Jason Ross

Being fair to Ballesteros, I'd guess his defense is more on par with being in South Bend. So his bat is probably two levels above that of his defense. It's the good and the bad of being so advanced as a hitter; as a hitter he's going to force his way to Iowa well before he's ready defensively there. Hopefully the Cubs can crash course him. Realistically, he's probably going to hit well enough that his defensive ability may never catch up and he'll just go the DH route because of it.

The number 1 prospect on the Orioles couldn't hit MLB pitching either. PCA is 22. He's barely seen Triple-A. And the jump from Triple-A to the MLB is getting larger. He's not hitting yet. I think he may never be a great hitter. But he doesn't have to be a great hitter. Brenton Doyle is currently showing what kind of value you can bring at an 87 wRC+ this year as long as you play great defense and run the bases really well; he's up to 1.4 fWAR in 75 games. He does it a little differently than probably PCA will, but point remains. Hell, he was a positive fWAR guy last year with a 43 wRC+! PCA just needs more time.

Being a slightly better hitter won't change his value though. What PCA is giving away offensively will easily be offset in that he's still a plus fWAR player due to defense and speed. There's nothing to suggest to me in the data that Canario is anything but, at best, a replacement level player today. If you want to make an argument that the Cubs need to put PCA back in Iowa because you think that's where he needs to develop, we can discuss that - that argument has merit. Who they replace PCA with in the lineup, right now, is kind of hard to figure out because there isn't an obvious answer; all of the options suck in their own right,. But the argument that the Cubs just need to do something different, and that the difference is "play Canario" isn't going to result in a net positive for the Cubs right now and that should be noted. A lot of this seems to stem from "well we just don't know what Canario will do" but the underlying data on Canario right now paints an ugly picture of a guy who's going to just come up, and strike out 40% of the time. He may add 20 points of wRC+ over PCA currently, but that won't offset the defense. He won't make the Cubs better and I do believe it will make them actively worse. And maybe that's fine. If the balance between "winning MLB games" and "developing PCA" is shifting, then sending the more useful MLB player down for Canario might be a fine tradeoff. I just think we should understand going into it that Canario isn't really looking like much of a help and that any added offense people think is coming is probably going to be much less noticeable than they realize.

Eh. Not sure I agree with that. The baseballs are very different from double to triple-A. Look at how BJ Murray and Cade Horton have struggled in initial time. PCA as well. The jump from Triple-A to the MLB is larger, today, than Double-to-Triple-A. But there's still a real step up.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs were okay with the idea of trading Moises Ballesteros. He is almost assuredly going to hit himself out of playing catcher; his bat is too advanced. While the bat is real, real good for many reasons, his overall long term value at DH is going to be limited in a sense. As a team the Cubs are obsessed with value and the concept that the Cubs would like to parlay a DH-only into something else is, at least, in line with their thinking, so it's not a crazy thing to think. With that said, I wouldn't say they're showcasing him, either. He was destroying Double-A, and without hyperbole, at historical levels for his age. He was ready for Iowa (offensively). He's hit his way to Iowa on merit.

