Chicago Cubs: Starting rotation is primed for a strong year

As the Chicago Cubs’ Joe Maddon figured out his rotation, it was out of respect and situation. While Jon Lester got the nod Opening Day, two other starters garnered starts last season on day one.

We’ve discussed the starting rotation a few times. Myself, I saw the Chicago Cubs giving the honor to Jon Lester. For my co-expert Jacob Misener, he saw it as Kyle Hendricks spot. In all honesty, neither of us could have been wrong. And Hendricks is one of just two pitchers in the rotation who haven’t started an Opening Day game. But his time will come, there’s no doubt about that.

More from Cubbies Crib

• Cubs: P.J. Higgins deserves to be in the lineup on a daily basis
• Cubs might start to limit Justin Steele’s workload soon
• Cubs: Adrian Sampson is forcing his way into the conversation
• Projecting the Chicago Cubs bullpen to open the 2023 season
• Cubs fans are beginning to see the light at the end of the tunnel

Last year, Yu Darvish was the Opening Day starter for the Texas Rangers. Jose Quintana did the same for the Chicago White Sox. Only Hendricks and Tyler Chatwood have yet to open a season for their teams.

Hendricks might get his chance sooner than later. And Chatwood may be a No. 5 starter, but that’s only regarding where he starts, not the stuff that he brings.

So let’s take a look at the rotation from back to front, and look at why these guys were slotted in as they were. Based on potential alone, this staff has the chance to be truly special this season.

No. 5 starter – Tyler Chatwood

The former Colorado Rockies pitcher has been described as “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” by our own Logan Whaley. That is dead on as Chatwood was a much different pitcher at Coors than he was anywhere else. Away from home, Chatwood posted a 5-7 record–not all that promising. But a 3.49 ERA with a 1.228 WHIP showed that when taken out of the rare air of the Rockies, Chatwood could pitch.

At Coors, let’s be honest here. He was rocked. He allowed a .302 average with a BAbip of .355. His SO/9 was better than it was on the road, but that didn’t seem to help him any. He also gave up 10 home runs (same as on the road) and three fewer walks. It shows how unforgiving Coors Field can be to a pitcher.

With an exceptional spin rate on his curveball, Chatwood could be the wave of the new pitchers in baseball. As hitters have become accustomed to the heat, he’s a different breed. And with the additions the Cubs made to the bullpen, it might be six strong innings for him and get him out of there. There’s no shame in that game, especially when the Cubs are winning games.

No. 4 starter – Jose Quintana

When the Cubs acquired Jose Quintana from the Chicago White Sox, it, by all means, cost them a pretty penny. Two top prospects in Dylan Cease and Eloy Jimenez went to the White Sox, and everyone lost their minds. How could Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer trade Jimenez and Cease?? According to Cubs’ fans, it was a move the team would regret. Except it wasn’t because that’s not how Epstein and Hoyer look at it.

The Cubs still have a logjam of outfielders, and now the rotation is set for the next few years. Cease and Jimenez may turn out to be good ballplayers, but Quintana isn’t too bad himself. Quintana finished the season at 11-11 with a 4.15 ERA. But that didn’t tell the tale of what he did with the Cubs. He went 7-4 with the Cubs with a 3.74 ERA and had a few bad starts against Arizona and Philadelphia that inflated those numbers.

Quintana did, however, strike out 207 batters in just 188 2/2 innings. Signed through 2020, he may end up being a steal for the Cubs at just over $10 million for the final two years of his deal. The trade last season sparked the Cubs and led them to a division title. There’s no question that Quintana was a big piece of that, and will be for the next three years.

No. 3 starter – Yu Darvish

There was some doubt that the Cubs would get Yu Darvish. The offseason took them from Alex Cobb to Darvish, to Jake Arrieta and back. But in the end, the Cubs stuck with him and signed him to a better deal than initially thought. Yes, $25 million this year isn’t cheap, but the Cubs saw past his World Series struggles. And that may have helped them get Darvish at a “discounted” rate.

When you look at the numbers of all the Cubs starters, it might appear that Darvish was the least deserving of a massive contract. But his 10-12 record (wins don’t matter as they used to) and his 3.86 ERA look pedestrian, at best. But if you ask Willson Contreras, standing in against Darvish isn’t easy. His slider is moving, and if he can put that pitch where he wants it? He could be lights out.

Darvish would have easily been a No. 1 anywhere else he would have signed. When you look at the Cubs rotation from 2016, they overachieved. All of them, to an extent. But you’ve mostly taken Hendricks and moved him up, and replaced him with Darvish. And I’m not sure we would have said that Hendricks was the No. 3. That season started with John Lackey more than likely to fill that spot. If Darvish fixes his “pitch tipping,” ala Ryan Dempster, the Cubs will be in good shape.

No. 2 starter – Kyle Hendricks

When Kyle Hendricks came over to Chicago, he showed promise. And the more he pitched, the more he was compared to Greg Maddux. Clearly, those are high standards to live up to. But it’s starting to seem more and more likely that Hendricks is on the right path. After winning the ERA title in the National League in 2016 with a 2.13, it looked like Hendricks was ready to breakout. But an injury slowed him down last year, sort of.

Hendricks pitched in just 24 games, allowing a 3.03 ERA in 139 2/3 innings. It’s hard to be as good as he was in 2016, but he wasn’t all that far off. His FIP was 3.88, something that some are taking note of. Will Hendricks begin to trend in the opposite direction of what he has? He has been as consistent as they come, but maybe a break is ahead of him?

Despite what Fangraphs has to say about him, I don’t see Hendricks letting up. The injury took its toll on him, and maybe even after he returned to the rotation. As I was told by one reader, “your body of work speaks for itself.” And until you change it, that is who you are. Well, I’m content with Hendricks body of work. I’ll stick with that until it indeed changes.