Jason Ross

I'm not a wrestling fan (and no shame to those who are) but there's one thing wrestling promotions understand: you have to have a compelling bad guy. It fuels the sport. I enjoy having something to hate. Whether the Cardinals, or the Brewers.

Deferred money doesn't affect the LT. It's why Ohtani isn't $1m against the LT. And it's probably not a smart idea to add more than five years to a contract for an OF'er like Suzuki. He had a great year defensively but wasn't always seen as a top-MLB defender even by the Cubs. He's had a few knee issues. And bats don't hold up much past 35 or 36 right now. I just don't see it happening.

Yeah, I think they almost do have to go over the LT and then close to the second. Once you go over it, you might as well go to the second because there's nothing but taxes on your overages. If you have $70m to grab what you need, it's going to be tricky without having a farm system that you feel very confident about trading from. I thought there was overlap between some prospects but they cleared that out with Rojas and Ballesteros being traded. So you're probably at a place where you're not really going to make a prospect for player trade right now. I also don't know if Shaw or Ramriez is getting you the kind of SP you want for either right now. So your money is going to have to do the talking. Either because you're in FA or taking salary dumps. Like imagine you QO (and he accepts Boyd) at $23m, sign another SP for $18m (like Taira) and then Peterson at $14m). Backfill with Cabrera, Rea, Assad. And then you hope Justin Steele is like, Justin Steele? And maybe you get Brown or Horton in the rotation? But that's three guys you cannot count on and I think you have to plan to get nothing from. That's $55m gone and you still don't have any additions to the LF/RF/DH mix or C. And I'm not sure I really like that rotation very much!

Well, if they aren't going over the LT at all next year, than they have less than $70m to spend in total. They need at least two hitters and 3 SP and probably some version of a catcher. They wouldn't be really able to spend money on Happ either if they're going to seriously attempt to address the SP issue.

I don't think Ricketts cares the Brewers are winning. Fans do. He cares about profits. If winning more playoff games makes the Cubs more profitable that's what matters. Who is winning is likely immaterial to someone like Tom. This is a business to him. But I don't think "same old Cubs" means much. We probably don't give Hoyer enough credit here. He traded for one year of Tucker two years ago; no one had that on the bingo card. He signed Bregman to the biggest deal in a half decade, using deferred money; no one had that on the bingo card. He traded prospects for rentals at the deadline. Hoyer has flaws. He's probably in a "proof of concept" off-season where 89 wins and a NL Wild Card Round exit isn't good enough for 2027. But I don't really understand the "same old Cubs" stuff, either. We gotta stop being so defeatest. Hoyer has a lot to do this off-season and has to do it fast with the CBA knocking time off. I'm not sure he's going to get it all done with what needs to happen. But I don't think "same old Cubs" is either rooter in reality or fair. If there's one thing, we can usually expect one unexpected thing out of Hoyer an off-season.

Nope. Just that they were unlikely to win a bidding war there. I would expect them to throw numbers at the situation more than anything. But it'll depend on the budget. It's a lot easier to justify bringing in an OF at $15-$18m if you have $100m to spend this off-season versus $70m. I'll be keeping an eye on what they do with Rea and Steele as some early signs. Like if they non-tender Steele and his (maybe) $7m it could be to clear extra space under that first LT ($70m budget) as a bad sign. Could also be they just think he's toasted, too, so it's not a fool proof sign. It's hard to know what Rickets is going to do here. A lot of us assumed he would stick under the LT last year and he went over. Could be he goes back under. Could be he gets a bug in his ass to get more of that playoff exposure and gives them a boost.

He played well, but the 4 weeks of data doesn't close the gap in the data above. He wouldn't have jumped four NL 2b in OAA. He doesn't deserve the GG this year. That's okay. Sometimes we are just good instead of great.

Suzuki resigning is highly unlikely. The market will push his contract closer to Kyle Schwarber's from last year than I think people realize. There just aren't many good bats. And the Cubs have too much to do with their pitching staff. Sharma and Mooney have said as much, they are not winning a bidding war for him. I'd come to terms with the idea he won't be back. I think he might be the most unlikely pending FA to be back.

Lots of reasons. A mix of what he does well, what the NPB isn't (a league with velocity), and the NPB ball being pretty dead right now in general. I'd expect he continues to limit home runs in the MLB pretty well, but not nearly as well in NPB for all of the reasons above.

Not super hard. He was still good. He just wasn't elite this year and the NL was specifically good. He was 4th in the NL (6th overall) in DRS and 5th in the NL (7th overall) in OAA. DRS +4 OAA +9

If anyone wants to hear straight from the source, Taima has his own YouTube. https://youtube.com/@taira_kaima?si=euHs4_13Wi-3zMsa He's a pretty cool dude. He thinks a lot about baseball. You can get a decent idea on what he thinks about pitching and his philosophy from it. Very open. It's also translated so you can follow along. Worth a dive if you're bored.

