What’s Wrong with the Cubs?

It’s June 1st. The Cubs are supposed to be running away with the NL Central right now, like the Astros and Nationals are doing in their divisions. Instead, the defending champs are 25-27, in third place in the NL Central, and only a game up on the rebuilding Reds. For a team that was being hailed as a dynasty in the making, this isn’t how 2017 was supposed to go. So what’s the deal? Why did last year’s juggernaut turn into this year’s mediocrity?

Well, to start, let’s eliminate the obvious suspect. It’s not luck. The Cubs are a .481 win% team by actual record, and a .488 win% team by BaseRuns, which strips out sequencing and looks at only the underlying events a team has managed on both sides of the ball. This isn’t a case where they’ve just been un-clutch or had a few one-run games go against them. The Cubs have are a sub-.500 team because they’ve played like a sub-.500 team.

For a team that was good at almost everything last year, there is no one area that can be pointed to as “the cause” of the slow start. You don’t go this far backwards without failure on a multitude of fronts. Let’s examine the biggest ones, and identify whether they’re legitimate causes for concern going forward.

Young Hitters Not Hitting

Kyle Schwarber‘s slow start has been well documented, but Addison Russell’s 73 wRC+ isn’t much better than the 70 wRC+ Schwarber is putting up, and it doesn’t come with the obvious BABIP correction in the future, as his current .264 BABIP is only 13 points lower than his .277 mark last year. Russell’s marginally improved his strikeout rate again, but his power hasn’t carried over from last year’s second half, and he’s not an offensive force when he’s not driving the ball regularly.

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.

Obviously, the offensive bar for Russell is lower than Schwarber, given their highly disparate defensive abilities, but while it’s pretty easy to look at Schwarber’s track record and see offensive improvement coming, Russell’s bat remains a bit more of a mystery. Still just 23, he has plenty of time to unlock his potential at the plate, but right now, he’s not hitting the ball like a slugger; his average exit velocity on balls in the air is the equal of Joey Rickard, Andrew Romine, Carlos Ruiz, and Chris Stewart.

Russell should hit better than he has early in the season, but his continuing inconsistency at the plate gives the Cubs less of a margin for error than they did a year ago. And with Albert Almora not exactly being Dexter Fowler at the plate, Willson Contreras looking more like a solid hitter than an offensive force, and some of the superhero shine coming off Schwarber with every strikeout, the Cubs suddenly have a line-up you can pitch to. This is still a better offense than they’ve shown early on, but in order to remain a run-scoring juggernaut, they were going to need guys like Schwarber and Russell to make up for the loss of Fowler and the inevitable regression coming at other spots on the field.

That hasn’t happened, and while these guys will hit better, there are enough holes in the offensive games of the team’s young hitters to suspect that the Cubs aren’t going to match last year’s 113 wRC+.

The Defense Is A Lot Worse

Even if they brought back the exact same group of players, the Cubs weren’t going to repeat last year’s +73 UZR/+82 DRS, which put the 2016 Cubs among the best-ranked defensive teams of the last 20 years. This was an area of obvious regression, even before you accounted for Schwarber’s return to the outfield or Ben Zobrist getting a year older.

And while two months of defensive data isn’t definitive in any way, the story is mostly what we’d expect. The Cubs aren’t a bad defensive team, ranking right around average by UZR and a bit better than that by DRS, but there was just no way the team was going to allow a .255 BABIP again, and sure enough, they’re up at .296 this year.

When looking at the Statcast data, the difference is just as stark. Last year, based on the quality of contact allowed (and their walks and strikeouts), the Cubs pitching staff had an expected of .297, but the team actually allowed a .281 wOBA, biggest positive differential in baseball. This year, they have an expected wOBA of .310, but an actual wOBA of .321, one of the biggest negative differentials in baseball.

Albert Almora doesn’t appear to have been the big defensive upgrade in CF he was expected to be on reputation, and the team has used Ian Happ in CF more than they’d probably have liked in an effort to get the offense going, though he’s slumped himself of late. With Schwarber in left field, the outfield especially isn’t what it was a year ago, and this is something the Cubs will just have to live with. The 2016 defense was historically awesome, but it’s not coming back. The 2017 and beyond Cubs can still be good defensively, but they’ll probably never match what the team did in the field last year.

The Pitching Has Developed A Dinger Problem

While the team isn’t preventing runs at the same rate as a year ago, the pitching problems in Chicago have been a bit overblown. The team’s strikeout rate has gone from 24.3% to 23.9%, which is basically nothing. Walks are up from 8.3% to 9.2%, which isn’t great, but the league average is up from 8.2% to 8.7%, so relative to the yearly norm, the change isn’t that dramatic. Last year, the Cubs pitching staff had an xFIP- of 91; this year, it’s at 92. Pretty much the same.

