RandallPnkFloyd

And it's not like he was a liability before. Image courtesy of © Matt Marton-Imagn Images Ian Happ has won three consecutive Gold Glove awards. Somehow. For the last handful of years, there's been a perception of the Chicago Cubs' left fielder that doesn't necessarily link up with reality. Those of us who watch the Cubs with regularity know that he is, at times, a terrific defender—but that he's less so at other times. He posted a Fielding Run Value of 1 in 2022, -4 in 2023, and -1 in 2024. In each year, Happ took home hardware indicating that he was one of the best defenders in Major League Baseball. We know that the Rawlings Gold Glove Award™ is based more on perception than reality. It's not an accolade distributed based on any statistical merit, but rather on reputation. Arguably, then, it's more telling that Happ hasn't even sniffed a Fielding Bible Award, which is rooted in data and positioning (among the various factors) and voted on by attentive experts. But something feels a little bit different about the way Happ is playing defense this year. Maybe it's having Pete Crow-Armstrong to his left on a full-time basis. Perhaps it's something as simple as a renewed focus. In a position that lacks high-end performance in the eyes of defensive metrics, though, Happ is proving to be at his best. Thus far in 2025, he's giving us defense that looks like this: And like this: We're not naive enough to put too much stock in defensive output before April even comes to a close. It requires a much larger sample than what a hitter turns in at the plate to make a sound numerical evaluation. For the sake of argument, though, let's look at some of the output that Happ has been able to turn in so far. Fielding Run Value is Statcast's comprehensive defensive metric. It takes every quantifiable component that a defender can submit to the stat sheet and spits it out in terms of runs above or below average. Happ is at 0. That would indicate him to be an exactly average defender. It's not a number that pops on its own, but consider where he landed in each of the last two seasons (decidedly below average). Also, consider where the position at large sits through roughly a month of play. Of the 23 qualifying left fielders, a dozen sit below the average threshold. Even Steven Kwan—two-time winner of the Fielding Bible Award in left—comes in at 0, losing a run for his range that he made back with his arm. Happ has no such compromise. He's been average across the board. More importantly, there is something interesting in his Directional Outs Above Average data. Happ was perfectly adequate the last couple of years coming straight in (4) or moving straight back (2). But when you tossed a direction toward either angle, problems arose. Happ was -3 in moving in and to his left, -2 in and to his right, and -1 back and to his right. While that latter figure still sits at -1, he's erased the shortcomings that existed on more shallow fare. He's above-average coming in and moving to his left (no surprise, given the above video vs. Arizona from this past weekend) and average elsewhere. It's possible that the initial jump bears some responsibility for getting Happ's defense in order. He was exactly average in Outfield Jump last year and below average in 2023. This year, he's at 0.6 Feet vs. Avg in the jump. It's not a significant leap, but could be just enough to kickstart the defensive output. Happ also, simply, looks more comfortable when tracking difficult fly balls this year. With Crow-Armstrong entrenched in center and the addition of Kyle Tucker opposite Happ, the Cubs have the makings of one of the best defensive outfields in the sport. If Happ's early returns are in any way sustainable, it's very possible that that upside could come to fruition. View full article

If you've got a legitimate starter at a position, shouldn't he get an unfettered opportunity? Image courtesy of © Kiyoshi Mio-Imagn Images The Chicago Cubs have a full-time first baseman on their roster. It's inarguable. Are there better ones? Sure. But the Cubs know what it looks like to not have one. Michael Busch is one. That's why Craig Counsell's approach to the lineup to start the year has been a bit perplexing. Busch earned the team's trust last year. He posted a 119 wRC+ and hit 21 home runs; his defense also improved dramatically as the season progressed. By fWAR, he was the ninth-best first baseman among 25 qualifers (2.3). Had it not been for the typical rookie ebb and flow, he might've landed higher, especially as the defense got better. But the upside in the bat was evident from the start. Not unlike this year, Busch got off to a strong offensive start in 2024. He posted a 130 wRC+ in the first month of the year, along with a .234 ISO. It didn't entirely hold up wire-to-wire, but Busch was able to reach the end as a more mature hitter in terms of approach. He even rediscovered his power in September (.243 ISO). His strikeout rate fell each month from May onward, bottoming out (in a good way) with a 20.9 K% in September. From Busch, we expected growth and got it. The gradual improvement of the approach and comfort on the defensive side left zero questions at first ahead of 2025, and the excitement only rose as he had a scorching spring. March and April have only brought more success in each regard, as the wRC+ sits at an astronomical 162. His ISO is a terrific .284, and he's only striking out 24.0% of the time. Despite that latter stat, Busch is demonstrating more patience. His swing rate is down (42.1%), as well as his chase rate (22.1%). While the sustainability of his start can be reasonably fairly questioned, the profile really can't be. We know what he is and now it's a matter of fine-tuning. Interestingly, though, the Cubs deployed him in a bit different a fashion throughout his rookie campaign versus what we've seen so far in 2025. Unlike 2024, Craig Counsell has chosen to shield Busch almost entirely from left-handed pitching. Busch has only seven plate appearances against southpaws; he has 68 against righties. He's struck out three times and walked once against same-handed hurlers, with a wRC+ of 82. Instead, Counsell has chosen to roll heavily with Justin Turner against lefties. In fact, we've openly wondered if this is a platoon situation. Seiya Suzuki's injury could press Turner into more regular DH duty, but that's been the trend on both the pinch-hitting and starting fronts. Turner has 16 plate appearances against left-handed arms, with three hits and three walks to speak of. The numbers are fine on their own, but they're also low-impact. Meanwhile, Busch hasn't proved completely inept against lefties in his own right. Of the 165 plate appearances taken by Cubs first basemen against lefties last year, Busch had 94. He totaled 100 encounters with them, sprinkling in pinch-hit and DH chances. He hit .258 therein, with a 103 wRC+ and .124 ISO. His strikeout rate was 25%, which is harder to work around when one hits for below-average power, but he accepted enough walks to be a viable producer. Nonetheless, this spring, Counsell has reduced Busch's exposure to southpaws in favor of the newcoming Turner. The slugging vet has been fine, but it's not as if he's some vaunted lefty masher. He's fairly split-neutral for his career (125 wRC+ vs. LHP, 126 vs. RHP). Obviously, that production against lefties is still much better than what Busch produced last year. Over the last three years, Turner has also become a bit more of a splits guy. He's batted .285/.379/.449 in 372 plate appearances off them since this date in 2022, so it's very reasonable for Counsell to expect more from him than from Busch with a lefty on the mound. On the other hand, Turner is 40, and Busch should be the medium-term future at first base for this team. If the growth we've seen is real, he should be able to handle lefties. Since there seems to be a large gap in his power production based on platoon matchup, and since this team (unlike last year's) has a trustworthy weapon to complement him, it's likely that Turner continues to take many of the plate appearances against lefties at the first base spot. Hopefully, though, the team also finds ways to keep the younger slugger involved—more so than he's been thus far, when there's a lefthander on the mound. View full article

