Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Cameron: Next year really might be THE year, Cubs fans

Wait til next year. Forever.

And here’s where Cubs fans should find optimism; by BaseRuns expected record, the Cubs have played like a .500 team this year. Their expected record is actually better than that of the first-place Kansas City Royals, in fact, and is not far off from what the teams contending for the NL wild cards are putting up….

This isn’t a great team, of course, but the only reason the Cubs are in the mix for a top pick again next summer is because they’re 28th in both clutch hitting and clutch pitching this season. They haven’t hit well when it mattered and their pitchers haven’t kept important runs from scoring, so despite average overall performance, they’ve lost eight more games than expected. 

So why is this good news? Because clutch performance has basically no predictive value, and the historical record of teams that dramatically underperformed their BaseRuns expected record in one year shows that these teams often improve dramatically in the next year. Right now, the Cubs are 53 points of winning percentage below expectations…

t might not have shown up in the standings yet, but even without the wave of prospects that are on the way, this team has performed like a roughly average Major League team. Add in some expected production from a few of the young kids and likely a significant free agent addition or two, and the Cubs are going to be everyone’s sleeper pick next year. But it won’t just be prospect hype and a big name addition. This is a decent team that is a lot closer to winning than their current record suggests.

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: August 27, 2014 at 01:33 PM | 58 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: baseruns, clutch, cubs, dave cameron, projection models

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.

   1. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:09 PM (#4780145)
If the Cubs *do* win the World Series in the next few years, is Theo Epstein a Hall of Famer?
   2. The District Attorney Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:23 PM (#4780159)
If the Cubs *do* win the World Series in the next few years, is Theo Epstein a Hall of Famer?
Yeah, probably.

Is "BaseRuns" David Smyth's BaseRuns?
   3. ursus arctos Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:28 PM (#4780166)
There's no question in my mind that Epstein would be elected if he pulls it off.

At the same time, I can't help but think that the Cameron Seal of Approval makes it somehow less likely that that will actually happen.
   4. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:36 PM (#4780173)
Oh no...now I feel a little bad for Cubs fans.
   5. SteveM. Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:38 PM (#4780176)
I thinks its far more likely they can contend in two years. I am excited about all the kids but Bryant being called up, but it will take awhile for them to turn into above-average MLB players.
   6. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:46 PM (#4780181)
Baez stat line is a wonder to behold: 90 PA, 40 K, 7 HR, 4 BB. Over a 650 PA season, that would look like 288 K, 50 HR, 29 BB.
   7. jingoist Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:46 PM (#4780183)
Their pitching sure neutralized the red-hot Orioles bats last weekend, so much so that the Cubs looked like the team 20 games over .500 and not the O's.
   8. Yoenis Cespedes, Baseball Savant Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:47 PM (#4780186)
Cameron does not make show how much the similar teams' actual records in the year they improve end up over or underperforming their expected BaseRuns record. He mentions it in passing, but it could just be underperformance the year before to overperformance the next year.
   9. Astroenteritis Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:51 PM (#4780189)
I think the Cubs are going to improve dramatically over the next three years. They really do have some serious talent in the pipeline. C'mon Cub fans, be optimistic!

Of course, at the end of 2008 I thought the Cubs would dominate the NL Central for the foreseeable future.
   10. Moses Taylor World Re-Tour 2.0: Warszawa Posted: August 27, 2014 at 03:53 PM (#4780194)
I thinks its far more likely they can contend in two years.