I think people who are entirely convinced that Hoyer will be fired very well may be disappointed. While I still stand by my belief that there's a good chance that Ricketts will choose to drop the axe on someone, and the only someone he can realistically drop it on is Hoyer, the reality is that's far from a foregone. Hoyer's contract runs out at the end of 2025. He has one more year left. The original plan was five years and the Cubs as an organization giving him five years to complete his vision is realistic. Secondly, while this year is super frustrating, and plenty of things are Hoyer's doing, many things are not Hoyer's doing. Hoyer couldn't realistically see this offense taking the step back they did; the average age of the Cubs offensive players is 28 and almost every player has regressed so far. And while we can say that a Bellinger regression was likely, they should have more than made up for that deficient with the addition of Michael Busch's 128 wRC+ so far. This was a top-10 run scoring offense last year and now they're just horrible. As well, the foundations of a good bullpen were there; it's not really Hoyer's fault that Hector Neris has just absolutely been a dumpster fire, that Alzolay and Merryweather have essentially been hurt all year, that Almonte got hurt pretty early, that Leiter is also on the IL (plus injuries to Steele, Taillon, Wicks, Brown...). That's, again, not to say there aren't qualms, grips, legitimate issues we should have with Jed Hoyer's roster construction as well, but you also can't really blame him for anything I've listed here and those are real reasons we're where we are at right now. Lastly, I'm not sure there's a significant upgrade over Jed Hoyer out there. You could go to the Tampa Bay Rays as a first place to poach, but Neader just signed an extension this calendar year to stick around there. Kim Ng has had helium in the past with what the Marlins were able to accomplish while she was the GM, but is she really ready for a role running the Cubs? You can make an argument that the foundations of the Marlins success' were laid previous to her; players like Alcantara, Chisholm and many of the youth prospects were previous to Ng. She did a killer job on the margins, but is that going to fix the Hoyer issues? David Sterns has already taken a job with the Mets, so he's off the market. You could try to grab Chernoff, but then, you're basically re-hiring Jed Hoyer in terms of what Chernoff is seemingly good at. I don't think you'll be able to lure Elias out of Baltimore right now, Breslow, our best internal option (IMO) is where he wants to be in Boston...so then you're picking from VP's and hoping they're more capable than Hoyer, in the same way you hired Hoyer. That's not to say an option doesn't exist, but it isn't like I can find or point to someone who's real likely to be poached or is a sure thing, either. It may also mean you lose your scouting and player development group with a new President of Basseball Ops coming in, which, would be a shame. Kantrovitz just eschewed the Mets, and the Cubs have continued to develop and draft well. All of these things will be taken into account when the time comes to evaluate Hoyer. As stated, the Cubs may want someone to blame and if they do...well...Jed Hoyer likely stands alone as the best option right now. But they may look at the options, the ramifications and the like and decide keeping Hoyer for one more run makes the most sense, despite the outrage from those on twitter.

Yeah, it seems to have coincideded with Triantos playing CF more that Alcantara hit the IL. Reports from Mooney and Sharma on Shaw's defense like, two weeks ago was super positive and that the Cubs liked his progress. Feels more like Tennessee doing what it can with the players they have right now, and less to do with Shaw.

How exactly do you think he will help? Again, he compares amazingly similar at Triple-A in terms of contact rates, swing decision and EV to what Nolan Gorman is doing at the MLB level in 2024 and Gorman has been bad offensively. With a jump in competition, it's likely that his data is worse than Gorman, and unable to even match that of Gorman currently. For Canario to have any positive impact offensively, he'd have to not only increase his contact rate by around 5-10% or so against much better pitching, he's going to have to lower his in-zone-whiff by 5 percent or so as well while maintaining the same launch, exit velocity and everything else. This is, highly unlikely considering his contact rates in 2024 are 7% worse than they were in 2023 at Triple-A; he's regressing in this category, not improving. It's made even more unlikely in his first extended run at the MLB level as he learns a new level of competition. While it's something that could improve in the future, there's nothing to suggest it would change for the better by promoting him currently. The result is likely going to be a hitter with a wRC+ in the 80's who provides neutral defense and base running. That will not help much. And the "change in dynamic" will result in re-organizing the deck chairs on the Titanic to fit a certain aesthetic as it sinks.

Forgive me for the clarification attempt, but it depends on what you're meaning by "that". If you're suggesting that "that's what you can do when you hit the piss out of the ball" is "run into a home run" or be Patrick Wisdom...you're correct, that is possible. If you are suggesting that as long as you hit the piss out of the ball, you can run 60% contact rates in Triple-A and expect MLB success? You cannot. Looking at the MLB, there is almost no one doing what Canario is doing, with one exception (and one big caveat). Nolan Gorman is probably the closest to what Canario is doing in Triple-A (with the caveat he's doing at a much higher level), as his contact rate is around 61.5%, with a 28% in-zone-whiff and near 50% swing rate. He's running a 95 wRC+, a .299 wOBA, with a .195/.271/.418 line while striking out more than one out of every three times. Gorman, has for all intents and purposes, been effectively a replacement level player this season. He was a 118 wRC+ hitter last year! He also made 5% more contact, made much better swing choices and these things are quite reflective and are above what Canario is capable of doing over large samples in a lower level against lower competition. Comparing to Canario, it's unlikely that Canario would be even capable of reaching those levels right now. Canario is putting up similar contact rates as Gorman is, but is doing so against much worse pitching. A reminder than Nick Madrigal and his sub 80 wRC+ was unable to barrel a single baseball at the Major League level this year and managed to barrel a ball in his third Iowa PA. Mastrobuoni, everyone's favorite Cub has a 107 wRC+ in Triple-A; he's got a 10 this season in the majors. Canario would be lucky to replicate that kind of contact data, meaning, the best case scenario, unless his contact rates change drastically, is that of a 5% below league average hitter, and but fare more likely well below that, in the 75-80 wRC+ range (or worse) as he'd be unlikely to maintain his contact rates against better pitching (which would make him about the worst contact% hitter in the MLB).