Except xFIP normalizes home run rate, and that’s an area where the Cubs have seen an early season spike. Last year, they allowed 1.01 HR/9 (#6 in MLB), and this year, they’re up at 1.26 HR/9 (#20 in MLB). The good news is that homers are a fickle beast, and this is something the Cubs can probably expect to improve going forward. They have the third highest HR/FB% in MLB, behind only the Reds and Astros. John Lackey, Kyle Hendricks, and Jake Arrieta are set to get the most significant bounces from some inevitable HR regression, and the lack of longballs should help the team’s pitching staff look a bit better.

Overall, the early season struggles are a mixture of things that the team will have to live with, a few things they’ll hope improve, and some things they should expect to start going their way a bit more regularly. There’s no reason to think the 2017 Cubs are a bad team, or that their first two months represents a true talent level for this club, and by the end of the season, they’re still very likely to be on top of the NL Central. Over the rest of the season, our forecasts expect the Cubs to win 58% of their remaining games, and make the playoffs three out of four times.

But our projections also think the Dodgers are clearly better this year, and the Cubs aren’t the runaway Best Team in Baseball anymore. If they find a quality fifth starter in the next couple of months, perhaps they can close the gap with the Dodgers — who don’t have as obvious a weakness to improve right now — but the 2017 version of the Cubs looks more like a regular really good team than a can’t-be-beat force of epic proportions.

Basically, everything went right for the Cubs last year, and this is a more normal mix of good and bad outcomes that most teams experience. There’s still plenty of upside with this Cubs roster, and it won’t be any surprise if they catch fire and finish strong over the last four months of the season. But this team also isn’t perfect, and with some guys struggling that weren’t expected to struggle, some of the holes have been exposed. Baseball is hard. Winning every year is hard. There’s a reason it doesn’t very often.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

88 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
mshwiesner
9 years ago

The NL Central is a really strange division this year. I wonder if any team in that division is going to want to sell at the deadline.

Also I realize the Astros were mentioned in this article, but what’s with the lack of Astros articles in May? I realize they’re getting a lot of love from other sites, but they just finished with their best month in team history, they’re in the midst of a 7 game winning streak, they have two players Correa and Gonzales who are tops in the AL in most batting categories in May, and Lance McCullers who has also been amazing in May. They also have lost 3/5 of the starting rotation due to injury. And with starters 3-5 still just clobbered the Twins, a first place team. All of this seems to be worth saying something about, but all I’ve seen in the last month that I can remember is something about Marwin Gonzales being an ok player. Have I missed some articles?

Jeff SullivanMember since 2022
9 years ago
Reply to  mshwiesner

I’m working on the Astros right now, but Dave writes a lot faster than me.

scooter262
9 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Sullivan

Looking forward to it. To the lay fan (e.g. me), they really seem like this year’s version of the Cubs: good team where absolutely everything is going right for them. Looking forward to reading your take on them, Jeff.

mshwiesner
9 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Sullivan

I’m looking forward to it!! Thanks for all the articles too. I’m a big fan and very appreciative of all the work.

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
9 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Sullivan

“but Dave writes a lot faster than me”

How is that possible? I’ve seen you publish three articles a day!

thwerve
9 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

This is not a criticism of Jeff because I devour all such articles, but I do believe “Dave writes a lot faster than me” should probably have read “I was too busy writing another patent Jeff Sullivan ‘Look at player X do something weird article”

southie
9 years ago
Reply to  thwerve

Unfortunately Jeff has a blinking problem. Slows him down a touch.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  mshwiesner

The NL Central is going to come down to the Brewers vs Reds in the final week of the season. For bragging rights and the division crown, Eric Thames and Eugenio Suarez continue slugging their way and making their case for NL MVP. You read it here first.

John Autin
9 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I don’t think many of us actually read it HERE first … but I’m enjoying your hitting streak.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I really didn’t think it would make any sense after Memorial Day. Or even by May 1st. But here we are!

baubo
9 years ago
Reply to  mshwiesner

I think the Astros just aren’t that interesting right now, except maybe the exception of Marwin Gonzalez who may still be in that “is he really legit” murky area. They were pegged to be one of the top teams and they are by fangraphs. And their winning are coming mostly from expected areas.

In general I think people find more fascination with things that don’t go as planned and try to find explanations for them than simply say “Good team is really good. Good players are playing really well. scoring a lot more than your opponents is really good for success.”

Don’t get me wrong clobbering opponents every night is very enjoyable as a team fan but I can see how people outside of Houston may not find it very interesting

tramps like us
9 years ago
Reply to  baubo

so…..thru 54 games they have a run differential of +90. At what number would you find them “interesting?”

baubo
9 years ago
Reply to  tramps like us

If the definition of interesting is based on superior results then most of the articles here should be about Mike Trout. Yet it took his injury for a slew of articles to be written about him.

I’m quite sure the much stronger correlation between reader interest/articles is the difference between expectations and actual results (both positive and negative), rather than simply the quality of result.

phpope
9 years ago
Reply to  baubo

I’d read articles on Trout and Kershaw every day and twice on Sunday.

johnforthegiants
9 years ago
Reply to  baubo

Hmm. Sounds like the Cubs last year, and Fangraphs people were obsessed with them.

