3 Cubs Pitchers Due For Regression (and How They Can Make it Not Matter)

[Cody Pirkl]

The Cubs had a handful of pitchers emerge in 2024 to help level out the pitching staff, some of whom look to be due for regression. How might some of these arms fight off that dragon in 2025?

Image courtesy of © Darren Yamashita-Imagn Images

 

The Cubs relied on a trio of arms last season who performed well but looked a bit suspect. With the 2025 season around the corner and each of these arms returning, it’s worth looking at what we could expect this season and how they can overcome the inevitable regression and continue their success.

Tyson Miller
It’s always fair to be skeptical of a 29-year-old reliever who suddenly posts a 2.32 ERA over 60-plus innings, and Miller is no exception. His expected ERA, FIP, and xFIP each point to his sterling ERA being a season-long overperformance. He struck out only 23% of opposing hitters, and opponents had just a .203 batting average on balls in play, which is difficult to count on repeating. Miller’s profile points to a reliever with more of a 3.50-4.00 ERA.

While we could see this regression in 2025, his performance wasn’t a complete fluke. Miller is a master of commanding his repertoire, as evidenced by his 4.7% walk rate. His ability to locate also contributes to his ability to avoid hard contact, and his .220 expected batting average allowed in 2024 wasn’t too far off from his BABIP. Mix in the fact that Miller shouldn’t see as many high-leverage situations (given the Cubs' additions to the bullpen this winter), and he should still be a solid contributor once again—once he's ready to come off the IL with his hip impingement.

Ben Brown
Brown’s raw stuff is unmissable, but his limited repertoire likely contributed to the under-the-hood stats pointing to some regression headed his way. His 3.58 ERA was backed up by FIP and xFIP, but his expected ERA of 4.17 reflects his tendency to give up loud contact.

Brown was in the 1st percentile in opponents' average exit velocity and barrel rate, and more developed scouting reports this season could exacerbate this concern. His two-pitch mix gives opposing hitters less to worry about, despite his high-90s heater and wipeout breaking ball. Adding even one more usable offering into the mix could go a long way in forcing weak contact and being able to build off of his strong rookie season. If Brown sticks to just the fastball/breaking ball combo, especially if he finds his way to the rotation again, the league will be even more prepared for him in 2025.

Nate Pearson
Acquired at the end of July, Pearson helped solidify the Cubs bullpen. His 2.73 ERA with the Cubs was helpful, but indicators point to an ERA closer to the low to mid-4s. Pearson stranded runners on base an unsustainable 88.8% of the time after being acquired, and only struck out 22.3% of opposing hitters. Batted-ball luck was his best friend, which is odd for such a high-octane arm.

The Cubs went to work tweaking his pitch mix, reducing his four-seam usage by around 5% by the end of the season and playing around with increases in his slider and curveball usage in the final two months. Both breaking balls are legitimate swing-and-miss pitches, and while their usage was inconsistent in Pearson’s time in a Cubs uniform, reducing his fastball and finding the right mix to draw the most whiffs is the likely path to staving off regression and taking Pearson’s game to another level.

The Cubs' pitching staff cost them dearly in 2024, but this trio was a stabilizing force. While it wasn’t enough for the Cubs to make it to October, they hope they can count on the group to help them over the hump this time. If Miller, Brown, and Pearson can be successful again this season to complement the offseason additions, this Cubs pitching staff will leave last year’s in the rearview mirror.

 

View full article

[Bertz]

This is really good.  I'll say that I tend to be an xFIP truther when it comes to smaller samples, so I don't view Brown as an especially large regression candidate.  Though that's possibly counterbalanced by fairly stark L/R splits, teams might push that advantage more this year.

Nate Pearson is a similar case, though he does have a longer track record of being dong prone so I'm not as quick to handwave it away.

Miller's  a pretty prime regression candidate.  I do trust him as a matchup guy, but I wouldn't want him facing any halfway decent lefty in a leverage opportunity.

I also think Jameson Taillon might be the biggest regression candidate of them all.  Especially since he doesn't appear to have clawed back any of the velo he lost between '23/'24.

[Cody Pirkl]

6 hours ago, Bertz said:

This is really good.  I'll say that I tend to be an xFIP truther when it comes to smaller samples, so I don't view Brown as an especially large regression candidate.  Though that's possibly counterbalanced by fairly stark L/R splits, teams might push that advantage more this year.

Nate Pearson is a similar case, though he does have a longer track record of being dong prone so I'm not as quick to handwave it away.

Miller's  a pretty prime regression candidate.  I do trust him as a matchup guy, but I wouldn't want him facing any halfway decent lefty in a leverage opportunity.

I also think Jameson Taillon might be the biggest regression candidate of them all.  Especially since he doesn't appear to have clawed back any of the velo he lost between '23/'24.

Much appreciated! I'm hoping the addition of Pressly and Porter Hodge being around all year pushes Miller down enough to where they can really pick his spots. I definitely think he knows how to pitch, but absolutely overperformed last season.

 

Brown and Pearson are interesting because I think both have adjustments they can make and the Cubs are smart enough to potentially make those changes. One or both of those guys could easily turn into lights out relievers (or Brown could be a solid piece of the rotation).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think it's important to keep in mind magnitude when we talk about this.  The difference in Pearson's LOB% and one much more sustainable is basically 2 runs.  That's not nothing when the sample is 26 innings, but his 2024 performance looks good even if you add those in.

Similarly, Brown giving up loud contact isn't good but an elite K%-BB% buys a lot of margin for error.  And if any tweaks lower that K% the loud contact likely goes down in turn.