There are a number of places for fans and press members alike to point the finger at where the team went wrong. The front office doubled down on what didn't work in 2017, then threw $185 million at the likes of Yu Darvish, Tyler Chatwood and Brandon Morrow- none of whom were on the playoff roster. Once again, questions arose over Joe Maddon's bullpen over-usage, as many of the team's best relievers either got hurt or didn't have their best stuff come October (see: Morrow, Pedro Strop, Steve Cishek, Carl Edwards Jr.). Other decisions by Maddon have been scrutinized, while the Cubs' bats went silent at the wrong time.
While the Cubs can't get a mulligan on 2018, they sure as heck can make some alterations that can bring them closer to once again reigning supreme in the National League. So where do they go from here? Here are the changes I would make.
1) Find a legitimate, everyday lead-off hitter
The top of my list begins with the top of the order. After two years of inconsistency in run production (the Cubs' were top 3 in Major League Baseball in "most games scoring one run or fewer" this season), the Cubs still haven't found a replacement to Dexter Fowler. Fowler's value to the 2015 and 2016 Cubs has gone somewhat uncredited. Fowler started 119 games in the lead-off spot in 2016, where he produced a .391 OBP. With Fowler setting the table in the lead-off spot, the Cubs offense soared. In the games he missed prior to the 2016 All-Star break, the team's offense looked lost and started to dip, going 11-17 without Fowler. Prior to that, the team stood at 46-20. Fowler hasn't been the same player since joining the Cardinals prior to 2017, so by no means am I saying the Cubs need Fowler back; more so, they need someone who can mirror Fowler's 2016 production.
The 2018 team couldn't identify a lead-off hitter. For the last two months, Daniel Murphy served in that role, despite only spending 12 games in the lead-off spot in his 9-year career prior. Murphy's OBP was .340 in the lead-off spot, and slumped down the stretch. Murphy had spent the last two years primarily hitting in the 3-5 spots, where he generated a .347 BA and 104 RBI's in '16 and .322 and 93 RBI's in '17. The team also struggled to cash in with runners on base, so he seemed like a more logical fit in the middle of the order.
Others to spend a chunk of time in the lead-off spot go as follows (these are splits only listing in their numbers when leading-off):
Almora (45 GS, 192 AB): .339 BA, .374 OBP, .811 OPS Rizzo (31 GS, 116 AB): .328 BA, .428 OPB, .989 OPS Zobrist (27 GS, 123 AB): .285 BA, .371 OBP, .810 OPS
Rizzo put up outstanding numbers in the lead-off spot. But does your first baseman who just drove in 100 RBI's for the fourth straight season really fit there in the long run when your team still has a problem with knocking runners in? In my opinion, Rizzo should always stay between 3-6 in the order. Which limits your options to Zobrist and Almora. At 37 years-young, Zobrist had the best year of his career in '18, batting over .300 for the first time. He's always been a strong OBP guy, but with back problems over the last couple of years and entering his age 38 season, can you depend on him to fulfill that everyday lead-off man role? Maybe. Almora is the most enticing option to me. At 24, he could very well be on the up as a potential elite defensive player and rising hitter, although he did struggle some in the second half when not playing regularly. If the Cubs don't feel they can rely upon any of these options, then they need to find their everyday lead-off man through trade or free agency this winter.
2) Ditch the power bats and embrace a consistent lineup of contact hitters
Through 22 innings of 'win and you're in' baseball, the Cubs offense was only able to muster two runs. The lineup has heavily relied upon the long ball the last two years. League-wide, home run numbers were down in '18, which begs the question, "Are the juiced baseballs gone?". In all seriousness, the boom-or-bust trend is extremely risky, and as I've harped on for the last two years, the team that strikes out the least, puts the ball in play, and fields it cleanly in the field will likely outshine a high-strikeout, home run team in a 7-game series. The '17 Astros won the World Series as the team that struck out least frequently in the entire league. The Cubs' offense has feasted on bad pitching, but when faced with the task of beating Freeland, Scherzer or Kershaw? The lineup shrinks. The lineup couldn't even pound Jhoulys Chacin, who had a 4.81 ERA just two seasons ago.
