Jason Ross

We are speaking the same language then! Yeah, the hands could use less movement. Might even unlock more power, frankly, and should create less movement overall.

Well, it depends on what you mean. If you mean the only way the Cubs will know if Morel can play 3b is by having him play there in the regular season, then, no. Morel isn't going to sit on a couch between today and April. You and I won't have baseball savant data. I'm sure the Cubs can figure out a way between today and Opening Day (winter ball, instructs, camps, training, etc) as to whether or not he can play 3b. They also have data and scouting from his MiLB days when he played 3b. The Cubs were able to find out if Nick Madrigal could play 3b over the same amount of time just last offseason and they didn't even have MiLB data or scouting on him at that position because he hadn't played there as a professional. There are 5 full months between now and Opening Day. If the Cubs are interested in finding out, they will.

I think we've finally seen that ship sail. The Cubs can be cheap at times and haven't really valued 1b, but they're not going to bring in a 90 wRC+ 1b. They might not go huge at 1b, but I don't think we'll see even close to a repeat of the Eric Hosmer nonsense.

I think they'll go a little longer with Arias for a few reasons. The first, he just hasn't really pitched much and starting should get him more innings, more time and more experience. Secondly, I wonder if the Cubs won't feel the immediate need so much. With Little, Palencia, Alzolay, and a few other arms already in BP, the immediate need to push Arias up may not be there. Lastly, I think it'll help keep him off the 40. If he spends most of the year at South Bend with a small trip to Tennessee as a SP, I think it'll help him not get selected next winter again versus pushing him through the system, having success and maybe him topping out at Iowa as a solid looking reliever. Just guessing with all of this, however, and usually when I guess I'm just flat wrong!

Maybe? But I'm not entirely worried about it yet. I think a lot of Alcantara's thing just comes with approach. Could see it early last year; no walks, but a healthy amount of K's. Right before the leg injury he seemed to fall back into a good approach, and both his walks climbed and his K's declined. I wouldn't be shocked to know he fell back into some bad habits in the AFL. Probably a pitch recognition thing as it comes with experience. He's done this a bit, where he'll struggle a bit early in a level with this, then settle in. As he moves up, maybe a situational load change would help him get around on high-inside-fastballs. Tall, lanky cats like El Jaguar get beat up there often, usually around the AAA level as pitchers' command begins to match their stuff more often. For example, shortening that load up a bit with 2 strikes when you're more likely to see that high-inside-pitch so you can get those hands around on it a bit quicker. Really I'd like to see his hands move a bit less (but maybe that's what you're looking at when you're talking load. Usually load, I'm thinking the leg load but you could be talking hand load). Keep the movement leg-and weight-transfer only.

