Jason Ross

The way the podcast made it seem was more along the lines that the Cubs are very open to improving any way they can. It wasn't so much as "the Cubs signed Boyd, so they're cool in the rotation" but framed much more in the sense of "The Cubs know they have to be better and while SP is a way they can improve, they're open to all avenues"

I feel like this would be a situation in which the Cubs would be willing to extend him out. The question, I think is: what kind of extension is Crochet thinking? He's 25 and has two years of arbitration. The Cubs aren't going to give him 7+, IMO. They're risk averse as is with long term deals and has a TJS on his record. So would something like a contract that takes him to...say...29 or 30(where you buy out 2025 and 2026) while adding a few years work? If Crochet is cool with that, I think they would. But I don't think they're signing him past that.

Man, that's wild. And entirely out of LF.

I mean, I think the Cubs aren't trading Shaw. Just a read on my end...I think they love Matt Shaw. But I could see "Shaw, Caissie and Triantos" turning into "Caissie, Triantos and Rojas". with an added kicker of like "Valez/Cruz" or maybe getting in a Wicks or Birdsell. Matt Shaw feels like the "start here, so I can get you down to my real ask" starting place.

If there's a positive, it tends to be that the asking price in the media (Shaw, Caissie, Triantos) tends to be the high-water negotiation price. Having ten total teams means that there's a market, but it's hard to determine how desperate each team is and how hard they're pushing. I imagine that if the starting price is there, you can maybe dicker down some. I don't think the final price will match the Levine, price. But it's good to hear some names, because it gives you a bit of a preview.

The Cubs selected the Florida State third baseman early in the 2024 draft. After an eye-opening debut with the Cubs, what should we expect from the slugging right-handed hitter as we move forward? We continue today looking at the Cubs' top 20 prospects (as ranked by our readers here at NSBB), with Smith, who comes in at No. 6 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 2024 Season Recap: Cam Smith, 3B Cam Smith started his year with the Florida State Seminoles and finished it with the Tennessee Smokies, jumping multiple levels over a short amount of time. Entering the draft, Smith had an interesting profile. Models loved his improved contact ability and exit velocity in college. Moreover, he was a darling of the Cape Cod League (a common theme among recent Cub draftees), showing skill with wood bats. If there was a knock on him, however, it's that his swing had undergone a change from 2023 to 2024: it got much, much flatter. This helped him lower his overall strikeout rate from 28% to a paltry 14% and helped increase his batting average by .150, but it also caused some concern about whether or not Smith (a third baseman who may eventually need to move to left field) would be capable of hitting for enough power. Clearly, the Cubs were either unfazed by this change, or felt as though they could work through it, because they selected him 14th overall. Upon being drafted, all the former Seminole did was crush baseballs, helping to dispel any notion that his swing would be a problem. Smith went nuts at Myrtle Beach, posting a wRC+ well north of 200 in his first 57 plate appearances, slashing .313/.400/.771. He followed this with 57 more plate appearances at South Bend with a 160 wRC+, which earned him a short-term promotion to finish out the year in Tennessee with 20 plate appearances in the Smokies' playoff run. It was a pretty successful year, all told, and while none of the samples are large, the early returns on their pick were tremendously encouraging. 2025 Season Outlook and Scouting Report: ETA - Mid-to-Late 2026 Smith had a really great 2024, and it's likely that he will start with the Tennessee Smokies in 2025. With a background playing at a good baseball school and seeing College World Series action. Smith will be turning 22 fairly early next year, so his age suggests that Double-A is a good home for him, too. Chicago's 2023 first-round selection, Matt Shaw, saw a similar boost to Double-A in his drafted year and spent most of 2024 in Tennessee, before moving to Iowa at the end of the year. I think a similar path for Smith makes sense. Delaying his ETA a little is the fact that he's got a little less versatility than Shaw (who could play second or third and, in a pinch, might moonlight a few games at shortstop if the team were desperate), so projecting a mid-2026 ETA is being conservative but fair. I'm curious to see how Smith's bat path and launch angle change throughout his time in the minors. The Cubs are on record that they try not to mess with swings as long as they're successful, and Smith's slash lines suggest that he's being successful. If we want to nitpick his data a bit, he hit a lot of ground balls in his 70 times up between High-A South Bend and Double-A Tennessee, finishing at 50% and 43.8%, respectively. If you're envisioning Smith as a power-hitting third baseman who slugs 30 home runs, that's not a great trait to have. I would imagine the Cubs will look to maximize Smith's size (listed at 6'3", 224 lbs) and generate some more loft. Trading a few strikeouts for some home runs is probably okay here. Defensively, he's been considered an average or so fielder with a strong arm at third. Concerns about him stem from the size and the future athleticism in his profile. It's not hard to see where Smith might just be a bit cumbersome at the hot corner long-term if he were to fill out any more, but that could also just be one of those draft-day fears that never materialize. As of now, it's probably fair to consider him a third baseman until we need to worry about it, with the understanding maybe third won't be his final destination. When speaking of his upside, Smith offers one of the highest ceilings in the system. You wouldn't be alone if you envisioned a third baseman who could meld a better-than-average contact skill with plus power and a solid glove. Based on his size and skill level, there's probably a Manny Machado comp to be made on his highest-end outcome—size-wise, position-wise and skills-wise. Alas, he probably doesn't have the defensive skill of prime, young Machado. Think more Padres Machado, where he's hitting 25-30 home runs with a 130 wRC+, though with maybe a little less defense. That would be a really fun player to have. The slightly pessimistic side on Smith has you looking at the ground ball rate and wondering why someone who has the size of Cam Smith can't seem to find a way to hit the ball in the air more often. It could also mean that his size would push him to a position where the bat is more important, and hitting that many ground balls is even less okay. I'm not trying to throw cold water on anyone, but we have to recognize where pitfalls exist; there isn't such thing as a "perfect prospect". Regardless, I'll be dreaming on the upside and quite excited for this guy next year. Getting to see a full season of Smith as he adjusts and pitchers adjust back will be good. The sky is the limit here, and it really wouldn't be shocking to see him as a universal top-25 type by the end of the year if he takes off. What do you think of Cam Smith today? Has your opinion of him changed since draft day? Let us know in the comments below! View full article

