Elegy for ’18 – Chicago Cubs

(Photo: Minda Haas Kuhlmann)
Some may say it was choking. Some may say it’s a new curse. Some may even say it was due to only scoring two runs in 22 innings of two must-win games against the Brewers and Rockies. However it happened, the Cubs were the first team dispatched of the ten playoff teams, baseball’s answer to the point-of-view character in the first chapter of a George RR Martin book.
The Setup
This may be a bit of obscure trivia, but the Chicago Cubs won the World Series in 2016, a matchup against the Cleveland Indians that determined which team could waste enough cheap beer to fill a very disappointing swimming pool.
Following up on a World Series championship is always a bit of a tricky problem to approach for a team. Since new seasons start every year–a very fortunate fact for those of us employed as baseball writers–there’s no final happy ending in which everyone walks off into the sunset. Even championship teams have difficult decisions to make, often centered around how much you’re willing to tinker with a winning roster while also keeping the team’s core more-or-less together.
The 2016 Cubs were lucky in that by-and-large, the team’s biggest offensive contributors were players you’d actually want to keep rather than ones you’d be tempted to cash in as trade chips at the first opportunity. The pitching staff was a bit older and required some work. But the Cubs went full-bore attempting to address those issues, bringing in Jose Quintana in 2017 and, in a very weak market, signing the best pitcher available prior to the 2018 season, Yu Darvish.
It’s weird to call a 92-70 season and a trip to the NLCS a disappointing season, but after winning 103 and looking like a team that could possibly challenge the 116-win mark in 2016, having an ordinary really good team made it seem like greed was no longer good.
While some people might lump the Cubs and Dodgers together as large-payroll teams with sabermetric front offices, there’s a very important difference between them, in that the Cubs are far more willing to gamble and swap their tippy-top prospects than the Dodgers are. Aroldis Chapman was a big part of the 2016 team — though I personally hated the trade and still do — and those flags fly forever. But there’s a downside in that you can’t always trade or buy precisely what you want; LA’s resistance to trading Walker Buehler is what enabled them to play Walker Buehler in 2018, after all.
Chicago entered the 2017-2018 offseason with plenty of money to play with, but outside of Darvish, not a lot in the way of interesting free agent targets. The Cubs were able to fatten up the bullpen with Brandon Morrow and Steve Cishek, but the team would start the 2018 season with the same question marks in the corner outfield as they had at the end of 2017.
The Projection
The ZiPS projection system was a bigger fan of the Brewers and Cardinals than some, but not to such a degree as to see the Cubs as anything but the clear, if not overwhelming, favorites to win the NL Central in 2018. ZiPS projected a 94-68 record, and a 72% shot at the division, not quite lapping the field. The team was too deep to fall too far and with a broadly talented and young core–at least in the lineup–it was hard to see acquiring the best pitcher available in free agency not pushing the team over the top.
The Results
Yu Darvish did in fact pitch for the Cubs in 2018, but only threw three quality starts and never got back into a game after mid-May, despite his constant rehabbing and the team’s insistence that his injury wasn’t considered that serious. The Cubs starting rotation combined for 8.9 WAR, the eight-worst of the 50 Cubs teams to play over the half-century of baseball’s divisional era. It’s even a bit worse than it sounds, as two of the years, 1981 and 1994, were strike-shortened seasons. And for awhile, it was looking worse than that; Chicago ranked 14th in the NL in starter FIP at the All-Star Break behind only the Reds.
Adding to the frustration was how many of the team’s hopes just never worked out. Sure, the odds are increasingly long that Jason Heyward ever looks like the player he provided glimpses of as a rookie again, but even some of the team’s more reasonable desires didn’t come to pass. Kyle Schwarber was run-of-the-mill after a hot April and Ian Happ took a step back with the bat, though he still demonstrated his versatility. Addison Russell may have played his last game as a Cub following a suspension under the league’s domestic violence policy. Even the über-dependable Kris Bryant’s shoulder sapped both his power and attendance.
