Add SportsStats to your home screen

Chicago Cubs

CHC · NL Central · 2026
See the full league board →

Roster construction

Metric Value Lg avg Diff Rank Percentile
Plate appearances given to sub-replacement hitters 217 762 −545 3rd of 30
Share of plate appearances given to sub-replacement hitters 4.2% 15.1% −11.0% 3rd of 30
WAR bled by sub-replacement hitters -0.7 -2.5 +1.8 3rd of 30
Count of sub-replacement hitters 2 5 −3 2nd of 30
Batters faced by sub-replacement pitchers 1794 943 +850 26th of 30
Share of batters faced by sub-replacement pitchers 26.7% 17.9% +8.8% 24th of 30
WAR of the club's best position player 8.2 3.9 +4.3 1st of 30
Combined WAR of the club's three best position players 15.1 9.0 +6.1 1st of 30
Combined WAR of the club's five best position players 20.9 12.7 +8.2 1st of 30
Total position-player WAR 28.6 15.1 +13.5 1st of 30
Total pitching WAR 8.0 11.9 −3.9 24th of 30
Share of position-player WAR from the top three 52.8% 63.0% −10.2% 23rd of 30
Concentration of WAR across the lineup 0.48 0.42 +0.06 4th of 30
Position players with a 2+ WAR season 5 3 +1 1st of 30
Position players with a 4+ WAR season 1 0 — 3rd of 30
Hitters used 19 22 −3 26th of 30
Plate-appearance-weighted batting age 29.5 28.4 +1.1 7th of 30
Plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under 1078 1161 −83 13th of 30
Share of plate appearances given to hitters 25 and under 20.8% 23.1% −2.4% 14th of 30
Plate appearances given to hitters 35 and older 0 316 −316 19th of 30

Staff shape

Metric Value Lg avg Diff Rank Percentile
Pitchers used 38 29 +8 1st of 30
Rotation WAR 9.5 10.4 −0.9 18th of 30
Bullpen WAR 2.8 4.0 −1.2 23rd of 30
Combined WAR of the club's three best starters 6.2 7.4 −1.2 23rd of 30
Share of innings thrown by starters 72.5% 70.9% +1.6% 14th of 30
Quality starts 55 45 +9 5th of 30
Blown saves 24 20 +3 23rd of 30

Results

Metric Value Lg avg Diff Rank Percentile
Run differential 99 0 +99 4th of 30
Run differential per game 0.78 0.00 +0.78 4th of 30
Runs scored per game 5.14 4.48 +0.66 2nd of 30
Runs allowed per game 4.36 4.48 −0.12 13th of 30
Winning percentage .575 .500 +.075 5th of 30
Pythagorean winning percentage .575 .501 +.074 5th of 30
Wins above Pythagorean expectation 0.0 -0.1 +0.1 16th of 30
Winning percentage in one-run games .581 .500 +.081 5th of 30
Winning percentage in games decided by five or more .683 .499 +.184 2nd of 30
Winning percentage in extra innings .625 .512 +.113 6th of 30
Home winning percentage .578 .524 +.054 8th of 30
Road winning percentage .571 .476 +.095 5th of 30
Winning percentage within the division .528 .502 +.026 10th of 30
Longest winning streak 10 6 +3 2nd of 30

Batting

Metric Value Lg avg Diff Rank Percentile
Team Games 128 127 — 2nd of 30
Team Plate Appearances 5041 4816 +224 1st of 30
Team At Bats 4392 4278 +113 2nd of 30
Team Runs 656 570 +85 2nd of 30
Team Hits 1089 1042 +46 6th of 30
Team Doubles 213 197 +15 7th of 30
Team Triples 20 17 +2 7th of 30
Team Home Runs 164 146 +17 7th of 30
Team Runs Batted In 617 545 +71 2nd of 30
Team Stolen Bases 95 86 +8 11th of 30
Team Walks 544 429 +114 1st of 30
Team Strikeouts 1100 1064 +35 24th of 30
Team Walk Rate 10.8% 8.9% +1.9% 1st of 30
Team Strikeout Rate 21.8% 22.1% −0.3% 15th of 30
Team Batting Average .248 .244 +.004 9th of 30
Team On-Base Percentage .337 .318 +.019 1st of 30
Team Slugging Percentage .418 .401 +.017 3rd of 30
Team On-Base Plus Slugging .755 .719 +.036 3rd of 30

Pitching

Metric Value Lg avg Diff Rank Percentile
Team Wins 74 63 +10 4th of 30
Team Losses 54 63 −9 5th of 30
Team Saves 29 33 −4 22nd of 30
Team Games 128 127 — 2nd of 30
Team Games Started 128 127 — 2nd of 30
Team Innings Pitched 1144.2 1129.0 +15.1 2nd of 30
Team Innings per Game 8.9 8.9 — 1st of 30
Team Strikeouts 982 1064 −82 26th of 30
Team Strikeouts per 9 Innings 7.7 8.5 −0.8 26th of 30
Team Walks per 9 Innings 3.0 3.4 −0.4 4th of 30
Team Earned Run Average 4.14 4.17 −0.03 17th of 30

Rank is among the MLB clubs with a value for that metric, best first. Descriptive metrics (roster age, WAR concentration) are ranked but not colored — for them, "high" isn't "good".