What’s Going On With the Cubs?

You know how this works: Early into any season, many of us get obsessed with checking on fastball velocities. Big positive changes might portend great success — or surgery. And big negative changes might indicate future struggles — or surgery. It’s all guesswork in the first half of April, but it’s something, something potentially meaningful. Fastball speeds generally don’t lie to you. It’s this line of thinking that brought Jake Arrieta to my attention a short while ago; out of the gate in 2017, Arrieta wasn’t throwing the same stuff. He’s a high-profile pitcher, who’s put up high-profile numbers, and so any change is an important one.

I’ve kept my eye on Arrieta. I tend to dismiss pitchers who are dismissive of velocity changes, because they all say the same thing. At the end of the day, velocity loss is correlated to performance decline. There are exceptions, but there are exceptions to almost everything. Yet, there’s a complicating factor here. Arrieta’s velocity is down, and on its own, that’s troubling to me. But within context, perhaps we’re just observing something intentional. You know who else has lost velocity? Jon Lester. Also Kyle Hendricks. Also John Lackey. And also Brett Anderson. All the other guys in Arrieta’s starting rotation.

For this look, I made use of the Baseball Prospectus PITCHf/x leaderboards, powered by Brooks Baseball. I combined four-seamers and sinkers to find overall average fastball speeds. I found 130 starting pitchers who’ve thrown at least 50 fastballs in both 2016 and 2017. Here’s a plot of their year-to-year average velocities, with the five Cubs starters highlighted in blue.

The average starter so far has lost 0.5 miles per hour. That’s to be expected; it’s April, and pitchers are still building up their arm strength. But Anderson is down 1.5 ticks. Lester, 1.7. Lackey, 2.3. Arrieta, 2.7. Hendricks, 2.8. To put it another way: Hendricks owns the second-biggest velocity dip. Arrieta’s tied for third, and Lackey is sixth. Lester is tied for 16th, and Anderson is tied for 20th. All five pitchers are easily in the bottom 20%, and that’s a tough thing not to notice. Any individual case makes you wonder or worry about an injury. When you have a team-wide pattern, you consider other explanations.

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

One thing I should note to go along with this: Cubs starters are 10th in baseball in ERA-, and 7th in FIP-. Last year, they were 1st and 3rd, respectively. They’ve performed a little bit worse, but they’ve still been plenty good. And nobody around the Cubs seems to be the least bit worried.

Heck, I’ll just keep on going. One way to examine things is by looking at average velocity. Another way is by looking at peak velocity, which Brooks Baseball tracks. Relative to last year’s best fastball, Anderson and Lester are both down 2.8 ticks. Hendricks is down 3.1, Arrieta is down 3.7, and Lackey is down 4.3. There are many more bullets to be fired, but none of these guys has gotten real close to last year’s top speed. It’s just further evidence of what we were already looking at. The fastballs aren’t the same. Not through the earliest couple of weeks.

How might this be explained? There could conceivably be some lousy calibration. Maybe the pitches just haven’t been measured right. I’m skeptical, since it’s seemed like opposing pitchers have been basically normal, but there’s a chance. There’s also a chance that, hey, all five pitchers are having simultaneous issues getting right! It’s crazy to think about, but seldom does a pitcher *want* to lose zip. I remain skeptical, because that’s five pitchers at one time. That’s too many pitchers, even by 2017 Dodgers standards.

The potential explanation I find the most interesting: This could be something the Cubs are doing on purpose. Two years ago, the Cubs advanced to the NLCS. Last year, the Cubs won the World Series. This year, the Cubs are expected to make another deep run, and they ought to take the NL Central without too much of a fight. Not that a team should ever take anything for granted, but just based on the rosters and the math, these Cubs ought to play more than 162 games. We’re looking at longer seasons, and shorter offseasons. More time spent pitching, and less time spent recovering. Wouldn’t it make sense to open the season by having your starting pitchers try to back a little off?