Michael Arias was once a failed shortstop with the Toronto Blue Jays. Today, he's a top-20 prospect in a deep, crowded Cubs system. Exactly how did we get here, and where are we going? Image courtesy of Myrtle Beach Pelicans 2023 Season Review Michael Arias has had a strange, fun, and winding route to becoming a top-20 organizational prospect. Originally signed as a shortstop by the Toronto Blue Jays, the Cubs scooped up Arias post-Covid to turn him from a shortstop into a pitcher. Since then, Michael Arias had not been seen much, compiling short stints in the DSL and the Arizona Complex League, which could have gone better. However, 2023 was a big change for the young hurler, and Arias is clearly on the map as someone with upside. Michael Arias's biggest success was during a 42 IP stint in Myrtle Beach. Flashing a fastball that was reported to hit in the high-90s throughout the season and a funky delivery from a three-quarter arm slot, Arias posted an awesome 3.26 xFIP and a K/9 over 13. There are a few caveats in this, being that Arias was 21 years old and in a pretty pitcher-friendly environment, but it's fair to suspend some of that as we remember how raw and new to the position he is. The walk rate was high, sitting over 5 per 9/IP, but forgivable for a pitcher making his professional debut proper. If there's one thing it's clear Arias is a star about, it's his ability to limit hard contact and home runs, giving up just two home runs all season (likely due to his arm slot, slider, and fastball combination) Arias moved through Myrtle Beach quickly and was promoted to South Bend mid-season. South Bend was far more up and down and offered a unique challenge for Michael Arias. He managed to keep a somewhat respectable 4.25 xFIP and continue to limit home runs (as just one of his two home runs surrendered occurred at high-A). He had a more up-and-down roller coaster ride, being a part of a no-hit-shutout from the South Bend Cubs on July 6th, striking out seven in just a little over three innings on July 22nd, but also having games like his last start where he walked five while striking out five. 2024 Season Outlook and ETA Be prepared to hear it often when we look at the Cubs' prospects, but Michael Arias will be another player on whom the Cubs will have to make 40-man and Rule 5 decisions. It's always a bit strange to see someone available for the Rule 5 draft around their 22nd birthday, but due to signing as an IFA, Arias is currently out of time and will need to be added to the 40-man or be eligible to be drafted. I do not think the Cubs will ultimately protect him, much like they exposed Luis Devers, the 2022 breakout pitcher. Suppose there's a small benefit to his struggles. In that case, I cannot see a team willing to commit to Michael Arias on the MLB roster for the entirety of the 2024 season, and you probably don't want to stash and "phantom injury" a player with as little background as Arias. Michael Arias is ticketed for South Bend to start the 2024 season (assuming he's not drafted). There will be more leash here and a slower build time than many other pitchers in the Cubs' system. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Cubs give Arias a quick hook and turn him into a leverage bullpen arm. Most players who are converted position players end up as relievers down the road. Players like former Cub reliever Carlos Marmol (a converted catcher) and others such as Sean Doolittle, Kenley Jansen, and even the great Trevor Hoffman settle in as relievers. There are success stories like former college position player Jacob DeGrom turning into a Cy Young caliber starting pitcher, but those are much fewer and farther between. Michael Arias has a very loose and a bit wonky delivery, which I think lends itself more to the bullpen, allowing quick removals if he's not finding the consistency versus starting, where that can put you in much more peril. Arias is a potential leverage reliever or a righty-killer with the arm slot and repertoire. There's a chance he's a starter, but he has more of a reliever's build. As a starter, I don't think we'll see Michael Arias on the Cubs for a few years, maybe not until late 2025 or 2026. As a leverage reliever, there's a possibility of a late 2024 call-up if everything goes to plan and he settles in with his stuff, though 2025 would be more likely. However, none of that should be disparaging for a player who was clearly not making any headway as a position player. Great scouting find and win so far for the Cubs. View full article

While not impossible, this also feels a bit, video-gamey. Christopher Morel has already shown that he can't really relied on to play the OF, despite having many of the necessary characteristics (athleticism, strong arm), which many believe is a very easy switch to make (I disagree with this belief myself, just saying it's something I know is out there). The Cubs didn't trust him to play 3b despite the athleticism and the arm. I'm not so sure he can just play 1b, or, really, if it's a great idea. His bat isn't so good you have to force it into 1b. So far, in his career, Morel is a 114 wRC+ hitter, where as league 1b put up a 108 wRC+. He's a bit better then the average, but then you're teaching him a new position with little fall back options on the roster. It feels a bit square-peg-round-hole. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it feels less than optimal too. Secondly, moving Happ, a positive fielder, to 1b, to put Soto into LF, a negative defender, to get Morel, a slightly above average DH (league DH 106 wRC+, but these get a bit skewed as players who primarily DH only, usually hit well above that level) feels like a rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul situation. Both outcomes feel like less than the best outcomes the Cubs can have, when it might just make more sense to trade Morel for Soto, use your prospects or remaining funds to fill out positions. Jim Bowden is generally an idiot, but he has Candelario pegged at 2/$15m (total) this offseason. I'm not the biggest Candelario fan, but I think him at 1b makes more sense than either of the above options at that price. We can debate that price and I'm a bit skeptical on it, but it's just one example. Not meaning to tear down your suggestion, only that I'm not sure either are really great routes other than just making due and I think the Juan Soto thing will get done early enough in the offseason (based on reports) that I'd prefer the Cubs to do more than just make due. For me, Morel becomes pretty redundant unless he's an MLB 3b with Juan Soto. Which isn't to say I think he can't be a successful 2b or 3b, but that's really where his athleticism (in theory) should meet the bat ability at a place to maximize his value in totality. Maybe the Padres aren't enthused by Morel and we have to make due, I just don't think we'll be there if Soto gets dealt to the Cubs.

