Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Jason Ross

North Side Contributor
  • Posts

    6,720
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    50

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Jason Ross

  1. Except that Bello has huge R/L splits and Shaw has yet to show aptitude against sinkers, Bello's most frequent pitch. There is clear reason that is beyond a trade.
  2. Bryan Bello has significant splits against LHH. He walks LHH 2x more than RHH (114% vs 5.6%) and has a 4.71 xFIP against LHH where as RHH, he has a 3.67 xFIP. This checks out as his two most used pitches are his sinker and his sweeper and these pitches have significant splits against opposite-handed hitters Matt Shaw hasn't hit well enough on the year to be penciled in against a pitcher with heavy splits. It is why Reese McGuire is drawing in on a night game after a day game. Carson Kelly could handle this one, but they went with a LHH heavy lineup. The Cubs are forcing Bello off his two best pitches, or, are forcing him to use them in incredibly disadvantageous situations. As well, Imanaga is a heavy FB% pitcher. 3b defense less needed. So Shaw is a good defender and RHH. Best to sit him, even if Brujan sucks. It's more than just Shaw, it's that one of them is lefty and they're playing the numbers.
  3. Was just about to come here and say that. With his arm slot being where it is, his fastball siting at 90-92 probably has significant movement to it. It looks like it's more of a traditional "two-seam" fastball with glove side run. With the movement on his sweeper, my guess, especially at MB, is that his fastball's shape is solid and creates a really hard decision point for young players because the two pitches are breaking away from each other; one down-and-away from a RHH and the other looks like it should sweep away from them due to how he has a low slot (like the sweeper) but has a bump back into them the other way late enough that they can't adjust. When I look at the swing decisions from the highlight video, specially from the RHH'ers, they are looking off the plate, each time convinced that fastball is outside. My guess is they read "sweeper" based on arm-slot and the pitch ran back to the outside of the plate and surprised them. I really like where he's throwing that fastball. His sweeper placement on a strikeout to a LHH was...I think very much the result of Low-A. Upper level hitters should bang that pitch (2nd strikeout). If he can't add a few MPH to the fastball, RHH middle reliever might be the ultimate route. Get the fastball up to 92-94 and his two-seam is probably just enough to run away from LHH in a pinch, but that Jose Cuas comp stylistically matches up with his current profile!
  4. Yeah, I mean, this is the reason why someone like Isaac Parades is built specifically for Tropicana and Daikon Park (formerly Minute Maid. Apparently, he's got...the juice at these parks. Heh. Heh...I'll see my way out). He has pretty weak EV but extremely high pull rate and flyball rate. Cody Bellinger is similar. Pulling the ball can hide weak contact. It's why teams try to get kids to pull the ball more. Now, I don't think that's a reason to ignore xData in any way shape or form; there are statistical outliers among any data, it's knowing the data. Kyle Hendricks was a FIP-beater; if you don't walk hitters and get a lot of ground balls, you can have a better ERA than your xERA or xFIP. It's why we don't use data as silver bullets and instead, use a lot of data to explain a hitter. I like the idea of adding direction to xData, it's a good thing, but I also think when we discuss hitters, it's important to bring up lots of data points regardless, which helps to limit the concept of xData beaters. Much like we can find the Kyle Hendricks of the world, and have for the better part of a decade been able to identify a skillset of pitchers who typically keep their ERA above their xFIP, we can do the same with hitters (and to behonest, have been for a bit). When it pertains to Matt Shaw, notice where his footing is today versus where it was, say, a week ago. I noticed it yesterday. I mentioned back on Friday as the lineup was shown for Yankees series that I suspected we would see two things: 1. Matt Shaw would sit the entire Yankees series 2. We would see him pop back up in the lineup directly after the ASB with something new to diagnose. Not to pat myself on the back too hard, but outside of a PH attempt on Sunday, kind of nailed both. It was a hunch but based on how the Cubs like to do these things, had a pretty good feeling on that hunch. I'll leave the updates to Shaw below in a spoiler so if you want to challenge yourself to notice what I did, you can play along! Or if you already noticed it/just want to discuss it, peep it below:
  5. Not at Knoxville. Id expect he plays plenty at SS. Part of why he played 2b or non-SS in SB was because Hernandez is there too and they split the time.
