Jason Ross

Both Passan and Rosenthal have mentioned us with 5 other of the heavy hitters, specifically, in separate articles today alone. We get mentioned a lot. In articles like the one here, from Sharma and Mooney, I think he isn't mentioned because the Cubs offseason probably doesn't change with or without Roki. You probably see some sort of semi-6 man thing with him, as he's had some injuries and NPB guys don't have as much rest naturally. So he's probably not going to be a massive inning eater right away. Also, he's essentially free on the budget. So you do your offseason and if you get him, awesome, and if you don't, you don't.

Sounds like the Cubs are a real option. I've seen a few reports that the Sasaki sweeps could be done quick, but obviously his final signature will have to wait.

Cubs are mentioned specifically in here as one of the six teams to watch.

I think there's a little too much fear and panic. I don't want to get into defending "we trieds" but it's December 6th and the WM's haven't even happened. @Matthew Truebloodconfirmed that the Crochet stuff wasn't a nothing burger (if you haven't read his first page article on it, it's worthwhile) and that there was some real work done in that area. Clearly the Cubs were attempting to get a good (possibly very good) player into the fold. It hasn't worked out so far, but there's also a lot of time to go. That type of creativity is good to see. Hope he can continue to use it. The backup catcher thing is...a bit worrisome simply because of the lack of options. Jansen was horrid last year and saw a lot of his hitting metrics drop off significantly. Wouldn't be the craziest thing to think injuries caught up a catcher. He's a worthwhile gamble I'd have taken, but alas, I'll survive without him. They do need to fix that spot, and I too hope it's not a Matt Thaiss situation. Based on his split deal, it feels like the Cubs don't want to go that route if they don't have to (they were reportedly in on Danny Jansen). I'll let Jed cook here a bit longer before I'm afraid that the man headed into his contract season is running it back with the same ol' same ol'.

Yeah, George Offman said it wasn't happening and a few people have suggested the Cubs aren't trading Suzuki. I have zero concern they're trying to trade Seiya. He also has a NTC. Sherman is probably just confused, or working on bad information. It's been the only report on it.

Suzuki thing has been refuted a few times various places. It's almost assuredly bad info Sherman is working on. We should probably let that one go. The Jansen thing is a bit frustrating but could signal that the Cubs are focused on other things at the position.

Jansen - 1/$8.5m to Rays. Done deal per Robert Murray

Catching options running thin quickly.

I doubt they would hand it to him on a platter with like, Luis Vazquez or Miles Mastrobuoni as his competition - I think if you send an INF out, you have to get an INF in. But I do think that the infielder would be a speed bump type over anyone who stands a real threat. The goal, seemingly, is to shed some salary places to reallocate it elsewhere, and I would imagine they'd spend a low amount on that backup infielder (especially if they kept Triantos as a hedge for injuries). But I think that depends on how the Cubs are modeling Shaw internally. I think we'd see their confidence on Shaw based on who they brought in, so perhaps I'm downplaying it, too. On the Shaw/Caissie thing - I'm the biggest Caissie guy out there and I agree that I have more concerns with Caissie on OD than Shaw. Shaw just doesn't have many red flags right now - he's making a ton of contact, he's hitting the ball super hard, he's not hitting a massive amount of grounders, he's hitting velocity at Triple-A at a pretty excellent rate...if we want to find the "concerns" a lot of it comes down to "Idk, he looks funny and maybe that'll be an issue", which isn't necessarily to downplay the leg kick and the strange toe-in, but more-so to say that to date, it's been an issue...never. Not at any level prior. Not at Premier 12. MLB pitchers are the best in the world and they can exploit you like no other, so if it is exploitable, they'll do that. But he also wouldn't be the first guy who "looks funny" when he does things and still is successful. Other than that, it's "I'd like to see him pull the ball more" stuff and maybe he has an issue with sweepers (but it's pretty small sample size stuff and could just not be as big of an issue as the sample suggests. Worth noting, but nothing I'm terrified of yet). Caissie made a lot of swing adjustments last year himself. More power, more pull, more lift. Good things! But he sacrificed contact to do so. He dropped from around league-averagish to the mid-high 60%'s and while I chalk some of that up to learning how to embrace a new swing, I'd like to see him smooth that out more. Caissie has more data-specific things I can find as "red flaggy" than Shaw. I expect him to struggle more than Shaw at the next level because he doesn't have that excellent hit tool that Shaw has to help carry him a bit. I would expect both to struggle initially because prospects are just doing that more and more league wide and I hate pretending our prospects are special or different because they're ours. But I think Shaw comes out of the fog faster than Caissie, especially if we're starting them on Opening Day as starters.

As someone who lives eight hours a day, five days a week around 12-14 year olds...this is entirely accurate. Literally two days ago, at 3pm, a 14 year old boy in my classroom attempted to use a hot dog as a pointer during his Ted Talk. The school served hot dogs for lunch. Four and a half hours prior. He saved a nearly five hour old hot dog (and I'm sure it spent time in his pocket) just for that.

I think one thing to maybe keep in mind in the event of a Hoerner trade - it probably says how the Cubs feel about Shaw. We can do our entire song and dance about how likely he is to or not be good. But you'd have to assume in that scenario...the Cubs have to feel good about not dropping off massive at 2b. They didnt force PCA into the lineup in the same way.

Yeah. Cotillo taught me that not everything you read on Twitter is nonsense. Despite the age. The last massive Cub/White Sox trade was broken by KatyPerrysBootyHole. Trades break from odd places.

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.