They "can" give him time at 3b, but the Cubs seemed entirely unwilling to do so last year; Morel had just 4 starts and it wasn't like there was a definitively better answer at 3b between Nick Madrigal or Patrick Wisdom. There's a potential for that willingness to change, but the Cubs reasoning behind that is unknown to you or me. However if he's not going to be a 3b for the Cubs, then what's the point of keeping him after a Soto trade? He picked up 100 innings at 2b last year, and it isn't like the Cubs don't have multiple other options in Nick Madrigal, Luis Vazquez, and currently on a mid-June/early July ETA, Matt Shaw. DH will be completely monopolized by Happ, Suzuki and Soto. The amount of playing time and opportunities will be pretty limited. He's a terrible OF'er, and a worse CF'er (the one position there may be realistic time, because whomever isn't taking DH between Soto/Happ/Suzuki will be in the corners) and the Cubs have players like Alexander Canario and the potential return of Mike Tauchman who will provide plenty of options at those positions outside of Pete Crow-Armstrong. The amount of time available in the OF is next to nothing. So the entire equation comes down to "Do the Cubs think he's a 3b?" If the answer is "no" than I cannot see a world where the Cubs are getting much of anything except 150 PA's from Christopher Morel post-Juan Soto, and that's no where near worth trading from the 2nd tier of prospects (Alcantara-Caissie-Shaw-Ballesteros-Brown, etc) tier to ensure. If the answer is "yes" than you can make an argument that keeping Morel and trading prospects has validity, but again, it's answer neither you nor I can answer. And frankly, we have such limited data on, that we can offer little insight into whether we think he's capable there. That's entirely a "Cubs" question and in the event the Cubs trade Christopher Morel for Juan Soto, or don't and instead trade prospects, we will get our answer.

For all of the questions surrounding Triantos. despite the obvious "small sample caveat" it's nice to hear a solid report on Triantos' defense for once.

A breakdown (using bWAR) of teams net gains/losses via trades since 2012. The Cubs have come out pretty strongly over that time span. Make of it as you wish, but did find the data interesting.

This is just spitballing on Morel; I think it's fair to say that the jury is way out on Morel overall. Going back to his MiLB days, the scouting report on Christopher Morel was always positive on his defensive ability. We know his arm strength is really high, he's in the 99th percentile there. His athleticism is very high, he's an 81st percentile for his sprint speed, as well as being a positive on the base paths. He hasn't really shown much aptitude at CF, which has really hurt his defensive value as an MLB player, and he's always been an infielder. The Cubs seemed unwilling to play him at 3b last year and he's blocked at 2b with Hoerner (logging around 100 innings here). Why the Cubs refuse to play him at 3b is something no one can answer (though I suspect it's his arm slot when he throws, but that's just a guess). If you're "high" on Morel, you probably see someone highly athletic, who posted a 119 wRC+ in 425 PA's last year and a career 114 wRC+ over 850 in his career who's more than athletic enough (in theory) to either handle 2b or 3b, though with his throwing angle I think you'd have to probably see a 2b as of today. There's something with staying at a consistent position as well that should make him settle in a bit. He probably wouldn't really need to improve; his 119 wRC+ last year would make him the 7th best offensive 2b. Brandon Drury (114 wRC+ last season) finished with a 2.5 fWAR, logged a -1 DRS in 700 innings at 2b (-4 in 500 innings at 3b), and was a negative runner. Even if Morel was a -2 or -3 DRS 2b, with his positive base running, you're looking at the profile of a 2.5 fWAR player. Even if he's streaky, that's going to be a valuable 5 years of a 2b before he hits FA. That's not to say this is exactly what he is, just that if you're a Morel-fan, that's probably what you'd see. I can't offer any personal opinions on his defense; all we have are his MiLB scouting reports (which are always a bit shaky at best) and some basic observations from his savant data. Nor is that to say I'd stop from trading him for Soto; quite the opposite (just so you don't think I'm disagreeing with you). Only that I can see where some teams are high on him. I can also see from a Cub perspective, if you don't think he's a capable 3b, why he might be a bit "blocked" at his best position and you would feel like maybe moving him would make sense.

