Chicago Cubs: Who’s next in line for the closer’s role?

Never would I wish someone to fail. But the same way that the Chicago Cubs’ have a backup plan, we should look at one as well. So who would the next man up be?

With the Chicago Cubs naming Brandon Morrow as their closer, there’s plenty of talk about if that will work. Morrow hasn’t had much experience closing, not since the early years of his career. He’s been mostly a set-up man, and we know how this can go. They can go well, like when Greg Holland took over for Wade Davis. Or like when a very good setup man in LaTroy Hawkins slid into a closer’s role–and failed.

More from Cubbies Crib

• 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
• Justin Steele has evolved into a frontline starter for the Cubs
• The future of first base is murky right now for the Cubs

Why Morrow works

Morrow might be the most likely to succeed for a few reasons. First, the Cubs don’t want to push him too hard. Joe Maddon already dealt with that in Aroldis Chapman (He’s fine, by the way), so he’ll be careful in utilizing Morrow. Very similar to the way they used Davis.

If there’s one place that Morrow stands head and shoulders above the rest, it’s his ability to keep the ball in the park. He allowed ZERO home runs last season. An impressive feat, no matter what role you are in.

When looking at leverage index, we can see when the game is on the line; the outcome will swing, etc. Morrow performed well in high-leverage situations, pitching in 20 games with a SO/W ratio of 5.33. He allowed a .288 batting average, but when you keep the ball in the yard? That stat can become irrelevant. But if Morrow fails, gets hurt or just isn’t working out, who’s next?

Carl Edwards Jr.

Where do I start with Carl Edwards? First, I think he’s a fantastic arm out of the pen. The “string bean slinger” can whip that ball, and has a great curveball to go with that heat. But all the talk of the “closer of the future” needs to pump the brakes. Does he have the stuff? Possibly. But right now, the mentality is missing.

Edwards has been electric in low-leverage situations, with a SO/W ratio of 3.00 and a .241 average.  Things tend to fall in line with those numbers at medium-leverage with a 2.83 SO/W ration and a .160 average. But in those high-leverage situations, the ones that would include closing out a game? Things tend to go horribly wrong for Edwards.

In 45 games of those type, Edwards has struggled mightily. He posted a 1.94 SO/W ratio, and a .356 average allowed–including five home runs. It as if when the game is on the line, Edwards is a deer in headlights. Even the World Series, it wasn’t easy. And Mike Montgomery came in to close the game. Edwards might be the closer of the future, but that time isn’t now.

Justin Wilson

When I say Justin Wilson, what’s the first thing you think of? Terrible trade? That might be true, but it was far from that. Whether it turns out to be successful is yet to be seen, but he’s not a bust. In fact, even with the debacle that he experienced when coming to the Cubs? He might just be the best closer the Cubs have after Morrow.

Wilson saved 13 of 16 opportunities last season. It’s likely how the Cubs saw him being utilized after the trade. But his inability to locate pitches became apparent. Oddly enough, his success against right-handed hitters was better than against lefties. But his SO/W ratio was just 1.53 in low-leverage situations with a .212 average. Bump it up to medium, and it went up to a 2.43 with a .160 average. Still, not too bad.

It’s in high-leverage though, is where you’d be surprised. In 36 games, Wilson allowed a 3.78 SO/W ratio with a .184 average. Just looking at these numbers, you could surmise that when the game is on the line, he dials in. But when you put that together with his struggles last season with the Cubs, he never got that chance. The thought is that if you can’t do it when it doesn’t matter, why should you get the chance when it does? Well, he’s the exception to the rule.

Next: Hendricks keeps impressing everyone

I know many of you won’t want to hear this. Or to believe it, but Wilson would be the “best bet” for the closer role. He’s had two lackluster seasons as a pro, and both could be equated to the number of walks he allowed. I’m sure many of you will come for me on this one. But as the figures show, he’s the right guy for the job.

But in the end, we hope not to have to make a decision like this. Teams don’t often have two closers on staff. And if they do, it’s about luck and not strategy. Closers don’t come cheap, as I point to Greg Holland’s status and what his price tag would be. Fans may want him, but it isn’t fiscally responsible. In the end, it’s nothing more than a fallback plan.