Jason Ross

I feel similar to Chapman as I do Bellinger because both have odd profiles moving forward. Both have odd batted ball data respective to their wRC+. Both rely decently heavily on their glove (Chapman at 3b, Bellinger at CF) in terms of their contract value. And neither I'm entirely confident moving forward on the contracts that are being bandied about. Both play positions of immediate need, but by 2025 those needs may be filled internally with two of the Cubs (arguable) top-five prospects. There are contracts I'd be okay with both on, but I don't think either fill the Cubs most immediate need which is an impact type bat. Bellinger did that last year with weird data, and Chapman's batted ball data looks that way, but with a 110 wRC+ hitter over his last 1800, he simply hasn't been one. I'm kind of at the point where I'd prefer the Cubs to pass on both, go more of a one-year route with the bats, and re-asses before being locked into some hitters I don't fully trust for 5-6+ years.

I think we already knew this, and now looking back, it was always going to be the Dodgers...but still, passing this along:

I wouldn't call Jon Heyman a twitter hack. Sam Olbur (who runs a pretty solid prospect-centric twitter account in his own right) was just relaying information from a Jon Heyman interview (which supports comments made by Sharma today about the Cubs and Yamamoto). Heyman can be a bit of a mouthpiece from time to time, but in terms of being "in the know" he's probably right below the Passan/Rosenthal level.

I am still miffed they gave him a two year contract.

There are worse depth catchers than Jorge Alfaro.

Yeah! He's one of those guys I think has some upside. Funky delivery, good GB%...just needs that sweeper. His fastball is shockingly highly graded (likely due to the funk in the delivery). But he can't be fastball only. We'll see what he does, he's a guy I hope they can fix, but wouldn't cry if they don't. Need to dump him? Alright. Try again with the next guy.

My guess with Cuas is the Cubs see a path to a RHH killer in Cuas. He's got some really good in-zone whiff% but poor chase%. The Cubs were clearly tinkering with his slider to give it more horizontal movement (aka, righty-killer-stuff) and it just wasn't taking right off the bat. I don't think they were going to use Cuas much if not for injury, and instead have him tinker in AAA, but ended up having their hands forced. I expect they're working with him this offseason on tweaking the slider.

Yeah, he had a nice run. That said, it's almost entirely un-repeatable. He posted a .346 ISO. He's either Shohei Ohtani. 14 of his 31 hits (in just 147 PA's) were home runs. Essentially, not ever happening again. I always thought there was a DH there so I hope he can figure something out, seems like a decent enough guy on the outside.

Only if his market falls on its face. Which I just don't think will happen.

Oh, Sarcasm. I'm not a fan of the Bellinger idea unless they trade PCA myself. And I'm pretty convinced they're not doing that. PCA is like, this team's dream player. Wins on the margins, safe floor, controllable, premium position. I can't see them moving him. Maybe they will, I'd be shocked, however.

Frankly, I'd still pump the money there, myself, if this is going to be the offseason. The Cubs have essentially backed themselves in a corner when it comes to acquiring an impact bat at this stage and I don't have any aspirations right now that the Cubs will pursuit Soto with the type of vigor they should next year, either. At that point, I'd rather the Cubs have gone with a Glasnow + another SP (a trade, or an Imanaga) and then looked to acquire Hoskins + another bat (using Wicks? Just spitballing, not necessarily giving specific names or targets). Just go all in on the pitching and make a dominant-ass rotation. But in the end, I agree with the end point that we're getting to a point where this offseason is getting hard to parse out how the Cubs end up having a very successful offseason if they're going to miss here.

Yippie.

Oh, I'm not absolving. I am captain of the "Tom Ricketts Sucks" fan club. But I don't think Jed Hoyer was hired because he has a small market mentality in the way I think some believe. That he was hired because he's risk adverse. I think he was hired to continue to the winning ways Theo Epstein had shown, but presented a plan that was more sustainable and Ricketts bought it hook line and sinker. Ricketts blows. But I'm starting to come around more and more to an idea that the way the team is being built is in many ways a Hoyer issue just as much as a Ricketts issue.

I think Tom Ricketts sucks. But the Levine has suggested the Cubs may run a $240-$250m payroll. That's not just an ownership issue. That's a Jed issue as well.

I'll flip a table if the Cubs do that. That probably puts out a pretty decent W-L product, but it also puts out a team that you know just can't compete with the major teams in the playoffs. It's an awesome way to out-pythag your market. To really maximize some decent, but not elite players. That's a team I think the Brewers build and pull 89 wins, with a 2nd round exit because there's no way that offense can hit against a murders' row of stuff, especially when teams shorten the rotation and lengthen the bullpen. I'll live with the Cubs not getting Ohani or Yamamoto. But damn, I want this team to wake up and remember they're the Chicago Cubs.

