May Observances
It’s been too long since I rapped at ‘ya, and for that I apologize. I wanted to set up an open discussion thread, but to kick things off, let me give a few off-the-cuff observations and thoughts:
I like Lou so far. Quite a bit, actually. He’s espousing plate discipline, he’s trying to play everyone, and he’s been willing to shake things up now and then (perhaps too often, but that’s another issue). What I’m particularly impressed with is that on several occasions, he’s visited the mound directly to talk to his pitcher and pump him up, without sending Rothschild and without intending to lift the pitcher. Sometimes (ok, usually) he’s delivered a tongue-lashing, particularly to Dempster and Cotts, but the talks have generally had the desired effect.
What’s more, Lou isn’t afraid to place blame where it is due. Take, for instance, the game in which Lou complained that he had a reliever (Ohman) throwing “30 to 40 foot curveballs” and that he can see why this team has been losing as long as it has. Would these frank words come from Dusty or any other Cub manager in recent memory?
I also like the fact that he’s growing impatient with the local mediots. Yes, many people want to know what’s happening with Prior and Wood or want to know how much time Pie will get and how he’s going to sort out the OF situation, but the same questions get asked every day—do the reporters really think he’s got something new to say each day? For the most part, it seems that he’s learning the local media and the media is learning him. There will probably be some bristling from both sides, but in the end I think this is a good thing.
Speaking of the OF situation, it seems to me that Lou is doing the best he can, but the problem is largely Jim Hendry’s and has been from the beginning. Personally, I’d love to see Murton play more (he may start these next few games) and I’d love to see the Cubs play a “legit” CF—which doesn’t necessarily mean Pie. In fact, if a gun were placed to my head, I’d like to see Jones play CF for now, with Soriano in LF and Murton in RF. (If Floyd can play RF, I’d throw him in that mix too.) This isn’t something I’d like to see through the end of the season, but it would be nice to see what that might bring over the next week or so, particularly as the Cubs face more LHPs. Nevertheless, while I’d like to see more of Murton, I appreciate Lou’s dilemma and feel that he’s doing his best and not really screwing anyone.
One thing I don’t understand, though, is why DeRosa needs to play in the OF at all. Heck, seeing that I’d favor sending Pie (briefly) back to Iowa, the last think I think we need is yet another OFer in the mix.
For that matter, it’s nice that the IF is starting to sort itself out. I’m not sold over the idea of Theriot playing SS in the long-term, but with the way he’s been hitting (and Izturis hasn’t), as long as Theriot can play a serviceable SS, that’s not a bad thing for now.
As for the pitching staff, things are looking good in the rotation so far. Zambrano had his bad April, but that shouldn’t last too much longer. Hill has been as good as last fall, and both Lilly and Marquis have been better than anticipated. (I wouldn’t expect Hill or Marquis to stay at their levels, but that’s ok). The bullpen can use some reworking, though—it seems that we’re always seeing Ohman and/or Eyre struggle, and why we need 3 LHPs in the pen is still not obvious to me.
Overall, though, I’m happy with the start so far. The team has made some baserunning and other fundamental errors (haven’t they always?), but they are playing good baseball as of late and I’m encouraged.
What do you kids think?
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.
Actually, I can see Don Baylor saying that. Only in his case it would've been done in lieu of talking to the player. That ain't the case with Piniella.
(I wouldn’t expect Hill or Marquis to stay at their levels, but that’s ok).
Between them they have an ERA of 1.90 so far. Yeah, I can live with a combined ERA worse than that from the club's supposed 3 & 4 starters.
No comments on how frustrating it was to see them lose their first six one-run games?
It's a sunny start to the season. The Cubs have a good record and are playing better than their record. The Cards are toast with Carpenter out, and the death of Hancock likely knocking the spirit out of the team (for the time being at least). That'll likely be enough to keep them out of the postseason. Houston lost Pettitte & Clemens. Pittsburgh's still Pittsburgh. I like Cincinnait. Narron's had them playing better than I would've guessed since he showed up, but they're at best a dark horse. Milwaukee's the team to beat & the Cubs are their main competition. The dozen games left where they face off will be pretty damn important ones.
Not to mention their sucktastic offense, which Hancock and Carpenter weren't going to fix anyway. And the fact that they have no prospects worth trading for to plug any significant holes. Rick Ankiel's going to be at least a platoon outfielder in St. Louis by the end of the year, and I say that with all seriousness.