It depends on what contend means. I don't think it would take a ton breaking the Cubs' way for them to hover around .500 next year and be within shouting distance of the second WC. The Cubs might come close to playing .500 the rest of this season the way things are going now.
   11. madvillain Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:00 PM (#4780198)
Baez stat line is a wonder to behold: 90 PA, 40 K, 7 HR, 4 BB. Over a 650 PA season, that would look like 288 K, 50 HR, 29 BB


I saw his wRC+ was like 94. I dunno if he can sustain any sort of production given his k/bb ratio. Eventually the word is going to get out to not throw him any strikes. It's what Jose Abreu had to adjust too and he turned from a 240/280/550 type into a 305/370/580 type almost overnight seemingly. Obviously Abreu is one of the top 10 most talented hitters on the planet but I like Baez and I think he can make a similiar adjustment. He'll have to in order to have a career.
   12. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:03 PM (#4780202)
Moses, they've been playing .500 ball since the middle of May. It wouldn't take much for them to do it through next year.
   13. tshipman Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:06 PM (#4780208)
If the Cubs *do* win the World Series in the next few years, is Theo Epstein a Hall of Famer?


Yes, 100%.

If Epstein is the GM of the Red Sox and Cubs when they break the streak? Easy narrative.

Plus, he's likely to have a 30 year plus career. Anyone who has that long of a career in baseball gets in.
   14. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:15 PM (#4780216)
Eventually the word is going to get out to not throw him any strikes.
I don't think that's going to be the problem. Baez actually takes a good number of pitches. The early problem seems to be pitch recognition which is no surprise for a 21yo rookie. If they start staying away from him, I think he will be able to make that Abreu adjustment, just probably not as fast because he's 6 years younger.
   15. madvillain Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:20 PM (#4780223)
The early problem seems to be pitch recognition which is no surprise for a 21yo rookie. If they start staying away from him, I think he will be able to make that Abreu adjustment, just probably not as fast because he's 6 years younger.


Hope so. I like the kid his interviews are good (for an athlete he's pretty self aware and well spoken) and I like PR (spent a good amount of time there) and I want to see PR baseball back producing great players on the regular. When I was there every kid had a basketball in his hands not baseball.
   16. Karl from NY Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:23 PM (#4780224)
There's no question in my mind that Epstein would be elected if he pulls it off.

Elected by whom? The Veterans Committee elects off-field personnel. That panel of greybeards wouldn't have much interest in a spreadsheet toting pretty boy. Epstein has a long line of other career executives like Cashman and Schuerholz to wait behind.
   17. Esoteric Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:26 PM (#4780227)
Elected by whom? The Veterans Committee elects off-field personnel. That panel of greybeards wouldn't have much interest in a spreadsheet toting pretty boy. Epstein has a long line of other career executives like Cashman and Schuerholz to wait behind.
This ignores the narrative. The voters? They won't.
   18. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:27 PM (#4780228)
Kiss. Of. Death.
   19. Walks Clog Up the Bases Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:33 PM (#4780232)
Of course, at the end of 2008 I thought the Cubs would dominate the NL Central for the foreseeable future.


I dunno. Maybe old posts by me contradict how I feel now, but that team sure felt like a one-and-done squad in retrospect. The pitching looked like it was going to be good, and unless I'm mistaken, it actually was up until 2012ish. Zambrano was already in decline, Dempster grinded out a few more good years, Ted Lily was an asset, and Rich Harden was made of glass. In the pen, it looked good, but Samardzija kind of sucked in relief after 2008 and Marmol, well, I'd rather not think too much about it.

The real problem was the offense. No SUPERSTARS, but just about everyone in the lineup was a contributor and had very good or great seasons in 2008. When the only change Hendry made to the lineup in the off-season was traded DeRosa for AARON GOD DAMN MILES, I had a bad feeling about 2009 and beyond. Soriano was wretched in 2009, Lee was in decline, Ramirez was still good by looked COOKED to start the season every year, Fukudome was useless after April, Theriot was awful and really good at nothing, etc.

I'm a Cubs fan, so I can't get too optimistic, but I'm definitely more excited going into 2015 than I was going into 2009.
   20. CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:34 PM (#4780233)
Sigh.

