How the Cubs Dynasty Could Collapse
It’s been about a week since the Chicago Cubs won the World Series. A few days less than that since the parade. And while there will always be time for remembering this season and this team’s accomplishments, it’s okay to look forward, as well. After the Cubs won last week, Dave Cameron wrote that the Cubs have a chance at creating a dynasty, not unlike the New York Yankees two decades ago. That possibility certainly exists — and just about all the evidence we have regarding the Cubs right now suggests that they’re going to be a good baseball team for the foreseeable future. There are no guarantees.
Two days ago, Jeff Sullivan turned the FanGraphs Depth Charts numbers, based on Steamer projections, into a way-too-early projection for next season. The Cubs are already situated in the mid-90s for wins — and that’s even after accounting for the loss of starting center fielder Dexter Fowler. When we talk about the future of the Cubs, we focus on the position players, as well we should. The position players are the Cubs strength — and for the most part, they’re young and cheap, allowing the Cubs to spend money elsewhere to fill holes.
So even if the Cubs do nothing, they head to next season with a strong core both on offense and defense. Kris Bryant isn’t likely to be as good as he was this past year, but the projections factor that in. Anthony Rizzo is projected for another good year. Javier Baez and Addison Russell, both of whom retain considerable upside, are projected for similar years. Willson Contreras is expected to continue his promising transition to the big leagues.
There are certainly going to be concerns about Jason Heyward at the plate — and, to a lesser degree, in the field, if he has to play center in a full-time capacity. He’s not going to cost the team runs, but replacing an outfield alignment of Bryant/Soler/Zobrist (in left field), Fowler (in center), and Heyward (right) with Schwarber, Heyward, and Zobrist, respectively, is going to downgrade the defense a bit. The projections assume that 36-year-old Ben Zobrist will also decline just a bit from his solid 2016 campaign.
But even if Zobrist starts aging poorly, Heyward fails to rebound, and Schwarber is unable to return to previous form, the club is still in good shape on the position-player side of things. That said, there’s no guarantee for success. Even if the Cubs hit well again and defend well again, a return to the playoffs isn’t a given.
Last season, Cubs hitters (non-pitching hitters, that is) produced a 113 wRC+ with their bats and 70 runs above average on defense. Both of these numbers were phenomenal. Even if they fall somewhat next year, the team’s chances of making the playoffs are still very good. How good?
Let’s say the Cubs are likely to finish among the top quarter of all teams offensively. Since 2000, the top quartile of offenses have generally produced a wRC+ of at least 105. So we’ll make that one baseline. We also know the Cubs are probably going to be good on defense, as well, so let’s set a baseline of at least 25 runs above average on defense (roughly the top 40% of defenses). Since 2000, 27 teams have met both of those criteria. Of those 27 clubs, 16 have made the playoffs. Of course, that means 11 teams didn’t. So, without knowing anything about the pitching of those clubs, we find that 40% of these excellent hitting and defending teams failed to make the postseason.
And as for that pitching, it was probably pretty bad, right?
Not always, actually.
| Season | Team | wRC+ | Off | Def | Position Player WAR | ERA- | FIP- |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | Cardinals | 114 | 92.5 | 29.9 | 31.5 | 101 | 104 |
| 2012 | Angels | 114 | 113.1 | 42.8 | 37.5 | 104 | 107 |
| 2015 | Giants | 110 | 64.7 | 30.9 | 29.3 | 101 | 106 |
| 2009 | Rays | 109 | 93.9 | 28.4 | 33.4 | 102 | 101 |
| 2008 | Mets | 108 | 69.5 | 26.7 | 29 | 97 | 101 |
| 2013 | Giants | 108 | 47.3 | 35.5 | 27.6 | 116 | 108 |
| 2000 | Angels | 106 | 51 | 49.9 | 31 | 102 | 112 |
| 2005 | Phillies | 106 | 54.1 | 50.7 | 30 | 97 | 98 |
| 2007 | Braves | 106 | 39.4 | 42.5 | 27.4 | 94 | 100 |
| 2004 | Cubs | 105 | 28.6 | 31.4 | 25.2 | 88 | 89 |
| 2011 | Reds | 105 | 44.3 | 37.6 | 28.3 | 107 | 111 |
Sometimes it’s poor pitching that prevents a playoff run, but sometimes it’s just bad luck. Look, for example, at that 2004 version of the Cubs. They were good in all facets of the game but didn’t make the playoffs. Their Pythagorean record gave them 94 wins, but some bad luck kept them down to 89, and that wouldn’t have even made the playoffs in today’s system. The 2004 Cubs were probably the second-best team in the National League that year, but sometimes 94-win teams only win 89 games and then they miss the playoffs.
So luck could cause the Cubs to miss the playoffs, but if you squint, talent on the pitching side could be an issue, too. Corinne Landrey wrote about the Cubs pitching staff in relation to their curious decision to let Jason Hammel go.
With Hammel gone, here are the returning four members of the Cubs’ rotation: John Lackey, Jon Lester, Jake Arrieta, and Kyle Hendricks. Now here are their respective ages on Opening Day 2017: 38, 33, 31, 27. Lackey is in the final year of his contract, battled a shoulder injury this season, and was good, not great, this season. Lester has been fantastic for the Cubs, but considering that they have him under contract through age 36 or 37, aging-induced decline is a matter of when, not if. Arrieta returned to Earth this year after his phenomenal 2015 season. But, hey, at least there’s Kyle Hendricks.
Jake Arrieta put up a 7.3 WAR season at age 29 and then a solid 3.8 WAR season this past year. While the glass-half-full theory says he might rebound a bit next year, he’s also now pitched 468.1 innings over the last two seasons. The projections say he’ll get better, but guys like Tim Lincecum, Jake Peavy, and Andy Pettitte all produced a great, heavy-inning season in their 20s followed by a decent year, followed by another drop thereafter. Pettitte recovered decently in later years and Peavy did a little, but Lincecum was finished. Even if Arrieta does post another solid year in 2017, he’ll be a free agent after that and the Cubs will either need to pay a heavy price in free agency for a pitcher in decline or look elsewhere.
Jon Lester has been the team’s best pitcher over the past two years, but he’s also on the wrong side of 30 and has seen a steady decline in his performance over the last three seasons, going from 5.6 WAR in 2014 to 5.0 in 2015 to 4.3 this past year. In the last 30 years, 10 pitchers have produced between 8.0 and 10.5 WAR at ages 31 and 32 combined, with a good season at age 32. Six of 10 followed with solid seasons at age 33 — and 9 of 10 recorded an average (+2 WAR) season — but only two out of 10 had 4-plus WAR seasons at age 34, four of 10 posting seasons that were below average. These represent some very good outcomes, but there’s some risk with Lester, not unlike all pitchers, going forward.
As for Lackey, he’s projected for a 2.8 WAR, but of the seven pitchers over the last 20 years who put up a WAR between 2.6 and 3.6 (Lackey was at 3.1) at age 37, none of them followed that with a seasonal WAR as high as the one for which Lackey is currently projected — and only Greg Maddux (2.6), Kenny Rogers (2.5), and Andy Pettitte (2.4) put a WAR higher than 1.1 in their age-38 seasons. As for Kyle Hendricks, he was obviously quite good this year, but the projections don’t yet believe his low home-run rate, BABIP, and high LOB% are all sustainable, putting him closer to above-average.
The Cubs pitching should be very good next year, but the rotation has a great deal of risk with little depth. The past two seasons, the Cubs have gotten lucky with starter health as Arrieta, Lester, Hendricks, Hammel, and Lackey have made 86% (280 of 324) of the team’s starts. The Cubs might give Mike Montgomery an opportunity to start in an attempt to find another Arrieta, but their depth is very thin at the moment, and help is not on the way from the minors. Add in questions in the bullpen with Aroldis Chapman departing and Pedro Strop and Hector Rondon at something less than their best at the end of the season, and a little bad luck might serve to close the margin the Cubs seem to have on the rest of baseball.
The Cubs have the financial wherewithal to spend through any pitching deficiency, but there’s no way to know when that deficiency could rear its ugly head. The team has invested a lot in Jon Lester and John Lackey; turning around Jake Arrieta has been great for player and team; and they control Kyle Hendricks for several more years. All that said, there’s a scenario for each of those pitchers that involves real attrition.