Per Bruce Levine, "You're going to give up three of your top players in your minor league system" for Crochet. Levine used the names Shaw, Caissie and Triantos specifically in conjunction here. Other notes: 10 teams (or more) have contacted the White Sox Levine thinks he will be dealt this offseason Nothing appears imminent

There's a lot of pessimism coming out of New York right now from the media on Soto at least those I follow on X/Blue Sky who are tangential to the team. It's not reporting, but "feelings" more so than anything, but the feelings are generally that the Yankees are setting up a "we tried" defense on Soto.

The Mariners are highly unlikely to trade Logan or Kirby. Nothing from their side suggests he's available. The Mariners have been pretty stedfast through the media of: 1. Not wanting to trade a SP from the MLB team 2. Looking for a corner. While I believe most of the time players are available for the right price and very few players are "untouchable" there is nothing to really suggest the Cubs are going to have a Logan for Nico Hoerner framework that works for both sides. I wouldn't even worry or concern myself about that framework as of now. The Cubs may be able to find a match for the second tier of arms, such as a Miller or a Woo as I believe there's the possibility that some of this is posturing. But they'd have to add significant capital to Hoerner to get to the next tier and even then, I'm not sure the Mariners are dealing them. It would also probably be Matt Shaw, in that case, that would go, not Hoerner. I think the statement of "doing whatever they can to trade Nico to open a spot for Shaw" remains silly as well, but we've done that dance.

I think he's probably among the most likely to be moved. While I think he's a nice player, the feeling I get from reading things and how the Cubs have treated Shaw is that he's the guy they like the most (Shaw that is). That the Cubs are considering moving Hoerner lets you know they like Shaw enough (I presume it's Shaw who'd get the position) that they're willing to move him in the right deal. If a team wanted near MLB talent, Triantos would probably be attractive. He can play a few positions. He's got an easy floor for being an MLB player - contact translates well, he's highly athletic, and versatile. If you believe the glove, he could be an average defender a few places. He's easy plug and play. I assume between today and TDL the Cubs will swing a few big trades - I think it'd be hard for Triantos to survive those 7 months unless the Cubs trade someone like Shaw instead.