Two pleasant surprises helped the Cubs finish with 95 wins and make the playoffs, a feat that was hardly a guarantee before the Phillies, Cardinals, and Diamondbacks all struggled down the stretch. Javier Baez continued to grow as a player, finishing second in the NL MVP voting, his glove once again looking like more of a plus than it appeared to be as a prospect. Give Christian Yelich a hot early season instead of a late one–and the Cubs a couple more runs–and Baez could very well have flipped the voters.
And Cole Hamels proved to be a revelation on his return to the National League. Hamels was hardly a hot commodity at the trade deadline; he posted a 4.72 ERA and a 5.20 FIP for the Rangers and his once-dominant changeup no longer embarrassed batters. To bring in Hamels and his 2.36 ERA/3.42 FIP/1.5 WAR stretch run, the Cubs gave up two prospects who likely weren’t in their top 25 and Eddie Butler, who has already been outrighted by the Rangers.
What Comes Next?
No, the Cubs are not planning a fire sale. There was brief panic in some circles when rumors swirled that the team was willing to talk about anyone on their roster, but far more was read into that than was warranted. Good teams should be willing to discuss trades involving anyone on the roster, even their franchise players, though the price for a Mike Trout or Mookie Betts is likely to prove too rich for most. The team’s core ought to be intact in 2019, and short of some earth-shattering move next month, Kris Bryant, Anthony Rizzo, Javier Baez, etc. will all still be wearing Cubbie Blue.
Chicago isn’t going to start dumping even their expensive talent, but this may be an offseason in which you see the team largely stay out of the pitching market. Darvish is far from done and Hamels is set to return after the club picked up his 2019 option year. A Lester-Darvish-Hendricks-Quintana-Hamels rotation looks stronger in the back end than it did even in 2016, strong enough, in fact, that Tyler Chatwood should only see a significant number of starts if very bad things happen to the Cubs or a wizard tricks another team into acquiring him.
Epstein and Friends have probably reached the point at which they can admit to themselves that Schwarber is unlikely to become one of the game’s premiere power hitters and that Heyward is unlikely to do anything but eke out average seasons supported largely by glovework, which means the team’s interests and cash align in the pursuit of Bryce Harper. Signing him would at least guarantee the Cubs start 2019 as the divisional favorite once again.
Early ZiPS Projection, Kris Bryant
ZiPS can deal with things like shoulder injuries in a rather general sort of way, so Kris Bryant’s weird 2018 isn’t an obstacle to checking in on his long-term projection, though it obviously increases the uncertainty. Coming into 2018, ZiPS projected Bryant to have the largest cache of WAR remaining in his career, ahead of Jose Ramirez, Manny Machado, Nolan Arenado, Alex Bregman, and Rafael Devers (in that order), so I was interested to see the projected cost of 2018 for Bryant. After all, Adrian Beltre’s retirement has given me third baseman-related baseball sads.
| Year | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | DR | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | .270 | .365 | .501 | 563 | 92 | 152 | 36 | 5 | 28 | 85 | 72 | 148 | 6 | 124 | 3 | 4.3 |
| 2020 | .266 | .362 | .500 | 542 | 89 | 144 | 36 | 5 | 27 | 83 | 70 | 145 | 6 | 123 | 2 | 4.0 |
| 2021 | .265 | .361 | .497 | 529 | 86 | 140 | 35 | 5 | 26 | 80 | 68 | 138 | 6 | 122 | 1 | 3.8 |
ZiPS does see a return of Bryant to the star tier and a return of most of his power. But his ceiling is also a bit lower than it was a year ago, and there’s no ironclad law of baseball injuries that says his power must come back. ZiPS expected 5.8 WAR from Bryant coming into 2018. That’s 4.3 now and overall, the difference trims about 10 WAR off of his expected career totals. That’s enough to kick him out of the first-place spot for rest-of-career performance among third basemen (though, since I’m a bad man, you’ll have to wait and see which player or players has passed him in the projections).
Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.
This seems pretty spot on.
