Jason Ross

The Toronto Blue Jays were not guaranteed to make the playoffs. So while he's going to get to an 8th start, at the time, he wasn't even ready to make an MLB debut. The Tigers and Mets have proven what nonesense can happen down the stretch - there was no guarantee an 8th start was ever coming. I didn't really undersell him to Wiggins. First, I said he was the closest 1:1 comp - he is. The Cubs don't have another top-100 pitcher in the system. Stephan and Wiggins were both 2nd round selections out of the SEC. And Wiggins is ranked 66th on FG's list to Stephans 73rd. I think that's a pretty close! I also said I think Wiggins is a better prospect even stating if you thought Stephan was the 125th best prospect that the price was significant. The inclusion of Wiggins was to give a relatable point of reference. I expect most people don't follow the Blue Jays system, but likely, have a cursory knowledge of the Cubs'. You're really warping my point. My point was only about the price paid for Bieber. The post said "Toronto gave up no much for him". There wasn't another pitcher on the FG top-100 who was moved. That is simply inaccurate. There was no implications for the Cubs based on my post. I wasn't defending Hoyer. Only disagreeing with a line that suggested the Blue Jay got a cheap price on Bieber - it was not a cheap price.

Listen, I wrote a whole article on bitching about the Cubs not getting a SP at the deadline; that isn't me defending Jed Hoyer. But saying that Toronto didn't pay a very high price for Bieber is also not appropriate. So I think I'd say two things are going on here: 1. I think the Cubs should have probably paid for something more - be it a SP, or another impact RP like David Bednar. 2. Toronto paid a lot for Shane Bieber. I was one of the people here suggesting they trade for Sandy Alcantara (who's been excellent) and Edward Cabrera (who's been excellent). So I don't want to let him off the hook. And that post you quotes wasn't about Jed at all. Only that, I don't think it's fair to undersell the price the Blue Jays paid. Khal Stephan was a good prospect given up for Shane Bieber. Which is cool! Sometimes you pay up.

I don't think that's the best bet, though. I think we can both agree that whatever injury Soroka had was not one that's going to destroy him; while shoulder strains are not great, they're pretty normal stuff pitchers handle. Long term, they can suggest arm issues, but while it probably isn't as benign as a hangnail or a blister, this isn't a UCL issue. Considering the velocity is back, structurally and health wise, we should assume he's fine for the playoffs. So, then we have to ask "why did he struggle post injury?" and I think rust and a bit of a pitching philosophy change is occurring. Look at where his fastball is landing now compared to before. The first is leading up to the TDL: And now since: We can see there is something different happening here. Whether or not that's because it's a mechanical thing or a new process is not really able to be seen there. But we can see things are very different right now. Regardless, I think the Cubs think there's a bit more here than you do. And considering that I don't think Assad and Civale have a lot of separation, Soroka probably offers a different option when things are right.

Toronto gave up a prospect who was on Fangraph's top-100 mid-season list and currently ranked 73rd on their list. While I think Jaxon Wiggins is a better prospect than Khal Stephan, the pitcher that went back to Cleveland in that deal, he's also probably the closest 1:1 comp in our system. Pitching prospects are always a little all over the place, and Eric Logenhagen at FG seems to be among the high-water-marks for their feelings on Stephan, but I would also caution you into saying they got him for not too much. Even if you think he's a little high, and you've got him more in the 125 range, the Blue Jays gave up a top-125 prospect for a pitcher who hadn't even made an appearance past A-ball on the season and who they got 7 regular season starts of. In terms of value, the Jays/Guardians swap was likely among the largest prices paid.

I don't disagree that a short hook for anyone in the playoffs is important. But I also think the pitcher that Soroka can be when he's right is likely better than what Assad can bring in the playoffs. But I think a lot of the discussion internally with the Cubs was "Do we really need two Javier Assad's?" because the overlap between he and Aaron Civale is real. They are similar softer tossing RHP who kitchen sink their way through things with low whiff stuff. Soroka overs a fastball at 95mph and a slurve that can really attack RHH and induce K's when he's right. In the end, they have to make a choice on what they think gives them the best shot. And I know Soroka got touched up the last game, but he also shut down the Padres the other night when called on. For his sake and the Cubs sake I hope it's better next time.