I fully expect the Cubs to have the sixth-best record in the Major Leagues next year.
   21. villageidiom Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:38 PM (#4780236)
Elected by whom? The Veterans Committee elects off-field personnel. That panel of greybeards wouldn't have much interest in a spreadsheet toting pretty boy. Epstein has a long line of other career executives like Cashman and Schuerholz to wait behind.

By the time we would get to the point of him being considered for election, everyone posting in this thread will be a greybeard.
   22. AROM Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:40 PM (#4780237)
Baez stat line is a wonder to behold: 90 PA, 40 K, 7 HR, 4 BB. Over a 650 PA season, that would look like 288 K, 50 HR, 29 BB.


In my sim league, many years ago we created a replacement player* who gave you the extremes of homeruns and strikeouts, named Koko the whiffing ape. Looking up Koko's stats, he was a bit more extreme, but not by much. Per 650 PA, 57 HR, 356 K, 4 BB. Koko was a shortstop, but not a good defensive one.

*When you had injuries, or players were just playing bad enough you wanted to replace them, you were allowed to create any new player you wanted as long as the sum of his abilities was bad enough that nobody else wanted him.
   23. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:46 PM (#4780244)
Koko the whiffing ape

Good name, but he preferred to be called "T-Bone".
   24. Cargo Cultist Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:47 PM (#4780245)
It's the Cubs. They will find a way to lose.
   25. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:48 PM (#4780246)
By the time we would get to the point of him being considered for election, everyone posting in this thread will be a greybeard.


Some of us plan on dying of heart attacks in our forties, thank you very much.
   26. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:56 PM (#4780255)
I remember when Sheehan kept picking Milwaukee based on such things not accepting that players advance at different paces. He got all annoyed and then gave up on Milwaukee

Cubs have a lot of positives. They have a great chance

One thing that surprises me is folks thinking Baez making big inroads on M's quickly

All the research shows that is rare. More likely he ends up as mark reynolds or worst case the strikeouts drive him out of the league


Wish him well. He's fun to watch
   27. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: August 27, 2014 at 04:57 PM (#4780256)
k's. Not M's
   28. Chris Fluit Posted: August 27, 2014 at 05:12 PM (#4780273)
Their pitching sure neutralized the red-hot Orioles bats last weekend, so much so that the Cubs looked like the team 20 games over .500 and not the O's.


Yeah, that was ugly- especially considering that the Cubs had two ex-Orioles pitching for them.

   29. Astroenteritis Posted: August 27, 2014 at 05:15 PM (#4780275)
but that team sure felt like a one-and-done squad in retrospect.


In hindsight it does seem more that way, but I just thought the Cubs were going embark on a period of using their big market financial might to stay at the top for a time.
Of course, I see the Cubs franchise as a sleeping giant; maybe Theo is going set the alarm clock.
   30. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: August 27, 2014 at 05:19 PM (#4780278)
Will Chicago rise to the #6 franchise by next year?
   31. Spahn Insane Posted: August 27, 2014 at 06:01 PM (#4780308)
Kiss. Of. Death.

Heh--I thought the same thing, but then again, nobody expects the Cubs to win next year anyway.
   32. Spahn Insane Posted: August 27, 2014 at 06:02 PM (#4780309)
Sigh. I fully expect the Cubs to have the sixth-best record in the Major Leagues next year.

Well, teams have won the World Series with far worse.
   33. Spahn Insane Posted: August 27, 2014 at 06:04 PM (#4780311)
Yeah, that was ugly- especially considering that the Cubs had two ex-Orioles pitching for them.

Three. Don't forget Strop! (I know, you meant starters. Still. Strop's been really good.)
   34. Curse of the Andino Posted: August 27, 2014 at 06:22 PM (#4780324)
Yeah, that was ugly- especially considering that the Cubs had two ex-Orioles pitching for them.


Arrieta has that Jamie Moyer vibe, where he's gonna be a thorn in Baltimore's side for giving up on him for years to come. Wada ya gonna do about Wada, though? We paid him $8 mil., he never pitched for us. U mad, bro?

