Jason Ross

https://dodgersnation.com/shohei-ohtani-to-sign-with-toronto-blue-jays-over-los-angeles-dodgers-sources/2023/12/08/ This is the first reports of Ohtani, indeed, choosing the Blue Jays. There is no confirmation yet, however this seems real.

https://www.si.com/mlb/cubs/news/cubs-reportedly-viewed-as-finalists-for-shohei-ohtani-jon9 There's not much there. But it's the faintest puff of smoke.

Yeah, the Cubs are strange in that my only hope for the Cubs pulling this one out is the amount of *not* smoke on the Cubs part. They're odd in that when they pull moves, many times they just...happen. And with how little there has been on the Cubs for the past week, it both could make you think they're just way out, or way deep. All that said, Toronto really sounds like the pick right now.

If there's at least a positive for looking forward to Myrtle, is that there are some upside young players who could break out there. Someone like Zyhir Hope, or any of these fun IFA kids, maybe McGuire figures out some control...I think Myrtle Beach is going to be fun for someone I just don't know who it is yet. There's a really interesting crew of young players who will probably make their way into Myrtle at some point.

Morosi seems to think it's Toronto. He was on MBLN talking about his standing with the Jay sand just tweeted a Canadian flag,

Mike is usually way off, and he's got a few teams listed who seem *way* off. But he did nail the Jorge Lopez to NYM thing recently. Passing it along, take it how you wish. https://twitter.com/mikedeportes/status/1733130726340518166?t=8RsEXDWh7RSGRom-wRLZCA&s=19

Have they been? The first is their actual deal vs the crowd-sourced predictions. It should be noted that the AAV in the crowd sourcing doesn't always match up with the contract value because the crowd sourcing isn't dealing in whole numbers for years. For example, Gray's AAV is $21.4m crowd sourced because the average years is 3.24 and not a nice, round, 3. Sonny Gray - 3/$75m ($25m aav) + option year for 1/$30m vs 3/$69m ($21.4m AAV) Jemier Candelrio: 3/$45m ($15m AAV) vs 3/$36.6m ($12.4m AAV) Eduardo Rodriguez: 4/$80m ($20m AAV) vs 4/$80m ($20m AAV) Aaron Nola: 7/$172 ($24.5m AAV) vs 5/$125m ($25m AAV) Shohei Ohanti - ??? vs 10/$450m Yoshi Yamamoto - ??? vs 7/$172m Jordan Montomgery - ??? vs 4/$100m Shoto Imanaga - ??? vs 4/$70m (reportedly already has deals over $100m) Just looking across the board, average crowd sourcing seems to be doing far better on the lower-end of the market (where there's inherently less variance. No one is blowing the doors off of Nick Martinez or Emilio Pagan, for example). Where they seem to be low is on the top end of the market, and pretty consistently by at least a decent margin. Sonny Gray may not feel drastically different at $75m vs $69, but 3.5m AAV isn't a nothing number (and his $25m AAV is closer to Clemons $26m). Same for Candelario. They're way off on Ohtani, Yamamoto, Imanaga, and Montgomery from the looks of it. Ben Clemens is much higher on all them and even he's likely low on all of them. Considering there is just not a premium amount of bats behind Ohtani, it's very likely that Chapman goes for much closer to Ben Clemens 5/$120m projection than the crowd sourced 4/$80m. If the Cubs could get Chapman on 4/$80m, that'd be a near steal. He's easily going to match that contract on value, QO attached or not. Which is also why he's not going to come in that low.

Not that this is necessarily the article for it, but I still have some concerns long term with Swanson, and I think he's kind of a good comparison to Chapman. They have some of similarities in profiles (though not really 1:1 across the board). I've at least come around to the idea that Swanson may continue to be a useful player longer into his contract than I had originally considered (and give him credit for the nice overall season last year), but I'd prefer if the Cubs stayed away from an entire left side of the infield with similar long term bat questions and value hinging on defense. With that said, I share similar concerns with Bellinger as you. I'm kind of at the point where I'd prefer the Cubs to either make a trade for a hitter or just sign two from the Hoskins/Belt range. I'm concerned with the amount of turnover this is yet again going to create next year but I think I'd rather deal with roster churn over being saddled with middling bats for 3-4 seasons, as well.