But what proof do we have that the reason that the Cubs fell into second place because of that? First, his decision to play or not play his bench has nothing to do with the Brewers going on a pretty historic run of baseball. The Brewers went nuclear and won a ton of baseball games. That's on Milwaukee, not Counsell. Beyond that, the Cubs have beaten any of their projection model outcomes pre-season. Most had them in the mid 80-s to 90(ish) range, but 92 wins is at the very top of what was expected. I know there is an argument that the Cubs got better than expected outcomes from some players who took leaps, but they also lost their best SP right off the bat and Tucker got hurt and missed time too, so I think it balances out. Most of the season, especially in July, the Cubs' bench was Justin Turner (unplayable against RHP), Reese McGuire, Jon Berti and Vidal Brujan. Do we think the Cubs would have won more games if they started multiple replacement level players? If we're blaming anyone there, that seems like a Hoyer thing first (though most teams run a pretty garbage bench, to be fair) before a Counsell thing. Into August, after they picked up Castro, the Cubs played the bench much more. I just don't see any thing for Craig Counsell to have to apologize or take blame for that.

Any time! I also explained up in a post about 2 or 3 above where his issues are with the cutter right now against LHH which should also explain why he's sucked against them recently.

I actually think he'll outpitch his metrics somewhat often with his current build. I think xFIP is a great datapoint, but there is enough information on how to outpitch your xFIP and it's generally by throwing strikes, getting ahead, and getting a ton of ground balls. Priester does all of these things. Where I think he should struggle against LHH specifically is how his pitch mix doesn't really change for LHH the way it should. Sliders and sinkers are a no-no for attacking opposite handed hitters and he just keeps tossing them. So I'm not shocked that he is.

Priester seems to have changed his pitch mix around August, using his cutter far more and it has not been a good pitch for him. About a 13% increase recently. It's been his worst pitch of the year and has the highest batted ball data against it. Based on heat maps, it's all over the middle of the plate. You'd usually use a cutter against LHH (he does use it around the same % against RHH) all I can do is guess guess because I can't super sort for pitch% per month per hitter, my guess is the cutter is the culprit. His numbers in September against LHH are horrible and it coincides with the cutter% increase. EDIT: It's the cutter. Look at how much he's lost the pitch location: The top is his cutter location against LHH before July and then after. He was getting the cutter in on hitters hands prior. Kind of how you'd expect him to attack LHH with the pitch. Here is where here's leaving it since: He's stopped getting the ball in on hands. He's getting all the plate now, so it's sliding right into the zone. Here is where hitters were making contact before August on the cutter: And compare to where hitters are getting it now:

The Cubs scored the 5th most runs on the season but around here, you'd believe they were a below average offensive team. The point isn't who scored more runs on the year, but that if you think the Cubs struggled up to the end of the year, the Brewers struggled more. If you think the Cubs offense is trash, the Brewers scored 13 more runs on the year, or by average, .08 more runs per game, what does that make them?. If you think the Cubs have to wake up and battle it out offensively, than data suggests their ability to do that. But I don't find either team to be offensive juggernauts and neither team are rolling out a pitcher without obvious flaws tonight. Both teams are in about the same boat.

You think that Michael Soroka's most recent 8 innings are more indicative than his prior 83? In the nicest possible way; that's not how data works, and is the literal definition of sample size error. Max Fried gave up 7 runs in 3 innings last night. Is that more indicative of who he is moving forward, or do we think his 2025 season is a better representation of that? Soroka had a strained shoulder and his velocity is back to what it was; he didn't have his arm amputated. There is no reason on the planet to think his last eight innings outclass 10x the sample.

Well, yeah. But so are the Cubs. They are both top-3 in almost every one of the base running stats you can imagine, and when they're not, they're in the top-5. It doesn't really change the point; the Brewers are not a juggernaut offensive roster. The comparison was of recent offensive output and how around here, you'd kind of come to the conclusion the Cubs wilted into the playoffs (especially offensively). While the Cubs had the 9th most runs in September, the Brewers had the 23rd. For all of the worry about how the Cubs offense has performed leading up to the playoffs, the Brewers have been worse. Yet, on here, you'd assume the Brewers had one of the best offenses in baseball. They're a fine offensive team who struggled more than the Cubs in recency biast. dRC+ (which factors in opposition quality) likes them less than wRC+ as well. The point is this; the Brewers aren't a team you really need to worry about crushing you offensively. They're not a bad offensive team either, but the Cubs shouldn't need to score five to beat this team very often, either.