On my part, this is entirely speculation. I don’t have any Cubs-specific insight. I also don’t know how easy it is for a pitcher to try to throw his fastballs at 95% instead of 100%. That might mess a guy up, for all I know. But maybe, just maybe, the Cubs are intentionally trying to ease their starters in, so that they might have more energy left come September and October. That’s not something I can recall ever seeing, but I see how it might be a workable theory. With all due respect to the Cubs’ divisional rivals, finishing first shouldn’t be too hard. Especially with the Cardinals slumping, and with the Pirates losing Starling Marte. The Cubs won’t finish in first by default, but they can probably afford to take things a little easier, at least from the get-go. So, hey, it’s a guess. Maybe it’s accurate. Which would be very cool, and a little bit cocky.

It’s easy to spin any velocity loss into a bad thing. In the Cubs’ case, it’s not too hard to spin this collective loss into a good thing, of sorts. I don’t know if my theory is right, and I don’t know if there are physical issues at the moment. But looking at the context, I feel better about Arrieta now than I did when I thought he was all by himself. There’s a certain amount of safety in numbers.





Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

44 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
southie
9 years ago

The season is a grind. Just pondering these power arms have to be pitching another seven months at a high level is crazy. Those additional high stress innings take a toll I’m sure. The price of being a winner I suppose.

FrancoLuvHateMets
9 years ago

Wouldn’t it make more sense for the team to just let them pitch normally, but reduce the pitch count/innings for April? Like you said, telling a guy to throw less hard on purpose could maybe mess them up compared to them having an extended spring training ramp up.

CC AFCMember since 2016
9 years ago

Probably sensible. Higher velocity is correlated with an increased risk of injury so this may just be a different way of attacking the same problem. I think Sale actually tried intentionally throwing less hard at the beginning of last year to decrease his injury risk.

swingofthings
9 years ago

Thing is, the Cubs bullpen was the half of their pitching staff which didn’t stay strong into the postseason, with Rondon and Strop getting hurt and never recovering their performance. Maybe they don’t want to put all those innings on the pen.

jamberg
9 years ago

Didn’t the cubs tell their starters to basically take most of Spring Training off? Maybe they’re just a few weeks behind on getting up to speed compared to the rest of the league. A very half-baked theory here.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  jamberg

This seems like the most logical explanation to me. Don’t we always hear about how at the beginning of camp, starters struggle with velocity?

This replaces my previous logic, which is “maybe they’re just tired from last season’s run” but they didn’t pitch *that* many more innings than everyone else last year? Did they? I mean, if that’s the case wouldn’t we expect Kluber’s velocity to be down? Maybe also Scherzer and Bumgarner? We haven’t seen that, have we?

Chili Davis Eyes
9 years ago
Reply to  jamberg

This is probably the answer. I think the top 4 didn’t pitch at all until the second week of ST, and guys like Eddie Butler and Alec Mills were still getting starts in late March. I don’t how how the Cubs rotation compared to the rest of the league in terms of total ST innings pitched, but it certainly seemed like they were throwing fewer.

victorvran
9 years ago

Hendricks 21.2 (was 38th most ip in spring)
Anderson 20.1 (46)
Arrieta 14 (168)
Lackey 12.2 (209)
Lester 11 (276)
Butler had 14.2 and MM had 13

Indians as an example

Salazar 26
Bauer 24.2
Kluber 23.1
Tomlin 18
Carrasco 15

So it would seem that the cubs had less innings from their starters. 6, 7, 4, 3, 3 for games respectively whereas the indians starters had 7, 6, 5, 4, 6 games respectively.

Brians Sticky Sock
9 years ago

I am a season ticket holding Cubs fan (not that it makes me special, I’m not). 6 days ago the Cubs were playing .667 ball. They lost 4 games, and then they won last night. Like other here say… “It’s April”.

Brians Sticky Sock
9 years ago

You guys are ruthless!

showerdeer
9 years ago

Can we do this for the Rockies? Their hitting is terrible and their Pitching is phenomenal by your WAR ratings. Maybe something is up at the park?

LHPSU
9 years ago
Reply to  showerdeer

WAR comprises of park-adjusted statistics. The Rockies are pitching well by Coors Field standards, and hitting poorly (mostly) by Coors Field standards.

showerdeer
9 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

” Maybe something is up at the park?”

