Jason Ross

In the nicest possible way; I think you should know me better at this point than to think I'd just defend anything the Cubs do blindly I am on the optimistic side of things at times, and I do try to cut through some of the cynicism (not shooting a shot over the bow of anyone in particular, just general cynicism) with positivity. I try to find the positives of a signing or a player where and when I can, or maybe, just the logic behind it. I also am not a single-issue-voter; I like popups! I don't think popups are the only thing. Popups are just an under valued aspect of pitching that the Cubs are certainly using to their advantage. From my article today: I like Hoby Milner just fine though. He gets a lot of ground balls, ground balls, much like IFFB are FIP-Beater profiles; it should take advantage of the Cubs infield defense (and I stated yesterday, I think run prevention is a symbiotic relationship between defense and pitching). He has the flat-arm-slot that Tyler Zombro clearly likes to work with. He's familiar with and is familiar to, Craig Counsell. He was tied based on fWAR as the 16th best LH RP in baseball. I'm not like over the moon here; I like him fine at 1/$3.75m for what he is; a useful LHP that fits into a competitive bullpen. I'll give you insight on my next project; I kind of like the guy they signed yesterday, Colin Snider for a lot of the same reasons! A value signing with enough green flags that for it's value and in a vacuum, I like the pitcher. But these are in a vacuum. Bigger picture, if Hoby Milner is the best reliever the Cubs sign; I'll have issue that the Cubs didn't address the bullpen adequately, even if they should get some runway in that they have shown an ability to build a bullpen from spare parts. If the Cubs get, say, Pete Fairbanks or Brad Keller still, Milner is good value. Honestly, I think in terms of players, the Cubs rarely acquire red-flag players, so I rarely take fault there. Where I do fault the team is in ambition at times. So you'll probably find that, like Milner, in a vacuum, I understand the player.

Yeah, bit of a bummer there, but I also assume it's because of how many GBs. Usually high FB guys (Shota, Boyd) are my popup guys.

That's fine. I'll take that. He's a useful part of the pen.

I like this? Submarine RP with negative arm angle. Lots of horizontal movement. Big GB% guy. 106 stuff+. The fastball velo is horsefeathers but you get that with his arm angle. It's not as good as LHH Taylor Rogers but it's not far from it.

In which way would we consider Jed to be "greedy"? This is an...interesting way to explain it.

I'll admit - I'm a big no-go on the 3rd year on Suarez myself. You could get me into Williams on a third year, I could get into a 2+1 on Helsley. I don't like Suarez as an ager.

Oh, I know. Mostly just throwing out there that I don't like him. His fastball bleed and pitch mix changes are not ones I love on a multi-year deal.

Sharma and Mooney talked about it in an article on The Athletic today and it seems more along the lines of "teams are asking, and while the Cubs do not operate on sentimentality, it probably isn't going to happen"

I'm pretty bearish on Suarez the reliever myself. I've come around on Fairbanks for a few reasons (including my new obsession, popups) but I'm probably out on Robert Suarez for a multi-year deal. I don't like the trajectory of his pitch mix right now. In fact, between E, Suarez, Robert Suarez, and Ranger Suarez, they might represent three of my least favorite free agents. And I promise it has nothing to do with some deep seeded hatred for people names Suarez!

