Jason Ross

Lovich! Called that one. Granted...with a little help from a friend.

I mean, just saying that doesn't mean it. It's pretty obvious you're attacking, very specifically, WAR. For example, your argument that "not all WAR is created equal" is that if you have a team who's already not great offensively, a player who's value is in defensive acumen wouldn't help that team very much. But that's not an "anti-WAR" argument, that' an "anti-anything" argument. If a team hit a lot of home runs already and doesn't play strong defense, would you say a team shouldn't add someone else who's value is generally tied in hitting home runs who plays poor defense? Then your argument has nothing to do with "WAR" and has everything to do with "don't be one dimensional". But note, you have very specifically made it about WAR. If you want to make an argument that teams should diversify, then fine...that's good thing. Teams who diversify are harder to counter on a day-to-day basis. But all WAR is still "equal". For example, the Royals are a pretty bad hitting baseball team. They have a 95 wRC+ on the year, that's 20th best. They're the 2nd best defensive fWAR team, however. If they replaced 75 wRC+ and negative defender MJ Melendez in LF with a bad hitting, but really good defensive LF'er...they're still going to be better. A better defensive LF'er would help their pitching and help the team prevent more runs. Value is value.

You've done, essentially that, but stating that teams should just get the best players and ignore WAR. As if WAR doesn't matter when determining "the best players". You have also stated that the Cubs were the 12th best team and didn't make the playoffs as an argument against WAR. Again, as if total team WAR doesn't matter and something else does. You've called it a "mythical" number. As if there was no formula for the data or that the input data wasn't real. It's pretty easy to surmise your argument down to "WAR doesn't really matter" without you explicitly stating so and it feels more like an "anti-analytics" argument instead of an actual argument against WAR itself.

This feels like a pretty foundational misunderstanding of what WAR is doing. You've called it a "mythical" number as if there isn't a formula or that the data being input into the WAR formula isn't real. Actual performance on the field = WAR, regardless of whether it's baseball-reference WAR or fangraphs WAR. WAR is simply giving us an easily digestible fully encompassing statistic to compare player value. We should always go deeper to get the best picture available, but WAR is the best snapshot number out there. Next, while team WAR is a useful point of data, no one should believe WAR is some silver-bullet and people who understand WAR don't use it that way. You can be, for example, the 12th best team in terms of WAR and still not make the playoffs; variance exists. Variance is a real thing. Teams get hurt and teams have bad luck. You know who that luck affects far more so than others? Teams in that 10-20 range. Teams at the top end of the WAR track make the playoffs because they're really good teams and variance isn't enough to knock them off. The inverse for the bottom. Where variance gets ya is being in the middle; it's why a team like Arizona Diamondback (15th in bWAR in 2023) made the playoffs and the Cubs (12th in bWAR in 2023) didn't. Variance. Is. Real. The best players in a season accumulate the most WAR. Teams should prioritize adding the best players. If your broader point is that the Cubs are a big market team and at times, full-on-efficiency is not-always priority number 1? I'd agree! Big market teams should use their ability to overspend others to, at times, pay market rate or slightly above market rate to improve their roster for peak win totals. I don't know if the Cubs have it in themselves to do that. Perfectly acceptable argument. But the argument that WAR doesn't matter doesn't hold water.

Lovich is double followed on social as of recently. I feel like he's a possible pick in the 11th. The Cubs have taken a few overslot preps at 11 recently. Gage Zeihl (who went unsigned and re-drafted this year) in 2021, Zhyhir Hope in 2023. Lovich fits that category, Chase Brajevich was a follow I felt very "Cub-like" in the 11+ rounds. Submarine pitcher. College of Phoenix commit, so nothing too pricy to get out of. Might be a guy to watch today, too.

I never understand the whinging about mid-round picks. I quite like this haul, about the same as I feel most of the times in these rounds. The Cubs got a lot of guys the batted ball data likes a lot, and everyone has a tool, some have a few. There's some pretty big swings here and most will miss; part of that's the nature of mid-round picks part of that is taking big swings. But every guy they took has MLB upside in some manner. There's something to develop which each guy. And there are common themes; most of the hitters have wood bat experience that went well for them or have wonderful batted ball metrics. The arms have control, and the ability size wise where added velocity is possible. People become too married to whatever MLB.com ranked a guy and spend too little time looking at the tools. The difference between #250 and #550 is generally razor thin. Once you get outside of the top 80-120 or so(depends on the draft) you're talking minimal differences that come down to a scout's personal preference with great degrees of varience per who you talk to. The top of the draft contains far more nuanced differentiation. And many times comes down to organizational developmental philosophy and pure unadulterated luck. When guys have no tools...thats an issue. Not a single player doesn't have a tool you can't see as MLB worthy. That's all you can ask for here. Zero complaints from me and I'm excited to see if the Cubs found a gem or two.