I highly suspect Castro will start for Shaw at 3b. They did the same thing the last time Priester went (also Imanaga started for the Cubs). Priester is much worse against lefties than righties, and Shaw's glove will be negated with a flyball pitcher on the mound.

Image courtesy of © Kamil Krzaczynski-Imagn Images Game 1 of the NLDS was the kind of contest that could easily eat your soul from the inside, if you let it. The Cubs started the game with a momentum-shifting home run on the second pitch, only to watch the contest quickly devolve into a 9-1 beat down behind (ostensibly) the Cubs' most reliable starting option. It was deflating, to say the least. To avoid dropping down two games to none, the Chicago Cubs will need to bounce back in Monday night's Game 2. While the Brewers have announced southpaw reliever Aaron Ashby as their starter, he will not get the bulk of the innings Monday night. The job of "bulk innings" will instead (very likely) go to sinker merchant Quinn Priester, and the Cubs' hope will be that they can solve him better than they could Freddy Peralta. Thankfully, they have had recent success against Priester, and many of the reasons the Brew Crew are going with an opener stem from that reason. For starters, the Cubs have seen Priester three times already on the season and have gotten to the right-handed pitcher pretty well. Priester has a 6.28 ERA against the Cubs in three starts, walking as many (11) as he's struck out, and sporting a .393 wOBA against the Cubs lineup. While Priester has been a very good arm in Milwaukee this year, the Cubs seem to see the ball well out of his hand—and are uniquely set up to be a problem for him. How are they doing it? First, the Cubs offer a pretty lefty-heavy lineup. Michael Busch, (switch-hitting) Ian Happ, Kyle Tucker, and Pete Crow-Armstrong all hit from the left side against righties, and Priester struggles against lefties. We can see this in both his wOBA against southpaws jumping nearly .030, as well as increased walk totals (nearly double the walk rate, compared to right-handed batters) and an increase in xFIP by almost a full point. This makes sense; Priester is a sinker-slider arm, using those two pitches almost 68% of the time. More importantly, he doesn't show a distinct characteristic to go away from those pitches against left-handed-hitters, as his usage of the sinker barely dips (42% to 41%) and while his slider usage drops some, it's still a pitch he'll toss out almost 20% of the time. This is almost assuredly why Milwaukee is going the opener route. Busch, the Cubs' left-handed leadoff hitter who homered to start the game, will be neutralized if he's allowed to face Ashby (81 wRC+ against LHP, 151 wRC+ against RHP). While Nico Hoerner and either Seiya Suzuki or Happ will likely bat up in the top three, starting Ashby will help Priester miss some of the left-handed hitters. It's likely the reliever-as-starter will remain in the game through the Cubs' cleanup hitter, Tucker, and while Tucker is essentially split-neutral, it will help shield Priester from his power, as well. It's not just that the Cubs have left-handed hitters aplenty, either. The arsenal Priester uses gives the Cubs an advantage. The Cubs rank fourth in the league offensively against sinkers, per FanGraphs. Better yet? The Cubs are third against sliders. So, how can the Cubs continue to exploit Priester's weaknesses? It starts with how you pencil in the lineup card, and one change I'd recommend for Craig Counsell is to start utility player Willi Castro in place of Matt Shaw. Castro, a switch-hitter, would create a matchup issue with the pitch mix that Priester presents. While Castro hasn't faired very well on sinkers on the year, with a -2 run value on the pitch according to Baseball Savant (.188 batting average and a .396 slugging on the pitch), his xWOBA is .358 on the pitch, suggesting he's had a fair share of bad luck. He should be capable of teeing off on a few misplaced breaking balls, and he has a strong plate approach in general, so this would be a good time to get use out of your trade deadline acquisition during the playoffs. The one drawback of taking Shaw out of the lineup and replacing him with Castro, is of course, defense. However, the Cubs are slated to use Shota Imanaga for the bulk of their innings. Imanaga is one of the most extreme fly-ball pitchers in the league, which would negate the value a defensive infielder would bring to the table. You can always bring Shaw's glove in later in the game, when you need to. The Cubs clearly think this a viable plan, as we can go back to August 21, the last time the Cubs faced the Brewers' right-handed pitcher, to see how they stacked the lineup. The only primary right-handed hitters in the order that day were Nico Hoerner at second base, Dansby Swanson at shortstop, and Seiya Suzuki at designated hitter (all of whom you should expect to see this time around, as well). Castro