Wheat has apparently been lighting up guns on the backfields. MB is starting to get exciting.

A .519 BABIP. Now, we have to remember this: BABIP at the MiLB level can and should be interpreted very differently than BABIP at the MLB level. High BABIP at the MLB level is almost always associated with luck; we know that speed influences BABIP greatly and that there's a limit to what BABIP we should expect moving forward. With MiLB data, high BABIP can be luck, but isn't always luck. Sometimes you're just figuring it out and are becoming that much better than MiLB pitching at your current level and it signals "I need a new challenge". With Howard, it's hard to say right now. Traditionally, if we saw a 22 year old with a full slate of MiLB PA's with a high BABIP, at high-A, we'd probably just say "ah, luck" or "he's too old" and move our ass on. But Ed Howard isn't a traditional 22-year old in High-A. He's had, around, 200 previous PA's at High-A, almost all of which were either "barely 20 year old in high-A" or "recently blew out his hip and is trying to come back from a devastating injury". So we have to look a bit deeper. First, we can see that the power is increasing; he's hit ten doubles on the season...six have been hit in his last 70 PA's. He's walked 14 times this year...seven have come in his last 70 PAs. His K% is at 23%, so he's not selling out for power hurting his contact rate. He's hit a ton of ground balls this year as well...this would improve BABIP, as well. It may also suggest his hip being healthy; speed = better BABIP. 70 PA's as well, is at a base line level where many things (contact rate, walk rate, strikeout rate) begin to stabilize and pass the "well it's just random luck" stage of statistics. That's not saying it's not a small sample, but that it hits a level of an "acceptable" level of small sample. His ISO, which isn't like, sparkly, is approaching .100, which would be a career high, as well. I can't dig much deeper; High-A savant data is not public information and as such, don't have access to it. It'd be interesting to see his contact rates and swing decisions. Barrels. That stuff. It'd help us understand even more. Thankfully, the Cubs have that data so they know more than we do. So what does it all mean? Frankly, I don't know. This could be a luck fueled BABIP by a 22 year old. It could be Howard is too old for South Bend now and is physically mature enough to just BABIP them to death. He could be over his hip injury, and doing something akin to Hernandez in Myrtle Beach; with mechanical improvements is slowly, but surely, conquering the level when people had begin to write him off. There's lots of outcomes here. The overall point I'm trying to make is just...Ed Howard is such an unknown. I think he got off to an unfair start to begin with in the 2020 draft (such an impossible draft to get right) and in Cub fan's minds to begin with. He's had injuries he can't control and the pandemic and a loss of a senior year he couldn't control. There's enough over his last 100 PA's that should suggest to us all to pause, take a second look and probably re-evaluate in...30 days. See where we're at. Is he still around a 110 wRC+ over another month? What's the BABIP like? Is it still .400? Well then it's likely not luck then. Maybe he' back at a 80 wRC+ over July and we can say "Ah, just a good month". Lots of things that can happen.

All of his main stats have come at times when he was either: 1. Super young for the league 2. Hurt 2024 is probably the first, real, honest, shot he's had a league where he's been healthy and at an age appropriate league. He's been a 103 wRC+ over his last 105 PA's and over his last 70 PA's has seen a 162 wRC+. What his upside is, as I said in the post above, is really unknown. Whether he as rusty earlier and is now at full health, is in an extended hot streak over the last 30 days, or plenty of things in between, it's impossible to say. He's had a very weird path to where he is today, enough to suggest we can't even trust defensive scouting on him from pre-hip injury. But that works in his favor with the bat as well. Let's just see where he goes before we worry about his upside right now. He's in an incredibly unique category of "it's impossible to tell" with all of the caveats (covid draft, missed development years, devastating injuries, aggressive promotions),

