Jason Ross

I'd be surprised to see the Cubs take Honeycutt, personally. He has a profile of a hitter that the Cubs, under the Dan Kontrovitz draft model, have largely shied away from in the first few rounds. They've tended to go hit over power profile's at the top: with players like Shaw/Triantos and even Ed Howard a bit (though that I think was 2020 fueled and they went with the safe prep-glove at SS, but that's a guess). They tend to expand the profile of hitters they're interested once they get deeper into the rounds (with guys like Alfonsin Rosario and Zyhir Hope, for example). It's pretty easy to dream on Honeycutt's upside, but I haven't seen the Cubs really go for that profile at the top of a draft in a while. Maybe they break the mold, but if that's the name they call I'll be surprised.

Yeah, the amount of walks Triantos isn't taking is probably slept on as much as his stolen base total, IMO. He's walked three times since May 28th, and just five times over his last 33 games. That's a 3.4% walk rate. And while I don't want to draw too direct of a a comparison here, Pete Crow-Amrstrong had a similar "I'm going to just swing" profile...and he nearly tripled that rate in Double-A. There's a lot of really good things going on with Triantos right now, but his approach remains a work in progress. Not everyone has to walk 10%+ of the time, but I think almost everyone needs to be able to walk near-ish 5% of the time and James doesn't look overly likely to do that as of today. Hopefully this is a "I am just too good at Double-A" symptom, but it's hard to really say that's also not a real flaw in his game.

Feels like "moving day" has to be coming soon for a pretty big group of kids. There's a handful of guys in Tennessee (Shaw, Triantos, Birdsell, to name a few) who probably need to get to Iowa. Following them, Ed Howard should move to Tennessee with a few others. Myrtle Beach should probably see Hernandez and Preciado, possibly Wiggins and a few others move to SB, as well.

Selfless plug...but...

Haha forgive me, I had edited my post before you had posted this because I realized I didn't read correctly. I had caught my mistake but seems like it wasn't fast enough for you not to have to do extra legwork! Whoops!

Nevermind, I read the post again and assume Brandon Woodruff counts as one of those 2023 injuries. I cant read!

Yeah, I don't think we disagree on the overall premise. I did say, "I think it's a bit silly" in my original post you quoted; it does feel a bit crazy. And it's not that I'm not trying to defend Hoyer, but when the market seems as frozen as it does (Arraez is the only even medium trade out there), it's hard to throw it on the feet of Jed and suggest he could have ripped this cord on his own. It would seem based on the Arraez trade that Bendix is willing to deal, but kind of like how the A's were pretty unrealistic on Esuery Ruiz, they might have been super high on like, Dillon Head or Mortorella comparative to the rest where as they might be less enthused with like Alexander Canario or Michael Arias. It's just really hard to pin point how one team views a prospect versus another. I just think there's more to it than an easy button push. Perhaps Jed Hoyer is being too scared to make a trade. But it could just as realistically be other teams setting prices too high. As of now, with Assad also hitting the IL, it may be a slight blessing in disguise that the Cubs haven't made a Scott-type trade, because they're getting to a point where the team is so hurt, and so far out of it, that I don't think a Tanner Scott could have saved this mess they find themselves in. Maybe the hole would be less deep had they gotten Scott 45 days ago, but maybe not. Lot of what if's here that are unknowable.

Nothing is fun.

Yes. But college catchers, like Malcom Moore, do not. Almost all teams are using pitchcom currently, and the calls are being made from the dugout, relayed to both catcher and pitcher via their watch.

I mean...maybe on Tanner Scott? I'm not trying to give Jed a pass here, but at the same time, it's really hard for us to say what the Marlins thought process is here. For example, Scott started off pretty rough this year. Through the first of May, Scott was walking more hitter than striking them out. From 2021-2022 Scott ran walk rates north of 14.7% both years. The Marlins, likely, would be holding out hope that Scott turned that walk rate around - what's the use of trading one of your few good remaining chips at his lowest point? Other teams are likely looking at 2021, 2022 and the first month of 2024 and saying "listen, I've seen this story before". So you've got a team unlikely to sell him at his low point and teams unlikely to pay the regular price too. Credit to Scott, he's turned it around. At the same distinction, no other team has traded for Scott either, and the Cubs aren't the only team with BP issues right now. So while we can say "Jed should have traded for Scott by now!" I think there's nuance there. I don't entirely disagree that the Cubs probably should have been more aggressive. I think you probably could have gotten Scott, or Hunter Harvey or something and paid a little extra from the Canario/Davis/Arias tier of prospects and been fine. We can also fault the Cubs for being one reliever short entering the season. But I can also see a world where the Marlins were being stingy on their end here, too, and Scott not being so available unless you were willing to pay for 2023 Scott with Early-2024 Scott production being your current data point. With the A's...I think there's two leverage guys; Mason Miller and Lucas Erceg. I think Mason Miller is almost unobtainable as of today. Erceg is more attainable, but has 4.5 years of control left - I cannot imagine he's cheap, either.

