The Cubs have started the urgency of the 2019 campaign like a bunch of Keystone cops falling over each other. It started with horrible pitching, then moved on to terrible fielding, then moved on to lack of hitting, and finally to questionable base running. After another bullpen meltdown, Jon Lester claimed that the team feels "the pressure" from the front office.
Yes, Theo Epstein was mad at the end of last season. He wants the players to take accountability for their performance. Prospects are no longer potential players. He wants results. Now.
But in reality, Epstein is both diverting the blame and redirecting his anger against ownership. He created this roster of underperforming, overpaid pitchers. He created the atmosphere of dread by not extending Joe Maddon's contract. He overspent on players in the past two seasons which gave him no payroll flexibility in this off-season to fix any glaring problems.
In all levels of the organization, the Cubs have fallen flat on their faces.
The fan angst will boil with another Yu Darvish start. He says he is fine; his pitching coach thinks there is a problem with his pelvic tilt; or vice versa. The embrace of big data in pitching (the
Cubs have a motion capture system where each pitcher in spring training threw a "base line" delivery) is further messing with the mental aspects of the pitcher's routine. Carl Edwards suddenly showed up in the first series with a new (illegal) delivery. There is no confidence that the coaching staff has any real insight or control of the staff.
But things get stranger. In the midst of the losing streak, David Bote suddenly gets a five year, $15 million extension. WTF? Bote got an extension before Schwarber, Almora, Baez or Contreras? Bote is not even a STARTER. Why is he getting a raise five times more than he would normally earn? Is Theo a spendthrift? Or was this giving ownership a quick middle finger? Clearly, the front office is also on tilt with this extension.
The team is playing bad, the front office has no answers, and the Brewers are off to a hot start. This all plays into the gloom and doom of the season opening 9 game road trip.
Showing posts with label wins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wins. Show all posts
April 4, 2019
May 7, 2016
PESSIMISTS
After the opening victory over the Nationals, the Cubs were 21-6. A 77.8 win percentage leads the majors. On pace for a record 126 wins. Even if the team goes .500 for the rest of the season, the Cubs will finish with 96 wins.
All is well on the North Side.
The stat of the night was the fact that the Cubs have won 33 of Kyle Hendricks' 50 games as a starter. That is a 66.0 winning percentage. That is incredibly good for a fifth starter. In his 50 Cub starts, Hendricks' record is 17-11, 3.45 ERA, 1.123 WHIP and 5.1 WAR. One would be hard pressed to find a better fifth starter.
But a certain segment of the fan base and media are pessimists. They worry about the Cubs pitching as compared to the young arms of the Mets. They may be uncomfortable with the soft stuff of Hendricks, but so long as he has confidence in his pitches, he can paint the corners with his two-seamer. They worry about John Lackey's age and rough couple of games for the Cubs. Lackey brings to the mound a mean streak of a junkyard dog. This compliments John Lester's apparent inner anger every time he pitches. This is in a stark contrast to Jake Arrieta's zen like machine performances.
So far the Cubs starting rotation has been solid.
But there is a probability that one or more of the starters will get hurt or go through a mid season slump (most nominate Hammel). The one major complaint against the front office is that Theo-Jed have not drafted and developed a starting pitcher (Hendrick is a carryover from the prior regime.) Even though the Cubs have used 47 percent of their draft choices on pitchers, it is the quality young hitters that have been the beacons to success.
There was a rebuild theory that you drafted the best bats early (since they are easier to project at the major league level) over pitching (because of potential arm issues) then buy starters in the open market when you are ready to compete. You get your fielders under cheap control while you pay a premium for known, quality starting pitching.
But everyone is looking for pitching since it can stop quality hitting. There is a shortage of quality guys. That is why the Mets home grown armada of starters is the envy of the league.
So far, the Cubs have weathered injuries to their platoon left fielder, starting catcher, and 5th outfielder. The pitching staff has not been stressed to date because the Cubs offense continues to set a ridiculous pace of a plus 96 run differential.