It's been better than we thought, but it isn't about to get any easier. Image courtesy of © Kiyoshi Mio-Imagn Images As of this writing, the Chicago Cubs are 12-9. They sit atop the National League Central, a game in front of the Milwaukee Brewers (10-9) and game-and-a-half ahead of the 9-9 Cincinnati Reds and St. Louis Cardinals. They've scored 124 runs and sport a +36 run differential. The former leads the league by a wide margin, while the latter trails only the San Diego Padres, by just a run. Like I said, better than we expected. The March and April schedule was always going to be a gauntlet. Starting in Tokyo against the Los Angeles Dodgers before returning Stateside for tilts with the Arizona Diamondbacks, Texas Rangers, and Padres was a tall order. Even the West Sacramento Athletics have looked awfully feisty, except in their games against the Cubs. And yet, Chicago has emerged from this stretch—to say nothing of an 0-2 start coming out of the aforementioned Tokyo series—a shade over .500. The offense has had a lot to say about that, but it goes beyond strictly run production. The Cubs are in the league's top six in on-base percentage (.340), ISO (.176), K% (20.2), BB% (10.6), and wRC+ (121). Their stranglehold on the league lead in swipes has shrunk a bit, but their 29 stolen bases are still pacing the field. While there are some individual nuances within the lineup, it's been a multi-faceted attack that goes beyond even the massive early success from the likes of Kyle Tucker and Michael Busch. It's a lineup that has propelled them in the face of some woes up on the bump. The Cubs' starting staff sports a 3.64 ERA that ranks ninth, but their bullpen ERA (4.92) sits 27th. The latter performance has resulted in just five saves, and a couple of blown ones, which is why it's been so essential that the offense has propped them up in the way that it has. It's harder to lose leads with a shaky relief corps when you've built up a healthy gap. The most important component of the start, though, is the quality of the opposition. While the A's are far less than a juggernaut, the Dodgers, Diamondbacks, Padres, and Rangers are formidable. All Cubs opponents are, in aggregate, 52-22 against teams other than the Cubs. The Padres, in particular, have only a single loss on the books vs. non-Cubs teams. Coming into this stretch, many would have been happy if the team had escaped as even a .500 club. That mindset really carries through the month of April, because they still have another round of games against the Snakes, the Dodgers, and the Philadelphia Phillies. Given where we already are, it isn't unreasonable to think that the Cubs could muster a .500 stretch through the end of April, at a minimum. Such an outcome would carry them to a 17-14 record to finish the month and, as such, would likely land above where we thought they'd be. While .500 should be a reasonable benchmark over the next 10 games, there's reason to think they can exceed even that. While projected to be quite a bit better, both the Diamondbacks and Phillies feature pitching staffs that have underachieved. They rank 20th and 21st, respectively, in ERA as a staff, with the former's rotation struggling and the latter facing some inconsistencies in their bullpen. Even with some new arms in the bullpen mix, there's more uncertainty for the Cubs' staff than that wrought by an uneven performance through 22 games. Justin Steele is gone from the rotation. The bullpen has been woeful. The burden will still need to be carried by the offense throughout this stretch. While they'll play host against the trio of contenders, each of the Diamondbacks (115) and Dodgers (110) sit in the top six in wRC+ on the road. If there's a narrative or a perception to be gleaned from the team's performance through the halfway point of April, it's that the Cubs can hang. Every team is going to experience some unevenness during April, as we watch factors related to health and weather manifest in ways they maybe wouldn't at other points during the year. That the Cubs are able to stave off those factors to a similar extent as their contending counterparts says a lot about this team. And as long as the team remains in contention, the expectation should be that additions will present themselves to allow them to continue to hang as the season progresses. View full article

The Chicago Cubs have been disciplined in the box. More so than most teams. But Kyle Tucker's been the best of 'em. Image courtesy of © Denis Poroy-Imagn Images Given that it's been so long a while since the Chicago Cubs have had a hitter like Kyle Tucker, there really aren't enough superlatives to deploy in discussing his start to the year. Only a handful of hitters have been better. He owns a .301/.410/.578 line, a .277 ISO, and a walk rate (16.0%) that exceeds his strikeout rate (12.0%). His wRC+ checks in at 172. There have been other good hitters throughout the lineup, but Tucker has been every bit the catalyst he was purported to be upon arrival. Similarly, there are a lot of good things about the way the Cubs approach each plate appearance as a collective. The lineup ranks in the middle of the pack in chase rate, but sits fourth in the league in Contact% (78.5%). And while a number of hitters are contributing to the quality of the team approach (Dansby Swanson, in particular), it's Tucker whom we should be lauding most. Not that it's a surprise. The eye test alone tells us that Tucker has already identified what he wants by the time he steps in the box, and the execution has been pretty spectacular to watch unfold each time he steps in. But the numbers are also indicative of exactly that type of player. Broadly speaking, his ability to avoid hacking outside the zone is a level above that of his colleagues. Tucker's Chase% (16.3) is in the 99th percentile, and his walk rate is in the 94th. Only San Francisco's Matt Chapman (16.2) has a lower swing rate on pitches outside the strike zone. When he does expand, Tucker is making more contact than he did last year, with a 64.3% contact rate that is the highest he's ever had. The awareness he has of the zone itself is allowing him to expand effectively. There are also some interesting things happening inside the strike zone, though. Tucker is hacking more in-zone (72.3%), but making less contact (81.6%) than he did a year ago. Part of that speaks to the types of pitches at which he's swinging thus far: There's been a big ol' jump, specifically, in Tucker's swinging (and missing) on offspeed pitches. He's missed on 26.7% of swings at offspeed stuff in the zone, compared to 17.1% for breaking balls and 15.8% for heaters. But he's also chasing that pitch at a lower frequency. And we'd be remiss in not noting that opposing pitchers are delivering offspeed pitches with more frequency than before: 19.6% of the time, which would be the highest share he's seen since 2019. An obvious aim is to limit Tucker's ability to find the barrel while also getting some additional groundballs. One of those has worked, and it's not the first one. Opposing pitchers would probably fall into despair knowing that offspeed is currently the pitch type against which Tucker's experienced the largest increase in Barrel rates, according to Statcast. Tucker's Barrel% has spiked in general, but a rise from 4.8% vs. offspeed last year to 14.3% this year is vast. There's a tradeoff happening here; he's more aggressive on that pitch (given the higher volume seen) and experiencing more extremes: hard contact, or outright whiffs. He's had 14 batted balls on offspeed stuff, and is hitting .500 (five singles, two doubles, one home run) against them overall: those eight hits, six outs on balls in play, and just two strikeouts. The ultimate point here is just in the nuances of plate discipline. We know, in a very general sense, that Tucker has been outstanding, but it hasn't been perfect. What he has done, though, is turn what could have been a rather glaring imperfection into an asset. Pitchers made an adjustment. Tucker made it not matter. It'll be interesting to see what the next one looks like. View full article

Losing your de facto ace probably isn't ideal. But what if the Chicago Cubs are... fine, without theirs? Image courtesy of © Ed Szczepanski-Imagn Images The following are objective statements: Justin Steele is one of the Cubs' players most crucial to their success in 2025. The Cubs can find success in 2025 without Justin Steele. Isn't it neat that two things can both be true? The news that Steele will miss the remainder of the 2025 season (and possibly beyond) isn't something that anyone is going to say is a good thing for the Chicago Cubs. In fact, it's quite bad. Losing one of their top two arms from the rotation is a blow, especially with a bit of volatility further down the depth chart. It's going to lead to a brief scramble in the short term, with some potential impact in the longer term as they scour the trade market for a replacement (assuming continued contention as the year wears on). At the same time, it's not an injury that entirely unravels what the Cubs were trying to accomplish this season. In fact, Matt Trueblood's initial writeup of the news indicated that it's something the organization was likely prepared for, given recent concerns over his long-term durability. They might not have pursued a top-flight starter to the extent we expected at the winter's outset, but they at least have some depth assembled. When you juxtapose that preparedness with what had been a fairly underwhelming start to the campaign for Steele, you're left with plenty of reason to believe that the Cubs can stave off the bulk of the negative impact wrought by such an injury. Even in the absence of Steele, the Cubs have a durable, competitive rotation with a relatively traditional structure. Their actual ace, Shota Imanaga, remains healthy and effective. He's provided more stability both in health and start-to-start length, with home run issues serving as the only area where he comes up short against his top-of-the-rotation counterparts. The Cubs don't have one of the few truly elite "aces" in the sport, but their actual No. 1 is in good shape to continue leading the charge. Beyond Imanaga, there's still plenty of stability here. The upside play for Matthew Boyd has paid off thus far, courtesy of the evolution of his arsenal. There's more upside to be had in the form of Ben Brown, too. If he can build off a six-inning, scoreless start against the Dodgers, then you're looking at No. 2 or 3 starter upside, which allows Jameson Taillon to settle nicely into a No. 3 or 4 spot. There'll be some clunkiness here, but that's inherent in virtually any rotation. For now, 80 percent of the expected rotation remains intact and (with the exception of Taillon's poor batted-ball luck) is faring well. When you get down beyond the four remaining starters, it's not as if the panic button is at the ready. There's not a lot of swing-and-miss, but anyone stepping in for Steele for any length of time has the support of an upper-tier defense. The Cubs' collective Fielding Run Value (4) is the second-best mark in the league, with the outfield alone accounting for a 2 FRV. As such, Colin Rea is perfectly acceptable every five days in the short term. He's not going to strike many batters out, but as long as he can avoid hard contact, his flyball rate will be served well by the exceptional defensive group the Cubs boast in the outfield. Javier Assad could be set to begin a rehab assignment soon. We know he brings a similar skill set. The Cubs could also move to Jordan Wicks or (later on) Brandon Birdsell. The latter three are all health-dependent, but none of the options would have to be perfect in order to be effective, given the team's defensive structure. This also opens the door for Cade Horton to make an appearance at Wrigley Field this summer. He was, after all, supposed to be here already, if health issues in 2024 didn't push that back. So far, he's thrown 7 1/3 innings across two starts that have included an even dozen strikeouts. The stuff is undeniably there. His durability will have to be built up and command reined in before it becomes reality, but it's not as if you're going to throw any of the other four above a healthy, stretched-out Horton. None of this is to say that the Cubs shouldn't pursue outside options should they become available. A chance to be aggressive at some point exists. Nor are we suggesting that these are benefits to being sans Justin Steele for the balance of 2025. But there are silver linings here. There's volume. There's opportunity. Many teams would be pressed into making a dramatic decision in the short term. The Cubs, however, can push that off for a time. In the interim, we could get a decent look at the longer-term picture in the rotation—all while the options have the comfort of an elite defense behind them. It'll be fine. (You know, hopefully.) View full article

