Cubs Remake Risky Bullpen by Adding More Risk
If there were a rule that prevented World Series champions from making moves during the offseason following a championship, the Chicago Cubs would likely be one of the teams best able to withstand such a handicap. In their rotation, they return their four best starters and plan to move bullpen acquisition Mike Montgomery to the rotation. On the position-player side the team loses center fielder Dexter Fowler but remains pretty well insulated to withstand his loss by fielding good players at every other spot.
The bullpen, however, would be another matter under the terms of this hypothetical scenario. The Cubs entered the offseason with a number of questions in the bullpen, and they have answered those questions with high-risk, high-reward relievers who could give the Cubs one of the best bullpens in baseball.
Entering the 2016 season, the Cubs’ two best relievers were expected to be Hector Rondon and Pedro Strop. Along with depth in the form of Trevor Cahill, Justin Grimm, Adam Warren, and Travis Wood, the Cubs began the season with a bullpen that ranked eighth in our 2016 Positional Power Rankings. It was a solid, but not spectacular, group.
Sensing an opportunity to win their first World Series title in a considerable time, the club decided to shore up that bullpen at midseason by bringing in Aroldis Chapman and Montgomery. While Chapman didn’t perform as well in the playoffs as he did in the regular season, the innings total of Cubs relievers in the playoffs reveals the importance of the team’s midseason additions.
| Player | IP |
|---|---|
| Aroldis Chapman | 15.2 |
| Mike Montgomery | 14.1 |
| Travis Wood | 6.1 |
| Carl Edwards | 6.1 |
| Hector Rondon | 6.0 |
| Pedro Strop | 5.2 |
| Justin Grimm | 4.1 |
| Jon Lester | 3.0 |
The Cubs’ two midseason acquisitions pitched roughly 50% of the team’s postseason bullpen innings, while the stalwarts from the beginning of the season recorded less than 20% of those crucial outs. Both Rondon and Strop suffered injuries in the second half and Cubs manager Joe Maddon was reluctant to rely on them in pressure situations. While Montgomery is still on the team, his role has likely changed. Meanwhile, is Chapman headed back to New York with the Yankees, and lefty Travis Wood is also a free agent.
So heading into the offseason, the Cubs’ depth chart in the bullpen, using a mix of Steamer and ZiPS projections, looked something like this:
| Name | IP | WAR |
|---|---|---|
| Hector Rondon | 60 | 0.9 |
| Pedro Strop | 60 | 0.8 |
| Carl Edwards Jr. | 60 | 0.4 |
| Justin Grimm | 55 | 0.4 |
| Felix Pena | 40 | 0.2 |
| Rob Zastryzny | 50 | 0 |
| Spencer Patton | 35 | 0 |
| Jake Buchanan | 30 | 0 |
| Conor Mullee | 20 | 0 |
| Zac Rosscup | 15 | 0 |
| John Leathersich | 15 | 0 |
| Duane Underwood | 15 | 0 |
| Caleb Smith | 10 | 0 |
| Total | 465 | 2.7 |
If you squint, it bears some resemblance to last year’s preseason bullpen, but there are quite a few problems. The projections for Rondon and Strop have come down just a bit, the projection for Grimm is way down, and the team lacks the MLB-level talent provided by Cahill, Warren, and Wood — even if they weren’t expected to provide a great deal of help. The emergence of Carl Edwards helps some, but given the way Rondon and Strop ended the season, the bullpen wasn’t too far away from resembling the mess of the San Francisco Giants last year. Given those projections, the Cubs bullpen likely would have been in the bottom 10 of the Power Rankings next season, a ranking that would have made no sense given the Cubs’ resources. The team has since used those resources to make the bullpen significantly better.
They started off by making a small move, signing Brian Duensing to a one-year, $2 million contract. A couple years back, in 2012 and 2013, Duensing was a solid reliever, transitioning from starting, but he’s mostly dealt with ineffectiveness since then. He has performed better against lefties than righties and he might carve out a role with the Cubs as a lefty specialist who gets occasional extra work, not too different from the Travis Wood role last season.
