Jason Ross

The caveat of "it's super small sample size" and likely "curated PA's at that" should apply, but Busch is sporting a 132 wRC+ against LHP this year. Now, I don't expect him to be that good against lefties; this is in under 40 PAs. But he didn't sport horrible splits in Triple-A (well over .800 last year) and he's more than held his own when he's hit lefties this year. I'd like to see Busch start against a few more left handed pitchers moving forward. Sit him against the Nick Lodolo's, but I think he's earned a little bit more of a look against lefties

Not sure that's a great idea. He's fallen off significantly the last two seasons, posting deflated batting averages, likely due to increasing K issues. We don't have wRC+ for the Japanese Leagues (at least, I can't find it!) But his OPS have gone from over 1.000 to the mid .800s in 2023 and 2024 (to the lower .800s) He's a pretty good NPB hitter who strikes out a ton (81 in 64 games). Considering the jump to MLB pitching, Murakami seems like a bad bet unless there's some major contact changes. His prospect star has dimmed considerably.

That's a hard question to answer. Coming out of HS, the scouting report was always that the glove was legit, he was the best prep glove in the 2020 draft, and the bat had potential once Howard filled out. It was believed the glove was good enough that he had a pretty high floor and a very high likelihood, if he hit decently, that he'd make the MLB based on the glove profile mainly. Howard looked good defensively, but offensively was rough. Then he had a devastating hip injury and last year and early this year looked like it killed him as a prospect. Last 30+ days, however, the bat has come around. Defensive eye scouting is next to impossible at the MLB level for people who aren't doing it for a job considering how many people and how many innings you need to see. MLB feeds come with HD quality. MiLB scouting has all of the same caveats, just add in that the video quality makes you wonder if some of these clubs shoot their feeds on an iPhone4. Point is; I can't really say one way or another where his defense is today. But if the hip has come back to full health (which, based on his hitting seems plausible) then there's a reason to believe his glove is back to the 60+ grades it was getting a few years ago. Hopefully that gives you a good answer!

Hey, gotta find the positives out there! I know Ed Howard is the whipping boy of Cub fandom, but there's still some hope for him being a useful, albeit, unlikely starting option. At age 22, Luis Vazquez had a 72 wRC+ in Tennessee. after posting his first decent run of offense, a 118 wRC+ in South Bend (just 100 PA's). Now, he's on the MLB 40-man, there were times people were clamoring for him over Madrigal and Mastrobuni, and he'll either turn into a somewhat useful second piece in a trade, or a chance to be a backup INF. If Ed Howard followed the same path, sure it's probably less than what many dreamed of on draft day (though I'd also argue with how difficult the draft is, this would be a decent outcome), but considering in April he looked like a release-candidate...there's at least a somewhat believable path to relevancy here!

Just to echo a few other points, and to add some more to the discussion; no one here should be upset a bit about the 2021, 2022, or 2023 drafts, as all three look like absolute bangers right now. The Cubs have drafted plenty of useful-looking MLB players. You really couldn't ask more from either draft, and the Cubs have done well to, every year, find some guys beyond the 10th round who has become some sort of a prospect. They've used some of these draftable guys (Ferris/Hope) to land Busch as well. The only "bad" draft is 2020, and as others have mentioned, the context of that draft can allow you to give it a pass. As well, I think some added context to 2020 is needed: despite not drafting PCA and Caissie, both are 2020 picks who have, essentially, been entirely developed within the Cubs system. Luke Little still has a decent shot at being a useful MLB mid-reliever, and I suspect Matt Mervis will eventually be used in some sort of a trade to get an MLB piece. And listen, while it's a small sample size, Ed Howard is currently in his best run ever as a pro. His last 61 PA's have resulted in a 174 wRC+, a 7.6 BB%, a 21.1 K%, and a .530 BABIP. That's not enough today to say "they won that pick" but there's just enough juice left in that squeeze, that at 22 years old, and with all of the injuries he's had...that there's still some potential there. He's kept a 100 wRC+ over his last 100 PAs and there seems to be some real improvement. He's hit six doubles in his last 16 games (that's six of his season total of ten). He also looks healthy. Don't pencil Ed Howard in as a top-100 prospect, that'd be ridiculous. But if he reaches Tennessee this season at age 22...there might still be a prospect there, too.