JoserMember since 2021
9 years ago
Reply to  showerdeer

Park factors generally aren’t adjusted month-by-month; I imagine Coors in early April is less Coors-like than average (conversely in mid-July it should be even more Coors-ian). And I can’t be bothered to look it up, but maybe Denver has had even more cooler, denser evenings than usual for the past couple of weeks?

1grm
9 years ago

If the cubs told them to ease off, wouldnt peak velocity be closer to their 2016 values? You would think there would be some important 2 strike or RISP situtations where max effort would be given regardless of an organizational push to save their arms till later in the season.

If they are being intentionally eased in, I’d think their avg velocity would be around 2mph lower than last year with their peak velocity around 0.5mph lower. Instead they are at 2.3mph avg lower and 3.3mph peak lower than 2016

phoenix2042Member since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  1grm

This is entirely theoretical but… So you know how early in the year, pitchers have lower velocity because of building up arm strength still and because of the colder weather? Well I wonder if that disproportionally shows up in their peak velo in general. Average pitcher velo average is down .5mph, the article states. How much lower is the average pitcher’s peak velo than last year? I bet it is more than .5mph. I’d guess it’s as much as 1.5 or 2mph.

TL;DR: Your gut says peak velo should be closer than average, but my gut says average velo should be closer than peak. We need numbers to test it!

NextSeasonTM
9 years ago
Reply to  1grm

Except that usually pitchers have their easy motion and their revved up version when they reach back for a little more. If you told a pitcher to ease up it’s more likely they just don’t reach back, since that’s easier and less likely to mess up their motion.

deb81162
9 years ago

Baseball is a Marathon, not a sprint. Let’s see where they are at come the ASB before being concerned on anything

showerdeer
9 years ago
Reply to  deb81162

I love platitudes. I have the best platitudes.

victorvran
9 years ago
Reply to  deb81162

I really don’t understand this line of thinking. Yes baseball is a long season and yes things can change over said long season, but you can also be concerned about negative trends that appear before the asb(which seems like an arbitrary point to all of a sudden have concerns matter).

Concern over things shouldn’t really function as a binary concern no concern system, but as samples get larger the level concern increase/decrease proportionally.

johnforthegiants
9 years ago

I have a feeling that the new way of calculating pitch speed is playing tricks on us. Bumgarner is measuring much faster than last year but he doesn’t look much faster. Cain is measuring much slower than last year but he doesn’t look much slower. Moore is measuring like he’s changing speeds a lot but it doesn’t look like he is.

Ryan DCMember since 2016
9 years ago

Your ability to turn any article into a Giants article is impressive

JoserMember since 2021
9 years ago
Reply to  Ryan DC

Not to mention his apparent ability to distinguish a 91mph fastball from a 93mph fastball just from looking.

Antonio BananasMember since 2026
9 years ago

Doesn’t “look”? I’m going to use that next time I get pulled over.

“Yea the gun says I was going 85, but how fast did it look like I was going,”

cmarts cups
9 years ago

Hard for me to buy if you look at these pitchers individually. For one, Kyle Hendricks already was one of the few starters in baseball who excelled despite an average sub-90s fastball. I highly doubt the Cubs would come to him and say, hey, shave another 2 mph off that thing. We’re seeing the results so far included today’s game. Hendricks doesn’t appear to be a very good pitcher with an 86 mph fastball, an no one should be expected to be.

John Lackey is old. Very old. I don’t think anybody would be surprised with a velo drop from a pitcher in his 38 year-old season.

Lester may be the most questionable, but again, he threw a ton of innings last year, has thrown a ton of innings in his career, and is getting older.

Arrieta is another guy who has put up some huge inning totals including the post-season the last couple years and prior to that had only hit 150 innings in a year once.

Brett Anderson is the embodiment of an injury-riddled pitcher. I think he just tweaked his shoulder opening a can of coke as we speak.

stanMember since 2019
9 years ago
Reply to  cmarts cups

While regression from the starting staff was likely given Hendricks’ career year in 2016, Lackey’s age and Anderson’s injury history, the story here is the lack of offense, IMHO. Really, none of the Cubs hitters are hitting like their projections.

