Jason Ross

Image courtesy of © Kamil Krzaczynski-Imagn Images As the MLB trade deadline concluded on Thursday, the Cubs' efforts kind of landed with a thud. I don't mean to sound fully negative. In fact, if you want my honest opinions up front, I don't think the Cubs made any bad trades leading up to the deadline at 5 PM Central. But regardless of how I feel about every trade individually, Jed Hoyer is likely to face a lot of criticism in the following days (and perhaps weeks, months, maybe years) for how the Cubs handled themselves. There will be articles (such as this one) written. There will be reddit posts, blogs, posts on our forums at North Side Baseball... it won't go unnoticed, to say the least. For better or worse, this was a microcosm of the Jed Hoyer experience. The man is who he is. "Jed Hoyer never orders delivery, he always picks up his pizza." I sincerely wish this was my own pithy turn of phrase, but one of our other, more clever writers (aye @matto1233) at NSBB mentioned it as the clock struck midnight on the deadline, and I think it's the perfect way to explain what happened. Hoyer is nothing if not a pragmatist. If he can drive himself to Domino's and avoid a $3 charge for delivery and a further $4 for a tip, the man will make that drive in rain, sleet, snow or sun. To Hoyer, $7 is $7 ,and his gas spent will total far less than $7. He does that math regardless of anything else about the situation. Value is value, afterall. To put it in baseball terms, Hoyer is someone who fervently sticks to his own valuations and does not budge. This can be a good quality. For example, as I have mentioned already, I liked every trade that occurred this deadline. The highest-ranked prospect the Cubs lost profiles as a fourth or fifth outfielder (Christian Franklin), and the closest thing to a real organizational loss was someone who hasn't blown out the candles on their 18th birthday cake quite yet (Wilfri De La Cruz, the cost for Andrew Kittredge). And in return for that smattering of prospects ranked 10th and beyond organizationally, the Cubs received four players who undoubtedly make their roster better, in utility man Willi Castro, starting pitcher Mike Soroka, and relievers Taylor Rogers and Andrew Kittredge. The Cubs knew what each player was worth, and they paid a pretty fair price for them. On the surface, this is nothing but a good thing. This is Hoyer's best trait as a leader of an organization; he really gets it when it comes to valuation. Hoyer will rarely, if ever, be fleeced on any trade, or in any free agent negotiation. His biggest misses have been short-term deals or small overpays. To date, I don't think he's made a single disaster of a move. You may quibble with a valuation here or there, but quibble is really all you can do. We can nitpick, but never truly find massive fault or a move that feels illogical or emotional. Arguably, though, Hoyer's pragmatism runs so deep that it sometimes becomes a problem. He's so principled in his approach that it sometimes becomes untenably rigid. Driving to Domino's is fine if it's nice out and you have the time. Paying the delivery fee makes sense when you're on a time crunch. We can see these issues play out during the deadline. The Cubs definitely needed an upgrade in the starting rotation, and while I like Michael Soroka as a neat little buy-low type, there were obviously bigger fish in the water that were ultimately passed on—despite the Cubs' unique situation, in being both a team of needs and means to acquire. Why is that? Almost assuredly, it's because Hoyer felt the value proposition of trading the prospects required outweighed the return. The deadline is a pressure cooker by nature, made only more intense with the expanded playoff system. Nowadays, more teams are in the thick of the chase and fewer teams are obvious sellers. It creates an even more difficult dynamic; it's almost always going to be a seller's market. It forces those who aren't obviously selling to decide if they truly have the guts to go for it—if they can stomach the price of admission to the playoffs and potentially, the World Series. While pragmatism may win the day as a seller (the Cubs came away with Pete Crow-Armstrong and Kevin Alcántara for rental hitters in 2021 under Hoyer), it makes life very difficult for the buyer, because it requires the pragmatist to go beyond their beliefs many times to make the big swing occur. If you want to truly make your team better, you have to be a bit irrational. On one hand, none of the exciting, controllable starting pitching was traded today, and if you want to suggest that prices were just too high, that's entirely your prerogative. Hell, Hoyer said as much in his press conference. It is true that MacKenzie Gore, Joe