Jason Ross

I'm rooting for chaos at the top. Washington should go off the board and the Angels can take Anderson and immediately announce he's starting on Friday (in the most Angels move ever),

Neyens would be a major departure from how they draft. Prep power hitter who looks more like a 1b isn't their norm in the last half-decade at the top of the draft. It is really interesting.

Love the Shannon pick, for two reasons. One, takes away a UoL commit and two he is from my former (a long 20 years former) HS.

There would have been zero reason for them not to send him back on Friday if they were sending him back. By waiting, it extends the time they would need to wait for him to return. That makes no sense. This is trending much more like what I suggested on Friday; a three-day off series, plus the ASB to work on implementing a new mechanical tweak or approach change before he comes back post-ASB. If they wanted him to work in Iowa, they'd have sent him there a few days ago.

They'll take some college pitchers and hitters in rounds 5-10, and then mostly from 12-20. But the reason you underslot at #1 is to get overslot preps. I'm not sure there is anyone in the 3rd round you'd go that overslot for that you'd under at #17. Conrad, on Zumach's mock (and Zumach is plugged in) would save around $750K. You spend that almost immediately on #56 (akin to Horton/Ferris). Doyle spoke to the number of prep hitters and pitchers he expects to forgo college this year and the Cubs are a "zig when everyone else is zagging" kind of drafter; going under at 17 would allow them to scoop up some extra prep players in that light. The Cubs have shown that they have full-scale draft "themes" but never draft for need, so I would be surprised if they went into today with any sort of thought that the draft was going to solve the roster cliff post-2026. That's just 1.5 years in MiLB and the only players they have seen rocket through a system like that are Smith (who they traded) and Shaw who I like a bunch, but has struggled.

Zumach mocks Ethan Conrad. Personal feeling is swaying that whomever the Cubs pick (and I think Conrad makes a lot of sense) will be underslot with the goal to overslot prep players in rounds 2-4 and then again with their "11th round special" every season. Perhaps with an eye to the amount of talent that will be lost in the next 2-3 weeks, taking Conrad (who could have been a top-10/15 pick had he remained healthy) and 3-4 upside prep guys would conceivably restock a bunch of what you lose from a pure ceiling perspective.

Good catch on Long. Dive into the batted ball and statcast data suggests that it's an improvement on in-zone contact%. His o-swing tends to have peaks and valleys, and his swing% seems consistent, but Z-contact% has been on an upwards trend (coupled with a downward trend in overall whiff%) for about 150 PA's.

A fair point! However, I do want to point something out which makes this a little difficult to see, this is a sample size of just 10 hitters. Striking out this much in general is a rare feat at the MLB level. Within that, however, I'll frame it a slightly different way: Between 2023 and 2024, ten qualified hitters struck out 28% (or more) of the time. Four of those were under 100 wRC+ but includes Ryan McMahon and Brenton Doyle, both of whom are defensive wizards and their offensive contributions are not really the primary reason they enter the lineup on a night-by-night basis. Three were above 110 wRC+, but Luis Robert and Eugenio Suarez were right at 110 and Elly De La Cruz was at 106 wRC+, meaning of those ten, six had wRC+ of 110 or better, and two of those who didn't aren't there for their bats, anyways. While I agree, it's not a normal profile, I do think Caissie has more in common with the likes of Kyle Schwarber, Kyle Stowers, and Teoscar Hernandez than he does, say, Brenton Doyle or Ryan McMahon (not to say he's going to be those guys, but he's not a defensive wizard like Doyle and his profile fits those types much more). In that same 10 hitter sample size over 2023-2024, a big differentiator was home run power. If you hit 50+ combined home runs over the course of those two years, you were basically fine. Even Langoliers hit 52 and sat at a 98 wRC+. Now, I think that's a bit of a unique case, as he's a catcher and gets more leeway, so I think that's okay to point out too. Owen Caissie at 98 wRC+ probably isn't good enough! Just to parse that out a little more, if we drop to the very high 27% K% range, we add three more hitters, Tovar, Raleigh and Garcia. Tovar had an 87 wRC, the other two over 110 or above. Again, one of them didn't hit a bunch of home runs and two of them did. I'm sure it's obvious who just based on the names. So I think the answer to the Caissie question is two-fold. It's first, can the contact rate sit around the 28-32% range? If yes, that's likely going to keep the strikeouts in check just enough that you can survive. Above that and it becomes untenable, regardless of the second concern. Secondly, is he going to hit 25-30 home runs a season with that K-rate? Because if he is, he's much more likely a 110-115 wRC+ hitter (perhaps some peaks and valleys mixed in) as most players who strike out that much, are able to make that level with home runs offsetting it. If he isn't going to get to the power and hit a bunch of bombs, than the strikeout rate will likely eat him alive.