There’s no guarantee that it happens, of course. The Cubs could unearth some more gems. But if the team can’t quite create a dynasty, if things fall apart a bit, it’s because they will have encountered a problem no organization, particularly the Cubs, have found easy answers, and that’s how to send a steady stream of solid starting pitching to the major league ballclub. It’s something from which no amount of position-player talent can make an organization immune. The Cubs took advantage of a fantastic opportunity this season, and if they are going to have that dynasty, they will need to have solid pitching to complement their great young core of position players.
Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.
The postseason seems to finally have brought public attention to the very serious problems which the Cubs’ hitters have with curves, having the lowest contact rate in the majors against curves (32.1%) and, on the rare occasions when they do manage to hit curves, the lowest exit velocity in the majors 84.3mph (see http://m.indians.mlb.com/news/article/207287130/josh-tomlin-ready-for-cubs-with-improved-curve/). It seems likely that teams will exploit this next year.
Remember that time mike trout wasn’t gonna be great anymore because high fastballs?
So you think the Cubs have basically 8 Mike Trouts in their lineup?
Yes, I think the cubs have (at least) 8 professional athletes who were selected for their ability to make adjustments and hit baseballs to the degree their defensive skills require.
Sure, but just because the public became aware on the biggest stage doesn’t mean teams didn’t know this for all or most of the season and incorporate it into scouting reports. Teams have had plenty of time to scout Bryant / Rizzo – that’s literally their job.
I would expect the league to continue to try to make adjustments and approach them as they would any good lineup. I would also expect the cubs to continue to hit the snot out of the ball.
Teams didn’t incorporate it into their usage until the World Series. Just look at curve ball %s. Samardzija didn’t throw a single one the first time through the order in game 2 of the nlds.
We know how painful this season was for you, you don’t have to keep reminding us.
That wasn’t my point. My point was to show that teams simply didn’t realize that they could and should take advantage of this weakness until the World Series.
Actually, the Cubs issues with hitting curveballs happened to be against some of the BEST curveball throwers in the game (Kluber, Kershaw, Hill, etc.). So if your curve is more ordinary than theirs, you may not be able to take advantage of this weakness.
The statistics quoted in the article were the general statistics against curves, not just the best curveball pitchers, and they were miserable.
I wish teams had scouting reports!
In reality it’s really hard to throw quality curveballs for strikes consistently. The loopy change of pace curves for strike one only work once.
Also the offense should only be better. Outside of zobrist and montero every offensive player is under 28, including role players like la Stella and Szcur. Schwarber should be As good if not better than Fowler offensively. Russell and Baez improving should negate any zobrist decline. And heyward can only go up, it’s very easy to see him being an average hitter next year.
This article doesn’t even mention the possibility almora starts in center with heyward in right and schwarber in left relegating zobrist to a Baez like utility role to limit age related decline. This would be an even better defense than last year… Zobrist comes in as a defensive replacement in left, and gets anywhere from 3-4 starts a week when baez, russell, bryant, rizzo, heyward, almora, schwarber need breaks or are injured should get him to about 100 starts + 3 innings a game for about 20-30 games.
You’re right, it depends on pitchers who can throw good curves and their aren’t so many of those. And the hitters are mostly young and should generally improve. But pitchers will also learn to pitch them better.
wow that bad against curveballs and yet their hitters still rated just above average against the pitch. http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=np&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=7&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=5,d
LoL – exactly – good curve balls get <> out. The Cubs, I think, may be uniquely dangerous vs hangers.
Yes, I would guess that something like that is the case.
Among the six qualifying Cubs batters last year, three had above average wCB/C: Bryant, Zobrist, Fowler; and three had below average: Rizzo — who is above average for his career —, Heyward and Russell. Addison Russell was even worse at hitting curveballs than Bryant was good at hitting them (-2.02 vs 1.87 wCB/C).
If you knock the bar down to 300 PAs to include Baez, he slots in just above Russell at a miserable -1.87 wCB/C. So sure, you can beat up the bottom of the order with curveballs, probably even with bad ones, but good luck curving your way against the rest of the Cubs unless your name rhymes with Tuber. And you can bet your bottom dollar Russell and Baez are going to work on hitting breaking balls over the offseason.