I think PCA needs more work. I also don't think Alexander Canario is still the answer. In fact, the mixup was because he's still hurt and the Cubs were checking him out. Regardless, however, his underlying numbers in Triple-A are ugly. I know he's been on a run up through the injury where it was home run, home run, home run, but overall his contact rate is...woof. He's making contact on 61% of his swings while in-zone-whiffing at 27%. To put that in perspective, he's making 10% less contact than International League average and swinging and missing in the zone almost 9% more. He's up to too many PA's at Triple-A for this to be nothing, as well, considering he's over 400 PA's at the level now. Even over his hot range, his contact% since the last week of May is 60% with a 28% in-zone whiff. If he had enough PA's to qualify, he'd have the third worst contact of anyone in Triple-A and bottom-5 in-zone whiff. Canario wll likely have a better wRC+ than PCA for a bit because I expect he can run into a home run more often. He's probably also capable of hitting four home runs in a week. But I expect he'd be Patrick Wisdom, mostly; someone who's capable of running into a home run or a super-mega-week but the in-between times are times of largely uncompetitive PA's and mediocre/poor defense. PCA is going to likely be a more useful player to the Cubs currently because in between the two who would be largely unhelpful offensively, one is providing elite defense at a premium position and other...well the other isn't in that ballpark. And I think while PCA has plenty to learn, learning at the MLB level probably isn't the worst thing right now, either. Take your lumps currently and if you can, get over them. It will take uber prospect Jackson Holliday a second chance to get it right and Jacksoun Chourio is only starting to look like he's turning a corner, 150 PA's into it.

As I said previously, Howard's been a popular punching bag for Cub fans, but I think we have to take a step back and say that, today, we have a hard time pin pointing what his upside is. I've compared Howard to Vazquez before and I'd like to continue to hammer that home; at this stage in his South Bend trip, Luis Vazquez probably had similar upside to Howard. That's not to say Howard is going to even hit Vazquez upside, but I think today we can say that Vazquez's upside has changed significantly over the course of the last two years, from someone who you'd have said "that guy will never play an inning in the majors" to "looks like a decent backup option and could be a second division starter". What Ed Howard's upside is today, isn't very clear. What I can say is that he had another good week with the bat and he's been an above league average hitter with South Bend long enough that it's very possible we're past "Well, he's just having a hot streak". With uncertainty with the glove (is it still plus?) and real uncertainty with the bat (and that's a good thing, there was a time it looked like there was no bat there at all), I'd implore everyone to kind of...suspend whatever you think, or you've thought, his upside is. To compare Howard to another Cub prospect, I'd point to Cristian Hernandez. Hernandez, a quite-hyped prospect, struggled mightily in Myrtle Beach for 1.5 years. This season, he entered with new mechanics and begin to really hit the ball...a lot...but with little power. The approach was much better but questions remained about would the power come. Then it started with doubles, and has now transitioned to home runs. He hit one home run in his first 140 PAs. Since May 28th, Hernandez has three home runs, six doubles and two triples. He's been one of the best hitters in Myrtle Beach, and while I'm not comping him as baby A-Rod, Cristian Hernandez is once again an easy-top-20 in the system and likely going to be worth a top-15 or better mid-season rank, Howard's had about 100 PA's where he's been over 100 wRC+. Let's see if the doubles turn into home runs. That doesn't mean Howard's going to make a top-15, he's a bit older (though does get the caveat of "horrible injury" as well), but that we've seen multiple times where prospects at his very position, that we have in our system today, have drastically changed where people saw them in the last two years. I don't know what his upside is. He's probably going to fail, but most prospects do! But his upside could be a lot of things right now, and we're experiencing the first time in his career where he's had extended health, and extended success. Let's see where that leads him. I was close to writing him off myself 100 PA's ago, but I was probably wrong to do so.

Update: False alarm. He's not in SF. Per Tommy Birch.

Either PCA to Iowa or (another) injury.

Edit: I made a mistake in my data set, so let me change my post. When setting up my table of .500 teams, I did not include the Cubs, who, were a .500+ better team and changed the data. The Cubs scored the 13th most runs against .500 teams but the 10th best Runs/G (they played less games against winning teams than others). The Cubs W-L against .500 teams was not great, but it wasn't their offenses' issue generally speaking. They played 89 games against winning teams and still were a top-third-run-scoring-offense. The idea that the Cubs offense beat up on bad teams is the hollow argument,.

Eh...I think they need to hit on one of them at least. That'd help a lot! But they still have tons of talent internally. If one or two of those don't work out, there's still Alcantara (who, despite it all, still has real upside), Triantos, Rojas, Davis, Canario, Hernandez...these are upside guys who can all be starting players if they hit their 95% (some more likely than others). Maybe none hit star level, okay, but the Cubs can figure out a way to acquire stars too (through aggression and the like - we can debate if they'd be willing or not). I don't think anything is so black and white, overall. There's plenty of way to skin a cat. Though the easiest is the Cubs top end prospects just turning out to be really good.