And I really enjoyed seeing the Cards beaten twice in the first month of the season by both of the starting pitchers they let go as free agents (Marquis and Suppan). Well, maybe I'd rather not have seen those Suppan wins, given the Brewers' start...
9th in VORP (6th in NL, behind, NYN, FLO, PHI, MIL, ATL)
8th in SNLVAR (4th in NL, behind MIL, NYN, LAN)
20th in WXRL (11th in NL, ahead of HOU, COL, FLO, PHI, CIN)
3rd in DER (2nd in NL, behind NYN)
So that's pretty good. I think the bullpen's better than that. Lineup and rotation seem about right. Defense is surprising given the personnel shifts -- it could simply be small sample size, or maybe Lou really is a genius.
Beyond the numbers, it's just a more likeable team (winning does that, I know). I'd rather Izturis not be around, Cedeno's continued scufflings are really frustrating, and it'd be nice for Murton to get a sustained shot, but these are relatively minor quibbles after what we've been through. So far, so good.
And the Brewers can't possibly continue playing near-.700 ball, though they're certainly a formidable rival (and look to be for a number of years).
Amazingly, I think Lou might be even more thin-skinned with the media than Dusty was -- which is really saying something. If he's gonna lose it over simple questions like "how much playing time is Pie gonna get?" how's he gonna react to legitimately critical questions? Sure, maybe it's part of his master plan or the Lou magic -- blow up at the simple stuff and they'll know they can get a rise out of you and never bother asking the legitimately critical questions. But right now he looks like a guy the media can poke and get a reaction from anytime they want and that will eventually be a detriment.
I wasn't thrilled about the Ohman situation. I'm glad to see the end of the Dusty excuse-making -- remember when he "defended" ARam taking a popup in the noggin -- but Lou seemed to take that question (and seemingly every question, just like Dusty) as a shot at his decision-making and he tossed the player under the bus to defend himself. Something more like "Obviously Ohman knows he pitched poorly today and he was off his game, but he's pitched well in the past and I continue to have faith in him" would have suited me -- at least as the public stance. If he thinks being blunter with Ohman in private will work, that's fine.
Not to say there aren't positives. Lou is more willing to experiment, he seems to understand that different situations sometimes call for different actions in response, etc. I'm not necessarily thrilled with his penchant for playing everyone -- that was one of Dusty's problems you'll recall -- and his love of Theriot (though if he keeps walking, he might be capable of Pierre type numbers which is better than I ever thought), but I'll wait to see how that plays out. That is, obviously he has to play everyone in the OF and he's had no choice but to screw around with SS until he found something that worked, but I'm thinking we'll see less of the bench going forward.
As to the play of the team -- they have been doing pretty well. Obviously the pitching is heading for some tougher times and there's nothing like a series against the Nationals to get the ol' W-L record (temporarily?) back into good shape. But I think my "concerns" here slightly outweigh my positives. Given how incredibly well some of the pitchers have done -- 3 starters and 5 relievers with ERA+ of 146 or better -- and that Derrek Lee is on pace for about 95 doubles (no really), this team should have been winning like mad. We've given up the 3rd fewest runs in the league and scored the 6th most but due to bad luck, poorly timed bad bullpen performances, and an OF that still has just 6 HR among them, we're at 500.
The point being I don't think we're really the 3rd best on pitching/defense. I don't think we're bad but other than Zambrano and Eyre and the 5th starter spot, seems every other pitcher on this team is gonna do worse going forward. The offensive production will have a different shape by the time the season's over but I'm not sure I expect it to improve substantially. In terms of true talent, this still looks like a low-mid 80s win team to me. Now if we had parlayed this nice run into a record like Milwaukee's, that would bode pretty well for staying in the mix all season ... but unfortunately I think our current record is more reflective of our true talent than our pythag record and I see us sticking around 500 most of the season.
Unless we get to play the Nationals every month. :-) Are the Royals on our inter-league this year?
I'd suggest you take a gander at the NLE. The Mets are first in RA/G and RS/G. And the cemetaries are full of men who underrated Bobby Cox.
Not to mention their sucktastic offense, which Hancock and Carpenter weren't going to fix anyway.
But Marquis certainly would've.
Amazingly, I think Lou might be even more thin-skinned with the media than Dusty was -- which is really saying something. If he's gonna lose it over simple questions like "how much playing time is Pie gonna get?" how's he gonna react to legitimately critical questions? Sure, maybe it's part of his master plan or the Lou magic -- blow up at the simple stuff and they'll know they can get a rise out of you and never bother asking the legitimately critical questions. But right now he looks like a guy the media can poke and get a reaction from anytime they want and that will eventually be a detriment.