As we continue to chalk up the lineup's struggles to "inconsistency", maybe the Cubs should alter their lineup and approach. Take the Brewers for example. Adding Lorenzo Cain (.308 BA in '18) and Christian Yelich (.326 batting champ and likely MVP) helped them become 10 games better from '17 and win the Central division. Their elite outfield defense put them at second in the National League at runs saved (for an entire defense), while Cain and Yelich proved to be a consistent one-two punch at the top of the order. The Cubs had just one player bat over .300 this season (Zobrist).
The Cubs should seriously consider cutting ties with some of the high strikeout/low average/all power/limited defense guys like Kyle Schwarber and Ian Happ. Schwarber entered 2018 in the best physical shape of his career, with very high expectations from the press (remember when Chicago writers were predicting him to receive MVP votes this year?) and pretty much performed at his career average (.238 BA), while his home run numbers were down from last season (26 compared to last year's 30). His defense wasn't quite as poor as it had been in years past, but he still struggled in left from time to time, with limited range. Imagine if the Cubs had pulled the trigger on a deal centered around Schwarber and Happ for Yelich last winter? Hindsight is always 20-20, but 2018 didn't give me much confirmation that hanging onto Schwarber is worthwhile. If a player like Contreras, who is above league-average defensively struggles at the plate, it's much more forgivable than players who already struggle in the field.
In my opinion, almost everyone on this roster save for the obvious (Rizzo, Bryant, Lester, Hendricks) should be movable given the right trade offer, even Baez. While Cubs' fans would have a hard time forgiving the team for trading the popular, budding star, a number of analytics make me worrisome of Baez sustaining his 2018 success. Baez still has one of the highest chase rates in all of baseball, meaning he still swings at a lot of pitches out of the strike zone. Despite mashing .290 at the dish, Baez's OBP was just .326. He hasn't proven to be capable of drawing walks. If I was pitching to him, I wouldn't throw him a single strike until he shows me that he'll take the walks consistently, and I would expect pitchers league-wide to take that approach when dealing to Baez next season. Defensively, he's terrific at second but hasn't been that great at short. He'll make the spectacular play, but botch the routine play. The Cubs' front office has sold low on players in recent memory. Schwarber could have been dealt two years ago, Happ last year, for a bigger haul than they would yield this winter. Now is their chance to sell very high on a player. While Baez's ceiling is very high, it wouldn't surprise me if he struggled mightily in 2019 as pitchers adapt to him. If the offer is right (deGrom?), the Cubs should be open to moving almost anyone for some pitching help, and contact hitters.
Recently, teams have shown that they're more interested in prospects than young players already at the MLB level. They can control them longer and develop them however they want. Don't be surprised if a player like Schwarber gets moved for a handful of talented pitching prospects that can help replenish the Cubs' farm system for now, and be moved later if the Cubs are in need of something at the deadline.
3) Identify the team's best 8 position players and make them your regulars everyday
The next step to finding consistency is allowing your players to play in a comfortable routine each day. Every athlete I know likes to keep things the exact same in their pregrame rituals and routines. Athletes are superstitious. If they struggle for a week, then have a great game, they may wear the same pair of socks for the next two weeks. So continuously juggling the batting order, for the sake of entertaining yourself as a manager, may not sit well with all the players. If a couple of hitters are developing chemistry batting back-to-back, keep it that way. Don't be obsessed with changing things. A consistent lineup can produce consistent results.
Maddon's obsession with shaking up the lineup works well with under-talented teams, in my opinion. However, once you have a super-talented team, it may be time to pull the plug on that.
Another issue with allowing everyone to play is that it can make some players unhappy in their roles. Former Cub and current MLB Network analyst Mark DeRosa has talked about how it's imperative for players to know and accept their roles. If a guy knows he's a bench player, he's typically content with that. But if you give him hope that he can win the starting job, and starts to outperform the other guy(s) vying for that spot, then still has to play part-time, he can get very frustrated and unhappy. This can happen with more than one player, and upset team chemistry.