started at third (Imanaga started on the mound, it should be noted), and Reese McGuire drew in at catcher to fill the lineup with six left-handed hitters. The result was that the sinkerballer was knocked out in the middle of the fifth after walking five. I don't expect McGuire to play Monday—Carson Kelly is too important—but I do think the Castro-for-Shaw swap is a real likelihood. Another thing the Cubs should look to do: get the base runners moving. William Contreras is not a particularly fast pop-time catcher, ranking 48th in the league in pop time and 43rd in exchange. Stolen bases aren't entirely off of catchers, either, and we can look into how the Brewers' likely bulk-inning eater does there, and it's fairly mediocre. He's currently neutral in pitcher stealing runs (the Cubs' Matthew Boyd leads the category with +9), and ranks just 46th in limiting runners' lead distance. Runners are two-of-four against these two as a pair and are 7-11 on the year against the pitcher himself. Below is an example of Oneil Cruz (admittedly, a very good baserunner) taking second on the pair early this season with relative ease. Priester just isn't very quick to the plate with his motion. A high, 94-mph pitch is the best chance you'd draw up to get Cruz, and it wasn't even close. SzRsT0JfV0ZRVkV3dEdEUT09X0FBaFJVVnhSQndNQVhsdFFWQUFIQ0ZCVkFBTU1BRllBQlFaWEFRTlJBQWNEQXdJSA==.mp4 Priester gets 56% ground balls and doesn't really limit hard hits, ranking in the 59th percentile of that statistic. This means that anyone at first base is a prime target for a decently hard-hit ground ball at an infielder, resulting in a double play. So how do you stay out of it? Go take second, before you can lose it. That might also move the infielders, as they break to cover the bag, and open new holes through which to shoot a single. This isn't an impervious plan, as the two are clearly somewhat decent together (runners have a 50% clip of getting hosed), but pick your poison. You either let your speed talk on the bases or you let the Brewers' defensive crew up the middle eat you alive. I'll take my chances on the bases. The Cubs should be able to take advantage of the Brewers here. Obviously, we shouldn't expect early-season baserunning from Tucker with his current calf issue, but Crow-Armstrong, Suzuki, Hoerner and either of Shaw or Castro are more than capable of swiping a bag or two. The Cubs are the third-best baserunning team in baseball, have the fourth-most bases swiped, are third in stolen base value and have only been caught 35 times despite their aggressive style. Take what isn't a strength of the Brewers on this day and tilt it to your advantage, by using what you are good at. The last bit of advice for Cubs hitters: leave the low-and-away pitch there. When painting the outside corner to left-handed hitters, Priester will groundball you to death. That area is his stomping ground, and the one place he can truly beat lefties. It's a subtle difference, but get him to find the plate by just a few more inches, and all of a sudden you land in the area where lefties find the most success. Priester isn't going to dominate you with pure stuff. His opponent chase rate is in the 29th percentile, his whiff rate is in the 44th, and none of his pitches jump out as Stuff+ monsters, with his best-shaped pitch being his slider (103; 100 is average). You can allow yourself to get a little deeper into a count to avoid that roll-over ground ball, if need be. Now, you should expect he will pound the zone, as his first-pitch strike rate is 65% and he's in the zone 52% of the time in general, but if you have to watch strike one because it's in the "ground ball danger zone," there isn't a massive fear he's going to dominate you after that and rack up a bunch of strikeouts. So, that's my game plan for Game 2. Get the lefties in the lineup; be judicious but aggressive in taking an extra bag; and at the plate, bring your sights up and don't help the Brewers pitcher out by grounding the ball into the dirt. There's nothing foolproof in baseball; even the best-laid plans fail. The Cubs can stack with left-handed hitters, and the Brewers may not use Priester as much as thought. The Cubs can make a lot of hard contact that find gloves. They could get killed on the bases. Things rarely go exactly how you'd like them. But, I think there's a blueprint to attack the Brewers' (likely) main pitcher on Monday night, and that's going to help give them a strong foundation to find a win in Milwaukee. The Cubs have had success against him before, and have employed these very same tactics. This is a very winnable game—don't let the stench of Game 1 come with you. This series is far from over; steal a win in Milwaukee and you shift the momentum before heading back down to Chicago. What do you think of the Cubs' chances on Monday night? Do you think the Cubs can get to the Brewers' pitcher? Let us know in the comments below! View full article