It looked like we were going to avoid a one run game. Then the bullpen had to have a piece of the action.

Clearly, this is the Tomas Nido effect.

Phew. The 33 stolen bases in a row record was almost lost.

Oh, Dansby doesn't suck any more. This is a nice thing.

That's the stuff that really makes me mad. It's hard to be perfect (human element) and these guys throw really hard. I've had the pleasure of facing an MLB pitcher before and let me tell you; the stuff is just different. And he throws 92mph and isn't in the league any more. So, missing strikes and balls here or there...that's tough and I'll accept that. But just take the theatrics and bin it. The game isn't about the umpire and his ego. And I get that sometime a guy has to go because it's just too much. But Lane Johnson got tossed for turning around, there was the guy who got tossed from the dugout because a fan yelled something...get over yourself.

I think if we went back in time, like 20 or 30 years ago and looked at the data from those umpires and compared them to CB and Angel Hernandez...I bet they'd grade just fine. Like, Angel Hernandez wasn't great this year before he retired, but he wasn't even the lowest rated umpire in the game. And I suspect the worst umpires today are better than the worst umpires 20-30 years ago. There's always going to be a "worst" regardless of how much better people get. Where I think umpires get themselves in trouble is the theatrics. Tossing guys for small things, fragile ego stuff. They create a world in which they become lightening rods for criticism.

I highly suspect (and since we don't have the data we have today, it's hard to really track) that umpires across the league are getting better and better and better and that they make more calls correct than ever (they have access to the same tools we do!). The problem is that with access to data, the K-zone (which sometimes TV K-zones can be a bit misleading!), umpire score cards and the like, we're just more aware of when they're slightly off. None of that is to say don't automate the zone (please, do. I don't buy the "human element" of the game. The strike zone is a rule...just enforce the rule)...but I think umpires in general get a little unfair rap due to the wealth of information we have,

Horrible PA by Bellinger.

IIRC, the first mention of it came from a Baseball America article by Josh Norris from 2020, well before he signed with the Cubs officially, giving him the "Baby A-Rod" moniker.

27 scoreless innings is cool and all, but the Cubs are already in a weird place with the 40-man. I think he's a RHH only kind of guy; he was under 15% K% against lefties. He does well to get guys out at Double-A, but he's someone who needs probably 15 or 20 innings in Iowa before I consider adding him to the 40 and saying "go get MLB hitters out". There are things in there that are good, but he's already on thin ice with how often guys make contact with his stuff, and that's before he's gotten the MLB ball they use in Triple-A. He's at least put himself on the radar and that's good. But there's enough "ehhhh" in the profile that just throwing strikes isn't enough to get him the bump yet. He's got to get Triple-A chases and in-zone whiffs that are around league average...MLB hitters will get to him if he's simply throwing a lot of strikes. Tyson Miller, for example, gets 37% chase against RHH, which is way over MLB average, so if we're talking about him as another Miller...that's going to be a tough bar to clear, and that's why Miller is so damn effective.

I'm usually the first guy to say that lineup construction barely matters; be it that the most optimized lineup and the least optimized lineups generally result in very, very similar overall expected run outcomes, or that any part of the order can come up with the most important PA spot of the game... ...but PCA right now is not helping the Cubs score more runs. His wRC+ is better than Amaya. Gomes and Mastrobuoni. That's it. He's been 1% worse than Nick Madrigal. That isn't to say he'll stay there, but he's done nothing to suggest hitting him more warranted right now. He doesn't need to lead off despite his speed.

Yes. Options have changed rules a few times over the years and some are behind on the new rules (not calling you out, saying the Score). Options are a full year and you can come up and down 5 times on the season.

