The Cubs Should Probably Develop Some Pitching

There are times when a single statistic grabs your attention. Such a time occurred for this author late last month, courtesy an excellent piece by Sahadev Sharma at The Athletic.

Sharma examined the number of innings recorded for every major-league team by pitchers they’d acquired via the draft since the arrival of the current curse-breaking Cubs regime ahead of the 2012 season.

During that timeframe, which includes six drafts, the Cubs have produced a total of 30 homegrown innings. Thirty! The Blue Jays lead the majors with 1,299 such innings. The Cardinals are second in the majors and lead the NL with 872, according to Sharma’s research.

Consider the following chart he produced:

Part of is this is by design, of course: when they were in tanking mode, the Cubs expended their premium draft picks on positional players, the idea being that they carried less risk. They planned to, and eventually did, flex their financial might to fill the pitching voids that remained via free agency. It’s hard to argue with the results — it led, in part, to a World Series title — though it’s a strategy that’s only applicable in large markets. For instance, the Brewers and Pirates are unlikely to address their own rotation holes with top-of-the-market arms.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

At the same time, sustaining success is difficult if a club’s draft-and-development systems are producing, essentially, zero pitching. (Kyle Hendricks, one of the few Cubs starters to pass time in the system, was acquired for Ryan Dempster in 2012.) The game’s super teams — the Astros, Dodgers, Indians, and Nationals have all drafted and/or developed top-of-the-rotation arms.

For Epstein, the issue really dates back to Boston, where Clay Buchholz — drafted in 2005 — is the last homegrown Red Sox pitcher to have a starting role of substance, though Justin Masterson was drafted and traded to acquire Victor Martinez, while Jonathan Papelbon was converted into an impact reliever.

The Cubs realize this is a problem and are trying to address it.

Said Epsten to Sharma:

“We’ve been real open about the fact that we need to do a better job with our evaluation and development of pitching,” Epstein recently said. “Especially young pitching. Finding a new voice or the right resource in the front office would be really valuable to us.”

This offseason the Cubs have hired former Pirates pitching guru Jim Benedict, who was let go by the Derek Jeter-led Marlins. The previous Marlins regime thought enough of Benedict that they traded Trevor Williams for him.

Said Cubs amateur scouting director Matt Dorey to Sharma:

“I think we realized we were narrowing the pool of pitching to the extent that it gave us really limited options, essentially handcuffing us a little bit from the pool of players we were picking from,” Dorey said. “This [current] approach is keeping more guys alive, not being so stringent or strict on the biomechanics, arm action, deliveries, but focusing more on performance, guys that miss bats, guys that have stuff that we think can play at the big-league level. Then really leaning on our development staff to iron out any deficiencies they have in their game. Whether it’s control, breaking ball development, whatever it may be.”

Maybe the Cubs have been overthinking it.

But even if they can improve their process in draft and development, the results won’t be felt overnight. This is akin, rather, to turning around a Gerald Ford-class carrier. It’s going to take time.

In the meantime, the Cubs are still winning, still trying to compete for World Series titles. And they continue to search, and sometimes overpay, for pitching. They traded Gleyber Torres for three months of Aroldis Chapman, for example. They traded their other 2013 international signing prize — Eloy Jimenez — and pitching prospect Dylan Cease as part of a four-prospect package to acquire the White Sox’ Jose Quintana. Jimenez is now the top prospect in a deep White Sox system. Cease ranks 10th, according to Baseball America. This offseason, Chicago has signed Tyler Chatwood and Brandon Morrow to lucrative deals. They might need more still.

The Cubs rank 11th in projected starting-pitching WAR (14.4), but eighth among 2017 playoff teams. And the Diamondbacks, Dodgers, Indians, Nationals, Red Sox, and Yankees all have arguably better No. 1 and No. 2 starting options, which matters in the postseason, when more innings are absorbed by teams’ best starters.

An offseason ago, the Cubs looked like a potential dynasty. While they’re still projected to be one of the better teams in baseball, their dynastic aspirations might depend on the ability to develop their own pitching.





A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.