One thing people forget is that the cubs won the 2016 World Series because they had a pitching staff where almost every player had career years, against a decimated Indians team, in a weak overall year for baseball.
I’m not taking anything away from what they did, I’m just highlighting the fact that almost their entire lineup was PROSPECTS when they won. Most of their flaws were covered up by the magic pitching staff and a super super weak NL.
Now that the book is out on some of these guys, I think fans are having a hard time realizing that these guys they thought were good major leaguers are actually still prospects who have been figured out:
Schwarber: complete platoon bat with no position
Russell: terrible bat that is unplayable
Happ: Just brutal
Almora: deficiencies hidden by platoon starts
These add up to 4 guys who aren’t all stars or even everyday starters on the same team. Fortunately, they won the World Series before these guys got exposed for what they are: not allstar prospects.
Fortunately they have spent and will continue to spend more money than their competition to cover many of these holes. Their 2019 pitching staff will be more expensive than at least 33% of payrolls.
I was a pretty big Schwarber-in-LF skeptic, but his positioning has been good enough to mask his mobility issues and the arm has been awesome. And he does hit well enough.
Happ’s big problem is (a) strikeouts, and (b) that he’s a jack of all trades, master of none defensively. There are some good reasons to worry about his bat once his BABIP comes back to earth, but “just brutal” is a pretty big overstatement considering that he’s a league-average hitter right now.
The Cubs will spend, but will they spend enough to cover their holes? All indications are that they intend to stay below the luxury tax threshold. If they do that, they can’t make any major additions this offseason. So, with a barren farm system, how are they going to change anything this offseason? Theo has his work cut out for him if he wants to keep this team in contention.
This is not true. If you included their arb estimates (guys like Bryant, Hendricks, etc), the Cubs payroll for 2019 is already at $225mil. THere are rumors that they would like to stay under the highest tier of the luxury tax ($246mil), but they are absolutely going to be paying the tax in 2019.
Ian Happ had a 106 wRC+ playing multiple positions. Interesting definition of “brutal”
Yeah never mind that they were a historically good fielding team with the 4th best offense in MLB in 2016. But otherwise spot on man.
“almost their entire lineup was PROSPECTS when they won”
False.
-Rizzo 676 PAs
-Zobrist 631
-Heyward 592
-Fowler 551
-Montero + Ross 489
Why call the 2016 Cubs lineup prospects, and then highlight four guys who were mostly backups?
Russell had 598 PA and 4.1 WAR that year.
Happ (0 PA), Almora (117 PA) and Schwarber (5 PA) combined for 122 PA for the 2016 World Champs.
In a perfect world where Bryant, Darvish, and Morrow all have healthy returns and career average results, the Cubs are in a great position. But those things alone do not seem enough to overcome those pesky AL’s super teams.
Cubs have tons of money despite the high payroll and have a new TV deal looming. Knowing that Theo is definitely reading my comments online, I’d say signing one of the top tier free agents could be a way to help boost the money in the TV deal. The initial ratings increase from the excitement over signing someone like Bryce could bring certainly help in their negotiations.
Theo, sign Bryce. Then reply to this comment with an email I can send my resume/cover letter to. Plz.
Super Teams, eh. Is that you Travis?
Do you ever add anything intelligent OGB?
Something that has been brought up on other Cubs Insider blogs is the Cub’s struggles against power pitching, one thing Heyward and AA do well against (as does Bryant and Zo – Bote, if he adapts). So a platoon in CF of Heyward and AA works.
The Cubs also love versatility, most teams do now. Machado makes more sense, to me. He also does well against power pitching.
I always felt Bryant was destined for RF anyway. But with 3 LHed starters going in to 2019, that versatility will help. Javy can play 3 infield positions; Machado 2; Bryant can play third and all 3 OF; Happ is serviceable at 5 positions; Zo is Zo. And on any given day the Cubs would have a combination of Zo, Happ, AA, Heyward, Bote and Schwarber off the bench.
I also expect Contreras to bounce back if they lighten his load.
I could live with that.