But it's a very different kind of thin-skinnedness. Here's a crack I've made before: the 2004 Cubs looked like they wanted to go away and cry somewhere. The Piniella Cubs look like they want to get in a bar fight. One uses thin skin as a reason to collapse, and the other uses it to motivate them to fight more.
Tony LaRussa can be incredibly thin skinned at times. Good example just recently when he shut out a St Louis paper because of something negative they said about the Cubs. But you can make a combative relationship work. It can help establish who is in authority and who isn't. It can help motivate by creating an us-vs.-them atmosphere. Guillen can be really thin skinned too if you think about it. Look at him sounding off on, well, anyone really.
As Dusty was, but at least Lou seems to deal with it directly (by snapping or being blunt) rather than making excuses, using his kid as a shield, or babbling on about how "walks clog the bases" or how dark-skinned folks play better in the sun.
Having said that, it's nice that the team is winning. I agree with Walt that the team's record reflects its quality better than its Pythag. Ain't no way any of Marquis and Lilly and Hill finish the year with ERAs below 3, much less 2.
But a .500 record, all things considered, wouldn't be half bad.
* Dusty would not give Theriot regular time as a SS. We'd still be seeing Izturis and Cedeno may still be on the roster as well.
* It's entirely possible that Theriot wouldn't see as much time at 2B either. Instead, he'd be nailed to the bench, used as a backup IF and 2nd PH (after Ward). IOW, he'd basically be Jose Macias.
* Dusty wouldn't use Marquis as a PH/PR.
* Instead of signing Cliff Floyd, Dusty would have wanted a speedy, non-hitting 5th OF type . . . and installed him as the every day CFer. Because Dusty wouldn't think Murton could play RF, Murton would either be traded or be in Iowa and destined for such a trade.
* Dusty wouldn't use Rocky Cherry and Will Ohman would probably be in Iowa as well.
Not all of these are bad things, but they are definitely different than what Lou has done. I'm sure I could probably come up with a few other differences as well.
It's not as if the Cubs have any obviously superior options at short, so as long as Theriot keeps hitting (and he doesn't need to hit .320 or whatever he's hitting now to be a vast improvement [offensively, at least] on Izturis; .270 would suffice, particularly if he keeps walking), I'm fine with this.
I'm bothered by Piniella's occasional need to add DeRosa to the outfield mix (why make that logjam more complicated than it already is, particularly if it costs Murton playing time to the benefit of an inferior hitter?), but that's my only major complaint.
And as far as I'm concerned, the media stuff's a non-issue.
But Marquis certainly would've.
Heh.
Please. If only we were so lucky as to have Macias nailed to the bench when he was a Cub.
Speaking for myself, I've registered my complaints about those first two things (IOW, while I think Piniella's easily been a net positive, he hasn't been perfect); as to the third, I don't recall anyone blaming Zambrano's poor April in '06 on Baker.
And deJesus Freak pretty much sums up my view of a range of positives/evidence of creativity that Piniella shows, which would have been unthinkable under Baker.
Actually, Zambrano did have trouble get going last year under Baker. His April was terrible. And I do remember one or two "Z's DOOMED!!" posts . . . but only one or two. Most people were willing to see how that one played out, and when he recovered in April the "Good bye Carlos" posts were forgotten.
As for Murton, people nailed Baker for not using the kids when the only alternative was clearly inferior players. There was some grumbling over his problems with Choi, but Karros had a good enough year so that it wasn't too vocal. Baker uninterested in even giving Cedeno a shot if it meant cutting into the playing time of Captain Everything Neifi Perez, even if the team was out of the running as they were in late '05.
Here, Jones and Floyd are both currently outhitting Murton and everyone acknowledges Soriano's got to be in the line up whenever healthy. There's more criticism at Hendry for creating the glut than Piniella. And he's still got Murton in 22 different ballgames, even if half were as a late inning replacement. Looking over this thread, there's some qualms about putting DeRosa in the OF, but that amounts to 37 innings in 29 games.
Well, 10% of the Cubs' innings have been pitched by guys with ERA+s in the 30s. Those two, Eyre and Wade Miller, have given up 1/4 of the Cubs' total runs allowed. So even though only a few Cubs players have been bad, those guys have been REALLY bad. Miller's crappiness should be replaced by Angel Guzmzan's below averageness. And if he doesn't improve, I doubt the Cubs will put up with Eyre's crappiness much longer. Combined with an improvement from Zambrano and the pitching should be above average overall. Even though the individual performances are different than I might have expected, the offense overall has been about what I thought it would be. I think the Cubs should find their level somewhere between their .620 Pythag. % and their .517 overall W%.