51 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
james123Member since 2024
8 years ago

Team building is sort of a catch-22. On the one hand, it’s risky to develop a team around pitching (see: New York Mets). On the other hand, consistently buying pitching in free agency is not a sustainable business model. Perhaps the best way to do it is to build a core of good position players with the next wave of prospects being pitchers. That’s what the Yankees seem to be doing (albeit unintentionally) and the Dodgers to a lesser extent. If the Cubs had two or three good near-MLB ready pitching prospects their franchise would have perhaps the best long term outlook of anybody.

Careless
8 years ago
Reply to  james123

Well, yes and no: they traded away so much of their top-end prospects, who could say what would be left?

tornadothor
8 years ago
Reply to  james123

if- That’s a mighty big ‘if’

Dominikk85Member since 2020
8 years ago

Theo is great but didn’t the red sox also rarely develope good pitchers, at least starters? That just might never been his focus, he was always loading up on hitters and hoping that the pitching depth is enough to survive the season.

johansantana17Member since 2026
8 years ago
Reply to  Dominikk85

That exact question is addressed in the article

compmanjx3Member since 2020
8 years ago

The projected WAR from starters thing is a bit of a red herring. If they sign Arrieta they will move up to 2nd overall. If they sign Darvish they move up to a tie for first.

And frankly, as a Royals fan, I would be pretty thrilled with 11th!

EDIT: My math didn’t account for other pitchers getting less playing time, but suffice to say that the Cubs project to have a very good rotation.

james123Member since 2024
8 years ago
Reply to  compmanjx3

I see it as more of an issue moving forward. They don’t really have any impact pitching prospects on the horizon. In 2018, they’ll manage. But what about 2019, or 2020?

Perhaps they’ll have some breakout pitching prospects, but if not, the future of their rotation is a bit hazy.

Ryan BrockMember since 2025
8 years ago

Pairing this with their recent comments on Justin Wilson, it really is mystifying that they could be such a good team and yet be so consistently failing at certain things on the pitching side.

Cubslol
8 years ago

They should, but the Cubs front office doesnt understand pitching. They got incredibly lucky with Arrieta and Hendricks, and their bullpens are always a disaster. Luck is running out though

duhbearMember since 2026
8 years ago

Seeing the Rays that low is very surprising to me. Damn.

jtmorgan
8 years ago
Reply to  duhbear

It’s mostly a timing thing. If you back it up one more draft you add innings from Snell and Faria. They also have been giving a lot of their innings to draftees like Archer and Odorizzi.

David SpracaleMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  jtmorgan

Point of information: Archer wasn’t a Rays draftee

macgyv13
8 years ago
Reply to  David Spracale

Neither was Odorizzi.

Bret
8 years ago
Reply to  David Spracale

Archer wouldn’t have qualified for this list anyway, he was drafted in 2006.

ShauncoreMember since 2019
8 years ago

Somewhat tangential to this piece, I’m curious on Sharma’s graph on why he used IP to help make his argument?

I wouldn’t necessarily tie “MLB quality pitching” to IP. The Orioles and their “MLB quality pitching” via the draft since 2012 is essentially Kevin Gausman.

Meanwhile since 2012 they’ve taken in early rounds:

Hunter Harvey
Branden Kline
Stephen Tarpley
Brian Gonzalez
Jonathan Hughes
Garrett Cleavinger
Cody Sedlock
Keegan Akin
Matthias Dietz
D.L. Hall
Zac Lowther
Michael Baumann

None of those guys have pitched in the majors. Pitchers that were drafted by the Orioles and pitched in the majors since 2012:

Kevin Gausman
Josh Hader (traded to the Astros in 2013 for Bud Norris)
Steven Brault (traded as a PTBNL)
Jimmy Yacabonis
Stefan Crichton
Donnie Hart

That doesn’t exactly scream “quality MLB pitching” pitching for them other than Gausman and Hart.