I know Mastro is a running joke among fans, but this is good news if you want Petr Crow-Armstrong to play. It'll be Pete's show every day and Mastro has shown to be bench fodder when he's around more than once, with the club being willing to let him rot as the 26th man.

I mean, if we're talking star potential bats, I think both Owen Caissie and Moises Ballesteros fit into that category. Ballesteros, by wRC+, is having one of the best seasons Double-A has seen based on his age in about two decades of numbers. Owen Caissie has consistently posted elite exit velocities, has been lowering his K% and increasing his home run production. Both likely fall into "star" bat possibilities. You can point to their overall rankings, but I think that has to do with the uncertainty of their defensive futures and less to do with their bats. That' not to say either, or both, will hit their ceilings, but let's not discount these guys; they're two of the best bat prospects the Cubs have had in a long time.

There is. But much like hitting coaches, I think we have to ask "does that really quell fans and the media?" and I think the answer is "no". Jed hired Carter, so that's still coming back on him. Carter's not been here for the full four years, And I don't think the average fan thinks Hawkins is pulling many strings. I just don't think "Cubs fire Carter Hawkins" makes the masses on twitter, facebook, reddit, and the overall media happy or calm. It feels like it'd end up in the same boat as "Cubs fire Dustin Kelly as hitting coach" to those groups.

In theory, yes. There's some negative variance here, and if Cub hitters continue the process by which they've gone about things, they should get better and regress to the mean. The problem is that there's no hard-and-fast rule on when luck changes, however, and it might not change today, tomorrow, or in July. They may also press and change their processes, in which, we should expect them to hit differently. And they may not ever get positive variance in which they over play their batted ball data and get their numbers on paper looking the way they should. It's been a nightmare season for the Cubs in many ways; they've had bad injury luck, bad batter ball luck, and their BP has blown games left and right. At some point the Cubs have to perform and we can't just wait for the luck to turn around, too. So we're kind of at a crossroads that they kind of have to do something sometime soon if they're going to get out of the hole they've dug themselves.

I'll offer a different perspective and it's that yes, I don't think he's very safe right now. While I don't think it's entirely Jed's fault for injuries and some bad luck happening, it's still his roster in year four, and I think someone's going to take the heat if this team wins 78 games. The Cubs made a managerial change last offseason amidst the fan anger, which both helped push forward expectations (by getting, in perception, the best manager in the game) and the team has continued to under perform (fairly or unfairly). They can't just fire the manager again, which leaves few options for the axe to fall on. The Cubs could once again, fire the hitting coaches, but they've tried that a handful of times and that's never fixed much; I'm not sure the Cubs are going to get away with that as an acceptable "fix" when it comes to fans and media. A lot of this comes down to how much you think Tom Ricketts cares about public perception. I don't think Tom cares about winning so much as the perception of being competitive brings; the latter helps bring in the money. Tom's the kind of guy who skips Cubs Convention, conveniently, when he knows questions of spending/winning/losing are going to come up. He feels like the kind of owner who, if push comes to shove, will shift blame to those he can; in this instance, Jed Hoyer. With one year left on his contract, Jed's firing won't hurt Tom super-big in the pockets, and his firing can spearhead both a positive public spin and deflect that blame. It may also bring in a general manager more willing to take some swings, for better or worse. While I don't think Tom's a particularly interesting owner, I think his biggest reservations are year to year spending, and not the long term contract (I think that's more Jed than Tom, personally), A new VP of baseball may be willing to make a bigger prospect trade putting the Cubs back in even more favorable media light. Initially, I thought Jed would be safe almost regardless, but I think Tom's the kind of guy who's going to make sure the axe comes down on any one but himself publicly, and I think the only real way to make that happen, unless the Cubs turn this around, is to blame Jed. Fans are mad right now. They're exhausted. I don't think the masses will be jazzed if Cubs keep the band back together and just say "one more time!". It might be prudent baseball ops wise, but again, I just don't know if Tom will be willing to eat that press.