JaCoby
9 years ago

The chances for all 5 starters to suddenly decline is just too unlikely for us to be concerned about as of now.
Did the cubs bullpen also lose velocity compared to previous years? If only the starters have diminished velocity, it would be very likely that they are indeed starting things off slowly, as they need more rest due to last year’s world series winning run.
On the other hand, if everyone’s velocity readings are lower, it’s more likely something wrong with the calibration?
That said, I just watched Eric Thames, one of the hottest hitters in the MLB right now, miss two in-zone swings on two ’86’mph fastball pitches. I remember reading that his success in Korea was through damage on fastballs(and thus doubted his ability to make contact on non-fastballs), and he should’ve seen plenty of ’86’mph fastballs there…
And if the Cubs starters are really intentionally starting off slowly, is it really more beneficial to maintain good form from mid to late season, as opposed to constantly being in good form and giving rest once the cubs eliminate their magic number a few games before the regular season ends?

redsoxmaniac
9 years ago

I’ve seen Lester do this his whole career. If you at his 1st 3 years, he was topping at 96-97 w 93 on his fastball. In an ALDS against Angels around that time he ramped up his FB by a good margin

Epstein, and I feel the league as a whole are doing more to have pitchers throw less hard unless the situation or hitter calls for it. Keeps them from getting tired faster and keeps hitters off timing the next 2-3 times up in a game.

I see it as pacing, possibly not because of this season but also workload that staff had going into the playoffs.

Artists and Lester have shown they can be dominant w mixing speeds and not hitting max. There’s also evidence of harder ball trajectory on fast fastballs and spin rates. So they could also be doing this against certain players-lineups that are vulnerable to slower spinner pitches to get balls in play.

Lester is an outlier as he’s been doing this for much of his career. But wouldn’t put it past player development to have all their starters do the same

JaCoby
9 years ago
Reply to  redsoxmaniac

the article mentions that peak velocity is down for all starters as well, so it’s not just about pacing

OneearMember since 2018
9 years ago
Reply to  redsoxmaniac

Are you implying Lester is not an artist?

BurleighGrimesMember since 2026
9 years ago

First of all: Jeff, I really like this article because I like the idea of being open to strange or unexpected possibilities. While it’s true that the answer to most questions right now is “it’s April,” it’s much more fun to think about some things that might have deeper reasons than that.

That having been said, there are several reasons why your explanation seems unlikely to me. Firstly, the team’s best interest doesn’t ever 100% align with player best interest, and I think that would lead to a roadblock for convincing pitchers to throw less hard en masse. In this case, I sincerely doubt that Arrieta (for instance), who is in a contract year and who is one of the ferocious competitor I’ve ever seen, could be convinced to willingly make himself look less good. It’s true that Arrieta has pitched decently well so far, but there is absolutely no doubt that the 95-96 mph version of Arrieta would command more on the open market than the 92 mph version would, even if the latter version still pitches reasonably effectively. Lester & Lackey have made their millions, but Kyle Hendricks is an arb guy who pitching much less well (which has has been to date this season) than his 2016 breakout negatively impacts him a great deal. Even if the Cubs planned on taking the reigns off these guys later in the season, I’m not certain they’d be able to convince their pitchers that there would be no lasting damage done to their brand by throwing less hard (and probably less well) for a meaningful length of time. As you indicate, who knows if telling pitchers to throw slower would negatively effect their mechanics long term, or even lead to different kinds of injury risks. It seems like a hard sell to five self-interested and competitive men, even if the team was 100% convinced it was in the best thing for the team long term.

Secondly, I am not convinced that any of these dudes’ competitive natures wouldn’t kick in during games if it could. As you note, not only is their average pitch speed down, but their high end mphs aren’t there either. If Arrieta *could* dial it up to 98 but is just holding back, don’t you think there would be some pitch in some game where he’d let it fly in order to get a big out? I mean, we’re talking about insanely competitive dudes. I know they are extremely disciplined as well, but again, it just feels unlikely to me that none of them would just say fuck it and let it fly if they could.

For me, the two most likely explanations are that either 1. hangover effect of so many innings the last couple of years plus the natural aging process (three of these dudes are over 30) or 2. late start / taking it easy in spring training leading to less arm strength in the early going.