I wasn't being sensitive, I was pointing out the irony in acting like you know about a pitcher but not even bothering to Google his name. It makes you look silly. I am not a spell check, we all make errors. Your post made it very clear you don't care to know his name, that's my issue. I mistype constantly. But I do know who everyone is. Also, I am 38 years old, not "today's youth" my friend. Trust me, both my knees and the growing amount of gray on my hair and beard wishes I was. But you do you. You seem more concerned with just being miserable consistently than looking up information about the people you're complaining about. No reason to continue this beyond of you have nothing else baseball related to speak on. Would you like to provide information in the form of statistics and data to suggest Assad is better? As stated, the Cubs don't appear to think so, so I would be interested in why you think that. I am of the opinion myself Soroka is a better option than Assad, especially out of the bullpen.

He had a shoulder strain this year. His velocity is already back. Let's not go crazy with what he had. This post makes it seem like he had TJS. I do think his routine and mechanics are a little off. I think he rushed back a little and didn't get as much rehab time in the minors as would have been ideal and we are seeing that rust shake off in real time. I also think he is a good pitcher and long term is fine. Both things can be true.

There are usually normal markers we have of players capable of doing these things. Left-on-base generally has no markers and is mostly considered a luck based concept. With anything, there are players who are able to skirt the danger zone more than others, and some who's luck lasts longer. I think as we project Assad in the future, we can either assume that the luck will run out sooner rather than later, or find some data in how he does the outlier thing he does. I can't find any real data for the latter, meaning the former feels like the safest option moving forward. I don't think he's so bad he doesn't have a space in MLB - I think he's a capable #5 if needed and likely more of a swingman. A Colin Rea type career sounds...realistic! But playoff starter? No thanks.

Don't you think it's a little bit strange that you don't even know his name and you're complaining about him? I say that because it feels odd to throw a fit about Michael Soroka but if you can't get the name right, it means you're probably not so familiar with his body of work. For example, when transitioned to the BP last year, Soroka posted killer K% and numbers. He was a stud reliever. In Washington, he was a great pitcher! His ERA was high, but the Washington Nationals finished dead last defensively - his ERA was inflated because the Nats couldn't field well. They're atrocious. Since coming to Chicago, it hasn't worked great. But I think that's more or less due to his injury and being thrown off. But yeah, I think Soroka is a better option. The Cubs do too.

I try to find some hope in the doom and gloom. Most of the time. Appreciate the kind words!

I think Javier Assad is not a very good pitcher. I can usually find a reason for a pitcher beating his xFIP, and I'm not very sure I can find one for Assad. His K% is dropping, the GB% isn't high enough to be one, his xERA routinely sits in the mid 4's. Most of his profile reads of a guy who is teetering on the edge of a pretty quick downfall as an MLB starter. I don't think he's a very good pitcher. I don't think the Cubs believe in him; they thought, at best, he's the 13th best pitcher right now, and it's safe to assume had Horton been healthy, he'd be deemed the 14th best pitcher right now. When you look at all of that, it'd be fairly perplexing for the Cubs to start him in a playoff game against the #`1 seed in the NL.

He's probably in line for around 12-15 outs. Ashby is going to take the first four through Tucker, and then it's Priester, probably through the 4th or 5th. I don't necessarily think they have to score 4. Shota is a good pitcher, and the Cubs BP is good. The Brewers didn't score a single run after the 2nd against Civale (who got 1 whiff in 55 pitches) and Ben Brown. They had a great first two innings but they're not a juggernaut. For all of the worry on the Cubs lineup over the second half of the year. the Cubs had a 113 wRC+ in September to the Brewers 101. I'm not so sure the Cubs have to outhit the Brewers this much. Don't get me wrong, four would be great! But I do think we're over valuing the Brewers offensive capabilities. Especially if Chourio is out.

Yep. Real bad against LHH, he doesn't use his mix well. Sinkers and sliders have issues against opposite handed hitters and he doesn't really change his mix. Cubs are lefty heavy (thus the opener) and crush sinkers and sliders. It's a good matchup for the Cubs tonight.

I've got an article coming out today about Quinn Priester and how the Cubs matchup against him. He is 99% sure they're bulk innings guy. TLDR: It's a good outlook.