Given that we're barely into the middle of April, there's still a few weeks to go before we can make wild claims about the 2025 season. Claims like: Dansby Swanson is the best he's ever been. Image courtesy of © Darren Yamashita-Imagn Images He's not (yet) technically the best version of himself. We've gotten excited about Dansby Swanson before. It never lasts. I wrote about his start to the 2023 season on April 4th of that year. At this point in last year's calendar, he had a 139 wRC+ while reaching base at a .367 clip. By September of '24, I was writing about an August & September turnaround courtesy of apparently-increased health. At this point, we kind of have to accept who & what the Chicago Cubs' shortstop actually is: an above-average-to-excellent defensive infielder prone to hot stretches and even colder ones. To read anything further into it would be foolhardy in his age-31 season. But! Is it possible that the player whose slash line currently includes a .211 average and .281 on-base percentage might be... better than we could have expected? Despite a rather brutal line, Swanson has done a number of things well. For one, he has a .263 ISO. His highest mark was .201 back in 2021. His HardHit% is at 51.1, which is nearly five points higher than his previous career-best. He's also cut his K% by nearly six percent (18.5). There's been some brutal batted ball luck, as reflected in his .190 BABIP. Things are going to even out. The average on balls in play certainly will. His slugging may come down. But, regardless of how the natural pattern of baseball plays out, it's fairly clear that the torpedo bat is serving as the ideal tool for someone such as Swanson. Swanson's percentile rankings thus far are as follows: I'm looking specifically at the contact trends (Average Exist Velocity, Barrel%, Hard-Hit%, and Squared-Up%). In 2024, Swanson sat 56th, 62nd, 64th, and 47th in each category, respectively. The year before that, only the Barrel% (70th) carried any level of respectability, as the other three landed in the 50th, 42nd, and 37th percentiles. What's interesting is that Swanson's bad speed has actually decreased. His average bat speed (70.7 MPH) is a full tick off last year's average while his overall rate of reaching average speed has fallen by more than half (5.9 percent). At the same time, he's also managed to jump the squared-up contact from 33.4 percent of contact to 47.7 percent in 2025. His rate of blasts has ballooned from 15.4 percent (per contact made) to 26.2. His overall rate of contact hasn't changed much, while his in-zone contact rate has remained fairly similar. Given that the torpedo bat moves the point of quality contact closer to the hitter, the utilization of the new hitters' tool has allowed Swanson to swing a little more freely within the zone. These are Swanson's barrels across the zone in 2024: And here's thus far in 2025: The second graphic is obviously thinned out due to a smaller sample. But, there's some increased zone coverage apparent here in the barrel game. Even better is that he's generating barrels slightly inward and slightly up. As Swanson doesn't have a particularly long swing, this appears to be a slight change that is helping him a pretty notable way. Not only that, the upward movement of the hotspot is giving way to more fly balls. This is, after all, a guy that abused worms to the point of a 49.9 GB% in 2024. In a broad sense, we can definitely point to the torpedo bat as a reason for the uptick in Swanson's quality of contact. But it would also be an oversimplification. Swanson has moved two inches closer to the plate, providing the ideal contact point for where those barrels are manifesting. He's also raised his swing rate against fastballs by four percent and cut his rate versus off-speed pitches by nearly 15. The hard stuff has largely been his highest source of barrels throughout his career while off-speed offerings have, more often than not, done the opposite. It's a really nuanced picture to attempt to draw this early in the season. The torpedo bat is the star. But Swanson has refined some other things in conjunction with the lumber change that clearly have him off to a good start, even in the face of a sub-.200 BABIP. It's obviously still quite early. And we've gotten excited about changes from Dansby Swanson before. I'm probably a sucker at this point. But what if I'm not? View full article

The Cubs had some concerns about Matt Shaw after Tokyo. A few weeks later, new ones have emerged. Image courtesy of © Darren Yamashita-Imagn Images The 2025 Chicago Cubs have, thus far, proven to be a much more offensively-adept team than their predecessors from last year. Even with cold temperatures attempting to pin down the offense, they still sit 10th in ISO (.163), are walking at the league's second-highest rate (12.4 percent), and might just be the best baserunning team in baseball (25 steals against a single caught stealing). That doesn't mean it's been flawless, though. Especially in when it comes to their rookie third baseman. The success of the collective has certainly helped to minimize the impact of Matt Shaw's early struggles. Coming out of Tokyo, we noted his slow bat while expressing concern over the subsequent soft contact. Through nearly 60 plate appearances, it hasn't completely changed. His Baseball Savant percentile chart looks like he's taking swings on the planet Hoth, while his wRC+ checks in well below average, at 77. Many of the same concerns from before are currently reflected throughout Shaw's stat sheet. The bat speed is in the 13th percentile, his 34.0 percent whiff rate is in the 14th, and he has just a single barrel to his name. His plate discipline, however, has checked in at a fairly admirable quality this early in his career. Whether that's reality or perception, however, is a reasonable question. Shaw's swing rate on pitches inside of the strike zone currently sits at 57.3 percent. That ranks as the 158th lowest among 179 qualified hitters. His overall Swing% (42.3) comes in at 141st. His Chase% (27.7) lands closer to the middle of the pack (52nd percentile). Those have the potential to be encouraging figures. A top prospect coming up and not wildly hacking out of discomfort or anxiety would typically check in as a positive. However: Despite a level of patience even on pitches inside the zone, Shaw isn't making contact with those at which he does swing. Only three players have a higher whiff rate on such pitches than his 31.7 percent clip. Perhaps even worse is that over 34 percent of those misses in the zone have come on fastballs. It's narrowly behind his work against breaking balls (36.4 percent), but he's also getting only 45 percent of fastballs inside the zone to begin with. For him to be whiffing on fastballs represents a concern, especially given the bat speed figures. That's another factor to consider, but not necessarily one for our purposes here. The game right now is discipline. And while the bat speed does likely cause some of the woes we're seeing in actionable output at the plate, the lack of contact in itself could indicate an absence of intentionality at the plate—there is such a thing as being too patient. If Shaw were making more contact inside the zone, perhaps we could dispel the idea that he is. As it stands, however, it's likely problematic. Of Shaw's contemporaries battling a similar zone-whiff conflict, only George Springer (62.1) and Byron Buxton (63.5) are even a little bit close to Shaw's actual swing rate inside the zone. The issues facing the others around him speak more to overall contact issues. For Shaw, though, it seems more rooted in a reluctance to swing manifesting in a direct inability to turn those rare swings into contact given a certain lack of experience. On the positive side, though, the overall swing-and-miss does appear to be settling down: That chart doesn't discern the difference between a whiff outside the zone versus one inside. But a relative downward trend should bode well for him in the coming days, as he becomes more accustomed to this level. That should, ideally, lead to more consistent contact across various zones. So, while Shaw's current discipline may not be on purpose, it's possible he's starting to reach a point where it very well could be. View full article