I think Matt Chapman is a perfect example of "Good player, Wrong Player" for the Cubs. There's a team out there that needs a glove-over-bat projected infielder for the next few years, but the Cubs aren't that team, with Hoerner and Swanson already locked in over the next few seasons, both of whom project as glove-over-bat types. Even with funky data last year that I can't entirely make heads or tails of, Chapman has been a 110 wRC+ over his last 1,800 PAs. What the Cubs lack are upside bats that provide run creation opportunities. With the previous infielders already mentioned, with Happ and Suzuki locked in, without an obvious plus-hitting catcher, and with PCA who's bat is a bit iffier than his glove, the Cubs just don't have a ton of opportunities on the team to add that kind of bat...third base remains one of the few chances they have. There may be opportunities for the Cubs to make an approach change to switch that projection, but that seems like a pretty hefty bet for someone with as much data as Chapman already has. I'd rather the Cubs not try to sign a Chapman to a six year deal hoping they can make him into a hitter that fits their needs, instead, just finding someone who already does. And so, while I think Chapman provides value, he doesn't provide the diversification the Cubs need. A different infield and a different offensive team and he'd make a ton of sense. For this team, I'd much prefer if someone else signed him for the next six years.

Well, that's fair, and maybe I could have been more clear, so that's on me, but I wasn't attempting to imply they couldn't outpace their wRC+ at all, but that I wouldn't expect the 12th best wRC+ team to be a top-6 offense based on their base running. That's a massive jump and one I don't expect to continue. If' we're using fangraphs BsR, while base running adds value it's not a huge jump. The Cubs were 14 runs above average on the bases. Taking them away, the Cubs still scored the 7th most runs in baseball. Do I think the Cubs were the 7th best offense last year? No. I'd buy them being closer to the 9-11 range. Which, is fine, don't get me wrong, but I think the amount of runs their scored makes them seem a tier above where I'd suggest their offense is. As we enter 2024, I think it's fair to suggest they have components to win on the margins and outpace their wRC+. I don't think the drastic jump from a slightly above average offense in terms of run creation will manifest as a top-6 team in run scoring, too with out some lucky outcomes.

It certainly is part of it (I'd argue it's certainly not all of it). But also, trading out, say, Bellinger out for the Hoskins/Belt/Naylor crew is unlikely for that trend to continue. Even more so depending on the future of Morel. I think banking on out performing wRC+ based on a lot of base running seems a bit suspect moving forward.

The one thing I'll push back on is this idea that the offense is really good. They finished 12th in wRC+ last year and 14th in ISO, and lost their best hitter. I know they scored the 6th most runs, but I think that is a bit misleading looking the other numbers. I wouldn't expect them to out preform these metrics in run scoring. I think it's an offense that was far more "fine" than "good" and will require some real work. That's not to say they can't but I do think there was some real positive variance in runs scored for this team last year that I don't really see continuing without that work being done. With losing Bellinger, and seemingly, no new 130 wRC+ hitter incoming at this point, it's likely going to be an offense that relies more on depth than core, and probably will require young players to make instant contributions (players like PCA, Canario, Mervis, Shaw, Murray, Caissie....etc) at some point to maintain depth. I think in the end, you'll be right that on paper, this should probably shape out to be the best team in a bad division. But I have less faith in the returning offense than you do.

I don't hate that idea here. There's some parallels between the two. That's not saying he's Burnes 2.0 or anything, but he's got some of the aspects Burnes had.

Yeah, I agree with that. There's always agency on all parties. I do think there are ways around agency and ways you can brute force yourself into situations, and I think my biggest issue with the Cubs is that I just don't know if they have the stomach to throw their weight around. I don't expect them to go all Texas Rangers, but the Rangers brute forced their way into Seager, Seimien, DeGrom...and while the back end of those might not always be pretty, and we can question whether brute forcing all of those were good ideas, I'd like to see the Cubs, just once, decide they had to have a guy and really brute force their way into them. Be judicious, be smart, but also...be a big market. From an outside perspective, the Cubs seem to really have hard limits. Maybe it's because they haven't determined what that player is. When it comes to Ohtani, if this wasn't the one to brute force (and while I do believe they gave an earnest account, I'm not sure if they brute forced it) then I do struggle to wonder who that is. When you're big game hunting, unless you're in a unique situation, brute force is almost necessary. I'll be happy to be wrong on this some time. At least, I hope I'm wrong.

I think this is a level-headed view. My one counter to this is that there should never be a reason to not fully attack some of these generational type talents like Soto, like Ohtani, regardless of how you feel about your current roster. It doesn't seem as though the Cubs fully attacked on Soto and Ohtani seems like they tried, but I'm not sure how fully they played that one (and we may never really know). And that's not a counter to you so much as the Cubs. If this is the view the Cubs have, it feels like they're waiting for that perfect player, at the perfect time, to go all in on, and I just don't know if that perfect confluence of players, time, availability, need will arise. I do have a bit of that fear. I do certainly hope this is the case though, that the Cubs see the roster as a bit better than I do. They have a full metrics and analytics team and all I have is fangraphs, so they should be infinitely better positioned to make that determination. Fingers crossed.

