Jason Ross

The issue isn't that training is any different. It's that people like Nolan Ryan's are freaks of nature beyond what a normal freak of nature is. He's a generationally healthy human in the same way Shohei Ohtani is a generationally talented baseball player. Instead ask "what's so different today that doesn't allow guys to throw as often?" and the answer is almost assuredly that instead of throwing 88-90mph for 140 pitches MLB has found out that it's better for guys to throw 98mph for 80 pitches, and then have another guy throw 98 for 15 pitches, and another guy throw 97mph for 15 pitches....until you get to 140. And when one of your freaks breaks, you just find another. This is a churn and burn scenario. And a downside of this comes in the form of elbows that explode because they aren't designed to throw 98mph. As well, part of this is just that science is better at detecting arm injuries. Dave Steib was arguably the best pitcher in the 80s who's entire career fell apart at age 32. Today he may have had elbow reconstructive surgery 3 years before that, extended his career to 35-38. Instead he was effectively done at 32. "Washed up" when he was really...just hurt. History is littered with pitchers who had short careers likely because their elbows gave way, but we never knew it. It's not that everyone forgot how to train. It's that we live in a very different world and the human body just isn't designed to do this.

They're pitchers. Notice a trend on most of the injuries? They're guys who throw super hard. And they're almost always an elbow or shoulder issue. This isn't a training issue. This a "this is what power arms do" issue. The Braves had 3 SPs go down with TJS in a week in March. These guys are doing what the human body is not meant to do. The reason the Cubs haven't seen this issue as often recently is in due part because they have had some of the lowest velo guys in the league. They added velo this year and all of a sudden the injuries followed. The Cubs need to continue to stockpile velo so that when the injuries happen they have some who haven't exploded. One of the issues is that when you're late to the velo party, you have less guys laying around to backfill. But we should all become used to pitching injuries...this is modern baseball for better or worse.

There is no OPS to wRC+ conversation, sadly. Because it's rooted in neutralized statistics and field and league, etc, no easy 1:1. This is as good as you'll be able to do; find some quick comparisons! His xwOBA since May 6th is .314 and league average is .318 which also lines up with around that number. You can find anecdotal poor PA's (last night like you showed) and he's probably pressing a bit. But generally speaking? He's fine. He'll be fine.

The Cubs are a year removed from being one game away from an NLCS, have tons of young talent and even with a rough time are on an 84 win pace. They do not "need to rebuild" nor do they need to trade the player they just locked up beyond FA to do that. I wouldn't disagree that they may need to look inward on how they rank what's important, how they evaluate some things, etc. There's always room for personal improvement! But get out of here with "a desperate rebuild". That's hyperbolic to the extreme.

Nico Hoerner since May 6th: BA: .171 xBA .283 SLG: .210 xSLG: .344 wOBA: .221 xwOBA: .314 None of his xData suggests he's "SUCKED". What it does suggest is some negative variance. Because that's another way you go from an OPS of 1.000 to getting closer to .650.

The Cubs aren't going to need to fill everything outside of the organization. One of those SP's will hopefully be Justin Steele to some degree. One of the OF spots will go to one of Shaw/Alcantara/Ramirez if not a combination of them. They can also use some of their prospects that have overlap to fill a gap through trade. They won't need all $100m in free agency to fill five spots. It's more likely that they have $100m to fill three spots.

I mentioned it at the end of May. Mike Petriello wrote an article about it on May 28th. In June they have a .350 wOBA against breaking balls. It's the 7th best number in baseball. They have also seen a big downturn in breaking balls this month, as well. Instead of historically many, they're down to around league average pitch% against.

One more thing I'll point out: if all we do is take away the best run of any team this year, their W-L would look a lot worse than it would today. We can do the inverse just as easily: what if instead of taking away a 10-game-winning streak, we took away the 10-game losing streak. I think either would be just as fair to hand-wave away, no? I'll say this: I'm disappointed how the last month and a half has gone. Part of that is because the Cubs have dealt with a pretty improbable number of pitching injuries. Part of that is that the Cubs patched together a handful of pitchers with arm injuries (however, this is a water-is-wet situation, as now a days most pitchers come with a history of that). Part of that is that players just aren't playing to the level that you'd have expected. Only some of that is Jed's fault. Some of that is bad luck. Some of that is the player's faults. But even through it all, the Cubs are on an 84-win pace. This has been about as bad of a 45-day run as you could have written down, and I don't think it will continue to be this bad. And I want to remind everyone this, too. Last year, on June 16th the Chicago Cubs had a 5.5 game lead over the Milwaukee Brewers, The Brewers had 39 wins. Today, the Cubs have 38. Let's not act like we haven't seen the script flip on the Cubs, and it's not impossible that the script eventually flips on the Brewers, too.

