Jason Ross

That's a helluva needle to thread. "Hey, teams who presumably need to upgrade at pitcher. What we want back is an MLB ready young pitcher!"

My guess would be three players: 1. A SP who the Cubs view as being a "playoff starter". It might not be a "rotation savior" but someone who is an improvement on the Peterson/Rea/Assad/Taillon crowd that you would have no reservations of starting a playoff game 2. A RP who is definitely someone you trust in key moments at the end of the game. It might not be a bonified lockdown "closer" per se, but someone you'd get up in the 8th or 9th inning without hesitation. 3. A second RP who is either optionable or cheap enough that if you leave them off the playoff roster, you don't feel like it was a wasted trade. It's hard to figure out which pitchers will be back and how many will be in the pen when they come back, so this type curbs your bet. Honestly, I think the blueprint for the deadline is "2025 but make the SP much better". So you still get a Kittredge and a Rogers, you just make it a tier or so above Mike Sorotka to like Clay Holmes or Casey Mize.

He's alright. But I'm not really sure what issue he solves other than being "available". He's running an xERA well above his actual ERA in his few starts this year. He throws a neutral amount of flyballs/groundballs, so he won't really take advantage of the Cubs defense on the infield to help beat his xdata. He's a career 4.43 xFIP pitcher, his velo sits 93mph, has a career 20% K% (which, yes he's at 28% this year, but it's under 30 innings and I'll say I don't believe it). He may be a better version of Colin Rea/Javier Assad/Jameson Taillon if you're believing he's really changed something, and that has value. But I wouldn't feel confident with Kremer starting a playoff game. And the Cubs have those three already and what they really need to do is upgrade and add a third playoff arm to go with Shota and Boyd. So I'd ultimately be a pass on Kremer. The Cubs need to aim higher. Maybe they have a rash of injuries between today and later in that group of guys at the end of the rotation, but unless that happens, the Cubs' would be fine with two of those guys in the rotation until (hopefully) one of Cabrera or Brown return.

I originally read "tatters" as "taters".

Right. Like I said recently he's been bad. But Hunter Brown has an xERA over 5.00 in the same span. Brandon Pfaadt has the 10th best xERA in that run. I know which pitcher I'd rather have.

He's been bad recently but his ERA is hiding a pretty strong season based on xFIP. He's got a 3.88 xERA on the year as well. His velo is fine, so I'd take the most recent few starts as "blip". He's 26th in baseball in fWAR for starters. He'd be a good get.

Yeah, maybe I was harsh with Bieber. He had a good start against the White Sox. He finally got a decent amount of whiff. Maybe the first four starts were rust? He's scheduled to start Thursday, so maybe that's why the scouts. He's just not throwing strikes, so if you told me "it's rust" I could believe it. His zone% is down 10 points from where it's been, If he starts throwing strikes, maybe you get him back to something.

I guess it could be Hoffman. Though the Jays seem likely to keep anyone controlled based on where they are on the win arc which is why I didn't really mention him, or Rogers. If the Jays were bad and likely were cool with being bad again next year, I'd believe Hoffman were available. I'd expect the Jays would be shooting for a 2027 revival so trading him puts them in a weird spot. But yeah, maybe.

Can't imagine who else they could be considering if it isn't Gausmann. Bieber sucks. Scherzer sucks. They're not trading Ysevage or Varland. He's about the only pitcher the Jays would reasonably trade who the Cubs could reasonably consider helping them.

So, this obviously isn't reporting, but I think these things can give you an idea of where reporters/the media are sitting on prices. Mitch Bannon, the author, the Jays' version of Sharma/Mooney for the website. In a recent The Athletic article, the following trade was proposed for the Jays at the deadline: Toronto sends: Kevin Guasmann Chicago Cubs sends: Brooks Caple and Brett Bateman If that's the cost, I sincerely hope both have their passports and visas up to date because I couldn't drive them north of the border faster. Source

If you want a player added in the next vote all you have to do is ask in that thread. We add players every time it's requested. But please only request the players you will actually add. It becomes unwieldy trying to drag and drop with 50 names. I would obviously disagree with you on the first part, however. But you're welcome to that opinion. The reason I personally continue to list Sanders above most of those names is that I do believe he will start MLB games and most of those other arms are either relief profiles or just so far down the system that I have a hard time ranking them within my top-20 as arms. My personal philosophy is that starting profiles generally get the nod over a relief one (unless that reliever looks like a real back end guy) and that I rate premium positions over non-premium unless I rate the bat *that* high. I also rate proximity to MLB higher than those further down the system unless we are talking an elite-looking prospect or a prospect with pedigree. I try to stay as consistent as possible on that, but sometimes I deviate. I am human. But this is why you get, Rojas over Hartshorn (positional and a level higher, plus I want to see Josiah do it longer), Sorrell over Bailey (pedigree and position) and Sanders over Kipp (he's a reliever at the MLB level, IMO, not a starter). As stated, you are more than welcome to have your philosophy. But that's why Sanders is where is on *my* rankings. Hopefully all of that helps.

