Cubs Don't Need to React Harshly to Nico Hoerner's Ugly 2026 Season

[Jason Ross]

Image courtesy of Mark J. Rebilas-Imagn Images

Entering the 2026 season, there was little clarity on the future of longtime starting second baseman Nico Hoerner. After being drafted by the Chicago Cubs in the first round of the 2018 draft, he's become a mainstay of the Wrigley Field infield. His most recent extension (signed in 2024), which bought out his arbitration years, was set to expire at the end of the season and it was hard to tell if the team would look to extend another one of their infielders. Over the last two years his name had even come up in trade rumors, and while those don't seem to have gone far, it highlights that his future was at the very least in some doubt at.

Things changed on March 29, when the then-28-year-old signed a six year, $141 million dollar extension to keep him in the Windy City for the bulk of his career. 

Immediately, Hoerner responded with one of the best months of his career, posting a sterling .291/.370/.449 line (good for a 130 wRC+) through April. It looked like he had unlocked a new gear, flashing some added power to go along with his Gold Glove defense. On May 6, things were going so well that the Chicago Sun-Times called him the "MVP"  of the young season.

Things hit a snag, however, as Hoerner went into a prolonged slump for much of the rest of the first half, finishing with a wRC+ that was below 80 at the All-Star Break. While he found some more juice in the second half, the overall numbers never fully rebounded, resulting in the worst full-season offensive year of his career. So, what went wrong? And more importantly, should the Cubs (and you) be concerned? 

First off, I think if we asked Hoerner about his 2026 season, he would be the first to tell you that it wasn't good enough. He admitted as much on July 24th this year; "I haven't produced," the second baseman said in an interview for MLB.com. "I haven't helped the team score runs."

If he pulled up his own FanGraphs' page, he may even point you to his 74 wRC+ with runners in scoring position, or his 76 wRC+ in high-leverage as proof. But I think it's also important to remember that Hoerner is the ultimate competitor; he's not going to give himself a break regardless. I also wouldn't be surprised to learn that his standards for himself are so high that they're next-to-impossible to live up to. It's very hard to get to the highest levels of this sport, even harder to stay, and harder yet to have fully earned a $141 million dollar extension. Being ultra competitive is certainly one way to push yourself to get there, and more importantly, to stay there.

But let me give everyone a moment of relief: The Cubs' Gold Glove second baseman was essentially the same guy in 2026 as he was in 2025 when he posted a 110 wRC+ and had a career high 4.8 fWAR. Below you'll see a chart comparing his two seasons and they are shockingly similar. In fact, his expected wOBA are identical between the two seasons. The two places that really stand out are his batting average and his BABIP. His batting average was 33 points lower from year to year, which is likely due to his BABIP being 38 points lower.

Your first reaction may be to think that there is a reason for his BABIP dropping, which is exactly what you should think in instances like this. If a hitter is suddenly making worse contact, you can expect less balls to find their way down safely, and looking for that data will help to tell us whether this is simply luck or earned. However, that expected data is trying to tell us something that a deeper dive into his overall profile confirms: we should probably relax. Nico Hoerner's demise does not appear to be upon us.

One place we can see this is simply in his expected batting average. Despite hitting .263 on the year, his expected batting average was .297. Much like the second baseman's xwOBA, it's literally identical to his actual batting average the season before. And the reason why is clear when we compare his overall profile from 2026 to years past: there's almost nothing separating him. He is a shockingly consistent player. 

 

So, what's the cause for the sharp difference in what we should have expected and what happened? It's most likely just a combination of balls finding gloves and bad variance. "Bad luck" can be a tough sell to some, but in this case, I'm not seeing any massive red flags moving forward. That's not to say that it was all perfect; anecdotally, we all remember really ugly plate appearances, times in which he probably could have (and should have) done better in a specific moment, or even weeks where it just wasn't clicking. But those are all normal ebbs and flows for any MLB player. When you take a 500-foot look at his season, zooming all the way out he looks just fine. He made about the same amount of contact, swung at the same amount of strikes, and hit the ball about as well as he's ever hit them. 

That isn't to say there aren't areas of improvement that can help him moving forward, though. One thing you can usually count on Hoerner to do is hit fastballs really well. Last year; not so much. Both in terms of actual production (.268 wOBA) and theoretical production (.319 xwOBA), he wasn't "right." A dive under the hood shows that he's just getting under the ball far too often on fastballs and is popping them up a bit too often. Pop-ups are akin to an automatic out, as much as a strikeout is in almost every case. He had 61 cases of making "poor/under" contact on four-seams last year which was third-most in the league. This is an area of his game he can clean up.

Despite the struggles offensively, Hoerner remains an excellent defender, posting a +4 in DRS and a +9 OAA at second. While his DRS was a bit low compared to 2025, his OAA was exactly what it was in 2024 and I'm inclined to believe OAA over DRS anyway. He was not nearly as good at shortstop, but that's to be expected as he rounds out his 20s; his arm was never really strong enough for the position to begin with, though he did fill in for the injured Swanson admirably down the stretch. 

