The 2026 Cubs Were Always a Two- (or Three-)Man Show at the Plate

[Randy Holt]

Image courtesy of Matt Marton-Imagn Images

 

The Chicago Cubs were bounced from Major League Baseball's 2026 postseason with extreme prejudice. They scored one run in two games against the San Diego Padres, and headed home with far more questions than answers. 

While most of those questions were about the men on the mound, that the offense scored just one run across 18 innings raised a significant issue in its own right—one the team will need to address moving forward. Run production had already waned toward the end of September, for the team that scored more runs than anyone else in the league for the entirety of 2026. 

The Cubs' 850 runs were 18 more than the second-place Milwaukee Brewers, a rare standings win for the Cubs over their division rivals. They were sixth in the league in batting average (.251), second in on-base percentage (.339), and paced the league in isolated power (.177) and wRC+ (114). It was an offense that, by all accounts, should have been quite a bit better across even as small a sample as the Wild Card round. 

Sadly, though, there's a case that what happened is exactly what fans should have expected, under the circumstances. Pete Crow-Armstrong (the presumptive runaway winner for National League MVP) and second-half star Alex Bregman went a combined 0-for-15 with eight strikeouts and a walk. Those two, occasionally along with Seiya Suzuki, were the engine of the team's offensive structure. As went those two (or three), so went the offense as a whole. 

It's not that the Cubs were entirely reliant on two bats. A team doesn't lead the league in runs scored on the strength of a pair of hitters. However, Crow-Armstrong and Bregman did provide the only sustained production we saw from the team's lineup. 

This is where the Cubs stood production-wise from a month-to-month standpoint in 2026: 

• March/April: 169 R (3rd), .261 AVG (4th), .353 OBP (1st), .166 ISO (7th), 119 wRC+ (3rd)
• May: 115 R (19th), .217 AVG (28th), .315 OBP (14th), .128 ISO (26th), 87 wRC+ (21st)
• June: 141 R (7th), .250 AVG (17th), .343 OBP (5th), .194 ISO (5th), 120 wRC+ (4th)
• July: 139 R (3rd), .266 AVG (4th), .342 OBP (3rd), .176 ISO (9th), 118 wRC+ (3rd)
• August: 178 R (1st), .271 AVG (1st), .349 OBP (2nd), .243 ISO (1st), 137 wRC+ (1st)
• September: 108 R (15th), .242 AVG (18th), .329 OBP (8th), .153 ISO (19th), 103 wRC+ (14th)

There were only two months wherein the offense average-ish or worse. In May, for instance, each of Suzuki, Dansby Swanson, Carson Kelly, and Nico Hoerner fell below 80 in wRC+. Kelly's 78 was highest; Swanson's 30 was a true black hole in the batting order. In September, Kelly took his turn being helpless (48 wRC+) as, once again, four starters fell well below the average threshold. Ian Happ's 85 paced that quartet. Ironically, Michael Busch's best work came when the team was otherwise struggling, but overall, he did more to weigh down the offense than to buoy it.

From April through September, here's where each of the team's starters fell by wRC+ (organized alphabetically): 

• Bregman: 104, 94, 92, 127, 177, 195
• Busch: 68, 167, 118, 96, 104, 117
• Crow-Armstrong: 87, 115, 235, 171, 185, 145
• Happ: 126, 127, 90, 89, 108, 85
• Hoerner: 130, 59, 62, 93, 105, 66
• Kelly: 143, 78, 129, 68, 133, 48
• Suzuki: 177, 51, 158, 160, 163, 107
• Swanson: 118, 30, 127, 93, 125, 52

Crow-Armstrong and Bregman started the season slowly. Once they found their footing, though, they were locked in for the remainder of the year; Crow-Armstrong paced the league in fWAR by a wide margin (10.6), while Bregman went on to finish seventh (5.5). The remainder of the group, however, was largely unable to provide steadiness in terms of their production. 

