Jason Ross

What's interesting is that the Cubs were not listed as one of the teams the Athletic reported have been watching Clay Holmes (article by Will Sammon and Ken Rosenthal). I'm not sure it means much, but they listed a handful of teams and the Cubs weren't one. I doubt Rojas is on the table for the Mets. But Brooks Caple could be...

It probably is. To be fair, Greg Huss, himself, the guy "super high" on Owen Ayers 365 days ago called him a pop-up prospect himself in his most recent updates! But then went to go describe why he thinks that he's a different type of pop-up prospect exactly how you're talking and that he believes this isn't a flash in the pan. I'd hesitate a bit about "producing" at every level, in that while I think he did "produce" in Myrtle, he did so in a way that was very dismissible. He was 24% better than average but didn't blow the doors off. He wasn't a power-merchant, nothing really stood out as amazing. It was very easily described as "24 year old in the lowest level possible". This year, I think he's blown the doors off. So I think two things are true: 1. He's the very definition of what we should consider a pop-up. He's a 19th round pick who coming into this year was a fringe-prospect in a system most considered down who is now a legitimate top-5 prospect in the system. 2. What he's doing looks mighty sustainable meaning that he's less volatile than your traditional pop-up prospect. And why I feel a lot more comfortably slotting him in as a top-5,6,7,8 (whatever) prospect in a system I think is on the rise versus, like, Mason McGwire.

I think that's fine! I think that's why people are excited! It's also what a pop-up prospect is; someone who kind of pops up out of the fog and jumps a handful of levels, jumps in the rankings significantly and goes from "guy who might be mildly interesting down the road" to "guy who might be on an MLB roster next year" in five months.

I think you're really using revisionist history here. Greg Huss, who I think is a great Cub-centric prospect guy, had him ranked 16th in the system five months ago. This was 16th without Harshorn and Conrad on the list; both of whom would have presumably been ranked higher based on draft pedigree alone and both he left off because neither had made a debut. He's third today on Huss' list. In five months he jumped everyone ahead of him except Rojas (Hartshorn is also above him, but again, he wasn't on the initial list). No one on the list jumped anywhere near that high.

I think that's a bit harsh. He had a fine year last year, but as a 24-year old, 19th round pick hitting six home runs in Myrtle Beach and a 124 wRC+ is much more "what you should do" than anything. He entered 2025 without even being a footnote in Fangraph's top-38 Cubs' prospects, he didn't warrant an addition to BA's mid-year top-30 last year and really started to get noticed come the AFL last year. Greg Huss had him ranked 16th in his preseason rankings and he claims he was "super high" on him last year. The Cubs system entering the year was not one wildly acclaimed so being ranked 16th in this system wasn't really that amazing this winter. I'd certainly classify him as a pop-up prospect. A year ago, he wasn't worthy of a top-30 spot on BA, today, he's 4th on their list. A year ago, had I told you Owen Ayers would be traded for a SP at the 2026 deadline, you'd have thought it would have been for Aaron Civale, and now he's a guy some refuse to trade at all. He doesn't have draft pedigree and realistically, the rocket got strapped to his back during the AFL last year. I think a lot of what he's doing is sustainable. He's showing great things. Him being a pop-up isn't a bad thing. But it isn't like there's a long line of people who have been clamoring for Owen Ayers for years and now people are just noticing. I'm cool with trading him if the Cubs get something good on the back end. I'm also very cool keeping him. But I'd definitely call him a pop-up.

So...that's just not true. He's pulling the ball this season (47.9%) more than his career average (45.4%). And his upturn in production has not seen him go to RF any more (17.3% since June 28th compared to 17.6% this year and 19.9% over his career). And going to RF is not good. It's not good for Hoerner. It's not good for Bregman. It's not good for anyone, really. Balls hit to the pull side, league wide, are far better. They land for more hits. They are hit harder. They result in more home runs. Pull: .443 wOBA, 90.5 EV, .359 AVG Oppo: .310 wOBA, 85 EV, .294 AVG And just to show you on Hoerner: Pull: 115 wRC+ .321 BA (career: 154 wRC+, .355 BA) Oppo: 49 wRC+ .248 BA (career: 80 wRC+, .302 BA) This is one of the oddities of Bregman's year: he's pulling off the ball and his GB% to the pullside is way up. So his pull numbers are really low. That's not normal. In fact, it could be very well explained as Matt did in the article; he's too far ahead of breaking balls. Last year Bregman, to the pull side, was a 175 wRC+ hitter. Over his career he's over 190 wRC+. This year he's under 100. This is not a unique Wrigley Field issue. Wrigley is 11th in pull wOBA and 11th in xwOBA. It's true that Wrigley Field is deeper in the wells than others. But it hasn't affected the pull-side data significantly. It's performing as an above average offensive environment for pull-hitters. The goal for Bregman is not "hit the ball to RF" more. It shouldn't be the goal for anyone. Pulling the ball is better than not. It's about figuring out why Bregman is struggling when he pulls it and how to fix that.