I quoted "unload" because unload generally has a negative connotation in terms of trades. When teams unload a guy, it's usually coupled with a bad contract or a bad influence. Like, the Washington Nationals didn't unload Juan Soto to the San Diego Padres so much as they just traded him. It's semantics, but when you say the Cubs can unload Steele, it comes across as though the Cubs have to or he's a negative, when I'd argue anything but that being the case. You're right, I did, however slightly mispeak on 2028; when I looked on FG they had him listed as FA in 2028; what I assumed that meant was post-'28 season, not pre-28 season. Small mistake. Point remains; tons of control. Secondly, I fully disagree with the teams' "inability" to adapt to a run-scoring environment. The Cubs finished 7th last year in runs scored! Yeah, this year sucks, but how is that a failure to adapt? This is largely a similar offensive team as last year. Run scoring is down in general, but the Cubs tried to essentially run back a top-10 offense last year. I'll admit, I thought a little of that was positive variance last season, but it isn't like we're talking some massive shift in how offense is scored. We can, again, debate roster construction - the Cubs have not put priority on star-power-bats that might help carry the team in times of negative variance. We can also point out flaws in the lineup; they don't do velocity well. That's true. But they weren't going to be able to remake their entire lineup overnight, and while we'd hope the Cubs would hit better than a .295 wOBA on 95+ pitches league average is a .303, so they're not like, pathetically bad. Last season they had a .310 against 95+ compared to a .317 league wOBA and finished top-10 in runs scored. Every team has flaws offensively. Overall on fastballs the Cubs have gotten better, going from the 23rd best team to the 17th best; so I'm not sure how much more adoption they realistically could have gone through. I feel fine about 2025. The Cubs have a great system, real upside guys who are close to the majors. They have money to spend. They have a far more defined "need" list and it's less wishy-washy. Let's put it this way: the Cubs have blown 17 saves and the average is 12. Assuming better health and some better variance, let's say the Cubs blew 12 games instead of 17, which, if the BP was mostly healthy (Alzolay, Merryweather, Almonte) feels realistic, no? The Cubs would be 42-37. They'd be 4 games behind 1st place (assuming none of those BS were against Milwaukee), and tied with the Padres for the 3rd WC. Would you feel that negative about 2025? I think our vision of the future right now is clouded, a lot, by present day frustrations...which...fair to a degree. It's hard not to be. But I think this year is like last year in inverse; we have to look through the trees to see the forest. The frustrations can't cloud what normal variance and normal luck would look like. I don't think it's a hopeless situation in the future. But I do think 2024 is starting to run out.

Because some of those guys are going to fail. And guys like Santander, who are good, but some of them will be allowed to walk, too. Every time we think a team has too many hitters or prospects who are *this* good, it always gets worked out. Remember when the Cubs had too many good shortstops? Things work out. It's different once we get tiers below (like, say, Davis and Canario!) But these high teir guys? They always find ways.

Yeah, I mean, I would too. But we also know that's like a 0% chance. Those prospects don't get traded now a days. You're likely talking lower level high upside guys who are 2-3 years out. Or higher level, mid-upside guys. Which is why I can't really see a reason to entertain Steele trades. I get the frustrations people have (I've got em too!) But trading Steele is the nuclear option when the issue here is more frustration than hopelessness.

Why are we assuming the Cubs will suck next year? I'd argue they don't suck now. This *year* sucks, but the Cubs have faced a pretty bad set of circumstances as well. Part of that is on them (poor performances), part of that is injury you cannot control, and part of that is bad luck that the slumps (and all teams have them) hit at the same time the team was ravaged by injury. You can't control much of that. That's not excusing it away, but understanding that if those things happened differently, we likely have a different outcome...it's why I don't think the Cubs suck, but that the year does. It's an inverse of 2023. Even so, he'd be able to more than "unload" Steele. Steele has until 2028. Barring thr Cubs packing it in and doing horsefeathers-all this offseason, it's probably a good bet the team enters 2025 with similar upside to 2024, if not a bit better (in the case the team adds the kind of talent we'd hope. Or at least one guy like that). I still wouldn't call Hoyer a wimp or not having the balls next season if Steele is still really good and the Cubs are mediocre if he kept him; he'd still be a Cub for 2026, 2027 and 2028! His clock is quite far away from hitting midnight and the Cubs shouldn't be super jazzed about trading away a 4 win, controlled arm like that. I think a lot of this is coming from frustration...which I get. Last night felt like a haymaker for 2024. Maybe that's a rally point and the Cubs get it together at the lowest point, but I think they're on borrowed time right now. I just think they're still set up to be fine in 2025 and talk of dealing Steele feels...extreme.