Image courtesy of © Frank Bowen IV/The Enquirer / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images I want the 2026 Chicago Cubs pitching staff to become "King of the Pop-Up". I admit, it sounds a little less sexy than becoming "King of the Strikeouts" (or for any Tim Robinson fans out there, Rog, the "King of the Slams") and frankly, a pop-up is just less exciting. There is a reason that, in the movie Major League in the penultimate scene, Ricky "Wild Thing" Vaughn gets Clu Heywood to strike out on a 99-mph fastball instead of inducing a weak can-of-corn to the first baseman; it'd be hard for audiences to go crazy about that. And yet, I'm here to tell you that, in a baseball-sense, it would have made no difference, and that getting a "Texas Leaguer" is basically the same as a powerful punchout. First, we should look just how devastating a pop-up actually is. Using MLB's Baseball Savant, there were 8,716 balls-in-play during the 2025 season that were classified as pop-ups fielded by an infielder. Of those 8,716 pop-ups, just 71 landed for a hit. What this means is that if you hit a pop-up on the in-field, it is the most guaranteed form of out one can imagine, at least from balls put in play. It may not look devastating — a baseball flying just 50 feet in distance, landing safely in the second baseman's webbed glove is kind of boring in real time — but in terms of getting an out? It's absolutely devious. Now, I can already hear the counterargument, "but a player can make an error." So, I'm going to push my (non-existent) glasses up on my nose and give you my best "uhm, actually" to point out this: There were only 20 errors in the league on those 8,716 balls in play. This means just 91 hitters found any way to reach base on an infield pop-up last season. This gives teams a 99% chance of recording an out on a pop-up — it's a near-guarantee. As I said: it's truly a fatal to a hitter. Further comparing it to a strikeout, lest us not forget about dumbest of all rules: the dreaded dropped-third-strike. That rule proves that not even a strikeout is immune to a player getting on base. In an article by Sam Miller, he outlines how many dropped-third-strikes happen on a year-to-year-basis; a strikeout is not a guaranteed out either, and by July of 2025, there were already 29 instances of a player reaching first on a K. In 2024, this number was 50, which is not many more than the pop-up. It's true, that there are far more instances of strikeouts, but in total, hitting a pop-up is just shy of a guaranteed out in a very similar way the strikeout is. Enter the Chicago Cubs. In 2025, the Cubs were second in baseball (behind the Minnesota Twins), inducing 345 infield pop-ups on the season. This included the seventh-best pop-up inducer in Matthew Boyd, the 13th-best in Shota Imanaga, the 19th-best in Colin Rea, and the 29th-best in Jameson Taillon. You'll note that two of these three were new additions to the team, and Taillon worked extensively on his pitch repertoire last year. The Cubs, as a team, use cutting motions on their fastballs, almost more than any other organization, which likely leads to the extensive pop-up heavy approach; they just have that added movement which misses barrels. The Cubs should improve on their pop-up-generation in 2026 simply by having their stalwart, Justin Steele, healthy. The left-handed pitcher has been a very reliable pop-up getter, ranking 70th of 361 pitchers between 2022 and 2024. While Steele may not be the master of his craft as much as Matthew Boyd of Shota Imanaga are, he uses a cut-ride fastball that is useful in this area. Why are pop-ups important? Well, our advanced metrics don't take them into account currently. Fielding Independent Pitching (FIP), which has become the basis of a lot of our advanced data on pitching, does not take batted ball data (such as pop-ups or ground balls) into it's equation, focusing heavily on strikeouts, walks and home runs. As FIP has become more popular, "FIP-beater" profiles, or pitchers who routinely post lower ERAs than their FIPs would suggest them capable of, have become an undervalued property at times. Kyle Hendricks is a great example of a FIP-beater; someone who threw a slew of strikes, generated abundant groundballs, and didn't walk hitters proved that this combination was effective here. Guys who induce a lot of pop-ups just may be the next "FIP-beater" out there. Last year, the Cubs were one of the biggest "FIP-beaters" as a team in the league, finishing ninth in baseball with a 3.81 ERA but just 20th (4.16) in FIP and 18th (4.16) in xFIP. Part of this is that the Cubs have a great defense, ranking among the top three in almost any category you can think of. But the team is just 25th in ground-ball rate, and this is generally a part of the "FIP-beater" profile. How do they achieve this? Well, in part, due to their innate ability to get hitters to get under the ball and hit weak pop flies. Getting even more Texas Leaguers is a way the Cubs can close the strikeout gap they currently face. Last year, the Cubs ranked just 27th in total strikeouts (1,271) and 21st in strikeout rate. Compare that to, say, the Yankees, who were fourth in total strikeouts (1,440) and seventh in K%. When we include the near-guaranteed out of a popup into the "easy out" equation, the Cubs close the gap from a difference of 281 to 205 — a healthy reduction. This isn't to say the Cubs don't still need to find swing-and-miss, but finding more pop-outs can also help to close the gap in terms of "guaranteed outs". This may be a way to figure out which pitchers on the current market appeal to the team. Michael King, in his healthy 2024 campaign, induced the 25th most pop-ups in baseball. He's been routinely connected to the Chicago Cubs this offseason, and while it's unlikely that the primary reason is his ability to generate pop-ups, that almost assuredly appeals to the team. Another starting pitcher who induces a lot of pop-ups? The Minnesota Twins' Joe Ryan, who is rumored to be among those who could be traded this offseason. Using the same properties, relievers Kenley Jansen and Ryne Stanek (of whom we reported recently that the Cubs do have interest in) have history of creating a lot of pop-ups and could interest the team. Caleb Thielbar as well could be a candidate for a reunion, based on his history with the team and his history with the pop-out. This obviously won't be the only factor a team like the Cubs will taken into account, but as we look for under-the-radar pickups, it's clear that this can matter in player evaluation. Ultimately, the pop-out is a boring version of an out; a hitter meekly hits a ball in the air a relatively short-distance and a defender camps out under it and catches it with ease. It doesn't have the same panache as an overbearing 99-mph heater, and a defensive player isn't tasked with doing some amazing. It's a play that literally results in an out at the major-league level 99% of the time, but one we generally have ignored as a viable way of limiting base runners. The Cubs cannot just get pop-outs, but they can look to add more of them coupled with swing-and-miss options. For a team who has a bunch of pitching to add, finding a few cheap pop-out getters is a way the team can continue to defeat its FIP reliably. What do you think of the pop-out? Do you think more teams need to embrace it as a legitimate way to get outs? Sound off in the comment section below! View full article