Entering the draft, many, myself included, expected the Cubs to go with a pitcher-heavy draft, seeing as the general consensus with the current state of the system was that the hitters were the star of the show and the team lacked some pitching depth. Instead, the Cubs selected two position players on Day 1 and continued the trend on Day 2. Who did the Cubs pick, and how should you feel about it? Image courtesy of © Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports Day two is always interesting in the draft as teams balance the draft budget, upside, positional need, and signability. With last night's selections of Cam Smith and Cole Mathis, the belief was that the Cubs probably had some savings to roll into today. The Cubs started the day off with not one but two prep bats and proceeded to select six more position players. One thing I've learned under Dan Kantrovitz is that when you expect the Cubs to zig, they zag. Round Three: Ronny Cruz, SS (HS, Senior) It's a bit of an off-the-board pick here, as Cruz was unranked by many industry publications (a common theme with the Cubs' Day two selections). However, I'd implore everyone to suspend their worry about draft rankings; these are super subjective, and the margin for "who's a top-300" prospect and who's in the 400s is... razor thin. Cruz, just 17 years old, is a lanky, tall shortstop with major power; he hit a ball nearly 108mph off the bat at the Draft Combine in Arizona for a towering home run. While unlikely to stick at shortstop long term, Cruz has the power and the athleticism to stick at third long term. The question here will be, "Does he make enough contact?" Regardless, the upside here is pretty high if the Cubs can work on quieting down his swing and improving his approach. Round Four: Ty Southisene, SS (HS, Senior) I'll admit this much: this is one of my favorite Day 2 picks. Diminutive in size, the 5'9" shortstop from Nevada possesses impressive barrel control with solid bat-to-ball skills. Southisene was committed to Tennessee, which has been one of the SEC's powerhouse schools as of late, which gives the shortstop a solid pedigree. Making him more interesting is that he seems likely to stick at the premium position. Power hasn't been his strong suit (yet), but reports are that with his strong barrel control, adding a little loft, quieting some swing mechanics down, and adding some muscle, he could see enough power added to the profile. At age 19, he's one of the older prep prospects, but he will likely see a start at Myrtle Beach by the end of the season and should be a fun follow. Round Five: Ariel Armas, C (San Diego University, Junior) Armas is the premier defensive catcher in all of college baseball. That's not hyperbole either; he was selected by Rawlings on their defensive team of the year and led the country in defensive runs saved. Not a great hitter, Armas hit .298 and slugged six home runs on the season, hitting much better as the season went along. Armas also posted strong exit velocities, which makes you think that a swing adjustment could create more power. There probably isn't a starting catcher's profile here, but his strong defensive ability could vault Armas into the conversation to be a backup catcher at the MLB level. While I don't think he will be a massive money-saver, there could be some slot saving, considering he's probably not a fifth-round talent. Round Six: Ryan Gallagher, RHP (UC Santa Barbara, Junior) The Cubs, under Kantrovitz, seemingly always take a pitcher who's fresh off Tommy John surgery (Cade Horton and Jaxon Wiggins, to name two), and they've done it again with Gallagher, who missed all of his sophomore season in 2023 with the injury. Returning as a Junior, Gallagher is your traditional "pitchability" guy; he lives in the low 90s and has a handful of pitches in his arsenal. Standing 6'4" and 220 lbs, there's an argument to be made that the Cubs, who excel at extracting extra velocity, could add a little to his profile. Perhaps, as well, he'd be more like a Jameson Taillon or Javier Assad, where they could work in some seam-shifted wake to his repertoire as well. While the upside is limited to a back-end rotation starter, there's still MLB upside if things break correctly, even if there is more floor than ceiling. Round Seven: Ivan Brethowr, OF (UC Santa Barbara, Junior) Not satisfied with just one UCSB Gaucho, the Cubs returned to the well with the next pick, selecting Gallagher's teammate, Ivan Brethowr. Brethowr has some of the most impressive raw power in the draft, with some scouts giving him 70 grades on his pop. Aaron Judge is a comp that he gets a bunch of, but I'll be honest and tell you I see Pete Alonso more, even if it's just for his setup. These comparisons are always unfair, but Brethowr can pay massive dividends if he hits the ball enough. Sporting an arm strong enough for right field, this is a fun back end day two selection to keep an eye on. There are concerns about contact ability with a power profile this big, but he will be a fun follow as sneaky value. Round Eight: Edgar Alvarez, 1B (Nicholls State, Senior) This might be the most fun pick on day two if you believe his batted-ball profile and the metrics behind him. As a 23-year-old, fringy defender, Alvarez has to hit and hit he has. He has, as Joe Doyle called, "elite" contact ability and showed impressive barrel control. The lefty hit over .400, slugged over .500, was named a conference gold-glover, a Rawlings second-team All-American, and showed his clutch gene by hitting go-ahead home runs in two games during Nicholls States' regionals. Alvarez is fun. He's a first base prospect, so he's got to keep hitting, but it doesn't get more fun than this in terms of picks this late on day two. I'm going to be keeping my eyes wide open on him. Round Nine: Brooks Caple, RHP (Lamar University, Senior) Caple is the first "senior sign" the Cubs have selected, and it took eight rounds to get there. Caple is huge, standing over 6'6". His fastball velocity varies considerably, as he sits in the high 80s to low 90s, but according to MLB.com, he can hit 97mph... which is quite the spread. The tall righty was named the Southland Conference pitcher of the year in 2024. The Cubs will likely give him a chance to start, but with the size and the peak velocity, Caple will probably be ticketed for the bullpen in the long term. That said, if the Cubs can use his frame and extension and squeeze some velo out of him, there's a possible very good reliever in there. Round Ten: Matt Halbach, 3b (UC San Diego, Junior) I am not sure the Cubs' draft plans were "take all of the third basemen," but with their four players ticketed toward the position, it feels that way! Unlike the others the Cubs drafted at the position, Halbach is less of a masher and more of a hit tool player, but don't let that make you think he can't hit either. Halbach was a top performer at the Cape Code League in 2023 (a data point the Cubs care a lot about!) and was off to a flying start in 2024 when he got hurt and missed 19 games. Halbach is a solid enough defensive third baseman that he could realistically stick here. Coming in as a tenth-round selection, it's hard not to think the Cubs found some real value here. It was a healthy season for the Junior from UCSD, and he'd have likely parlayed that into a much higher pick. Overall thoughts: This is a more fun group on day two than you usually see. There are some real gem possibilities, and no one feels like they're nothing. The least sexy pick was likely Armas, and he's arguably the best defensive catcher in the draft. They took a handful of swings on the upside, with Cruz, Brethowr, and Alvarez all with real power potential. Gallagher and Caple look like they have interesting enough pitch mixes and stuff that they could eventually make an MLB roster, Halbach is fresh off an injury but has intriguing stuff, and my favorite pick, Southisene, with a bit of Mookie Betts (thanks @CaliforniaRaisin) in his profile! Pumping the breaks a bit, however, we have to remember that there are reasons these kids are going on day two and not one. They represent a fun upside but a real risk. For every bit of Mookie Betts in Southisene resides all of the short-king-shortstops who have failed before him. For all of the excitement of Edgar Alvarez or Ivan Brethhowr's power potential are all of the corner position players with 65 or 70-grade power who struck out too many times to ever use it—most of, if not all of, these players will probably fizzle out somewhere. But the Cubs' strategy was taking real chances on these players and spreading the love. There's only a single senior in the class, and you could probably argue that a handful of these players will be picked later than they deserve to go, which should give the Cubs more bullets in the chamber to find something out of these rounds. I think it's a pretty good haul, but only time will tell. View full article