The Cubs in 2021 were a vastly different organization top-to-bottom than Theo took over. Theo got a few years of bad results because he had to fix literally everything. When Hoyer inherited things, the issue wasn't that top to bottom it needed modernizing (and if you think it did, what you're really upset at is Theo). What he inherited was an owner off of post-covid "biblical losses" and a demand to lower payroll immediately (Yu Darvish trade). And to say he did that "right away" is pretty unfair. He signed all three of those players after 2022...after two full seasons. That isn't "right away", IMO. And frankly, all of those contracts have mostly been fine. Taillon has probably been the worst of the bunch, but he's a pretty "meh" contract to begin with; $15m in this day and age just isn't asking a lot. I know $15m sounds like a ton, but in context of the MLB salary structure? Yeah it's a pretty minor miss. Not to mention, it isn't like the Cubs haven't drafted and developed well without a slew of top-5 picks. He's traded for players like Pete Crow-Armstrong, drafted Matt Shaw and Cade Horton, and there's a lot of other scouting wins within the system and the draft. His team hasn't batted 1.000, as it's impossible to do so and once you get past the top-5 the MLB draft is unforgiving, but the two biggest "misses" here have been an odd 2020 draft and then a later half 1st round SP who has dealt with injuries on top of developmental issues.

Squally and Bertz said it better than I could, but I did just want to say that I'm in this camp as well. If you want something mechanical? I think his swing is off. Look below: This is a swing breakdown. He's late, tied up, and his bat is under the ball on fastballs; but here's the thing - this is normal for him. What the issue is, however, is that he's way early on breaking balls right now This is last year. Pay attention specifically to the middle chart. Notice how there are essentially two peaks for Swanson on green and blue? These are breaking balls and off speed. He's super early on them and it's not a normal curve. This is a processing issue. My guess? He's in his head, and he's pressing. His LA is also super high right now. I think this is a hitter in the throes of a slump. Not someone entirely broken or dead due to age.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth here. Remember "Six years no pennant"? Do you think that by "developing through the draft" would have made a pennant happen...quicker? The Cubs signed a good player to contract that has been worth every penny so far. You can't both be mad that the Cubs got better immediately but also blame Hoyer for not winning immediately. The reason the Cubs haven't had a pennant is not on Swasnon so far. Nor would have "building through the draft" more (which the Cubs have done very well, IMO) sped that up. We can't both be upset that the Cubs didn't win immediate and then also tell them to have slowed down. There are real flaws with the Cubs. At some point I think they need to take the bullpen more seriously. They should probably be less afraid to pay big ticket FA SP's. They were slow on velocity development. These are three right off the top of my head. I think you can directly trace all of those right back to Jed. But Swanson ain't the issue.

But that's the entire point I'm making here. Nothing here is to suggest Jed Hoyer cannot be upgraded upon (I've said it a hanful of times). But everyone here pissing and moaning seem to think that all the Cubs have to do is fire Jed Hoyer and everything will be better. The reality is that even if you bring in the most exciting guy from a strong organization (David Sterns) the outcomes aren't guaranteed. What the Cubs have currently is a baseball ops guy (he isn't a GM, we need to stop calling him a GM) who has for a fourth year in a row put the Cubs in a contention bubble. Is that the end goal? No, which is why I have been consistent in that Hoyer can be improved on. But that the likely replacement is something similar to this; someone who puts the Cubs in a contention bubble most years. Even what seems like a slam dunk hire (Sterns to the financially insane Mets remains a gold standard for this) might not be. I'm not saying "Save Jed Hoyer at all costs". What I'm trying to say is that I think a lot of people here haven't thought through this very well and that there's a lot of downsides to just firing Hoyer. And firing Hoyer today does nothing. If there's someone out there who is better, I'm all for making that point and looking into it. But it's an offseason question first and foremost.