I'll lead the damn riot if that's the Cubs plan.

Honestly, my fear is that the Cubs have a small-market mentality with a big budget. I've feared for a few years that what the Cubs aim to do is "Cleveland, but more expensive". This would play out perfectly in a scenario where the Cubs decide, through a combination of acquisition cost, their defenses' ability to maximize ground balls, and contract, to go with Shane Bieber over Tyler Glasnow. And that's not the worst logic, but it's also not the way I feel a team like the Cubs should be built. Use your advantage. I might be proven wrong, and I really hope I am. But this is my fear. At some point you can't worry about min/maxing every single penny on an acquisition. Sometimes it's just about getting the better player.

I would argue even if he is way down the road on one of them this is a bad look. The pathway for the Cubs in 2024 to be really good is likely going to be "pitching-pitching-pitching". Replacing Stroman with any of those three is probably closer to a push than it is anything of a real upgrade (looking at the way Stroman pitched when healthy. I'm not really blaming him on the rib injury) talent wise. Get two good pitchers. Let's make it a dominant ass rotation. My fear is that the Cubs are more interested in Shane Bieber over that of Tyler Glasnow, which is my biggest issue right now with the team. Bieber is a fine pitcher, but I think the reason you'd be more interested in Bieber is because "he gets ground balls which our defense can make better" and "he'd be nominally cheaper to acquire" (per Steve Anderson of MLBTR, he said the price on Bieber would be less). I get it, taking Bieber, putting him with an elite middle infield defense can squeeze extra value out of him. But why not just get the better pitcher to begin with? Use your resources. Big a big market team. Absorb a $25m contract. Assume the injury risk. Get the better player, damnit. Maybe I'm wrong on that last paragraph, and I'll accept that I don't know. But damn, that would really make me mad. That's small-market mentality.

If there's a positive, it's that these two (with a follower count of under 9K combined) seem to be the lone two reporting this trade going down. Not to say they can't know something, only that it seems on the very "unverified" side right now. If that's the end package, I'll be a bit miffed that the Cubs couldn't make that one happen after the smoke connecting the two for a few weeks. Sure, the Cubs can go sign an Imanaga or a Montgomery yet, and they're good pitchers, but neither fill a glaring need the Cubs rotation has for velocity and strikeouts like Glasnow does. There's some injury risk there of course, but Glasnow is one of the few, truly impactful players remaining on the market that is likely to move. Maybe the Cubs are really stealthily playing the Yamamoto game, but losing out of Glasnow hurts, if it's the case.