A two-part question: 1. How many second baseman in MLB do you think are better than Nico Hoerner? 2. How many position players do you think are better than Nico Hoerner in general?

It probably isn't what people want to hear or see, but in the world where the Cubs are prioritizing Tatsuya Imai, this is likely what our Winter Meetings would have looked like. Doesn't mean they are....but he wasn't going to sign these three days. Last year as well, we came away from the Winter Meetings with just Matthew Boyd (who, reminder, wasn't exciting) and then 2 days later traded for Kyle Tucker. So hopefully groundwork was done. We'll see. I still feel there is enough smoke on the Cubs really caring about the SP market that we'll make a good sized move there.

That would have likely come out by now. They almost assuredly haven't selected or traded for anyone.

Absolutely. Which I'm fine with. As much as I trust the Cubs pitching infrastructure, it'd be nice if we didn't have to build the plane midflight this year.

Same. I think if you told me to rank things that would surprise me, which would include outlandish things like "The Cubs resign Kyle Tucker to a 10 year market value contract" I still might put "The Cubs elect to not select a P in the Rule-5 draft with 9 available 40-man-slots" as the most surprising. I guess they have a plan for those 9 spots that doesn't include a Rule 5 guy.

Listen, I'm shocked. Nothing is more Jed-coded than a free shot at an upside arm and they didn't take it.

Cubs pass on Rule 5 pick.

That is shocking. Their 40-man has the most open slots in the entire league. I guess they're planning on adding that many players?

But I want him...

Basically, pop-outs and cut-ride fastballs correlate. The Cubs are the masters of the cut-ride fastball. I think it's institutional, Colin Rea turned into an elite pop-out getter last year after the switch in arm angle and pitch mix. They target pronators - people who get more horizontal action as well. And they were 2nd in pop-ups last year; something I don't think is an accident when you break it down. I don't think the Cubs necessarily taught Boyd the pop-up, but his arm angle is cut-ride heavy. But I do think they targeted Boyd because of it. If that makes sense? Because the pitch moves and misses barrels, hitters tend to just miss them. It's that late ride movement that messes with the bat. I think their usage of the seam-shifted wake stuff, as well, like Horton plays into it. I think 2025 is probably the start of what Zombro likes; and I think the cut-ride fastball is it. They used it more in MiLB than any other team. So I think moving forward, we should expect more popups. (who knew they were so fun!?)

I don't agree with this. Jon Heyman is known to have ties to Boras. Now, you might want to say that Boras is planting the Cubs name there, and maybe, okay. But let's pretend for a minute that the Cubs' interest is legitimate. It's not a stretch; pitch wise he matches with a lot of what they look for, they love the IFA market, and the Cubs need an impact P. We have heard a few times the Cubs are more engaged at the top of the market and seemingly were willing to offer near $200m for Cease (maybe it's a we tried? but maybe it's just legitimately where they're at). If it's legitimate interest, the Cubs know what his price is. And they can't just sit there, wait for Imai, miss on Imai because despite every report and prediction of his market being likely over $100m the Cubs offered him some bonkers deal and still hope to realistically address their SP. The Cubs have yet to address SP yet. There's enough reason to believe the Cubs are legitimately interested. And in that case, they know what it'd take. So sorry, don't agree.