' uni-watch and been a member of the Chris Creamer SportsNet long enough that it's a bit of a miracle I've managed to keep a partner. Totally agree on the City Connect hat! It was the only part of the last set I liked. Strangely enough, it's the cap this time that I *dont* like.

Yeah, the white pinstripes below are are a miss. Plain white would look much better IMO.

I think yes and no. Essentially, all of the uniforms are still designed by Nike at it's core, so I think the designers and the process are very similar. Current uniform rules are as follows: teams are allowed four uniforms + 1 city connect. So I think the designation here is important. What it allows the Cubs to do is have a fourth uniform in the rotation (home pinstripes, road gray, road blue top, home "Legendary Blues") while also adding a City Connect when 2.0 comes up. My expectation is this: the Cubs will not add a "City Connect" this year, but will add one next year and this will move to something away from "select" home games and will be more in line with the usage of the road-blues, where they will wear them more often (as I expect these will be a hit merch wise).

It's either super desperate or done with intent. Straw's $15m ain't nothing.

Toronto just acquired more IFA money...

Kevin Alcantara made his MLB debut at the very end of the 2024 season. How good do we think the Jaguar will be when he arrives again in 2025? Image courtesy of © Kyle Ross-Imagn Images We continue today looking at the Cubs' top 20 prospects (as ranked by our readers here at NSBB), with Kevin Alcantara, who comes in at No. 5 on that countdown. Before you read about him, though, don't miss our previous posts on the current state of the Cubs' farm system, with my looks at some honorable mentions, the Cubs' Top Prospects #20-16 and the Top Prospects #15-11. #20 - Pedro Ramirez, INF #19 - Luis Vazquez, INF #18 - Michael Arias, RP #17 - Alfonsin Rosario - OF #16 - Drew Gray, SP #15 - Jonathon Long, 1B #14 - Fernando Cruz, SS #13 - Derniche Valdez, SS #12 - Alexander Canario, OF #11 - Cristian Hernandez, SS #10 - Brandon Birdsell, SP #9 - Jaxon Wiggins, SP #8 - Jefferson Rojas #7 - James Triantos #6 - Cam Smith 2024 Season Recap - Kevin Alcantara, OF Kevin Alcantara, the prized return for the much beloved Anthony Rizzo, has been a part of the Cubs' organization for the better part of his career. From a personal standpoint, it feels as though he's been around much longer than he has been; acquired in the summer of 2021, he hasn't been here that long. Entering 2024, the tall, lanky outfielder was slated to see action in Tennessee but had an outside chance at making noise in Iowa if he stuck the landing, but I didn't have "get his first MLB hit" on my bingo card, either. Starting the 2024 campaign, however, Alcantara really struggled through his first 29 plate appearances, going hitless while striking out 11 times. Despite the no-good first week+, the outfielder found his footing and tore through the league after that point, hitting .298, striking out 23% of the time compared to a 9% walk rate, and posted a 142 wRC+ through a tough Southern League. It was great to see the K% remain low - Alcantara is a tall drink of water, and pitchers can sometimes use those long levers to their advantage. Alcantara's time in Tennessee would end in early August, as he was promoted to Triple-A Iowa on August 6th. It didn't take long for him to make himself at home, hitting a home run in only his second game. There were a lot of positives for "The Jaguar" in Iowa, hitting a robust .292, to go along with a 123 wRC+, an ISO approaching .200, and walking 11/5% of the time. If there was a knock (and there was a knock), the K% was elevated, inching ever so close to the 30% threshold. The K% reminds us that he's not a finished product and that progress must be made. The good news is that it's a smaller sample size for a 22-year-old making their debut at Iowa - so while it's notable, it's not something to worry about - more or less, just something he'll need to polish moving forward. Regardless, it ended up with him getting a call to the majors for the last week of the season and even getting his first MLB hit. 2025 Season Outlook and Scouting Report: ETA - Summer 2025 Kevin Alcantara is very close to making himself a mainstay at the MLB level. Entering the 2025 season, Alcantara will just be a few months shy of celebrating his 23rd rotation around the sun - meaning he's still very much on the young side of things. He's all but assured to make his season's start in Iowa with the Triple-A Iowa Cubs as he looks to refine some of his bat-to-ball skills and work towards alleviating some of the strikeouts. If he can do that, Kevin will be among those considered this summer for a return to Chicago if an injury happens to an outfielder, being in the conversation with Owen Caissie, another top-5 Cub prospect. Who will be called upon may be a question of "who got hurt?" with Caissie being more likely if Michael Busch or Kyle Tucker were to suffer from an injury, but Alcantara being the chosen one if PCA went down, for example. Where things get a little messy is that there's still plenty of offseason to go, and Kevin Alcantara isn't guaranteed to remain with the Cubs. The 6'6" Alcantara is blocked at his (current) primary position of center field, with Pete Crow-Armstrong the de facto starter, and it looks like he might be a very good regular. While Alcantara's bat and glove would easily play in right field as well, he's a bit of a unicorn considering there just are not a lot of 6'6" outfielders who can hold their own in center field as opposed to being relegated to a corner, which gives him a unique upside. While the Cubs' trade rumors have all but dried up, it doesn't mean they aren't or can't be working on something in the background. At some point, there may need to be an internal conversation about "Caissie or Alcantara?" as the team debates how to infuse more talent into the MLB side. It may not happen in the offseason, but he would remain a hot name come July at the trade deadline. Overall, the outfielder looks like an MLB power-hitting outfielder capable of playing center field for the interim and shifting to RF later. To unlock everything, Alcantara must learn how not to be beat up and in with heat and continue to refine his approach. If he can make those final tweaks to his game, whether in Chicago or elsewhere, there would be a real all-star upside in the total package: Kevin Alcantara. What do you think of Kevin Alcantara? Do you think he will remain with the Cubs or be traded to another team? Do you think he has an all-star upside? Let us know in the comments below! View full article

It's going to be Ohtani 2.0 for Toronto.

