Jason Ross

If we win, you can all thank me today for my attendence. I did a lot of work, clearly. If we lose, I'm sorry I'm a curse.

This was my challenge team. I'm really proud of that outcome. Red Kress was a complete and utter dart throw.

No more than the Twins, who have a 104 wRC+ without RISP and a 109 wRC+ with RISP in the same time period. But compare the top-10 teams in wRC+ from that same span to the top-10 with RISP and you'll find this: the only team in baseball who was a top-10 team in wRC+ but wasn't a top-10 offensive team with RISP was the Tampa Bay Rays. How far off the top-10 pace were they? They were 11th, just one point of wRC+ behind Boston. Why? It's not a definable skill. Good offensive teams are just good offensive teams. It doesn't matter if a runner is on second base or first, or no bases; they're just generally good. The Brewers are the only team in baseball who was not a top-10 offensive team in context neutral situations but are with RISP. It's an outlier, but not one that we can trace back to any discernable skill trait. We know this because in a league of copycats, no one else is doing it.

When Pete Crow-Armstrong was a prospect the same talk of "the Cubs have a lot of exciting prospects but no stars" was also the discourse. That discourse looks rather silly now. As I pointed out to someone else, Jacob Misiorwski never was ranked higher than 44 in BA and mlb.com had him preseason in 2025 as #100. Elite prospects pop up like this at times. It's probably best just not to worry about who "looks like a star" because the consensus was that PCA wasn't a star (leading the NL in positional player fWAR) and Misiorwski wasn't a star based on his rankings (arguably best SP in baseball).

They should be open minded, but we are playing a very dangerous game of "hypotheticals" here. There is no report suggesting the Astros as entertaining Yordan Alvarez trades right now outside of speculation. The Astros have shot it down. He's signed and isn't an upcoming FA. The Nationals also have not signaled any reason to trade Abrams. Nor do we have any idea if the Cubs have enough to make that happen (If probably argue they don't unless you're okay moving Hartshorn and the Astros want a Hartshorn). Here's the reality; the Cubs are far better positioned to trade for a pitcher. They need a pitcher more. Both now and next year. What prospects do they have who will be MLB ready next year? Most of them are hitters. Wiggins is about the only exception pitching wise and he's spent the entire year hurt so far. I think the Cubs trading for a Reid Detmers is entirely more likely than them trading for Yordan Alvarez. Detmers is even rumored to be available.

I'm not sure you have any idea of who the Cubs do or do not have in the farm system. The Cubs system is not universally ranked as a top-10 system. However: 1. The Cubs system has a big green arrow UP this year 2. The system has a handful of top-100 or fringe top-100 types.

No. I'll bring this back to a school setting, being a teacher and all. You're someone who scores really well in Math. You're not labeled gifted and talented but you usually score high B's and low A'. But you've got a C+ in Math class. Why? Combination of not trying hard enough, got a little behind and missed some time sick. You also have a a D in English. You're not a gifted writer. You struggle. In fact, you probably need a tutor. Would you spend your time with a Math tutor, even if it was the best Math tutor on the planet? Or would you expect your natural math ability, plus things just going your way will help you get back to where you should be (B+/A- area) plus an English tutor would get you the best combination of grades? There isn't enough time in the day for both, so you have to make a choice. I think this is what the Cubs are facing. Yes, Yordan Alvarez is a great hitter, but how much better of an offense are the Cubs going to get? If the offense as a whole doesn't get going, adding on excellent hitter isn't going to fix it (has PCA's hot streak fixed it?). If the offense does get going, how much better are you getting offensively? But how much easier would it be for the Cubs to get a pretty good arm, or a few, and go from a bad pitching staff to a slightly better than average? The jump on pitching is both easier to make happen and likely has a bigger impact.