Look one post above. Great minds, TT, great minds.

That's a name I forgot. I both enjoy remembering that name and hate that you're dating me here with that reference.

I think the Harper one is a bit of a red herring. Harper still has eight years left on his contract. And he's 31 years old. So we're talking about an extension for 39 year old Bryce Harper...of course he's interested in that now. 39 year old Bryce Harper is forever away and I don't think the Phillies are all that worried about extending him today.

Yeah, I don't think he's going to be an early-season call. But I also think the amount of arms ahead of him is a few less than it seems considering he's on the 40-man (as of today, at least). It's guys who are on the 40-man who get the quick-need calls and there's a situation where they need a BP arm quickly that could see Hodge get that call. I think he won't be trusted early. But with Counsell's usage (he prefers one inning usages in Milwaukee, never afraid to entrust young-guy-stuff) I can see a path where Hodge becomes more interesting than a Cuas, for example. Similar profiles (sweeper-cutter/fastball) profiles but the stuff on Hodge is just better.

I think it's important to note...he throws strikes, especially with his slider. He throws his slider in the zone almost 67% of the time! And gets a 40% chase rate when he doesn't. With the vertical movement he has, this is a high wiff% pitch in and out of the zone. I think a lot of this can be a sequencing and pitch mix thing. More sliders early, more cutters (the pitch he loses a bit) later. Work backwards. Even if he misses on the slider early, the amount of chase he generates is going to give him extra padding.

It's easy to feel that way. I'm a bit disappointed right now. I think it's early enough and the Cubs can sometimes work quietly enough that there's potential for things off the radar to still happen. I can't really even begin to speculate what those things are, however. I'm going to try to go with an open mind, but with their approach seemingly veering away from the top talents obviously available, I can't blame anyone for feeling a bat defeated on that front (and I can feel myself feeling that way too).

Time to eat some crow: I predicted Porter Hodge as my breakout pitcher during the build-up to 2023. Things didn't go so well. All Hodge did was post an ERA over 5.00 and get a quick hook to the bullpen. So why am I doubling down on the tall, powerful righty in 2024? Image courtesy of © Orlando Ramirez-USA TODAY Sports The 2022 season went really well for Porter Hodge, a 13th-round selection in the 2019 draft. With a ridiculous ground-ball rate and good home-run prevention in 69 innings at Myrtle Beach, followed up with (seemingly) improved control in South Bend, 2023 was shaping up as a really strong year for the hard-throwing right-handed pitcher. It was enough that, as we entered the 2023 season, I predicted he'd end up being the breakout arm of the system. I wasn't alone, Geoff Pontes of Baseball America included Hodge in an article titled "20 Pitching Prospects I Think Could Break Out in 2023". The always-excellent Arizona Phil called him "probably the Cubs #1 pitching prospect", as well. There was some real buzz on the thrower. Sadly for Hodge (and for me and for Geoff and for Phil), 2023 didn't really work out the way it could have. The season was not a kind one right off the bat for the hurler. Hodge struggled in his first four starts, walking eight hitters over that span, and giving up 14 runs in under 14 innings pitched. Through June, there were peaks and valleys aplenty. One night, Hodge would throw five scoreless innings, striking out eight and walking only two. The next time out, he'd give up six runs. On June 14th, the 22-year-old made his last start of the season with Tennessee, and the Cubs began the transition to the bullpen. Initially, the change to the pen had mixed results as well, mirroring his time as a starter. In his first two innings as a reliever, Hodge struck out five, walked none (though he did hit someone) and gave up no runs. His next three and a third innings saw him walk five and give up three runs. Clearly, there was a bit of a learning curve as he continued to dial in the control. It really wasn't until the calendar flipped to August that something clicked within the flamethrowing reliever, but when it did, there seemed to be a fairly impressive change. Over his last 12 appearances, Hodge walked more than a single hitter only once (seven total free passes), to go along with 18 strikeouts, a 3.14 ERA, and a 3.41 FIP. The walks remained a bit high, but walking one hitter over two innings of work won't kill you out of the bullpen most of the time. Still, it'd be easy to look at the raw numbers and wonder what the big deal is. The answer is: it's the stuff, dummy. On the surface alone, Hodge's cutter (which averaged 93 MPH) was the second-fastest in Double A last year, but that's just the start of how interesting this pitch is. Hodge is unique. Standing an intimidating 6-foot-4, what sets him apart is that he throws literally over the top. According to an article on Baseball America, Hodge throws with a 12:00 tilt (that's perfectly over the top) and gets seven feet of extension. What does that mean? It might be the second-fastest cutter on average raw speed, but it looks much faster to the hitter. Extension is a real factor in determining the effectiveness of velocity and is becoming an important data point to look at. Not all 93s are made the same. Add in the four inches of horizontal run and what you have is a devastating cutter. If all we had was the cutter, that'd be fine, and it would make him mildly interesting, but there's more here, too. Again, using data provided by RoboScout and Baseball America, his sweeper (viewed in the tweet above) is a truly plus-plus offering. He throws it a lot, and he throws it with authority, It showed the third-most horizontal movement of any slider in Double A, and while he tends to walk hitters, his slider actually gets thrown in the zone almost two-thirds of the time. He also gets chases out of the zone nearly 40 percent of the time, as well. A little tweak on the command here, and there's an amazing one-two punch of cutter-sweeper that would make Hodge a real weapon out of the bullpen. It was probably surprising to some when the Cubs protected Hodge from the Rule 5 Draft last month, but take a deeper look into his pitch characteristics and you can start to see why the Cubs were interested in keeping him around. If you're a team who has an open bullpen spot and you think you can work with his kind of stuff, you find room. While I expect him to start the season in Iowa, that he's already a member of the 40-man suggests to me that he will be someone on the call-up radar for the Cubs come midseason. The Cubs have done decent work recently in converting starters into relievers and cleaning up some of their walk issues (i.e., Luke Little and Daniel Palencia) and Hodge could follow suit. A cutter-sweeper combination is the foundation for a righty-righty nightmare. With a decent curveball in his back pocket as well, there's also enough here where he doesn't have to be limited to right-handed hitters only. While it would be premature to say that Hodge will be eating valuable innings for the Cubs down the stretch in a playoff run, the kind of stuff Hodge has makes him a bit of a unicorn. He's tall. He releases the ball from such a weird position, gets excellent extension, and has the kind of movement profile you dream on. Would it be shocking to see the Cubs rein in the walk totals a little bit? Not really. And we know new manager Craig Counsell is someone who loves pitchers with stuff and isn't afraid of turning to younger arms. Will Porter Hodge pitch for the Cubs in 2024? I'm doubling down on my prediction from last year. Do you agree with me? Or is this just another case of dreaming big on stuff that will never be controlled? View full article