Who needs power, when you have efficiency? Image courtesy of © Matt Marton-Imagn Images The 2024 Chicago Cubs weren't a bad offensive baseball team. They were 12th in the league in runs scored (736), eighth in steals (143), and were top 10 in on-base percentage (.317). But they also lacked impact. Their team ISO (.151) sat 21st, while they made contact at the league's 16th-best rate (76.8 percent). Two weeks into the 2025 season, I'm not thinking about last year's group anymore. But while I thought Kyle Tucker's addition and Seiya Suzuki's subsequent move to a (physically) safer role as the designated hitter would correlate with an increase of "impact," the team is generating runs in a way that perhaps I didn't initially expect. This iteration of the Cubs is one carried by their offense. A team that ranks just 16th in starting ERA (3.81) and features the 24th-ranked bullpen ERA (5.21) hasn't really been fazed by their shortcomings on that side of the ball—not when they've scored more runs and stolen more bases than anyone else in the league, by a pretty wide margin. These two things are related. Nobody in the league has scored more runs than these Cubs, whose 94 sit well ahead of the second-place New York Yankees (78). They also feature the league's fourth-best strikeout rate (19.3%), best walk rate (13.0%), and are running the ninth-best ISO (.170). Yes, the Cubs have a couple of extra games on their line, but it's not as if they were stuffing the sheet with those two games in Tokyo. Perhaps most notable, though, is the fact that they've also stolen 25 bags, which leads the league. Better still, they've only been caught once. Boston hasn't been caught yet, and each of the Giants and Angels have been caught once, as well, but those three teams have combined for 34 steals. Pete Crow-Armstrong is an obvious culprit here. He only has a .300 OBP through 60-ish plate appearances, but it seems like he's working his way on base in other ways (fielder's choices, etc.). He's stolen six. Nico Hoerner is tied atop the leaderboard, though, with six of his own. Jon Berti has swiped five in limited service, while each of Kyle Tucker, Dansby Swanson, Ian Happ, Michael Busch, and Seiya Suzuki have at least one steal on the books. Monday night's game against the Texas Rangers demonstrated the team's ability to take advantage of in-game context. They were able to take advantage of a slow-to-the-plate Nathan Eovaldi and stole five bases in that game alone. Given the Cubs' standing last year in the stolen base rankings, it's not a surprise. But it feels like the additions of Tucker and Berti, in particular, give them additional personnel to feel comfortable in making the attempts. But it's not just the steals that are working for the Cubs. It's their overall aggression and efficiency. Statcast has the Cubs as attempting advances on 46 percent of their opportunities. That comes in above their estimated advance attempts, and is the highest rate of attempts in all of baseball. They've been safe on such advances 38 times. The raw number trails only Boston and Arizona, while their success rate per opportunity is ahead of the entire league. In a more comprehensive sense, FanGraphs's baserunning metric (BsR) measures baserunning runs that take into account extra bases, outs on bases, steals, and contact into double plays. The Cubs are at a 3.2 there, which is also tops in the league. For context, they finished at a 10.6 last year. It certainly helps that the Cubs are, in fact, fast. We know about Crow-Armstrong. However, I'd like to submit the following into evidence: Crow-Armstrong is a boon to your team's baserunning output. But getting Suzuki, Matt Shaw, Dansby Swanson, and Nico Hoerner at the higher end of their positional groups means that over half the Cubs' lineup is among the fastest at their position. And it's not as if the rest are all slow. Busch and Happ sit right about average in their speed. The book on Tucker has long been that he's not fast, but he's smart. So the collective is one built to do exactly what the team is doing, considering their only slow and bad baserunners come from the position that is supposed to be slow and bad at baserunning. We knew the Cubs would be better on offense. It'd be really difficult to add someone like Tucker and get worse. But while we expected a bit more on the impact side to manifest in terms of power given the factors noted at the top, it's actually been the baserunning driving the bus—which is a good thing! For two reasons. First, it's sustainable. Unlike hitting into some batted-ball luck or performing outside a career trend, it's an element over which you can exert control. Second, and perhaps more importantly, it's cold. If you're setting the stage for generating offense at a point in the calendar where power production is going to be pinned down by the temperature, the warmer temps to come should almost serve as something of a bonus. View full article

When the Chicago Cubs signed Justin Turner late in the offseason, the assumption was that he'd be a capable bench bat and a supplement to Michael Busch at first base against particularly tough left-handed pitchers. It turns out that "tough" might've meant "all". Image courtesy of © Sergio Estrada-Imagn Images On March 30th, Justin Turner got the start against the Arizona Diamondbacks' lone lefty starter, Eduardo Rodríguez. On April 4th, Turner pinch-hit for Michael Busch against Athletics reliever T.J. MacFarland in the seventh inning of a 6-4 game. The next day, it was Turner in the starting lineup again, facing southpaw Jeffrey Springs. Things got really interesting over the weekend, though. On Friday, Turner hit for Busch in the fifth inning of an even 1-1 tilt, as the San Diego Padres sent Yuki Matsui to the mound. Yes, the Chicago Cubs' starting first baseman was removed halfway through the game for a pinch-hitter. Turner was back in the starting lineup on Sunday against Kyle Hart, and committed a rather egregious error that allowed the go-ahead run to cross the plate in the top of the ninth. He also struck out to end the game. The Sunday notes may be unfair to Turner; he has largely come in and succeeded when tasked with entering late or starting against a left-handed arm. He has two hits in two pinch-hit opportunities (that were not in Tokyo), and was hitting .429 vs. lefties in nine plate appearances heading into that series finale. Busch, meanwhile, has had only four opportunities against lefties this season. He's 1-for-4 with a double and a pair of strikeouts in those four chances. Seeing Turner get about 70% of the plate appearances available to that lineup spot against lefties is surprising, though. It feels like more than the role that was projected for him when he signed. After all, it's not as if Busch has been especially bad against pitchers of the same handedness. He has a 113 career wRC+ against right-handed pitchers, and a mark of 93 going the other way. He's actually hit for a higher average (.250) against southpaws than against