I'll just cut to the chase: the Giants fired Zaidi for Buster Posey. How's that going for them?

Someone has to pitch in Iowa. Why are we complaining that a former 1st round pick is pitching in Iowa? It's this or the corpse of Kenta Maeda. Even the best pitching organizations have guys like Wicks in their Triple-A affiliates. Sure he hasn't worked out at the MLB level through a combination of injuries and development, but we don't need to whine that the Cubs have a Jordan Wicks type in Iowa.

I've seen people mention this talking point about the Cubs and breaking balls, but I think we need to clear some things up on it: 1. The league as a whole doesn't hit breaking balls. League average wOBA against breaking balls is .284 and xwOBA is .281 2. The Cubs have a .289 wOBA and a .291 xwOBA against breaking balls. This is above the league average and is 14th in baseball. They have a +5 RV on breaking balls. 3. The Cubs have seen the most breaking balls in baseball. What is happening here is that people keep talking like the Cubs are especially bad at breaking balls which is not true. Instead, what you're seeing is that the Cubs are being fed an inordinate (as in the most in baseball) amount of breaking balls, and while they maintain a better than league average outcomes against them, even the best teams on breaking balls are bad and much worse against them than fastballs. This isn't a Cubs specific issue they have refused to address. Breaking balls and elite spin is just really, really hard to hit. For whatever reason the Cubs have seen more than anyone else in this regards. It isn't because they're so elite at fastballs (though they are good at them). I won't go out on a limb as to why beyond that as other teams are worse at breaking balls and have seen less.

Let's start here: how many "cornerstone" (I horsefeathers hate when we create words like this because they have no set meaning and you can play "move the goalposts" however you see fit, but for now, I'll play along) players do other teams have in their lineup 7+ years out? Almost no team does. The Cubs have about any many as any other team because the only "corner stone" players signed 6+ years are either: 1. Former FAs, meaning they're probably around 29-30 when they signed and in six years will be 36 (they're not going to be very good any more). 2. Are a very young player and while a few of these elite-elite prospects sign the long-term extensions, many do not. So while they'll remain a "corner stone" in six years most will either have to extend out later or be a free agent. In fact, the Cubs have one of those players in the number 2 category: Pete Crow-Armstrong (more on him to come later)! The broader point is that when we begin inventing things to be pissy about, we know we aren't starting from a logical stand point. Yes, the Cubs have "zero pennants" in six years but most teams do. That's an incredibly small amount of time. And lets also point this out: one of those six years was 2021 when the Cubs cut budget, one of those years is 2022 when the Cubs were clearly trying to be bad because they had to cut budget and you can't fix a team in one year, and one of those six years is 2026 which hasn't ended yet so blaming him for 2026 already is stupid. They had three teams where they had budget and some semblance of talent. Is that partially on Hoyer? Yeah probably. But they've gone with a .500 record in each of those years and were a game away from the NLCS last year, so maybe we can be a little more fair, here, too, no? And to say the Cubs don't have "high end talent". Buddy, Pete horsefeathers Crow Armstrong the guy I already mentioned is literally leading the NL in fWAR for position players and it isn't like this is the first time he's had a good year. Just stop. Either be fair and fair or just say you're a blind Jed Hoyer hater. Because you're not being objective, you're just trying to find pain points to be mad about. And before anyone twists my words or adds something I didn't type: no I don't think the Cubs have been amazing. I just think the outcomes Jed Hoyer is producing, which is a team capable of being consistently good (the Cubs are trending towards a fourth straight winning record as of today and a good shot at a playoff birth) while not elite is what most VP's of baseball would produce. It's a good outcome. He avoids disaster and comes up short of elite. You can improve on Hoyer, but it isn't as easy as "fire Jed and just hire someone" either and so many people act like it's that easy. The Mets did that with David Sterns and it isn't that easy.