Theo always leans towards quantity in his bullpen, so I do not see major signings there, maybe one.
The farm might be barren, but they have some intriguing arms there that could contribute out of the pen (or more) in 2019, at some point.
Nico Hoerner may be a fast mover and Zack Short was a top 5 Fringe 5 last year, both could contribute late season.
I could see them moving any combination of Schwarber and Monty/Q though.
Would love Marwin Gonzalez. And Pollack, if they bypass the big 2.
Yes, a Lester-Darvish-Hendricks-Quintana-Hamels looks deep, in the sense that we should see some bounce backs and so no one is likely to be terrible, but keep in mind this is a rotation that literally had no one with more than 2 fWAR in 2018 except Hendricks (although Hamels had 2 on the dot) and they’re all pretty old. It’s crazy to think that Hendricks is probably going to be their best pitcher next year, considering that 2 or 3 years ago the other four all looked like solid #2 starters (and in short stints, sometimes better).
More generally, this is a team that has made a ton of big moves for veterans (both in trades and FA) and almost none of them look like excellent bets for 2019. The saving grace is that the veterans make the team deep enough around its core of Bryant-Rizzo-Baez-Contreras that even without upgrades they’re still a good shot to win the division again, and that pretty much everyone in that core is signed through 2021. I think that given how much money they have, it’s worth it to throw a bunch of money at Harper or Machado, see if you can get another ring, and if it doesn’t work, reverse course. The Cubs’ only top-notch prospect isn’t due up until 2022 or 2023 anyway (Amaya).
This team is good and so fun to watch, but the pitching staff is frightening.
Hendricks is a totally different pitcher when he sits 87/88 than when he’s 86/87. He’s not likely to tick up.
Lester is part wizard, but still an aging wizard. How he continues to flirt with 80% strand rates is too consistent to be lucky but not something on which I’d want to bet.
Hamels was stellar and there’s enough of a change in his repertoire (riding his FB more and he goosed his velocity across the board), but recency bias is hard to overcome. His 2017/2018 were rough until he rejoined the NL.
Darvish and Quintana could be wonderful but are certainly ¯\_(?)_/¯.
The defense will take a hit without Addy. He wasn’t the bat (or person) most thought he’d be, but he gobbled up a lot of contact. BABIP suppression has been a thing but the defense can’t do anything about the denominator.
Yeah, I feel like all of those pitchers could either be solid 2s or age into middling 3s. Darvish is probably the only guy who still has ace potential, and of course that probability seems to get increasingly more unlikely.
Last year, they were pretty much all 4s and 5s. I think it’s reasonable to expect some regression to their career norms, but they’re also getting older.
I know nobody fully trusts defensive metrics, but it’s weird to me that even on Fangraphs nobody seems to appreciate that Kyle Schwarber just put up a 3.2 fWAR season with a career low K%, a career high BB% (albeit aided by IBBs), and he even managed a .352 OBP/85 wRC+ against LHP, which is hardly unplayable. He had a drop off after his hot start, but still put up 4 above-average offensive months and only really struggled coming out of the ASB, before a strong finish that was interrupted by a bad back down the stretch.
Since the start of June 2017, Schwarber has hit .240/.349/.500 (120 wRC+) over 790 PAs (even better against RHP). I don’t necessarily expect him to be an elite bat anymore (though I wouldn’t rule it out), but I think he’s established himself as a solidly above average regular who is one of the Cubs players I trust the most going forward after Bryant and Rizzo.
One problem with going after Harper is simply money: the Cubs are going to run one of the highest payroll commitments in 2019, if not *the* highest, after accounting for all of the arbitration raises that are coming down the pipe. Even the Red Sox won’t crest over them unless they sign someone significant (which they very well might do).
So yes, Harper would make the Cubs instantly a lot better in an important area of need, and it would allow them to free up Schwarber as a trade chip, perhaps to pluck some bullpen help or just restock the farm a little bit, but I just don’t think they have the money to convert an early-arbitration contract into a Scrooge McDuck free agent, even when the production gap is so massive.