Looks like Gallagher has grown a lot. Was listed at 6"1, 155lbs by PG. Up to 6"4, over 200lbs now. Cubs do a good job increasing velocity. Already throws a lot of strikes. Sounds like there's a potential for a back end arm there, and probably one who moves quick-ish through at least South Bend.

Cubs take their yearly "recently had TJS" guy in Ryan Gallagher.

I think it'll matter less, though it might not matter that much less. It kind of depends on what system they go to; I suspect it'll be a while before it's a fully automated system. Even with the challenge system, each team gets three challenges. You can still steal strikes, especially, early in game and early in count. It'll be harder to steal a pitch 3-2, bases loaded, in the 9th. But 2nd inning, 2-1 count? Probably going to get that call to go unchallenged.

This reminds me of the Casey Opitz pick a few years back. You hope he can hit enough for the shining defense to carry him to the MLB as a backup or even as one of these elite defensive guys who have an 80 wRC+.

- SDU website

Yeah, he's not a full-slot save. But he's also probably not going to get full 5th round slot, either.

I'd imagine a decent amount still. Not a great college track record outside of defense. I don't think he's your "full-slot" save or anything insane, but this is also probably a "Listen. you're not a hot draft prospect type, so we'll offer you 6th/7th round slot and take you in the 5th" type stuff, too. So I'd guess it's not a major money saver, but that he's under slot.

Sounds like a money-saver pick.

Might be on to something...

The Cubs did something similar last year when they zigged while everyone zagged. Last year it was "draft college arms when no one else was (I.E. Wiggins, Sanders) and this year it feels they're doing that with prep bats the last two picks.

Cobb Hightower sounds like a Star Wars name to me.

It's amazing to me how we as a society can create all of these AI things but until a human being gets to the MLB we have no idea how tall or how much they weigh with any sort of accuracy.

I've come on a full 180 on Southestine. When you read the BA stuff and the MLB.com thing I was...luke-warmish on Southestine, but the more I see from him the more it sounds like he's a fun little pick (pun intended. Got 'em!). There's an interesting profile there. Sounds like he needs a swing cleanup a bit, add some lift? But as a 4th round pick there's MLB starting upside. Maybe find 12 home runs in that bat.

- PBR

PG PBR

Yeah, I'd say he's a Myrtle guy. Already 19. Has a barrel feel.