BTW, does anyone know when, if ever, pitch value stats stabilize for batters?
Using fwar for cubs starting pitchers completely discounts the cubs run prevention unit imo. Any and every starter is likely to outpitch his peripherals.
You don’t get to double dip in defensive value from the position players. Either use fWAR and give the position players credit for defense or use RA9 WAR without crediting the defense.
He cited steamer projections which react poorly to young players defense and then cited fwar for pitchers. The writer was double dipping imo.
Secondly the cubs outperformed their fips by 100 runs and were only credited for 73 uzr. I’m going to assume their is some quality of contact being left out of fwar imo.
Theoretically the difference could be pitch framing. Which also goes unaccounted for in UZR. The cubs had 2 elite pitch framers and 1 above average and that flips to one above average and only one elite next year.
Side note I’m surprised fangraphs is lagging on incorporating framing although it is extremely hard to quantify, we have known about it for years.
I would expect that FIP captures a good chunk of the value of pitch framing, perhaps almost all of it. Good framing should impact both K rate and walk rate. Good framing also should have some impact on home run rate, which is impacted by count.
I’m sure it captures some, but the change in a count is more likely to reflect directly in quality of contact rather than rate stats through count factors like you said.
“Secondly the cubs outperformed their fips by 100 runs and were only credited for 73 uzr. I’m going to assume their is some quality of contact being left out of fwar imo.”
One could assume that. One could also assume good fortune on balls in play and sequencing that isn’t likely to prove sustainable, and that the Cubs are likely to see some regression of ERA toward FIP.
Two of the Cubs’ returning starters (Lackey and Lester) have long careers with cumulative ERA almost exactly equal to FIP, yet greatly outperformed FIP in 2016. Lester’s ERA underperformed his FIP as recently as 2015, and Lackey did so as recently as 2014.
Cubs’ starters had ridiculously high LOB%’s in 2016. Two of them (Lester and Hendricks) were over 80%. The NL average for starters in 2016 was 71.9%. The lowest of the Cubs’ starters was 74.9% (Arrieta).
Should have also added that, in fairness, you can assume that some of the 27 runs are contact quality but that some are these other factors.
Some good fortune and sequencing ok but 27 uzr would be the 7th best defense in baseball, it’s quite difference.
In regards to lester in 2015 there are 5 relevant names to me, heyward, baez, castro, almora, soler.
Adding heyward, baez, almora while removing playing time from castro and Soler is just a massive swing of about 50 runs imo. Additional playing time to 3 pretty elite defenders while decreasing playing time to bad defenders. Which is again why I wouldn’t be shocked to see almora in center next year to add at least 10 drs to negate schwarber probably dragging down lf a bit.
i wouldn’t go so far as to say that. the cubs historically suppressing runs and babip had a huge part to do with their outfield defense who’s metrics are what truly set them apart, and while heyward can probably replicate and even exceed fowler’s defense in center, the fact is that zobrist can come no where close to replicating the value of heyward’s defense in right, and with bryant’s well above average defense regularly situated in third with schwarber getting the majority of ab’s in left, defense in left field is gonna regress as well. the cubs starting staff had the lowest average against and OPS against balls hit to the outfield last year, and WHIP and ERA, etc.: http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/split_finder.cgi?class=team&type=p#gotresults&type=p&class=team&as=team_pitching&offset=0&match=season&min_year_game=2016&max_year_game=2016&team_id=&playoffs=&split_1=hitty%3Ahitlo&sid_situa%3Aleado=situa%3Aleado%3Aany&sid_situa%3Atkswg=situa%3Atkswg%3Aany&sid_oppon%3Aoppon=oppon%3Aoppon%3Aany&sid_situa%3Atimes=situa%3Atimes%3Aany&sid_plato%3Aplato=plato%3Aplato%3Aany&sid_role%3Asprel=role%3Asprel%3Aany&sid_situa%3Abases=situa%3Abases%3Aany&sid_outco%3Aoutco=outco%3Aoutco%3Aany&sid_plato%3Aplats=plato%3Aplats%3Aany&sid_hitty%3Atraj=hitty%3Atraj%3Aany&sid_lineu%3Alineu=lineu%3Alineu%3Aany&sid_age%3Aage=age%3Aage%3Aany&sid_situa%3Apitco=situa%3Apitco%3Aany&sid_total%3Atotal=total%3Atotal%3Aany&sid_dates%3Ahalf=dates%3Ahalf%3Aany&sid_locat%3Astad=locat%3Astad%3Aany&sid_situa%3Ainnng=situa%3Ainnng%3Aany&sid_locat%3Asite=locat%3Asite%3Aany&sid_dates%3Amonth=dates%3Amonth%3Aany&sid_situa%3Adefpo=situa%3Adefpo%3Aany&sid_situa%3Adr=situa%3Adr%3Aany&sid_rs%3Ars=rs%3Ars%3Aany&sid_situa%3Acount=situa%3Acount%3Aany&sid_situa%3Aouts=situa%3Aouts%3Aany&sid_wpa%3Alever=wpa%3Alever%3Aany&sid_locat%3Ahmvis=locat%3Ahmvis%3Aany&sid_hitty%3Ahitlo=hitty%3Ahitlo%3ATo+Outfield&sid_situa%3Aclutc=situa%3Aclutc%3Aany&exclude_incomplete=1&c0criteria=&c0gtlt=eq&c0val=0&number_matched=1&orderby=onbase_plus_slugging&sr_split_totals_choice=by_split&order_by_asc=1&c1criteria=&c1gtlt=eq&c1val=0&c2criteria=&c2gtlt=eq&c2val=0&c3criteria=&c3gtlt=eq&c3val=0&c4criteria=&c4gtlt=eq&c4val=0&c5criteria=&c5gtlt=eq&c5val=1.0&c6criteria=&ajax=1&submitter=1
Why are you assuming heyward is the cf and not almora who is a better defender than Fowler?
Probably because of Almora’s 83 wRC+ Steamer projection, an assumption that the Cubs will try to get Zobrist and Schwarber’s bats into the lineup most of the time, and an assumption that Baez will be a near everyday player at 2B if he’s at least as productive as 2015/16 Baez at the plate (and Steamer also projects Baez right around that level: 95 wRC+).
Steamer also projects Bryant to have his worst season and Rizzo to be worse than he has been in each of the last 3 seasons.
Further it projects negative defensive contributions from almora, baez to be league average after accounting for position, russell to significantly regress, bryant to regress defensively.
I like projection systems on the whole but it’s not an end all be all. Almora is similar to kevin pillar. Runs are runs, offensive or defensive.
because his bat is a potential liability still and he is the least experienced on the list, and also the team has given no indication that almora is going to assume the starting role without earning it first.
Liability? Pillar posted an 80 wrc+ and was worth 3 war. Defense matters. Having one bad hitter in a lineup with contreras, schwarber, bryant, rizzo is not a killer.
Also almora still has excellent bat to ball skills and is 22. Its not like he is hopeless up there just because he projects that way.
all i said is he has to earn the role, and is not going to the top of the depth chart as a primary reaction to fowler leaving. i think that’s a pretty sensible assessment.
A straight Almora/Heyward CF platoon seems likely. Can’t afford to have both of their bats in the lineup everyday.
so basically 3 of their starters have to decline a lot for the cubs to miss the playoffs. that is not impossible but not likely even at the age of Lester and lackey.
if one or even two pitchers go down they still have a ton of trade chips to get a good one back (schwarber,based, happ, soler, Jimenez, candelario).
of course something could happen but there is no team who is able to deal with injuries that well.
In a word, bees.
holy crap – do the ads at the bottom of the page make everyone else’s browser auto-scroll every 30 seconds? The site is practically unreadable right now.
No.
Dynasty?
“Kris Bryant isn’t likely to be as good as he was this past year”
Um what? He was only 24 and in his second year in the majors. There’s reason to believe he could be even BETTER next year.
He also could go from MVP level to being a 5-6 WAR all-star level player through either some regression or loss of time to injury. People would likely say the same thing about Harper when he put up almost a 10 WAR season last year. It’s definitely possible he stays an 8 WAR player, but if he just stays really good and not MVP level that’s a pretty significant loss of production.