I've got one in the can. Website will post it when we get more into FA mode. I'm not Lance but it should give a fairly comprehensive breakdown. I spent hours digging on research, videos, data, etc. I believe it's over 2,000 words. There are good things. There are some flaws. Ultimately I think the two sides have a ton of common ground and expect there to be mutual interest. We should trust NPB statistics. We just need context.

Carroll (12 DRS and 10 OAA) is gonna take RF. Suzuki (14 DRS and 5 OAA) is going to come second. It'll be close, but Corban has the better reputation out there and it's close statistically but in his favor, too. Voters tend to rely on the rep a bunch and when the stats are also mostly on your side, you end up winning. Bregman and Pete will take GG's. Happ will finish 2nd to Chourio. Wynn takes SS, Swanson finishes third.

Yeah, Shota is an interesting and frustrating pitcher. Really, his ability to be frustrating felt like a good microcosm of the Cubs' season; that he was the only "healthy" SP all year, that he gave up a lot of home runs, that he probably suffered from a little bad variance and that he was such a razor's edge type of player... I'm going to miss him as a human. And as a pitcher mostly. But I won't miss the home runs.

Image courtesy of Patrick Gorski-Imagn Images Shota Imanaga's three years in Chicago were punctuated with some of the highest highs and lowest lows a pitcher can have. Imanaga won over fans quickly on the North Side. His infectious personality shone through in his initial interview, and his first start at Wrigley Field saw him strike out nine Rockies over six frames. There was a time in early 2024 when Imanaga looked like a legitimate Cy Young candidate, and he finished fifth in his rookie season. The 2025 campaign had far more lows, as Imanaga struggled with injury early in the season. (possibly) tipping pitches, and became unpitchable at the end of the year as the team lost to division rivals Milwaukee in the NLDS. His 2025 was such a downer that both he and the Cubs turned down potential contract extensions, which saw the lefty play out the 2026 season on the one-year qualifying offer—Imanaga hoping to rehab his image, the Cubs hoping to avoid a disastrous long-term pact. The 2026 season was another volatile one, though it had more positives than negatives. On the positive side of things, Imanaga got his whiffs back, as he struck out 24.6% of opposing hitters (up from 20.6% in 2025). He continued to keep his walk total low, as well, providing an impressive combination of strike-throwing and whiff-getting, finishing in the 91st percentile for chase rate, 82nd percentile for whiffs and the 95th percentile for walks. The reason for the revival; health and better velocity, two things that likely go hand-in-hand. Imanaga avoided the Injury List and pitched a full compliment of games and innings. It's fair to assume that the diminished fastball velocity in 2025 was due, in some part, to the hamstring strain he suffered in May, which cost him almost two full months. In 2026, his velocity jumped (almost) a full mile per hour and was on par with what it was in 2024. The added health also aided in his mechanics, as the pitcher was able to increase his arm angle a few degrees, closer to what it was in 2024. The 2026 version was much closer to the 2024 version, and it showed. Another positive for the lefty was something the Cubs had to have: availability. Making 32 starts on the year and pitching 174 innings, Imanaga lead the team in both categories. In a season which saw Cade Horton, Edward Cabrera, Ben Brown, and most of their other starters spend copious amounts of time on the IL, simply being healthy was a massive positive. When other's couldn't, Imanaga still took the ball. But not everything was perfect. His warts showed at times, making him a somewhat frustrating watch. The biggest issue in Imanaga's game is how reliant he is on getting fly balls. Even with his increased velocity, his fastball sat at a pretty uninspiring 91.6 mph, meaning he has little room for error to begin with. Add in that his fastball works the best up in the zone, and any miss can turn what would have been a routine flyout into a big-fly home run. So while the diminutive pitcher has the ability to generate a lot of whiffs, he runs a pretty hefty home run rate, and 2026 saw him surrender the second-most gopher balls of any pitcher. For a team that lead the league in the statistic, Imanaga still managed to stick out like a sore thumb. Another glaring issue is that Imanaga just doesn't have a massive arsenal of out pitches. He's either fastball-splitter (to righties) or fastball-sweeper (to lefties). While most pitchers struggle against hitters a third time through, without a deep bag of tricks to pull from, Imanaga was more susceptible than others. Seeing hitters a first time, he struck out 29.3% of hitters and had a 3.22 xFIP. When facing hitters a third time through the order, those numbers fell off a cliff, to just a 12.2 K% and a 5.53 xFIP. So, while he was available to start every time through the rotation, he could provide length within games only when the offense left plenty of margin for error. With all of the negatives said, Imanaga was probably better than many gave him credit for. It's true he had terrible home-run numbers and it's also true that he was limited in length, but he still put together a pretty solid year. His 3.77 ERA doesn't appear to be luck-driven; his expected ERA was 3.80 and his xFIP was 3.74. While he gave up (more than) his fair share of bombs, he largely worked around them by limiting walks and free passes. His worst moments of the season came in moments where he was his own worst enemy; walking a hitter and then giving up a follow-up home run, like what happened during his August 30 start against the Reds. But those moments didn't define his season. They just highlighted why someone of his ilk is hard to sustain; he runs on a razor's edge. When things are going right, they can go very right, but any deviation, any slight disturbance in the force, and things could go wrong quickly. Overall 2026 Grade: B- Imanaga is both a benefit of the circumstances and a prisoner of them. His 2026 was better than the home runs he gave up suggested he was, because in a year when the Cubs needed someone (anyone) to stay healthy, he did. But those home runs still cost him (and the team), because in a season when the team needed someone to keep the ball in the ballpark, he could not. From a player getting $22.025 million, you'd have liked for him to have been a bit better on the margins. With that said, while he may have been slightly overpaid on the qualifying offer, it was also a one-year deal, and it's really hard to have a "bad" one-year deal. A B- is probably a bit rich, considering he didn't accrue even 2.0 fWAR and gave up the second-most homers of anyone, but a C+ felt a bit harsh for a starting pitcher who finished 24th-best in ERA for a team who desperately needed a pitcher to stay off the IL. Because of that, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and give him a boost in his overall grade. Being available is an important skill, and he delivered it. However, it's also due to those flaws and the incredibly slim margins for success Imanaga has that he should find himself in a new organization come 2027. What did you think of Shota Imanaga's 2026 campaign? Do you think the good outweighed the bad? Let us know in the comment section! View full article

