Jason Ross

Just five years ago, the Chicago Cubs' farm system was not highly regarded throughout the scouting community, with just Nico Hoerner registering on the Baseball Prospectus Top 101 list in 2019. This week, the Cubs lead the way, with nine prospects on the list. How have the Cubs come this far in just half of a decade? And what do we think about the list? Image courtesy of © Ron Chenoy-USA TODAY Sports Over the last five years, the Chicago Cubs have methodically built up their developmental system. Hiring former relief pitcher Craig Breslow (once dubbed "the smartest person in baseball") to develop their pitching, Dan Kantrovitz from Oakland to run their drafts, and a multitude of hitting directors, the Cubs have rebuilt their internal infrastructure from the ground up from the Theo Epstein and Jason McLeod days. The reality of prospects and development is that it takes years to begin to see the fruits of the labor. After a few years of waiting, the Cubs are now on the precipice of seeing their system begin to pay off. While the ultimate goal is to turn prospect development into MLB success, we can get an idea of how the rest of the industry sees the system by diving into the Baseball Prospectus Top 101 that was released Tuesday. Below are the nine Cub prospects on the BP list, as well as their rankings: Pete Crow-Armstrong, CF - 20th Matt Shaw, 2b/SS/3b - 21st Cade Horton, RHP - 27th Owen Caissie, RF/1b/DH - 65th Michael Busch, 1b/2b/3b - 71st Kevin Alcantara, CF - 80th Moises Ballesteros, C - 84th James Triantos, 2b/3b/OF - 91st Jordan Wicks, LHP - 94th This is an incredibly interesting list, and it shows just how diversified the Cubs have been in adding talent. They drafted Shaw, Horton, Triantos (second round) and Wicks; signed Ballesteros as an international free agent; and traded for Crow-Armstrong, Caissie, Alcántara and Busch. A complaint levied, whether fair or not, on Jason McLeod and the former developmental team was that it was pretty easy to develop high first-round selections such as Kris Bryant, Kyle Schwarber and Ian Happ. This time, the Cubs are finding prospects in a multitude of different ways. Even more promising: although the Cubs traded for three of those players, those three have done the bulk of their development within the Cubs' system. Credit needs to be given to the Cubs' player-development team, because it's clear their system is working, in addition to that of the scouting department. Having this many prospects on the top 101 is also good for the Cubs from a 2024 Rookie of the Year perspective. With Crow-Armstrong, Horton and Busch all likely to get significant run with the Cubs during the season, the team now has three prospects who can be in that conversation. If any of them (or even, possibly, Shaw or Wicks, though those are less likely for a few reasons) were to finish in the top-3 of voting, the Cubs would be awarded an extra draft pick in the 2025 draft. The BP list does not help determine which prospects are eligible for that incentive, and any player who does qualify has to accrue a full year of service time in order for the Cubs to receive it, but this is still telling. There's a bit of weirdness in having authors and staff members at places like Baseball America being partially responsible for draft-pick compensation, but the more the industry has strong perceptions of the Cubs' system, the more likely the Cubs are to get a few extra draft picks these next few years. The most surprising addition: Moises Ballesteros, #84 This isn't me saying he's not deserving--just that I'm surprised to see him ranked right up there next to the likes of Alcántara (80th), as well as a few other notable prospects such as Max Meyer (86th) and Termarr Johnson (90th). I wrote about Ballesteros earlier this offseason, ranking him the eighth-best prospect in the Cubs system. I was pretty bullish on him then, and I remain so; his bat is really good and really advanced. With that said, a ranking in the top-85 suggests some belief that the big-bodied catcher can actually stick at the position. DH-only types won't really make a list that high. When I asked Jarrett Seidler of Baseball Prospectus (and one of their staff who helped with the list) about his future at the catching position, he had this response: Overall, I think that's a positive development for Big Mo'. Even if he's a "maybe," it means there's a realistic chance that he can stick at, arguably, the most premium position on the diamond. Ballesteros the catcher is really one of the most enticing prospect outcomes in the entire system. Most disappointing omission: Jefferson Rojas, NR It's really hard to find someone I'm overly surprised to see not make the top 101, but if there is one, it's probably Jefferson Rojas. You can make an argument that an 18-year-old shortstop at Myrtle Beach who put up a 115 wRC+ while showing advanced plate approach is someone who deserves to make a list. BP placed the Braves' shortstop Ignacio Alvarez in the #99 slot, and I think you can argue what Rojas did at Low A was more impressive (or on par with) what Alvarez did at High A. Alvarez, at 20 years old, is nearly two full years older than Rojas; hit the same number of home runs in 200-plus more plate appearances; and had a wRC+ of 123 with a similarly solid strikeout-to-walk ratio. None of this is suggesting BP made a bad choice, just that you can make an argument for Rojas over him there in those last few slots. In the end, it's not really worth complaining about; these things are so subjective that it'd be pretty impossible to truly say one deserves the slot over the other. Most of this is probably just because I really like Rojas, too. The next steps for the system: Maybe the best news of all: the Cubs had nine prospects on the top-101, but it could have been more. Jarret Seidler tweeted this out: Obviously, the Cubs traded Ferris away, but this just goes to show that the Cubs could have realistically had up to eleven players (that's an impressive 10% of the entire thing!) on the top 101. It's one of the reasons why the Cubs likely felt comfortable moving Ferris and 2023 11th-round selection Zyhir Hope just a week ago. It's also why I think the Chicago Cubs are still in a position to make trades from their prospect depth now, or at the deadline. Not only are the Cubs showing a meaningful ability to develop prospects across the board, they're starting to build another group of exciting prospects just under the surface. It wouldn't be surprising to see the aforementioned Brown and Rojas jump into the midseason lists. Nor would it be surprising to see a few names a bit farther down join top 100 lists later. The Cubs have a handful of enticing, high-upside prospects, and it's likely a few break out. Whether that's Derniche Valez, Drew Gray, Jaxon Wiggins, or someone still unexpected, the Cubs are well on the way to changing the narrative on their farm system in a lasting way. Which of BP's rankings jump out to you? Who has you most excited in the system? Let's talk about the future. View full article