I do not believe the Cubs need to add any major pieces to the offense right now, no. That isn't me saying the offense is great as is, but that the solution offensively is internal. Part of that is mental; I think the team is pressing (and I don't think fan sentiment and media is helping with that, but I'm not blaming anyone for being frustrated). I think the team has been the recipient of some bad luck. I think some players have been the recipient of bad play (Swanson particularly is bad right now). But on paper this is a good offensive team and the solution is for the good players to be good again. The same cannot be said for the pitching. The issue there is that players are hurt and some of them aren't coming back. It was also the aspect of the team on paper entering the year that was projected to be worse. Your best hope internally is maybe Justin Steele comes back, but that's far from a guarantee. And you don't pick up any more ouchies. The Cubs only have so many prospects to make a move in July and so much time. Opportunity cost is a real thing. So between the offense, which I believe can be fixed internally and the pitching, which I do not believe has any immediate internal fixes, you have to spend your resources on pitching. The Cubs can re-evaluate the offense in the offseason.

Javier Baez has better numbers over his career with runners in scoring position than without runners on base or with runners on and not in scoring position. I know, it feels like someone like Baez wouldn't; but it's probably another reason why we shouldn't use it. Swanson, as well, has better numbers with RISP over his career than any other game state. And has a 104 wRC+. It's true that Nico Hoerner has better RISP numbers, 116 wRC+ to Swanson's career 104 wRC+, but couldn't that just be because Nico Hoerner is a better hitter? Hoerner is a career 101 wRC+ hitter and Swanson is a 95 wRC+ hitter. I don't think hitters are magically better because someone is on second. When we see hitters doing well one year versus another, it's almost always down to "small sample size". Like, Hoerner has 326 PA's this year but 76 are with RISP. Many batting statistics aren't even stabilized at 76 PAs (stabilized in this just means they are large enough that dumb luck isn't affecting the numbers; certain stats require higher thresholds than other).

No. That's an anecdote. What is the skill? You can't just say it's a skill. What is the skill? As an example, I can define the skill of getting on base: some hitters have a better ability to to determine strikes and balls. This helps raise their ability to walk. Hitters who have better contact rates, also have an ability to get on base better. We can track these underlying skills through things like baseball savant. We can prove that hitters have a better OBP when these things go up. There are underlying metrics to these skills that add up. As well, you ignored entirely the "predictive and repeatable", We don't see hitters strike out 30% of the time one year and then 15% of the time the next, yet we see hitters like Ian Happ go from a 122 wRC+ last year with RISP to a 91 wRC+ with RISP this year. https://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2024/11/23/24273174/the-mysteries-of-hitting-with-risp This is a study that also proves it's not a repeatable statistic. Do you have a study to support your point of view? So again, I ask the same two questions: 1. Define the skill 2. Prove it's repeatable Until these two things are defined, it's not a worthwhile aspect of the game to focus in on. The issue is that the Cubs aren't hitting. Hitting with RISP is a symptom of that issue but is not the issue.

It's only worth bringing up if we believe that hitting with RISP vs hitting without them is: 1. An independent skill 2. Repeatable and predictive If it isn't an independent skill (as in, hitting with a runner on second base requires some sort of a skill in which hitting with a runner on first or no runners does not) and it isn't predictive and repeatable (as in we see trends year over year and through large sample sizes that show hitters across the league remain somewhat consistent) then it isn't something that we should really be focusing on. So if we'd like to have this discussion, it's probably important for you to define those two things for us. I'll go on the record: I do not believe it is an independent skill, and when we look across the board, players tend to waffle heavily year over year unlike things like wRC+, or K%. That isn't to say the Cubs offense is fine today; they have flaws. It is that I don't believe this data set is indicative of anything. At best it's a symptom.

I think he's a useful MLB piece who will first find his footing as a plus defensive OF'er in the corners while adding big power numbers against LHP. I think his upside is "Jose Siri" type; he's going to have a low batting average but pace himself with defense and 25+ home runs. That's roughly a 3-win player. A contending team will likely use him in the above situation as a rookie and then plan on slowly expanding that role to see if he's more of a situational piece or more of a 500+ PA guy. A second division team will likely give him far more runway initially.