Not bad, but over what some thought, too. While generally a blowhard, I'm going to use Jim Bowden's predictions here for effect: everything Bowden has predicted (and as much of a blowhard he is, he's usually in the ballpark) has been low in some fashion (mostly AAV). He had Ohtani at $477 (with escalators) and it seems like $500+m plus is coming. Yamamoto at $210 and we're hearing maybe $300m. He's been low on the AAV on Eduardo Rodriguez (had 5/$90m and it sounds like he got 4/$80m from Arizona) and had Candelario at 2/$15m (3/$45m actual). What I'm getting at is this: his predicted number of 6/$127m is probably either a bit low, or in the ballpark of the final figure. I think he'll get pretty close to what people expect. I'll say this: I'd be equally unenthused with Candelario at 3/$45m and Chapman at 6/$127m (or whatever). I don't think Candelario is anywhere near the type of player you lock down for 3 years when you have a few prospects with upsides the Cubs have at the position (nor is he a good enough hitting 1b), and while Chapman is closer to the kind of player you block those prospects with, there's enough weirdness in his batted ball data vs the power production that I remain really skeptical of him. Coupled with already being locked in on two other glove-over-bat profiled infielders, I'd prefer the Cubs to find places to add bat-over-glove types and the more we add on 6+ extended deals the less likely that's going to happen. I don't think either player is bad, just for what they'll get respective to what the Cubs need, I think there are better ways to spend their money.

Yeah, I'm not really worried they're held up, more so, I find it odd that the Cubs aren't finishing those up right now and instead seem to either be waiting on them or are doing something else. Glasnow has a market, for example, and I doubt the Rays are just waiting on us. Hoskins probably has more time with Ohtani being the cog in the bat-market. Like I said, I could be reading into it too much. Only that I find the concept that the Cubs have spent the last four days on bullpen arms and left handed bats mostly a bit strange considering everything. It's not the comment I'd expect to hear for a team who's been most connected to a starting pitching and a right handed hitter, neither of whom they've acquired yet. I could also just be trying to make myself believe the offseason will be better than what it probably seems on the surface. Which will still largely be fine, but lacking from what I think the Cubs should ultimately be doing as we previously discussed, so take that into consideration with my view hah.