The next move the Cubs made was a big one, trading Jorge Soler for Wade Davis. Most, including Dave Cameron, saw the move as a win-win. Davis has just one year remaining on his contract before he hits free agency next season, and he was injured for part of last season. However, when he has pitched, he’s been one of the very best relievers in baseball, and he pitched well at the end of last season. Our depth charts current have Davis at 1.7 WAR for next season. Only Andrew Miller, Aroldis Chapman, Kenley Jansen, Dellin Betances, Zach Britton, and Edwin Diaz have higher figures.
Even if Davis falters, Chicago might still have a decent bullpen due to their most recent signing: Koji Uehara. The 41-year-old, splitter-throwing righty signed a one-year deal for $6 million. Given the modesty of the deal, it was never going to draw the attention that other reliever signings garnered this winter, but it could prove to be very beneficial. Uehara is an extreme fly-ball pitcher who has gradually, and understandably, lost some velocity over the years. Given his fly-ball tendencies, his value over the years has often been predicated with keeping the ball in the yard.
In the five seasons when Uehara’s HR/FB% has been less than 10%, he’s averaged a 2.48 FIP. In the three seasons where his HR/FB% has been greater than 10%, he’s averaged a 3.21 FIP. The latter number is still good, but in two of those seasons, 2011 and 2014, Uehara’s walk rate was below 4%. That walk rate sat at 6% last season. That’s also still quite good, but when paired with a 13.3% HR/FB rate, his 3.51 FIP and 0.6 WAR represented the worst season of his career.
Considering his age, it would be quite fair to assume an even greater decline next season. However, Uehara’s still posting very good strikeout and walk numbers. Assuming an average home-run rate, Uehara projects for a 3.32 FIP and 1.2 WAR next season. He might be better and he could very well be worse. His ceiling is limited by his relative lack of durability — he hasn’t pitched more than 50 innings in either of the last two years — but when the ball stays in the park, he’s going to be very effective.
Bullpen performance is no sure thing, and predicting it is incredibly difficult. What the Cubs appear to have done, though, is collect a set of high-risk players in a position that is already high-risk — and to hope that some of those risks pan out. The rewards could be great. Our depth-chart projections page for the Cubs currently looks like this:
| Name | IP | K/9 | BB/9 | HR/9 | BABIP | LOB% | ERA | FIP | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wade Davis | 65 | 11.0 | 3.1 | 0.7 | .293 | 76.8% | 2.76 | 2.89 | 1.7 |
| Koji Uehara | 65 | 10.3 | 2.3 | 1.1 | .283 | 75.9% | 3.18 | 3.31 | 1.2 |
| Hector Rondon | 55 | 9.7 | 2.6 | 0.8 | .296 | 74.6% | 3.10 | 3.17 | 0.9 |
| Carl Edwards Jr. | 55 | 11.2 | 4.9 | 0.7 | .294 | 76.4% | 3.16 | 3.43 | 0.5 |
| Pedro Strop | 45 | 10.5 | 3.5 | 0.7 | .298 | 75.8% | 2.90 | 3.08 | 0.5 |
| Justin Grimm | 40 | 10.0 | 3.6 | 0.9 | .295 | 74.9% | 3.32 | 3.46 | 0.3 |
| Brian Duensing | 35 | 7.9 | 3.4 | 0.9 | .293 | 73.8% | 3.64 | 3.97 | 0.1 |
| Rob Zastryzny | 30 | 8.5 | 3.4 | 0.9 | .294 | 74.2% | 3.52 | 3.80 | 0.1 |
| Felix Pena | 25 | 9.9 | 3.6 | 0.9 | .293 | 74.7% | 3.37 | 3.54 | 0.1 |
| Spencer Patton | 20 | 10.3 | 4.0 | 0.9 | .295 | 74.6% | 3.45 | 3.61 | 0 |
| Jake Buchanan | 15 | 6.8 | 2.4 | 1.0 | .299 | 71.6% | 3.78 | 3.93 | 0 |
| Conor Mullee | 10 | 8.6 | 3.7 | 1.0 | .299 | 72.5% | 3.92 | 4.01 | 0 |
| Zac Rosscup | 10 | 9.9 | 4.3 | 1.0 | .295 | 74.4% | 3.81 | 3.99 | 0 |
| John Leathersich | 10 | 10.5 | 4.6 | 0.8 | .293 | 75.7% | 3.37 | 3.69 | 0 |
| Duane Underwood | 10 | 7.6 | 4.1 | 1.1 | .294 | 71.7% | 4.24 | 4.47 | 0 |
| Caleb Smith | 10 | 8.0 | 3.6 | 1.0 | .294 | 73.4% | 3.80 | 4.10 | 0 |
| Total | 474 | 10.0 | 3.3 | 0.8 | .292 | 75.5% | 3.15 | 3.37 | 5.5 |
By projections, the Cubs have gone from one of the worst 10 bullpens in baseball to the third best. While the Cubs are taking on a lot of risk, Davis, Rondon, and Uehara could all profile as very good to elite next season. Edwards, Jr. and Strop also have some upside. If everything works out, this bullpen is fantastic. Everything isn’t likely to work out, and some combination of those top guys will likely be hurt or prove to be ineffective. That is still an okay outcome for a Cubs team that doesn’t need a great bullpen to be a great team.