Well jeez, I never noticed that there's a whole 'nother division over there. Must be my Midwest bias. The NL East is a tougher division top to bottom than the NL Central which will put the Mets or Braves at a disadvantage for the WC. Being the best team in the NL should hurt the Mets odds at the Wild Card. And while the Braves obviously have a significant chance at winning the WC with that stellar offense, they have needed Tim Hudson to pitch out of his mind just to put up a team ERA+ of 95 so far.
Honestly, there are a ton of teams who could be the Wild Card: the Cubs, Giants, Dodgers, Brewers, Mets, Braves, Phillies, Padres, Diamondbacks, Reds, Brewers and maybe the Marlins, Astros and Cardinals. Most of those teams probably have at least a 5% chance of the WC. To be the favorite for the Wild Card, you need to be a very good team that's competing with another, better team. To me, the favorites are he Cubs and the Braves. And while I'm sure I'll be killed and buried in a cemetary for contemplating it, I think the Cubs are better than the Braves. Still, it's important to remember that when talking about such a wide open WC chase, unless the Cubs were head and shoulders above everyone else, being the favorite only means that they'd have a 15-20% chance instead of a 5-10% chance. Whether the Cubs are the favorite or not over Atlanta, it's only a matter of a few percentage points, either way.
And here I thought Hendry was the GM.
Well, 10% of the Cubs' innings have been pitched by guys with ERA+s in the 30s.
And over 40 percent of the Cubs' innings have been pitched by guys with ERA+ of 195 or better. That's gonna last about as long as an ice cold frosty malt on a hot summer day.
Sure, but if you didn't think Dusty had any role in getting guys like Goodwin, Macias, Neifi, Martinez, etc. -- or for getting rid of guys like Bellhorn, Choi, Dubois, etc. -- then you're just nuts.
We had four long years of Dusty to allow the fact that he sucked to sink in. I know that I felt he was a poor tactical manager early on, and that he had obsessions with terrible players like Lenny Harris that bordered on lunacy, but I didn't realize he was a full blown retard until he allowed his team to bat out of order against the Pirates in 2004. That was nearly 180 games into his tenure.
Lou so far hasn't done anything remotely that stupid yet, thank God.
I'm not sure folks realize how incredibly some of the Cubs have been pitching:
Dempster 195 (and by far career best walk-rate so far)
Wuertz 224
Howry 150 (there's a good chance he'll keep that up ... consistent with his last few years)
Cotts infinity as of yesterday
Guzman 188
Hill 238
Marquis 197
Lilly 146
even Ohman's got his numbers back to tolerable.
The bullpen really has been off the charts -- and sometimes those things do hold up for an entire season.
Don't get me wrong, I think it will be a good staff going forward. Zambrano will, god willing, return to form. I think Hill and Lilly are both quite capable of 120ish ERA+'s (also capable of worse). Marquis being durable and league average-ish is possible. But the team ERA+ right now is 117 ... and I was expecting to say it had been a really long time since they'd done that, but turns out it was 118 in 2004. :-) But before that you have to go back to 1972!
Anyway, it remains that, with some breaks, this team could put up a pretty good record and make the playoffs. And of course following 3 of their last 4 sub-70 win seasons, they added 21 or more wins so they're a virtual lock 87+ wins. :-)
I think Piniella might be a little thin-skinned, but he handles it better than Dusty did. Dusty's response was to blab on and on, saying stupid things that would make your blood boil. Piniella just clams up when he's annoyed by the media, and I think that's an appropriate response. It also appears that he is tougher on his players when they screw up, and that's a good thing. The team is still performing poorly in terms of fundamentals, but it seems better than it used to, and Rome wasn't built in a day.
I'm not sure folks realize how incredibly some of the Cubs have been pitching
The pitching has been amazing. I've been meaning to do an entry on this. Jason Marquis with 5/6 quality starts and a 196 ERA+ -- wow. I wondered if he would put up 5 QS all year. Now, looking at his peripherals, clearly he hasn't been that good, with the exception of only giving up 2 HR in nearly 40 IP, a trend I expect to end with the weather having warmed up.
But if anything approaching this combination of good pitching and decent hitting is maintained all year, the Cubs should be pretty good.