Baserunning-wise, he was yet again a positive force on the bases. He stole a few less bases, but this is mostly due to being on base less on the year. He still provided the team with nearly +4 runs of baserunning value according to Fangraphs, while his sprint speed stayed relatively the same as it's been. Eventually he'll slow down here, but there seems to be nothing imminent suggesting a decline in this phase of his game.

Final Grade: C+

Ultimately, it's a little tricky to grade Hoerner's season on the whole. Regardless of the processes, he didn't provide a ton of offensive value for a good deal of the year. And while it's almost assuredly that bad variance is the primary culprit, it doesn't retroactively put runs on the board, either. Defensively, he was generally as good as ever and remains a positive on the bases, so despite the 88 wRC+, he was still worth 2.8 fWAR (which allowed him to finish tied for 10th in the league at his position) in total.

So, while it may be hard to give a fair grade for 2026, I remain confident in him moving forward, remain happy with the extension, and expect he'll be much more like the guy he was between 2023-25.

View full article

[Victor Reichman]

C+ is ridiculous for Hoerner. A B would be more accurate. His defense was an A-. 

He was some of the glue that kept the team together and was helpful filling in at SS when Swanson was out for about a month. He did have a slump in the end of the 1st half, but at times in the 2nd half he led the league in hits. He is a terrific overall player and the article was far too harsh.

[Jason Ross]

35 minutes ago, Victor Reichman said:

C+ is ridiculous for Hoerner. A B would be more accurate. His defense was an A-. 

He was some of the glue that kept the team together and was helpful filling in at SS when Swanson was out for about a month. He did have a slump in the end of the 1st half, but at times in the 2nd half he led the league in hits. He is a terrific overall player and the article was far too harsh.

Context matters. Nico Hoerner was 12% worse than league average bats (100 wRC+). He's usually above average (he has a 106 wRC+ between '21-'25). We can contextualize the numbers, as I did; there's clearly some bad batted ball variance in there and the underlying data suggests "he'll be fine long term" but we can't just ignore that. The expectation was around ~20% better. 

Let's put this in more context. In terms of 2b who had at least 400 PAs he was:
21st in wRC+
23rd in wOBA
5th in base running value
9th in DRS
7th in OAA
10th in fWAR of 20 qualified. 

He was good defensively, not elite like he has been. He was bad offensively, though the data says he'll likely be fine. But in terms of expectations and reality? Yeah, anyone giving him anything above a C+ feels to me like you're being a rosy-Hoerner-homer (in the nicest way). I love Hoerner, but his normal season is way above this. It's objectively his worst season of his career. I doubt Hoerner would give himself even a C+, to be fair. The dude is incredibly harsh on himself. 

I think he's a great player. I think the contract is fine. I think he'll be fine in 2027. But the expectations were an above average offensive player and a top-5 defender at his position with a likely top-5 finish in fWAR. He came in below all of that. Sure, it's better than many second baseman in baseball, but I'm grading on expectations and reality of an individual not a flat, equal grading scale. 

I have a very hard time giving someone who was 10th in the league at his position (20 qualified), when the expectation was much higher than that, above a C+. 

[chopsx9]

Yeah C+ is bang on I think.  No reason to panic...yet.

[Victor Reichman]

25/30 teams would love to have Nico. He would be a positive addition to any team. No reason to bash him. C+ is insulting.

[Rcal10]

6 hours ago, Victor Reichman said:

25/30 teams would love to have Nico. He would be a positive addition to any team. No reason to bash him. C+ is insulting.

But it isn’t really. I think Jason was very fair with his grading. Both in grading Nico against other 2nd baseman and in the expectations we had for Nico. He is a fine player, but last year was not a great year for him. I don’t see the article about Nico as insulting it bashing him. If anything I think he was trying to educate some people who thought Nico sucked this year by explaining it wasn’t as bad as they might have thought. 
I also think suggesting 25 teams would love to have Nico is overstating Nico’s value. My guess is if he was offered straight up for every other teams second baseman maybe half the teams would make the deal. But considering his salary, I’m not even sure half would. 
I love Nico. Love the way he plays the game and glad the Cubs have him. But Jason is spot on with his assesssment of his play last season. 

Edited 15 hours ago by Rcal10

[Jason Ross]

6 hours ago, Victor Reichman said:

25/30 teams would love to have Nico. He would be a positive addition to any team. No reason to bash him. C+ is insulting.

This isn't about teams "wanting" Nico. It isn't grading him as an overall player. It's grading his 2026 based on expectations and reality. A good reminder: a C+ remains an above-average grade, despite his below average offensive performance. Nothing is bashing. 

Would you like to make an actual argument over what he did that would constitute a B using just his 2026 season? I'd be glad to hear it.