I feel like Conrad could be a sneaky fun underslot. Had clear 1st round grades before his injury. Has CF upside. He would be a bit riskier based on position and some of his aggressive swings, but I think the real strength of this draft is prep mid-rounds. Been talk from Joe Doyle that freshman have bigger reasons than ever to sign and go-pro. Conrad+extra overslots could be a creative way to add a lot of upside into a system that will have (likely) lost a good deal of talent by August. This is starting to feel a bit like the 2022 Horton./Ferris draft where the smoke started to billow towards underslotting.

This is why we have things like wRC+! It creates a neutral playing field between steroid era and everything. Bonds last four seasons of his career: 232 wRC+ Judge last two seasons: 218 wRC+ So, it's definitely in favor of Bonds, but it's not like, that crazy either! For example Bonds 2003 line looks like: .321/.524/.749, but was a 212 wRC+. Judge's last two seasons have both been (when a neutral environment is involved) better! It's easily the closest we've seen to Prime Bonds since Prime Bonds.

Fastball-slider-splitter mix. Stuff+ has the slider as his best offering. Generated great whiff in Iowa, but is 31. Sits 93-95mph on the fastball. Nothing special, but should eat a few innings and you'd be able to DFA him without much concern if it doesn't work.

He didn't throw a single changeup in his last appearance. What he's doing on the side and what he is doing in a game, however, are not mutually exclusive, though. It was his first Iowa appearance for two weeks since sent down. Likely just working back int things.

Wicks to Iowa, Brooks Kriske has been selected and added to the 40.

My guess is that Shaw will sit tomorrow too. A full week reset. Have a keen eye next week after the ASB and see what's new with his swing. Guarantee there will be another change.

Yeah, with any prospect you'll have questions. Caissie's contact ability at higher levels is a question. I do think that the first few hundred PA's could look rather ugly. But do think after a decent learning curve, he will setting into a 28-32% K% hitter, and at that range, the batted ball quality and power would be able to carry him through as a good hitter regardless. But once it creeps over that, you're far more questionable.

FWIW, I've got Caissie #1, with Rojas and Wiggins nipping at his heels at #2. I'm a bigger believer in Caissie than others and want to see small things from Rojas (production at a new level, this isn't particularly his fault right now, the Cubs are on a promotion freeze) and Wiggins (more innings, a little progress in non-fastballs) before I give them a bump over him. With that said, I don't think any way you could possible rank Ballesteros, Caissie, Rojas and Wiggins is wrong. Like, if you had Triantos #1, I'd have some questions, but between those four, it's pretty clearly "when you squint, what do you see?" and if you see a catcher in Ballesteros, a 120 wRC+ SS in Rojas, a 135 wRC+ RF in Caissie or a TORP in Wiggins, then I can't say that's a ridiculous thing to squint and see.

Regardless of who you think the best prospect in the system is, Rojas, Wiggins, Caissie or Ballesteros, it's cool to have this kind of talent that we can have those debates on. And it isn't like we're debating between who is the tallest short-king, but instead, looking at four prospects who all have legitimate MLB big-time upside. Now, I think the next two-to-three-weeks will cull the herd in some fashion, but a good problem and debate to have for the time being.

Wonder if Shaw takes the entire Yankees series off, then gets ASB as well, to reset and work on another mechanical thing.

Handedness is a luxury, IMO. Gore is so good that if you can get Gore, you just do it and worry about having three lefties, or four of 'em next year, later.