All of those guys are from 2012 and 2013 drafts, meaning no one the Orioles have selected from the 2014 draft on has played in the majors (hitters and pitchers). That’s not that odd given how close that draft was and that they didn’t pick until the 3rd round in 2014, but still. I wouldn’t put them at the top of my list for producing “MLB quality pitching” through the draft.

coldbagel12Member since 2018
8 years ago

To be fair, the Indians are 26th on this graph, and the Nationals are 25th, yet both are cited as examples of teams that have successfully drafted/developed pitching talent. So I am not sure how reliable that graphic is at demonstrating how ineffective the Cubs have been at drafting pitchers.

drazthegr8
8 years ago
Reply to  coldbagel12

The Nats have been pretty bad at developing pitchers the last 5 years. Roark was an unheralded swingman in the minors who ended up pitching well and Joe Ross came from the Pads, pitched great, and then regressed. Besides that, Giolito and Lopez faltered and Fedde had a rough debut. The Nats have retooled their pitching coaches throughout the system this offseason as a result.

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
8 years ago
Reply to  drazthegr8

Yep. In addition to Giolito and Lopez, other Nats prospects traded away include Tommy Milone, Brad Peacock, and Robbie Ray.

Ray is a mega success story, but consider that the Nats traded him to DET and the Tigs moved him to ARI before he really broke out. Lots of development there that can’t be attributed to the Nats.

Peacock may be on to something, but he was traded to OAK and then to HOU before he figured it out. Again, lots of cooks.

Milone … well. He’s thrown a bunch of MLB innings but I don’t think anyone’s going to accuse him of being truly successful.

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
8 years ago
Reply to  coldbagel12

The only Nats starter who was drafted by the organization is Stephen Strasburg.

Scherzer (FA), Gio (trade), and Roark (trade) all came from elsewhere

There are a few MiLB guys in the running for the 5th spot (Fedde, Voth, Cole) so that could change. But none of them are going to be rolling up big innings totals any time soon.

Even in the bullpen, the only Nats draftees in the running are middle relievers like Solis, Glover, and Grace.

theoriolewayMember since 2026
8 years ago

If the Orioles are 4th on a pitching related list, being last probably isn’t a bad thing.

j27roenick
8 years ago
Reply to  theorioleway

I came across this during my research for my comment. Enjoy.

The Astros acquired the 37th overall pick (Derek Fisher), L. J. Hoes, and Josh Hader from the Orioles in exchange for Bud Norris at the 2013 trade deadline.

Combined with giving up on Jake and Strop for a few months of Scott Feldman and a backup C, I’d say that was a pretty crippling month for the long-term future of the O’s.

YKnotDisco
8 years ago

FWIW — 5 outta 6 of their 2018 top prospects are pitchers (3 domestic — 2 draft). Although, only one is currently at least a 50FV with the other 4 at 45.

j27roenick
8 years ago

I hesitate to even publicize this information, because it seems like the Cubs might have a philosophical advantage on this front, but it should be fairly obvious at this point.

College position players carry the lowest risk of bust at the top of the draft. This strategy also tends to favor college position players known more for their bat than their baserunning/defense (which are easier to project at the MLB level). The reasons are simple:
1) You have more information on performance, physical maturity and projection than you do with HS position prospects.
2) Pitchers are more likely to flame out because of control issues or injuries.
3) Top-level position player prospects (especially mashers) are worth roughly double that of their pitching counterparts.

For the same reasons that AA and AAA prospects carry more value than young and talented A- and rookie ball players (in trade valuation, anyway), this same sentiment goes for college and HS draftees. Let’s take a look at a (non-exhaustive) list of college position player draftees since 2012 to coincide with this list on the ineptitude of the Cubs to develop homegrown pitching.

2012: Mike Zunino, Tyler Naquin, James Ramsey, Devin Marrero, Richie Shaffer, Victor Roache, Stephen Piscotty, Kevin Plawecki, Mitch Haniger.

2013: Kris Bryant, Colin Moran, Hunter Dozier, D.J. Peterson, Hunter Renfroe, Tim Anderson, Eric Jagielo, Phillip Ervin, Aaron Judge.

2014: Kyle Schwarber, Michael Conforto, Max Pentecost, Trea Turner, Casey Gillaspie, Bradley Zimmer, Matt Chapman, Derek Fisher.

