The Cubs come up short in Pittsburgh and lose 4-3.
Some of my longtime readers may wonder if I had a life transformation or if someone else is writing this for me this year. No questions about glasses half full or empty. No extended metaphors or analogies. Not particularly even any off topic discussions that don’t talk about the game itself much at all.
To this point, I’ve been content to just surface talk about the games. Why? Because I’m happy with this team and how it has played. Are there some games that have been frustrating? Of course. I’ve got some nitpicks on lineup construction. I was even going to write about one. Then Craig Counsell dropped Dansby Swanson to eighth. That was the most glaring issue. Carson Kelly is probably not a long time middle-of-the-order option and will probably look silly in the future when looking backwards. Riding a scalding hot hand while it’s scalding? Defensible.
I’ve had issues with bullpen construction too, albeit, much less than most of you. I agree with the overarching bullpen philosophy of the organization. Relievers are notoriously fickle and inconsistent year over year. I wouldn’t spend a great deal of money there unless I was relatively certain I had a generational type of talent there. I’m also not bothered because the Cubs are running a merry-go-round through the last two bullpen slots. Even after a guy like Tom Cosgrove threw two good innings, they shuffled again. Keep fresh bodies. Give them things to work on, send them back to do the work.
It takes a village to win a championship. A team is usually going to use at least seven or eight starters and 12 to 15 relievers. Both of those numbers can escalate significantly, but don’t drop off too much, even for the steadiest teams. I’m fine with the process. I suspect, somewhere along the way, another Porter Hodge-type will emerge. Mark Leiter Jr., Julian Merryweather, Scott Effross. I’m sure I’m forgetting plenty. But random guys have emerged in recent years. I believe they will do so again.
Tonight, for the first time I found myself trying to search my mental database for an apt thought on my thoughts. Those thoughts surround the question of, if the Cubs had to spend the majority of their capital on one acquisition and mix and match for the others, what is the choice? My default thought was wait for Matt Shaw, mix and match until then. Mix and match in the pen. Spend the chips on a starter (when Shōta Imanaga was helped off the field, this was feeling doubly important).
As the Cubs were losing Wednesday night to the Pirates, I had to wonder. Is that actually the right call? This loss isn’t on Matthew Boyd. And it’s not really on the bullpen. I haven’t looked at hard data recently, but in general, there’s a pretty bright line. The flip point across baseball for winning games is scoring four runs (and conversely allowing three or less). Anything that gets you to four runs or keeps them away from four runs is valuable.
I play a variety of games. From the Civilations franchise to Dungeons and Dragons to the app Empires and Puzzles. When I play these games, I often find myself debating a strategy. Do you lean into a strength or balance the scales? I’ve found in most instances that the most effective strategy for me is to lean into a strength.
I’ve probably oversimplified that idea for brevity’s sake, but I suspect most of you followed me through the thought. I bring that back, and the next thing is thinking through it. Are the Cubs going to pick up prime Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez or Bob Gibson? There haven’t been too many of those guys in all of history that you feel like will definitely win every fifth day. It feels like we are at a point in baseball history where there really aren’t any. To the extent that there are, no one is going to let them go.
So you’re going to get a guy. He’s probably going to have some or even a lot of questions around him. A change in scenery, some good coaching, a strong lineup and defense behind them. These things might propel this hypothetical pitcher to catch lightning in a bottle down the stretch and he might have an outsized impact to finish out the year. Or, it could all go wrong and he could struggle down the stretch. I believe in this team and I believe they’ll get at least a Jameson Taillon/Matthew Boyd-like impact and help the team be better every fifth game down the stretch.
An elite reliever to add to the back end, particularly one who can work four plus games per week would be helpful too. The bullpen can really use a lot of length that it doesn’t have presently. I can see the allure to adding a starter or a reliever. One of those aspects I mentioned is run prevention.
How great is the third baseman you can hypothetically obtain? IF, intentionally capitalized, you could obtain that offers at least two elite or borderline phases out of offensive, defensive and baserunning. Maybe you should do that. Is that player available as a rental? I think I’m looking for Matt Shaw projected in the future and performing every day to the best we’ve seen of him. Strong defense, decent speed, some pop and a bat that can do some damage. Obviously, the ideal situation is Matt Shaw becoming that player by some time this season. I do not know how realistic that is. Assuming it is not, I’m conceding that trading for that hypothetical player on an expiring contract is pretty interesting.
Of course, I’m also over-reacting to Kyle Tucker having a slump for the first time as a Cub and that was topped by Pete Crow-Armstrong’s first really rough game in a couple of weeks.