In my opinion, a team is most cohesive when it plays its best eight players a large percentage of the time, and always in the playoffs. I'm not saying you can't give players days off, or have a platoon at a position or two, but I don't think you can end up starting David Bote in an elimination game either. Bote batted .165 over the club's last 39 games, starting 26 of them. He's a fine replacement-level player for now, but isn't one of your best 8. I would have much rather seen Heyward (.290 vs. lefties this season) in there.
4) Bring in some veteran clubhouse leaders
The '16 world champion team had a very nice mix of veteran leaders and young players who would follow them. David Ross and John Lackey were a pair of fiery guys who always worked hard and knew what buttons to push with their teammates. Dexter Fowler was a guy on the team, a little older and more experienced, that everybody loved being around. The departure of the three has left big shoes to fill.
Maddon's laid back approach works, but when things are going wrong, I think it works better when older players are showing younger players what they're supposed to do, when they need to relax, when they need to turn it on, etc. Rossy and Lackey were vocal leaders that always worked extremely hard. Lester and Zobrist are a pair of lead by example types, meanwhile, the current Cubs' captain wants to play less games. Don't get me wrong, Rizzo is a leader, but I think the Cubs could benefit from a couple veteran additions.
Curtis Granderson, who will be 38 by the start of next season, has yet to win a World Series and is hungrier than ever for one as a free agent. The Chicago native still does a great deal of philanthropy in the area and would make a welcome addition as a fourth outfielder who would be content in his role. He's also one of the most liked players in the whole league.
Among those who could fill a need as a veteran back-up catcher from the free agent market, and also could give Contreras a little more rest from the grueling position in '19: Kurt Suzuki, Jonathan Lucroy, Martin Maldonado, Matt Wieters and AJ Ellis could all be viable options.
5) Don't overspend on free agents
Though the Cubs already have a lot of money and will have more in a few months when they sign their next TV deal, the front office has already spent over $300 million combined on just Heyward, Darvish, Chatwood and Morrow. Eventually Rizzo, Bryant, Contreras, Almora, Hendricks, Baez and co. will need new deals. If you want to keep this young core in place, you're going to need money to save for them.
Bryce Harper and Manny Machado will be the talk of the winter. The Cubs are currently the odds-on-favor to add Harper, according to the offshore casino Bovada. But does Harper really make the Cubs' that much better for what he will cost? Scott Boras will be looking for $300 million for his client that hit .249 and 34 homers, playing lackluster defense in right. You can get similar production if you hang onto Schwarber at a much cheaper price. Harper's team failed to reach the playoffs, and there have been whispers that he isn't the greatest teammate.
Machado may be a bit more appealing, however he has had serious injuries on both of his knees. He's elite defensively at third, but isn't the same defensive beast at short. I wouldn't feel comfortable giving either guy a 10-year contract, as we've seen how those contracts have financially crippled teams in the past (see: Albert Pujols). There will be a number of enticing free agents that can be had at a cheaper cost.
Whatever the Cubs plan to do with Addison Russell (an issue I don't feel comfortable commenting on), I would expect them to add a shortstop regardless. Freddy Galvis and Jose Iglesias are a pair of plus-defenders that won't cost too much. Even if the Cubs elect to keep Russell, they'll need someone to fill in for the 30ish games he'll miss.
Another potential free agent target: Jon Jay. He was very good for the Cubs in '17, serving as a lead-off man and good defensive outfield option. He would bring some depth if the Cubs choose to pass on some of the flashier outfielders past Harper (Andrew McCutchen, Michael Brantley, AJ Pollock, Nick Markakis, Carlos Gonzalez; all of whom could be solid adds).
Conclusion:
I have no idea in what direction the Cubs will go in this winter, but I would expect some significant changes. The status quo hasn't worked for two years and the Cubs need to patch up the holes they've found since they won the World Series two years ago. I would also expect them to add a couple of relievers. Despite a lackluster 2018 season, with the right off-season moves, the Cubs aren't far from returning to glory.
Follow me on Twitter @TheJackVita and let me hear your thoughts.
(Image via Chicago Tribune)
No comments:
Post a Comment