I don’t think that’s the explanation.

Art Fay
9 years ago
Reply to  mshwiesner

I think the author nailed it saying everything went right last year. Almost every pitcher had a career year, defense was super luckily good, the young guys didn’t have to earn it and have growing pains. It’s almost like this year is what you would have expected last year and last year is what you’d expect maybe next year.

Somehow they skipped the “growing pains/earning it” phase last year. Probably because the Reds aren’t as weak. If they didn’t play the Reds last year and pad stats like crazy, Bryant probably doesn’t win an MVP and Russell probably gets sent down to the minors to work on his bat.

Crazy game.

Careless
9 years ago
Reply to  Art Fay

Almost every pitcher had a career year? Hendricks yes. Lackey no. Lester basically matched his career best in a few fewer innings. Arrieta no. Hammel no. Chapman matched his career best. Edwards had no comp. Strop and Rondon were down. Wood had his best ERA, in limited innings. Montgomery was in his first full season.

So the full list of “almost every pitcher” is Hendricks and arguably Lester and Wood and Chapman.

OrangeJoos
9 years ago
Reply to  mshwiesner

The Astros are doing what people expected, they are boringly good, and that is a good thing. You should be happy you get to watch good baseball. Some of us get to watch Plouffe, Canha run around in the outfield..yayyy

carterMember since 2020
9 years ago

It’s funny how much a year changes. I remember looking at that team last year and thinking “this team is not beatable”. This year I look at the team and wonder what the big fuss was a year ago. Not only do they look very beatable (ask the Padres) but they do not even seem as if they are the best team in the National League going forward. Or even the 2nd best.

Spudchukar
9 years ago
Reply to  carter

I tried to remind folks entering this season that the chance that Cubs’ rotation could repeat their 2016 numbers was suspect. And the notion that they will all be healthy 2 years running is still doubtful. It almost never happens. The idea that their #5 in the rotation would “work itself out” was also foolish, particularly since they have zero options in AAA. They have a number of position players they could move for a starter, but they don’t seem to be interested in parting with any of them. They have boxed themselves in. Granted it is early and their offense should get better, but on the pitching side what they have now is who they are, and the rotation isn’t going to carry them. 10 over .500 is very possible in 2017.

channelclemente
9 years ago
Reply to  carter

Who knew Dexter Fowler was the Cubs secret weapon, or totem maybe. What was the estimate by analyst here early on, 100-110 wins for the 2017 Cubs…able to leap tall buildings with a single bound.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago

Fowler was pretty awesome for the Cubs and losing that presence at the top of the order hurts. But he hasn’t exactly lit St. Louis on fire so far either.

Jason BMember since 2017
9 years ago

100-110 wins? Wha? No.

dtpollittMember since 2016
9 years ago

I know BABIP does not equate to luck, but when Schwarber and Rizzo own the 3rd and 4th lowest BABIP in MLB, I’d like to think there’s nowhere to go but up for them.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  dtpollitt

Schwarber, I believe, has hit 6 ground balls in his entire career the opposite way. The shift eats guys like Schwarber alive; he’s a dead pull hitter on the ground even though he sprays the ball to all fields in the air. Expecting a BABIP in the .250 range isn’t unheard of for the batted ball profile of someone like Schwarber. Obviously the .194 BABIP won’t be sustained, but even with a 50 point spike he’s still a 225ish hitter this year.

Why Maddon continues to throw him out there at the top of the lineup I’ll never understand.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

This is something Dave has pointed out before. Schwarber’s BABIP was always going to be low because they don’t worry about shifting left-handers with extreme pull tendencies. Add in his speed and you’ve got a recipe for low BABIP.

Running Schwarber out there at the top of the lineup really looks bad. Does Maddon really think Schwarber’s going to suddenly start magically drawing enough walks to compensate for the low BABIP?

Dominikk85Member since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Schwarber doesnt have a history of low babips in the minors. He isn’t going to get anything out of grounders but usually he is not a high gb guy and his ability to go to all fields in the air should allow him at least an average babip.

The low babip guys are the guys who pull everything ground or air ball and hit a lot of fly balls (bautista, dozier), the sell out for power guys. Schwarber doesnt have to sell out for pull elevation power because he is very strong.

He stil was overrated by many cubs fans who basically thought he would be albert pujols and would even call a straight up trade proposal for kershaw an insult to the cubs and the whiff problem is real but I don’t see why he wouldn’t be a 260/350/500 guy going forward.

That guy has a minors ops of over 1000, he can hit.