We recently ranked Alexander Canario as North Side Baseball's 10th-best Cubs prospect, but does the right-handed masher have a future with the Cubs? If not, what do we think he commands in a trade? Image courtesy of © David Banks-USA TODAY Sports The case of Alexander Canario in 2024 is a curious one, The outfielder has had a roller coaster of a year, including a devastating ankle and shoulder injury; tons of hard work and rehab; a return through the minor leagues; and a cup of coffee spent with the Cubs during their playoff push. It's really a feel-good story for the Dominican, who signed with the San Francisco Giants in 2016. He even hit his first MLB grand slam. Despite the good vibes, as we enter the new season, the Cubs will be tasked with deciding how Canario fits into both the present and the long-term plans, and neither are particularly easy choices. In the interim, there's a role that the powerful slugger can fill, though just how large a role will be determined over the next few months. As it stands, the Cubs outfield has two of three positions clearly spoken-for, with 2022 and 2023 Gold Glove-winning Ian Happ in left field and Seiya Suzuki (who came on like a wrecking ball the final few months last year) in right. That leaves center field as the lone unsettled position in the outfield. Luckily for Canario, while center may not be his long term home, it's likely that he could be useful there in the short term. Barring some external addition, it's likely that Mike Tauchman will be the Opening Day center fielder (with Pete Crow-Armstrong getting a little extra work in Iowa), but Tauchman comes with the limitation of needing a platoon partner. While Canario didn't really light up left-handed pitching in his injury-hangover 2023 in the minors, in 2022, he posted a .254/.336/.627 line against them across Double A and Triple A, including 13 home runs in just 135 plate appearances. It would make sense, then, for him to platoon with players like Tauchman (a career 96 wRC+ against southpaws) or the aforementioned Happ (a career 93 wRC+ hitter against them). This would give Canario a solid role, and one which he's seemingly capable of filling. The equation gets a little murky if the Cubs don't plan on letting Tauchman handle center. There are four months between today and Opening Day, and the Cubs may choose to re-sign free agent Cody Bellinger. Conversely, Crow-Armstrong could still be the choice from Jump Street. New manager Craig Counsell is no stranger to playing defensively sound rookies and may push for the Cubs to let the youngster cook at the major-league level instead of simmering in Iowa. Either outcome would probably move Tauchman back into a fourth outfielder role, and would make the pathway for Canario to find playing time a bit more rocky. That's where the issues become far more noticeable, and we need to look no further than last season to see what could transpire. In 2023, the Cubs broke camp with Nelson Velázquez, an outfielder with a similarly risky profile (though one who was given extended run in 2022 that did not ultimately impress) as a fifth outfield option on the bench. What resulted for "Nelly" was a truncated 32 plate-appearance sample size from April through May--one that led to him being shipped back to Iowa before the season ever truly began. The team did get a fourth option year on Canario, due to the time he's lost to injuries, but he'd still feel fairly locked into the active roster. While Canario is the better prospect than Velázquez was, it wouldn't be shocking to see the Cubs get into a similar outfield crunch if either Bellinger or PCA is with the team in April. It's this type of scenario that would curdle optimism into caution when projecting just how impactful Canario could be on the 2024 roster. Thus, Canario's true fit might not be on the Chicago Cubs at all, but on another team entirely. As we detailed in our Cubs Top Prospects list, the hard-hitting right-handed hitter has both interesting upside and considerable risk in his profile. It might be a case in which the Cubs are not in a position to give him the developmental time he needs and would, instead, benefit from turning him into something more useful. If the Cubs see him as a useful fourth outfielder, and another club sees a starting one, it would be in the best interests of both Canario and the Cubs to find him a new home. But what kind of trade value would he have? Going back to Velázquez for a second, regardless of his 2022 season, the Royals and the Cubs made a deadline trade in which he was swapped for José Cuas, a controllable, 29-year-old right-handed reliever with decent stuff, but somewhat limited upside. Canario, who's younger and has more upside than Nelly had, should bring a stronger return, even if they end up with similar fates. The Cubs could use some high-leverage relievers, so perhaps a team like the Washington Nationals (who are currently projected to start journeyman Stone Garrett in left field) would be interested in a Canario-for-Hunter Harvey-type swap. Other interesting relief targets could be the Marlins Tanner Scott or AJ Puk, if Miami wants to cash in on their relievers for more offense (though I think these are a bit less likely, considering the Fish's needs). Perhaps a team such as the Seattle Mariners would find him interesting, as well. The M's have struggled to find consistent offensive players throughout their lineup. They've already lost both of their other starting corner outfielders, in free agent Teoscar Hernandez and recently-traded Jarred Kelenic. Even if they end up making a trade for Randy Arozarena (as has been rumored), they could be interested in a swap where Canario is part of a package in exchange for a Bryce Miller or Brian Woo, two starting pitchers whom the Cubs would have uses for. The Cleveland Guardians could also find his profile interesting. After they waived 2022 playoff sensation Oscar González, the Guards are shockingly thin at the MLB level in the outfield, projecting Myles Straw to start in center and Ramón Laureano in right--both positions that Canario could fill. With the Cubs interested in Shane Bieber, Josh Naylor and even Emmanuel Clase, it would make sense if he was in a package deal (though, clearly, not of the caliber to headline the thing) if something were to be finalized and agreed to with Cleveland. The good news is that, regardless of the outcome, Canario is almost assuredly going to be useful to the Chicago Cubs. He's got enough offensive ability that, if the Cubs decided to use him as a fourth outfielder or platoon option, he'd be more than capable of giving the team a few hundred (or more!) useful plate appearances throughout 2024, or providing intriguing injury cover for Happ or Suzuki. However, he also has sufficient trade value that if either the Cubs are put off by the risks he poses or another team is extremely interested, the Chicago front office can turn what may have been a useful "extra" into a "need" position, as well. What do you think? Will Alexander Canario eventually settle into a role in Chicago, or would it be more useful for the Cubs to cash him in for something they need more? View full article

