Jason Ross

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.

I would consider that still odd, though. Be weird to have those conversations before the WM's, then show up to the meetings and, well, just not continue them. You'd think he'd be wanting to finish those deals, especially if the Cubs are pivoting from Ohtani. But maybe that's just me.

Yeah, it's fair. I think the easy guesses right now are Glasnow and Hoskins. There's smoke on both. But we've seen in the past the team pull things out of thin air (Counsell. Suzuki) and just because there's smoke, doesn't mean these will happen. It'll be interesting to see where it goes. I certainly hope the aspirations remain sky high for this team.

The optimist wants to say "Well, they're still secretly in on Ohtani and think there's a chance" because Ohtani/Glasow combined feel like a great combination move. The realist thinks the two are kind of dancing around hoping one of them blinks on getting this done to extract a little more value from the other side (or giving up a little less) and that the medicals may be somewhat complicated.

Yeah, it's odd. I can't tell if it's "smokescreen" for Glasnow/Hoskins like we all think. I can't tell if maybe we're misreading the offseason. It's a weird comment.

Yep. It's a weird comment.

Well, what I'll say is this: Sharma just dropped an article in the Athletic. And to give it a quick summary, it doesn't appear there's any surprising moves coming. It's very much that Hoyer is doing this patiently and his way, and he won't jump the market. It talks about Glasnow and Hoskins specifically. But also very much comes to a conclusion that could easily draw you to these being the biggest acquisitions the Cubs are likely to make. That doesn't mean they'll be the only moves. Hell, we haven't acquired either yet (though both feel fairly inevitable, if we're being honest). But I think that's the most likely scenario here.

The Astros inclusion was less their behavior in free agency, but more their ability to remain a powerhouse. The Astros got good around the same time the Cubs did. Through a handful of factors which includes leadership at the baseball ops, ownership and players (and this isn't to say every factor was a controllable one for the Cubs, some things were well within their power, others have been well without of their power) they've maintained their powerhouse status for a much longer period of time. I don't think the Cubs have necessarily acted in accordance to these teams. And it's not asking the Cubs to go back and change the past, but even moving forward, the Cubs, at least to me, feel more like they're going down a path in which the Guardians travel than these teams such as the Astros, the Dodgers, the Yankees in a roster building sense. I'm glad to share a differing opinion, and I'll be happy to be wrong, as well. As I've said a few times, it's less that I'm trying to be the unhappy, fit-thrower or incapable of seeing that the Cubs offseason can still be relatively fine, but that I do think the Cubs need to take some steps beyond where they've been willing to go to reach the level I think they should ultimately be at.

Eduardo Rodriguez is expected to sign soon. Has met with teams and is down to two possible destinations.

Well, I think we should be a little careful of leaning too much into pythag, and our RD last year. I think there's some positive variance (offensively) there in that I think some of those blowout wins are doing a little more work than they should. I say this as a statistics guy, so I'm not throwing stats out, but we were the 12th best wRC+ team. Looking at stats+ we were pretty close to 100 on almost every metric, iso, k%, bb%.... I'm not actually a monster believer in the offense returning right now. It's not that I think it's a bad roster, but I don't look at the Cubs 2023 roster and see a 90 win team. It looks a lot closer to an 84-86 win team that dealt with some negative W-L variance but also had some blow outs that aided on the RD making them look a bit better too. And I want to be clear: I'm not saying an offseason in which we add Glanow, Hoskins, Belt and Imanaga, or whatever is a bad one. I do think it's a failure to address the issues that the Cubs have currently and long term which are those capital S stars we lack. I think the Cubs will be a solid 85-88 win team who has a bunch of pretty good players and some good prospect depth. I think it's a better team than we had opening day last year, with a chance to add some talent at the deadline to be even better. It's probably the NL Central favorites, partly because it'd be a pretty solid team, partly because the NL Central sucks. So I want to make sure no one thinks I'm trying to horsefeathers on this team entirely. But I do, very much, think this team needs something a bit more premium somewhere. So while I think we can have a decent offseason, I don't think that the idea of lacking on hitting on what we need (that truly upper echelon player) is not also mutually exclusive. I think both, in tandem, can be true.

I do think the Cubs gave that effort here, but it's important to remember; you and I are working on some really spurious stuff right now. While it's not enough for me to burn my Cubs jersey to the ground in protest as some have been over Nightengale's report, it's not so ridiculous that it's 100% discountable. As a middle school teacher with zero inside sources, I have to say that benefit of the doubt lays with the Cubs, but it's not without some doubt, too, you know? When it comes to Yamamoto, I think projections are a bit iffy. And I'm open to the belief that maybe a team doesn't love Yamamoto! But it seems like the Cubs liked Yamamoto. They sent scouts to view Yamamoto in Japan. Rumors over the summer linked the Cubs to him. The Cubs seemed in on him early, But then it hit an uncomfortable level and the Cubs seemingly backed out. I think we have to accept things like inflation, an increasingly LT line year by year, and a few other teams starting to swim in higher waters as to factors that push contracts up. But what seemingly has happened as an outsider is once again, the Cubs were interested at the "acceptable" pre-offseason levels but once it hit the uncomfortable have seemingly backed way out. Whether that's because they won't go years, or top-price, not sure. I'm not even sure that's an accurate story. I try to be very realistic. It also seems to have been similar paths they took on Correa (x2) and a few other players recently. I really don't want to seem like I'm coming off as the whiney, creaky wheel here. But I do think that at some point, the bar for the Chicago Cubs needs to be raised a bit higher than it has been.