Probably where I am at. The more I dig into Kayson Cunningham, I'd be pretty excited if he could find his way to 17. Most of the mocks feel like he's going to go before us, but he's got a really fun profile. At this point I'm kind of sitting at a group of like: Kyson Witherspoon, Gage Wood, Kayson Cunningham, Steel Hall, Wehwa Aloy, Daniel Pierce as my group of "dudes". Less excited about Bremmer than some others, but he'd probably be cool too. Would rather pass on Summerhill, Houston and Kilen, though if push comes to shove you an probably get me into the pick.

Lumpuy has always jumped off the screen for me even when the numbers were bad. There's some electricity in him. I had him on my initial top-20 of the year but convinced myself to drop him on the most recent one.

Mike Soroka was named in a Athletic piece by Mooney and Sharma and I really like that name. The ERA looks bad, but the Savant page tells a different story; he's lowered his arm angle, increased his walk rate (positively), added a MPH and some glove side run on the fastball. xFIP and xERA really like him. Added a cutter. His LOB% is comically low pitching in front of the worse defense in baseball. Couple him with Cabrera. Expiring contract, should be cheap to acquire.

I'll leave this here, because it doesn't feel like it warrants a different thread. But today in the Athletic, Mooney and Sharma mentioned bats and how the Cubs will look for help at the deadline (there was plenty of pitching nuggets, but that doesn't belong here). They mentioned a few names, Willi Castro and Rob Refsnyder as two specifically. They mentioned that it would be more about versatility, and it didn't seem like they were looking to pigeon hole themselves into "starting 3b" (much the chagrin of some folks, I'm sure) or "RHP who mashes LHP" (though both names above fit that category). Does seem like they'll prioritize the bench more than upset the applecart on the starting lineup as much.