  6. I've wondered that, if deep down, he feels a little cheated by that. But as well, you have as rough of a start as he had to the year at times, it wasn't like it wasn't without cause. From an outsider perspective.
  7. Dude, the baseball world is so huge now a days, there's no shame. Dorks like me know who Lance is because when I'm bored I want to learn about the difference between observed movement and induced movement.
  8. I 'm not sure if it was posted back in the draft thread, but if not, Hartshorn was intereviewed after the draft. When asked about the Cubs and the process, he basically said that "he had a number" and it was the Cubs who called and gave him his number. Had teams in higher rounds but they wouldn't meet it. (Which, an aside, dig how candid he was! Great attitude in general) I'd guess he's getting a good number, yes.
  9. I'm really a big fan of his. If you're ever bored, his Youtube Channel will make you feel really smart by the end. I've learned a lot about the real data behind pitching; movement profiles, spin and seam-shifted wake. It's awesome stuff.
  10. xBA of .520, .520 and .310 with two swings over 97mph. New mechanics. Changed his front foot placement.
  11. Nope! You can be awarded a hit on a catchers interference as the hitter gets the choice of either 1b or the result of the PA. If the batter instead choices 1b, it does not count as a PA or impact OBP.
  12. Probably one of the absolute best baseball minds around. He works with Marquee and does MLB.com Pipeline stuff. His YouTube channel might be next to Foolish Bailey as the two best baseball channels. Period. He focuses a lot on prospects but mainly pitching and pitching development. A team will one day hire him and they will be better for it. Lance is the horsefeathers.
  13. New mechanics. Front foot is slightly open instead of closed off. Hands seemed a bit higher.
  14. I think the Cubs are going to move OF'ers but I don't think the Ethan Conrad selection has anything to do with it. He won't make a debut in the system until 2026 due to his shoulder injury and likely isn't going to have an ETA until deep in 2027 if everything goes really fast. He won't likely replace any talent in Iowa and the Cubs still have somewhat interesting OF prospects around. He was just the best on the board. Things shift greatly in MiLB terms, so the Cubs wouldn't be shortsighted enough to draft for need in such a defined way.
  15. The Cubs are likely to use Horton in the BP and have roster cliffs after 2026. Horton, even if not in the "rotation" will likely play an important role. Teams don't usually trade from their MLB roster, and Horton is probably among the least likely to be traded in the entire organization who's trade likelihood is above 0. I wouldn't even overly concern myself with the thought. If we saw exhaustion in a pitcher, we would expect to see some combination of loss of velo, loss of mechanics (either because they're tired and getting involuntarily "lazy" or to overthrow to compensate for lack of velo), loss of control, loss of pitch shape. I'm sure the Cubs are monitoring those things between now and end of 2026. Is he any more or less likely to regress? That's the rub, ain't it. But here's the thing that is counterintuitive to our understanding of pitchers and their fear of TJS or arm injury; pitchers, not hitters are aging more gracefully league wide. There are more pitchers aged 35+ having success than hitters. You always have the "one pitch away" fear with an arm, and Boyd has not been the picture of health. That said, if the TJS was the root cause. and that's taken care of, he may be less likely to regress as the rate of recidivism on TJS usually jumps around 6+ years out, so there's reason both way to believe he could be risky and reasons to believe he wouldn't be. Would I expect the Cubs to extend a 35+ year old Matthew Boyd post-2026? No, I wouldn't. The Cubs under Hoyer tend to target mid-rotation arms that don't pop on paper or excitement and like to get an undervalued arm based on the rest of the league. Boyd, if he repeats or comes close to repeating 2024, would be anything but; max-value Boyd. The Cubs are more likely to try to find the next Boyd than to resign the Boyd, if that makes sense.
