A Deep Dive on UCLA Shortstop Roch Cholowsky: Could He Drop to the Twins?

[Jamie Cameron]

This week at Twins Daily, we’re continuing our series of deep dives into candidates for the number three overall pick in the 2026 draft. It has long been considered a given that UCLA shortstop Roch Cholowsky is a lock to be the first wire-to-wire number one ranked player since Adley Rutschman in 2019. While it's still more likely than not that Cholowsky is the pick at number one (or two), Texas HS shortstop Grady Emerson and Georgia Tech catcher Vahn Lackey have narrowed the gap significantly. Cholowsky is no longer the number one player on every major industry board. The UCLA shortstop recently made it to pick three in a recent Keith Law mock draft. Let’s be prepared and dig into Roch’s profile.

Bio and Background
Originally hailing from Chandler, Arizona, Cholowsky grew up around baseball. His father was a standout college player at Cal, and played 9 MiLB seasons after being drafted by the Cardinals in 1991, before becoming a long-time scout. Unlike Vahn Lackey, Cholowsky has been on the map as a notable prospect for a long time.

Cholowsky was ranked as the 35th player overall by consensus ahead of the 2023 MLB Draft. You’ll remember that draft class was absolutely loaded. In addition to its famous top five (Skenes, Crews, Langford, Clark, and Jenkins), other top-50 notables include Aidan Miller, Kevin McGonigle, and Colt Emerson. The Twins were one of a handful of teams interested in signing Cholowsky as a prep prospect (the White Sox were another) with their Comp A pick. They eventually used that selection on Charlee Soto after Cholowsky would not be dissuaded from his commitment to UCLA. Cholowsky was the highest-ranked unselected player in his class.

College Stats
Cholowsky played 52 games as a freshman, with around two-thirds coming at third base, and the rest at shortstop. He showed right away why he was such a highly regarded prep prospect. Cholowsky hit .308/.399/.500 (115 wRC+) with 8 home runs (21 XBH) in 235 plate appearances. It was a debut season that put the college baseball world on notice and raised expectations significantly ahead of his sophomore season.

As a sophomore, Cholowsky ascended. After taking over as the Bruins everyday shortstop, he managed a .353/.480/.710 line with 23 home runs (43 XBH), a 13.9 BB%, a 9.3 K%, and a 164 wRC+, one of the best offensive seasons in college baseball in 2025. Cholowsky also developed his least discussed superpower, getting hit by 21 pitches along the way. In particular, Cholowsky’s bat-to-ball numbers in-zone improved markedly as a sophomore, as did his approach at the plate.

Let’s get to the center of the Cholowsky discourse, his junior season. Was it a fall-off, or is it prospect fatigue? While 2026 wasn’t as exceptional as 2025, it’s a similar trap Drew Burress set for himself after his freshman and sophomore seasons: an almost impossibly high bar. In 2026, Cholowsky hit .320/.452/.636 with 21 home runs (31 XBH), matching 12% walk and strikeout rates, and a 146 wRC+. Not as exceptional as 2025, but not too shabby, either. Cholowsky was hit by a further 25 pitches in 2026. Perhaps it was his (and UCLA’s) uninspiring performance in the postseason, crashing out to St. Mary’s during Regionals, that left a bad taste. Still, I think the narrative of a fall-off might be overthinking it a bit.

Unpacking Cholowsky’s numbers further cements his prospect case as fairly unimpeachable. An overall contact rate over 80% (approaching 90% in zone), a chase rate just over 20%, an average EV and EV90 above the 90th percentile in D1 baseball. Roch Cholowsky has a complete offensive profile.

Let’s dig into his swing, though, as I do think you can level some minor criticisms here. I don’t love it (who cares?). Cholowsky has, from this seat, some inefficient rotation in his swing, a tendency that might give him some fits against velocity, especially up, or be out in front enough to maximize pulled fly balls. It hasn’t slowed him during his amateur baseball career, but I’d watch out for it as he begins to face better pitching in pro ball.