Keep an eye out for a Ryan Tepera MiLB signing today to be announced. He just changed his profile photo to that of a Chicago Cub. He's not done enough to likely get any MLB deals, but coming back to the organization in Iowa feels like a real possibility and the Cubs do enjoy employing those types as Iowa-depth for emergency call ups.

Yeah, no I get it. There are some similarities. But I think we should probably not use Madrigal here as the comp. There's just too much power. It's why I tried to go with guys like Steven Kwan, Adam Frazier and the likes. Madrigal is like a 20 game power bat. Triantos is probably a standard deviation above that, which isn't a massive leap, but is significant in relation. When we think of Madrigal, we think of zero home run power. Triantos has some home run power.

Triantos shouldn't really be compared to Madrigal, his body suggests there's more there. He's also hit for plenty more home runs already. For example, last season, in what we can consider 75% of a year at Double-A, and at age 21, James Triantos hit seven home runs. This was in 391 PA's. Now let's compare to Nick Madrigals entire professional career spanning every plate appearance, over every level. In those 1,761 professional career plate appearances, Madrigal has hit nine home runs. I know the easy comparison people will make will be to Madrigal, but I think it's a pretty unfair comparison to Triantos, who's hit 4-7 home runs at every level he's spent at least half a season at. I think it's fair to wonder if Triantos will hit double digit home runs in a season...Madrigal may not get to double digit home runs across his entire career. That's a significant difference, even if we have some worries about James' entire package.

Do you think the Chicago Cubs are looking to sell Nico Hoerner at a discount? Because I don't think so. They have little reason to do that. He's too cheap, too controlled and has been too good for the Cubs to give any sort of real discount. Which is why in the event Hoerner *is* traded we can probably, pretty safely assume the follow things: 1. Any team who acquires Nico Hoerner is not overly concerned (short/long term) about his injury status. 2. The Chicago Cubs do not feel his injury has negatively impacted his overall trade value in a meaningful way. Ultimately, the injury probably effects the likelihood of a trade but not the return. It takes an already narrow pathway for the Cubs to find value (and team who's willing to swap MLB pitching for a 2b) and makes it smaller (adds the injury into negotiations). But if the Cubs feel as though this is effecting the return, they probably just go ahead and keep Hoerner. They have little reason to sell him for less than they value him, and would probably be fine keeping a quality player on a relatively cheap contract. And if a team is that concerned by it, they won't meet that valuation and a trade won't happen.

There will probably be nothing new on Hoerner for a while. The surgery was just a few weeks ago. Timetable is 3-6 months. It sounds pretty likely barring a massive setback that even if Hoerner misses time, it'll likely be in the "weeks" at most. Like, 15-20 games, as the 6 month timing would push into the March/Early-April area. I think we have to assume any trade of Hoerner means the other team (in this case Seattle) has an understanding and little worry about the injury.

Crochet has had injuries, yes. But many of them stem from the elbow which he has had TJS on. Since then he's had one IL trip in June of 2023 related to his shoulder. He was free of the IL last year. When it comes to injury history...he's a pitcher. Reality with pitchers now a days? They almost all come with injury history. There are those who may not have needed TJS, but it's rare to find workhorses who miss that kind of thing. That doesn't mean we should be getting guys prone to being hurt...but I think we have to accept when it comes to getting arms...that's probably going to be a thing.

I think part of it is simply the way they look, for better or worse. The reality is that Moises Ballesteros looks weird. He's not very tall. He's kind of round. He doesn't have a lot of comps to that body style in the modern game. Just being realistic, but it's like Alejandro Kirk (who's been good), Dan Vogelbach (who's ocellated from good to bad) and then...what...Prince Fielder with that body type? When players have funk to them, I think we intrinsically knock them down. Doesn't make it correct, but I think it's a decent part of the process here. I do think that year matters, too. So I don't want to say it all as "Ballesteros looks funny" but being 19 in Double-A, even with a bit lower of an output probably makes up the difference in many eyes. I do think they're probably closer than the rankings let on, though. But also why rankings are kind of funny like that and they're a bunch of semantics, too.

I'd allow Assad in that. He's a nice swing guy, but I'd trust the Cubs to replace him. Gripes aside from the front office, they've done well identifying solid-ish arms. "Hey, Jed, you can go find another $5m swing man!" seems like something Hoyer wouldn't mind hearing at all (and I'm saying that a little tounge-in-cheek but a little not. I really think he revels in those kinds of finds).