Ryan, Edward Cabrera, and even Sandy Alcantara all remained with their organizations. The Cubs were asked for Matt Shaw and/or Cade Horton in specific trades, which sounds egregious. You can also point to Dylan Cease, potentially the best rental who was tenuously available, not being traded, if you so will. But regardless of these players not being traded, there remained the potential for each to have been traded, had the Cubs been just a bit more irrational than the rest. Would it have required the Cubs paying a premium? Probably, but the Cubs could have afforded that premium, if we are being honest with ourselves. As it stands, the Cubs kept many prospects who have no clear path to a big-league role. Even if they do not retain Kyle Tucker in the offseason, there would be only one starting position obviously available for the quartet of Owen Caissie, Moisás Ballesteros, Jonathon Long and Alcántara. That's too many names, all of whom will be ready for the next step in their development. If the Cubs re-sign Tucker, well, it's even harder to figure out where they will all go. I understand not wanting to gut the system, but prospects have depreciating value. Is Caissie ever going to have more value than he did today? What could he possibly do between now and December to raise that profile? It's probable that any one of these names will have less value moving forward than they did today, so while the cost of acquisition may be high now, if each prospect is less valuable, are you really saving anything? What Hoyer needed to do at this deadline was become just a little irrational. Sure, $7 is $7, but it's raining outside, Jed, and you're really tired. Let someone bring you the pizza this one time. Splurge a little. I can hear Donna Meagle and Tom Haverford from the great sitcom Parks and Recreation, screaming at Hoyer to "Treat Yo'self!" Would a controllable starting pitcher have cost 15-20% more than they should? Maybe it would have, and yes, that would be (on paper) a "bad" trade from a value standpoint, but you pay that premium now and you worry about that overage in a few years. I'm not asking Hoyer to become A.J. Preller (who, in this instance, is likely ordering DoorDash at peak hours from McDonald's, despite living literally right next to the establishment), but only to step out of his shell once or twice and be just a little irrational. Ultimately, I don't think the deadline was a disaster. Each individual trade was fine. The Cubs didn't get taken to the woodshed in valuation by the Twins, the Pirates, the Nationals or the Orioles. But they also didn't address their most glaring need, which was to lift the ceiling by improving the front end of the rotation. Instead of having a Ryan or a Cabrera, the Cubs will hope that Soroka will be better the third time through the lineup, and that there are no more injuries of consequence. They will continue to lean on Colin Rea and need to hope that Jameson Taillon comes back healthy and ready to go right away. Being a little irrational would have solved that issue. Had the Cubs gone too far, even if it was an "overpay" by some dumb model like Baseball Trade Values, that irrationality would still have provided the 2025 Cubs (and beyond, considering the pitcher was controllable) a better foundation to make the playoffs and continue to win baseball games. They would have paid too hefty a price on paper, but also would be a better baseball team—now and, probably, over the next few years. The Cubs draft fairly well; they develop players fairly well. It's possible they would have replaced that added fee on their own. The Padres and Dodgers live on this mantra, with an unfettered confidence that they will just recreate what they sell. Perhaps the Cubs should believe in themselves just a little more this way, too. This was Hoyer's trade deadline, for better or worse, and for better or worse, this is who Hoyer is. He will never be the guy to get egg on his face at the deadline, but he's unlikely to ever be the guy who makes it (whatever it is at that specific time) happen. This is who he is, and will continue to be; it's both a blessing and a curse. So while I may not hate anything he did individually, this deadline feels like a missed opportunity. Hoyer will tell us that the prices were too high (in fact, he already has), and I'll probably believe him. They probably were too high, from a pure value standpoint. But sometimes, it's just nice to have a delivery pizza, and I wish Hoyer was willing to treat himself to a Gore or a Ryan. Just once. What did you think of the Cubs deadline in 2025? Do you think the Cubs will be able to hold up the rest of the year? Should they have spent more for a controlled starter? Let us know in the comment section below. View full article

