User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.3733 seconds
55 querie(s) executed
You are here > Home > Gonfalon Cubs > Discussion
Gonfalon Cubs
— Cubs Baseball for Thinking Fans
— Cubs Baseball for Thinking Fans
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Lest we forget…
The Cubs have nine games left, with what appears to be a weak schedule ahead of them, one game ahead in the division standings.
On September 24, 2004, the Cubs had nine games left, a mostly weak schedule ahead (two against the Mets, who were terrible, four against the Reds, who were terrible, and three against the NL East leaders, the Braves), and were a game up in the wild card.
We all know what happened in 2004. Actually, I know less about it than you do, because I was in South Africa, with only occasional access to the internet and box scores. The Cubs lost seven of those nine games, and the Astros won seven of their remaining eight...and the rest is history.
Could it happen again? Sure it could. It just might. Heading into that horrible stretch in 2004, the Cubs had just completed a 13-3 run, albeit against a very weak field of competition. The Cubs have been a solid 12-8 so far in September, having righted the ship after a poor August. But we know that this team is capable of playing very badly, having seen many examples of it this season.
That 2004 team was odd. I’ve discussed it before, how that team’s demise felt like divine retribution. This year, of course, doesn’t feel like that. This team has battled its demons, but it doesn’t carry the annoying air that the Baker-led Cubs teams did, the sort of misguided arrogance that precipitates ridicule. I will actually be quite disappointed if this team comes short, because I think for the last three months they’ve been playing as well as they possibly can.
Both the Brewers and Cubs have played well lately, and that’s a very good thing. The winning NL Central won/lost record is not going to be pretty, but with a continued strong stretch run, I will feel like the winner will deserve it, like the 2004 Astros did. What I don’t want to see is for both teams to fall over in a heap ahead of the finish line, only to have the finish line moved forward and the title awarded to the warmest corpse. If that happens...well, the Brewers can have it.
Support BBTF
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2007 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Big difference is that this year the Cubs manager is not an enabler for hypersensitive players. Lou has EXPECTATIONS.
Earlier today someone threw out a number of 10 wins being the difference in having Lou as manager versus Yost. retro thought that was unreasonably high.
Personally, and having sifted through the game log, will state that ten is about right. I won't bore everyone with the methodology as it incorporates more than just in-game tactics. For example, the bullpen meltdown of late July through August can be directly tied to Yost's mismanagement of the staff so I attribute several losses to that element alone. And I was conservative. Honest.
Anyway, ten wins is about right. Lou is worth about ten wins to the Cubs when compared to his counterpart in Milwaukee.
Goodness.
That's outrageously incorrect. The Cardinals squeeked into the playoffs last year and were the beneficiaries of the Jeff Weaver Revival Tour. I'd hardly say they were the warmest corpse. If the Tigers didn't completely forget how to throw the ball around the diamond, they would have at least won a few games and maybe the series. We'll never know since they completely folded defensively, but I wouldn't say that the Cards won because they were the warmest corpse. They won because their pitching produced. Most of that pitching is gone or hurt this year and they're 10 games under .500. Not a suprise.
To avoid the same fatigue issues, the 2007 Cubs should sit their starting catcher more often.
In fairness to me, I said "I'm not *sure* it's that high" (I'm open to persuasion as to whether it's "reasonable"--just seems like a lot. That'll be almost 15 percent of the Central winner's win total.), and acknowledged that Piniella vs. Yost was a significant advantage for the Cubs.
What happened in 2004 WILL NOT happen this year. Because luckily, we do not play a team like the Braves.
The Cubs' playing the Braves had nothing to do with the '04 collapse. That was the last series of the year, and the Cubs were already effectively finished in the WC race. (They *were* mathematically eliminated during that series, but it was the Mets and Reds series that killed their chances. With the Astros' hot streak, they could've swept the Braves and it wouldn't have mattered, as they finished three back [and they won one game in the Braves series].)
That said, I like this team's chances of not tanking, in large part because of Piniella's apparent ability to demand results of his players (unlike Baker) while not destroying their egos (like Baylor did). They could fall apart because they aren't a great team, and such teams are prone to bad stretches. (This team's not nearly as talented as the '04 team that nosedived at the end.) And while the Brewers have played well in September, I don't see them reeling off a megastreak like the Astros did in '04.
This year's Cubs just finished a stretch of 24 games in 23 games. They're not dead yet.
I agree. The last few weeks featured game chatters where we talked about how the Cubs would blow it. We'd start with a look at BPro's Playoff Odds Report, and talk about how this Cubs team was among the 35% that wouldn't make it, then it just seemed to happen as if we were either prophetic or responsible for it.
Piniella has his faults, but I don't see any cases of Winburglary other than the bullpen issues early in the season, and even those aren't that clear.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main