Yeah, I'm a big Bryan Smith fan.

The plyer you trade (Christopher Morel) would be immediately replaced with his successor (Juan Soto) while also retaining the vast majority of your prospect capital (where you'd ideally be looking to trade from). Pete Alonso would likely sacrifice more from the prospect capital (assuming the Cubs aren't trading a player like Morel in this deal) leaving less to trade from in a subsequent trade. The addition of Christopher Morel saves prospect capital for a second trade. At the same time, Juan Soto roughly has been worth the same amount of fWAR as Alonso+Morel has been in the past. This is my reasoning. Cuzi, I'm not looking to change your mind on a topic I don't feel has an "answer". You asked my opinion on whether or not the best version of the Cubs in 2024 has Juan Soto on it. In my opinion, that answer is yes. That question has so many variables, and variables we have no idea if we're even on agreement on (like, how much does my "best version" get to spend?). I took the question in a very loose, and hypothetical way, as if to mean "in your best case scenario in the offseason, is Juan Soto on the Cubs?" Maybe you meant it a different way. Or maybe your "best" version of the Cubs has different parameters than mine. But that's my answer in the way I have understood the question.

Yes, I understand your argument. My argument is that the best version of the 2024 Cubs includes the best realistic player the Cubs can acquire. Pete Alonso and Christopher Morel may offer more wiggle room, but I've got the better player. Historically, Soto averages somewhere between 4-5.5 fWAR with peaks at 7 per year. Alonso between 3-4 with peaks at mid-4s. The difference between values is around what Morel was worth last year. Pete Alonso is not free, and will also be required to be traded for, though at a lower cost. I expect the cost difference between whatever else is needed to push over the Soto trade over the line with Morel headlining will be less than the total cost of Alonso. So option 1 retains more trade value to make a 2nd splash trade. I think you can work within that space with a lot of ability to continue to fill out the team. I don't think Pete Alonso is a bad plan; so please don't get that twisted. I think you can lay out a successful offseason using Pete Alonso as the traded player, and one which would result in a good 2024 season for the Cubs on paper. But I'll remain in the camp that the best version of the Chicago Cubs in 2024 has Juan Soto apart of it.

The best version of the Chicago Cubs in 2024, IMO, includes Juan Soto. Yes. I'm not convinced Jose Ramirez is realistically available, and think Juan Soto is better than Pete Alonso, Cody Bellinger...etc. Acquiring Juan Soto for someone like Morel + not-top-9 prospects would allow for a lot of wiggle room elsewhere via trade. The only other player I think who could be better is Ohtani, but I'm not convinced he's a realistic target. We'll have to see there. He should be a target, but coming from Jesse Rogers, the Cubs big acquisitions, according to him, are likely via trade.