By taking on a bunch of risks, the Cubs have increased their chances of having an elite reliever without paying the price of the big free agents who were on the market. It’s possible the Cubs could still be searching for a better bullpen at some point next season, but they have done a good job at deepening their pen and insuring against disaster.
Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.
I’m just glad that they’re moving on from the “stash our 6th-8th SP in the bullpen” strategy that has led to them having 3-4 effective guys and 3-4 questionable longmen for the last couple years. At least now if one of the top guys goes down, it’s a real bullpen arm stepping in to fill the space, not Trevor Cahill. Will be interesting to see what they do if their rotation doesn’t luck into 100% health for a second straight year, though.
Although Montgomery was pretty useful
There’s a name on this chart that can be a wildcard it’s Duane Underwood. If made in to a full time reliever his stuff is so good in short stints I would expect him to fly through the minors. Another couple of interesting names with great 2 pitch combos are pierce Johnson and Corey black. Mid to upper 90’s with great breaking stuff, some control issues but the stuff is there for late inning roles.
Leatherisch is also interesting as a loogy, so many k’s.
Underwood Johnson and Black all had bad years in the minors last year. If the Cubs have to rely on them, they are in trouble. And I wouldn’t say their stuff is “great”
Underwood and Johnson were hurt, black is more just a wildcard but he is near big league ready. Underwood and black have great stuff, black has the worst control though. Johnson is more very good stuff I’ll give you that, remember out of the pen it only takes 2 pitches.
Inconsequential point here, of course, but Rosscup, Mullee and Patton are, at least currently, not Cubs.
Rosscup & Mullee resigned minor league deals. Patton has gone to Asia though
http://www.thecubreporter.com/12132016/cubs-sign-four-free-agent-pitchers-minor-league-contracts
Would San Diego take Duensing and Caleb Smith for Brad Hand? Who says no to that?
I’m curious (not trying to be belligerent), can you be more specific with regard to what you mean by high risk and high reward, why that applies to the Cubs pen (and presumably not the average pen) and briefly what evidence you have for whatever definition you put on high risk and/or high reward?
The normal definition would be that the spread of outcomes is either large or tending towards being binary or bimodal, but more importantly, more-so than some baseline or average outcome. In other words, it wouldn’t be very interesting to call a player or group of players high reward/high risk if everyone were like that or the average were like that.
Writers throw those words around cavalierly and as always I must question their use.
I thought it was pretty clear that the risk added was Davis’ injury history and Uehara’s age/decline. He repeatedly called their additions high risk/high reward, not the bullpen as a whole.
If writers use “high risk/high reward” so often, then perhaps the “normal” definition is actually their cavalier one.
Garys of Olde – agree with your first point, in that he was actually talking about the Cubs decreasing the risk in their bullpen by adding high risk/high reward guys.
But on the definition of “high risk/high reward”, if the expression is used too often, how meaningful is it? That would be like commenting on a student getting “top grades” at a school where 95% of the grades awarded are A’s – in that situation the phrase “top grades” means a heck of a lot less than at a school where only the top 15-20% make A’s. MGL’s point is relevant (and a good topic for someone to look into.)
Davis is high-risk/high-reward with his injury history.
Uehara looks the opposite: low-reward due to age, low-risk due to cost.