If I was guessing today I think the Cubs will be looking at: Tibbs. Yesavage, Smith, Waldschmidt, and Lindsey and both Moores (Malcom and Christian). I think Christian and Tibbs will be off the board, as will Yesavage. I would be surprised if the Cubs went with Honeycutt based on the Cubs previous first round college bats. They tend to prefer guys who model really well (which Honeycutt does) but also guys who go hit over power, which Honeycutt does not. So my early betting would be on Waldschmidt, Malcom Moore, Smith and Lindsey.

I think this is the general issue...most teams just aren't ready to give up today. The teams who are giving up, like the A's, Rockies and White Sox don't have much to trade outside of the like, Crochet/Robert/Miller types (which isn't to say we should ignore bigger trades, just that those are the only things of interest they really have). Which then puts you in a situation where you have to force a team to trade those guys; likely by overpaying (The Mets reportedly wanted Caissie for Alsonso. We all know that's not what it'll end up costing whomever buys Alonso in July if he's traded, but goes to show where some of these teams are holding the ransom line today - even if that's still never going to happen). It takes two to tango and baseball teams have kind of all decided with the number of WC spots open that trading is a last moment thing. I think it's a bit silly myself, but I wonder how much can realistically be done right now outside of grabbing the Nitolli's and (Tyson) Miller's of the world and hoping they work out. Once you get in a situation where the Cubs are, you almost have to find a way to tread water until July 15th or later.

While a fun anecdote provided by Billy Beane, it's simply an anecdote. I also don't think it necessarily applies here; Malcom Moore may have that same mental understanding at the plate but defensively, may a greater understanding of the game or a far better way to articulate that understand versus his peers; an important quality for catcher that other positions simply don't need to have. I think it's counter productive and silly to think any one sitting behind our computers knows exactly what Moore said to impress teams. I can also say from years of watching the draft, most fans (and this is directed at no one in particular, yourself included CubinNY) have no idea what they're talking about at the draft. They throw fits when the Cubs take guys like Cade Horton because they think teams are making snap judgements based on two starts at the end of the year (when they're picks that have been in the making for years) and pine over players who fail. I'm guilt of not liking Jordan Wicks and a few other draft picks who look like good baseball players, myself. Nature of the beast! Point is, if good drafting baseball teams think that Malcom Moore said something really important in those interviews, it's probably fair to believe what he said mattered. Considering he "blew away" the "entire industry", the assumption is that very well run teams do think that. What he said? I don't know and Doyle didn't really say. But it's probably worth noting that Moore is doing an saying everything right and that's not nothing. If you had him and Walter Janek, for example, neck and neck in terms of catching prospects...this may give the edge to Moore.

I think there's a fair reason to question whether or not Hoyer should be fired or not. Part of this simply isn't his fault, though, some of this is. Secondly, I'm not certain there's a clearly better option. I think ultimately he'll get another year, but the way it's going, my confidence in that is waning.

I mean, to be fair, there's a thread dedicated to one of these that's five pages long just below this.

Malcom Moore is a catcher. It's likely not that he is smart, it's likely how he talks about and understands the game. Moore's defensive game has been questioned. So it could be that Moore was very capable of of discussing things such as a strong understanding of his own game, his changes needed, or more likely even than that, a really strong understanding of pitch calling, pitch mixes, game flow, etc...the types of things that catchers are largely in charge of at higher and higher levels of playing. For someone like Moore who, as stated, has questions about his defensive work, not only being able to articulate these things well, but seemingly, incredibly well, would likely be able to convince teams that he's far more capable of sticking at catcher than previously believed. As a catcher, Moore is stud considering the belief is that he will hit well at the next levels. Which is what I'll assume Doyle means when he says "he made himself a lot of money".