He's a 23 year old OFer with 15 home runs in 46 games in Triple-A. He's going through a swing change but his contact rates have been going up as he's gotten more used to it. I'd focus more on the development of that data than a single number like K%. "Prospect development is not linear" is a great view to have on these things. A good look here shows his quality of contact is through the roof right now in Iowa. He's had a decent amount of PA's in Triple-A but he's 23...he's not some elder prospect, either. A good reminder that headed into 2025, Jacob Misiorwski was ranked the number 100 prospect by Jon Mayo and his highest was number 44. He's a golden goose in the mound. I'd highly recommend that we don't use top-100 lists as end all be alls or how teams internally rank these guys. They're an interesting lens into a specific evaluation, but the difference between #83 and #142 or whatever is largely "my personal preference". Do I think he's going to carry a trade for a SP with 5 years of control and ace upside? No. Do I think he's an MLB hitter of a short side platoon with plus defense in the corners and capable of playing CF? Yes. And that carries value for the Cubs and another team in trade. It isn't to say there isn't risk here, but the way you're acting, he's a 27 year old former top-prospect who's been toiling in the minors for years. He's a 23-year old with great batted ball data who has inherent risk his contact ability but it's not dire, either.

Yeah the MLB has a problem. And candidly, we have a human problem too. Really, what happens to a guy in 30 years after he's had three TJS? Do we really know? These are people and while science has gotten way better, there has to be some ethical questions too. But putting those aside, I agree, there isn't an easy solution. And unless this becomes a real CTE type "guys are dying" thing, I'm not sure the MLB is really going to step in.

I'm sure one of them will. But they also have players like Rojas, and Kepley who will also be available via trade. Those aren't the only three options they have who can be moved.

Yes. However should be important to note that Horton and Harvey, who were here to help that issue, are both essentially dead for the season (Harvey isn't officially listed as our but his prognosis sounds bleak based on recent reporting). I also don't think it's unrelated that they're among the hardest throwing guys in the team and are both hurt, too. Velo and arm issues tend to go hand in hand.

The issue isn't that training is any different. It's that people like Nolan Ryan's are freaks of nature beyond what a normal freak of nature is. He's a generationally healthy human in the same way Shohei Ohtani is a generationally talented baseball player. Instead ask "what's so different today that doesn't allow guys to throw as often?" and the answer is almost assuredly that instead of throwing 88-90mph for 140 pitches MLB has found out that it's better for guys to throw 98mph for 80 pitches, and then have another guy throw 98 for 15 pitches, and another guy throw 97mph for 15 pitches....until you get to 140. And when one of your freaks breaks, you just find another. This is a churn and burn scenario. And a downside of this comes in the form of elbows that explode because they aren't designed to throw 98mph. As well, part of this is just that science is better at detecting arm injuries. Dave Steib was arguably the best pitcher in the 80s who's entire career fell apart at age 32. Today he may have had elbow reconstructive surgery 3 years before that, extended his career to 35-38. Instead he was effectively done at 32. "Washed up" when he was really...just hurt. History is littered with pitchers who had short careers likely because their elbows gave way, but we never knew it. It's not that everyone forgot how to train. It's that we live in a very different world and the human body just isn't designed to do this.

They're pitchers. Notice a trend on most of the injuries? They're guys who throw super hard. And they're almost always an elbow or shoulder issue. This isn't a training issue. This a "this is what power arms do" issue. The Braves had 3 SPs go down with TJS in a week in March. These guys are doing what the human body is not meant to do. The reason the Cubs haven't seen this issue as often recently is in due part because they have had some of the lowest velo guys in the league. They added velo this year and all of a sudden the injuries followed. The Cubs need to continue to stockpile velo so that when the injuries happen they have some who haven't exploded. One of the issues is that when you're late to the velo party, you have less guys laying around to backfill. But we should all become used to pitching injuries...this is modern baseball for better or worse.