(To the commenter who implies that, since Indians pitchers or MadBum haven’t experienced lost velo, it can’t be hangover effect, I’d say that no two pitchers necessarily responds the same way to drastically increased workload. Last year, several Mets pitchers had reduced velo early on, and there was a general consensus that there was some hangover effect for them from all the innings they threw the year before. There had been worry that Arrieta would experience this hangover effect last year due to the massive increase in his innings, but that didn’t happen. And obviously MadBum is a total freak.)

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  BurleighGrimes

I’m gonna upvote this because I agree with most of this, but I still disagree with your parenthetical statement. I disagree because *all five* Cubs are showing decreased velocity and we haven’t seen that in other pitchers with huge workloads last year. To me that seems like an organizational effect.

That said, I don’t think that rules out the hangover effect, just means it is less likely, which makes me like the training camp explanation better. Re: Hangover effects, some kind of regression of velocity in the previous year on innings pitched and an aging curve would probably resolve this fairly well.

Pwn Shop
9 years ago

Egads! You have unwittingly stumbled upon the cause of the ‘hangover effect’ where the world champions tend to underperform in the following year. Or at least a partial indicator if not the full cause. Please study the same data for previous champion teams’ subsequent years!!

Brians Sticky Sock
9 years ago
Reply to  Pwn Shop

The Cubs are well aware of the short offseason and rested most of the core until March. The starters didn’t play until the 2nd week of March. One of the theories going on in Chicago is that they’re going through their dead arm period *right now* instead of spring training as a result of taking things slowly. Management has been very open about not pushing things too hard. Great thing is, we’re going to find out soon enough!!!

jsolid
9 years ago

“There’s a certain amount of safety in numbers.”

On this website, that’s well played.

Rambostyne
9 years ago

I’m sad this article isn’t about their recent improbable and amazing comeback wins. We probably won’t see too many teams win back-to-back games where their WE% dropped below 10%. But that’s what made this team great last year. Glad it carried over into this year.

JaCoby
9 years ago

Although lots of statistics in April are small samples and is dismissive, every statistic is built up by adding every single data. The frequency at which successful outcomes happen matter in the long run, but if that’s all we’re concerned about, there’s no need for articles like this, and we could fill everything with steamer and zips. No matter how good the cubs are, how they have more strengths and less weaknesses compared to other teams, they will run into problems and failures throughout the season. I read fangraphs to understand the science behind what actually happens in baseball, and what and how players and teams try to best their oppponents. Let’s not dismiss everything just because of small sample size or because they are irrelevant to final standings.

JUICEMANE
9 years ago

When Vegas had the under on the Cubs season win total at (-145) Maybe we should be asking “why do we think there is something wrong with the Cubs?”

John W.
9 years ago

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, and pitches like a duck, it is a duck….

res
9 years ago

Four of the five, excepting Anderson, didn’t get a start in ST until two weeks in. This was intentional to give extra rest and lessen ST innings. Maybe they’re just a couple weeks behind where they would normally be.

SoxWatcher
9 years ago

“how easy it is for a pitcher to try to throw his fastballs at 95% instead of 100%. That might mess a guy up, for all I know.”

Perhaps it could cause minor control issues, like, say…walking the opposing pitcher on 4 pitches! 🙂

Antonio BananasMember since 2026
9 years ago

How much of this is temperature?

Temperatures by game day
3 games in STL
4/2: high 68, low 45
4/4: 67. 54
4/6: 58. 43

3 in MIL
4/7: 52. 36
4/8: 66. 37
4/9: 75. 56

9 in chicago
4/10: 78. 42
4/12: 57. 39
4/13: 62. 45
4/14: 69. 46
4/15: 82. 63
4/16: 74. 57
4/17: 69. 45
4/18: 71. 59
4/19: 65. 53

That’s a lot of cold games (without the adrenaline of playoff baseball) on relatively unstrengthened arms.

Antonio Bananas
9 years ago

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/instagraphs/quick-study-cold-weather-effects-on-velocity/

Forgot to add this. They weren’t pitching in sub 40 degrees, but 8 of the 15 days had lows at or below 45 degrees. Without looking up game time weather, I would assume most games were played in low 50/high 40 degree weather.

TommyMember since 2017
9 years ago

Would Arrieta risk this in a walk year? Wouldn’t he want to show he’s in top form all year including the playoffs.