Still of course his defense still limits his ceiling and I think long term he is an AL player.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  Dominikk85

Your second paragraph is just not true. The low BABIP guys are guys who never get hits on ground balls because they are dead pull hitters; frequently left handed. When 42% of your balls in play are ground balls, and 95% of those are pulled, you’re going to have a lower than average BABIP. Look at Brian McCann and Jay Bruce as examples; they actually hit fewer GB’s (37%) but they pull 95% of their ground balls as well; they spray the ball to all fields in the air, but they have very low BABIP’s. They didn’t always used to be that way either – before shifting became as extreme, McCann was league average.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Friends, there is more than one way to fail.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  Dominikk85

Also, what do his minor league numbers have to do with anything? He has fewer MiLB AB’s than big league AB’s at this point and there are plenty of guys who raked in the minor leagues that did not rake in the big leagues.

JoserMember since 2021
9 years ago
Reply to  dtpollitt

Every year somebody has the lowest BABIP. Though usually they are (or become) a part-time player. They certainly don’t regularly lead-off their line up.

dtpollittMember since 2016
9 years ago

I’ll be interested to see what moves Theo makes over the next 8 weeks. He is almost always a buyer on July 30/31, and right now the 2018 rotation includes Lester and Hendricks and nobody else. Some combination of Eloy, Happ, and…Baez? could all be moving if it is for a SP who is controlled for a few years.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  dtpollitt

If I’m the Cubs, I want Sonny Gray. No sense in going for a rental. But that will probably cost one of the team’s top young assets (Happ, Schwarber, Eloy). It’s way too early to give up on the team but they need a top-of-the-line pitcher with Arrieta scuffling, and it’s too risky to go for a rental.

David SpracaleMember since 2016
9 years ago

What’s wrong with the Cubs is all the deals we fans made with the devil during that rain delay are coming due.

tramps like us
9 years ago
Reply to  David Spracale

It was worth it.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  David Spracale

One of the best comments of the season, and absolutely true.

lonewolf371
9 years ago

Could some teams be more susceptible than others to the fly ball revolution? I haven’t checked how each team throws in the zone, but perhaps a team that previously focused on pitching down in the zone in the past would be more susceptible to hitters moving their swing plane down. What if the Cubs’ homer problem is more about how the Cubs pitch than just unlucky dice?

Kevin Bannon
9 years ago

Would be nice to see something more granular here. This article is basically “The Cubs’ results are not the same because their players are getting worse results.” But what’s driving it? Is it bad luck? Have Schwarber and Russell been less selective? Has the team been less selective? Seems like there’s a lot more digging to be done here.

Joe
9 years ago
Reply to  Kevin Bannon

why don’t you get out your shovel?

Kevin Bannon
9 years ago
Reply to  Joe

Because, unlike the writers on this site, it’s not my job.

Damaso
9 years ago

When a team gives the impression of being a “young team”, it’s just easy to see surprising performance as expected breakouts instead of flukes (even when talking about older parts of the team).

But if we go back to before last season, we should remember that the likes of Hendricks/Lester/Arrieta/Fowler/Zobrist/Contreras weren’t actually expected to be anywhere near as good as they were last year.

tung_twista
9 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Arrieta, who won the Cy Young just a year ago beating Kershaw
with 1.77 ERA and 2.35 FIP wasn’t expected to be anywhere near
3.10 ERA and 3.52 FIP?
I agree, but probably not in the way you are thinking.

And if you look at Zobrist’s numbers since 2011
wrc+: 130 137 114 117 123 124 (2016)
WAR: 6.3 5.8 5.0 5.5 2.0 4.0 (2016)
Looks pretty reasonable to me.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago

I do believe the offense will work itself out, and they will eventually go on a stretch of dominance at some point this season but the pitching regressing seems to be something that many expected. The Cubs pitching staff is not young, and frankly they have been lucky health wise for quite some time now. Outside of Hendricks, there’s a lot of years and innings on that staff.

I know there were some people critical of this opinion in the past, but the Cubs being a dynasty never made sense given their starting pitching; they need to acquire more arm talent. Their positional depth and talent is real, and should be around for quite some time, but they never had the arm talent in the minors.

I have also harped on this quite a bit, but Theo’s reluctance to move Schwarber always seemed like a major misstep for a guy who doesn’t make many. Schwarber’s value always seemed really inflated, and the cubs should have pounced on the perception before it changed. He has no position, and he does not make contact at even a league average level.

The Cubs are still really talented, but their staff is aging, and their bullpen has been pieced together year to year. They should trade some of their young talent for pitching and then it all comes down to them trading the right pieces or the wrong ones.

JimMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

A recent article in Sports Illustrated suggested that Epstein considers Schwarber’s clubhouse presence irreplaceable.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  Jim

I can’t imagine Theo really believes in some non-metric based nonsense like that. I’m sure a positive clubhouse presence is a plus for a player but the reason to keep a player who may not have a place on the roster? That seems a bit far fetched. Theo could have traded Schwarber instead of Torres for Chapman; I’m sure if he could go back and redo that decision, he would.

grandbranyanMember since 2017
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

You mean the Schawarber that hit 412/500/471 to help the Cubs win their first World Series in well over a century? Even with his struggles so far this year I don’t think Theo would go back and redo that decision.