right-handers (.235). The primary differences are in the power (.192 ISO vs. RHP; .120 vs. LHP) and the walk rate (11.8% vs. RHP; 6.7% vs. LHP). But we're not talking about a guy who is egregiously terrible against pitchers of the same handedness. In a vacuum, though, this is not an illogical deployment of either Busch or Turner. Busch is worse against left-handed pitching; Turner is better against it. But even Turner's own career trends aren't stark. He's actually put up a slightly higher wRC+ against righties (127) than against lefties (125). The ISO is roughly 20 points higher (.186) against the latter than the former (.167), but much of his line looks consistent, regardless of handedness. Our ability to estimate individual batters' platoon skills is very limited, but both Busch and Turner exhibit the few traits we tend to associate with small splits (like catching the ball farther out front against same-handed pitchers). Neither player needs to be platooned, per se. If you're looking for an argument in favor of Counsell's deployment of them, it's possible that the Cubs are trying to give Busch a bit of a breather, given a slow start to the year. He's hit only .235 through 39 plate appearances, and has been quiet on the power side (.118 ISO). But he's also walking about as often as he did last year; is striking out less often; and has run into some poor batted-ball luck—although that could be fueled by a sharp rise in his groundball rate (52.0%). Even that doesn't entirely hold water, because a lot of the underlying stuff is similar to what was an impressive rookie campaign in 2024. That's to say nothing of a very strong spring training performance. From a performance standpoint, there's plenty of logic to be found. But taking a long-term outlook, it's a bit less clear. Michael Busch was able to bring some stability to a position that has lacked it since Anthony Rizzo's departure. He demonstrated an increased level of maturity in his approach as the year wore on, while providing above-average defense for much of the season. Presumably, the Cubs (who raved about Busch all offseason) still view him as a fixture at the position for the next few years. That is ultimately the question here. If Craig Counsell plans to platoon Busch with a right-handed hitting veteran, he might squeeze a bit more production out of the position. If that was the plan when the team signed Turner, though, it raises some new questions about their offseason strategy and their valuation of Busch. View full article

Kyle Tucker hit .100 in spring training. He was 1-for-9 in Tokyo. Remember that? Elite hitters are elite hitters for a reason. A rough spring or a stumbling out of the gate is rendered somewhat meaningless when you're talking about a 162-game season. And for the Chicago Cubs' star right fielder, that's exactly what we're looking at. After starting the domestic slate 1-for-10 in Arizona, Tucker has reached base multiple times in each game since. He recorded three hits on Saturday, four on Monday, and two more on Tuesday. On Wednesday, he was 0-for-3 but walked twice. That five-game stretch featured a four-game home run streak. In total, Tucker's run his slash line up to include a .324 average and .444 on-base percentage, with a 229 wRC+ through the season's first 45 plate appearances. He's obviously been quite good. As advertised, you could say. But there are a couple of interlocking factors here that are leading him to excel: plate discipline and barrels. Tucker has long been a guy capable of drawing a walk. He drew free passes at a shade over 16 percent last year and is off to a 17.8 percent clip in BB% this year. While his Swing% is up this year (albeit extremely modestly), his chase rate continues to drop: Fangraphs has him at the sixth-lowest swing rate on pitches outside of the strike zone. Conversely, his in-zone swing percentage is up from 67.7 percent last year to 72.1 thus far in 2025. Even on those rare occasions where he does chase, though, he's not missing. His chase & miss rate is at 33.3%, which would represent the lowest rate of his career. To say Tucker is locked in would be underselling it. There's such an intense awareness of the strike zone that appears to exceed even his typically upper-tier approach. That's a positive on its own. Value exists in discipline in a vacuum. But being able to maximize that value through impact isn't a given. Except in Tucker's case, where he's making something out of it: As a result of his discipline, Tucker's Barrel% has skyrocketed. He's at 25.8 percent thus far, which sits almost double his 12.9 percent mark in 2024. Given his previous marks, it remains to be seen how sustainable it is. But it's worth noting that Aaron Judge carried a (league-leading) 26.9 Brls/BBE% (barrels per batted ball event) through all of '24. Given where Tucker landed last year in the barrel game, this increased concentration should continue to bode well: The visual itself isn't any kind of surprise. The idea that a hitter is going to generate barrel contact on pitches inside of the zone seems like a fairly obvious concept. But the discipline with which Tucker is proceeding this year should allow him to maintain such a high rate of barrel contact. Especially given his seven percent cut in chase rate, as depicted above. Another factor worth noting is in Tucker's bat speed. His average swing speed remains similar to the two previous years for which we have data available (72.7 MPH). But he's also demonstrated a higher rate of fast swings this year. Tucker's at a 33.3 percent clip for fast swing rate, up significantly from 22.8 last year. It all speaks to a comfort with which Tucker is currently approaching each plate appearance. Discipline isn't a foreign concept. But there's something about a guy who knows exactly what he's looking for and is able to execute that search within each plate appearance. The Cubs have hung 35 runs on the board over their last three games. Kyle Tucker has been entrenched in the middle of that. It's hard to imagine that changes anytime soon. View full article

The runup to Opening Day contains a strange cocktail of intrigue, anticipation, and eerie calm. It's a combination that spikes the ol' anxiety in someone such as myself. Image courtesy of © Darren Yamashita-Imagn Images I catastrophize. Mostly over smaller scale, trivial things. But the physical response is the same as if it were a big thing. The anticipation element of the day before Opening Day stems from the fact that we don't actually know what'll unfold over the course of 162 games. While the postseason itself may end up rather "chalky," getting there requires navigating a series of unknowns and singular moments that create a collective, coherent season—a story. The possibilities exist in the abstract until we have late-summer certainty. It's the abstract with which I struggle, in particular. And it's the abstract in which I find myself thinking about this year's group. Given that, it's no surprise that as roster news trickles out about the fringes of major-league rosters, my thoughts about the 2025 Chicago Cubs have begun to spiral. The following is where my anxieties have taken me, ahead of the big day. What If? #1: What if Cam Smith is incredible? This is something that I—and virtually anyone else with any association