Just on the discussion of age/ranking as well, I kind of want to highlight two players on the BP rankings and where/why I think there's a bias towards younger players with less data. The two players I've selected are fairly similar - they were drafted in the same range, both came directly from the college ranks, and even have some of the same questions/flaws within their scouting. Below, I'll look specifically at their offensive output, but I'll add context too. Player A - drafted in 2023 High-A: 197 wRC+ Double-A : 120 wRC+ Double-A: 142 wRC+ Triple-A: 146 wRC+ Player B - drafted in 2024 Low-A: 219 wRC+ High-A: 160 wRC+ Double-A: 122 wRC+ Now, looking at the two players, Player A hit better at High-A and basically the same in his first cup of coffee in Double-A. Player B does have eyepopping numbers in Low-A, but Player A outhit him at a better level so we can assume he'd have done similar or better. Both have some similar question marks about defense - so this is not a case where one of these is a glove-maestro and the other is a butcher. But BP, when ranking prospects, placed Player B a bit higher than Player A. It's enough spots that it's pretty pedantic, and I think arguing over a handful of slots is silliness, but I think this also highlights the bias towards lack of data. And yes, there's personal preference here, and you can say some of this is projection and ceiling and etc, but that's also what I'm getting at here. If you haven't been able to guess yet this is Matt Shaw (drafted 13th overall) and Cam Smith (drafted 14th overall). BP has Smith at #20 and Shaw at #25. I think that's a pretty insignificant difference, but what exactly has Cam Smith done to be ranked higher? Nothing, really. Maybe you think his ceiling is higher, and whatever, that's a personal thing - but I think part of that is directly tied with lack of information. We have no idea how Smith will be truly attacked, if he can hit good sweepers, if his flatter than normal bat path is going to be an issue, or will need tweaked...but we hand ring more over Shaw because we have more to hand ring over (data). Shaw has a funky stance and a big leg kick. He didn't hit sweepers great at Triple-A in limited samples. But if we're being honest, Shaw did everything you would have wanted. He posted wonderful offense, made progress in limiting the chase and free-swing and I think if Cam Smith posted wRC+'s in Triple-A at the end of next season, that's like a 95% outcome for his season. I think it's important to highlight this as well - last year, BP, had Matt Shaw ranked #21. I bring this rant up to remind us that this rings true for young prospects around the board. Youth accentuates ceiling because we can dream more and fill in the data-gaps with dreams of what might come. With more data, we can dig and pick a guy apart more and more. Remember how high we had Rojas a year ago? He kind of didn't have a huge season and now many have soured. So maybe take this into account when we worry about losing a Zyhir Hope, as much as we do as we worry about losing Cam Smith. I'm guilty of it myself sometimes. We all need these reminders.

Well, to be pedantic, no one has called him a tenth round talent. I have pointed out where he was drafted (11th round) and his slot value but for reason and cause. Frist, you're right, he's not an 11th round talent either. But that doesn't change the fact that every team had ample opportunity to pick him - every team essentially passed on him at least ten times, a few a handful more than that. This include the Dodgers. No team was clawing over any other to target him as a must have. Secondly, he signed for $400,000. To put that in comparison, the Cubs fifth round selection in 2023 was Michael Carico, who signed for $400,000, which was under the slot value by a few thousand dollars. The Cubs paid him like a fifth round pick. They didn't have to float second round money or anything. In context, one year later the Cubs, in the same round (11th) selected another toolsy teenager who plays OF named Eli Lovach, He signed for $650,000, which was $250.000 more than Hope. No one, no one thought Zyhir Hope was a top-100 draft prospect in the summer of 2023 let alone a top-100 prospect in all of baseball. Between draft day and trade day, he had a whopping 43 professional PA's. That's in no way shape or form to change that outlook. He was a toolsy teenager who was a lottery ticket to hit. It's the right kind of gamble to take, but it's also a lottery ticket that almost every team buys and very, very few cash out. Did the Dodgers end up with a prospect who is seemingly pointing up? Absolutely! I think if you asked the Dodgers brain trust and they answered honestly, they'd tell you they've been very lucky that Hope is trending towards that 95% or better outcome. They'd probably say that he had tools they liked but never expected this outcome. I don't think that makes them any smarter than the Cubs who took the initial leap on him.

A bit of an "Expos" vibe. I'm cool with that.

So they're *not* the City Connect. They are an official alternate. Wrigleyville *is* retired however.

I do believe this is their City Connect v2.0. Which should replace those. I need better looks but my initial reaction is...I kind of like it? Put aside I don't think the Cubs *need* alternates, they're going to be there regardless. But I think good uniforms are simple, don't look to chase trends (these are almost always dead on arrival and dated as it takes years to approve and are then outdated when they show up), and especially when it comes to "city connect" should still evoke the team who's wearing it. This feels classic-y and near the Feds/Whales stuff. It's generally Cubs' colors. If they were wearing these with the sound off, I don't think you'd have to ask who was playing. It's not garish. It's city-flag colored without feeling like it is just a flag rip off. Is it better than the home whites? No. Is it pretty decent in terms of just uniform design? Yeah...yeah it is. That's not bad at all.

Good to hear. Much closer to Tucker's number, too.