Jason Ross

I mean, I don't think they'll sell tonight so no matter what, they won't have a 7 game win streak; either it's 8 or it's reset. As it's been reported, they'll go down to the wire. I think there's a very different space to being, 4 games back at 51-50 tonight than where they'll be on Monday, after two more games. For example, if they lose tonight, drop to .500 and are 5 games back again, that entire first part is gone. Maybe they win 2 more in a row and are 2 games back...well...that's very different too. With the players...eh...they'll get over it. Bellinger and Stroman are the free agents to be, and they're not extending regardless. On the last part? I don't think it'll matter; who cares what a pundit says and money fixes all in FA. It was Hoyer who pissed and moaned deadline 2021 about Bryant/Rizzo/Baez on the radio and we managed to sign other FA's. We had other players resign and extend. I'm not saying at all that the Cubs should sell at all costs either. But I think you can make a very cogent, cold-hearted and logical argument that the Cubs could sell and while it'd suck for fans today, it could make a difference for 2024 positively. A lot of this is going to have to come down to the Cubs ability to read the market while being realistic with themselves. We can debate whether or not the Cubs management is capable of reading that market capably, but I think it's a pretty important to get this exactly right, and right could mean selling still.

I'll say this: I don't care whatever it looks like. I only care what it means to the organization in totality in a baseball function. Whatever it looks like is very subjective and rarely matters. What looks like a white flag today could pay off in spades later. And what looks like an effort today could end up with an 81 win finish. There's lots of options, I don't mean these to be the only two, just that I think there's a big picture to consider. You're right, I don't think the Yankees or the Dodgers would do that. But I think it's a bit disingenuous to compare the Cubs to the Yankees and the Dodgers simply because I think both of those organizations care far more about winning than the Cubs have/do. I think both teams would have better rosters and are far less concerned with the boogey-man luxury tax. If the Cubs acted like the Dodgers and the Yankees, I'd agree with you. I don't think the Cubs do that, which is why I have some pretty big hang ups as of now as to whether or not the Cubs are in a position to really make the most of losing Stroman for nothing. As a fan and only as a fan, I want them to keep the two and make the playoffs. But I think, as the word fan (derived from fanatic) implies, the fan in me may not always be the most logical of places to be coming from.

Well, Stroman can't be offered a QO any longer; he used that up with the Mets. I also think he'll be able to get what Giolito brought back, at least to the Cubs (remember, they have some funky internal evals that don't really match with the industry. And they seem to do quite well). I think that's an important distinction. It's you trade Stroman now, or you get nothing back. And I think that's a very real discussion the Cubs need to have. Which is why I think the Cubs either need to say "You know what, we're going to win the division" and go out and make that happen (obviously without stupid things like shipping PCA for a rental), or need to say "I don't like the margins and we cannot risk things like losing Stroman for nothing with a team that just has too much margin for error" The amount of sellers is also questionable. I think a lot of this has to hinge on the Cubs reading the market.

There's not a lot out there on Rojas defensively right now. Which makes sense, he was in the DSL, never touched the ACL really, and wasn't a top-top IFA signing. Per a Cubs instructional coach

I remain on the fence. The Cubs are super hot right now, but Im a staunch believer things are never as good as they feel when you're steaming along winning and never as bad when you're in the duldrums of a losing streak. Even at 4 games back, this is a very flawed team with 2 of their best players leaving at seasons end. You can sell me this is a flawed team, and that they're a 5 game bad streak from being in a very precarious position. Where I'll be most mad is if they just tip their toe in the "buy" market and get some patchwork BP arm and a patchwork 1b who won't realistically raise the bar much. If you're in, be in. If you're out, I can accept it, but be out. Don't lose Stroman for nothing and Bellinger for a QO in November except a "well, we kinda tried?" effort.

Sounds like the Mets and the Rangers have agreed in principal to a Scherzer deal minus the approval.

As of now, probably. But I wouldn't say that's a long term outlook, either. The Cubs aren't against putting arms in the BP to *use* them only to place them in the rotation later. The Dodgers do similar things and the Cubs are pretty close in how they handle MiLB arms to LAD. If there's a complaint I have, it's that the Dodgers block their good prospects with good players and force their prospects to succeed beyond them, where as the Cubs are happy to block prospects with lesser talents, it feels.

I'm so glad you called that. And so angry it was right.

It has been! I was worried you'd not find us here. Been good. Weird to see the Cubs winning, for sure. How you been? Have missed seeing you around. You made PSD in many ways, legitimate.

He made it! Bystro!

Hey, Trey did a thing. That's fun.

Caissie 1-2, double, walk, no K so far. Lowes his K% under 28% for the month of July.

I think the idea of an opener can be useful, but I don't understand what the purpose is here. Wesneski is someone who struggles against LHP, so is the idea that the Cardinals load up LHH and then tee off on Wesneski? Is the idea that maybe Wesneski can survive a full trip and then you'll have so many lefties that Smyly will be more effective? Smyly's been better against LHP, but still carries a weak 4.47 xFIP (or did before Nootbaar's homerun). I simply don't understand the idea here. Smyly's been pretty bad this year, so what's the purpose of him being the longer-man? It feels backwards. Feels like you force the Cardinals to go RHH heavy for the first few hitters, and then put Wesneski in after an inning. I'm just so confused.

I cannot tell you why. I have no idea.

Can we please be done with Drew Smyly for a while? Please?

One bad pitch from Wes so far. Encouraging two innings.

Wonder why the skip for Wicks? I assume it's more of the Cubs being uber cautious with arms, but I guess you just don't know. EDIT: Sounds like Birch thinks the same based on comments.

It's the kind of argument I expect my middle school students to give me. "But you didn't warn me that I wasn't allowed to throw my food at him, so I shouldn't be in trouble". Well, no horsefeathers, kid. You don't need a warning for that.

Well, Mikolas got suspended for 5 days. If only they had taken the time to write the rule "It's totally cool to throw at a guy if he accidentally hit a catcher with his backswing" into the rulebook! Damn those unwritten rules!

My guess is the argument David Ross would give you is that More's defensively shaky at 3b, and has a 79 wRC+ against LHP on the season. I'd counter with Wisdom being DH level bad at 3b, and Trey Mancini being worthless, personally, so I don't agree, but that'd probably be my guess.

Rucker to AAA, Wesneski called up. Will start.

Man, there's nothing more than I hate about people whinging and moaning about fictitious rules that only exist in their brain. Example: here's Yan Gomes getting knocked out of a game with a backswing. No one threw at anyone.

I can't read. You're right, AA Rocket City.

The Angels just promoted 2023 1st round pick Nolan Schnauel to their AAA affiliate. They do things very differently. EDIT: I can't read.