Listen, I'd have loved to have gotten Soto. I argued they should have been more in on him this offseason and I'll agree with you it'd have been really great to get him last TDL. How feasible that is, we don't know. The Padres aren't the "pack it in" kind of a team (especially, looking back on things, with how the owner's health was I'm sure there was a human element of wanting to see the Padres succeed for him), and if we look how they handled the Soto trade this offseason, we can see they prioritized a near-MLB-ready arm in Thorpe, who they used to parlay into Dylan Cease. I suspect the Padres, even if they could have been convinced to deal Soto at the deadline last year, would have prioritized near MLB ready talent and how likely teams were to trade those talents mid-season is hard to tell. Teams generally don't like doing that with no succession plan ready in case of injury. I know there's always the "well just offer them a deal too good to say no to!" or "whatever, just do it anyways!: but then we start to get into really far fetched-hypotheticals and what-ifs. It's very easy to just say "well make it happen" but there are a lot of moving parts. In the end, all we know is that Juan Soto wasn't dealt at the deadline and the reasoning behind that (whether it was a SD decision or a rest-of-the-league decision) really isn't able to be known. I agree, Jeimer Candelario isn't like, very exciting. And when Candelario is the best bat traded, it says as much about the Cubs as it does the rest of the market; I get it.

I don't think DJ Herz is necessarily better than any of those players and I don't blame Hoyer for not keeping him over them. At the deadline, Cuas looked for more likely to be an MLB player. The issues he's had since coming to Chicago are mainly new (the walks). I get everyone hates Cuas because he kind of sucked here, but Cuas had some interesting things to him and for whatever reason, it just didn't work. He was far more MLB ready last deadline than Herz was. Alzolay was really good last year; he's bad this year because he's hurt. That's not Hoyer's problem, that's just what happens. Neris...Neris had some underlying things I wrote about being worried about. He also has a fairly long track record of being a useful MLB reliever. It was far more likely Neris was useful to the Cubs this year than Herz. They also didn't really choose Neris over Herz...Herz was gone. I think they would haven chosen him regardless, but that's because one has a track record of MLB success and the other walks a ton of guys in the minors. Hoyer is a bit of a punching bag right now, and in many ways, he probably deserves it. Trading Herz, a double-a pitcher with walk issues over keeping Alzolay and signing Hector Neris, isn't it, though. With that said, Herz profiles as a version of Luke Little without a 98mph fastball. He has similar mechanical inconsistency which creates lots of non-competitive pitches. He isn't a starter long term in profile Yes. He had one magical start, but let's be real, that's an outlier based on his entire career. He's more likely a middle reliever with some possibility of ending up in an 8th inning role if he can solve that (despite the lack of a 98mph fastball his stuff is clearly good) but so far in his career he hasn't. He was walking 1 in 5 hitters in Triple-A and 5 in 8 innings as an MLB pitcher...we know he didn't wake up and just know how to throw strikes. If Herz is successful that's the price of doing business. The Cubs have plenty of "guys with stuff who can't throw strikes". Drew Gray, Michael Arias, Luke Little, Daniel Palencia...we can play this game over and over. (The Cubs bullpen has been playing this game all season. The last thing it needs is more walks.) The Cubs were fighting for the playoffs and they spent one of them, who was in Double-A, who they didn't seem overly likely to Rule V protect, to get better last year. If you weren't going to protect him, and he was likely to be taken, then get what you can. They did in the form of the best available hitter (at the time) for a playoff push. You can't lose there. It's a small cost overall. If Herz eventually becomes a reliever, that's fine. The Cubs shouldn't have problems drafting and finding more "stuff" guys who struggle with strike throwing in the draft, it's not an uncommon profile. There will always be DJ Herz's in the system. Most of them will never throw enough strikes to be good, and a few of them will break out. For Herz's sake I hope he's one of them, for the Cubs' sake I don't think it's a bad idea to use those as trade bait.