/I actually was talking to a neighbor, she's a relocated extremely casual Cubs fan, about how I thought Chicago had turned the corner. Apparently, she'd heard that line once or twice before in her 60+ years on this earth.
   35. zonk Posted: August 27, 2014 at 07:06 PM (#4780347)
Baez seems at least a tad unusual for your standard high K batter, though...

For one thing, he's not really a hacker. He will sometimes 'work' a count - but he's also not afraid to swing early and swing at a pitcher's pitch. He also doesn't have that standard high K weakness - it's not like he hopelessly flails away at breaking stuff off the plate or chases anything high, etc.

Finally, the other thing I think he has going for him is that his swing is most definitely NOT a long one.... It's not like he's guessing or waiting for a mistake to unleash a long, loping - but powerful - swing at. His swing is all controlled violence.

Of course, he still does strike out at a very high rate... I'm just saying he doesn't really strikeout like a prototypical high K guy. He's already quite adept at going the other way. He'll stay with a good breaking pitch.
   36. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 27, 2014 at 07:11 PM (#4780351)
Heh--I thought the same thing, but then again, nobody expects the Cubs to win next year anyway.

Yeah, but now I expect 3 top players to be maimed in a water cooler explosion, and Wrigley field to be condemned.
   37. DKDC Posted: August 27, 2014 at 07:13 PM (#4780356)
Their pitching sure neutralized the red-hot Orioles bats last weekend, so much so that the Cubs looked like the team 20 games over .500 and not the O's.


Or the Cubs are an average team and the Os are a crappy team that has been lucky for three years, or whatever Cameron's nuanced position is.
   38. The District Attorney Posted: August 27, 2014 at 07:37 PM (#4780371)
If Soler keeps up this pace, definitely!
   39. Spahn Insane Posted: August 27, 2014 at 09:04 PM (#4780437)
Zonk in 35: yeah, that's a good assessment of Baez and his swing. He's really not quite like anybody I've seen before.
   40. McCoy Posted: August 27, 2014 at 09:08 PM (#4780443)
Why would anyone call 2008 one and done? That was the second year in a row year went to the playoffs!
   41. Spahn Insane Posted: August 27, 2014 at 09:50 PM (#4780486)
Yeah, but the 2008 team was a lot better than the 2007 team, yet it was built on a lot of career years from oldish players. I don't think it was that big a shock when they declined pretty quickly afterwards.
   42. McCoy Posted: August 27, 2014 at 10:15 PM (#4780506)
It was at the time. They were a mature team but they weren't over the hill. They certainly didn't look like a last gasp team. Aramis is still playing nowadays and still playing well. Geo Soto's first full season. Fontenot and Theriot looked like they were going to be perfectly cromulent and cheap middle infielders for awhile. Derrek Lee had an off year but his defense was still good and he had a great year in 2009. Soriano was serviceable and that was about all you can say good about him. Then of course you had the pitching staff. Nobody was over the hill, some were in their prime, and some were youngsters. The pitching staff stayed great in 2009 while the hitters did not. Ramirez was hurt, Soriano was hurt, Soto was hurt, Bradley was a bust, and Theriot & Fontenot turned out to be guys that walk the razor's edge.