Down the stretch, the only reliable help those two got came from Suzuki. With the exception of a brutal May and a closer-to-average September, he had another season of sustained production. However, while Crow-Armstrong and Bregman were each able to produce across a variety of situations, Suzuki ran into some trouble in the form of a ballooning strikeout rate (touching 26% even in strong months) and underperformance with runners in scoring position (.213 batting average for the season). He's as close a third member of the team's run production squad as the Cubs had this year, but there are always those small stretches that stop him from completely emerging as a slugging superstar. 

Only four regulars provided regular value at the plate, and much of Busch's was wrapped up in a career-best 13% walk rate considering; his ISO figure dropped more than 100 points from 2025. Bregman's percentile distribution looks as it always has. Crow-Armstrong's in illustrative of an MVP-caliber season. Suzuki has his approach and some other figures working his way. The rest are a smattering of limited skill sets that, as indicated by their run value, are unable to sustain production over a long stretch. Much of the positive work Swanson, Happ and Hoerner did came in April and May, too. By the end of the year, none of those three brought much to the table.

That's where the 2026 Cubs ran into trouble. The floor for this group is high. But the ceiling is not especially impressive. The group, as a whole, is too streaky to have been expected to find success in the absence of production from Crow-Armstrong and Bregman. Each popped for a two-week or a month-long stretch. Big picture, though, this was always a two-man show, starring two top 10 fWAR players, with Suzuki occasionally popping in. As we saw in the final stretch of the year, that was ever going to be enough for the Cubs to compensate for their woeful assembly of the pitching staff.

 

View full article

[camiata2]

I can understand being frustrated with Seiya's performance with runners in scoring position this year (I know I was), but to come to the conclusion that he was an inconsistent and only occasional contributor on offense this year is just horrendous analysis. Be better.

[Brock Beauchamp]

5 minutes ago, camiata2 said:

I can understand being frustrated with Seiya's performance with runners in scoring position this year (I know I was), but to come to the conclusion that he was an inconsistent and only occasional contributor on offense this year is just horrendous analysis. Be better.

Welcome to the site! Maybe you misunderstood Randy? He said this about Seiya:

"Down the stretch, the only reliable help those two got came from Suzuki. With the exception of a brutal May and a closer-to-average September, he had another season of sustained production."

[Rcal10]

2 hours ago, Randy Holt said:

Image courtesy of Matt Marton-Imagn Images

 

The Chicago Cubs were bounced from Major League Baseball's 2026 postseason with extreme prejudice. They scored one run in two games against the San Diego Padres, and headed home with far more questions than answers. 

While most of those questions were about the men on the mound, that the offense scored just one run across 18 innings raised a significant issue in its own right—one the team will need to address moving forward. Run production had already waned toward the end of September, for the team that scored more runs than anyone else in the league for the entirety of 2026. 

The Cubs' 850 runs were 18 more than the second-place Milwaukee Brewers, a rare standings win for the Cubs over their division rivals. They were sixth in the league in batting average (.251), second in on-base percentage (.339), and paced the league in isolated power (.177) and wRC+ (114). It was an offense that, by all accounts, should have been quite a bit better across even as small a sample as the Wild Card round. 

Sadly, though, there's a case that what happened is exactly what fans should have expected, under the circumstances. Pete Crow-Armstrong (the presumptive runaway winner for National League MVP) and second-half star Alex Bregman went a combined 0-for-15 with eight strikeouts and a walk. Those two, occasionally along with Seiya Suzuki, were the engine of the team's offensive structure. As went those two (or three), so went the offense as a whole. 

It's not that the Cubs were entirely reliant on two bats. A team doesn't lead the league in runs scored on the strength of a pair of hitters. However, Crow-Armstrong and Bregman did provide the only sustained production we saw from the team's lineup. 