So, I think a few things are going on simultaneously. First, I find MLB.com the highest on grades, as in, they grade players the highest compared to others. I have a bit of a conspiracy theory that this is the case because MLB wants to hype their own product, but can't say that for certain. Eric Logenhagen of FanGraphs tends to be the lowest, IMO. He'll write up a prospect's profile, say almost nothing nice about a player for two paragraphs, highlight every weakness on the planet and then move them up-20 spots in his rankings. I like Eric a lot, it's just his style comparatively. MLB.com also uses a single grade for tools. I suspect these aren't his current grades, but his future grades. So like a best case scenario for Jaims Martinez is average power and above average hit tools. But the overall grade reflects how unlikely he is to be that; thus the 40. A 40 grade on FG is "bench player" but if he really is a 55 hit, 60 field, 45 power guy...he's going to be a 3 win player. So there's a disconnect because of how young and far away he is. Something like Fangraphs will provide a current and a future grade. It helps those make a little more sense. Like if a guy has 40 grade power today, but 60 grade future power (let's say it's a big OF'er who's growing into his body) it helps make the FV make more sense. Sure he's a 35 today but if he fills out he gets a bump. Where as MLB.com misses that so the 40 FV feels like a weird outlier with the profile. To compare the two further, Martinez didn't make the top-34 prospects in the Cubs system this spring from Logenhagen. Remember, one tends to right high, the other runs low and didn't even get a throw-away line in the "young and projectable" section for Logenhagen. Is what it is but is an interesting look into how these two differ. Ultimately, I think it's best we just take these as fun snapshots. They're not useless, worthless, or entirely random but especially with teenagers like Martinez are incredibly volatile, change quickly and are unstable. They're non-scientific so each place has their own rating system and rationale. And with less resources, it can be hard for someone like Eric Logenhagen to see enough of a 17-year-old in the DSL to really have an opinion considering how many players, teams and the like exists, so they're using a network as well. And then you have the teams' own internal rankings which can fly heavily in the face as to what the industry thinks as well. So just because Eric might have a guy as a 45+ FV SP, a team may either like a guy more or less. And we'll never know!

Bring back Jamo. It's the only chance teams have when our offense does this.

He looked like maybe he turned a corner. Yeesh.

I'm just using the relievers who are in the ballpark of Weaver. Sadly, it was seemingly the Mets who made all of those deals last year which makes my point a little more foggy...thanks David Stearn for that. But mostly my methodology was that I felt Miller and Duran feel like a tier well above Luke Weaver, where as Caleb Ferguson feels like he was less. Soto, Helsey and Rogers feels more in line with Luke Weaver, from my stand point so I went with them. If we want to look at Caleb Ferguson, on an expiring deal, the Pirates acquired him for a single 40+ FV pitcher in Jeter Martinez. But he was signed to a 1/$4.5m deal in the offseason where as Luke Weaver was signed for 2/$22m. So I think it's fair to assume that Weaver would go for much more than Ferguson at the deadline simply based on how the league handled the two in the offseason. I don't know. In the end, I don't think the Mets would do an Ayers/Wing swap from their end. I also understand anyone higher on Ayers than Eric (and it's an argument I think you could passionately argue and I'd probably come away thinking it was a good one). But I do think if we're using the FG ecosystem in total that the deal makes sense. Ultimately, no team is doing that, so there's plenty of nuance that we just can't know.