If there was kinder gods in this world the Cubs probably win a handful more games and take a couple more from the Cards and get into the playoffs for a third time. After that? Well, who knows. At the time of the Soriano signing I had said that the teams was built to win now and that as Cub fans are only hope was that the Cubs would do something in the beginning of Soriano's contract because at the end he was going to be an albatross around their neck. By 2009 it was clear that Hendry had hit his payroll limit and no matter how good the core is the Cubs were going to go downhill since the farm wasn't producing anyone and the Cubs didn't have the capability to add anyone besides from their farm system.
   43. Spahn Insane Posted: August 27, 2014 at 10:47 PM (#4780540)
I don't really disagree with any of that.
   44. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: August 28, 2014 at 01:52 AM (#4780630)
as my mom pointed out, Soler has a stance just like derrick lee.
   45. McCoy Posted: August 28, 2014 at 09:41 AM (#4780689)
The insane thing about the Cubs is that they had the parts in house to be just one game back for the second wild card spot this year. Sure they probably wouldn't have been but I think we can all agree that they had the parts and resources to be at least a couple of games above .500 at this point in time.
   46. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: August 28, 2014 at 11:24 AM (#4780794)
I am not sure what you mean by "parts in house"? Do you mean if they hadn't traded Hammel and Samardzija? Then I don't agree. They were terrible before that trade. If you mean they had the money to buy a few more players to get them to .500, then sure, but the whole point is that .500 and marginally contending from year-to-year is not going to be the goal anymore.
   47. Spahn Insane Posted: August 28, 2014 at 11:40 AM (#4780807)
I am not sure what you mean by "parts in house"? Do you mean if they hadn't traded Hammel and Samardzija? Then I don't agree. They were terrible before that trade.

And Hendricks/Wada have outpitched Samardzija/Hammel since the trade anyway. I'm not sure that's what McCoy was talking about, though.
   48. McCoy Posted: August 28, 2014 at 12:19 PM (#4780843)
The Cubs have played .500 ball now for three months and they have added nobody from outside their own system. They went into the season with known issues on their major league roster and had no intention of filling those holes and trying to compete this year. When it was obvious that the holes were going to be in fact holes and other players turned into holes the Cubs made no real moves to try to fix those issues. It was very obvious that the Cubs had no intention of competing this year but as it turns out they probably could have if they had a different mindset. Hendricks didn't need to be down for as long as he has been down. It is obvious that Bryant should be up and that he should have been up awhile back. Wada could have come up earlier as well.

Take away the collapse right after the big trade and add a few more wins at the start of the season and they are above .500 and competing for a wild card spot.
   49. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: August 28, 2014 at 12:31 PM (#4780860)
They went into the season with known issues on their major league roster and had no intention of filling those holes and trying to compete this year.


We had this argument before. What holes did they have and how do propose they should have filled them in a way that doesn't block the very prospects who are up now or will be soon? Specifically, how would you have filled those holes in such a way as to not block the prospects AND made a difference of 10 or so wins? I know you said before that hendricks should have been up earlier, and that you have said so in the past. I'll give you that, but who does he replace? You say bring Wada up earlier. Who does he replace absent the Smar.../Hammell trade? And don't say Jackson, because no team cuts an $11 million player 1 year into a 4 year deal.
   50. McCoy Posted: August 28, 2014 at 12:48 PM (#4780872)
Does the whole "parts in house" thing confuse you?

   51. Starlin of the Slipstream (TRHN) Posted: August 28, 2014 at 12:55 PM (#4780880)
I think it's reasonable to think that if the Cubs could have optimized their talent on hand at the beginning of the season, they would be .500ish. Wada, Hendricks, Baez, Alcantara and Soler wouldn'tve needed to be all that great to be upgrades over Olt, Lake, Schierholz, Jackson and Veras.

Still, it's not really possible to optimize your roster that way. Just about every team is giving up a couple of WAR with their crummy players. And you don't know right away who would be useful coming into the season (let alone whether that usefulness projects out). It'd be like saying, if the Phillies would have only cut bait on Galvis, Brown and Howard (for Ruf, Sizemore and Blanco and Nieves?!? Man they suck..), they'd be .500 right about now.

In the Cubs case, as #49 notes, Jackson was (is?) gonna get starts. Veras and Nate were both supposed to be good players and possible trade bait, so limiting their damage wouldn't have been possible. Giving a ton of ABs to Lake and Olt and having that result in 2.5 wins against replacement being flushed away was not all that surprising. But the Cubs had to see what they had, since both seem to have some talent.