Consider me whelmed.

To add, FG did a list of notable combine performances and listed Kellen Lindsey, who's gotten some connections to the Cubs, as the first player listed who stood out in a positive way. Got some Trea Turner comps. He's a fast riser. I'm guessing as it sets up today that the Cubs take a college hitter up top; the draft is college heavy, and specifically in the mid-range, college-hitter heavy unless Ysevege makes it to #14 (which seems unlikely). But I suspect after their college hitter, the Cubs go heavy pitching. Speaking of the FG article, guy I'm keeping tabs on now and doing homework on is PJ Morlando. He had an awesome display out there, looks like a 2nd round overslot prep-bat. He's filled out at 6"3, 200lbs already. Big power in the bat. Someone is going to get a really good corner bat/1b bat in the 2nd there. Different profiles, but similar in how I felt to Owen Caissie in 2020: that's a bat you want in your system if you can make it work. Especially in a prep-weak class.

I don't think you're very wrong there. The amount of things I can create, manipulate and the such with Baseball Savant, TruMedia and Fangraphs is crazy. And I'm just some moron at home. People who are much more intelligent than me can manipulate these things to create almost any data set they could dream of. I do think most people have, at their finger tips (and if they have the understanding) the tools to find out just about anything. Or at least, anything that's so close to being the ballpark of the absolute answer that it's well within an acceptable range. The one caveat I'd give is that I don't think defensive metrics are as reliable as, say, pitching/batting stats and I think there's a degree of "iffy" to them. I find them the best we have available and far more useful than "Well I think I saw this" kind of defensive scouting people are wont to do., but I think they're a little behind. OAA is getting very close and DRS is good...but I think they need just a bit more marinated time to really hit those levels.

Sure! But what magical data do you think suggests outside of a Crystal Ball that could even half suggest that Hector Neris was going to turn from a pretty good reliever to, essentially, the worst reliever in baseball? I can concede that he's 35 and logged lots of innings - sometimes 35 year old relievers just fall off like that. It's a real thing, and it happens. But many of the times it happens not as a random roll of the dice. When these things happen, more times than naught, there's a trail of data that anyone can find. I have no doubt the Cubs have powerful data; far more powerful than I can pull from. But there are times when no amount of data equates to a crystal ball and if we're going to go on the assumption that Jed Hoyer (or any GM) should be capable of predicting the future without fail, then you're simply never going to be happy with any baseball operations management ever. It seems with Neris, you're more than likely asking him to have had a crystal ball to predict that the 35 year old was just going to fall apart more so than asking him to have found any trail of data that existed. I've got no issues being critical of Hoyer. I've been critical in the past. I can find plenty of faults. But I think blaming Hoyer for Neris feels like "I'm mad and want to assign blame to someone" more-so than it's just the cost of doing business. Sometimes mid-30's relievers fall apart. But that's also why you stick to one year contracts, which the Cubs did (unless they allow it to vest, which feels very unlikely).

I'm not saying that the Cubs bullpen is better than the Brewers, you're moving the goalposts (and I'm fairly sure you know you're doing that). Let's try to have a good-faith discussion. I have already given plaudits to the Brewers organization. They do great. No one here is saying the Cubs bullpen has been good or better than Milwaukee. Beyond that, we can discuss why I think the record is a bit misleading later, if you'd like, but staying within the discussion we were having (the Cubs hit-rate on reclamations), it has little bearing. You were complaining that the Cubs miss too often on relievers and throw games away, which suggested the Milwaukee Brewers didn't have guys they scouted come in, and suck. The Brewers have thrown, essentially, 88 IP out of their BP this year to 0 fWAR or negative fWAR relievers. I listed off about 10 guys there who have been anywhere from "not great" to "really bad". These are the same Richard Lovelady and Colton Brewer types the Cubs have tried (and failed) with in similar amounts of innings. If we want to highlight the 5 IP that Lovelady gave the Cubs, we should also point out the Thyago Viera's for Milwaukee. They're not infallible; clearly they churn through mediocre to bad relievers. That's the point of my post. Due to their relative health, they're more capable of doing that. You can dump a guy in 3 IP if you have the depth to do so. The Cubs have not had that depth when they have, at any point, 4-5 of their BP guys already on the IL. Comparing the '24 Cubs BP to the Brewers is probably fair in ways but also unfair in ways. If we are talking about the Cubs, three of their eight best pre-season projected arms are on the 60-man IL. The Brewers have lost Williams, but the rest of their pre-season projected BP remains largely in tact outside of Devin Williams. They entered with a better BP and haven't faced the injury issue the Cubs have. That's both something that the Brewers should get points in (constructing a better BP) but also should probably be noted; the only injuries their BP has sustained is Williams and the previously mentioned bad Uribe. Williams is a loss, but they haven't faced the sheer adversity the Cubs have had to there. I doubt, for example, they'd have the sixth best ERA if they were missing Williams, Megill, and Hudson all year, while intermittently missing a few other guys.