Wood Bat Performance
As when we examined Lackey, we should take a moment to examine Cholowsky’s record with wooden bats. Similarly to Lackey, it’s not an extensive history or a particularly impressive one. Cholowsky played for Orleans for a brief stint on the Cape in 2024, managing a .666 OPS in 65 plate appearances. This was immediately following Cholowsky’s freshman college season. While it’d be nice to have Cape performance as a feather in his cap, this run of games was before he’d truly taken off as a collegiate prospect.

Defensive Profile
There’s been so much discussion and conjecture on Cholowsky as a hitter in 2026, that his defense has been given short shrift. In my write up of Roch ahead of the 2023 draft, I described him as a ‘legitimately excellent defensive shortstop.’ He’s done nothing but cement that sterling defensive reputation in his three years at UCLA.

In his sophomore season, Cholowsky was the top college shortstop in the country, amassing +20 DRS (per D1 Baseball). For context, he’s the only shortstop to accrue 20 runs saved or more since D1 began tracking defense using the metric in 2023. While he isn’t the smoothest mover, he’s athletic and explosive at the position.

Cholowsky has a history as a high school quarterback and it’s easy to see the parallels in his defensive game at shortstop. He’s particularly adept at making throws on the run, leveraging outstanding body control, a plus arm, and a pinpoint internal clock to augment extremely soft and reliable hands. He’s a lock to stick at the position and Brandon Crawford defensive comps (a player Cholowsky has long admired) are not out of pocket.

What Teammates and Coaches Say
Cholowsky has earned a reputation as a vocal leader on and off the diamond. Away from baseball, Cholowsky became known at UCLA for finding creative ways to promote team togetherness. "He's always planning things, which is really important as a leader," shared teammate Phoenix Call. "He’ll always make sure everyone (on our team) is there’"

Cholowsky developed a close relationship with UCLA Head Coach John Savage in his time in Westwood. Cholowsky credited Savage for sticking with him while he was adjusting to college baseball as a freshman. Savage, in turn, reflected glowingly on having an asset like Cholowsky on his team, remarking that "there’s nothing better than your best player playing the way he plays. He was the offensive player of the year, he was the defensive player of the year (in 2025). That’s a combination you just don’t see’"

It remains unlikely that Roch falls out of the top two in the draft. We’re also accustomed to expect chaos in round one. In the unlikely event that he falls, I’d be hard pressed to imagine a scenario where the Twins don’t take Cholowsky, a player they have long coveted, at number three overall. That’s his floor in this draft.

View full article

[Old Twins Hat]

Last year's crash out of contention and stripping of assets is looking better and better as time goes on.

Like virtually any team in MLB, going young is proving to be a great way to build back a competitive team.

Twins will get another crack at it in the '26 Draft and it sure looks like they will get a winner, though how many right side infielders we can funnel to the majors is an open question.

[Dman]

You never know with Tampa as they seem to love the younger high school players.  I don't know if that is because there is a greater likelihood of buying out years when they make it or if they just feel the upside is generally greater, but they do seem to focus on younger players.

That being said they are a playoff team right now and getting one of the two top fast moving college bats who both play premium positions sure seems like it makes a lot of sense.  I still think the Sox go Cholowsky and I don't know how the Rays feel about Lackey, but his bat and versatility sure make me think they will take him at 2, but we'll see.

If by some miracle Chicago took Lackey and the Rays took Emerson or Flora or someone else.  I guess that scenario would allow Cholowsky to fall, but it seems like a long shot to me.  However, I said the same thing about Brooks Lee falling to the Twins and that magically happened as well.  You never know what teams have lined up in the draft so things can change right at the top, but as strong as these three appear to be it feels like Emerson is the one who falls to the Twins IMO.

[Mai.K]

Is there any chance we could draft a starting pitcher like Jackson Flora?

I agree with the general philosophy that you should take the best player available regardless of position. However, if the difference between the players at, say, No. 3 and No. 4 on the draft board is relatively small, I wonder whether it makes sense to take organizational needs into account.

And if there's one position this organization desperately needs, it's probably starting pitching.

I live on the other side of the world, so I've never seen any of these prospects play in person. All I can do is read scouting reports, so I'm not really in a position to evaluate them myself. But if given the choice, I'd rather come away with a potential starting pitcher than another catcher or shortstop.