with this organization—have been turning over in my mind in the latter stages of the spring. The Cubs sent Smith to Houston as part of the package to acquire Kyle Tucker, with the assumption that Tucker would provide more immediate value on the offensive side. Of course, Smith then went on to hit .342, reach base at a .419 clip, and post a 186 wRC+ across 43 spring plate appearances, leaving himself entrenched in right field for the Astros to start 2025. In a vacuum, the Cubs are not going to regret trading 2025 Cam Smith for 2025 Kyle Tucker. The latter is one of the best dozen hitters in Major League Baseball, and the type of catalyst they've lacked in recent years. He's the superior player; we'd be kidding ourselves to think otherwise. But the trade doesn't exist in a vacuum. If Smith can reach any level of stardom in 2025 while Tucker plays out a single year on the North Side—all while Jed Hoyer failed to push chips in further for the season—then things get a little bit questionable. A long-term contract for Tucker becomes imperative. Will the team even approach him about an extension? Will they even talk long-term next winter? It sure feels like this is a one-and-done type of thing at present, and that feeling is going to paint the deal in a wildly unfavorable light given the additional context. The paradox of enjoying the one year of Tucker while being aware of Smith is going to require an Olympic gold-worthy routine of mental gymnastics for some. I'm worried I'm among them. What If? #2: What if Pete Crow-Armstrong can't stop swinging? Despite the positional difference, it isn't a stretch to compare Pete Crow-Armstrong and Javier Báez. Elite defensive tools, incredible vibes, offensive upside, and a complete inability to stop swinging the bat. As the heading indicates, it's the last bit that I'm a little concerned about. Through 436 career plate appearances, Crow-Armstrong owns a strikeout rate of 24.8%. Only three hitters with more than 400 trips to the plate last year had a higher swing rate than Crow-Armstrong's 59.2%. Only six chased more than his 43.5% of pitches outside the zone. And while he was able to maintain decent contact rates, we watched him start the year in Tokyo swinging at over 70 percent of the pitches he saw across seven plate appearances. It's something that has the potential to become entirely untenable within this lineup. While the defensive and baserunning value will help to keep his profile viable, there's an upside here that could be completely stifled if he can't rein it in at least somewhat. He's capable of it. We saw him tone things down in a pretty successful August. To this point, though, we have no reason to believe it can be sustained quite yet. What If? #3: What if Matt Shaw isn't the guy? This is a natural concern about any prospect, and just because he isn't the guy at third base immediately doesn't at all mean he can't be the guy at third base later on. If the latter rings true, though, the Cubs are going to have a massive short-term problem on their hands. I've mentioned the absence of a safety net on multiple occasions. While the team had indicated they'd let Shaw "earn" the job, it was always his following the trade of Isaac Paredes. We've seen Shaw in two "real" games, wherein he was able to record his first hit. But the bat looked slow and he looked overmatched. Should he prove to need a bit more developmental time or require a reset in Iowa, I'm not exactly sure in which direction the Cubs could turn. Their depth options include Jon Berti and Gage Workman. Berti is a light-hitting utility player, and Workman has decent upside but exactly zero big-league experience. To say Shaw's rookie campaign is crucial to the collective almost becomes an understatement. If he's not the guy right away, he may be fine. But I'm not sure the team will be. What If? #4: What if the Cubs are just...mid all over again? The Cubs did quite a lot this winter. But did they do enough? Ahead of the 2024 season, we were in a particularly frustrating place. The team came out hot in hiring Craig Counsell, and then proceeded to do very little to support their new manager from a personnel standpoint. This year, the Cubs struck fast and loud by acquiring Tucker, but other areas of need were left unaddressed, or only lightly upgraded. The rotation has some depth, but it's ultimately a collection of lower-velocity types reliant on location and movement. Which is fine! You'd still like to see at least a little velo coming out at the start of games, though. Not landing Alex Bregman really felt like the pivotal failure. Ultimately, this anxiety is not about whether or not the Cubs did enough. It's what happens if they didn't do enough. Jed Hoyer's contract is up at the end of the season. Tucker's a free agent. Nico Hoerner, Ian Happ, and Seiya Suzuki each have one year remaining after this one. The pitching staff isn't exactly young. The timeline on even the upper-level prospects remains unclear. It has the potential to get a bit messy. The Cubs are favorites, by most accounts, to win the division. Objectively, they should win the division. One imagines they'll be active at the trade deadline if they are, in fact, contending. But there's also a troubling absence of any certainty beyond 2025, especially if the success for which they are projected doesn't come to fruition. To clarify, I'm not worried about the Cubs being bad. But only three teams in the league have a longer active drought between playoff wins than this one. They've been hovering in sports purgatory for the last handful of years already. Another middling season could force them into a more permanent residence. View full article

Sometimes, you just have to trust the stuff. The other two bits of notes there are obviously significant in matters of the Opening Day roster (and gosh, what a bummer about Vidal Bruján's elbow, funny how that worked out). But the news of Brown grabbing the fifth starter job is massive. In case you forgot (which is entirely possible, if you live in a western time zone and essentially woke up in the middle of the night to watch the Cubs in Tokyo), we've already seen Brown this season. He followed Shōta Imanaga's four hitless innings in the opener with 2 2/3 frames of his own. The results weren't terrific—four hits, three walks, and three runs allowed—but the stuff was there. Brown struck out five Dodger hitters, inducing 14 whiffs in his appearance. The fastball velocity was down from 96.7 in 2024 to 95.6 in the outing, but 13 of the 14 whiffs came on his knuckle-curve (a.k.a. the pitch we actually care about). While we'll have to monitor the velocity, given its importance in allowing Brown to work off and toward his nasty breaking pitch, the fact that the hook was on point is all the encouragement we needed. That speaks to what makes Brown being in this rotation interesting in the first place. While his fastball was just about average last year, his Stuff+ on the knuckle-curve came in at 124. That's considered to be well above average for a pitch of that variety. Would it be nice to see him develop a third pitch? Sure—especially when we talk about his long-term outlook as a starting pitcher. But the allure of even that particular two-pitch mix isn't something I'm willing to overlook, when you consider the aesthetic appeal of