Jason Ross

Alcantara was hurt last year. He's an above average defender in CF while being plus in the corners. I think people are far too down on him due to the injury and fatigue. He's been a top-100 prospect for a good amount of time. There is starting upside but a good chance of him being an MLB player as a 4th OF too. Totally fine to be a little skeptical, but also feels like we have swung too hard in that direction. This is a a great spot for him. He has the inside track to 4th OF duties this year but had a competitive player behind him to push. The Cubs can curate his PAs and surround him with a great lineup. They can also bring up a McCormack or trade for a replacement if he's terrible though June. But this is a good spot for the Cubs to break him in.

Yes. As a website and the writing team, we don't use Spotrac because of how inaccurate their MLB numbers are.

Spotrac is horrible for MLB contracts. Use Roster Resource from FG or Cots.

When Swanson got the contract he did, he was not on the same tier of players as the others. From 2019 (the year before covid) through 2022, his free agent year (and the same 4-year split I used) here is how he stacked up to the other players: Turner: 20.7 fWAR (1st among SS over that time) Bogaerts: 17.7 fWAR (3rd among SS over that time) Correa: 15.9 fWAR (5th among SS over that time) Swanson 13.9 fWAR (7th among SS over that time) When Swanson signed, almost half of that fWAR all came in a single season, the 2022 season. Teams were rightfully concerned that Swanson was not that good and he had just two full seasons where he was good (Swanson's other great year was the 2020 covid-shortened year but it was small sample). You're conflating teams paying more money to better players with "teams prefer offense". Swanson got the least amount of money because at the time, he was viewed as the fourth best shortstop. It wasn't because he was a glove-fist shortstop. Cody Bellinger just signed a 5/$162.5m deal with the Yankees. Pete Alonso and Kyle Schwarber's offensive ceiling are considered to be much higher, and yet it's Bellinger, who's defense is much better who is out earning both. You can make an argument pretty easily that Bellinger is the better overall player than Alonso, but it was Schwarber who equaled his fWAR last year. It just doesn't hold up. Better players get more money on the market. As Bertz showed, the ceiling for how-high an offensive value can go is just higher (more chances, etc.) which leads to the best players having good bats. But as we get to the point we're at, where Tucker and Hoerner have been, the ceiling isn't all that important. Realistically, their trade value should be pretty close. You can give a half win edge to Tucker, and you should, but in the course of a season, we're not talking immense value difference, either. And yes, I assume teams are running on analytical models. I don't think that's "vibes". I think suggesting teams value offense over defense is a vibe. It just doesn't look like that happens in the way fans think it does. Do I think teams might try to hold the Cubs feet to the fire about that in a negotiation? Sure! Teams look for any advantage they can get. It doesn't mean that I think teams would internally value the two as vastly differently as fans think they do, either.

"Clogging the bases" were the man's words. 2003 was a simpler time.

You said it was insane to expect the kind of return Tucker has, and yet on the field, the two players have shockingly similar value upon it. Trade value for one year of each should, then, be mostly the same. The Cubs have no reason to take anything less. Which is why what will happen is the Cubs almost assuredly won't trade him, making your argument about the return, moot. If the Cubs viewed it as the way you did, they'd treat him the way you are. And yet... Clearly the Cubs value defense here. That might tell us something about own own personal biases on how we view offense and defense. MLB teams are run on analytics, not vibes. They run on models that are proprietary but they're likely models that don't don't drastically differ from fWAR either. If we can see that the gap between Tucker and Hoerner is roughly half a win over the course of that one season, MLB teams can too. And that half of win isn't drastically going to change a trade return.

Fien was the 12th pick in the most recent draft, so I'd assume the Nationals are pretty high on him, as were the Rangers. But certainly risky for his age and profile.

Bertz did a great job explaining why this is the case. There is a higher offensive ceiling; but it doesn't mean offense is more important than defense. A run scored is no different than a run saved. They count the same. There is a reason why Kyle Schwarber, coming off of a much better offensive season than Alex Bregman is making about the same AAV. Bregman's defense makes up the difference. If offense was worth so much more, he'd be making more. More importantly, this discussion is not about long term contracts, but one-year value. How a team values a player like Tucker long term versus Hoerner long term is meaningless. An acquiring team in both scenarios is acquiring one year of value.

Yeah, the Mets are pretty good. They're probably with the Cubs as the 2nd/.3rd best roster on paper in the NL right now.

Sharma and Mooney have said the Cubs are listening multiple times for example. There are credible reports out there. Have been for a while. Do I think the Cubs are shopping either? I don't think they're shopping him. But there has been smoke that the Cubs were open to moving Hoerner for over a year now. And here's the thing about how the Cubs operate; when there's smoke, there is fire. We heard names like Bregman and Cabrera for over a year and the Cubs got both of them. They worked with the Marlins as far back as last offseason in trading Caissie to them; he ended up there. I'd take these reports as a very real possibility. But I wouldn't take any of them as a certainty.