35 days and counting
What's with this 'Play Murton' sentiment. The Cubs' primary goal is to win games. Murton is not an appreciably better hitter that Floyd or Jones, so Piniella is doing the smart thing and platooning them. It just so happens that the Cubs have faced very few LHS so far...
There's something really perverse about pointing at the great performance of the pitchers up to this point as a reason why the Cubs will do poorly. Sure, many of the Cubs' pitchers will regress, but how much is overstated by the diminishing returns on ERA+. It's not as if every pitcher would have to be below average to hit their projections. If Hill, Lilly, Zambrano and Marquis all throw about 160 more IP each with respective ERA+s of 111, 119, 155 and 89, the Cubs will be fine.
1 new thread in the last 53 days.
I'll work on it.
Just Left Chicago? Did you move elsewhere or are you on vacation?
Well, to be clear it wasn't really about who did/didn't have the keys, it was about trying to get this thing off the ground, and clearly, that didn't happen. None of us expected to be able to maintain this thing on our own, so we thought more access would work. Maybe we weren't wrong about that, but simply need to expand the circle more. Any useful suggestions would be appreciated.
Speaking personally, I just haven't had much to say that would take more than a few sentences. Actually, now that I think about it, I just came up with an idea. Maybe you'll see it soon.
I dunno, rather than ambitious stuff (deJesus' wayback machine stuff) maybe simpler features. A fun thread about guessing what date Piniella will get ejected. When he'll blow a gasket in a press conference. Whose bad performance will set him off.
Just a general kvetch thread. What's wrong with the team, can it be fixed, is it just luck or something deeper at stake.
Mundane news items that aren't quiet big enough for primer newstand. Maybe a thread on the beat reporters pro/con, good/bad/indifferent.
More basic historical features (skim b-ref or retrosheet and find 1-2 things that happened this date on Cubs history and make an item on that. Nothing heroic, just a few sentences, to maybe spark reminisces. Also, just keep a note on famous events that we'll have anniversaries of later this year. Keep especially close item on any anniversaries than happened 5/10/15/20/.. .45/50/55 . 100 years ago. That makes it sound harder than it needs to be. I mean just scan b-ref's franchise index page for the Cubs, see if there's any memorable players/seasons we're on the 5-year marker of, and file away a note for future news about it. Then when the anniversary comes up, spend 5-10 minutes mentioning it. This is the 100th anniversary of the 1st Flag that's flown forever (what year was the Tinker-Evers-Chance poem written anyway? 1907 or some other time)? 95 years since Zimmerman's near triple crown. 90 year marker of the double no hitter. 80 years since Charlie Root's best season. 75 years since the '32 pennant winning squad & the called shot. 70 since the Giants' furious September drive overcame the Cubs. 50 since the Drott/Drabowsky phenoms flamed out. 45 years since the worst team in club history & Banks's move to first. 40 years since the Durocher Cubs broke through & Jenkins first won 20. Late July marks the 35 anniversary of Durocher's firing. There's a thread that can be had on the best/worst Cubs managers base on that. Was Pappas's no-hitter that year, too? It was Reuschel's first year in the rotation. 30 year anniversary of the Little Blue Machine - not the most famous swoon, but the biggest collapse. 25 years since Sandberg's first season with the club. (Man that sentence makes me feel old)> July marks 25 years since Lee SMith became closer. 20 since Dawsons' MVP season. Also 20 since Maddux's first season. Also 20 years ago: the Eric Show game. July 4/5 marks the fifth year anniversary of the firing of Don Baylor.
Obviously, I'm biased towards the historical stuff. It might not be as popular with others.
Fun fact: last week was the 5 year anniversary of Mark Prior's MLB debut.
Items on how ex-Cubs are doing on other teams.
A new prediction thread - now that we've seen them "play" for 40+ games, what do you predict their W/L record will be. Maybe even give a fun potential gift (winner gets a night of free drinks the next night at whatever watering hole youz meet at in Chicago. Or have someone with a big batch of tickets offer to donate 1 game's tickets for the contest).
Anyone follow the minor league squads at all? Just a basic little update or two on that stuff.
My main suggestion is, avoid any large-scale projects. I know Anthony Giacalone stopped working on Centrist because every post of his took an hour to do, and would get 6 responses, and he got sick of it. And he couldn't get himself to write something smaller. My hunch is this blog is deader than doornails because people's ambitions for what they want to do is often a little too daunting for themselves. Well, scale it back some
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main