Image courtesy of © Mitch Stringer-Imagn Images It's no secret that the Cubs need starting pitching depth between today and the trade deadline. I also think it's no secret that they will acquire starting pitching. Jim Bowden of the Athletic claims that the Cubs are "all-in", and the hope of many Cub fans (myself included) is that the team acquires some top-end starting pitching talent—perhaps the Marlins' Edward Cabrera, for example. However, with a recent injury to Jameson Taillon and Cade Horton's impending innings limit, the Cubs could probably stand to acquire two pitchers. Enter: Orioles starting pitcher, Charlie Morton. Let's get to the elephant in the room: his 5.47 ERA is ugly. But I'm going to ask you to bear with me for a few moments and set the ERA to the side, because I think Morton has some gas left in the tank. While it can be bad form to stake an argument to numbers defined by arbitrary end points, Morton has essentially had two seasons within 2025—one terrible, and one excellent. Over Morton's first 36 2/3 innings, the right-handed pitcher had a disgusting ERA that sat over 8.00, struck out under 20% of hitters, and walked a whopping 12.8% of those he faced. This is very much un-Morton-like; he's had just one season where he walked even 10% of hitters since his revolution in Houston back in 2016. It was looking pretty ugly for the pitcher early in 2025. Morton's numbers made him look washed. It would be fair, at this stage of the 41-year-old's career, to think that this is Father Time coming for yet another player, but there was some hope left. Morton's fastball velocity hadn't fallen off a cliff entirely, with his average heater sitting at 93.9 mph (last year, he was at 94.3) while showing pretty similar Stuff+ to his career lines. Maybe something could get fixed, and he could find some footing. Something seemed to click on May 17, however, because since then, he's been significantly better. Since then, in a sample size over 40 innings pitched (and six starts), he has posted a 2.88 ERA. While this kind of drastic improvement could suggest Morton has just been the recipient of positive luck or variance, I don't think the rest of his data supports that conclusion. Looking beyond his ERA improvement, we can see that his xFIP is 3.19 in that span, and goes along with a .349 opponent BABIP. As well, his strikeout rate has shot up to over 28% and his walk rate has dropped below 7%. Even better, Morton's average fastball velocity has jumped over 0.5 mph, as his average velocity now sits at 94.5 mph. He's not merely the beneficiary of good sequencing, stranding lots of runners, or great defensive support—signs we'd expect if a pitcher was just getting lucky. Maybe Morton's still fighting off Father Time, after all. To determine further whether or not Morton has rebounded, diagnosing the fix can help us decide whether we believe it or not. I think the issue for Morton was that he was getting himself in bad counts, thus making him fairly easy to hit. Looking back at Morton's Stuff+ chart, it's obvious based on pitch shape that his best pitch is his curveball. It shouldn't surprise us, then, that it's also his best whiff-inducing pitch, as well as his best put-away pitch. Comparatively, Morton's fastball is quite hittable, as hitters have a .534 SLG against this pitch on the year, compared to a .385 on the curve. Therefore, it's easy to conclude: more curveballs are good for Mr. Morton. The problem? Morton wasn't throwing enough strikes early in the count, and thus, HE was leaning heavily on the fastball. Look, here, then, at how Morton's in-zone% seems to work hand-in-hand with two things: more curveballs and fewer fastballs. The goal for Morton is clear: get ahead in the count. Between Opening Day and his appearance against Minnesota on May 14, Charlie threw a strike on just 55.3% of hitters he faced. This is around 4-5% lower than Morton is used to getting, putting him behind in the count and forcing him to rely more on the fastball. He had one start, specifically against the Cincinnati Reds, where he seemed to bottom out, getting behind two out of every three hitters, giving up seven runs, and walking four, compared to just two strikeouts. That day, he didn't even last three full innings. He came back the next game and got blasted by the Tigers, once again struggling to find strikes. Things have looked up since then, however. Since re-joining the Baltimore rotation, Morton's first-strike% has jumped from just 55% to over 64%. Below is a chart highlighting Morton's swing-and-miss% by game. Take special notice of how Morton's whiffage was oscillating widely at the start of the year, as Morton's first-pitch-strike% struggled. Beginning May 17, however, things began to stabilize for the righty, as his swing-and-miss has been significantly better. To put the visualization into raw data, before May 17, Morton's swing-and-miss% was 9.3%. Since then, it's jumped to 16.5%. So what caused the swing-and-miss to jump? Pitch usage! Remember, Morton is more likely to use the fastball when behind, and through the first portion of the season (when his first-pitch-strike% was low) his fastball usage was over 34% and his curve usage was also 34%. This was a large departure from last year, when his curve usage was over 40% and his fastball usage was under 30%. But starting May 17, which coincides with an increase in first-pitch strikes, Morton's fastball usage has dipped to 27.2% (last year, it was 28.6%) and his curve soared to 42.5% (last year, he threw the curve 42.4% of the time). Go figure: when Morton has the ability to get to his best pitch more often, the results seem to follow. Before we decide that Morton is 100% fixed, I will point out that Morton hasn't been entirely challenged over this recent 40-inning sample. He has only faced one top-10 offense in that span, according to wRC+, the Tampa Bay Rays—though it's fair to point out that the pitcher went six strong, striking out seven, walking none, surrendering only two hits and one run on that occasion. He's also had the benefit of seeing the Rangers, Angels and White Sox over that span, so if you'd like to remain a bit skeptical that prime Charlie Morton isn't entirely back, that's probably okay. The great news for the Cubs is that Morton shouldn't cost much. At age 41, teams are likely to remain skeptical. The Orioles are starting their selling already, trading reliever Bryan Baker to Tampa on Thursday. They don't have the leverage of pretending they're contenders. This shouldn't be the only trade the Cubs make, even for the rotation. (Please, Chicago, I implore you to go save Edward Cabrera from the depths of Miami.) Still, I think Morton is a wonderful secondary addition. Shota Imanaga's been worse than his top-line numbers suggest. Matthew Boyd has been amazing, but the concern of him slowing down has to remain in the back of your head, Horton is going to be limited at some point. Taillon's return date will be at least a fortnight past the trade deadline, so go get a second starter. If the Cubs want to be all-in, I'm not sure there's a better secondary pitching target than Morton. What do you think of Charlie Morton? Do you buy his recent 6 starts as indicative of the rest of his 2025 season? Do you like someone else? Let us know in the comment section below! View full article