Steamer projects him to be worse than he was as a rookie..,
I think a team needs to win at least two championships close together before even discussing the prospects of becoming a dynasty.
No organization, particularly the Cubs, have found easy answers, and that’s how to send a steady stream of solid starting pitching to the major league ball club.
Have you ever heard of free agency?
The rays seem to have had starting pitcher after starting pitcher.
price, shields, garza, kazmir, moore, cobb, archer, odorizzi, snell, davis, honeywell, smyly, neiman, hellickson, sonnanstine, karns, ramirez, andriesse.
Think of the talent there… But no money and injuries. That’s just a list of average or better off the top of my head plus snell and Honeywell who are filthy.
Free agency is too full of expensive aging players to be a consistent solution as a primary means of player acquisition. Just ask the Yankees what happened when they stopped supplementing their huge free agent deals with actual young prospects.
The Rays only managed to do that because they kept trading most of their star players for other teams’ top prospects when their players became too expensive to keep, and even that strategy only kept them on top for a few years. Though, the Cubs could use a variation of that strategy by trading some of their extra young hitters for young pitchers this offseason.
I think lack of rotation depth is a better problem to have than lack of hitting/position player talent. I think if anything the Cubs have proven that quality pitching can turn up when you need it. Yeah it meant getting a little lucky via trade (Arrieta and Hendricks) but a lot of that is also scouting and development.
There is no reason to think the Cubs can’t use their considerable capital (both cash and young talent) to find more pitching in the unlikely event their aging starters go south in a hurry. I wouldn’t be shocked if the Cubs went out and acquired another low cost swingman type this off-season, although I thought Jason Hammel was that guy and they cut him loose so who knows.
I think the more dire issue for the Cubs would be if some of those key position players were injured or regressed. Sure there is plenty of depth, but the trickle down would cause a lot of issues. I’m not sure the Cubs really want Baez, Soler or Almora playing full time quite yet and if any of the three get thrust into a full time role, a lot of problems will follow.
Jeremy Hellickson is the solution to the Cubs’ woes.
Actually, it was pitching that kept the 2008 Cardinals out of the playoffs. While their starting rotation led by breakout seasons from Adam Wainwright and Kyle Lohse was pretty good, their bullpen that season was absolutely horrible and cost them a lot of late leads. Naturally, since the starters pitch a lot more innings than the relievers, their overall pitching numbers actually look about average, but those relief innings can be just as important when trying to pile up actual wins to reach the playoffs.
While it probably won’t happen for at least a couple more years, I agree that the Cubs could collapse via their pitching despite currently having arguably the best starting rotation in baseball. I’ve thought all along that their great rebuilding project was too heavily unbalanced in favor of position players. While they do have the money to just buy a bunch of pitching to fill in the gaps, there is only so long you can keep that up with the expensive older pitchers you can find on the free agent market. To avoid this kind of mess, they should act now by trading some of their extra offensive pieces (like say Soler and Baez, while moving Zobrist back to second base) for young, controllable pitching.
How about Schwarber and Soler for Gausman, Givens and Bundy?
(Just to see the O’s go full Jack Z. mode 😉 )
How the Cubs dynasty could fail to materialize:
An average number of typical baseball things happens in the next few years.
Under today’s conditions, the odds are heavily stacked against any team actually becoming a dynasty. Unless you lower the “dynasty” bar to “a team that usually contends for the playoffs over a span of years.”
The main point of the table seems to be missing. Those are almost all teams that you would like to be a fan of going forward. Most of them were in the midst of runs of playoff appearances or just about to go to the playoffs. Only the 2008 Mets fell apart after that year and were more than three years removed from their next playoff appearance.
Over the next five year, assuming the hitting and defense continues, I would expect that the Cubs will have two years where the pitching fails them. One of those years they will miss the playoffs and the other they will sneak in. The good side is that when the pitching fails, they will go out and find new pitchers. The Cubs will not have as good a team as they had this year every year for the next five, but that does not mean they are going to be relegated to the ranks of the non-playoff teams.