Inconsistency can be maddening. A team who sweeps the Dodgers but gets swept by the Rockies is a hard team to watch. Also a hard team to watch? One that is maddeningly consistent. Take the 2024 Chicago Cubs.
In series of three or more games, the Cubs have not been swept this year. They were technically swept once in a two-game set—that rainout-marked trip to St. Louis—but aside from that, nobody has completely bested Chicago’s National League team. And yet…
And yet the Cubs are in last place in the sport’s worst division, with a 7–13–2 overall record in series and a 1–9 record over their last ten series. Over the last five weeks, the only team the Cubs have beaten in a series is the worst-run franchise in American professional sports, and even that required a pair of herculean comebacks featuring a lot of help from the opposition.
Have the Cubs really been bad over this timeframe? Yes. Their offense has been the third-worst in the league.* Their pitching has been in the middle of the road overall,** but it’s been fifth-worst at performing when the pressure’s high,*** and it’s been blessed with only one matchup against a top-ten offense* during this stretch. Yes, the Cubs have been bad.
But they haven’t been terrible.
This is the great Cubs frustration, and it dates back all the way to the end of 2018. The Cubs are frequently mediocre, but they’re rarely awful. They don’t take huge offseason swings and miss them, but their development underwhelms enough to overshadow a line of shrewd free agencies. They’re generally fine hitters, but they are statistically the second-worst franchise*** over the last eight years at coming through when it counts. The Cubs are maddeningly consistent.
*by wRC+
**15th in FIP
***by FanGraphs’s “Clutch” metric
Moves/Injuries:
- It’s an oblique injury for Jordan Wicks, and it sounds significant. This is better than his arm being injured, but I do wonder if, given the recent forearm concern, the Cubs might consider taking advantage of the pitcher being sidelined to do something proactive with Wicks’s elbow. I don’t know that there’s anything proactive that can be done, but if there is, now might be the best time to do it, even if it slightly extends his absence.
- Keegan Thompson got the recall in exchange for Wicks’s placement on the IL. Ethan Roberts, who didn’t exercise his minor league opt-out on Saturday, was added to the 40-man roster on Sunday but will stay at Triple-A for the time being. Jose Cuas was the odd man out, designated for assignment in the corresponding move.
News/Rumors/Speculation:
- Moises Ballesteros, a top-100 prospect in a lot of places, was promoted to Triple-A yesterday after hitting for the cycle on Friday. Ballesteros, a catcher, posted a 155 wRC+ during his two-plus months at Double-A. That number is fifth-best in the Southern League. Cubs catchers, meanwhile, have something like a 40 wRC+ on the year. Is Ballesteros a better option? Probably not. He’s 20 years old, hasn’t been expected to debut this year, and has played a total of 61 career games above Single-A. But the Cubs might be desperate, especially if the Hoyer regime begins to worry about its job security.
- On that catcher topic: The Mets released Tomás Nido this afternoon after designating the catcher for assignment last week. Nido isn’t much of a hitter, but he’s been better than Yan Gomes and Miguel Amaya on the season, and his defense is great. He’s six years younger than Gomes, who’s slightly outlived his defensive reputation. Any signing would require removing someone from the 40-man roster, but this is a more desperate situation than first base or the bullpen, and I do wonder if Wicks or Ben Brown could be a 60-day IL candidate.
Games:
- Monday: Cubs vs. San Francisco, 7:05 PM CDT (Marquee)
- Tuesday: Cubs vs. San Francisco, 7:05 PM CDT (Marquee)
- Wednesday: Cubs vs. San Francisco, 1:20 PM CDT (Marquee)
The Giants bring Jordan Hicks and Logan Webb to the mound in the first two games, with Spencer Howard the likeliest primary pitcher on Wednesday (the Giants use some openers). Hicks and Webb are tough. Webb’s a top-ten pitcher so far this year, going by fWAR, and Hicks is sub-4.00 in both xERA and FIP as the Giants’ aggressive conversion of him from reliever to starter continues to prove prescient. Javier Assad and Justin Steele should compete with the two of them. Especially Steele. Kyle Hendricks, who returns to the rotation on Wednesday, is much like Howard in that you can see the upside but the situation’s volatile. Guessing the odds will be close to even in all three games, which means the odds of a series win—which the Cubs do desperately need—are also close to even.
The Sky Can Make It About the Sky
Since we last checked in on them, the Sky have lost three more times, bringing their 2024 record to 4–9. They haven’t won since Elizabeth Williams tore her meniscus. They’re a game out of playoff position as the season’s halfway point approaches, ceding eighth place yesterday to the suddenly hot Indiana Fever. Speaking of that game.
As you may have heard, if you were watching CNN (good god, this was covered on CNN), the game featured a hard Angel Reese foul on Caitlin Clark, the latest iconic moment in their rivalry. Clark said afterwards she thought Reese was going for the ball, and I’d agree, but a flagrant foul call was fair. Reese clubbed Clark in the head. Clark’s a flopper, but this was one that wasn’t about the flop.
Reese could and should have owned the foul better, but using the media to work the refs isn’t novel and isn’t ineffective, so it’s hard to be too upset with her about that. I think the bigger problem for the Sky is that for all the “It’s not about Caitlin Clark” talk, they keep making it about Caitlin Clark and not making it about the Chicago Sky. This was not an avoidable play for Reese, like the Chennedy Carter foul was for Carter. If Reese is playing her game, she commits that foul. But because of Carter’s foul a few weeks ago, and because of comments by both Carter and Reese, the Sky—who, again, keep asking for attention on their own merit—let Caitlin Clark remain the focus.