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  grandbranyan

So if Torres turns into a perennial all-star shortstop and Schwarber turns into an average hitting DH, you think that Theo wouldn’t redo the trade because of a 7 game series outcome and a sample of about 24 at bats?

Tim JacksonMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

I think the decision would be less about Schwarber and more about the assured World Series in that context, but there does seem to be an infatuation with him

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  Tim Jackson

He had 17 at bats in 5 games in the World Series with 2 RBI’s. In the game in which he knocked in 2, they won 5-1. In the game in which he scored another run they won 9-3. Pardon me if I don’t think the Cubs won the World Series because of him and my mistake if I think they win it without him. He was on base 3 of 5 at bats in game 7, but he did not score a run or knock a run in; it was a one run game. I’m not saying Schwarber didn’t have a good World Series, but if we are using small sample outcome oriented decision making already (which I don’t think any intelligent GM would do) I figured I’d dig a little deeper into the context of the poster.

If Torres goes on to be a terrific SS or 3rd baseman and Schwarber is a replaceable asset (as he has been in his 118 MLB games so far), then Theo regrets that decision IMO.

Kevin Bannon
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Point of order: Schwarber got the hit that put the go-ahead run on base in the 10th inning of game 7. Maddon pinch-ran Almora for him. So that was a big hit.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

I find the almost universal idea that Torres is going to play SS for the Yankees somewhat mystifying. It will take a lot to move the incumbent off of that position.

Kevin Bannon
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

He could’ve gotten Andrew Miller for Schwarber (plus other guys), according to some accounts. IF true, Theo really looks dumb. But who knows if it’s true.

I know Theo generally is a metrics guy, but in any interview with him you can just tell he really, really likes Schwarber. Like as a person. I think it factors into his decision, probably way more than it should.

Anyway, Schwarber has looked like garbage this year. We’ll see if it persists. The guy HAS hit a ton, but maybe he won’t ever again.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

I like Schwarber, but if Billy Beane (or another GM) asks me for him as part of a Sonny Gray (or some other top-line starter) deal I’m not hesitating. He’s not actually as bad as he looks, but I agree that Epstein’s belief that Schwarber will turn into a “Top 10 hitter in MLB” is an incredibly optimistic take that I don’t share. And he doesn’t have anyplace to play with Rizzo and no DH.

Psychic... Powerless...
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Rational Fan, I agree with 99.9% of your original comment. Thanks for saying very elegantly what I wanted to say.

Here’s the point I believe people are trying to make: If the Cubs had traded Torres, Bryant, Rizzo, Lester AND Bill Murray for Chapman and somehow won the world series, yes, it’s worth it, considering the 108-year wait/weight.

As a Cubs fan who has been watching since 1975 and had a major health issue in the last few years, I wholeheartedly agree!

j27roenick
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Rational Fan, I want to thank you for continuing on the tradition of exuding the opposite of your poster name. Let’s go back in time, shall we?

Rational Fan
Thank you. One of the most correlated bust factors is MiLB K-Rate – as you indicated, a K rate over 30% is alarming.

I have thought for quite some time that Bryant was not the best Cubs prospect – personally, I think Soler is their most valuable piece. The last big time prospect with a very high K-Rate and subpar contact rate was Wil Myers – I was not a fan of Myers because of it. Myers came into the league and succeeded, but he has struggled mightily once pitchers adjusted.

As you also pointed out, subpar K-Rates in AAA are more detrimental than poor k-rates in AA. When Bryant hits the ball – he hits it hard… but you need to be able to make contact more than 70% of the time – his K-Rate could be closer to 35% than 30% in the MLB too.

-1 2 years 4 months ago

Here’s another gem:

Rational Fan
LOL What? Brandon Wood was the 3rd best prospect in baseball in 2006. They are/were both power hitting 3rd baseman with inflated K rates – Bryant has a better walk rate, which helps, but his pitch selection has not been much better.

Kris Bryant entered the year as the 3rd best prospect in baseball… hmm, seems like more similarities than you want to accept. Maybe that’s because it doesn’t bode well if he’s similar to Brandon Wood? Wood’s numbers in 2006, power wise, were lesser than Bryants by a little but that can be attributed to the fact that Bryant played in the PCL this year, and Wood did not during his 2006 season.

-3 2 years 4 months ago

The level of accuracy on these is just breathtaking:

Rational Fan
Kris Bryant’s projection is an embarrassment, and further evidence of proof that ZIPS is a poor evaluator of young players with no MLB playing time. Someone who swings and misses as frequently as he does will not take over the lead as a rookie. This is kind of like last year when ZIPS forecast Baez to have a 2.2 WAR last year – I wonder how that one turned out….

-9 2 years 4 months ago

Rational FanMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  j27roenick

So I was wrong about Bryant…? What does that have to do with Schwarber? I’ve been pretty spot in with the Schwarber comps and the fact that he was vastly overrated for quite some time… The fact that you have to go back two years to prove some point is rather comical though; thanks for bookmarking the posts.