There were things Bauers always did well. Good bat speed. Really good EV. Back in 2023, he started to show signs; more barrels, much better xwOBA but significant whiff%. He was striking out 34% of the time; you cannot sustain that. When Milwaukee got him they got him to swing with a better LA. Significantly more launch. The last two years have seen huge jumps for him in zone-contact. From under 80% to 87% (last year) and 84% (this year). His chase and o-swing isn't drastically different. What Milwaukee did was work heavily on the swing. Mechanically he's just found his swing. He's much more open. He has more air under his swing so when he does make contact (even if it's not a huge amount of contact) it's crushed. It allowed him to get to his really good batted ball data more often. That's not to be taken as like a deep-dive on him step-by-step, but I think this is really a story of "highly touted prospect who had good data but was missing something" and a team who fixed that thing he was missing. Swing with Yankees Swing with Brewers Moving forward, with a new organization he could always backslide into mechanical peril. But I think as long as you are a good organization and have a good understanding of swings and development, you can stay on top of that and keep the swing.

I would guess the lower number is only there for years. So like 5/$70m. You bring the AAV down with years, something I think Bauers probably does with his track record. I think to grab him short, you're going to have to pump that AAV. Sending him back out to FA in 3 years is probably a tough sell; 34-year old DH's don't get paid often. So you gotta buy him off it. I'm not 100% out on Bauers, under the hood there isn't much to dislike, I'm a bit skeptical on the whiff% but he chases so little he'll recoup that with walks. But that said, I'd need to know the team had $100m to spend before I advocated for it, and I think the Cubs can "throw spagehtti" at two-three veterans at LF/RF/DH and couple with Shaw/Pedro and be mostly fine. One guy you feel pretty good about, maybe someone else who gets DFA'd and needs to rehab their image. They need starting pitching and that's where I think $50-60m+ need to go. If not more. So that's where my aim is.

I think 2026 Ian Happ fits closer to what O'Hearn was, but O'Hearn was always bad against LHP and Ian Happ, while it was never his strong suit, was playable against lefties until this year. I'm not sure teams are going to look at Happ as a strict platoon hitter, and I don't know if Ian Happ, especially, is going to see himself as a strict platoon hitter. My guess on Bauers is $14-18m over with the term of three to five years. He feels like the type of player a mid-market overpays to get their "big boy bat" at a more discounted rate (DH, lack of track record). His wRC+ was top-7 in baseball. So I think someone will overpay a little to get that especially in his market. It's the kind of contract you see the Cincinnati Reds dole out (again, not a prediction, just more of a style/type). It's not a "nothing" contract (3/$54m is not cheap as an example) but it's probably a bit of an overpay to get him into Cincinnati while other teams balk at the position/track record.