  16. I would guess that while anything is "non-zero" Cade Horton being in a trade feels extremely unlikely. Teams who are in the middle of pennant races rarely trade from their MLB roster as it is taking one step backwards to gain two. I would suspect Ben Brown (who is in Triple-A) or Jaxon Wiggins (who I feel is already an unlikely addition but might go in a big-type trade) are much more likely.
  17. Yeah, his profile isn't my favorite either. I think what it comes down to is that it's just hard to dream on those guys. Like if Kepley was Kepley but was, 6"1? You could dream on something. But his size and age just means this is who he is, and you've got to really believe in it to love it. I made some comments prior about how Nico Hoerner on draft day wasn't overly exciting and wasn't my favorite pick, too. Over half a decade later, and it's clear he's a major win and among the best picks in the entire draft. Kepley kind of has that ability, too. Less likely to get there; if he was, he'd have been drafted higher, ranked higher, and given more slot than he'll get, but there's a not-so-crazy world in three years where Kepley is starting in CF for someone, has a 95 wRC+ and is a plus-defender in CF and on the bases and everyone goes "man, he's pretty damn good!" (either that or whatever team he's starting for is trying to trade him every offseason like they do Hoerner. Nothing in between)
  18. This is a feature, and not a bug. Many times we associate not striking out with contact in the zone, but the top three players least likely to strike out swing at a very high% of pitches out of the zone compared to league average. Why? Because a great way to avoid strikeouts is to be able to make a load of contact on chase pitches. Most hitters, when chasing out of the zone swing and miss. These guys, make contact. Easy way to not strike out is to hit the ball in play (though far easier said than done). Beyond that Hoerner is an above average hitter (by 2% this year, and 1% over his career) and well above average for his position. His BA with RISP and his base running don't factor into that. He's just a better hitter than people realize.
  19. The Kansas City Royals, who have an 11% chance to make the playoffs just bought Adam "replacement player" Frazier with the belief he could help them win. They gave up an overager who doesn't look like much of a prospect at age 28, but he's crushing Triple-A, and wasn't nothing either. As much as we might think these teams should sell, the slim prospect of making the playoffs or having a strong two weeks is still enticing to teams.
  20. I will never grow sick of questions. Keep asking, my guy. Baseball is a community. Consider this "passing it on". I only learned because I asked questions and people two decades ago gave me a crash course. So, think of WAR as our best single-all-encompassing number, but don't think of it in absolutes. WAR in general is a great approximation, taking in tons of data points (offense, defense, ballpark, neutralizing for era, pitching, etc) and dumping it into an easy-to-digest number, like...four. On the surface, that's kind of insane. Sincerely, it's a revolutionary concept for a sport so inundated in different numbers to boil something down to a number (in almost every case) under 10, with just a single decimal point and it mean something. Like, when you think it of it, it's kind of insane. But because of that, it's prone to being somewhat inaccurate in terms of absolution. Anecdotally, Kyle Tucker has been worth 3.8 fWAR and Francisco Lindor, 3.6. Should we really concern ourselves over fractional aspects of a win? Nah, they're virtually the same value. Maybe your team needs a RF over a SS or whatever, but value-proposition wise? The same, essentially. No use debating it. When it comes to fWAR and run differential, etc, lots of things go into that. Strength of schedule can play a part (of which fWAR does not account for, because over the a 162 grind it's not really a factor in it) especially in partial seasons, sequencing plays a part of it, and a full-team aspect plays apart in it. For example, we can't just add all of the fWAR up on a team and say "well, their fWAR and their win totals are different so something here is fishy!" It's a cool way to project things out, but they have enough variabilities that they don't entirely equate. That said, they usually are close; for example, having the best run differential and the 3rd best fWAR makes sense. We rarely see a team leading in fWAR and then, say, 22nd in RD. That would raise some weird flags.