Nothing I have said in this comment section has been inaccurate, but sorry it was not pro-Cub so it bothered you.

j27roenick
9 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

When you say that the world is flat, that obviously affects your credibility for future conversations, wouldn’t you say? There was zero reason to question Bryant’s ascension if you actually followed his career. He raked at every stop along the way in MiLB, and his speed was vastly underrated by people like you who were only scouting the statline and presumed he was a lumbering slugger, and, most importantly, his coachability and drive to improve is off the charts. That someone could compare him to Brandon Wood or say they’d prefer to Soler to him, who is worse defensively than Schwarber and has a long injury history, is just, well, mind-boggling. I just think you should wear a red A on your shirt until the end of time, that’s all.

Don’t overlook that you were also dead wrong about Soler. And then you scout the statline on G7 of the WS again and see Schwarber “didn’t have an effect on the outcome because he had zero runs scored or RBIs,” despite the fact that he started the game-winning 10th-inning rally. I mean, it’s embarrassing. Pay attention for god’s sake. You’re mitigating all the decent points you’re making by bundling them with exasperating arguments that come from you seeming to be absolutely certain about things you are dead wrong about.

You make your assertions matter-of-factly as if this isn’t baseball. Schwarber has obviously struggled this season, but he’s coming off a major knee injury, a grueling rehab and a spectacular WS, followed by a whirlwind offseason that seemed to go on forever. Personally, I think he would have been in AAA already if they had someone ready to give them more offense, but Candy hasn’t been able to handle MLB pitching yet and they don’t have an obvious replacement if it’s not going to be him.

Kyle is 24 and wants to be great. His desire is obviously evident from his truncated rehab from a torn ACL and WS success (.500 OBP) against the Indians’ staff that dominated the AL playoffs. He raked at every stop in his MiLB career and has a 218 RC+ in 51 playoff PAs. It’s obvious that he can achieve greatness. But the move to leadoff and the slump that followed have clearly gotten in his head. His timing is off and he’s trying to break out of the slump with a 500-foot HR in every AB. But to say with absolute certainty that his is who he is for the rest of his career is as foolish as dismissing Bryant on the basis of the research you put in. Maybe this stretch of ~200 PAs to start 2017 isn’t the defining stretch of Schwarber’s career? But you’d never consider that possibility if you read your know-it-all assessments of him and his value, despite apparently not watching him perform in the World Series.

Jon
9 years ago

I thought I would dig a little deeper into Russell’s stats to see what was really going on, because on the surface, he really looks similar to last year, and even better in some respects (e.g. strikeout rates). Like Dave said, you can’t blame it on BABIP either.

The obvious difference is his power – specifically his home run rate. First observation is if you just turned 3 of his outs into home runs, his overall numbers would basically be the same as last year. Doubling his HR from 3 to 6 would put not only his HR rate in line with last year, but also his HR/Fly Ball rate in line.

He is hitting fly balls at the same rate as last year, so what’s happening with those fly balls?

1) He is pulling them less often (29% vs 35%).
2) He is hitting them hard less often (20% vs 34%) – interestingly he is also hitting them softly less often (14% vs 24%). He has a huge increase in medium contact on fly balls (65% vs. 43%).

Now, of his 21 HR last year, 17 were pulled and 4 were hit to center. Nothing the opposite field. So power-wise, we should consider him an extreme pull hitter. So what’s happening with the fly balls that he’s pulling this year?

First off, he has only hit 14 of them, so small sample size warnings apply (but note that this is in line with the 52 he hit last year).

What has happened on those 14?

14% hard hit, compared to 48% last year. MLB has hit about 52% of its pulled fly balls hard. Give Russell a few more hard hit flies to left, and he gets a few more HR, and he’s exactly the same player as last year.

So why is Russell hitting his pulled fly balls so weakly? Is there any reason other than luck?

Runaway ToasterMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  Jon

You have to be careful when saying things like “if you just turned 3 of his outs into home runs, his overall numbers would basically be the same as last year.”

This early in the year, adding 3 HR is a big deal. It changes Aaron Judge from “wow, he’s hitting for power” to “WOW! He’s on pace to break Maris’s 62!”.

That said, the analysis is great. I really like the idea of distilling the pull FB stats since they are often so different from other-way FB stats.

Jon
9 years ago

Thanks. I should have been a little more clear about adding the 3 home runs – I didn’t mean to imply that they are insignificant, just that if you *did* add those 3 home runs, it would fully explain the difference between last year and this year (and as a lead in to the further analysis trying to find the answer to *why* he hasn’t hit those 3 extra home runs).

RoyalsFan#14321Member since 2024
9 years ago
Reply to  Jon

I thought you explained that well enough in your original comment.