There is no OPS to wRC+ conversation, sadly. Because it's rooted in neutralized statistics and field and league, etc, no easy 1:1. This is as good as you'll be able to do; find some quick comparisons! His xwOBA since May 6th is .314 and league average is .318 which also lines up with around that number. You can find anecdotal poor PA's (last night like you showed) and he's probably pressing a bit. But generally speaking? He's fine. He'll be fine.

The Cubs are a year removed from being one game away from an NLCS, have tons of young talent and even with a rough time are on an 84 win pace. They do not "need to rebuild" nor do they need to trade the player they just locked up beyond FA to do that. I wouldn't disagree that they may need to look inward on how they rank what's important, how they evaluate some things, etc. There's always room for personal improvement! But get out of here with "a desperate rebuild". That's hyperbolic to the extreme.

Nico Hoerner since May 6th: BA: .171 xBA .283 SLG: .210 xSLG: .344 wOBA: .221 xwOBA: .314 None of his xData suggests he's "SUCKED". What it does suggest is some negative variance. Because that's another way you go from an OPS of 1.000 to getting closer to .650.

The Cubs aren't going to need to fill everything outside of the organization. One of those SP's will hopefully be Justin Steele to some degree. One of the OF spots will go to one of Shaw/Alcantara/Ramirez if not a combination of them. They can also use some of their prospects that have overlap to fill a gap through trade. They won't need all $100m in free agency to fill five spots. It's more likely that they have $100m to fill three spots.

I mentioned it at the end of May. Mike Petriello wrote an article about it on May 28th. In June they have a .350 wOBA against breaking balls. It's the 7th best number in baseball. They have also seen a big downturn in breaking balls this month, as well. Instead of historically many, they're down to around league average pitch% against.

One more thing I'll point out: if all we do is take away the best run of any team this year, their W-L would look a lot worse than it would today. We can do the inverse just as easily: what if instead of taking away a 10-game-winning streak, we took away the 10-game losing streak. I think either would be just as fair to hand-wave away, no? I'll say this: I'm disappointed how the last month and a half has gone. Part of that is because the Cubs have dealt with a pretty improbable number of pitching injuries. Part of that is that the Cubs patched together a handful of pitchers with arm injuries (however, this is a water-is-wet situation, as now a days most pitchers come with a history of that). Part of that is that players just aren't playing to the level that you'd have expected. Only some of that is Jed's fault. Some of that is bad luck. Some of that is the player's faults. But even through it all, the Cubs are on an 84-win pace. This has been about as bad of a 45-day run as you could have written down, and I don't think it will continue to be this bad. And I want to remind everyone this, too. Last year, on June 16th the Chicago Cubs had a 5.5 game lead over the Milwaukee Brewers, The Brewers had 39 wins. Today, the Cubs have 38. Let's not act like we haven't seen the script flip on the Cubs, and it's not impossible that the script eventually flips on the Brewers, too.

The Cubs in 2021 were a vastly different organization top-to-bottom than Theo took over. Theo got a few years of bad results because he had to fix literally everything. When Hoyer inherited things, the issue wasn't that top to bottom it needed modernizing (and if you think it did, what you're really upset at is Theo). What he inherited was an owner off of post-covid "biblical losses" and a demand to lower payroll immediately (Yu Darvish trade). And to say he did that "right away" is pretty unfair. He signed all three of those players after 2022...after two full seasons. That isn't "right away", IMO. And frankly, all of those contracts have mostly been fine. Taillon has probably been the worst of the bunch, but he's a pretty "meh" contract to begin with; $15m in this day and age just isn't asking a lot. I know $15m sounds like a ton, but in context of the MLB salary structure? Yeah it's a pretty minor miss. Not to mention, it isn't like the Cubs haven't drafted and developed well without a slew of top-5 picks. He's traded for players like Pete Crow-Armstrong, drafted Matt Shaw and Cade Horton, and there's a lot of other scouting wins within the system and the draft. His team hasn't batted 1.000, as it's impossible to do so and once you get past the top-5 the MLB draft is unforgiving, but the two biggest "misses" here have been an odd 2020 draft and then a later half 1st round SP who has dealt with injuries on top of developmental issues.