2015: Dansby Swanson, Alex Bregman, Andrew Benintendi (remember, the Cubs were linked to him before the draft before Theo’s old team stole AB away, leaving them with …), Ian Happ.

2016: Nick Senzel, Corey Ray, Zach Collins, Kyle Lewis, Blake Rutherford.

This isn’t to say that you can’t find a talented HS OF (Mike Trout, 2009) or college pitcher (Chris Sale, 2010) or HS pitcher (Jose Fernandez, 2011 … we miss you), and there are always exceptions made for standout slam-dunk talents (Carlos Correa, 2012) but the odds are with you early if you’re focusing on the top college hitters available. I’m sure Theo would love to have Jon Gray to eat innings and fill out this chart, and even though Gray has developed probably exactly as the Rox hoped he would, he’s still only been about 1/3 as valuable as Kris Bryant so far in their careers, who was drafted one spot ahead of Gray (and one spot behind Mark Appel).

You can always trade your superfluous positional talent for young SP, if that’s what you need to fill out your roster.

forum199Member since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  j27roenick

All this patting on the back for the Cubs college hitter draft strategy, but Bryant is really the only guy that’s helping the major league club, with Schwarber providing some flashes.

Theo’s rebuild was really based off some amazing trades (Dempster for Hendricks, Hunter for Arrieta/Strop, Cashner for Rizzo, Shark for Russell, etc.) and some good FA signings (Lester, Fowler, Zobrist).

The Cubs were candid in how they plan to approach pitching in the future: they didn’t fail at developing a pitcher from the draft because they purposely avoided investing in the position at that level, rather they’re considering that they disproportionately valued health, delivery, mechanics, and build over performance and stuff.

Along that vein, 2 of the 3 best pitchers in baseball were considered to have terrible mechanics as prospects: Scherzer and Sale.

j27roenick
8 years ago
Reply to  forum199

It’s not just the Cubs, though. Teams are getting more value out of this approach, and it dovetails with prospect player valuations. The thing that saved the Astros from the Appel over KB disaster was that they didn’t sign Aiken in the 2014 draft, and ended up with Bregman (as compensation) in 2015.

j27roenick
8 years ago
Reply to  forum199

This isn’t to say that Theo/Jed haven’t failed to properly identify, scout and develop some of their other pitching draftees, because they have. Miserably. But they haven’t used their highest picks on pitchers, rather choosing a strategy in 2014 to take the best college hitter (Schwarber) at a discount (as compared to his draft slot) and load up on tough HS signs (Cease, etc.) with the extra bonus allotment savings in the middle rounds. Combined with their prized IFA signings, they were able to parlay some of those assets into young, controllable and cheap SP. It’s not the method discussed in Sharma’s graph, but it’s been reasonably effective at masking Theo/Jed’s homegrown pitching inefficiencies.

Larry Faria
8 years ago
Reply to  j27roenick

Which came first the failure to develop pitchers or the failure to use higher draft slots?

I know what you’re saying, Jed Hoyer said it himself when he was with the Padres: pitcher prospects are less of a sure thing, and it’s better to pick position players and then trade for pitching.

Jed learned his lesson when the Padres had a couple of top prospect pitchers and neither one panned out. But he didn’t choose them, he was Padres GM for a short time, and didn’t change the Padres emphasis on high floor guys.

Preller changed that, going after high ceiling guys and lots of them, ESPECIALLY pitching prospects. Of their seven prospects in the BA top 100, five are pitchers, and they’re all tier one, possible Aces. The attrition is awful, but all it takes is one or two to anchor a staff.

For the Cubs to do the same, they have to do a great job of scouting, and use high picks to get high ceiling, possible aces, not the high floor guys who top out at #3 rotation pitchers.

E L
8 years ago
Reply to  forum199

Every first round pick by the Cubs front office from 2012-2015 has made the majors. Every single one.

Schwarber, Happ, and Almora combined for a 4.5 fWAR last season in 1222 PAs, with all of them providing flashes. 2.2 WAR/600 is definitely “helping the major league club”.

forum199Member since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  E L

They won a championship in 2016 without Happ or Almora. Schwarber basically played in the World Series only.