They are. But I'd say this as well: they're not afraid to be uncomfortable. They traded for, then extended Betts to a $365m contract over 12 years. They went in on Ohtani, full force (the Cubs, may or may not have). They went in on Freeman and beat the Braves for his services. I think, if they miss on Ohtani, they'll do the same on Yamamoto. I do think they're a judicious franchise, but they're also a franchise who, when they're in, tend to be all in. The Cubs seemingly are in...until they hit that line where it becomes uncomfortable. Then all of a sudden, they tend to back out and go back to that safety blanket of the 2nd tier of players (kind of like what I think we both think the Cubs will do now). I don't think the Cubs need to go full force on everyone. But it'd be nice to see the Cubs start to wander past what is comfortable and safe, too.

I think my issue, as I see it, is how the Cubs operate. And maybe it's a personal choice issue, maybe I'm way off (I always know there's personal stuff here) but it feels like the Cubs are operating less like a powerhouse team like the Astros, the Yankees, the Mets, the Dodgers (which they can) and more as if Cleveland had a bigger budget. It's a team that feels like it's designed to make higher budget market inefficiency decisions that leans heavily into run prevention with just enough offense to boot. I know we finished 6th in runs scored, I do question a bit the RD and runs in total (I think there's a bit of a smoke and mirror thing with some of the blowouts). Just a personal feeling more so than probably anything.

While I think these things are fair, I think it's important to note: mid 4 win players are good players but are not what I'd consider to be stars. Like, is TJ Friedl a star? Brandon Nimmo? There are some players like Tatis in this range too, but I'd argue Tatis isn't a star because he made 4.5 fWAR, but what he can do above that. These are players who can have all-star caliber seasons, but I would suggest don't raise the bar to the elite level. And it isn't that you can't build a team with a bunch of pretty darn good players, but truly elite teams have truly elite players. Is there a single Cub hitter you're confident, even with Hoskins or Lowe, or Belt, reaches a 130 wRC+? Is there a true game dominating SP we can count on? Even if we get Glasnow, it's a one year thing; it's not fun to have to continuously have to replace that. Not that this is the only barometer, but just using it as an example of where I find the deficiencies. I know it's half devil's advocate, but these are the issues with the Cubs right now that I see as we move forward because there are a lack of solutions (by nature, stars are hard to come by) and the Cubs remain a team I'm not confident has the ability to lean into the uncomfortable to acquire them. I don't mean to suggest they won't, but for a team who hasn't shown the ability to jump in to the true deep ends, I think maintaining a healthy skepticism they will, is fair (until they do).

He just signed a really big contract to stay with Cleveland. I guess, maybe he does become available. But we're again, at a place where we're hoping a player might become available. Then it doesn't even add into everything that would go into acquiring him and the other teams. Which leads back to: I think it's fair for people to wonder "when?" as it pertains to the Cubs adding legitimately star level players. It doesn't mean it can't...but everything tends to hinge on "if" this player even becomes available. We've been kind of doing it for a bit now. I don't think they'll never get one again, but sometime might not be as soon as it needs to be, either.

I'm not super enjoying it as a fan. But doesn't it feel a bit...entitled, as fans, to demand players to use this time for our entertainment, as well? They aren't being paid for their production during this dog and pony show. At some point, I think we have to remember they're people. this is their offseason, and this is their lives. I'd like it to be more fun for me, but I'm not the main character either.

I like Bregman a lot, though he's an interesting case. The legitimate star player doesn't seem to be there and the power has taken a dip. He'll be 30, and while he'll likely be a good hitter, I think it's fair to wonder how many 130 wRC+ seasons will be left. His last 2,000 PA's have been a 125 wRC+ hitter, and he's decently reliant on the defense. Is that the $250m+ contract the Cubs pay out? Not shitting on him, just throwing down, that I think even Bregman is an interesting case and I'm just not sure that's the guy the Cubs go in on. Maybe they do, they love defense and approach.

Perhaps there will, but there doesn't seem to be many available. I think it's fair to be worried about the Cubs adding stars to this roster at this stage. No one should say "never", and we shouldn't be super "woe is me" but I think it's really fair to look at the Cubs and wonder when that will be. Next offseason has a similar set of hitters past the one star, Soto, which, will be another uphill battle.