Looking at recent drafts, many of the college starters taken near the top have reached the majors within two years:

• 2022: Cade Horton
• 2023: Rhett Lowder (and of course, Paul Skenes goes without saying)
• 2024: Chase Burns

I'm not particularly confident that our pitching staff is going to be in great shape by 2028, which is why I keep wondering whether taking a starting pitcher in this draft might be the right move.

Sorry for my poor English, but I hope my point comes across.

[tony&rodney]

I wonder how Cholowsky now compares to Brooks Lee when he was drafted?

[D.C Twins]

No. 

[jmlease1]

37 minutes ago, Mai.K said:

Is there any chance we could draft a starting pitcher like Jackson Flora?

It could happen if Cholowsky & Lackey go 1-2 in some order? I think the Twins are a little less high on Emerson than others, and if either Roch or Vahn fall to them at 3 they're taking them regardless of who is available for pitching.

I think at the end of the day, CWS take Cholowsky. I'm hoping TB goes with Emerson and leaves us with Lackey...but you never know with this stuff. The MLB draft is weird.

[Jamie Cameron]

1 hour ago, Dman said:

You never know with Tampa as they seem to love the younger high school players.  I don't know if that is because there is a greater likelihood of buying out years when they make it or if they just feel the upside is generally greater, but they do seem to focus on younger players.

That being said they are a playoff team right now and getting one of the two top fast moving college bats who both play premium positions sure seems like it makes a lot of sense.  I still think the Sox go Cholowsky and I don't know how the Rays feel about Lackey, but his bat and versatility sure make me think they will take him at 2, but we'll see.

If by some miracle Chicago took Lackey and the Rays took Emerson or Flora or someone else.  I guess that scenario would allow Cholowsky to fall, but it seems like a long shot to me.  However, I said the same thing about Brooks Lee falling to the Twins and that magically happened as well.  You never know what teams have lined up in the draft so things can change right at the top, but as strong as these three appear to be it feels like Emerson is the one who falls to the Twins IMO.

I like the Callis odds on Cholowsky to the Twins, ~25% feels about right, which is significantly higher than we should have projected a couple of months ago.

[Jamie Cameron]

45 minutes ago, Mai.K said:

Is there any chance we could draft a starting pitcher like Jackson Flora?

I agree with the general philosophy that you should take the best player available regardless of position. However, if the difference between the players at, say, No. 3 and No. 4 on the draft board is relatively small, I wonder whether it makes sense to take organizational needs into account.

And if there's one position this organization desperately needs, it's probably starting pitching.

I live on the other side of the world, so I've never seen any of these prospects play in person. All I can do is read scouting reports, so I'm not really in a position to evaluate them myself. But if given the choice, I'd rather come away with a potential starting pitcher than another catcher or shortstop.

Looking at recent drafts, many of the college starters taken near the top have reached the majors within two years:

• 2022: Cade Horton
• 2023: Rhett Lowder (and of course, Paul Skenes goes without saying)
• 2024: Chase Burns

I'm not particularly confident that our pitching staff is going to be in great shape by 2028, which is why I keep wondering whether taking a starting pitcher in this draft might be the right move.

Sorry for my poor English, but I hope my point comes across.

Thanks for reading and commenting. I'd say Flora has a chance, he's still the number four player in this class, by consensus. I think there is now an established tier break after the top three so I think it's most likely he's not the selection. Don't think the Twins have rules him out either, though.

[Jamie Cameron]

10 minutes ago, D.C Twins said:

No. 

Describing anything in the draft as having no chance just demonstrates a lack of ball knowledge, sadly.

It might be slim but there's definitely a chance. Even a cursory reading of industry rankings, mocks, and analysis would yield that conclusion.

[Dman]

28 minutes ago, Mai.K said:

Is there any chance we could draft a starting pitcher like Jackson Flora?

I agree with the general philosophy that you should take the best player available regardless of position. However, if the difference between the players at, say, No. 3 and No. 4 on the draft board is relatively small, I wonder whether it makes sense to take organizational needs into account.

And if there's one position this organization desperately needs, it's probably starting pitching.

