If the 2024 Chicago Cubs Were a Person, They'd Be 2013 Edwin Jackson

[Matthew Trueblood]

It's Flag Day, and the Chicago Cubs welcome the St. Louis Cardinals to Wrigley Field for the first time in 2024. When they take the field, the flags waving above the center-field scoreboard will tell the story: this is a team flapping blandly and ineffectually in the breeze.

Image courtesy of © Nathan Ray Seebeck-USA TODAY Sports

It's unkind to both parties, but the 2024 Cubs powerfully evoke former Cubs righthander Edwin Jackson, circa 2013. That was the first season of Jackson's four-year contract with the team, signed after the first season of the Theo Epstein-led rebuild as (they hoped and believed) a relatively high-floor innings eater. It went sideways right away. Jackson didn't break; he didn't undergo surgery and miss an entire season. He didn't crater and run an ERA north of 6.00, either. (That came in 2014.)

No, in 2013, Jackson took every turn in the rotation, and he struck out 135 batters against 59 walks, in 175 innings. His 4.98 ERA was ugly, but his 3.79 FIP suggested that there was some bad luck involved. He was clearly a below-average pitcher, but he wasn't a trainwreck. He was, if possible, something worse: bad and boring.

That's how the 2024 Cubs feel, 69 games into the 162. They're a talented team, coming off a season in which they won 83 games and had underlying statistics that implied they could have been even better. There are positive signs, including not only the remarkable Shota Imanaga but the progress the team is making in terms of pitching development, as evidenced by the campaigns Ben Brown, Jordan Wicks, and others have had. On the whole, though, they're stubbornly below-average, and it's hard to figure out how that will soon change.

Their series loss in Tampa Bay this week laid bare the problems at hand. The Cubs showed power, speed, and starting pitching prowess, but they couldn't consistently put together threats and score runs, and they couldn't get through 27 outs of shutdown, shutout baseball. Thus, though they played as well as they have in some time against a team suffering from issues similar to theirs, they lost two out of three. Since their 17-9 start, they are 16-27, and in the last five weeks, the only series they won was the two-gamer against the White Sox last week.

Rock bottom is miles away. So is the promised land. This team is very much in the middle, but it's not at all a happy medium. As was true with Jackson over a decade ago, this team is maddening, because it's clear that they could be better than this but equally clear that they don't know how to get to good from here. They're just good enough to lose a lot of close games, and not good enough to win any significant number of more typical, three- or four-run contests.

The Cubs are:

• 24th in batter strikeout rate, fourth in walk rate, 23rd in ISO, and 20th in BABIP, settling them at 22nd in team wOBA
• 13th in starter strikeout rate, and eighth in starter walk rate, contributing to a ninth-place standing in starter opponent wOBA
• Eighth in reliever strikeout rate, but 25th in reliever walk rate, contributing to their landing at 23rd in reliever opponent wOBA
• 24th in Defensive Runs Saved

If you cast about enough, you can find ways in which the team is extreme--mostly in bad ways. Earlier this week, we talked about their ghastly inability to control the opposing running game; nothing has changed since. They're also 28th in MLB in fastball velocity in late-game, high-leverage situations; they remain a little behind the league in that regard.

Mostly, though, they come in 20th and 23rd in a lot of places, and it cancels out (and then some) the places where they come in ninth or seventh. There are elements of a better team here, but when you look at the big picture, it's hard to make the case that they're something other than what their record says they are. There are too many things they're not only not good at, but not even average at, and there are no important things they do best out of any team in baseball.

Jackson was just starting a four-year deal, and the team was locked in with him when things got much worse in 2014. This front office, the top decision-maker within which was part of the group bringing in Jackson back then, needs to think hard about how they can avoid being cornered the same way they were with Jackson. Nominally, the team is committed to the likes of Seiya Suzuki, Ian Happ, Nico Hoerner, Dansby Swanson, and Jameson Taillon for multiple seasons beyond this one.

Maybe they need to explore ways out of their investment in this particular core, since it's clearly not a good enough one to win the way they should expect to. Maybe they need to be open to trading Justin Steele next month, while his value is sky-high and they have a chance to get star-caliber talent in return for him. Taking any kind of seller's stance heading into trade season would be grossly disappointing, but at the moment, 'grossly disappointing' is following this team around, anyway.

View full article

[Geographyhater8888]

If Jed Hoyer was an NFL GM he’d outbid the Falcons to sign Kirk Cousins offering 4 years $200 million.

he loves creating a core of bottom of the order bats on MLB heavyweights. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

I think we're seeing what happens when you strive for the middle in player acquisition.

[Andy]

You know, this is a good comparison because Edwin Jackson is probably the Cub that most consistently pissed me off during his career and this team has consistently pissed me off a lot.

[JHBulls]

16 hours ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

If Jed Hoyer was an NFL GM he’d outbid the Falcons to sign Kirk Cousins offering 4 years $200 million.

he loves creating a core of bottom of the order bats on MLB heavyweights. 

Jed Hoyer: