RandallPnkFloyd

The Chicago Cubs' lineup gained stability and concrete shape this weekend. Their defense, meanwhile, got even more fluid. Image courtesy of © David Banks-USA TODAY Sports The Chicago Cubs’ re-signing of Cody Bellinger to what is, in essence, a one-year deal quelled many a nerve across the North Side fanbase over the weekend. In bringing back one of their offensive stalwarts from 2023, the Cubs locked in their sorely needed lefty bat for the middle of the order and a strong defender, to establish themselves as, at least, a contender for the National League Central crown in 2024. The ramifications of bringing Bellinger back into the fold run deep. There are lineup construction implications. There’s likely to be fallout on the 40-man. It puts the team into a position where prospects get to focus on the final steps of their development, rather than being thrust into a role from the jump. Most importantly – and perhaps impressively – it unlocks an absurd level of defensive versatility that should be the envy of teams around Major League Baseball. It’s no secret that this team has to be excellent on the margins in order to succeed. While signing Bellinger seemed essential, they’re still multiple steps behind legitimate contenders elsewhere in the NL. This is especially true on the defensive front. The Cubs have not built a staff of power arms. Some are on the rise throughout the system, sure. But with a staff that relies on soft contact, the defense has to be the crux of their aspirations. That makes the Bellinger re-addition that much more fascinating. Realistically, there are about four spots on the roster that are genuinely locked in. The middle infield features Dansby Swanson and Nico Hoerner (with the latter possessing the ability to move over to the six when the former needs a day off). Ian Happ will once again man left field. Yan Gomes is the guy behind the plate, until Miguel Amaya can hang as the No. 1. Seiya Suzuki will get the bulk of the starts in right. But without a true designated hitter on the roster, we can likely assume he’ll grab at least a decent share in that role, to open up some playing time for others. That leaves three and a half spots where the Cubs are lacking in everyday certainty: First base, third base, part of the DH gig, and center field. For those spots, the Cubs have Bellinger, Christopher Morel, Michael Busch, Patrick Wisdom, Nick Madrigal, Mike Tauchman, and Miles Mastrobuoni currently on the roster. Pete Crow-Armstrong and Alexander Canario are on the 40-man. They also have David Peralta, Dominic Smith, and Garrett Cooper in camp on minor-league deals. That’s a dozen names. Of them, Bellinger will most likely get the lion’s share of starts in center out of the gate, but we know he can handle first base at an upper-tier level, as well. When PCA is ready (or when Craig Counsell wants to work one of Canario or Tauchman into the mix), we’ll see him bounce to that infield corner. We may also see him in right for a spell once Crow-Armstrong does arrive permanently. So that’s two guaranteed spots in which we’ll see Bellinger, and maybe a third. Morel appeared at six different positions in 2023. The team wants to give him a shot to lock down the hot corner. If he can’t, we’ll likely see him bounce around in a somewhat similar fashion (while grabbing the majority of starts out of the DH spot). Somewhat similarly, Michael Busch played four separate positions in Los Angeles last year. The Cubs want to give him a chance at first. But we may also see him bounce around to second and third on an as-needed basis in order to get the bat into the lineup. Further down the roster, you’ve got Wisdom, who can play first, third, and the outfield corners (although those, please, God, only in emergencies). Madrigal can play second, and showed us last year that he can play third with the best of them. Tauchman can hold down any of the three outfield positions. So can Canario. Mastrobuoni played second, short, third, left, and right. The current slate of non-roster invites don’t offer the same level of flexibility, but they can handle first and/or an outfield corner in a pinch, opening up the DH spot, which would further goose the team's total flexibility. When Crow-Armstrong demonstrates that he’s ready for a regular role, your guys in center can be deployed elsewhere. Each of these guys can be counted on for at least some level of stability, too. You don’t want to trot Wisdom out at third for multiple weeks at a time. But on a Tuesday, so Morel can sit or just take some hacks at DH? Absolutely. You’re not worried about defensive metrics in single game samples. The purpose of having a roster constructed this way is that it allows you to plug guys in as needed without any real fear of catastrophe in the field. Point being, the Bellinger signing does a lot of really positive things for the Cubs. The defensive component might just be the most fascinating of it all. We’ve come to view Counsell as something of a chess master. And while he’ll certainly have a pretty regular lineup – especially having noted the comfort of hitters being an important consideration over the weekend – there are an absurd number of possibilities for his defensive configuration as 2024 gets underway. We’ll see some continued movement throughout the spring, for sure. But from a roster construction standpoint, it’s very clear that the organization has a significant desire to incorporate movable pieces. Not only from bench spots, either. Nearly half of the regular starters will experience some level of positional variability. It’s a massive tool in the toolbox for a manager such as Counsell and one that could play out as a significant advantage in 2024. View full article

As the Chicago Cubs undertake the project of trying to turn one of their best hitters into a credible defender at a key position of need, the big question will be how high a bar he needs to clear. That question has a few wrinkles to it, so let's examine them. Image courtesy of © Rick Scuteri-USA TODAY Sports Minor-league outfield signings serving as a potential Cody Bellinger contingency notwithstanding, perhaps the biggest Chicago Cubs news to emerge from the extended weekend was that they would give Christopher Morel a prolonged run at third base this spring. We (obviously) do not know what shape that will end up taking. The assumption has long been that Morel would get most of his starts out of the designated hitter spot. Nick Madrigal and Patrick Wisdom have been loosely, uneasily projected to hold down the hot corner, with an occasional cameo from Michael Busch. Morel, in the meantime, could see a splash of playing time at myriad positions, as was the case in 2023. He appeared at second, shortstop, third, and all three outfield spots last year. That would likely be on an as-needed basis, however, as none of those spots appear to be a long-term home for Morel. The middle infield is locked up for at least the next couple of years. The corner outfield spots are, too, with Ian Happ and Seiya Suzuki. Center field represents more of a question, but the Cubs already have Pete Crow-Armstrong, Mike Tauchman, and Alexander Canario vying for time, and the 2022 experiment in which Morel got extended run in center didn't leave anyone especially encouraged. Morel’s opportunities are constrained by others and by his own limitations, all over the diamond. There was brief chatter about a look at first base, but the acquisition of Busch seems to have put that on hold. This means that third base represents the most logical fit for Morel, if the team is hellbent on getting him time in the field. Realistically, shouldn’t that have always been the case anyway? Morel’s bat profiles well for the spot--much more so than the contact-oriented (and-nothing-else) Madrigal or the massive strikeout rate (even compared to Morel's own bloated one) of Wisdom. In matters of playing time, it’s largely about the defense, which is what the Cubs are aiming to examine this spring. But just how good does he have to be in order to stick there, anyway? Could the team get by with him being even average? Slightly below? Or does he have to be Actually Good in order to maintain a grip on an everyday positional role? There are three fairly close comparisons to be made against Morel’s offensive production in 2023: Max Muncy, Jake Burger, and Jeimer Candelario. Here are their respective lines: Morel: .247/.313/.508/.821, 31.0 K%, 8.4 BB%, .260 ISO, 119 wRC+ Muncy: .212/.333/.475/.808, 26.4 K%, 14.7 BB%, .263 ISO, 118 wRC+ Burger: .250/.309/.518/.828, 27.6 K%, 5.9 BB%, .268 ISO, 120 wRC+ Candelario: .251/.336/.471/.807, 22.0 K%, 9.2 BB%, .220 ISO, 117 wRC+ Candelario featured the highest WAR of the three (3.3, ranked eighth among qualifying third basemen). Muncy followed at 2.9 (12th) and Burger at 2.5 (15th). Nothing identical to Morel among them, but similarities abound. The most notable difference is that Muncy and Burger each project for over 70 percent of the playing time at third base, according to the depth charts over at FanGraphs. Candelario is in a bit more of a unique position, given the glut of infield prospects in Cincinnati, but totaled 994 innings at the position last year. Should one of the Reds’ prospects falter or hit the injured list, he’s likely the guy to step into a larger role there. So it stands to reason that this trio of Morel’s offensive comps are considered everyday guys at the hot corner. And yet, the defensive output isn’t terrific. Muncy went for an Outs Above Average (OAA) of -7 and -3 Defensive Runs Saved (DRS). Burger was -8 and -7, respectively. Candelario ended up on the positive side of OAA, at 2, but fell on the negative of DRS, at -5. In roughly 180 innings at the position over the last two seasons, Morel has a cumulative OAA of -3 and DRS of -4. It stands to reason that he could improve that if given more reps. Obviously, he has to make at least minor strides, because that rate of defensive leakage would amount to 15 or 20 lost runs over a full season. The hope would be that he makes bigger progress. But if he doesn’t – and he ends up being a bit under the average threshold – would it really matter? The reality is that there are very few third basemen who excel on both sides of the ball. José Ramírez, Manny Machado and Nolan Arenado stand almost alone in that regard. Outside of the truly elite at the position, you’re likely getting a glove-first guy with a mediocre bat, or an above-average bat with average-to-below average defense, like the Morel comps. With that in mind, who’s to say that Morel has to be good in order to nail down the position? It’s not as if the rest of the league (or the Cubs' own alternatives) are perfect. Madrigal looked solid in a very small sample, but his bat is better suited for…not a corner infield spot. And Wisdom’s glove was an atrocity in both 2022 & 2023. It certainly seems as if the Cubs should be giving Morel every chance to stick. Now, of course, there’s a bit of additional context. It’s a team built to live on the edge. Steady pitching, strong defense, and very little margin for error. It’s possible that the team decides to ride it out with Madrigal (or, hey, wild idea: sign a massive-upside defender like Matt Chapman) in order to ensure that fielding phalanx remains intact to cover any offensive shortcomings. You could also argue that allowing Morel to ride it out there makes more sense under these circumstances, given that almost no infielders are better at making plays to their right than Dansby Swanson. With such good defense around him, one becomes a little more optimistic as to: The impact of below-average defense from Morel; and The potential for development over time. In an ideal world, Morel shows he can handle the position from a defensive standpoint. This would help the club to avoid wasting his athleticism as an everyday DH. It would also allow the Cubs to operate with a little more freedom at the DH spot, which could lead to increased opportunity for many of the youngsters coming up through the ranks (Alexander Canario, for one) and for Busch to play often even if Bellinger re-signs. If it doesn’t work, though (or if the team decides to stay status quo with the Madrigal/Wisdom Braintrust), then we’ll likely see much of the same we did last year. Heavy time in the lineup, but sparingly seeing the actual field away from the basepaths. Let’s just not pretend that he has to be good to be the answer at third base for now. View full article

Both corners of the Cubs infield remain sources of uncertainty, if not outright confusion. Their big trade with the Dodgers early this month has offered new possibilities, but not (yet) a clear solution. Image courtesy of © Charles LeClaire-USA TODAY Sports When the Chicago Cubs first acquired Michael Busch from the Los Angeles Dodgers, my instinct was to immediately evaluate him as part of the picture at third base. The Cubs lacked certainty at both infield corners, sure. But given Busch’s prior role in Los Angeles and an easier road to clarity at first base, it was the logical fit. My justification existed within that future projection. Patrick Wisdom strikes out too much, for a guy who plays subpar defense. Nick Madrigal doesn’t have the offensive profile needed to play regularly, despite his great glove. The organization has shown almost no interest in allowing Christopher Morel to ply his trade at the spot on anything resembling a long-term basis. On the other side, the team was linked to Rhys Hoskins all winter, with Matt Mervis also waiting for another crack at nabbing a permanent role at the top level. So, in the face of people much smarter than me declaring otherwise, I honed in on third base as Busch’s immediate spot with the Cubs. Since that time, Hoskins has signed in Milwaukee. Pete Alonso, an apparent trade candidate from the winter’s outset, doesn’t appear likely to be moved prior to his own free agency. With that, there’s also this from Carter Hawkins (via Marquee😞 “Our expectation is he’s on the Opening Day roster," Hawkins said. "I think there’s obviously opportunity at first base — that’s kind of the easy plug-and-play. He’s got really good reviews defensively over there from our scouts that have seen him, from talking to the Dodgers, from obviously seeing him over there.” Hawkins also offered the caveat that Busch does have a history of time at second and third. He noted that third base will require extensive work from a defensive standpoint, something that makes plenty of sense given the organization’s commitment to upper-tier defense. Nevertheless, the Hoskins signing is what likely seals this more than anything. With no viable candidates existing outside the organization at present, it’s likely going to be Busch, no matter what misguided inklings I had at the time of the trade. Busch’s professional experience at the position is minimal. In 2023, at Triple A, he started seven games at first base. He spent 10 innings there across four games in the majors, but no starts. That’s it. Until he was drafted, though, first base was his primary position. He played 158 games there at North Carolina, and another 66 in wood-bat summer leagues. He's more comfortable at that spot than anywhere else on the diamond, even if he hasn't made it his primary home in a few years. It makes sense to stick Busch at first, especially since the path to clarity now seems more obvious on the other side of the infield. You can survive with a combination of Wisdom and Madrigal there. You can sign Matt Chapman. There are a couple of prospects scratching the upper levels of the minors. The intrigue exists far more there (in both the short and long term) than it does at first base. Busch as the guy getting the run out of the gate makes multiple degrees of sense. Of course, that also creates a massive question pertaining to one former darling prospect: Matt Mervis. After his power bat broke him onto the scene as a potential future first baseman, he sipped 99 plate appearances' worth of coffee in 2023. That culminated in a .167/.242/.289 line, with an ISO of just .122 and a strikeout rate a touch over 32 percent. Mervis went to Iowa and adjustments were made, but not to the degree of really impacting outcomes. Cody Bellinger’s extensive, health-related run at the spot helped to hold Mervis down indefinitely. In terms of the “future” context, Mervis’s demotion seemed more permanent, as the discussion moved to names like Alonso or Hoskins. Busch anchoring first base would seem to indicate a fair amount of gloom and doom for Mervis’s future on the North Side. Busch doesn’t offer the power that Mervis could, but his 20-plus homer potential isn’t exactly a far cry from Mervis's upside. Add in more contact and more athleticism and there’s plenty of logic in it being Busch over Mervis. When you add in Morel’s standing as the team’s full-time designated hitter, Mervis gets squeezed out, quickly and easily. So it would, in fact, appear that the Cubs were at least able to solve one part of their corner infield puzzle with the Busch acquisition. Maybe they even answered the question of what happens with Mervis moving forward (if Busch succeeds). Third base is still in question, but there are bodies available, inside and outside of the organization. Maybe Busch thrives and Mervis hits. That would be a nice problem to have. Regardless of the way it shakes out, though, it’s a situation that offers far more intrigue than hoping Eric Hosmer and/or Trey Mancini can hold it down over the course of a full season. Where do you like Busch's fit on the roster best? Would you make room for Mervis, or start looking to trade him? Weigh in below, and let's get a brainstorm going. View full article

The Cubs made a crucial upgrade in their lineup with a trade Thursday, adding left-handed thump. The question is what, exactly, they just did to their defense. Image courtesy of © BRYAN TERRY/THE OKLAHOMAN / USA TODAY NETWORK Within the same calendar day on which their deal with Shōta Imanaga was announced, the Chicago Cubs swung a major trade, too. In this one, they acquired (former?) top prospect Michael Busch & reliever Yency Almonte from the Los Angeles Dodgers. In return, the Cubs sent highly-regarded pitching prospect Jackson Ferris, and 2023 draftee Zyhir Hope, an outfielder. It’s not a wildly significant trade on paper. In one description, it’s a couple of guys not on the 40-man roster for a former top prospect being squeezed out of a championship-caliber roster and a reliever out of options. But the ramifications run deep, especially on the Cubs’ end of things. One aspect that seems essential to discuss, though, is the defensive angle of it all. While there are still moves to be made—if you believe the hype, the Cubs could be in line for multiple marquee free agents before the offseason expires—the early assumption is that Michael Busch could assume a role as the regular starter at either third or first base. It’s an idea worth exploring on multiple levels. Busch’s sample at the major-league level is small. He has 81 plate appearances to his name, all of which came in 2023. He doesn’t have a real stretch at the top level to make any determination either way, nor is the mainstream fan base aware of the skill set he brings. Scouting reports don’t love the glove or arm, though, and essentially any overview you read of Busch as a player questions the position at which he’ll spend his time for the foreseeable future. For the sake of ease, here’s MLB Pipeline, on Busch’s defense: Though Busch has fringy speed and arm strength, he has worked hard to improve his quickness and arm since turning pro. Evaluators inside and outside of the organization were impressed at how he has transformed himself into an adequate defender at second base, though the Dodgers have deployed him primarily at third base in 2023. The game speeds up on him at the hot corner, however, and he's still best suited for first base and capable of playing a passable left field. I am, admittedly, not well-versed on the Dodgers’ system. I know it’s good; it’s good in perpetuity. Virtually every scouting report I’ve seen, though, reflects the same sentiment, and the conclusion of all of them is the idea that Busch does not have a defensive home moving forward—save for maybe first base (where the Cubs also happen to have a long-term need). Again, that initial vibe is one that has him as the Cubs’ primary guy at third for 2024, perhaps independent of any other moves they would make (short of a Matt Chapman, of course). This makes it a fascinating move for the Cubs, on a couple of levels. The team does not have a long-term option settled on either corner of the infield. That doesn’t mean they don’t have bodies, though. Nick Madrigal, Patrick Wisdom, Christopher Morel, and Miles Mastrobuoni could, theoretically, all see time there in 2024. Longer-term, someone like BJ Murray, Jr. or (more notably) Matt Shaw represent some upside within the system. The organization’s previous reluctance to roll Morel out with any level of consistency at the position probably rules him out. Mastrobuoni isn’t anything more than utility off the bench. As such, of those likely to get the bulk of the starts at third, only Busch, Madrigal, and Wisdom seem realistic. All three bring drastically different types of offense. Defensively, though, it isn’t a difficult puzzle to solve; the job could already be in Busch’s hands. Madrigal, without question, exceeded expectations with his glove at the hot corner. Across roughly 560 innings, he went for an Outs Above Average of 10 and posted 8 Defensive Runs Saved. His lack of long-term viability is about his contact-only bat (given what you want out of a corner infield spot), rather than his defense. Interestingly, ruling Wisdom out kind of takes the opposite perspective. Wisdom has the pop (strikeouts notwistanding) to hang in a corner, but it’s his glove as the limiting factor. In over 900 innings in 2022, Wisdom posted -6 DRS and -11 OAA, before going for -5 DRS and -6 OAA in roughly half the time (460 innings) in 2023. Busch only has 99 major-league innings at third base. The numbers aren’t terrific, with a DRS of -1 and OAA of -4 in that small sample. You can make the argument that the Cubs were an upper-tier defense even without full-time excellence at third in the last few years. You can also note that having Dansby Swanson to your left—someone who featured an 80 percent success rate in moving to his right—would mitigate some of those concerns. And defense can always be coached up. If Busch made strides at second base, it’s absolutely possible he could demonstrate the type of growth in a full-time switch to third that we saw from Madrigal. The possibility of a platoon with either of the others, both of whom are right-handed bats, exists. That could allow for Busch’s growth within a small sample. But it is interesting that a team as defense-oriented as the Cubs would be willing to quickly install Busch into their infield picture, given the shortcomings that have been noted throughout his professional career. Which leads me to two conclusions. The first is that we should take seriously (though not at all as gospel) reports that Busch will be the Cubs’ 2024 first baseman. It’s the early assumption, according to the always-reliable Sahadev Sharma, but not close to official yet. The second is that the Cubs believe they can get him moving at a passable rate with the glove, to a point where the massive upside with the bat will help to compensate for any defensive deficiency. All that—this is likely an essential component for the Cubs specifically—without the hefty contract of someone like Chapman. After the most dull offseason possible, the Cubs have started to create a buzz this week. The infield configuration with Busch in the fold is fascinating, especially when you consider additional signings or a trade of someone like Wisdom on the horizon. It’s a trade that creates questions, but also unlocks all sorts of potential for the balance of this winter. View full article

As the Cubs seek to add a big bat to their lineup this winter, they figure to lock in on a few first basemen as potential acquisitions. They're a team that prioritizes defense, though, and it will be interesting to see how much weight they assign to the glove at that position as they go about their hot stove business. Image courtesy of © John Geliebter-USA TODAY Sports The Chicago Cubs introduced Craig Counsell as their manager on Monday morning. While his staff still needs sorting, we now know the face of the man tasked with manning the bench in 2024. There are a few other spots, however, where we aren’t quite so fortunate. Among those is first base, where the Cubs will assuredly feature someone not currently on the roster. The 2023 iteration of the club saw a mix of Cody Bellinger (59 games), Trey Mancini (51), Matt Mervis (27), Jeimer Candelario (21), Eric Hosmer (15), and Patrick Wisdom and Jared Young (14 each) log time at the position. Of those players, two didn’t finish the season as part of the roster (Mancini and Hosmer); one has already departed this offseason via waivers (Young), and two are set to find a lucrative payday in free agency (Bellinger & Candelario). With no positional prospect on the cusp, that leaves Mervis and Wisdom as the only in-house options that might see time at the spot in 2024. The team has also said Christopher Morel will get some winter reps at the cold corner. It’s hard to imagine that any of the trio will be a viable option to see major time there, however. The organization spent 2023 mismanaging Mervis to the point of wondering if he’ll ever get a genuine shot again. Wisdom is a non-tender candidate given his loud but shallow skill set. It remains to be seen how serious the Cubs are about Morel as a viable option at the spot in the longer term. All of this is to say that we’re going to see a new first baseman at Wrigley Field in 2024. Bellinger could very well return on a long-term contract. So, too, could Candelario (albeit less likely). The door hasn’t been closed on either as firmly as it has with, say, Marcus Stroman. However, given their commitment to other positions (center field and third base, respectively), it would likely end up being more of a timeshare situation. In either case, the Cubs would still need someone else capable of holding down the spot. There’s a nonzero chance that we could see a roster that involves part-time Bellinger at first, with someone like Morel filling in the gaps, but for now, we should be acting under the assumption that whoever starts the majority of games at first is not someone currently affiliated with the organization. Rhys Hoskins has already been mentioned in conjunction with the Cubs’ pursuits this winter. A torn ACL and the permanent transition of Bryce Harper to first base has left him a free agent unlikely to return to his previous club. We just watched the Cubs have massive success with a one-year, injury-related reclamation project. There’s some logical smoke there. Pete Alonso is the other notable name tied to the Cubs. One year away from free agency, Alonso is said to want to bring his power bat to the North Side. If Morel ends up being part of the picture, there’s some serious offensive upside involved with the Cubs’ first base prospects in the offseason’s infancy. However, it’s the defensive component of a potential addition that shouldn’t be overlooked in the discussion. One of my main concerns with trotting out Hosmer as last year’s Opening Day first sacker was his defense. The 2023 Cubs were a team built around defense. With a pitching staff low on swing-and-miss, the team was set to rely on the combination of Dansby Swanson and Nico Hoerner up the middle, Yan Gomes behind the plate, and whatever body they could get to man third base. With such a slim margin for error, you didn’t necessarily want Hosmer holding it down in the longer term–especially given that since 2017, he was among the worst in Defensive Runs Saved (-10) and Def rating (-101.2) within the group of qualifying first basemen. While the sample was too small to draw any real statistical conclusion, the eye test gave us all we needed. He never appeared comfortable, was regularly out of position, and had difficulty picking the ball on throws in the dirt. Clearly the Cubs’ brass felt that was enough, as Hosmer was jettisoned before the end of May. In a miniscule sample, Mancini wasn’t any better (-5 DRS) and Young was worse still (-3 DRS, -3 Outs Above Average). Among the remainder of that group, Patrick Wisdom also finished on the negative side of the metric threshold (-1 DRS). Both Mervis & Candelario were fine, finishing on the positive end of DRS (2 & 1, respectively) and the negative of OAA (-1 & -2). Bellinger ended up logging the most innings at the position (421.2) and compiled the most appealing defensive output of the group (5 DRS, 0 OAA). Ultimately, though, the statistical sample itself was far too inappreciable for any real information to be gleaned as far as what the Cubs should look for at the position for 2024. And advanced metrics tend to be less illuminating at first base than at other positions, in large part. We can conclude that the Cubs–at a bare minimum–need at least average defense at first base. Having Swanson and Hoerner slinging the ball across the diamond helps, but the team needs stronger glovework than they got in 2023. Would Hoskins or Alonso fill the bill? Hoskins doesn’t have a stellar defensive reputation. He did finish 2022 with 3 DRS, but also -6 OAA. His mobility has also left something to be desired, and that was before a devastating knee injury. Alonso, by contrast, is coming off the best defensive season of his career, in which he went for a DRS of 6 and 0 OAA. But it’s also not as if he has an established history of defensive efficiency, either. Three of Alonso’s five seasons with the Mets have featured below-average defense, by the estimation of both DRS & OAA. The Morel factor remains interesting in all of this as well. He’s obviously very athletic and, by all accounts, has decent hands. Even if he’s a bit undersized for the position, there isn’t any real reason to think that he couldn’t take to it. The instincts required for the position would likely be the largest hitch. One does wonder if his athleticism would almost be wasted there, though, and if the Cubs would prefer to give him the legitimate shot at third base that seems to have been a long time coming. That aspect of the winter will be an interesting one to monitor, and should lend insight into whether or not the Cubs are serious about giving their young slugger an opportunity to latch on to an everyday spot there. In any case, what is it exactly that the Cubs should be looking for in a first baseman on the defensive side of the ball? It stands to reason that even average production would do just fine. While the long-term third baseman for this organization is also unknown, the Cubs are solid as a rock up the middle. This makes it so that your first baseman doesn’t have to compensate in the event that you were rolling with anything other than elite pieces on the infield. Thus, while first base defense shouldn’t be overlooked, the Cubs can also afford to trade in a bit of defensive quality in favor of a big bat. While you don’t want to drop in any old body just because they can hit a little bit, if you can get even average defense from the position, the rest of your infield construction compensates. This leaves Hoskins as the least preferred option among the trio, given that he’s been consistently below the average threshold, whereas Alonso becomes the preferred option between the two (if his 2023 is to be believed). Morel is, of course, a total wild card within the picture. Which means that in the overarching question of what the Cubs should look for defensively, the answer appears to be somebody decidedly average. The good news is that even the most average of solutions come with an above-average bat. What weight do you assign to the glove in the team’s search for a first baseman? Do you have a strong preference between Hoskins and Alonso, given their respective price tags in free agency and trade? Give us your opinions on this crucial question in the comment section. View full article

There are a lot of hats in the ring, and the season is running out. It's time to assess where the Cubs' ace southpaw falls in the hierarchy of candidates for the 2023 NL Cy Young Award. Image courtesy of © David Banks-USA TODAY Sports Confession time: I was never that high on Justin Steele. A mid-rotation arm? Sure. But a frontline starter capable of hanging with some of the top hurlers around the league? It wasn’t something I was buying, entering 2023. It won’t be the last time I’m wrong, but Steele has spent the bulk of this season turning me into a believer. Not only has Steele anchored the staff throughout the season, especially in light of Marcus Stroman’s second-half absence, but he’s managed to establish himself among the league’s elite starting hurlers. An All-Star this year, he’s sure to garner plenty of attention as a National League Cy Young candidate when awards are handed out this fall. Just how much attention, though, is a subject of some debate. Down the stretch, there were likely at least four names in the mix for the NL Cy Young discussion: Steele, Spencer Strider, Blake Snell, and Zac Gallen. An argument could be made that Zack Wheeler and Logan Webb could find their way in there before it’s all wrapped up. Here’s where Steele stacks up against the other names mentioned: Pitcher GS/IP W ERA xERA FIP K/9 BB/9 J. Steele 29/168.0 16 3 3.44 2.99 9.11 1.88 B. Snell 31/174.0 14 2.33 3.75 3.48 11.74 5.02 S. Strider 30/176.0 18 3.73 2.98 2.82 13.81 2.76 Z. Gallen 32/197.2 16 3.6 4.2 3.38 9.33 2 L. Webb 32/207.0 10 3.35 3.65 3.22 8.13 1.35 Z. Wheeler 30/181.0 12 3.63 3.19 3.22 9.99 1.84 There are a couple of separate debates swirling around this award, in particular, this year. While that’s a group of extremely impressive arms, there’s no one that has been outright dominant over the course of the full season. The guys with the higher strikeout rates are also issuing free passes at a higher rate than the others. The ones with the high inning counts aren’t overpowering hitters; they’re limiting baserunners and utilizing the defense behind them (a crime, truly). There’s already a negative perception brewing for whoever wins the award, in some circles. It’s the kind of year where we’re just throwing it to someone who was… fine. It’s silly. The other debate is exactly what stats we’re looking at in determining who should take home the hardware here (I enjoy alliteration). There’s an argument out there that the volume stats are most important. After all, if you’re going to win an award as the league’s top pitcher, you should probably be anchoring your staff throughout the year. Thus, starts, innings, and (gulp) wins matter more so than the other categories. I understand the heart of the argument. I think I agree with the spirit of it. For me, though, the other stuff matters just as much. If you’re going to win the Cy Young, you should showcase an ability to overpower hitters with punchout volume and limit your baserunners. That, ideally, should lead to higher volume on the innings and wins side of things, in a more organic sense. Voters–a body of which I am extremely not a part–will certainly have some sort of philosophy to which they stick. That could be more of a factor in this particular race than others that we’ve seen in recent memory, because it does look like there are a couple of distinct groups. Our purpose here is to discuss Justin Steele’s candidacy for the award. We’ll keep it simple with two categories: What Helps & What Doesn’t. What Helps Steele is second in the group in ERA, and while he does trail Blake Snell, he has two additional wins, an underlying FIP that lines up well with his ERA, and far fewer free passes. Some have considered Snell the frontrunner, but the factors where Steele has an edge are important. He’s allowed much less traffic and has an xERA & FIP that are closer to his actual results. While we’d also like to imagine a world where pitcher wins become as (un)meaningful as context should indicate, it’s going to matter. And Steele’s 16 certainly help, as they are up there among the NL’s most. Additionally, he may not have the high strikeout rate, but of the group listed above, only Logan Webb has a higher ground-ball rate than Steele’s 49.1 percent. Perhaps more notable is the fact that no qualifying pitcher in the National League has allowed less hard contact than Steele’s 27.2-percent mark. The next closest among that group is Snell, who’s almost four percentage points higher than Steele in that regard. And in the event that recency bias becomes a factor, Steele continues to make a strong case. His seven wins trail only Snell’s eight, his strikeout rate is up a tick (10.5 per nine), and his FIP is better than everyone not named Spencer Strider in the second half. What Doesn’t Steele has spent some time on the IL this year. He’s at 29 starts thus far, which is obviously the lowest number in this pool of candidates. As a result, he has the fewest innings pitched of that group. Like it or not, that’s going to hurt him. So, too, will his lack of true power stuff. While his strikeout rate has been higher in the second half, he just doesn’t possess the kind of arsenal where he’s going to send hitters packing at a double-digit clip. Again, we may not like it–strikeouts are not equivalent on their own to good starting pitching–but it will likely factor into the voting. Speaking of recency bias, Steele’s close to 2023 could also hurt him. With the Cubs in need of every win they can find right now, their ace has surrendered six earned runs in two consecutive starts. On Sept. 15, he did so against Arizona, a direct competitor with the Cubs for a Wild Card spot. He did it again on Sept. 20, but against inferior competition out of Pittsburgh. As much as the broader context of the second half could help, his close could end up doing more harm than good. Ultimately, it’s tough to pick a direction as to where this NL Cy Young Award is actually headed. There’s an argument to be made for any of the six above. Strider & Snell have dominated hitters for the bulk of the year. Logan Webb has not, but he’s been extremely effective with his own skill set. Steele, Gallen, and Wheeler represent the middle tier of the debate. While these final couple of weeks could render a death knell to Steele’s chances, the fact that it’s still a hodgepodge of a variety of pitcher types means nothing is decided quite yet. He’ll have another chance to stake his claim next week, against Atlanta, and perhaps even a Game 162 start in Milwaukee to lend him the spotlight. View full article

Bringing up PCA seems to have completed the Cubs' carefully constructed defensive phalanx. Will the team's emphasis on fielding yield any individual accolades for the key cogs? Image courtesy of © Katie Stratman-USA TODAY Sports This week’s promotion of Pete Crow-Armstrong generated a positive buzz, amid a stretch of inconsistent play by the playoff-hopeful Chicago Cubs. Any club’s top prospect arriving at the highest level will do that. Perhaps more notably at present, though, it continues to enhance a defensive group that has been among the league’s most exciting to watch. Crow-Armstrong’s debut series in Colorado showcased the speed and instincts that are sure to make him an elite presence on the outfield grass moving forward. As thrilling as PCA has already proven to be–especially in the massive outfield at Coors Field–he won’t be taking any defensive accolades home this year (though there may be a compelling, albeit ironic, case to be made, depending on what he does over the next two weeks). However, the club isn’t without their defensive standouts beyond the addition of their top prospect. The Cubs rank ninth in the league in FanGraphs’s comprehensive Def rating (11.2), in addition to their sitting fifth in Outs Above Average (22) and fourth in Defensive Runs Saved (39) as a collective. None of this is a surprise. This was a team built around their defensive efficiency, given the inconsistency of the offense and the lack of genuine firepower in the rotation. Naturally then, there are at least a couple of other names over the next couple of months that could be in for recognition as some of the league’s very best with the glove. Ideally, this attention will occur more on the side of something such as the Fielding Bible Awards, which rely more on statistical evidence than their Rawlings Gold Glove Award counterpart, which is more abstract and seemingly tied to reputation and narrative. Notably, the Gold Glove Award does take into account defensive analytics under the banner of the SABR Defensive Index. From SABR’s Website: On the other side, the Fielding Bible Award leans heavily on Defensive Runs Saved. And because Outs Above Average is a personal favorite (and, arguably, the most complete of the available metrics on that side of the ball), we’ll include that as well. Regardless of the label and criteria, though, the names with a crack at recognition remain the same. At least one pair of Cubs certainly have the numbers on their side. Cody Bellinger is probably not among them, however. His defense in center was steady (4 OAA, SDI of 3.0) and put him in league with the higher end of defensive CFers, but not as a legitimate awards contender. His first base play has been Top 10 from a defensive standpoint–in both OAA (1) and DRS (3)–but also quite limited, as he’s at barely over 300 innings at the position. The split doesn’t help him, but being a solid defender at two essential spots given the team’s roster construction is notable. Among those that have a realistic possibility of claiming some hardware, though, we’re talking about Dansby Swanson, Nico Hoerner, and Seiya Suzuki. Dansby Swanson (Shortstop) Outs Above Average: 18 (1st) Defensive Runs Saved: 16 (1st) SABR Defensive Index: 9.4 (1st) Gold Glove, Fielding Bible, it literally does not matter. Dansby Swanson has been the best defensive shortstop in baseball this year. Wild stuff, in that it’s extremely normal. When evaluating the shortstop market last year, the general consensus was that Swanson was going to give you the most upside with the glove and (likely) the least with the stick. Only one of those things has been true, and it’s the former. Swanson has an ability to turn difficult plays into something much more routine with regularity. He’s boasting a 78-percent success rate against a 74-percent expected success rate at converting outs, and there isn’t a direction on the field that can be deemed a shortcoming. Of note, also, are his instincts. Despite Wednesday’s loss in Colorado, the broadcast was marveling at Swanson’s direction to Pete Crow-Armstrong to get a ball in to second base following a single that moved a runner from first to third. It allowed the Cubs to limit the later damage to just one run, when a single otherwise would’ve scored two. Of course, the point ended up being moot following that one, but it speaks to the small things that Swanson does. And just in case the small things weren’t enough, he has an OAA edge on Ezequiel Tovar (15) and tops the SDI over Francisco Lindor & Miguel Rojas (both 7.0). He’s a lock for hardware, and there won’t be any controversy about it. Nico Hoerner (Second Base) Outs Above Average: 13 (4th) Defensive Runs Saved: 12 (3rd) SABR Defensive Index: 5.7 (3rd) Essentially everything we could have hoped for from Hoerner’s transition back over to second base has come to fruition. He and Swanson make up the most dynamic middle infield in baseball in defensive matters. It’s spectacular. He’s been especially good at snagging ground balls that end up in the 3-4 hole, with a success rate of 77 percent (75 percent expected) and an OAA of 6. Things aren’t as clear cut for Hoerner in the race for end-of-year accolades, though. While there are other shortstops playing at a high defensive level, Swanson’s case is clear: he’s tops among them. Hoerner will face competition, in the former of Bryson Stott in particular, as his OAA (15) and SDI (6.4) could make him a factor on both fronts. Ha-Seong Kim has had a fantastic year in San Diego, with his SDI leading to potential favor in the eyes of the Gold Glove. That shouldn’t preclude us from showering Hoerner with plenty of praise, though. He took a terrific year at the six and made an absolutely flawless transition over to the keystone. Without Hoerner’s defensive combo up the middle, the Cubs likely aren’t fighting for a Wild Card slot right now. Seiya Suzuki (Right Field) Outs Above Average: 2 (10th) (Tatis 12) Defensive Runs Saved: 1 (8th) (Tatis 26) SABR Defensive Index: -1.5 (7th) (Tatis 16.0) It’s a tough scene for Seiya Suzuki in relation to any award talk. He’s had a very strong year defensively and has made real strides at the plate. With respect to the former, he’s turned a rookie campaign that featured an OAA of -4 and -4 DRS into some very above-average defensive numbers. As far as right field is concerned, there’s an argument to be made that he’s among the very best at the position defensively. For our Cub-centric purposes, the growth here is essential. After an uneven first year in the U.S., which was compounded with a slow start to 2023, the importance of Seiya establishing himself as a key component on both sides of the ball cannot be overstated. But neither Seiya nor the rest of the field stand a chance here. Fernando Tatis, Jr leads in OAA (12), DRS (26), and SDI (16.0). While Suzuki is very much in the mix as a potentially elite defensive right fielder moving forward, the Padres superstar is simply too good & athletic for the position and is blowing everyone else out of the water as a result. View full article

The Cubs strengthened their lineup and added optionable pitching depth Monday, checking off two important boxes on the eve of the trade deadline. Now, it's time to finish the job. Image courtesy of © Kamil Krzaczynski-USA TODAY Sports The MLB trade deadline is almost never dull. We’re always in for at least some action in the moments leading up to it. The overall ambiguity surrounding buyers and sellers in 2023 has also led to what seems like one of the more unpredictable trade deadlines in recent memory. A number of the surefire names that were available for those on the buying side have already been moved, many of them a full 24 hours or more before the deadline itself. It’s left a thin market even thinner, with just a very small handful of names remaining out on the market. Surprises could occur, of course, but from the perspective of the Chicago Cubs, the obscurity of the timeline necessitated moves prior to deadline day. In moving swiftly, the team was able to secure two important pieces of their roster for the stretch run: Washington Nationals corner infielder Jeimer Candelario and Kansas City Royals reliever José Cuas. Candelario essentially fortifies the positional group. We’ll see what the configuration itself looks like. He’s obviously adept at third base, defensively. But with Nick Madrigal performing at a very high level with the glove and finally starting to come around with the bat, you do wonder–and this is, perhaps, some of my own pro-Madrigal bias–if we could see more of Candelario on the opposite side of the infield. The need for offense is greater there, after all. Of course, his bat is objectively better than Madrigal et al., so it stands to reason he'll grab the bulk of the starts. If he’s plugged in at first, you’re looking at less Mike Tauchman time, as Cody Bellinger mans the infield with less regularity. So the group itself is set, but we aren’t super sure how it’ll look regularly quite yet. The larger questions in the wake of the Cubs’ dual Monday transactions is how the pitching staff could continue to take shape in the hours leading up until the deadline. Cuas is a decent addition, coming from a brutal Kansas City squad. He’ll generate some whiffs, and the Cubs’ enhanced pitching infrastructure could do him some good in the late going here. But while strikeouts and whiffs are part of his game, he also has a propensity for hard contact. He’s surrendering Barrels at a 13.0-percent rate, and his HardHit%, at 44.6, sits just 16th percentile. So ultimately, he doesn’t move the needle much for the bullpen. The Cubs lead the bottom half of the league in bullpen ERA (3.99), are middle-of-the-pack in FIP (4.05), and are in the bottom 10 in the league in BB/9 (3.96). Cuas helps them in an area where they’re already succeeding with the strikeouts, but doesn’t help them to compensate for those shortcomings. As such, the expectation–now that the team has solidified itself as buyers–is that at least another arm is on the way. Could they return to Kansas City for someone like Scott Barlow? He has late-game experience and far better peripherals than his former Royals compatriot. He’s two years older than someone like David Bednar, with only one year of arbitration left (in comparison with Bednar’s three). Thus, the cost within the trade and the payroll implications would be far less impactful, in addition to the fact that Barlow wouldn’t come from a team within the Cubs’ division. Across town, Keynan Middleton represents another option in middle relief, having a solid year out of the White Sox bullpen. Aaron Bummer would fit nicely as well, though as the Sox are less inclined to move him. Given his contract (which includes an additional year and two option years), the cost could be greater. Colorado lefties Brent Suter and Brad Hand are additional options that wouldn’t come at quite as high a cost. The same goes with righty José Cisnero and southpaw Chasen Shreve, out of Detroit. If the Cubs really wanted to cash in on the reunion-type moves, Alex Lange is another potential arm out of the Motor City. Should the Cubs look to the starting front, options start to narrow a bit. Jack Flaherty is an impending free agent, but the St. Louis Cardinals may still be reluctant to move him to their archrival. Michael Lorenzen and Eduardo Rodríguez could also cost more than what the Cubs are willing to give up if they’re satisfied with their starting staff, while names like Rich Hill, José Quintana, and Carlos Carrasco probably don’t offer much more than you could get from someone like Drew Smyly or Hayden Wesneski. Regardless, options certainly exist, to say nothing of the myriad talks likely happening that involve less obvious names. It’s a matter of for which role the Cubs are seeking relief help, and what they’re willing to pay. Luckily, neither deal made on Monday should cause apprehension out of Jed Hoyer’s office. While each of DJ Herz, Kevin Made, and Nelson Velazquez present certain levels of upside, it’s well-documented that the organization is also heavy with similar profiles for each. We’re likely finished seeing moves on the position player front. It’s tough to see an addition to the starting staff, given that the Cubs are at least somewhat set there and considering the dearth of available starting pitching. Any impact addition will likely be to the relief corps. And, again, given that the Cubs are now buyers in this market, it simply must be an impact addition. Cuas makes the bullpen deeper, but not necessarily better. A Barlow or a Bednar or even a Bummer takes it to a much more satisfying level. It’s just a matter of what Jed Hoyer and the rest of the brass are willing to shell out in order to bolster the group. View full article

The most disturbing thing about the Cubs' frustrating season to date is, without a doubt, the fact that the core of their next serious and lasting contender has not emerged. Even the core pieces they thought they had haven't stepped up. However, there's one diminutive player knocking on the door of that kind of role. Image courtesy of © D. Ross Cameron-USA TODAY Sports Earlier this month, we discussed the concept of the current “core” of the Chicago Cubs. The results, alas, were inconclusive. The discussion did feature the notion of locks within the group, including Ian Happ, Dansby Swanson, Nico Hoerner, and Justin Steele. It also dealt heavily with players on the fringes of such a discussion, with Marcus Stroman the most notable among them. Where things got really murky, though, was with respect to Nick Madrigal. Whether out of my own cowardice or legitimate apprehension, I dropped Madrigal into the second tier within the discussion. The name of the tier itself–the Maybe, Potentially Tier–indicated an unwillingness to commit to any name mentioned with any certainty. Even after a June in which he finally appeared to turn a corner offensively, such ambiguity with respect to Madrigal’s Cubs future remains very much intact. It's not just that Madrigal has largely underwhelmed in his time with the Cubs. It’s not just that he’s had a difficult time staying on the field. But those two factors are under strong consideration as we pose the question as to whether or not there’s a place in the current core for Madrigal moving forward. Madrigal made his Cubs debut in 2022, having been acquired as part of the Craig Kimbrel trade at the 2021 deadline. Of course, at the time Madrigal was still recovering from a hamstring tear that required surgery. His debut season, though, left plenty to be desired, both in performance and in health. His 2022 slash went .249/.305/.282/.588. He struck out at an 11.8-percent clip (high for his skill set) and walked 6.1 percent of the time. Unsurprisingly, there was virtually no power to speak of, to the tune of a .033 ISO. He ultimately turned in a wRC+ of 70. That’s an extremely non-impactful bat. We’re also coming off a winter in which Madrigal had almost no immediate future on the Cubs’ infield. The signing of Dansby Swanson bumped Nico Hoerner over to the keystone, and locked in the middle infield for the next few years, at least. It wasn’t until the organization decided to deploy Madrigal at third base this past spring–a move born of necessity, given a lack of depth and impact at the position–that a longer-term future could be even mildly speculated upon. While Madrigal’s still a below-average hitter sporting a wRC+ of 95, the overall numbers do look better. He’s slashing .278/.335/.364/.700. The strikeout rate sits at 9.6 percent, which is still a touch high given the high volume of contact, but is an improvement, nevertheless. It’s his June performance, though, to which we can really attribute the bump in his stat line. Therein, Madrigal hit .340, reached base at a .417 clip, and wRC+’d 148. His ISO sat at .132 for the month. This was a stretch far closer to the player that many had expected as he was coming up through the system on the other side of town. He's also provided shockingly stable defensive work at the hot corner. Having only played second base at any level of professional ball, the overwhelming reaction was that this experiment would be short-lived. But through 38 games (33 starts), Madrigal had a Defensive Runs Saved of four and an Outs Above Average of five. He’s shown to be more than adequate with the glove there, at minimum. There’s a place for that iteration of Nick Madrigal in the Cubs’ core. The June Madrigal that initiated seemingly constant contact and played exceptional defense at a position where the team does not have a long-term answer secured could very well be a core member in a pretty safe fashion. The contact itself started to become more impactful, given the uptick on the ISO side. But the other caveat noted above is what could ultimately hold him back from ever being a part of any legitimate core discussion: the health. Madrigal arrived on the North Side physically broken. He made his debut at the outset of last season, but dealt with injury woes on four separate occasions–predominantly groin issues–that limited him to just 59 games and 228 plate appearances last year. This time around, he’s been out since July 3 with a hamstring issue. Yes, the same one that was surgically repaired back when he was still with the White Sox. While a return is on the horizon, it’s exceedingly difficult to trust him as a regular lineup presence, regardless of performance. That’s what continues to make tackling any discussion of Nick Madrigal as a member of the “core” of the “next great” Cubs team so daunting a task. For him–or anyone, I guess–to be classified as such, we’re looking for impact and a steady presence. Does Madrigal’s skill set allow him to be an impactful enough bat to be considered? Can he stay on the field long enough to make that discussion even matter? June Madrigal is the type of player who could be deemed a core guy. He’s never going to be a power hitter, but more barrel contact seems like a necessity in order for him to drum up the kind of “impact” to be a part of the discussion. At a 6.3-percent rate, we saw Madrigal’s first Barrel in his time with the Cubs (not an exaggeration, he had a Brl% of 0.0 in 2022). That player can be a core guy. The absence of power be darned, startingly high contact compounded with occasional gap power and steady, if not above-average defense can be a key cog. Especially because, again, the Cubs don’t have a surefire, long-term answer at the position (the closest is likely B.J. Murray Jr.). The free agent market doesn’t present one either (Matt Chapman, sure, but that’s about it before the appeal of names craters). Even with his fairly unique skill set, there’s very much a version of Madrigal that could be considered an essential component of future Cubs teams. It’s the June version. But we need a far larger sample of the June version when he returns from his latest IL stint before we can have a serious discussion about it. View full article

The concept of the “core” across sports fascinates me. It could be argued that a clearly defined core doesn’t need to be established in order to reach championship heights. We’ve seen so many iterations of the “whole greater than the sum of its parts” roster over the years, after all. But with any roster under the team sport umbrella, fans are going to be naturally prone to designate certain members as the core group. Image courtesy of © David Banks-USA TODAY Sports Chicago sports are no exception. The Bulls dynasty of the 1990s had theirs. The Blackhawks teams of 2010 to 2015 had their core. The last great Cubs team featured an extensive one, with a core group that consisted of Anthony Rizzo, Kris Bryant, Javíer Baez, and Willson Contreras, among position players. Maybe Kyle Schwarber, too. Jon Lester and Jake Arrieta anchored the core on the mound. The volume of names that could be considered core members is what makes the discussion so fascinating. Those Bulls teams had Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen. The Hawks had Jonathan Toews, Patrick Kane, Duncan Keith, and Brent Seabrook throughout their three title runs. Seven names–and this is assuming we’re leaving those seven as the guys–seems like a lot. But it also speaks to how deep and talented that particular group was. It’s also worth noting just how clearly defined that group was before they even really became “the core.” Acquiring Rizzo in conjunction with drafting Báez, Bryant, and Schwarber set the Cubs on a clear path to a core group. Arrieta’s emergence and the signing of Lester furthered the concept. We knew exactly who was crucial to what areas of the ballclub at the time when they reached their highest apex in over a century. As the Cubs continue their transition from their not-a-rebuild stage into prospective contenders, the picture is far murkier this time around. It also requires us to even be able to define what a core is, in baseball. Statistics feature so much nuance, and a copious amount of what we call “performance” relies heavily on surrounding players. There likely isn’t a stat that can lend itself directly to the idea of a core. It’s just one of those things that you tend to observe, given their statistical performance within the context of the remainder of the roster. Age and contract status likely also play a role, as a “core” member is one who will likely be around for at least the foreseeable future. With these loose parameters, I’ll avoid the Sith practice of dealing in absolutes. Let’s throw the current roster into a couple of tiers. We’ve got our Probably Definitely Tier, the Maybe Potentially Tier, and the rest of the group that we can deem non-essential: Probably Definitely Core: Dansby Swanson Nico Hoerner Ian Happ Justin Steele Maybe Potentially Core: Marcus Stroman Seiya Suzuki Nick Madrigal Adbert Alzolay Hayden Wesneski Matt Mervis The two groups of names here are the ones worth discussing most prominently. The locks are fairly self-explanatory. Swanson is locked into a longer contract than anyone on the roster. He’s an elite defensive shortstop who has outplayed his offensive expectations this year. As a multi-time All-Star with a clear track record, he’s a core guy beyond a shadow of a doubt. The recent extensions for Happ and Hoerner also get their names written in pen in any core conversation. Neither will be a free agent until after 2026. Both provide steady offense, and largely top-tier defense. They’re non-negotiables at this point. Steele is the most interesting quantity among those that we can consider locks. While he doesn’t have the flash or punchout ability that other upper-tier starters around the league might have, he’s been among the steadiest starters in the game. A low walk rate and high ground-ball rate should help his game age well, especially given the Cubs’ commitment to a strong defensive foundation. He’ll extend eventually, and thereby officially take his post in the Probably Definitely Tier. The Maybe Potentially Tier has far more intrigue. If Stroman extends, he’s a lock. The Cubs have been reluctant to start those talks, even though he’s an ideal fit for this group atop this rotation for the same reasons Steele is. He’s also shown a willingness, over his career, to tinker with his arsenal and evolve as needed. But the player option, and impending free-agent status associated with it, leaves him out of the locks. For now. Seiya Suzuki is also one that could very easily find his way into the next group. The performance hasn’t quite been there to this point. There have been some health issues and some bad luck that have left him as barely above average this year (by the reckoning of wRC+). But we’ve seen enough flashes offensively, improvement defensively, and he’s locked in through 2026 as well. Overall, there is far more certainty with the above names. Our four locks are locked. Stroman is, too, if he sticks around. Suzuki just needs another step. From there, that second tier starts to cloud the picture a bit as we work to establish the core. I love everything I’ve seen from Madrigal lately. He’s absolutely an asset if it holds. We’ll talk about his place within a “core” context in the coming days (in addition to what our new guy Matt Ostrowski had to say heading into the weekend). “If it holds” is doing a lot of work in the above statement, though, and we need to see more of it. It's a similar conversation with Alzolay. The tools have long been there for him to be an impactful pitcher. Is he the closer? Is he an arm you can deploy in any spot in relief to get outs? His role could have a lot to say about his status as a core guy. Speaking of roles, we’ve seen a lot of really nice things from Hayden Wesneski since he resurfaced as a reliever. Is he a future rotation mainstay? He’s been tagged for more hard contact and homers in a limited sample than we saw in a cup of coffee last year. He may very well have the chops to be a core guy, but it just isn’t there quite yet. And then there’s Mervis, living in the same vein as “guy with big-league experience who hasn’t quite shown us enough yet.” Again, small samples. A lot of people aren’t particularly high on Mervis’s ability to mash at the top level like he did in the minors. We know he possesses enormous power. Until we see it with any level of consistency at Wrigley, though, he’s living in the second tier, at best. You will, of course, notice some names conspicuously absent, both from the current MLB roster and in the levels beneath. Cody Bellinger has a lot of work to do to erase his last few years of massive underperformance (and health woes). Jameson Taillon is too much of a mess to be a factor. Yan Gomes is too old. Miguel Amaya has a sketchy health history. The rest of the pitching staff is closer to the end of their career than the start of it. There really isn’t anybody else to consider there. The larger elephant in the room: no prospects? The Cubs have a prospect logjam in the outfield; development isn’t linear; and I’m a coward. These are the reasons for not including any non-MLB guys among the core. This organization has such a deep and interesting system that projecting anyone else to have the type of breakout that could get them to core status seems futile. Because it could be several of them. If I had to guess, my guesses would be Pete Crow-Armstrong and Cade Horton. There. Future core guys. So that’s our (my) conclusion. The core members of the Chicago Cubs? Dansby Swanson, Ian Happ, Nico Hoerner, and Justin Steele. Marcus Stroman and Seiya Suzuki could be, depending on various factors. Before anyone else can be considered, we’ll need to see quite a bit more. My last caveat here: This core is not as good as other core groups across Major League Baseball. Thus, it’s not terribly encouraging to discuss, especially as a follow-up to a prior core that brought so much joy to the North Side. Ideally, some guys come up from the system and take their place alongside the current “Core Four.” In any case, it’s (at least) refreshing that after a couple years of bleak outlooks, a core is taking shape, and there is far more room for it to expand in the next couple of years. View full article

The Chicago Cubs have had a good start to the week. A tidy three-game sweep–their second one against the Pittsburgh Pirates in 10 days–and boarding a plane to London? We should all be so lucky. There was, however, one element that I noticed throughout the series in the Steel City. Ian Happ didn’t take too kindly to being rung up. Image courtesy of © Charles LeClaire-USA TODAY Sports Not that a hitter is ever gratified coming out of the box with a backwards K. But multiple times on Monday and Tuesday, Happ was punched out with the bat on his shoulder. Each occurrence I noted ended an inning, and each saw Happ spend an extended time chatting with the home plate umpire. And I somehow don’t think he was asking in earnest about what Blue saw. The fact is that Ian Happ has been a master of the strike zone this year. He currently boasts a 16.1-percent walk rate that trails only five qualifying hitters. He’s also seeing 4.36 pitches per plate appearance. Both represent career highs, and he’s in the 85th percentile of the league for chase rate. Few hitters are maintaining an understanding of the strike zone in a way that Happ has in 2023, which means that you can understand his frustration at borderline strike three calls. But is that to his benefit? Over at Pitcher List, I recently had a piece published in which I looked at whether plate discipline (Read: Patience) is really the asset that we think it is. The conclusion: Could be, but also maybe not? Ultimately, the concept of patience in 2023 is something that we have to look at contextually within an individual player’s skill set. Juan Soto’s patience is absolutely part of his offensive identity. Luis Arraez, on the other hand, is chasing the first .400 season since World War II, and he isn’t remotely among the league’s more patient hitters. We like to think that a hitter who is patient is more likely to find “his pitch”, thus generating more quality contact and big-picture offense. That is, of course, not always the case. So is Happ’s wildly increased patience (he walked at a 9-percent clip last year) really benefitting him? It’s tough to look and opine that it is. Happ’s overall Swing% has dropped significantly between seasons, going from 48.9 percent in 2022 to 44.1 percent this year. He’s chasing at a materially lower rate, dropping an even six percentage points to 21.9 this year (hence the 85th percentile chase rate). Inside the strike zone has obviously seen a drop as well, from 69.0 last year to 65.3 percent this year. So it’s not as if Happ became more patient on pitches outside the zone. He kind of just stopped swinging, regardless of pitch location, which is why the numbers don’t necessarily support an increase in performance in correlation with the higher discipline. In fact, the underlying numbers have gotten marginally worse. He’s making less contact in and outside of the zone, though not drastically. What is concerning, however, is the quality of contact. For the fourth consecutive season, Happ has seen a decline in HardHit%, and while he is finding the barrel a touch more than he did last year (7.2 percent vs. 6.5 in 2022), it’s still far less than at his power apex. Historically, Happ’s power has always come more in the left-handed batter’s box (.224 career ISO as a lefty). This year, it’s only at .168 (he’s going for a .058 ISO as a righty). Additionally, his power output has also come against breaking pitches. And while that still represents his highest Swing%, he hasn’t been able to recapture finding the barrel there with any level of consistency. What’s particularly strange is that there’s been no real change in his swing trends other than, you know, just not swinging. But opposing pitchers don’t appear to be approaching him any differently, nor is he being particularly choosy against a specific pitch type. It boggles the mind. Can I say with any level of objectivity or certainty that Ian Happ’s increased patience is hurting his overall output? Nope. There are hitters who actively pass up grooved pitches in the name of their approach. That doesn’t appear to be happening with Ian Happ. His called-strike percentage isn’t any higher, so he doesn’t appear to be missing out on opportunities that could lead to higher-impact results. If anything, the absence of power we’re seeing is more of a continuation of what has developed over the last few seasons, just with more volume in the walks department. In the absence of any verifiable theory, maybe he’s just a contact guy now. And if that’s the case, the constant on-base presence can be an asset to the Cubs. Of course, so could the power that has gone missing. View full article

Just when you think you have the 2023 Cubs figured out, they change something, or something changes on its own and compels them to make a major adjustment. That's not always as ominous as it sounds, though. In fact, the team might have fallen half-accidentally into the best version of itself in terms of lineups and defensive alignments. Image courtesy of © David Banks-USA TODAY Sports Back on June 2, Matt Trueblood wrote a piece in which he detailed the underwhelming defense of the Chicago Cubs. The crux of the discussion was that while the team was lauded for their defense on paper (especially given the signing of Dansby Swanson), they ultimately were coming up short in an area where they needed to thrive. No lies detected, as a team with as slim a margin for error as this iteration of the Cubs possesses almost needs to be elite defensively in order to be competitive longer-term. There are elements of the defensive configuration of these Cubs that have never been up for debate. Yan Gomes and Tucker Barnhart form an upper-tier defensive pair behind the plate. Swanson and Nico Hoerner are (perhaps) the best middle-infield duo in matters of the glove. And Cody Bellinger was shining on the outfield grass prior to his knee injury. Elsewhere, though, they were not meeting expectations. We’re now speeding toward the end of the month in which that piece was published, and things look slightly different, but in a way that is far more impactful than a small change might indicate. And it’s very much for the better. Of course, it’s important to note that such changes have been triggered by injury more than any other factor. But with the Cubs winning five of six heading into their week of division matchups against Pittsburgh and St. Louis, it’s hard not to wonder if the new look in the field could lead to an extended run of much-improved play (to say nothing of the overall vibes). The first of the changes was the selection and subsequent call-up of Mike Tauchman. He’s certainly played his part with the bat, turning in his steadiest offensive performance since 2019 with the New York Yankees, but he’s also ensured the Cubs have not experienced a drop-off in centerfield play following the Bellinger injury. Through 27 games (just over 200 innings), Tauchman has posted 2 Defensive Runs Saved and 0 Outs Above Average. So one metric likes him, and the other considers him just about average. Bellinger was at 1 DRS and 3 OAA through about 330 innings. While other outfield metrics don’t love him, especially his jump, the Cubs haven’t lost anything trotting Tauchman out there in center. This was likely at least part of the thought process when deciding to place Bellinger at first base upon his return (in addition to the health considerations & struggles of Matt Mervis). Bellinger is likely overqualified as an athlete to man the position, but he has a solid history there. His rookie year notwithstanding (where the numbers were decidedly worse), Bellinger has posted a DRS of 2 and OAA of 1 in the years since 2017, at a position where it’s difficult to shine in the eyes of defensive metrics. The trio of Mervis, Trey Mancini, and Eric Hosmer, responsible for almost the entirety of first base play prior to Bellinger’s return, combined to post a -3 DRS and -2 OAA. So you’re getting stability in center (albeit with an athletic drop-off) and a defensive boost at first base, which seems essential given the high-level play elsewhere on the infield. Score one for the defense. On the other side of the discussion is the hot corner. Patrick Wisdom started 41 games at third prior to hitting the injured list over the weekend. The numbers there are, well, not great. As exciting as his early offensive stretch was, his defense hasn’t followed suit at any point. He’s gone for -6 DRS and -3 OAA thus far, a season after posting -6 and -11 in those metrics, respectively. Miles Mastrobuoni has started seven games there (for some reason) and been largely fine, while Edwin Rios has only appeared in five. Third baseman Christopher Morel has yet to appear at third base this season. Dare I say the Cubs have their solution at the spot, though, in Nick Madrigal? Since returning from his brief demotion to Iowa on June 9th, Madrigal has appeared in eight games at third and started seven of them. He has a DRS of 1 and is exactly at the ‘average’ threshold by OAA. A move that was originally born of necessity in order to get Madrigal’s (ideally) high-contact bat into the lineup has actually not been anywhere near the disaster most of us expected. The bat obviously needs to come through in the way that his skill set says it should, but the defense appears to be–shockingly–the best option for the Cubs at the position at this point. Elsewhere, we’re now in a stretch where Seiya Suzuki is healthy and looks steady on both sides of the ball. Ian Happ looks better by the eye test, even if the metrics still don’t look terrific. (Ultimately, we’re talking about volatile numbers that require far larger samples anyway.) With improvements at those spots happening organically combining with those that were necessitated by injury, we may be looking at the best possible defensive configuration that this team could offer–which seems like an absolute imperative at this point. It would be negligent not to note that we’re working with as minuscule a sample as possible for defensive metrics in a 2023 context. Even from the start of the year, it’s hard to lend too much credence to any performance, for better or worse. Ultimately, though, this particular configuration has worked in ways that others have not. And while we don’t know how things could change when Wisdom returns or if the Cubs will ever decide to allow Morel to ply his trade at a single position, there are worse lineups that we could see from a defensive standpoint (and we probably have seen them). You’d love for this movement to have been internally developed and not prompted by outside factors, but even if injury ends up being responsible for the shuffle, the improving defense is at least one factor boosting the Cubs into contention in their immensely winnable division. View full article