I don't think the Cubs will pull a "stunt" as I cannot imagine Jed Hoyer would just give away Christopher Morel to sell more tickets for Tom Ricketts. I also don't think the rumors are stunts, there's too much smoke for me to think the Cubs don't have some legitimate interest outside of "just rile the fans up for a hot minute". Not saying I think it's going down the way the rumors may suggest, just that I think this is some level past "make fans happy, leak some Soto stuff". I do have questions about their ability to identify useful MLB helpers and upgrades (just about every "raise the floor" player tanked last year and while they've been good at BP arm acquisitions, they've kind of failed at every reclamation project that wasn't Bellinger on the offensive side), questions about Tom Ricketts ability and willingness to spend, etc. But I think the Cubs using Morel to trade for a stunt feels like doomsday fan conspiracy stuff. If the Cubs wanted to pull stunts, they'd bring back old fan favorites or stuff like that, and this just doesn't fit that. Hoyer, if anything, has been conversative when it comes to trades. Giving up 5 years of a useful player just to sell some tickets for the owner feels out of his wheelhouse. Because of that, I'm not worried about an actual stunt here. I do believe there's some legitimacy and earnestness here. Between Alonso and Soto, you could make an argument for Alonso and spreading out the $10m, but I'm a little hesitant to worry much about $10m extra. On the free market, that's little over an extra win purchasing power and I'm not sure that's worth the difference between Alonso and Soto (which historically has been 2-3 fWAR or so). In the end, I'm still hoping for Juan Soto over Pete Alonso. I think both are about as likely to extend as the other (both are Scott Boras) once a trade happens, but I'm more confident in the Cubs paying for Juan Soto than Pete Alonso, as well based on his age. And I like that the idea of Soto would allow the Cubs to still make a 2nd trade with prospect capital (though how likely that is comes down to concerns about Hoyer's aggressivity. I'd feel better about him being aggressive if he made a trade for Juan Soto, so it's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, too). Not to say I can't see where a Pete Alonso argument makes sense, just my feelings and opinions on it.

Not every move needs to be a min-max situation, and we have to accept that efficiency, while great, cannot always be achieved at it's highest level. The reality of efficiency is that it's way easier to achieve on low-cost acquisitions, and it's next to impossible to achieve when it comes to elite talent. Why? There's just so many cheap options to snatch up easily, and so very few elite talents. It creates a supply-and-demand market that creates inefficient outcome; either via trade or by FA signing. I don't disagree, I hated the Mancini, the Barnhart and the Smyly deals last year. I still do; I think they were significantly bad bets at "raising" the floor with players who statistically had red flags abound. I also don't think they have much to do with Juan Soto. Christopher Morel may represent an "inefficient" trade at the end, but not so ridiculous that it's not worth the cost of entry. Unless he's going to be a 3b, he's likely to continue to return around 1.5-2.0 fWAR or so value at DH unless he takes a big step forward offensively. So that's, what, 10 fWAR over 5 years? Juan Soto should return 5 of that in one. I'd actually say the two are very equal to each other, actually, when we consider the spread. For example, 5 fWAR in one season is much better than 2.5 fWAR over 2 years. @Bertzdid a really good job highlighting, as well, just how much better offensively Juan Soto is than Christopher Morel. They're magnitudes apart. Just because the Cubs trade Morel for Soto (and likely some extra prospect) doesn't mean that they can't/won't continue to upgrade or still won't trade those same prospects for other players. It doesn't mean on Opening Day Morel would have still been the "third" best hitter on the Cubs. None of these things are mutually exclusive. If you can get Juan Soto for a (mostly) headlined Christopher Morel package, you should probably do it unless you're truly a believer of Christopher Morel being successful at 3b.

Oh I didn't think you meant it that way! Just was expanding on it. You're right, they do have a bit of a type early, and they have one later. A good observation.

I think there are some things we can see in common, with that said, for a third-round-college type, that's not a bad profile. College players with above average and weighty tools in the 3rd round are either limited (for example, a plus-power grade in third usually comes with a negative hit tool, or perhaps DH level defensive concerns) or jack-of-all-trade types. The Cubs seem to be excited to pick the hitting-forward college players in rounds 11-20 (Murray, McGeary, Bowser, Kalmer) and are having early success with that pattern. I'll admit, I wasn't the biggest Josh Rivera fan, but I can see what the Cubs like. There did seem some real step forwards for Rivera in the SEC. If you get anything out of Rivera as a pro, that's a win for a 3rd rounder.