Angel Reese is a big deal. She might be the second-most famous active women’s basketball player. But she has some control over whether or not she’s defined by Clark. A good way to start that shift is to get back to winning.
Games coming up:
- Thursday: Sky vs. Dallas, 11:00 AM CDT (Marquee)
Did the White Sox Already Break Drew Thorpe?
Obviously, this is not how it works. But Drew Thorpe managing a strong debut against the Mariners only to then, five days later, utterly implode against the Diamondbacks is exactly the plot device an author would use to illustrate the White Sox destroying every promising resource which reaches their locker room. Heavy-handed, sure. But it gets the point across.
Moves, News:
- Chad Kuhl, who’d been pitching at Triple-A, was added to the 40-man roster on Friday afternoon. 31 years old, Kuhl had a serviceable season in Colorado’s rotation in 2022 but crashed hard in D.C. last summer as a swingman. As expected, Tommy Pham was activated off the IL at the same time, while Jordan Leasure and Zach DeLoach took the corresponding demotions to Charlotte.
- Yesterday, the White Sox selected the contract of Chuckie Robinson, a mostly career minor leaguer who had one of those June 15th opt-outs which hinged on him being added to the 40-man roster. Duke Ellis was designated for assignment to make room, which makes Ellis very much a candidate for the Moonlight Graham Award, something that doesn’t exist but could be given like a Purple Heart to those with a tremendously sad MLB career.
- Mike Clevinger will make rehab starts on Tuesday and Sunday this week at Triple-A.
Games:
- Tuesday: White Sox vs. Houston, 7:10 PM CDT (NBC Sports Chicago)
- Wednesday: White Sox vs. Houston, 7:10 PM CDT (NBC Sports Chicago)
- Thursday: White Sox vs. Houston, 1:10 PM CDT (NBC Sports Chicago)
Garrett Crochet’s start’s on Wednesday. The Astros are hurting and scuffling, but they still aren’t anybody’s top choice in an opponent.
When Trading Up Is a Win–Now Move
With the NBA Draft next week, most smoke around the Bulls centers on whether they’ll trade up, garnering better draft capital than their current stash: the eleventh overall pick and nothing else.
It’s a conversation laden with both optimism and pessimism. The pessimism centers on the well-covered weakness of this draft class. The optimism centers on a perception that trading up would signal a commitment to a much-needed rebuild. One note on the pessimism, before we talk about the rebuild angle:
Drafts can be weak in a few ways. They can be weak at the top. They can be weak in the middle, or at the bottom. My impression is that this draft is just as weak at the eleventh pick as it is at, say, the fifth pick, when the Pistons are slated to select. Which means that while the eleventh pick and fifth pick are both weak, their relative value—the difference between how valuable they are—isn’t necessarily very different from usual. If the eleventh pick and the fifth pick are both included in a trade, you can probably conceptualize that part of the deal as you would in another year. Where the weak draft becomes an issue is if future draft capital is included. The time value of draft picks doesn’t apply like normal to the 2024 NBA Draft. If the Bulls include future draft capital, it should be discounted to make the deal work.
Will Artūras Karnišovas see it this way? I actually kind of think he will. The one* bullish indicator on Karnišovas is that he anchors aggressively during trade negotiations. It’s possible he’ll flail, wildly softening his approach in order to acquire a player with the fifth pick who wouldn’t have otherwise gone until the ninth pick, but the simplest implication of his trade discussion delusion is that if the Bulls do finally make a trade, it’s unlikelier than most to be a bad one at face value.
The bigger issue with future draft capital is that the Bulls should not include it at all. That’s the real cause for pessimism regarding this cycle of rumors and speculation. This isn’t universal, but a lot of hypothetical Bulls trades in the blogosphere involve the Bulls including a future draft pick. There are protections involved, but even with protections, that’s future value being traded. The Bulls need to maximize future value. At a point this far from contention, it doesn’t really matter what shape that future value takes. It can be young talent. It can be future draft picks. But if the Bulls are trading future and current draft capital for better current draft capital, that is not a rebuilding move. That is a win–now move. That is the Bulls identifying a specific player they want and getting that player at the expense of future assets. Zach LaVine and Alex Caruso for every pick the Sixers have for the next two years? That sounds great. The eleventh pick and a future first-rounder for the fifth pick? Not worthwhile. Especially given we have no indication this regime knows what they’re doing when it comes to identifying strong prospects.
*Honestly, I think the number is only one, and more often than not this tendency is also a bad thing.
Real news from the last week:
- Maurice Cheeks is leaving the Bulls organization, moving to join Tom Thibodeau in New York. Cheeks’s departure from his assistant job was framed as a choice by Cheeks to take a smaller role but stay within the organization, so while this isn’t a move with much practical consequence, it’s a little surprising.
When Will the NHL Offseason Start?
Depending on the Game 5 result tomorrow night, we might be into the NHL offseason by the next time we convene. Given the Blackhawks are one of the more prominent teams in trade rumors, they could be early to the stage.
Devin Hester and the New Kickoff Rules
With the Bears reportedly signing DeAndre Carter, presumably eying the increased importance of kick returns…How would Devin Hester have done with the new rules?
The NFL has shared that, thanks to the new rule, it expects more than twice as many kickoffs to be returned as last year. However. Last year, teams were returning hardly one quarter the number of kicks they were returning back in 2006. If the point of this is the quantity of kicks being returned, I’m not sure Hester would have been any different. If the point is that the rules, transferred back two decades by some imaginary time machine, would have always made kick returns more advantageous? Hester presumably would have done a bit more. His punt return touchdown rate was nearly three times his kick return touchdown rate, over his career. The new rules don’t exactly turn kicks into punts, but there are some similarities there in terms of the return man acquiring the ball in space.