Cubs look like they'll have three guys who could get RoY votes in 2024 between PCA, Horton and Busch. PCA and Horton will depend a bit on when they get the call, but both have the ability to really blow up it wouldn't be surprising to see them finish in the top-3. Busch should get a full year and could jump into that conversation. With Pipeline and BA adding their names to the top-100's. they now qualify.

Yeah, sounds about right. I know that Hoyer mentioned that trading for Busch wouldn't preclude them from adding a 1b, but I wonder if that was more lipservice or a mention of Bellinger (who would have to move off of CF if the Cubs promote PCA) more so than Hoskins.

Daniel Palencia is one. I wrote about it in my top-20 list write up. It's small sample still, but he only walked six in his last 17 innings in the bullpen. There was some decent regression in Luke Little's walk rates last season as well. Both haven't done enough to where you can say "yeah, these guys are entirely, fully, 100% better" but there were some positive movements for both.

Yeah, I love the gamble there. The control/command was always a bit...iffy in his profile. With that said, SEC Junior year is the big jump year we see for starters. Reports from the fall were that his secondaries took a big step forward on their own, so it'll be interesting to see how and if that continues to hold true. I'm pretty excited about him and was far more excited about him than the general fan. Positives: I was far more excited about Cade Horton, too! Negatives: I was far less excited about Kris Bryant on draft day, so my draft-day confidence giveth and it taketh haha.

Matches the MLB Execs ranking of Horton.

Yeah, I think I'd agree with this. I don't see a unicorn. I think your best case scenario is something akin Dustin Pedroia offensively while being average at a position defensively like 2b or 3b. Something like a 120 wRC+ hitter or so. While Pedroia had a few seasons where he could be the best player in the org, Shaw probably doesn't have the defensive potential at any position (though may add more base running with his athleticism) to do that.

Good news: the Cardinals fairy dust seems to be on a bit of short supply recently.

Agreed. I think he'll come a long a bit slower than Horton this year. With that said, if you told me Wiggins had a similar (although relative to his draft position) rise from a guy fans don't even include in their org-top-20's to being a top-50 guy league wide...I'd entirely buy it. Stuff jumps that much.

Wiggins is the most underrated prospect in our system, IMO. I think people see the TJS and the college numbers and write him off as just a lottery ticket, but there was some real helium on his progress in the fall, and we never got to see it in the spring. In a draft that was pretty devoid of high-end-college arms outside of the top-20 or so picks, the Cubs got someone who had first round hype later in the draft. Add in that this was a Ty Nichols recommendation (he recommended Wicks and Horton!) and I'm all in on Wiggins.