I'm not sure I agree with that, either. I don't think he has to pitch to a sub 2.00 ERA to be worth two 40+ prospects. Gregory Soto picked up Wellington Aracena (45) and Cameron Foster (35+). At the time of the trade Soto was pitching to the tune of a 3.96 ERA, a 3.89 xFIP and was a free agent at the end of the year. To map that out using the updated FV chart, a 45 pitcher is valued at $9.5m and a 35+ pitcher is valued at $1.5m. So that's $11m value back. Using Logenhagen's valuation a 40+ hitter is worth $8m and a 40+ P is valued at $7m. So you're at $15m. I totally understand if you're on the fence of thinking Ayers is a 45 hitter. That adds a lot of value. It takes the total from $15m over $20m because it effectively doubles the value of Owen Ayers. But if we're just sticking within the entire FanGraphs ecosystem, the price of Ayers and Wing is valued at slightly higher than Gregory Soto's expiring contract, and I think Weaver, especially with control, is worth $4m more than Soto. EDIT: I read a 45+ pitcher initially and noticed that with all of my charts. that I erroneously added a + to his rating in my brain, throwing off my numbers initially. I have updated my math and post, but there's a real chance you saw the original. I don't think it changes my premise, but I did want to be accurate.

I'm not sure I agree. It depends on how you're valuing a lot of things here: 1. What is Owen Ayers' value? I think he's very hard to pinpoint on what the Cubs should value him as and how another team should value him. The numbers are great. The age is a bit of a concern as is the lack of track record. 2. What is Kaleb Wing's value? What kind of injury are we talking? Ryan Helsey went for Joshua Baez (40+ on FG) and Nate Dohm (35+) last year at the deadline. He was having a worse year than Weaver, but was also better than Weaver before. He also had no control. Ayers is a 40+ on FG right now as is Wing. Tyler Rogers went for a 45+ and a 45 as well as Jose Butto. I think you can say that maybe Ayers is low on Eric's list. But even if you bump him to a 45, I think it's in line with how relievers were bought last year.

Just not sure what value he's taking there. I don't think he's headlining that deal. If he headlines it? Sure. But Doubt he does. I'm not against Detmers one bit, but I do think there's a belief that Ayers is like 1a or 1b in that trade and I think he's a clear 2 behind Rojas. Obviously if he leads it? Cool. But as 2nd piece, there are others I'd prefer.

I'd probably do that. I like Ayers but he's truly a 25 year old pop up prospect; catcher be damned. Wing has a season ending injury - that isn't a good thing. But I think the same reasons I'd probably, with an arm twist, do it, are the same reasons I also don't get from a Mets' perspective. Why do you target Ayers when you have Alvarez? Why do you target a teenage pitcher who's hurt?

Not reporting, but thought it was worth a talking point:

I'm a fan of: 1 SP 1 RP 1 RP you get cheap and can dump either with an option or just leave off the roster and not feel like you paid too much for that privilege

As much as I'd like it to be two, I think the Cubs will go, ultimately, with one. Obviously, injuries can happen and will, but New Guy, Shota, Boyd and Cabrera/Brown would be a perfectly fine playoff rotation as long as you are planning on those two guys coming back to the rotation. And with Rea and Assad in tow, you have two depth options to easily take the 5th spot. The math changes based on your feelings on Cabrera or Brown returning, certainly, but the Cubs are definitely acting like they're coming back. There is a bit of an event horizon in that the deadline is to get the Cubs into the best playoff shape they can be, and if they need a Rea still on top of a playoff arm? I think you'd get two. But I do think they have three pitchers you can reasonably trust (or that the Cubs feel like they can trust) in that regards. I'd probably rather them spend the resources they would on the 2nd SP on the bullpen. Give me the best SP you can get and the best RP you can get.

Becuase these things will undoubtedly affect the deadline there are a few injury updates of note: - Alex Cohen says Justin Steele is progressing towards pitching for the Cubs. - Ben Brown is about to resume throwing. Was seen in Arizona.

Looks like Shelby Miller is throwing today.