Which is more disingenuous; using adjectives and opinions (such as "slappy hitting") or using a data point that is designed to encompass value? The reality is this; fWAR is designed exactly for this discussion. It takes offense, defense, baserunning, positional value and neutralized league data and compiles it into a single value. It takes out opinion of "slappy" and boils it down to a number. It's not a silver bullet, and fractional fWAR is often used in the wrong way but it's also a great way to even the playing field, take personal bias out and see how much value a player generally brings to the field. The point that I'm making is this: I think many people (and your post is indicative of this) don't understand just how good Nico Hoerner is because they look at his "slappy hitting" and ignore the overall picture. On the open market, I don't disagree that teams probably value what Kyle Tucker does in free agency as more valuable. He can transition from RF to 1b to DH and Nico Hoerner probably can't. Hoerner has more value tied to his legs and his glove. But when we're talking a trade for one year of value what Tucker is going to be in four years and what Hoerner will be in four years is immaterial; all that matters is what you're buying in that one year. And the value difference between Hoerner and Tucker in that one year is a lot closer than you're acting.

Is it? A reminder, both only had one year of control: Kyle Tucker's previous 4 years fWAR : 18.9 fWAR Nico Hoerner's last 4 years fWAR: 17.5 fWAR Tucker has a 1.5 fWAR advantage, but it's a lot closer than I'm sure many realize.

Well, in their defense, they claimed Shaw would bring back even more. So if Boston is in the market for a defensive-minded 2b the Cubs corner the market here. Hoerner would probably be the cheaper option. Ultimately, I think I'm becoming more convinced one of them will end up in Boston, but who knows what the Cubs could realistically get back.

Just for reference sake, Sharma and Mooney suspected that the Cubs would look to get something akin back to what they traded Kyle Tucker for in the event of a Nico Hoerner trade.

The amount of dislikes his posts getting are impressive; he racked up a -15 and a -12. The +/- on his posts are basically like looking at Nic Castellanos' DRS year to year.

ZiPS is a good system but these things can get a little wonky. Bregman is probably being dinged because of his shortened season last year where as Swanson is getting a jump because his xwOBA was actually very good. Horton is getting dinged because he wasn't a big xFIP guy last year. But all of that is important to remember. Swanson usually underperforms his xwOBA, so he's probably getting a little unfair benefit. Horton is a good bet, instead, to out play his projected fWAR if the progress over his last 44 innings is what we see in 2026. And Bregman can over perform that by staying healthy.

The "Lou Brock" trade thing is the most played out Cubs comparison of all time. Listen, Shaw is a fine player, but we have to stop equating any trade to the lopsided trade of "HoF player for scraps". We heard this nonsense last offseason with Cam Smith (who was by any metric bad last year). Matt Shaw had a fine rookie year. Defensively, according to DRS, a great year, according to OAA, far less impressive one. Offensively he had a good second half, and overall was, fine. But there's plenty of markers with batted ball that suggest he's probably got some red flags still. This also ignores the team isn't giving him away. Trading him will bring back equal compensation as viewed by the Cubs. So if they trade for, say, Peyton Tolle is a great prospect. And would be on par with that of Matt Shaw. If the Cubs traded for Tolle, then the "Lou Brock" trade doesn't make any sense. Let's be nuanced. Let's realize Lou Brock happened in 1964: over 60 years ago. The reason people keep coming back to "Lou Brock" is because in those 60 years there hasn't been another trade like that. That's important. The Cubs can trade young players and be just fine. Remember how trading Gleyber Torres was like Lou Brock? How about Eloy Jimenez? Jorge Soler? I've read the same argument 10x in a decade. If the Cubs trade Shaw, it almost assuredly won't be Lou Brock. More likely, it'll be at worst Eloy Jimenez.

Juan Cruz. He was neck-and-neck with Mark Prior, and having those two hit would have been a ton of fun.

I think we are going to have to shift how we view these arms and their role in the team. I don't think players fit into neat and nice boxes. Colin Rea might be a "reliever who can go longer" but I also don't think he's going to be limited to "long relief". Now, I don't think the Cubs will open with Assad and Rea in the bullpen regardless (Assad has options) of what happens, but relievers are having to fit multi-role situations now a days more and more. A 6-man rotation is already going to be new. We should expect most everything behind it to not follow convention. If you're running an extra SP, having guys who can go more in the BP is going to be required. There are less arms for that job now.

Cubs connected to Andujar today. Doesn't make sense, unless of course, they trade an infielder.

I don't see the point in blocking Alcantara with a bench OF'er. This is the pristine way to break in a young player; in a deep lineup that isn't asking him to be a star and allowing you to truly curate his PA's. It's unlikely that the difference between any major outcomes in 2026 will hinge on him; and it's not like he wouldn't be replaceable mid-year. The team has done what it needed to at the deadline offensively; Candelario, Parades, Castro. Clearly they won't pay up for a SP, but if Kevin is struggling in July, "4th OF'er" isn't a pricy addition.

Yeah this is a pretty brutal offseason for Philly all things considered. It just doesn't look good at all for them. They aren't entirely horrible, but it feels like they've missed across the board this year.

Realmuto to Phillies - 3/$45m

There are plenty of baseball reasons to consider Shaw. He's a fine baseball player now, but his batted ball data wasn't great on the season. Part of that is because high contact players have mediocre batted ball data, but his defense may be overblown by DRS (OAA didn't love him as much) and getting a Peyton Tolle isn't like you're selling him short - Toille is nasty and he's the kind of guy you want in your org. You can find backup infielders far more often than you can than Tolle, for example. The price on Shaw should be exorbitant, but with Bichette and Tucker off the board, teams have little in the way of starting infielders to consider.