This is where the Cubs stood production-wise from a month-to-month standpoint in 2026: 

• March/April: 169 R (3rd), .261 AVG (4th), .353 OBP (1st), .166 ISO (7th), 119 wRC+ (3rd)
• May: 115 R (19th), .217 AVG (28th), .315 OBP (14th), .128 ISO (26th), 87 wRC+ (21st)
• June: 141 R (7th), .250 AVG (17th), .343 OBP (5th), .194 ISO (5th), 120 wRC+ (4th)
• July: 139 R (3rd), .266 AVG (4th), .342 OBP (3rd), .176 ISO (9th), 118 wRC+ (3rd)
• August: 178 R (1st), .271 AVG (1st), .349 OBP (2nd), .243 ISO (1st), 137 wRC+ (1st)
• September: 108 R (15th), .242 AVG (18th), .329 OBP (8th), .153 ISO (19th), 103 wRC+ (14th)

There were only two months wherein the offense average-ish or worse. In May, for instance, each of Suzuki, Dansby Swanson, Carson Kelly, and Nico Hoerner fell below 80 in wRC+. Kelly's 78 was highest; Swanson's 30 was a true black hole in the batting order. In September, Kelly took his turn being helpless (48 wRC+) as, once again, four starters fell well below the average threshold. Ian Happ's 85 paced that quartet. Ironically, Michael Busch's best work came when the team was otherwise struggling, but overall, he did more to weigh down the offense than to buoy it.

From April through September, here's where each of the team's starters fell by wRC+ (organized alphabetically): 

• Bregman: 104, 94, 92, 127, 177, 195
• Busch: 68, 167, 118, 96, 104, 117
• Crow-Armstrong: 87, 115, 235, 171, 185, 145
• Happ: 126, 127, 90, 89, 108, 85
• Hoerner: 130, 59, 62, 93, 105, 66
• Kelly: 143, 78, 129, 68, 133, 48
• Suzuki: 177, 51, 158, 160, 163, 107
• Swanson: 118, 30, 127, 93, 125, 52

Crow-Armstrong and Bregman started the season slowly. Once they found their footing, though, they were locked in for the remainder of the year; Crow-Armstrong paced the league in fWAR by a wide margin (10.6), while Bregman went on to finish seventh (5.5). The remainder of the group, however, was largely unable to provide steadiness in terms of their production. 

Down the stretch, the only reliable help those two got came from Suzuki. With the exception of a brutal May and a closer-to-average September, he had another season of sustained production. However, while Crow-Armstrong and Bregman were each able to produce across a variety of situations, Suzuki ran into some trouble in the form of a ballooning strikeout rate (touching 26% even in strong months) and underperformance with runners in scoring position (.213 batting average for the season). He's as close a third member of the team's run production squad as the Cubs had this year, but there are always those small stretches that stop him from completely emerging as a slugging superstar. 

Only four regulars provided regular value at the plate, and much of Busch's was wrapped up in a career-best 13% walk rate considering; his ISO figure dropped more than 100 points from 2025. Bregman's percentile distribution looks as it always has. Crow-Armstrong's in illustrative of an MVP-caliber season. Suzuki has his approach and some other figures working his way. The rest are a smattering of limited skill sets that, as indicated by their run value, are unable to sustain production over a long stretch. Much of the positive work Swanson, Happ and Hoerner did came in April and May, too. By the end of the year, none of those three brought much to the table.

That's where the 2026 Cubs ran into trouble. The floor for this group is high. But the ceiling is not especially impressive. The group, as a whole, is too streaky to have been expected to find success in the absence of production from Crow-Armstrong and Bregman. Each popped for a two-week or a month-long stretch. Big picture, though, this was always a two-man show, starring two top 10 fWAR players, with Suzuki occasionally popping in. As we saw in the final stretch of the year, that was ever going to be enough for the Cubs to compensate for their woeful assembly of the pitching staff.

 

 

View full article

 

Couldn’t you do this with evey team? All players have peaks and valleys. The superstars’ valleys aren’t as low or last as long. But how many teams have multiple superstars? Kind of a needless analysis IMO. Just another post that wouldn’t have been posted had the Cubs still been playing. And, maybe, had the two stars of the team actually played well they may have still been playing. Not blaming them, just pointing out that research to try to explain why a team failed after it failed is easy. And in this particular analysis, I do think after every team loses someone can post the same thing about that teams line up.