Savant. You can find these percentile rankings on every player page. Just scroll to the bottom! Cool stuff.

I'd have said pre-trade I liked Pasquitino more. and I still think I do. With that said, Busch impressed me more than I thought when I dug into the 2022-2023 changes. I'd say Pasq has better bat to ball, Equal power, equal approach, Busch the better defense. I think I'd take Pasq's bat upside, but Busch isn't a full standard deviation below. I kind of dig Busch.

I mean, it did in 2020-2022. Last year some approach changes help. But this goes, literally back to the start. You might not care how he managed to get to an OPS+ of 133, but teams do. How he got there is worrisome, not that he got there.

Okay so first...why? Adbert Alzolay was really good last year. He struck out over a hitter per inning and he doesn't walk anyone. He had the 13th best fWAR. It's just about being good. Alzolay is good. Secondly, you cannot believe for half a second Ben Brown is making the OD roster. You know better then that. He was hurt and terrible last season in AAA over the last 2 months. Now I think part of that was he was hurt, but he has major control issues. Also, the Cubs have a bunch of arms ahead of him. He's going to be in Iowa OD and he's going to start down there. Unless a rash of injuries hit the BP, yes, he's going to be down until July. You know that, thaw. He might not even be in the BP in Chicago! He very well may start games. He's been a consistent starter thus far and until the Cubs decide to move him to the pen, he'll remain a starter. They've made no such decision to my knowledge.

You can see his batted ball data. Here's the thing: this is the norm, Chops. It's been the norm since his injury. It got better but not significantly better. What data here suggests he can get back to 2019? It's 2024. We have had 1,699 PA's of results from 2020 to 2023. I think we can say that he's healthier now and that 2023 was better. He made some important approach changes, specifically with two strikes. But what in this information do you think suggests he's ever reaching 2019 levels again? This isn't one year of data, it's years of data. We can say that 2023 Cody Bellinger was better, but that doesn't mean we just simply ignore 2020-2022 because we feel like it. If you think this is me making the "batted ball data the end all be all" then you're not really being fair to my overall argument. I'm saying that the batted ball data highly suggests regression from 2023 to something more around 110-120 wRC+. That's a good player; and better than 2020-2022. I've also said there are some underlying things that he does better to help mitigate the batted ball data, too, but that it's just not enough. That's not the "end all be all" that's just the reality. 2019 Cody Bellinger probably isn't coming back unless his batted ball data gets much better very quickly and without warning. I also think 2023 Bellinger is a bit better than we can expect 2024 Bellinger to be. But that also doesn't mean he'll be bad...just....not as good as he was last year, probably.

It's pretty unlikely they'll replace Alzolay in the 8th and 9th innings this season. Alzolay had a wonderful year last season, tied for the 13th best according to fWAR in 2023. Unless he falls off a decent amount, there's little to no way two rookies will replace him there. Not saying I'm not rooting for Little and Brown who both look very interesting, just that...that's probably a good step too far. Brown probably won't be up until July, anyways. Not really enough time to become the closer in a playoff race as a rookie.

Well, now we're just putting words in my mouth, Chops. I've never once said that his batted ball data is the "end all be all". I've said I don't think he can keep being 35% better than average with well below average batted ball data. That isn't to say he also doesn't do somethings that mitigate that; his base running turns a few singles into doubles, and his two strike approach will likely allow him to BABIP a bit better than others. It's that it's incredibly hard to make that much weak contact and be as good as he was last year on a consistent, year to year basis. I'm not alone, either, as fangraphs, ZiPS, Mike Petriello...they all seem to agree. I'm not just making up these concerns or anything. It's okay to point out concerns in players profiles. This is no different than pointing out swing% issues, or launch angle issues, BABIP issues, HR/FB% issues...almost every player has some question marks. It's not disparaging to point them out and Bellinger doesn't need defended at every crossroads. Lastly, I won't be quoting any posts at the end of the season. I will gladly admit I'm wrong if he posts similar batted ball and keeps being a 136 wRC+ hitter, but I can't see any realistic scenario in which Cody Bellinger will post similarly bad batted ball data and then end up better than last year (he wasn't even playing at a 5.5 fWAR pace last year if he played 162 games). If he gets to 5.5 fWAR, it'll be, almost assuredly, that he improved his batted ball (or that his defense was just other worldly); something I've never claimed he couldn't do (though based on his trends, does feel a bit unlikely, however certainly not impossible). In which case, I'll still be correct today for pointing out that he can't keep the same batted ball profile and repeat a 136 wRC+. It's just really unlikely. In the end, if the Cubs sign Cody Bellinger I'll root for him to have a great season. He seems well liked by his teammates and a pretty decent dude from the outside. He seemed to like being here...that's good. The Cubs doing well is always more important than my silly little opinions. But I'll remain steadfast in that I very strongly believe that unless Cody Bellinger's batted ball gets better, he'll likely regress some.

The Cubs will sign SS, Fernando Cruz today, as IFA signings are now eligible to made public (shady non-sense, these things). He will be the only Cub IFA signing in the top-50 bonus' so expect it to be quite large. Cruz is considered on of the five best IFA prospects during this cycle. EDIT: Of course it drops literally moments after my post. $4m.

Before I dug into his fastball, I was a bit concerned. Averaging 92 mph felt like a bit "more of the same". But as I dug into the fastball shape and release point...I've become a huge fan. Essentially, he's going to throw his incredibly high-ride fastball from an arm slot no one else throws it from (closest starter to shape, and velocity might be Nester Cortes but his comes from a higher arm slot). It's a fastball that should play well on the upper third of the zone quite well. It's incredibly unique and one of the better fastballs in the world. We shouldn't really expect the WBC 94mph (pretty obvious he was able to empty the tank a bit more then) and the amount of ride will lessen (the NPB baseball is smaller than the MLB variant). With that said, I think his fastball, as long as Shota is willing to transition into a more western style of pitch-mix and location, will be one of the better fastballs on the team, regardless of pure velo.

So, you took all of that information and you boiled it down to...that? My very first sentence? That's a bit of a poor faith argument on your part I very clearly explained how David Bote's exit velocity had plenty of process issues, as well as providing data from Mike Petriello on Bellinger. Yes, hitters who strike out less can have lower rates, but it's not a hard and fast rule. Cody's average exit velocity sucked. So did his max exit velocity. So did his HR distance. This isn't someone who just made a lot of contact and so his exit velocity was bad, it was that he made weak contact consistently regardless. His max exit velocity was 221st and his max HR distance was 124th. Comparing Bellinger to Freeman also goes off the rails pretty quickly. Yes, Freeman's average exit velocity was 92nd, but his barrel% was 15th in baseball, the guy found the barrel constantly. He literally doubled Bellinger's barrel total. ZiPS has Bellinger at a 108 wRC+ next year versus 143 for Freeman. While I think former seasons and injury years are dragging Bellinger down a bit, ZiPS takes into account batted ball data, too. There's a reason why ZiPs thinks Freeman is 43% better than average and Bellinger is...well 8%. Is ZiPS end-all-be-all? No. But it's a much better projection system than "well I just feel" and that feels like what you're doing with Bellinger. You want so badly for him just to be great that you've allowed that to be all you can see. Teams should care. Clearly they do. If they didn't, Cody Bellinger, the 135 wRC+ player would have been signed. You sign a135 wRC+ CF'er to a $200m during the Winter Meetings if you truly believe he's 35% better than average. Not a single team has made him a priority for that amount to date. And before we get into the "Boras clients!" argument, Boras had a CF free agent already sign with a team (who could have used a 35% better than league average CF'er!)...Boras clients can be signed. I think Bellinger is a fine player. I also think he's likely a 3 or a 3.5 fWAR player moving forward unless he changes his batted ball profile. I'd be fine with the Cubs signing him to something like 6/$25m AAV or so. But we have to live in reality where his batted ball data matters when we talk about 2024 and beyond.

Swanson probably isn't helping, though. Not only is it riling up the fan base (imagine if the Cubs don't sign Bellinger at this point the horsefeathers storm that social medias, reddit, twitter will be...) it's not helping the Cubs negotiating hand. All it's giving is Boras more of a reason to hold steady. I appreciate Swanson would like Cody Bellinger back on the team, but I'd rather they let the team take care of this and not calling for it so publicly. If there's a positive, it's that I'm not sure Hoyer really gives a horsefeathers what people think and he'll hold firm on his valuation.