If the cubs don’t have the ability to run a super high payroll, then who does? The Yankees are the only team you could argue is more of an “evil empire” than the cubs. I expect the cubs to outspend the Brewers by $100M again if not $150M. They just need to fully commit to being the Evil Empire instead of this 90% evil (oh look at us we develop from within) crap. They beat teams by outspending, not by outdeveloping. They just need to admit it, loud and proud.
They’ve always had the ability to spend that much. Their revenues are enormous. The question is whether management wants that.
Yup I’d like to see the Cubs pass on Harper and sign Pollock and get more pitching depth.
I don’t really think that’s such a big deal from a competitive standpoint. They have tons of money. And thanks to the declining salaries from some of their bigger names, they actually are projected to clock in for similar salary commitments without losing anyone of note. It hurts that they have 45M tied up in Heyward and Darvish, but otherwise their long-term balance sheet looks fine.
The bigger issue is that they have so much depth and make such good use of platoons that there’s no way to upgrade cheaply. Which 2-win (or more) position player or rotation member would they bump? Which platoon are they going to disrupt, and will it actually upgrade the lineup or just cost more? Maybe they just get some relievers in FA, but big contracts for relievers are kind of a bad idea most of the time and I think the Cubs know this. If they want to do more than tinker around the edges and really want to maximize the current window, they probably have to spend big.
Theo is a great GM but his track record with free agents has a few blemishes, both in Boston and Chicago. He does well with trades. And considering that lefthanded power is not quite their biggest need, I can’t quite see them going after Harper.
Machado is a better fit. Little question about his defense, too. Replaces Russell and keeps the rest of the infield where their defense is best.
Beyond that, a trade or two might round out a better team, moving Russell, maybe Happ, and sundry parts for an innings eater as insurance or maybe a buy low swing man. Dunno, but I’m thinking Mets. Lagares, Wheeler, plus?
A team that embraced Reyes wouldn’t mind Russell’s baggage, would they?
I just have to point it out every time I see it or hear it. Epstein is the president of baseball ops. Jed Hoyer is the gm. Those are the roles they have both always had since the beginning of their respective tenures with the cubs. I agree with all that other stuff though. Besides Machado. If Baez were to come down to earth even a bit from his production last year. I still prefer his, or for that matter, anyone’s defense at short over machado. Machado can rake but I think his audition this year pretty well proved to everyone he is 100% a 3rd baseman.
Machado would most likely end up at 3B since any contract would be longer than his ability to fake it at SS but if getting him to sign requires playing along with his ego…
The problem with moving Baez to short is it weakens 2B and nobody they put there will match Machado’s bat of Javy’s defense. And the rotation would still need backup. And if Bryant’s power doesn’t come back they’d have to look for it elsewhere.
Machado is about as good as they can get for 19 and beyond.
Only way to clear up machado money is to somehow convince Hayward to wave his NTC. Or find a suiter that’s on his list. I’m not totally sure of the specifics of it. I just know he has partial trade protection 2019 and beyond. I guess if they package Russell and some cash with that. They may have a chance to do that. Even in a world where they could manage that , I’d rather see the cubs go after a pollock and some depth than just spend on one big FA. The core position players are there. And if they want to hold onto Bryant long term they’re going to need to hold on to some money.
All fair points.
But Machado remains a better fit than Harper, no?
And moving Russell leaves a hole in the middle infield unless you’re willing to live with Happ/Zobrist at 2B. And that still leaves rotation quality/depth a concern.
They can live with what they have but the risk of injury/decline is very real. Maybe they’re handcuffed and have to go dumpster diving but with their revenue streams they shouldn’t have to.
They should be able to afford longer term solutions.
Some cash? It will take a big pile of cash. Heyward is worth 0 once his defense declines.
Heyward’s no trade clause is not the major issue with trading him to help “clear up Machado money”. His performance over the last 3 years compared to the remaining money on his contract is the issue.