  21. DRS and OAA are our two biggest defensive metrics today. OAA uses MLB Statcast inputs to determine everything; EV, defensive positioning, closure rate, attack angle...you name it. DRS has human input in which using the Fielding Bible and historical defensive metrics and defensive results and they assign difficulty ratings, meaning it does have a human element to it. DRS is good and OAA is a bit better, though both are behind offensive metrics in reliability and age. I find both can get wonky on even a year-to-year basis with odd outliers here or there and there are times the two do not agree; Ian Happ a great example. DRS loves him. OAA feels hes kind of "meh". None of this wonkiness is enough to ignore or go elsewhere, just important to note when discussing them if we are to be comprehensive.
  22. Yes. At least. Even if a college kid makes his professional debut in 2 years, we can expect that they will struggle upon initial callup for a significant sample. Then, you probably don't want to make a decision on a player's entire career after one or two years of data; plenty of players have a good year and then never repeat it. Prep player's will take 4 years to realistically make a debut at age 22, and five to make a debut at 23. They factor into this as well. And thats if they arent a pitcher and dont have TJS and miss 1.5 years in the middle. We are only really able to start to look at the 2020 draft class and make determinations. If you looked in 2024, I doubt we would all say "yeah, Pete Crow Armstrong might be the best OFer in the entire draft!' A year later and its shaking out that way, but that is now five years on and as much as I love PCA, if he slides backwards on something (not the craziest concept) that could change again. Max Meyer looks pretty good, but is he better than, say, Jared Jones? I don't think we have enough data there. Best practice is that with more years we can make a more definitive assessment of what happened with development and asset usage. Today all we can say is "yeah, the draft felt different" but the fruits of it will continue to bared for years to come. I can squint and see the plan for someone like Dominick Reid but who knows what happens there. Or Hartshorn. Or Wing. Lots to go to see if this switch up is a positive one or not.
  23. Here's the thing about the MLB Draft: teams generally have a profile that you can bank on. The Los Angeles Angels will usually select someone who they feel will join their MLB roster within a year of the ink drying on their contract, and Tyler Bremner could be their next guy to do that. The Cleveland Guardians adore their high-strikeout, big-power outfielders, and lo-and-behold when Texas A&M product Jace Laviolette fell to them late in the first, they were the team to jump. The Cubs have some tendencies of their own under Dan Kantrovitz, they like college hitters who have Cape League experience at the top, and in taking Ethan Conrad, I thought they were well on their way to keeping up with norms as Conrad fits a typical Cub profile. By the second round, however, things felt a little different. Overall, this draft feels a bit different than how the Cubs operated prior. But therein lies a question: is change inherently negative? I won bury the lede here—I don't think different has to equate to bad. Sometimes, different is just, well, different. In other words, it's change. The 2025 draft, on the surface, was shaping up like a different year; NIL is a real thing for college hitters, the covid-bonus-years are running out, and the top talent of this draft felt like it was lagging behind in star power of the last few classes. Regardless, the Cubs definitely zigged where they had been zagging. For example, the Cubs have been pretty consistent in how they handle their second-round pick, taking a bit of a swing on prep players, or players with perceived high ceilings. Instead, this year they went with UNC outfielder Kane Kepley. Kepley, a very speedy, great baserunning, 70-grade defender in CF lacks game power to a point where it's safe to say he's got a very high likelihood to make an MLB roster some day, but probably doesn't provide enough value to start for a contending team. Between their recent second-round picks where the Cubs gambled on upside like Jaxon Wiggins (coming off Tommy John surgery) or Cole Mathis (also a TJS under his belt) Kepley feels like a departure in that regards. I don't dislike Kepley per se, but I do find him as a bit of a different pick from their normal second round type. Moving forward, a hallmark of Dan Kantrovitz drafts has been the high-upside 11th-round pick. For those who are a little confused at the structure of the MLB draft, the 11th round changes the game for teams in that in any round past the 10th, a team is not penalized from their draft pool allotment if they cannot secure a signature, which allows teams to take a larger