With whatever small areas we may disagree with each other on this, I think we ultimately agree that the Cubs need to probably push some chips in at some point between today and whenever the 2027 season kicks off. They have prospect capital to do it. And frankly, they have enough overlapping capital that I think it borders on prospect hugging at the organizational level not to. It'd be one thing if it were a load of pitching prospects when you consider pitching attrition, but with hitting prospects? Cash some in.

I don't necessarily agree with Hoyer on some of the stuff, but I think he's on to part of it. I think sitting where they do in the division, trading for 2 months of Skubal probably isn't prudent, for example. Hoyer laid out a strong argument that the 1st/2nd seed changes the math and I'll hand it to him, I think he's got my agreement there. That is going to be a dogfight of a trade and I expect the price it would take for a rental would be prohibitive for a controlled SP. Considering how a 3 game series can play out and the ultimate need for pitching next year...I think I'd pass on that. Not entirely the rental market, but just probably that aspect of it. Where me and Hoyer would probably disagree is in trading for controlled pitching today. Though I do think there is an aspect of "we don't know". We don't know what pitchers Tyler Zombro wants to work with long term; you and I might like a guy's savant page but they didn't invest in Zombro to take my opinion. I also don't know what the asks are; I would think the difference between today and January (let's just assume the CBA isn't a thing right this second for this sake) shouldn't make a difference. Especially if you consider trading for a controlled pitcher today vs a rental (say, Clay Holmes?) and then back into he market in the winter ..I think the prices are probably going to be a wash in the end. But I also don't know. And I think we can only speculate there. It makes a lot of this difficult to read. I will say this: if the Cubs walk into Opening Day and they haven't dealt at least one of Shaw, Ramirez, Rojas, Ballesteros than I think it's very likely that the front office has likely failed in their ability to functionally add to the rotation. You can sell me on a decent rental pitcher like Clay Holmes and a strong BP option as the meat of the deadline and then address the controlled SP in the off-season as viable. But once OD hits? It has to be done.

I don't agree. I really don't think Holmes will be super expensive; he's been a reliever his entire career until last year, has spent time on the IL this year and should be expiring. Merril Kelly-esque here. Nor do I expect the Mets to extend a 34 year old mid year before the CBA. I know we all want them to get controlled pitching but last year was probably a good example of how the Cubs will handle that aspect; talk to teams, decide the price in July is too high then go back in on it during the off-season. I'd love to be wrong, but Jed Hoyer is incredibly transparent when he talks. He was transparent both about how he views the trade deadline on pitching prices and how he views where teams sit. In terms of rentals, I think by the deadline Holmes will be around the 5th or 6th most expensive pitcher moved. I expect the Tigers will probably sell on Skubal and Mize. I expect Peralta will go. There's probably a surprise or two. And he feels like a prime Cubs candidate based on what he does well and where I perceive his price to be (keep all your best prospects, maybe you trade a guy in the Kane Kepley "not fun to lose, but you can live with it") group and a young upside play down the farm). With who the Cubs have coming back in the bullpen, I think they'll target their resources at a starter. They know they don't need another Colin Rea and Holmes sits in between the best rentals and the "better than Jameson Taillon" types pretty neatly.

With where the Cubs are at in the standings and Jed Hoyer's comments previously about the 1/2 seeding, as much as I'd love to say the Cubs would be big-game hunting, it probably won't happen. Right, wrong, whatever; not the point of where I'm going. Point I'm going for is that if I were guessing on a starting pitcher the Cubs go after it's going to be Clay Holmes. He's a good (not great) starter who gets a lot of ground balls and chase. He probably won't be super expensive as he's likely to be on an expiring contract*. Feels like he strikes a balance in "now and affordable". He probably won't blow the door off, but he'd certainly raise the pitching staff. *It's a player option and he can opt out, but he isn't picking it up unless he's super hurt.