Brown versus that of Rea. Here is Brown's Baseball Savant percentile distribution: And heres Rea's: Brown's is, obviously, quite imperfect. You'd like to see far less 'hard contact against him and a bit more harnessing of the command. But the velocity and bat-missing you're getting out of him is tantalizing, especially when you're considering him against someone as straightforward as Rea. There's an intrigue and aesthetic appeal that Brown brings, and that is utterly absent with Rea. The veteran righty's greatest strength is control, which is valuable but insufficient in assembling a starter's suite of skills and value sources. Aside from my own visual preference for watching Brown over Rea, there's a matter of roles here that is entirely logical. Despite the absence of a third pitch, settling Brown into a rotation spot now gives him a bit of stability within his continued development. You keep him on a certain routine, instead of deploying him in a variety of roles as he's attempting to get some longer-term footing. He might fail, for reasons having to do with the limited arsenal or with durability, but it's much easier to switch him to the pen midseason than to stretch him back out if he were to make a move to the pen now. Rea, meanwhile, is accustomed to this kind of work. In his 2020 work with the Cubs, Rea appeared in nine games while starting two. In 2021 and 2022, with Fukuoka of Nippon Professional Baseball, he combined for 22 starts across 29 appearances. He started 49 of 58 for Milwaukee over the last two campaigns. He's primarily been a starter, but serving as a swingman role (and perhaps as a piggyback option for Brown or Matthew Boyd, at times) will not be unfamiliar or uncomfortable for him. It's going to be clunky at times for Brown, perhaps deeper into the season than we're comfortable with, but nobody can deny the upside. Nor can they balk at the electricity he has the potential to bring. Between Brown and Rea as your option for the last spot, Brown brings that upside and the aesthetic appeal. Conversely, Rea is exactly the type of boring arm who can ply his trade in work for which he's particularly well-suited. Everybody wins. But mostly our collective eyeballs. They're the big winners here. View full article

The temptation to make more than we should out of the first few games of a new season is always strong, and when those games take place under the bright lights of an international showcase, it's even stronger. Still, one thing from the Tokyo Series does deserve a closer look. Image courtesy of © Darren Yamashita-Imagn Images In the weeks leading up to the series in Japan, there was plenty of curiosity as to whether or not Matt Shaw would even make the trip. An oblique injury stalled him early in camp, allowing only six Cactus League games under his belt before the team departed Arizona. But Shaw fared well in that small sample. He notched five hits across 19 plate appearances (.313 AVG), walked three times (.421 OBP), and only struck out once. Sample size be damned, it was clearly what the team wanted to see from him before making a call on his involvement overseas. The Cubs' intention has long been to insert Shaw as their starting third baseman. As long as he was healthy, the team likely didn't want to be down two of their infield starters. When Shaw was able to succeed with minimal adjustment across those six games, it made it an easy call. Even with the performance, though, there's an argument to be made that the absence of Nico Hoerner likely pushed Shaw not only onto the plane, but into the starting lineup. His inclusion, in particular, gave us plenty of reason to watch the early-morning tilts, even beyond all of the fanfare. You're talking about a potential lineup fixture at a position of need making his debut. That's extremely noteworthy, in itself. The overall anticipation of the series itself gave way to our own little mini-excitement over Shaw's first official taste of MLB action. That was, of course, until the results came through. Shaw was able to record the first hit of his big-league career: an infield single off the glove of Jack Dreyer, which probably should have been called an error. It was, however, Shaw's only hit in the series, as he went 1-for-9 with four strikeouts. Those are just numbers, but the at-bats looked bad, too. Here's Game 1: And here's Game 2: Game 1 featured (at least) something of an approach, with some pitches taken and others fouled off. Game 2 represented something of a contrast to that, as Shaw was more aggressive and whiffed at a handful of pitches inside of the strike zone. He seemed to get anxious. Nothing here sets off alarm bells, of course. Stepping into the box for the first time against this vaunted Dodgers staff isn't a trivial challenge. In the rare instances when Shaw did make contact, though, the resulting contact was enough to generate at least a little bit of concern. Matt's post speaks to the main issue with Shaw in his first big-league work: he looked slow. In the first game, Shaw took four of the team's nine slowest swings. He owned four of the seven slowest in the second. His work combined for an xBA of just .185, and that number includes an expected batting average of .500 on a groundout in the first game. His lone hit of the series had an xBA of only .060. To say that he looked overmatched would be an understatement. The results aren't worrisome, but the indicators of his process might be. If he stepped in and was making quality contact (while still throwing in a few whiffs) across those nine plate appearances, you're probably feeling alright about where he's at. Instead, the bat speed and the resulting exit velocities painted a picture of a player who wasn't quite ready for the moment. With any prospect, you want a kind of tangible starting point following that first action. If Shaw had come out, swung at tons of junk outside the zone or taken an inordinate number of called strikes while not reaching base at all, you'd have clear adjustments to make. Had he come out on the other end of the spectrum, with consistent contact and inspiring bat speed figures, then you'd want him to find ways to build on it. Shaw looking discombobulated and slow presents a more intractable problem he now needs to solve. It isn't ideal. Not that we're rushing to any actual panic over two games, played thousands of miles away from home. It's not that we don't think Shaw is capable of adjusting. He demonstrated an ability to do just that upon reaching each new level of the minor leagues. We certainly aren't ready to draw any bigger-picture conclusions about Shaw's major-league ability after exactly two (2) games. The slow swings might not be a lasting aspect of his game; they might just indicate that the oblique flared up again and he was being cautious. It's just something to monitor. It's noteworthy either way. If it snowballs, one can't help but wonder how long the team will ride it out before giving him a reset in Iowa, and what the pivot looks like. We have, after all, already noted that the safety net doesn't exist. But should he head the other direction, where he quickly gains some traction, that'll also be worth dissecting. We win as viewers either way. The hope, though, is that the Cubs win as a result of what comes next for Matt Shaw. View full article