Matt
9 years ago
Reply to  Jon

I believe Russell has been dealing with a right shoulder injury most of the year, which I’m thinking is the culprit. It is interesting because Addison’s throwing arm has been all over the place this year as well, alternating between short arming throws to first and throwing them way over Rizzo’s head.

I’d put money on his shoulder being a bit more banged up than suggested. The Cubs haven’t really been able to afford sitting him though (if that’s the real problem) because Zobrist is also banged up and not being allowed to face LHP, Heyward was banged up, Schwarber is an even bigger mess, etc.

For a team with as much depth as the Cubs have, they haven’t quite figured out that the 10 day DL can be used far more aggressively than the 15 day DL.

SucramRenrutMember since 2017
9 years ago

Dave, has anyone taken a look at wind effects on home runs at Wrigley this year compared to others? It would obviously affect both teams equally, but it certainly seems like I have seen a lot of wind aided home runs this year.

skmd
9 years ago

Small nitpick about terminology, and I know this will sound whiny and annoying: “.481 win%” makes no sense – mathematically it means they win .481 out of 100 games. Which is pretty bad. We don’t say a hitter has a “.280 batting%” do we.
You could say “48.1 win%” or “.481 winning average” to be mathematically sensible.
That is all.

Jon
9 years ago
Reply to  skmd

Mathematically, I agree. But we do say he has a .350 on base percentage, and a .450 slugging percentage, no?

(And if you talking about how you actually verbalize it, we say “he has a 450 slugging percentage.”)

And the fact that “slugging average” is sometimes also used, and it’s used synonymously with “slugging percentage” shows that the terminology is just imprecise (which is exactly your point, I guess).

skmd
9 years ago

Are the Cubs just doing it backwards – is this the team that we were supposed to see in 2015?

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago

They never should have let David Ross go.

ashlandateam
9 years ago

The Cubs are a combined 20-5 against the Cincinnati Reds dating back to last year, and have 13 games left to play against them this year.

So, to answer the question: “Nothing a Series or Three With The Reds Can’t Fix.”

And now, as a Reds fan, I will go cry quietly in the corner at the thought of those 13 remaining games.

BPBerkeleyMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  ashlandateam

As a Cub fan I appreciate that thought. Yet at the start of this week I was thinking “nothing a series with the Padres can’t fix”. Oops.

johnforthegiants
9 years ago

All last year I was saying that the Cubs weren’t nearly as good as they seemed to be, largely because of luck (e.g. the pitchers’ completely unrealistically low BABIP), and this year I would say that the Cubs are much better than they seem to be, also largely because of luck (e.g. the pitchers’ completely unrealistically high HR/FB%).

1for108
9 years ago

Everyone laughed at me a couple weeks ago for saying they should trade Wade Davis while he has value. The Cubs are sellers, sellers, sellers!!!

sadtromboneMember since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  1for108

Keep going. Still not convinced, but I appreciate the number of exclamation points.

Anthony
9 years ago

I liked your article, as a cubs fan it’s good to see some positive narratives, very doom and gloom amongst Cubsnation. My question is this. If the good batters aren’t hitting well and pitchers are throwing a lot of homeruns, and that stuff should correct itself, then isn’t that just luck?

johnforthegiants
9 years ago
Reply to  Anthony

That’s what I think. All last year I was saying here that the Cubs were a good team that only appeared to be a great team because they were getting lucky, and they won the World Series not because were necessarily the best team but because they fought and scratched and came through when they had to, and people here were just furious with me. This year it looks they’re still a good team which is now getting UNlucky, but people here seem to believe that some fundamental change has taken place. I just don’t see it.

SethMember since 2016
9 years ago

Zobrist this season has 174 PA in 52 team games (3.34/game). Last season he had 631 in 162 team games (3.89/game). Earlier in this season he was playing even less, it’s only recently he’s been starting more consistently.

It seems like a player of his ability should have been playing a lot more from the start, though I am inclined to trust Joe Maddon when it comes to how to play Zobrist since they’ve been so good together for so many years.

signedepsteinsmother
9 years ago
Reply to  Seth

From what I have read, they have made a conscious effort to limit veteran playing time because of the deep runs the last 2 years.
In Zobrists case, we are talking about 3 straight years.

Dave TMember since 2025
9 years ago
Reply to  Seth

Zobrist has on two separate occasions this season been listed as day-to-day with back soreness (April 21 and May 14) plus a more recent wrist injury (May 27). No trips to the disabled list for him, but last year he not only avoided the DL but was never listed as day-to-day. http://www.prosportstransactions.com/baseball/Search/SearchResults.php?Player=Zobrist&Team=&BeginDate=&EndDate=&PlayerMovementChkBx=yes&DLChkBx=yes&InjuriesChkBx=yes&submit=Search&start=25

For a back injury, it’s not crazy to surmise that it may have been bothering him to some degree this season before it got to the point that the team announced it as a day-to-day injury.

RadermecherMember since 2018
9 years ago

Madden 2016,He goes,we go.
Fowler went,Cards get a solid CF,and great team mate.
Despite a slow start,he is a catalyst,and missed by Chicago.