I get "Even the Playing Field" ads consistently on MLB.TV. I find it gross.

Josiah Hartshorn is a top-50 prospect in baseball according to many outlets.

Opportunity cost is your biggest issue here. Really, consider everything: 1. The Cubs have a top-5 offense already 2. The Cubs have the 8th most fWAR from catchers in baseball 3. The Cubs have two young catchers in Iowa in Ballesteros and Ayers 4. The Cubs have some trade pieces, but they have mostly enough for one big trade. I don't want to take anything away from Hunter Goodman who has been great, but in 100 games the Cubs have gotten a 2.1 fWAR output from the catcher position and in 93 games Goodman has been worth 2.3 fWAR. They're basically getting Goodman production as is, albeit with two roster spots, but the Cubs will have to still carry a backup, so it won't solve that issue adding him. Do you think the .2 fWAR bump Goodman gives you is worth spending the prospect capital on catcher versus a pitcher? Just to be clear about my personal answer to that question: I think it would be a grade mismanagement of assets. Godman is a very good player but outside of getting a personal thing of "we have one catcher we count on instead of a rotation" it really doesn't move the needle for the team. The Cubs need to move the needle. The offense really doesn't need a fix.

Context would change the math, but generally speaking for napkin math, convert 10 runs to equate one win. Again, context changes things and even if we're going to context neutral most analytics have fancy formulas and things that don't get to a simple 10=1 end point. But if we use that napkin math, you're talking about two wins and a possible rounding error in either direction. Maybe it's a little more, or a little less, but the overall point I'm making: the standings probably aren't very different.

Taillon has looked cooked since Spring Training. He shouldn't be on the roster come Aug 4th.

On one hand I don't like hearing "knee issue" with how reoccurring it is with Maton. On the other hand it at least gives you a reason to believe "fix the knee, fix the pitcher" for at least the second year of his contract.

Jefferson RojasJosiah HartshornJaxon WigginsCade TownsendEthan ConradOwen AyersKane KepleyCaden SorrellKaleb WingJonathon LongMyles BaileyJames TriantosBrooks CapleMason McGwireTy SouthiseneWill SandersGrant KippJuan CabadaDerniche ValdezEli Lovich

Well...to be fair to Ballesteros, through 71 professional PA's, he too was great. He had a 143 wRC+ in 66 PA's last year. So that's just revisionist history. Ramirez is getting curated PA's right now and is very similar to have Mo was used last year who came up, then back down, then back up and then a small run at the end of the year. Ramirez has been toted along on the bench a little more than Ballesteros was originally, but it's not too dissimilar, either. But it's also what we should expect rookies to do: come up and have ups and downs before a level out. They tend to adjust, then the the league re-adjusts to those changes until they'll settle into an equilibrium. Lastly, I wouldn't say it's "likely" he's traded. I think it's certainly possible. But he probably is as likely as Matt Shaw or Jefferson Rojas to be dealt in a larger trade and I highly doubt more than one of them are traded. I think it's more likely than not any three of them are dealt. He's more likely than, say, Josiah Hartshorn to go...but I'd expect him to be on the Cubs next year more than I would expect him to be traded.

Arraez is fun. But I don't even think he's a throw back to before analytics. Dude has a 125 wRC+ this year; he'd be a good player in any era. Ramirez has chased up and in a bit, but it's 71 PA's and chasing up is common. With current bat paths, up in the zone is the place you want t live with your fastballs. So it's kind of just "whatever". Probably don't have enough data on a rookie with 71 PA's either way, most numbers are just beginning to stabilize before we even add in the context of "rookie". But he looks like he belongs at the MLB level in curated PA's so far. And I'll take that. For someone most people thought of as a bottom-of-the-top-10 in a system that looked to be bad in March and starting in Knoxville, to being a top-75 prospect and a guy you like seeing at the MLB level in three months? Massive.

Not really. I like Pedro Ramirez, he makes a lot of contact. His lowest K% above DSL in full season ball is 15.1% against Double-A pitching. Luis Arraez is under 5% this year against MLB pitching and the last time it was above 5% was in 2023. In 71 PA's Ramirez has 10 K's this year. In 416 PA's Luis Arraez has 18. Luis Arraez is an anomaly. There's no comparison other than "they both play 2b". Nico Hoerner has the second lowest K% in baseball and it's over 8%. He's the closest other thing to Arraez around.