Entering 2023, many didn't have Rivera pegged as a third-round selection. After a strong year with the Florida Gators, how does Rivera fit into the Cubs' long-term plans? Image courtesy of © Steven Branscombe-USA TODAY Sports 2023 Season Review Headed into the 2023 draft cycle, Josh Rivera, an infielder with the Florida Gators, wasn't on anyone's draft board as a possible top-100 selection. A 22-year-old junior this season, Rivera had posted fine, albeit unimpressive, lines over the course of two full SEC campaigns already. Since his freshman year, Rivera had posted a .704 OPS as a freshman (redshirt) in 2021 in a more limited role and a .780 OPS as a full-time sophomore (redshirt). From his freshman to his sophomore year, improvement was seen, though not in a big enough way for people to expect the type of 2023 season Rivera would have. This year was a breakout season in almost every way for the Gator. Rivera managed to lower his strikeouts for a second full season in a row and increase his walk total to the point where Rivera walked more than he struck out. The biggest change was his power output. In 2022, Rivera hit nine home runs compared to the whopping 19 he would power out in 2023. Not only did he make more contact, the quality of contact was better, and this is seen in a steep rise in BABIP. While we often see BABIP as a "luck" category, when assessing young players who may be "too good" for their levels, a high BABIP can signal being on a higher plane physically and talent-wise, so seeing Rivera improve is a good thing. All of this resulted in a third-round selection from the Cubs. Since jumping to the professional ranks, Rivera has had a good amount of success in limited action. He went straight from the Complex League to the Cubs High-A affiliate, the South Bend Cubs. While his initial start with the South Bend Cubs started slowly, he began hitting his stride over the last few weeks. In his final 52 PAs, Rivera posted a .346 batting average and a 173 wRC+. He hit both his home runs during that stretch and six of his eight doubles. While it's a small sample size, he ended the season on a high note. 2024 Season Outlook and ETA Josh Rivera will probably go right back where his 2023 ended, with the South Bend Cubs. Having just over 100 PAs there, and only 50+ of them any good, he'll probably spend April to June in South Bend unless he absolutely crushes it and forces an early June bump. Rivera just turned 23 years ago as of the writing of this article, so age-wise, he'll be a smidge older than you'd want out of a South Bend Cub, but he'll hopefully move quickly. One of the questions with Rivera is where he'll end up defensively. He's not a small guy, as he's already listed at 6'2", 215 lbs. I don't see the body of a shortstop in Rivera long-term, and he's probably more of a third baseman down the road. That's going to put more pressure on the bat. Swing-wise, I would like to know if some work will have to be done down the road to shorten the hand path. He tends to have some extra hand movement (from down to up) that can be cut out. There seems to be a solid launch angle approach, so hitting the ball into the air shouldn't be much of an issue. As a ceiling, Rivera has MLB upside. I don't think we'll see a star-turn, but he might not need that. For Rivera, I see a "jack of all trades, master of none" type of build currently. Someone who has a bunch of grades that sit in the 45-50 range, but that's not a particularly "bad" thing, especially if you're familiar with the second half of the old saying (..."better to be than a master of one"). He could offer 2.5 fWAR upside as a starting 3B, or maybe he'll be more of a rotational bench player capable of filling in a few places. That's good organizational depth; players like Rivera are great glue types. For his ETA, an aggressive 2024 would put him on a path to see action in late 2025, but maybe more of an early 2026 type of prospect. View full article

Cool video of Triantos pulling a Baez on a ball in the dirt from the AFL:

I'm a "process over results" kind of guy when it comes to MiLB players, myself. I think it's really easy to look at the numbers and go "ah horsefeathers me running" and write kids off, or say they had a bad season. There are times when teams care little about the raw results and more about the things they're tinkering on, working on, and want to see that come out more. My hope, especially in the 2nd half, is that this is the case, that the Cubs are happy with progress we can't see in his wRC+, or his batting average or whatever. That they challenged him to work counts differently, do things that may be a bit "awkward" for him and it started to pay off in small ways. There's so many tools with Hernandez. There's so many (unfair, probably) expectations. I really hope his approach change in the 2nd half is a sign that he's finally seeing things better, the game is slowing down.