I think O'Hearn was viewed as a very strong "platoon only" type. He had good numbers against them in 2025, but the Pirates immediately cut that way down and prior to 2025 was entirely unplayable against lefties. So while his 2025 was good against LHP, I don't think teams or the Pirates viewed him as anything but a pretty strict platoon hitter. Bauers crushed lefties last year to the same tune as he did RHP. He even made more contact against LHP while not losing a lick of power. If teams don't look at him as a platoon hitter he should out-cash O'Hearn by a healthy amount. I would not look at him as a platoon bat, myself.

I think he's going to get a good pay day by someone. FA is pretty deep on arms but thin on hitters. I think some teams are going to be scared away by the DH-factor, but at the same time, the scarcity of hitters makes me think someone is going to pay up. Let's assume he's mostly a good hitter moving forward and has seasons of decline (fWAR) of: 2.5, 2, 1.5, 1.0, .5 through age 32-36. That's 7.5 wins over five seasons. Teams are paying ~9.5m-11m per win. I think if you add in a little market scarcity, you'll see someone give him like five years and somewhere between $75-90m total. He also feels like a player I can see one of these "smaller" market teams (Pittsburgh, Athletic types...not a prediction just a type) getting excited about and going to grab him at higher than market value just to secure him. Just vibes though, could be wrong. There could be a 1-year heavy AAV+opt out situation for him to re-hit FA at age-32 if he's getting squeezed, but I don't think he will, If he was like, 29 and hitting FA I think he'd be more open to like a three year thing, but my guess is he'd rather have some years. In a market with less offense, he could look at lower pay, but just think in this market he'll get the years due to scarcity.

I think calling him "most likely a replacement level player" is probably too far. I think we should be a little skeptical, but we have to find reasons for the skepticism past "he hasn't done it before". He wouldn't be the first older breakout. For example, what red flags do we have? His 27% K% rate isn't great, but it's not super-high. Now the whiff numbers are really bad, but he tends to balance this out with swing choice. It's a good way to help fix that in some fashion. It's a normal, elevated K% for a power hitting player. His wOBA was .381, his xwOBA was .371. A .371 xwOBA is very good. He was good against both LHP and RHP. He didn't slow down and "get got" posting a 142 wRC+ in the first half a 143 wRC+ in the second. He posted elite-elite batted ball data and elite chase rates (93rd percentile). The one red flag I can find in his game is that he rocked a .339 BABIP. He had a .266 BA and a .253 xBA. I think we can probably think that the BABIP won't stick that high for someone with a 34th percentile sprint speed. Another thing, is that Bauers was expected to be good a while back. He was a 50 FV prospect. People loved the bat. It obviously took a long time for him to figure it out, but this isn't entirely out of left field, either of some guy everyone thought sucked from the start of time. Would I treat him like a 140 wRC+ hitter with track record? Hell no, he's 31 and did this once. But when we dive under the hood, there's barely any red flags here too that stand out, either. I think he'll probably be a pretty good hitter moving forward for a bit of time. He might see the whiff rate end up leading to higher and higher K's especially as the bat speed declines with age. 34+ might be a bit ugly. But I think the next 2-3 years is probably going to be pretty good for Bauers, too.

Yeah, totally agreed. I think you got me when I was mid-edit: I think giving Shaw a platoon buddy, but also a little rope to force his way against RHP more is about where I'm comfortable at. He should have some real MLB talent with him; someone you're comfortable with having a floor against RHP. But giving him just enough PT against RHP initially that if he can show proof-of-concept against them, that he can earn more as he goes.

I think it's fair to say that he may not add defensive value. I do think it's important to point out that even if he's not "adding" value, he can "add value" comparative to his peers. Even if his DEF value is net neutral, if he's able to not be, like, a -5 out there (as most of his peers are or are far worse) it's a way to close the gap on his wRC+, too. All of these are the reasons why I wouldn't hand him the starting spot, to be fair. But are reasons why I think I'd be very willing to give him a starring platoon role and some leeway to force his way as a starter if he can.

Absolutely. Arm strength is just one data point. Accuracy is another. Below is where Dansby Swanson lies as a SS. He's one of the weakest armed SS in baseball. We shouldn't directly compare RF or LF to SS; shortstops make a lot more throws and the positions are different. They require different things. I also don't want to compare Swanson to Shaw; not saying Shaw is as elite as Swanson is defensively even beyond the position issues. Mostly, just pointing out that if Shaw was somewhat under the average arm-strength at the position that we have seen multiple players on the roster (Ian Happ, Dansby Swanson and Nico Hoerner) all who have below average arms for their position find sustained defensive success. Matt Shaw can find ways to overcome it; namely good jumps, athleticism and arm accuracy. OAA and DRS are already picking up on his ability to potentially do that. We don't have a large enough sample size to just accept it as 100% fact, but it's certainly a reason to believe he's got a skillset to be someone who can, as well.