Pitch Counts:
- Cubs: 139, 8 innings, 35 batters (17.38 PPI/3.97 PPB)
- Pirates: 127, 9 innings, 36 batters (14.11 PPI/3.53 PPB)
Here, we see that the Cubs weren’t very effective offensively in this one. They drew just one walk and had nine hits. On the other side, in one less team at bat, the Pirates put up the same nine hits and drew four walks. This was part of what got me to wondering if the Cubs might benefit most from another bat. After all, a bat plays almost every day.
There’s very little downstream impact from this. Pirates closer David Bednar is probably unavailable for the series finale after pitching in both of the first two games. Otherwise, no other Pirates pitcher worked in both games or worked particularly hard in this one. On the Cubs side, Caleb Thielbar also pitched in the first two. Going unsaid, the Cubs almost certainly need more pitchers behind Colin Rea than the Pirates do behind Paul Skenes. Porter Hodge is the only “A” reliever of the Cubs who has pitched in the series and he threw 10 pitches Wednesday.
Three Stars:
- I often try to think how the performance, if repeated, would effect other games. That is particularly true when there aren’t a ton of outsized accomplishments. Dansby Swanson had three singles. They didn’t particularly tilt the outcome of this game, but three hits is going to play. He scored one run.
- Jon Berti had the only extra base hit and drew the only walk. He scored a run as well. The error was costly. Perhaps that knocks him down from here.
- At some point, the Drew Pomeranz story is going to be an interesting one. Let’s not think about it much and see how it goes. Three up, three down. One strikeout. So far, so good.
Game 31, April 30: Pirates 4, Cubs 3 (18-13)
Fangraphs
Reminder: Heroes and Goats are determined by WPA scores and are in no way subjective.
THREE HEROES:
- Superhero: Ian Happ (.149). 2-4, RBI, R
- Hero: Dansby Swanson (.108). 3-4, R
- Sidekick: Brad Keller (.085). 1⅓ IP, 5 BF, H, R (0 ER), K
THREE GOATS:
- Billy Goat: Caleb Thielbar (-.403). ⅓ IP, 3 BF, 2 H, ER, K
- Goat: Kyle Tucker (-.155). 0-4, DP
- Kid: Pete Crow-Armstrong (-.147). 0-4
WPA Play of the Game: Andrew McCutchen batted with runners on first and second with two outs in the seventh. He hit a ball that Dansby Swanson couldn’t quite get stopped and two runs ended up scoring, turning a one run deficit to a one run lead. (.423)
*Cubs Play of the Game: With runners on first and second and one out in the fifth, the Cubs up one, Matthew Boy got Joey Bart to ground into a double play to end the inning. (.133)
Cubs Player of the Game:
Yesterday’s Winner: Carson Kelly (79 votes) edged Shōta Imanaga (77) and Seiya Suzuki (73) in one of the closest three-way votes I can ever remember.
Rizzo Award Standings: (Top 5/Bottom 5)
The award is named for Anthony Rizzo, who finished first in this category three of the first four years it was in existence and four times overall. He also recorded the highest season total ever at +65.5. The point scale is three points for a Superhero down to negative three points for a Billy Goat.
- Kyle Tucker +12
- Miguel Amaya/Shōta Imanaga +8
- 4 Players at +4
- 2 Players at -5
- Nate Pearson -6
- Matt Shaw -7
- Ben Brown -8
- Dansby Swanson -11
Up Next: The third and final meeting of this first series of the year between these two teams. Colin Rea (1-0, 0.96, 18⅔ IP) has been fantastic this year. Each start has been longer than the one before. Last time, he threw five innings of scoreless ball against the Phillies, leading to the lone win over the Phillies. Colin started twice against the Pirates as a member of the Brewers last year. That didn’t go well. Let’s not dwell.
There’s not a lot I need to tell you about 22-year-old Paul Skenes (3-2, 2.39, 37⅔ IP). The 2023 first overall pick appears to be one of those pitchers I talked about in the open. The kind of guy you expect to win every fifth day. Though he does already have two losses. This is his seventh start. He’s averaged better than six innings. Last time out he held the Dodgers scoreless over 6⅓ innings. He allowed five hits, no walks and struck out nine. He started four games against the Cubs, including his first two MLB starts. He was 2-0 and allowed six runs (five earned) across 20 innings of work.
If I were betting on this one, I hate to say I’d follow the obvious money. But the Cubs have risen to a number of challenges this year. Maybe this can be another one.