Steele hasn't even hit arb yet. He's 28 (though very soon to be 29). He's a career 3.26 ERA, has posted three seasons in a row (so far) with his highest xFIP of 3.58, so based on his GB's these all feel in line. For all of the "well can he repeat 2023..." all of his numbers are basically spot on them right now. He's a *very* good pitcher. He's on the right side of 30 and the right amount of control. He's (knock on wood) had no major arm related issues for a while (the IL stint was a leg muscle pull). Selling Steele is a nuclear option. I see no reason for the Cubs to hit that button right now. The Cubs season has been frustrating but why would the Cubs pull the rip cord on a 28/29 year old arm who's as good as Steele and controlled for three+ more years (he would hit FA in 2028)? The Cubs have no reason to not be a good team in that span. Maybe we don't give him an lengthy extension, but trading him now feels...like a real bad idea.

A full-blow-up is both unnecessary, and likely, a bad idea. It's unnecessary because as frustrating as this year is, this isn't a team devoid of talent like, say, the Rockies or the White Sox, almost, across the board. They have players you'd consider to be average to above average starters at LF, RF, CF, 2b, 1b, SS. They have a rotation that borders on really good when heathy. They have the foundation of a bullpen (one, that, is quite injured right now) - I know it doesn't feel that way, but a healthy Alzolay, Almonte, Leiter and Merryweather is a pretty good 7th-8th inning group (they're all on the IL). They've got plenty of youth; this isn't an old team (the current average age of Cubs' hitters is 28 and pitchers is 29). They have lots of prospects who are likely 2025 ETA (if not sooner). They also don't have a ton I think that is going to be tradeable at the deadline. Happ and Suzuki are NTC. Bellinger is either a rental or a $30m AAV guy - neither brings back a lot (depending on how you view his option situation). The players you might look to move have had bad years, like Hoerner (if you thought Shaw needed to be a 2b) or Morel (if you wanted to swap him for something else). They're not going to trade Busch, Swanson isn't movable, no one wants Amaya/Nido/Hendricks...So there's almost nothing to blow up if you wanted to for any sort of return, outside of like, nuclear and selling Steele. The Cubs aren't that far away. The holes they have are pretty glaring; the team has no distinct bullpen-shutdown option. Catcher is...ugh...it's a bad day when Tomas Nido is an upgrade. They need a real middle-order-bat - they need someone in the lineup who isn't just "good" but transcends good. We can debate how they can acquire them, or what they're going to do there...but I think the shopping list for the Cubs right now is small, and targeted. They have money (in theory) and prospects (in theory) to trade to get them (we can also debate if the team has the right people in charge to make the moves needed, but that's another topic, IMO). This was a team who probably could have won 84 or 85 games this year had injuries been less brutal, had players not collectively all been bad during the injury time and the like. It's not a brutal roster. It's a flawed roster - one that can't sustain down turns and negative variance in any meaningful way without the stars. But I think it's quite salvageable.

Alzolay threw 14 IP in April and 13 in May. He threw 14 in August. How was he "on pace" to shatter his innings when he was placed on the IL on September 10th? He was literally equally his innings highs the month before. Merryweather threw 11.2 in April. 12 in May, while throwing 14 in August and 12 in September. How is this "on pace" to shatter his high? August was his highest usage month and he threw...two more innings. And no, they all didn't "spend time on the IL" only one of them did...Julian Merryweather never was placed on the IL in 2023. His last IL stint before the back injury was in 2022 with Toronto. Mark Leiter JR has not been on the IL since 2018. On the topic of Leiter Jr...he threw 10.2 IP in April, 12 in May, 11 in June, 11 in July, 12 in August and 7 in September (because he completely lost the splitter). That's not shattering anything. You're inventing a narrative. Not only did two of the pitchers you claim went on the IL never were placed on the IL, there's no major uptick in usage later in the season. We can blame Hoyer for imperfect roster construction. We can say David Ross wasn't great manager. We cannot find anything to support the narrative that these three were abused by David Ross and that the reason they're sitting on the IL today is because Ross overly relied on them at the end of the season.