Heyward was a 2 WAR player in 2018, and that was the best of his last 3 seasons: he was a 1 WAR player in each of 2016 and 2017. His remaining contract totals 5 years / $106 million. He’s 29 years old. His realistic mean projection for 2019 is something like a 1.5 WAR player, with annual declines thereafter because of where he’s at on the aging curve. He’s now had a long enough stretch of below average to average seasons (3) that I don’t realistically see that any team would bet a lot of money on the upside of Heyward returning to the ~5 WAR player that he was years ago.
How much guaranteed money would Heyward get as a free agent? Something like $30 to $40 million seems like a stretch, and that would be in a contract with some team favorable structures that aren’t part of his current contract (e.g., a team option year tacked on to the back of it). Realistically, the Cubs would have to eat ~70% of Heyward’s remaining contract to trade him, which doesn’t free up that much money at all relative to the likely contract for Machado, either in actual cash or in the contract AAV calculation for luxury tax. The latter is important since the Cubs will be over the luxury tax threshold in 2019 and look like they’ll stay for there for a few years as players keep progressing through arbitration and it looks like the team will continue to need to be active in free agency with players who roll off contracts, particularly pitchers.
Wheeler just had a breakout year and looked like the legitimate ace he’s always had the potential to be. He put up more fWar last year than Russell has the past two years combined. You want him, Lagares (who for better or worse is our opening day CF right now and might still be elite defensively), PLUS MORE in exchange for Russell and all his baggage (which would also mean giving up on Rosario already) and “sundry parts”? Come on…
I’ve been reading some stupid trade proposals for Mets starting pitchers lately. I know the Mets are being morons by floating around the idea of dealing Syndergaard, but they’ve been pretty clear they would want elite talent back. I know everyone still loves “LOLMets” but I don’t know where everyone has suddenly gotten the idea that they are looking to give away all their SPs for other team’s spare parts.
There has been zero indications from the local journalists that cover the Cubs that they are going after big free agents this year. Harper is a pipe dream not based in reality. They recently traded Smyly to save a few million dollars, so they are going to give hundreds of millions more to Harper?
When the Ricketts purchased the Cubs and Trib a few years ago it was heavily leveraged. As of 2014 it was estimated their annual debt servicing payments were between $30m and $35m a year. They have also made significant real estate acquisitions around Wrigley and continue to spend upgrading the park and surrounding neighborhood.
All indications point to the Cubs being close to their salary cap. Don’t expect any major signings or acquisitions without corresponding moves to reduce payroll. If the Cubs were flush with cash as some think I would have expected them to eat Chatwoods salary who remains a liability on the 25 man roster. He isn’t suited to start or relieve, the Cubs have pitching depth, so why did they trade Smyly instead of cutting Chatwood?
Great points on the debt service. It is a real obligation but it pales in comparison to the increase in valuation (real estate and stadium upgrades, WS win) which makes it more of a cash flow argument. The argument *for* spending in order to boost cash flow is that they will likely own their own television station soon (2020?) and ratings (i.e. ad sales) will become a more important revenue driver.
Exactly. This team has proven they aren’t going to play by the same rules as about 26 other teams (fiscal responsibility). They simply don’t need to; they print money. That’s why Jed Hoyer was able to spend half a billion dollars in 2015-2016 to buy the World Series.
I can’t imagine the upper limits of spending have even been close to approached at $225M. Is it possible they don’t want to BLATANTLY look like the team that spends the most, that they’d rather hide all the way back as the second or third biggest spender?
Schwarber was still #3 in WAR on the team among position players, #4 overall.
STUNNED not to see Trout anywhere on this list:
“Coming into 2018, ZiPS projected Bryant to have the largest cache of WAR remaining in his career, ahead of Jose Ramirez, Manny Machado, Nolan Arenado, Alex Bregman, and Rafael Devers (in that order)”
Dan, what gives? (Trout is only a year older than Ramirez & Machado, does age really make that much of a difference?)
I thought the same as you but I think he’s only talking 3Bmen.
LMOTFOTE is correct. “Among 3B” is a very crucial phrase that I left out!