We are sincerely glad to have you. Thanks for being apart of it! I like a lot of our prospects as well. My background has been in young player and minor league prospects, so I understand the love of our young guys. It's hard to give up the future in some ways; prospects can be whatever our mind sees. Ballesteros is the next top-5 catcher in baseball, hitting .320 with 20 home runs. Owen Caissie is Kyle Schwarber who plays RF competently. Jaxon Wiggins is throwing 100mph and leading a rotation. But our minds deceive us with tantalizing ifs and buts, when the reality almost assuredly falls short. Most of these prospects will fail to become our perception. Keeping them all will ensure we keep all of the good ones, but also, will force us to play all of the those who take 800 PA's and never materialize. At some point, swapping some future assets for current ones, is better. Before you're left with the whole bag and you wish you would have gotten a little more defined assets out of it.

Welcome to NSBB! It works for AJ Preller. And while I don't think Hoyer needs to become Preller, I'm not giving him a pass simply because "it was expensive". I'm sure it was expensive. But at some point, you either pay the price of admission or you just waste your bullets to a degree. And the Cubs are bordering on the latter. They are now almost assuredly in a place where they *have* to trade some of these guys in December or they will really be at a "what are you doing with these guys?" point - their value will be going down and it's unlikely that pitchers will be any cheaper.

I'm not worried about reading much into it. Jed Hoyer lives in a world of black and white valuation. This will apply for Tucker and Caissie. It means that I don't think this has much to do with Tucker in and of itself, but at the same time, it also means Jed will draw a line in the sand and likely won't jump it in December.

Yeah, he's a dude. I hope he gets going too. As much as today was kind of a bummer, the Cubs can still make a fun year. I'm hoping that's the case.

I'm sure Adrian Hauser is a nice guy, but frankly. glad that didn't happen at this stage. Let's say it was like a Will Sanders going back the other way. I don't think Hauser really changes the math for the 2025 Cubs at this point and I'd rather just have Sanders, even if I think he's like a Colin Rea or an Adrian Hauser later on in his career.

He doesn't need to do much more. If his season ended today, it would be his second best offensive season per wRC+ ever. He's half a win away from his best season ever. Tucker's been a dude this year. He's basically got to avoid a season ending injury for this to be the best full season of Kyle Tucker ever.

I think every team has their own unique rankings. Think like how BA and BP and FG can range wildly sometimes. Now make it...30 different rankings. I think most people have the same few top prospects in the same area, but once you get to 15-75 you probably start to see a pretty wide difference. Beyond that? I'd gues it's wild west. One man's trash is another's treasure. Good example is Estuary Ruiz. He was a fringe-top-100 type but the A's traded Sean Murphy, almost exclusively, for him. To get that value they basically had to internally see him as a top-25 type. It has not worked out.

Probably between $400m-$500m. His slump is still a good player and he'll probably go bananas for a bit and we'll all forget this.

It probably was unreasonably high. But at some stage, you either go unreasonably high or you're left where the Cubs are today where they're probably still one player short - a place the Cubs have been since probably February. At the same time, how much are prices going to drop on controlled SP in December? The prices were deemed to high by the Cubs last offseason, nothing suggests they'll drop this year. Beyond that, when are Caissie, Long and Ballesteros' ever going to have higher value than now? If they have anything close to even one bad month, even with a drop in price, you probably give back in devalued assets. I think any trade would have probably sucked. It would have failed a BBTV evaluation. But sometimes, that's the only way you get better. I wouldn't argue this way for a rental, but when you control the player for 2+ years still, it's a lot easier to live with a 20% overpay.