I don't think we've had a single SP hit the free market, especially post new CBA (with new luxury tax lines) who's in the same ballpark as Cole, however. Inflation is going up, and with the LT going up (at a much larger and more consistent rate) I think we have to readjust where contracts are going. This is also going to play a role in what $30m today means, versus, say, $30m in 2030. Look at what the league has done to the Bryce Harper contract. His $25m AAV in 5 years is what Cody Bellinger might get? This also plays into how we should look at his contract long term, too. Secondly, while 25 guys may have amassed 30 fWAR, 33 have made 28 fWAR. Over 10 years, the difference between, say, 28 and 30 fWAR is fractional: .2 fWAR per season. We know what fractional fWAR is. That's not to completely move goal posts, but to say that I think there's wiggle room when we consider the, likely, rising costs of all contracts, inflation, and fractional fWAR to determine if he's going to be worth, roughly, 2x more than Montgomery. Hell, we can do this as well: how many SP have been worth 16.5 fWAR between 31 and 36 in that same span? 20, if we're including Adam Wainright at 16.4. I may be over reaching on the Jordan Montgomery fWAR curve, making 16.5 fWAR through those years, if we're being honest. Based on this data set, we've seen more pitchers reach 30 fWAR from ages 25-34 than we have 16.5 fWAR from ages 31-36. The number Yamamoto needs to hit seems, likely, lower than the target I originally set. In the end, I think we really need to rely on team scouting here, which you and I just, can't do, we don't have access to that. But I don't think this many MLB teams have just, lost their minds here, either. I think there's a damn good reason many of the teams who can afford this kind of contract are all clamoring for him. We'll see where it comes in, and I don't know if it'll reach that level. But when you're a large market, you can afford to be a bit riskier. Maybe it wont be a pure surplus value win, but I'm willing to trust some pretty good organizations here on their internals. Where I ultimately end up on this whole thing is this: it's one thing if the Cubs have the drop on these teams, and I'll accept that's a real-world possibility, but it's another if they're being overly cautious and refuse to accept that there is never a perfect time to go get great players. They've done pretty good in scouting pitching over the last 3+ years, both at the MLB level and the MiLB level (with some misses) so believing the Cubs scouting is the hold up here and there's something there they don't love is a thing we can likely believe. But the Cubs seem like the large market team on an island here, as well. Perhaps it's being coy, not playing the game of letting everyone know that they're in and they do really love Yamamoto and aren't on that island, as well (if so, good job, Jed! and it wouldn't be the first time). But they seemed pretty interested previously, both in the summer sending scouts over and at the start of the offseason being deemed a favorite to sign him, and now don't seem that enthused (both reports and Hoyer's comments). And I'll say...that gives me some pause.

I guess I'd ask you this: if Kevin Gausman was 25 years old today, do you think he'd get 5/$110m? I think he's one of the more criminally under paid players in baseball right now, but he had a lot of circumstances as to why he got there. He was pretty much a mediocre-to-failed SP for much of his career with only one solid year under his belt. I think if Kevin Gausman was a 25 year old free agent today, he'd be paid far above and beyond that. Probably approaching $250-$300m. I think you're paying a bit of a premium for Yamamoto because he's a unique free agent based on age. Let's put it another way: Aaron Nola just picked up an AAV of $25m and Sonny Gray, one of $25m. If we assume Yamamoto if of their quality, which I think is around these two, then you're looking at another $25m AAV Now multiply that out 10 years. Why the years? His age is incredibly unique. I have a feeling the "$250m" price tag is not coming with a 7 year commitment, but likely, continuing the trend we're seeing of teams adding years to lower AAV. At that point, you're saying he's somewhere between a SP who had a 3.6-3.8 xFIP and would be worth around high 3's to low 5's on his fWAR. I think that's right in that "ace-but-not-Cy-Young" territory. Even if you're getting a bit on the high end, in the $30m AAV, I think that's a product of age+inflation+rising CBT tax lines (we didn't see this with the last CBA, remember). That's not a crazy high suggestion. The belief is that he's a better prospect than Kodai Senga, and Senga finished with 3.4 fWAR, and a 3.77 xFIP. How likely is it he's twice as good as Montgomery? I think decently likely...Jordan Montgomery is 31 years old. How many fWAR are we thinking Montgomery is going to be worth over the next, say, 5 years? 4, 3.5, 3, 2.5, 2, 1.5 feels like a pretty fair guess on fWAR for his progression. So what, 16.5 fWAR? Do I think Yamamoto on a 10 year deal can double that? Baring health, I think there's an argument that a 25 year old pitcher between 25-34 will get to ~32-33 fWAR. That's what a fraction over a 3 fWAR average? That's not easy, but again, that age is doing a lot of work here. In the end, I don't think I agree this is just wanting to do something as big as Ohtani. A lot of this comes down to scouting and you've got to trust your scouting here. What I've got is some really cool Eno Saris stuff, so it's not what MLB teams have, regardless of how cool Saris' stuff is. That's something we should take into account. But I don't think teams like the Dodgers (who already did the Ohtani thing) and the Yankees, Mets, Giants...have all whipped themselves into a frenzy over this just hoping it's another Ohtani. I don't think Eno Saris did either. I very much believe the Chicago Cubs, when given the chance to acquire a 25 year old with ace-type stuff, even if he's not generational-type-stuff, for money only, should be there. It's one thing if the Cubs internal scouting just says "hey, maybe this isn't an ace type guy". It's another if the Cubs are saying the contract is too scary for them. If it's the first, I fully understand and defer. If it's the second...then I am becoming a bit worried on their hunger to ever land the type of player they may never develop themselves.