swing because you can survive a miss. In past years the Cubs have selected prep hitters such as Zyhir Hope and Eli Lovich in this spot, upside kids who you can dream on. This year, the Cubs picked a pitcher who hasn't pitched in two years. Elijah Jerzembeck was a pretty highly regarded recruit to South Carolina a few years ago, but we haven't seen him take a mound for quite some time. Jaxon Wiggins hadn't pitched in a bit, himself, so there is recent history with injured arms, but this feels a bit different. Again, maybe not "bad", but it sticks out. Jerzembeck still has upside, but feels like quite the risk. There is a lot to like about his curveball and a fastball that was hitting 95mph at age-19, but it's been a while. Speaking of Jerzembeck and his injuries, a litany of Cubs 2025 draft picks are coming off of injury. First round pick Ethan Conrad (who I like a bunch!) missed most of the year with a shoulder injury, previously mentioned Elijah Jerzembeck hasn't thrown in two years, Kaemyn Franklin (Kohl's younger brother) just had his own TJS, and sixth round Josiah Hartshorn was rarely healthy over the last period of time, forcing the switch hitter to hit either hit just right or left handed (depending on his ailment) for stretches of time. On one hand, it's probably better if these kids rehab their injuries with an MLB organization and all of the resources they have, but it is a bit of an eyebrow raiser with the amount of players who are hurt. Perhaps this is a way to get in on the ground-floor of someone others are too afraid to pick, or maybe they will not pan out; only time will tell. I don't want to be a negative Nancy, however, as there are plenty of positives to find. First, I really like Ethan Conrad. In a draft that feels like it was lacking big-time talent, getting someone who could hit 20 home runs from the left side, has a real shot to stick in CF, and had some top-10 helium as recent as April already felt like a win. Add in that he's likely to sign under-slot? Huge win. Dominic Reid has a dominant change up that profiles similar to second-overall-pick Tyler Bremner, so if you believe in the Zombro-system, he could become an under-slot poor-mans version of a top-pick. The Cubs fourth and sixth-round picks of Kaleb Wing and Josiah Hartshorn have big time upside, with the former being someone who could legitimately top the upper-90's with some work and Hartshorn is a beast of a human at his age already. Even deep in the draft, 16th-round pick Riely Hunsaker, a pitcher from Lamar University, has history with Tread Athletics (Tyler Zombro's pitching developmental team), so you have to feel like the Cubs have some inside information. I really like all of these picks in a vacuum, so I'd caution all of us not to be too down on this draft. In the end, I can't quite help feeling like the Cubs went in a very different direction than we're used to seeing. Coming from a team that has had a lot of success drafting from 2021-2024, finding standouts at the top of the draft and later rounds, it feels like an odd departure. The pessimist in me would say something along the lines that perhaps their shift in scouting has affected things and that it feels quite bold to go away from what worked recently. That's only one view, as I would think that the optimist would say that best time to change your process isn't after it stops working, but before. Anecdotally, we've likely all seen the person who doesn't know when to stop gambling. "I can't stop when I'm ahead," they grumble, right before they lose it all on black. The best time to change, or to get out, isn't after you lose, it's before. With a shifting draft landscape, changing your style can pay dividends. You may feel differently than I do, and that's fair. Funny thing about the MLB draft is that none of us will know if we're right or wrong for over a half-decade, long enough that whatever we disagree on today will be long forgotten. I'm trying to balance the different feel of the 2025 draft with my belief in Dan Kantrovitz and his previous drafts. He's turned into one of the better minds in baseball when it comes to the amateur draft and him losing the plot entirely feels unlikely. In the end, despite it being an appeal to authority, the Cubs and Kantrovitz have earned more than enough good will from me to say "I know it feels weird today, but..." and to give this new strategy a chance. Initial reactions from fans on Cade Horton and Jaxon Wiggins were, at best, split (and at worst, much more accusatory than that) and I doubt you'd find anyone willing to move either in a trade short of highway robbery. These things take time, so even if you're feeling that negativity creep in, I think we're in good hands. In Dan I trust. Do you? What do you think of the 2025 Cubs draft? Who was your favorite pick? Who did you dislike? Let us know in the comment section below!
×
×
  • Create New...