I know you do. You know I love you Bitts. We are all frustrated. I just get less frustrated because I have taught middle school for 13+ years now. There's almost nothing that can affect me now a days. My emotions are all dead.

The first line is my exact point: we kind of do know, though. We know what conveys the most from MiLB to the MLB and what signals likely success. It's not bat speed. It's not EV. It's contact rate, swing decisions and the like. It's one of the most consistent identifiers of MLB success. So far Canario has 40 PA's in the majors...he's struck out 40% of the time. You know what his contact rate is? Under 60%. We can safely assume that a player who can't make 62% of contact on his swings in Triple-A will be that level or worse at the MLB level. 40 PA's isn't enough to say anything definitive, but it's also exactly what we should expect from him; that data tracks. We can also safely assume that if he does that, he will not find success at the MLB level. It's super rare for hitters to take a contact rate below 63% and find any sort of success with it. Brent Rooker was able to find success at that level last year, but he's in the 93% of barrel rate, 91st in hard hit and 85th in LA sweet spot. He's even higher in those categories today. So unless we think Canario is going to be in the 90% or above in terms of damage when he makes contact...I think we have to assume he's more Nolan Gorman 2024 than Brent Rooker 2023. Even if he's a 100 wRC+ hitter, he's a mediocre fielder at best. What do you think a 100 wRC+ RF'er with mediocre defense is worth? Alex Verdugo has a 100 wRC+ and is worth .9 fWAR...but he has +8 DRS/+1 OAA. It took him 77 games to get there. It's more likely today that he comes in 20% lower than league average than league average making it much more likely he's a 0 fWAR guy than a .9 fWAR guy in 300 PAs. We can use the "maybe" arguments and "we don't know" all we want, but we know better. I've got 0 PA's at the MLB level. Maybe I can have a 100 wRC+. We don't know. But we do. We do know. We know that's a bad idea. Much like we can take a few minutes, look at Canario's processes, compare him to other MLB hitters and we can say "oh, yeah, that won't work". It's a losing proposition. Sure, maybe he just BABIPs people to death and is great for 200 PA's before he sucks. But that's the worst way to do this because anyone could have a lucky tear. It's how likely someone is to actually help. You might win the lottery tonight! But much like Canario being good (unless something seriously changes), you probably won't.

The Brewers and the Rays have countless misses too. Abner Uribe has 14 IP this year, an ERA just south of 7. That's more innings than Brewer and Lovelady combined with the Cubs. In fact, in their 2024 bullpen alone, they've given 22 IP to Thyago Viera (-,3 fWAR), 8.1 IP to Mitch White (-.2 fWR), 2 IP to Owen Miller (-.1 fWAR), 3 IP to Jacob Junis (-.1 fWAR). Over those 35 IP, the Brewers have gotten -.6 fWAR. This doesn't include the other 52.4 IP the Brewers have given to guys like the aforementioned Uribe, Jake Bauers, Kevin Herget, Janson Junk...who have accounted for 0 fWAR. The point I'm making is this: if you're going to find the Bryan Hudson's and the Julian Merryweathers you're going to find more Thyago Vieras and Michael Ruckers. We just don't pay attention to the Thyago Viera's because we don't watch the Milwaukee Brewers very much, but we do notice the Michael Ruckers because we pay attention daily to the Cubs. I'm not saying that there are times the Cubs have missed, or let someone go early. Or that they're imperfect. Just that while it's easy to remember the Cubs misses, these teams have tons of misses too...you're just not really paying attention to them.

That feels like a balanced approach to this.