Yeah, I think this is around the level of price I'm thinking works. With that said, I'd probably allow Ballesteros into the talks on the hitter level. I think he's probably a 2/3rds of the time DH and while I really like the bat...I can let that go if push came to shove. If I could, Shaw would be the one I'd keep hold on tightest. I really like his profile and the more I dive into the numbers the more I keep seeing Dustin Pedroia type outcomes.

I think that's fair. I'm just not sure I share the same worry. Like I said, I think the uptick on the velocity even in the shorter outings as the season waned makes me pretty confident that there's a dude there that you can bank on for 150 IP on the season. That's a 5IP guy most days (figure if he's making 25-28 starts, that's 140 IP or so) with some spikes at 6 IP. But I think the days of the 6+ IP guy is kind of falling behind us, for better or worse. Crochet probably requires the team to have a deeper than average bullpen knowing that he's going to Blake Snell himself into 5 quality innings most starts (though in a different version of why he goes 5). But on a per-rate basis, I think he's going to be about as good as you can find this offseason so I'm pretty full-steam ahead on the Crotchet concept.

Yeah, I think we have to look at Ballesteros as a non-traditional catcher. I'm not sure he's going to be the guy to log 100 games back there. But I think getting him to log 40-50 games where you feel like you can live with the decent enough ability, coupled with the bat, and then playing him as a DH on the other 100 games is his landing strip. And I'm not sure that's a bad thing - if you believe in the bat than keeping him fresh and in the lineup without the hell on the knees is probably a good thing!

I think the first half is pretty sustainable myself just really diving into it. In the first half, he actually got less chase, and had slightly lower velo. I'd imagine part of that was that he was able to juice back a little more knowing he was going four innings instead of seven, but interesting to note. His strike quality was nearly identical, no uptick in non-competitive strikes, and strike% was under 2% difference. He threw his cutter a bit more than the fastball in the second half, which again, interesting to note, but nothing I think is other than that. He got more ground balls in the second half than the first, but did give up a bit less harmless contact (but still within a slightly better-than-league-average range). Long and the short of it, most of what he was doing in the first half, he was doing in the second, and those things like chase, whiff, strike%...they're that of a pretty elite arm. If there was a big difference between the two sides, I might find cause for concern. The biggest indicator for me is that uptick in velocity in the shorter outings - it came from somewhere. Just my take on it; it says "I'm adding extra juice to my pitches because I know I've got more in the tank than they're letting me empty out", which makes me feel pretty good about Crotchet being able to be a very good arm for 150 IP. I'm not sure he'll ever be a 180 IP guy, but the way the pitching is moving, that might not be the worst thing?

I'm just guessing, but looking at his very sharp cut off after June 30th that the White Sox decided to limit innings and hoped to trade him at the TDL or in the offseason without putting too much on his arm or causing an injury. The ERA shot up, but if we look at a few of the splits between those two time periods: OD - June 30th: 35.3 K%, 5 BB%,, 75% LOB, .286 BABIP, 96.9 mph velo Post - June 30th - 34.7 K5, 6.6 BB%, .387 BABIP, 71 LOB%, 97.6 mph velo I think it was just bad luck (BABIP way up, but didn't massively increase home run rate or decrease strikeout rate or velocity). and I suspect that the White Sox just really massively limited him after that on the innings. I also think that's probably something the Sox would be willing to discuss openly in the negotiations, so I think these are things the Cubs can get a peak on that we can't.

Yeah, I don't think that's necessarily it going back, but if we're thinking about prospects "a bit further away" these are names I think would be popping up. Looking back to when the Cubs traded Darvish, it's a slightly different scenario, but it was: 1. Owen Caissie, 18, 2nd round overslot 2. Reggie Preciado, 18, IFA bonus baby As your two "big" gets, with Preciado getting some top-100 love places. And then two other smaller, 18 year olds. So for the Cubs, you'd think they'll pay more because Crotchet is younger and cheaper, but I'd assume that's a framework the Sox might look at. Younger prospects, and a few of them. Could add in the likes of Valdez and Cruz.