Can't agree with JD there, I don't think that's going foul, plus by the time it takes that bounce the calculus changes since 2 runs score if you're wrong.
Glad to see Tucker bumped to 2nd and splitting him and Busch. The Tokyo late innings were a bit too easy to gameplan for with a LHRP to face the top of the order.
Yes, a first round pick who immediately hits in his first true pro season is going to be a more noteworthy prospect than someone who needed to repeat both A ball levels in order to be the 8th best hitting catcher in the midwest league at 24. This is just sad, you can simply like Ethan Hearn! Everyone has their guys they like more than the consensus. It does not have to be a conspiracy that others are not on the bandwagon with you.
Tom he's turning 25 this year, will be reaching AA for the first time, his only offensive successes have come in repeating *both* A ball levels, and even when he does hit it has not shown improvement in the primary problem of Ks/contact. His defense is statistically unremarkable and doesn't have an elite reputation either. If you want to hold a candle for him that's great, the bar is lower for catchers and I hope he makes 10 all star teams as a Cub. But please, spare us the 'you only don't see him as a good prospect because the Man spoon feeds you your opinions', it's embarrassing.
This is the type of thing that tends to be true right up until the point that it isn't. The ebbs and flows from the Rays over the last ~15 years are a good example. When your resources require you to be so much better/lucky with your decisions than everyone else it's very hard to maintain and even harder to do so when you have the turnover at the top of the roster, coaching staff, and front office the Brewers have had over the last 2 seasons. I expect them to be the stiffest competition for the division, but they lack high upside pitching and their depth has been hammered by injury already. The median expectation of their offense doesn't look good enough to bridge that likely gap.
I think it's important to keep in mind magnitude when we talk about this. The difference in Pearson's LOB% and one much more sustainable is basically 2 runs. That's not nothing when the sample is 26 innings, but his 2024 performance looks good even if you add those in.
Similarly, Brown giving up loud contact isn't good but an elite K%-BB% buys a lot of margin for error. And if any tweaks lower that K% the loud contact likely goes down in turn.
I had a similar thought about Brasier's place in line relative to Hodge/Pearson when I saw he was the choice in the 9th. Probably not a wide margin, but probably a safe assumption that Counsell didn't throw any of his preferred 3 leverage RPs.
The Cubs will win the division and bypass the wild card round.
In the divisional round the majority of starts will be made by SP who are not Steele or Shota.
I think especially in the college game it's easy to overstate the height differences. Having a few inches on a player is an advantage, but it's not an easy button to free points and rebounds. Between the possibility of turnovers, lack of elite passing out of double teams, etc, that advantage gets minimized by good/smart teams.
I hope they have a fairly quick trigger with Miller since his profile isn't necessarily one you expect to hold up for years. But Morgan is optionable so if they like what they see under the hood from Miller(and don't want to ditch Merryweather or option Pearson) they could start Morgan at Iowa.
No, that's not the assumption at all. The idea is that there is a point where the productivity you get in the at bats you don't K makes up for the marginal negative of putting the ball in play less. The existence of that line is the point, because you have to consider what that line is and not just the singular at bat or the focused idea of 'are strikeouts worse than other outs'
Of course you would rather have that first one, there's no difference in the upside, which is the entire point! An actual more grounded example of this dynamic would be something like 1B, HR, K, K, GO vs. 1B, 1B, GO, GO, K.