If Ramirez isn't a 120 wRC+ bat, than he isn't an Ian Happ comparison, though. So we're either moving the goalposts, underselling how good Ian Happ has been, or overvaluing Pedro Ramirez. If you want something a bit more realistic to what I think Ramirez is right now? It's whatever Brian Rocchio is putting up. A 106 wRC+, a K% around 15% and a walk rate around 7%. He's hit nine home runs on the year. That's roughly where Pedro was for much of his MilB career. His xwOBA on the year is .297 compared to Pedro's .299. Maybe you move a few things around, but that's about a line I think I'd expect for Pedro Ramirez, especially at age-23 when you don't curate the PA's so much, the league adjusts and he settles in. But that 106 wRC+ puts you in the 20's when you look at LF'ers with 150 PA's at the position. And that's where the issue is for me. Whatever defense you think you're gaining in LF, you're throwing away with the bat. And I don't think that's the worst case scenario, but that isn't worth prospect hugging him this year. I can see that being servicable, especially with a strong bench, so it isn't so much "it can't happen" only "let's not overpromise" or in this case, expect too much. It's alright, but not something you can't replicate. A lot of this feels like you're taking a square peg and putting it in a round hole. It's a lot of "well maybe if he does this" or "maybe that". But that's the same argument for Matt Shaw. Shaw's xwOBA last year? .302. What's he doing this year? Putting up glove and base running value to offset his bat in the OF. That's what I meant when I said they're equal value. You can personally just like one over the other, but when we get to brass tax, they're pretty similar. And a good reminder, Shaw hit better than Pedro Ramirez at Triple-A before he came up. He had a 144 wRC+ in Iowa. He walked more than Ramirez. And had a longer history of power hitting. I just think when you boil it down, it's 6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other.

I like Ramirez, but there are a bunch of pitchers I'd happily move him for. He doesn't really have a home with the Cubs that is a good fit. For example, I think you're being super kind to him suggesting an Ian Happ comp at any level. A 120 wRC+, which is what Happ has been consistently, would basically be the best hitting 2b in baseball. I don't look at Pedro Ramirez and go "yeah, that guy is going to be the best hitting 2b in baseball" as a comparison right now. I think a fair expectation is in that 100-105 wRC+ range which still gets him above the 2b average. Which is also just ever so slightly better than LF league wide (99 wRC+ this year) but it's not so much better that you draw a circle around him and say "there's only like 3 guys I'm trading him for". Between he, and Shaw, one of them has to move, IMO, in a perfect world. You cannot walk into next year with a bunch of 2b bats in the LF/RF spots. And between the two of them, I think if you're valuing one over the other at a pretty high level, I think you're probably being unfair to the other one. You can like one thing about Shaw or Ramirez over the other, but on paper, they look pretty equal value wise. Especially for a team in which "another infielder" is probably the last thing the MLB side of things needs.

Jeff Passan posted a podcast about the TDL. It wasn't super insightful, more discussion than news. But a few things I caught on it: 1. He thinks Emerson Hancock will be traded. 2. Talked about Detmers and the Angels needing to sell and start over. 3. Mentioned that the industry thought Skubal would be dealt in the offseason, and now it's a lot of fog on whether he'll be traded 4. Executive told Passan they may keep Skubal and trade Mize. 5. Doesn't think Joe Ryan will be traded. 6. Mentioned he didn't think the Cubs and the Mets were a matchup for Peralta. Doesn't see it. "Things would have to change". But did suggest the Brewers there. 7. Royals are telling teams they won't be trading Wacha and Lugo. Passan finds that curious. 8. Thinks Mets should deal Weaver. 9. Believes Marlins are "listening" on Alcantara, did mention the return wouldn't be massive. 10. Jays are talking with teams on Varsho and Guasmann. Possibly Tyler Rogers. Anticipates Guasmann to be dealt. 11. No traction on Holmes extension. Thinks the Mets will make more than 5 trades. Expects Holmes to go "guarantee it". Mentioned the Cubs as a possibility.

He doesn't look bad, but his xwOBA is under .300 currently and his BABIP is over .350. These are pretty curated PA's and he's barely played against LHP. I don't think he's basically like Happ; he is someone you can take to the bank on hitting 20 home runs and Ramirez probably isn't someone you can even bank on hitting 15. The xData is still in small sample size territory, but part of that is also brought back down with the curated PA's thing. Definitely something to monitor. I'm not entirely against the idea of Ramirez getting a look in LF and had floated that idea before he even came up, but there are some underlying numbers that should give everyone pause and the idea that his bat is much more that of a 2b than a corner OF'er. He's fun, but I'm not entirely sold yet in that fashion.

Absolutely. As much as we like to think the Cubs' are in a unique situation with as many pitching injuries, they're not that unique. Many teams have pitching woes; Lucas Giolito picked up almost 30 of the most ineffective innings across baseball for the Padres, as an example. Between August 4th and September 1st, there's a good chance some MLB team is going to be running on fumes for MLB pitching and the choices of who to pick up will be incredibly thin. A "game-shape ready" Jameson Taillon, even with how bad he's been, will probably appeal to someone.