And “high risk/high” reward has a technical meaning where it’s appropriate to take a prescriptive linguistic approach. If it’s misused it’s wrong, rather than evolving. Descriptive linguistic approaches simply do not apply with technical terms.
Okay.
What does age have to do with potential reward? If age makes it low reward wouldn’t it also make it high risk for injury?
I assumed it was about the likely outcomes being at the extremes of the spectrum. Davis and Uehara are most likely to either have great seasons or get injured and hardly pitch. “Normal” pitchers might also have a high potential of getting hurt (though likely less than these two) but would also have a high percentage chance of just being healthy but mediocre, which is very unlikely with these two.
Of the top six relievers, three of them have one remaining year of control – Davis, Uehara, and Strop. Rondon and Grimm have two remaining years of control, and Edwards is pre-arb. At the tail end of last season there were two arms that came up that impressed during their small samples:
Rob Zastryzny is a lefty who pitched to a 9.56 k/9 and 2.15 FIP in 16 innings.
Felix Pena is a righty who pitches to a 13.00 k/9 and 2.70 FIP in 9 innings.
Edwards might deserve a little more of a nob in this article, though I understand he isn’t really the subject. A 37.7 K% in his debut suggests a guy who has really elite potential.
Uehara is an interesting fit for Wrigley because you can choose to deploy him based on the wind conditions. With the wind blowing in, pitcher-friendly Wrigley is a far cry from Fenway, and Uehara would probably dominate in those conditions. With the wind blowing out, just use someone else.
Counterpoint: all bullpens are risky.
The Cubs bullpen is the dodgers’ rotation…well without Kershaw and Hill
The title and opening of this piece had me poised to fire off a comment to the effect of what bullpen isn’t risky”….but as i read the whole thing, that was entirely the point. Nicely done, you got me.
The projections don’t really illuminate what we saw from Zastrzny though…he looks like a nice replacement for Travis Wood.
The title got me too, but I think the point is actually the last paragraph:
“By taking on a bunch of risks, the Cubs have increased their chances of having an elite reliever without paying the price of the big free agents who were on the market. It’s possible the Cubs could still be searching for a better bullpen at some point next season, but they have done a good job at deepening their pen and insuring against disaster.”
In other words:
Shallow bullpen without elite reliever + several “high risk/high reward” additions = Less risky bullpen.
I know nothing about this guy, but John Leathersich and his projected 3.37 ERA seem interesting.
5’11 lefty coming off Tommy John surgery with a history of control problems with his low-90’s fastball…but also a history of crazy high K rates because of the deception/late life on that fastball. A lottery ticket to be an effective, non-LOOGY reliever.
Here’s an interview he had with David Laurila from three years ago:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/qa-jack-leathersich-new-york-mets-pitching-prospect/
Leathersich is a wild card indeed. I saw a bit of him with with 2015 Mets, but not enough to understand his weird minor-league stats.
For one thing, his crazy 15.0 K/9 comes with 6.9 H/9, a very odd coupling. The 5 MLBers with 300 career IP and at least 12.0 K/9 all gave 6.6 H/9 or less, often much less. The top 14 MLB seasons by K/9 (14.6 and up) all had 6.7 H/9 or less, usually much less.
I’d love to see him stick with the Cubs, but he’s 26 now and his walks have climbed as he’s climbed the ladder — 10% BB through high-A, 14% since, and the same in that brief MLB stint. No one sticks long in the majors over 12% any more; Chapman’s the active RP leader at 11.6%.
Kind of off topic.
When you mentioned that Uehara is an extreme fly-ball pitcher, it made me wonder if the Cubs would be an especially good fit for him if they only let him pitch when the wind is blowing in.
You always hear about the wind at Wrigley, and I wonder if it’s overplayed. Has anyone done a study on HR/FB rates dependent on wind speed and direction?
“plan to move bullpen acquisition Mike Montgomery to the rotation”
You aren’t the only person suggesting this, but there’s almost no evidence to support it. The Cubs plan is to acquire a starter with years under team control. If their plan was to move Montgomery to the rotation, why would they be talking about Sale, Archer, other Rays starters, etc.? If the season started today, Montgomery would be the #5, but they have 3 months to find another starter and push Montgomery back to 6th starter.