I live on the other side of the world, so I've never seen any of these prospects play in person. All I can do is read scouting reports, so I'm not really in a position to evaluate them myself. But if given the choice, I'd rather come away with a potential starting pitcher than another catcher or shortstop.

Looking at recent drafts, many of the college starters taken near the top have reached the majors within two years:

• 2022: Cade Horton
• 2023: Rhett Lowder (and of course, Paul Skenes goes without saying)
• 2024: Chase Burns

I'm not particularly confident that our pitching staff is going to be in great shape by 2028, which is why I keep wondering whether taking a starting pitcher in this draft might be the right move.

Sorry for my poor English, but I hope my point comes across.

Pitcher versus hitter has been debated quite a bit on this board.  Pick the right arm and it can change your team for years to come.

Here are some things I'd say teams likely consider if for this example we say Flora and Emerson are rated equally.

First a pitcher impacts your team once every 5 days and a position player impacts your team everyday.  So just based on that you can see a position player has a leg up in the debate.

Second arms (pitchers) get hurt at a higher rate than position players and the recovery for arms is longer than most injuries a position player would have.  Some arm injuries are career ending or turn your starter into a bullpen arm.  Position players get hurt too, but the risk there is lower than a pitcher.

Third you'll notice that because of the first and second reasons top position players tend to come off the board before arms.  With most position players of consequence gone by the second round.  Whereas impact arms can be found all over the draft.  Joe Ryan was a 7th round pick and there are plenty of other arms that have made it that are drafted lower.  The odds of a position player making it outside the second round are lower than finding an arm so the draft tends to go heavy on hitters in first two rounds and heavy on arms the rest of the way.  This is a long way of saying that if you don't get your bat right away you likely won't get one at all.

So IMO the odds favor you taking your position players early and hoping you find that diamond in the rough arm later,  Does that mean you should never take a pitcher early?  Of course not. Every prospect can fail despite the most glowing scouting reports.

IMO Times when it makes sense to take a pitcher high.

One would be if you are a rebuilding team.  Having a nearly complete pitcher draft from top to bottom would make sense.  Arms fail at a higher rate and you need high quality arms to compete.  Arms tend to take a bit longer to develop so getting started on building your rotation would make sense and you can buy impact bats easier (cheaper) than arms so it makes sense to start with arms.

Two would be teams like the Phillies, Dodgers or Yankee's who tend to like to buy their bats and have the means to buy bats so they can go arms early while other teams are grabbing position players.  Or if your team already has a great offense a pitcher draft can help as arms break down so much you always need pitching.

In conclusion I think all things being equal a team would take the position player simply based on impact and less risk. Still they can always choose to take a risk on any arm if they feel good about the player and every team needs a good 5 starters.  The Twins have had issues finding good bats to go along with good defense.  I'd expect them to go with a position player, but they have surprised us before and Flora looks to be a solid pick. We'll see what happens in a few weeks.

[Mike Sixel]

Either him or Flora or Lackey is my choice. If he falls to Minnesota, it will be ridiculous and awesome. 

[Dman]

39 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

I wonder how Cholowsky now compares to Brooks Lee when he was drafted?

I feel like there were more questions about Lee's power and his ability to stay at short than Cholowsky.  Lee was always expected to move off short but the bat was supposed to carry him.  I think Cholowsky would be rated quite a bit higher than Lee ever was but I think Lee was projected as top 5 in his draft as a fast moving bat first player.

[Mai.K]

32 minutes ago, Dman said:

Pitcher versus hitter has been debated quite a bit on this board.  Pick the right arm and it can change your team for years to come.

Here are some things I'd say teams likely consider if for this example we say Flora and Emerson are rated equally.

First a pitcher impacts your team once every 5 days and a position player impacts your team everyday.  So just based on that you can see a position player has a leg up in the debate.

Second arms (pitchers) get hurt at a higher rate than position players and the recovery for arms is longer than most injuries a position player would have.  Some arm injuries are career ending or turn your starter into a bullpen arm.  Position players get hurt too, but the risk there is lower than a pitcher.