Just for fun, bbrefWAR/162 or 34 starts for recent Cubs standouts: Alcantara 4.5; Baez 1.5; Hendricks: 9.3; Wada 6.8; Arrieta: 7.3; Soler 16.2.
   52. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: August 28, 2014 at 12:59 PM (#4780885)
Does the whole "parts in house" thing confuse you?


It does if you are suggesting they should have started the year with a bunch of guys who had never played above AA (or in the case of Soler, not even that high.)

Hendricks and Wada should have been up earlier. Fine, assuming you don't trade BPJ and Hammell (and you've said they shouldn't have), where do they get their innings?
   53. Brian C Posted: August 28, 2014 at 01:25 PM (#4780898)
It's not at all clear that Hendricks and Wada should have been up earlier because it's not clear to me that they're all that great. Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed watching them and they've done well, but between them now they've put up 96 major league innings. It's an open question still as to whether Hendricks in particular has big-league stuff.

I'm just saying, it's a bit of a stretch to anoint them missing pieces of the playoff push that could have been. Maybe they'll continue to be successful as they get around the league more than once but it's not obvious that it'll happen that way.
   54. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: August 28, 2014 at 01:38 PM (#4780901)
I'm just saying, it's a bit of a stretch to anoint them missing pieces of the playoff push that could have been. Maybe they'll continue to be successful as they get around the league more than once but it's not obvious that it'll happen that way.


And again, barring the trade, who do they replace? Alright, so Jackson is now on the DL for chronic suckiness. It's unreasonable to have expected them to have done so much earlier than they have. the man still has 2 years and $11 mil to go. I'm all for cutting him now, but it's not my money. I'm not sure I would have at the start of the season, and I know no GM would have. So, if they would have planned to bring Hendricks onboard at the start of the season, or soon after, then they don't sign Hammel. Not sure what, if anything, that gains you. OK, Wood has been pretty lousy this year. But he was their best pitcher last year, and under team control until 2017. No way he gets cut for an unproven rookie.
   55. McCoy Posted: August 28, 2014 at 02:00 PM (#4780922)
There is absolutely no reason to give Edwin starts. They should never have signed him to begin with but obviously by the time the 2014 season rolled around the barn had left the planet, nevermind about the horse. So you've got a guy who is making you quote Arrested Development and I can see and understand giving him a dead cat bounce of a try. But Edwin was pretty horrible right out of the gate as well. So you definitely don't give the guy 26 starts if your intentions are to compete. Travis Wood started the season okay and then just fell apart at the end of April. His ERA improved in June but he is still letting hitter knock him around. His last 15 starts he has had this slash line: .277/.356/.417. Again, if you're trying to compete you make the hard decisions. Lou made these kind of decisions all the time and it led to two playoff berths. Lou pulled Kendall and put in the untested rookie Soto even though going by the numbers it looked like Kendall was doing okay. You don't have to cut Travis but you certainly don't have to hand him 27 starts and counting.

As for positional hitters the Cubs either knew or should have known that the outfield was going to be a mess and that the infield was going to be questionable. For all this talk of Nate being good last year he had a .301 OBP and he couldn't hit lefties. Anyone expecting him to be a good regular starter this year was seriously fooling themselves.

It should be obvious to all that the Cubs punted this season and had no intention of competing. My point wasn't that this would be a 100 win team if only they had tried. Only that it has now become obvious that the Cubs had the talent and resouces on hand to potentially contend this year. They chose not to even try.
   56. Brian C Posted: August 28, 2014 at 02:09 PM (#4780932)
Only that it has now become obvious that the Cubs had the talent and resouces on hand to potentially contend this year.

Again, this is not "obvious", at least without putting a lot of weight on the word "potentially". I guess that "potentially" all the moves that they might have made "in house" would have gained them 10 more wins and put them in the thick of the race. But it's just as likely that they'd have been just as badly off (or worse).