I think the Cubs will make an offer to Tucker that is reasonable. As always with Hoyer, we should expect him to go to what he deems reasonable, but the moment it goes beyond that, probably fair to worry if he would become irrational enough to make it happen. I hope he does. I think he's worth it. But with Jed, it's always a question.

I agree with the last sentiment. My guess goes back to the good and the bad of Hoyer - you will probably never get a truly horrendous bad trade from Jed. You'll probably never get the slightly irrationally big trade you need to make to get *your* dude.

Absolutely. Good trades generally hurt a bit, and the Tucker trade hurt a bit in future value. I hope they resign him, however.

I do not believe that is a horrible value trade in any way. I think fans both overvalue what Smith was as a prospect at the time (and even now as an MLB player) and undervalue how expensive Tucker, even at one year, is. That trade is probably bang on how I would value both what was lost, and what was gotten.

I think it's more that Jed is who Jed is? He's very black and white on value. He won't pay a penny over what he feels is fair. And that means we will be very unlikely to lose a trade in a horrible fashion but it's very unlikely that the team will ever make a big move come the deadline. Jed would rather not make a move than budge on his value, for good or bad.

I just wrote a big article on this, kind of really fleshing out my ideas, and I do think Jed has a small point here - he's right, not one of those guys was moved. At the same time, the Cubs were in a unique position to likely bully one team into moving one of this players. Would the cost have been a lot? Sure thing. Would it have failed a BBTV mode? I bet you it would have. But sometimes you pay a little bit over a price to ensure youre the team with the thing, and the Cubs didn't do that. I'll concede that maybe every team with a controllable SP had such astronomical prices that it wouldn't have ever been feasible, but with the amount out there...I feel like they probably could have gotten one if we were willing to pay a price above what felt rational (that remained short of astronomical).

Listen folks, I drive down the road to get Big Kahuna Burger (yes, it's real, and yes it's a tasty burger) because it's one light away from my house too. But damnit, I ordered a pizza the other night and I paid that delivery fee. Jed needs to be more like me. (that said he did trade for Soroka...)

So my thoughts, just to get them on paper (or internet paper) on the deadline: In a vacuum, I really have no issues with any trade the Cubs made. You can quibble on a prospect here or there, but the highest-ranked prospect traded profiles like a backup, and your best upside is a kid who isn't even-18, so he'll almost assuredly fizzle out. The Cubs got a perfect bench bat in Castro, an undervalued SP in Soroka, and two arms to help the bullpen. The Cubs are unquestionably better than when we last saw them. But...I think this is a failure of a deadline from Jed Hoyer. His best asset as a leader is that he holds strong to his valuations of players. I love that about him. It's why I liked every trade above; the Cubs didn't get fleeced once - they really don't get fleeced. Maybe you don't love a trade but they never get fleeced. But it's that same pigheaded valuation that means you never get irrational for needs. Jed Hoyer is a fine VP of Baseball Ops. He put together this roster, and the Cubs look like a team who can make the playoffs. They're better than yesterday. But sometimes you need to pay 15% more than you should just to have it and Jed's undying loyalty to the value means that while he won't get fleeced, he won't go big. One of our other writers, put it best in our slack today. "Jed always picks up his pizza, he never orders delivery" and I think that's the best analogy I've ever heard for Hoyer. He will never pay the delivery fee, he'll never pay for a tip if he can just drive seven minutes down the road and get it from Dominoes. I don't think he needs to Door Dash McDonalds every night like AJ Preller probably would, but sometime, he needs to treat himself.

There is nothing more coming. They're done.

I wrote a whole ass article on him! And I'm not happy.

Yeah. This is unacceptable.

Just because we haven't heard doesn't mean they haven't told the league.

But the Yankees could give them Spencer Jones for Skenes. Heyman told me.

I'm 100% okay with the Castro trade. Armstrong was Gallagher a year ago. Gallagher is a popup. I'm fine.