RadermecherMember since 2018
9 years ago

He goes,we go,Madden on D.Fowler,2016.
He went,despite a slow start,Cards will benefit from this player.
Great catalyst,solid CF,and great teammate.

Doorknob11
9 years ago

Stool don’t understand why people are expecting Schwarber to be so great right now, he’s really only play a half season in the majors and everyone treats him like he’s been here forever.

Ukranian to Vietnamese to French is back
9 years ago
Reply to  Doorknob11

The President doesn’t understand why people expect SCHVARBER is so high now, he’s really only played half a season in the big leagues, and treat him like he’s been here forever.

mando3b
9 years ago

I never trusted this pitching staff, not even last year, and I have to ask why Theo sank all the assets into young position players only. Lester can be great, but he’s baseball-old, and gets the vapors when he has to throw the ball anywhere except to the catcher; Lakey isn’t chopped liver, but he’s not the pitcher he once was; the league might be catching up to Arrieta; Hendricks is young. If they make any trades, it has to be for armS (plural). Given his defensive liabilities, I wouldn’t mind seeing Schwarber go, if he can bring back a good pitcher in return. The Young Studs in the lineup generally are going to be okay–they’re going to find their way eventually. I think one of the keys is Maddon proving he’s the great manager everyone says he is. I love the guy, but he needs to show more creativity with the lineup if we’re going to pull out of this tailspin. There is NO WAY Schwarber needs to be hitting anywhere above 6th or 7th. Or anywhere, given that he’s not an asset on defense. Sit him, let him pull it together, then stick him back out there. Still, the only team I’m worried about right now in the division is the Cards–the Reds & Brewers are going to rejoin the pack soon enough. Lord, I miss Dex–I think his leaving left a void. I understand why they didn’t want to pay him top $$ and why he wanted to go somewhere for a big payday, but I don’t think things would be quite this bad if he were still there.

John Autin
9 years ago

In no particular order:
Predictable decline by some older players — Zobrist, Lackey, Lester.
Arrieta continuing the decline of last year’s second half.
Not too surprising underachievement by less established players — Schwarber, Almora, Russell.
Randomness.

Beyond that … While I usually scoff at notions like “championship hangover” and “falling in love with their press clippings,” if there ever was a team vulnerable to such things, it would be one like these Cubs — given the cultural magnitude of their World Series win, and the sheer avalanche of “dynasty” declarations by pundits and fans.

Lastly (and pure speculation), maybe Maddon’s offbeat style doesn’t work as well the year after a long-awaited success. His Rays fell off a lot the year after their surprise pennant of ’08, before returning to regular contention.

Or maybe — as my brother the White Sox fan says — they’re not due again until 2124.

LogicLiker
9 years ago

Schwarber’s season ending injury is looking like a blessing in disguise last year. His bad defense, and blackhole-bat in the lineup is actually costing the team wins.

Also, why is Baez not a regular at one of the middle infield positions at this point? He seriously sits out 2-3 games a week and bats somewhere in the lower 3rd of the lineup — even more diminishing his potential impact.

OrangeJoos
9 years ago

Two points, as an A’s fan Gray to Cubs makes sense and maybe it is best for all concerned for such a deal, Gray may revive himself under a championship caliber team and the Cubs won’t exactly pay a fortune for it to happen.

The other is on Russell and following his exploits in the A’s system, while he projected star quality he never really showed it consistently, his defense has improved as it was very Semienesque in his minor time with us. The bat was always disappointing, he projected power but never got to it much because his contact was always bad. A’s fans will cry about it because he was the top prospect at the time in our system and we are just a shocking team now, but Russell would not be the number one in the current farm which is still not a fantastic one. In all honesty Russell and Semien will be hard to tell apart at the end of their careers, the strengths and weaknesses will cancel out and they will be you normal run of the mill 2-3 WAR type players.

Harry Arrieta
9 years ago

Cubs hitters lead the league in pull% by a healthy margin. So basically every one of their hitters gets shifted. What this has done is take away the middle of the field. Their slash going up the middle is abysmal. The Cubs need to start using the whole field consistently. The problem is that when they do, they tend to put it in the air. Not enough line drives, tons of lousy contact. But the point is that they are about as predictable, in terms of defensive positioning, as they come. It doesn’t help that they make a ton of soft – med contact and not enough hard. Not many of those balls are gonna fall for hits and that’s why you see a poor BABIP.

Rizzo really needs to get it going but he just pounds into the shift over and over and over. When he’s at his best he’s finding the LCF gap and bleachers often.

Sam
9 years ago

Still feel like the cubs have a 20-5 stretch in them somewhere. Thank goodness theyre in the NL Central and still have a shot at the division.

stanMember since 2019
9 years ago

They played 10 games above their expectations last year and are 10 games under their expectations this year.

I think the difference is that they had more talent on the cusp of the major leagues last year to draw on when there were struggles.