You're quite a piece of work - it wasn't that long ago that you were talking about how hopeless 2015 was for the Cubs. Now you're castigating them for not realizing that 2014 was within reach. Whatever.
   57. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: August 28, 2014 at 02:20 PM (#4780943)
Sure, they should have started the year with AA in CF. Never mind that a) he had never played the position before, and b) had never played above AA. And let's start Soler in RF despite a) he had never played above A and b) had trouble staying healthy. While we're at it, let's put Baez at 2B, a guy who a) had never played above AA and b) never played the position before. Totally reasonable.

Bringing Bryant up (early enough to have made a difference) is maybe, maybe defensible. But remember, they wer'nt sure his glove would play at 3B until this year. So had they brought him up at the start, he probably plays LF, which a) costs you one of the few bright spots, Coghlin, and ) means Olt still get's his ABs.
   58. McCoy Posted: August 28, 2014 at 02:33 PM (#4780956)
You're quite a piece of work - it wasn't that long ago that you were talking about how hopeless 2015 was for the Cubs. Now you're castigating them for not realizing that 2014 was within reach. Whatever.

Yes, how dare I actually want a team engaged in competition to actually compete.

Again, this is not "obvious", at least without putting a lot of weight on the word "potentially". I guess that "potentially" all the moves that they might have made "in house" would have gained them 10 more wins and put them in the thick of the race. But it's just as likely that they'd have been just as badly off (or worse).



The Cubs had absolutely nothing to lose by trying and yet they didn't because they wanted to protect some nebulous future. Bryant could have been called up way early in the season. Hendricks should have started the season up. Wade should have been up at some point earlier than he was. The whole system right now smacks of "oops, we didn't know our major leaugers would suck this bad and our prospects would develop so quickly". Like I said the Cubs had no intention of being good this year. They punted it and that leads me to worry about 2015.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogBaseball Will Test Out Six New Rules To Speed Up The Game
(33 - 10:43pm, Oct 01)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogPosnanski: The Beauty of Belief [Royals win Wild Card, headed to ALDS]
(6 - 10:42pm, Oct 01)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogFangraphs (Sullivan): How Jarrod Dyson Stole The Biggest Base Of His Life
(13 - 10:39pm, Oct 01)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogNL WILD CARD 2014 OMNICHATTER
(245 - 10:38pm, Oct 01)
Last: Gamingboy

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(21 - 10:34pm, Oct 01)
Last: Norcan

NewsblogAdam Dunn, 34, calls it a career
(68 - 10:27pm, Oct 01)
Last: Walks Clog Up the Bases

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(490 - 10:25pm, Oct 01)
Last: frannyzoo

NewsblogWSJ: Scoring in Baseball Is Down. Blame the Umpires A Study Found That Umpires Have Expanded Their Strike Zone in Recent Years
(2 - 10:22pm, Oct 01)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogLinkedIn: 10 Sales Lessons From “The Captain”
(21 - 10:21pm, Oct 01)
Last: jobu

NewsblogDayton Moore's vision for Kansas Royals validated - ESPN
(46 - 10:10pm, Oct 01)
Last: bookbook

NewsblogA’s wild swing of a season ends in wild-card loss to Royals
(30 - 10:09pm, Oct 01)
Last: Walks Clog Up the Bases

NewsblogNed Yost on the sixth inning and his bullpen usage: “its just one of those things” | HardballTalk
(109 - 10:02pm, Oct 01)
Last: toratoratora

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(137 - 9:52pm, Oct 01)
Last: bobm

NewsblogThe Baseball Show with Rany Jazayerli and Joe Sheehan - 9/29/14
(2 - 9:41pm, Oct 01)
Last: Harveys Wallbangers

NewsblogOT:  October 2014 - College Football thread
(1 - 9:28pm, Oct 01)
Last: Every Inge Counts

Page rendered in 0.3347 seconds
53 querie(s) executed