Rizzo, Arrieta, Hendricks, on the other-hand, all on the roster courtesy of lopsided trades? They contributed 13.3 WAR in 2016, and 10 WAR in 2017.

Theo generated over 100M in surplus value in 2016 via those 3 lopsided transactions.

Accordingly, while Theo smartly prioritized hitting over pitching early in the draft, it’s hardly a basis or pillar for the process leading to the Cubs’ subsequent ring.

E L
8 years ago
Reply to  forum199

Almora scored the first run in the 10th inning of Game 7 after tagging up from first on a flyball. Those plays had rather high championship leverage.

MoateMember since 2022
8 years ago
Reply to  forum199

Real quick “Ignoring stats that don’t help my point” guy:

Rizzo, Hendricks, Arrieta (BTW, weren’t you talking about HITTERS before? Whatever, we’ll play your game): 13.3 WAR in 2016

Baez, Bryant, Almora (Spoiler: the Cubs weren’t Without him): 11.8 WAR in 2016

MoateMember since 2022
8 years ago
Reply to  forum199

Just so we’re clear: Javy Baez was also a Cubs draft pick (if a 2.9 WAR isn’t “helping” at team, I don’t understand what is. I’ll give you that Happ’s 1.8 is pretty marginal, but he didn’t play a full season and I’d be hard pressed to say that having him on the team to keep lesser players out of the outfield doesn’t contribute.

mikejuntMember
8 years ago
Reply to  j27roenick

Fuck, the college hitter strategy was original in 2002 when the A’s tried it, it isn’t original now.

tornadothor
8 years ago
Reply to  j27roenick

….drinking the Theo Kool-Aid…

tb.25
8 years ago

Disclaimer: the graphic is a bit misleading.

It only analyzes pitchers drafted since 2012. Pitchers drafted prior are excluded.

For example, the SF Giants have had 14 pitcher-seasons of 150 or more innings since 2012 thrown by drafted pitchers.

Limiting the graphic to drafted pitchers since 2012 is misleading, as what one thinks of when they hear of a “homegrown” rotation spans beyond those drafted most recently.

Larry Faria
8 years ago
Reply to  tb.25

As mentioned above, don’t forget international players.

Larry Faria
8 years ago

The big omission is the use of the JUne draft. There’s s July signing period for international players like Dinelson Lamet, who pitched 114 innings in 2017 as a rookie.

Instead of using the June draft (easy, I know), try looking at pitchers who spent most of their minor league careers with a club and moved up to the majors with them.

largebus
8 years ago

In fairness, saying that the Orioles “developed” Arrieta would be a insult the Cubs.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago

First thought after reading headline…
EPSTEIN: Well, what do you think we’ve been trying to do all this time, you joker?

Second thought after reading headline…
EPSTEIN: Well we seem to be doing pretty well thank you

Yeah, they could probably use a “real” ace but couldn’t everyone? They can pay for pitching, so it’s not a huge deal.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

It’s true to a point that the Cubs can simply pay for pitching, especially in the near-term, but that eventually catches up with even high-payroll teams.

The payroll numbers really start to add up if a team is spending at free agent prices for the majority of a starting rotation plus late-inning relievers.

Another factor with the Cubs is that the cost-controlled position players are getting less cheap for the team as those players hit arbitration (and are potentially in-line for contract extensions).

Lastly, one issue is that a team can’t really build up much in the way of quality starting pitching depth other than by having a pipeline of minor league prospects. The Cubs have Montgomery as a swingman, though he’s reportedly not very happy about going to the bullpen for 2018. That situation hints at the difficulty of signing Mike Montgomery-types as FA’s unless they get a rotation spot. So if a team is hit by a couple pitching injuries during the season, the injury depth really needs to be in the upper minors or the team is left scrambling with subpar options or paying up to plug pitching holes at in-season trade prices.

chuck e
8 years ago

“Sharma examined the number of innings recorded for every major-league team by pitchers they’d acquired via the draft since ….the 2012 season.”
Ambiguous sentence. But no way the Jays get that many innings counting only guys drafted post 2011, so it seems like that must include Sanchez, so I thought that it counted all innings thrown by all (any year) Jays drafted players for the Jays since 2012. But if that is true no way Cleveland is that low cause of Allen and Tomlin. what is happening here?