I didn't say he was a good or bad GM here. I told you that your critique of his drafting was wrong. I also don't think you have any idea what you're talking about. You mentioned Kevin Alcantara. Why? 1. He was an IFA. 2. He was signed by the Yankees. 3. The Cubs traded Anthony Rizzo for him at the deadline Literally nothing to do with, the draft. You mention a Cubs system that has failed to produce talent. Your example? A fourth round pick from 2020 a historically weird draft. You didn't want to go with Pete Crow-Armstrong (leading the MLB in player fWAR who's name isn't Ohtani), Cade Horton, Matt Shaw, Pedro Ramirez, Justin Steele, Moises Ballesteros, Daniel Palencia, Ben Brown? These guys didn't come to your head first? Luke Little did? Way to be disingenuous. Then you go on a Dansby Rant and something about bad records. You want to talk draft? Talk draft. You wrote 1,000 words that boil down to "moving the goal posts" because you can't be mad about the draft any more so you picked a new thing. So I'll wait for your replay about the draft before I allow you to move the posts any further.

I really like Harshorn, but I'm going to hold off on putting him number 1 right now for a few reasons: 1. Jaxon Wiggins is both closer, and he had a really, really encouraging year last year. I know it feels like he's dead but like, one good start where he's pumping 100mph and we'll remember the upside 2. Josiah Hartshorn hasn't had a slump yet and I want to see a team attack a weakness. He can't have none. 3. It's still just two months. 4. First base remains in play As of today, I think I'd list them as follows: 1. Jefferson Rojas 2. Pedro Ramirez 3. Josiah Hartshorn 4. Jaxon Wiggins And I say this as someone who's been a big time Josiah fan. I just need a bit more. Talk to me on draft day. I think a full half season sample of him just cruising will be enough that I'll forgive there being no slump/work through as a fear (which you can say he's just that good or that I'm punishing him for being good, but I kind of expect every young player to have a slump because I like seeing the response and the next step). I'm in the "slow moving list" camp, so I try to keep things pretty consistent month over month when I can be.

I'm fine with that. If he was going to be in the lineup at all, that suggests it's very minor. Better safe than sorry.

I don't disagree. However, I do think the amount of "reasonable" fans is pretty limited, especially at the point when Counsell was hired (fresh off a really rough month of September). The overall point is that simply swapping out a manager, or a VP of baseball Ops with someone who has had success isn't an immediate light switch or fix. Counsell was an easy Cubs-centric one, but David Sterns and the Mets is probably a better analogy to what might happen if the Cubs were, say, to can Jed Hoyer and then sign the guy running another successful organization. It doesn't mean it has to go badly, just that it isn't so simple.

I don't have a 1-30 ranking, but I'd grade him as "pretty good". He isn't perfect, I do think you *can* upgrade on him, but that most moves would be "lateral". Much of what people piss and moan about Hoyer can be said about others. And for his drawbacks, he rarely just sinks the Cubs or that they're watchable. The Brewers are good, yes. Good reminder, though, David Sterns and Craig Counsell were considered the engine, both left and the Brewers have been just fine with both Sterns and Counsell haven't had the same success. So when we do these things, what we attribute to one person or another isn't always the case.

Huh? The Cubs have drafted really well outside of the 1st round. Jaxon Wiggins, Kane Kepley and Jackson Ferris have all logged top-100 rankings at one point or another and Ferris was used to bring in Michael Busch. Don't forget 2026 non-1sts like Josiah Hartshorn (popping on top-100s already) and Kaleb Wing (off to a flying start). There's also Zyhir Hope (top-50) traded for Busch and Jonathon Long as deep-picks. Brooks Caple is off to a great start this year, too. Don't forget Cam Smith being used for a full year of Kyle Tucker, Matt Shaw and Cade Horton (first round picks) as well. I get people want to blame Hoyer right now (I'm not inclined to say this is as much on him as the players) but his drafting and specifically the people who's been chosen to be around him to ensure good picks, is not one of them. There are legitimate gripes I can understand, this however, isn't a top-20 issue.

Typical of high-swing, high-contact rookies. Sadly, the only way to get better is to get through this. They have to learn "just because I can hit it doesn't mean I should".

Not impossible, but feel like it's highly unlikely. The Cubs never say anything about any MiLB injury, really. The only time they don't is when you have a guy down for TJS or something. Beyond that they're incredibly mum. I also don't think he'll be in trade talks. He hasn't played much in a full calendar year and a half. He has more value to the Cubs as an org than another team is going to view him.