Third you'll notice that because of the first and second reasons top position players tend to come off the board before arms.  With most position players of consequence gone by the second round.  Whereas impact arms can be found all over the draft.  Joe Ryan was a 7th round pick and there are plenty of other arms that have made it that are drafted lower.  The odds of a position player making it outside the second round are lower than finding an arm so the draft tends to go heavy on hitters in first two rounds and heavy on arms the rest of the way.  This is a long way of saying that if you don't get your bat right away you likely won't get one at all.

So IMO the odds favor you taking your position players early and hoping you find that diamond in the rough arm later,  Does that mean you should never take a pitcher early?  Of course not. Every prospect can fail despite the most glowing scouting reports.

IMO Times when it makes sense to take a pitcher high.

One would be if you are a rebuilding team.  Having a nearly complete pitcher draft from top to bottom would make sense.  Arms fail at a higher rate and you need high quality arms to compete.  Arms tend to take a bit longer to develop so getting started on building your rotation would make sense and you can buy impact bats easier (cheaper) than arms so it makes sense to start with arms.

Two would be teams like the Phillies, Dodgers or Yankee's who tend to like to buy their bats and have the means to buy bats so they can go arms early while other teams are grabbing position players.  Or if your team already has a great offense a pitcher draft can help as arms break down so much you always need pitching.

In conclusion I think all things being equal a team would take the position player simply based on impact and less risk. Still they can always choose to take a risk on any arm if they feel good about the player and every team needs a good 5 starters.  The Twins have had issues finding good bats to go along with good defense.  I'd expect them to go with a position player, but they have surprised us before and Flora looks to be a solid pick. We'll see what happens in a few weeks.

Wow, thank you for the thoughtful and detailed response.

I've been a member of this site since its early days, but because of the language barrier, I've usually just read the great posts here rather than replying to them. I've always been a little afraid to write responses in English, so I'm glad I decided to comment this time.

I always find the first point especially interesting because it highlights a different philosophy from Asian baseball. In Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, baseball culture tends to value pitchers far more than hitters.

When I look at our prospect rankings, I don't see many pitchers near the top. Beyond Joe Ryan, it feels like we're lacking a pitcher who can realistically lead the rotation in the near future. That's why I found myself hoping we might take the top pitcher available in this draft.

No matter who we select, I trust the organization to choose a good player and make the best decision possible. Still, I have to admit that my preference leans a little toward pitching.

Thanks again.

[Dman]

7 minutes ago, Mai.K said:

Wow, thank you for the thoughtful and detailed response.

I've been a member of this site since its early days, but because of the language barrier, I've usually just read the great posts here rather than replying to them. I've always been a little afraid to write responses in English, so I'm glad I decided to comment this time.

I always find the first point especially interesting because it highlights a different philosophy from Asian baseball. In Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, baseball culture tends to value pitchers far more than hitters.

When I look at our prospect rankings, I don't see many pitchers near the top. Beyond Joe Ryan, it feels like we're lacking a pitcher who can realistically lead the rotation in the near future. That's why I found myself hoping we might take the top pitcher available in this draft.

No matter who we select, I trust the organization to choose a good player and make the best decision possible. Still, I have to admit that my preference leans a little toward pitching.

Thanks again.

Teams have different philosophies.  I'd say the Miami Marlins are a team that prioritizes pitching and they have had some good arms over the years, but they have also struggled to find good bats to go with it.  It takes both good offense and defense to be a really good team. Balance is key when it comes to drafting unless you are a top revenue team as then you can just buy what you need no matter what happens in the draft.

Pitching is very important and you are not wrong in your statement about top of the rotation pitching for the Twins.  I would hope Bradley can be Joe Ryan like and was thinking Abel might be as well, but with his arm injuries that seems doubtful now.  I still think Prielipp and Rojas can be mid rotation guys a step below a Ryan type arm, but after that the there isn't much behind them.  I was hoping Hill and Soto two young arms would look closer to ready but they are not.  Quick was the Twins 1st round supplemental pick and has looked good in short stints, but has a ways to go.  Beyond those arms not much that I see for top of the rotation arms.  

So no question  the Twins could use more high quality arms.  We'll see what they do.  They watch all these players a ton so they should have a good idea of what direction they want to go.