John Autin
8 years ago

Two thoughts on the underlying assumptions here:

1) “First signed by” would be a better starting point than “drafted by.” About 1/4 of all MLB innings in the last 5 years came from pitchers born outside the U.S. and Puerto Rico, my proxy for those not subject to the draft. That’s a big enough share to have some effect on these rankings.

2) Is there a difference in “cost per WAR” between pitchers and position players? The overall number is often cited here at FG, but I’ve not noticed a breakdown. Maybe that’s *because* there’s no significant difference, but if there *was* such a difference, it would affect how one thinks about team-building strategies.

chuck e
8 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

WRT 1) I agree with the sentiment, but Ohtani falls into that group and he’s not exactly a product of development systems of say LAA. Maybe “first signed as an amateur IFA” or some such thing.

John Autin
8 years ago

True that the Cubs’ “dynastic aspirations might depend on the ability to develop their own pitching.” But keep in mind the potential huge impact of individual transactions.

The easiest example is the Braves of 1991-2005, who finished first in every full season.
— Of their total pitching value in that span, the HOF trio of Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz totaled 58% of bWAR and 90% of WAA (wins above average).
— The non-homegrown duo totaled 39% of all WAR and 62% of all WAA.

Of course, you can’t base a team-building strategy largely on such coups. But one or two of them can go a long way. The Cubs scored smash hits with the trades for Arrieta and Hendricks. The trade for Quintana, while costly in prospects, gives them a huge asset in the next 3 years with a laughably small contract commitment. (The two team options are pure gold.)

It will be hard to maintain *that* success rate, but I don’t doubt that Theo & Co. can continue to outperform the field.

AlabamaShake
8 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

And, of course, of the HOF trio, only Glavine was drafted and developed by the Braves.

Original Greaser Bob
8 years ago

Prediction, “super team” gets played out in 2018.

CarMars FavoriteMember since 2018
8 years ago

I’m confused. Since 2012 the Mets have only gotten 63.1 innings from drafted pitchers? That’s definitely not right. What am I misreading?

Bret
8 years ago

From pitchers drafted since 2012. So anyone drafted before that wasn’t included.

Rational FanMember since 2025
8 years ago

I wrote this same thing last off-season when cameron was touting the dynasty. The cubs have very littlr pitching and lester isn’t getting younger.

bucklebe
8 years ago

I’m curious to know how this correlates with winning percentage over this period. It looks to me that many of the best teams don’t have homegrown pitching.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago

I agree with this take from Travis, and I see a broader point that the Cubs’ recent draft success has been extremely top-heavy. They’ve had a run of five straight first round draft picks, from 2011 to 2015, making the majors as at least solid contributors (with one superstar player in Bryant). One of those five first-rounders (Baez) was from the Cubs’ final draft pre-Epstein/Hoyer, and all five players were top-10 overall draftees.

After the first round, however, the Cubs have had very little to show from those drafts. Even as trade chips, the high-end prospects who have been the central pieces of big trades (Torres and Jimenez) were both big bonus IFA signings, which is an acquisition method for amateur talent that’s similar to high first round draft picks. They did also acquire Cease as heavily above slot ($1.5 million bonus) 6th rounder.

I understand that the expected individual value of each draft pick drops off pretty sharply after the top of the first round of the draft, but even teams with big payroll budgets need to find at least some solid contributors out of their portfolios of picks farther down in the draft. The payroll rapidly adds up if a team is having to pay free agent prices for quite a bit of starting pitching and also late-inning relievers, and the Cubs’ young core of position players is getting more expensive as these players hit arbitration years (and are also in-line for potential extensions). The Cubs are also now in a position to be on the other side of the “now for later” trades that brought back players such as Hendricks and Arrieta, and with the new CBA they can no longer spend heavily on amateur IFA’s every few years.