But the problem in last post-season was that the Cubs only had two trusted starters, Arrieta and Lester. Lackey was brought in to be that post season #3, but his age and a long day game summer season could put him into the bad Hammel camp. No one knows if Hendricks can handle the pressure of being a #3 post season pitcher (which could lead to being a game 7 starter). There is no one in Iowa (AAA) ready, willing or able to be a #3 starter in the majors. No one wants to the Cubs to part with their young stud talent (Baez, Almora, McKinney, Contreras) for starting pitching, but you never can tell when a championship window opens and closes. Ask the Nationals about that.
All is well on the North Side.
The stat of the night was the fact that the Cubs have won 33 of Kyle Hendricks' 50 games as a starter. That is a 66.0 winning percentage. That is incredibly good for a fifth starter. In his 50 Cub starts, Hendricks' record is 17-11, 3.45 ERA, 1.123 WHIP and 5.1 WAR. One would be hard pressed to find a better fifth starter.
But a certain segment of the fan base and media are pessimists. They worry about the Cubs pitching as compared to the young arms of the Mets. They may be uncomfortable with the soft stuff of Hendricks, but so long as he has confidence in his pitches, he can paint the corners with his two-seamer. They worry about John Lackey's age and rough couple of games for the Cubs. Lackey brings to the mound a mean streak of a junkyard dog. This compliments John Lester's apparent inner anger every time he pitches. This is in a stark contrast to Jake Arrieta's zen like machine performances.
So far the Cubs starting rotation has been solid.
But there is a probability that one or more of the starters will get hurt or go through a mid season slump (most nominate Hammel). The one major complaint against the front office is that Theo-Jed have not drafted and developed a starting pitcher (Hendrick is a carryover from the prior regime.) Even though the Cubs have used 47 percent of their draft choices on pitchers, it is the quality young hitters that have been the beacons to success.
There was a rebuild theory that you drafted the best bats early (since they are easier to project at the major league level) over pitching (because of potential arm issues) then buy starters in the open market when you are ready to compete. You get your fielders under cheap control while you pay a premium for known, quality starting pitching.
But everyone is looking for pitching since it can stop quality hitting. There is a shortage of quality guys. That is why the Mets home grown armada of starters is the envy of the league.
So far, the Cubs have weathered injuries to their platoon left fielder, starting catcher, and 5th outfielder. The pitching staff has not been stressed to date because the Cubs offense continues to set a ridiculous pace of a plus 96 run differential.
But the problem in last post-season was that the Cubs only had two trusted starters, Arrieta and Lester. Lackey was brought in to be that post season #3, but his age and a long day game summer season could put him into the bad Hammel camp. No one knows if Hendricks can handle the pressure of being a #3 post season pitcher (which could lead to being a game 7 starter). There is no one in Iowa (AAA) ready, willing or able to be a #3 starter in the majors. No one wants to the Cubs to part with their young stud talent (Baez, Almora, McKinney, Contreras) for starting pitching, but you never can tell when a championship window opens and closes. Ask the Nationals about that.
April 5, 2016
STATEMENT GAMES
In an oddity of scheduling, both the White Sox and Cubs started the 2016 season on the West Coast. Both clubs had night games scheduled at the same time, 9:05 p.m. local.
The Cubs had generated the national hype in spring training; World Series or Bust.
The White Sox had generated the national scorn with the Adam LaRoche sudden retirement.
Both Chicago teams have something to prove this year. The White Sox were supposed to be great (on paper) last year. This off-season, the team added 3/4 of a new infield and a new veteran presence in the locker room.
The Cubs have to prove that last year's 97 wins from the Maddon Magic Bus was no illusion. The Cubs also added veteran players to the core group.
The Cubs rocked the Angels 9-0 with Jake Arrieta in excellent form. Two holdovers drove in the majority of runs: Montero and Sczcur.
The White Sox also won, 4-3 over the A's (who lost their starting pitcher to pre-game food poisoning) behind a solid outing by starter Chris Sale and the bullpen. Newcomer Jimmy Rollins had an RBI.
All Chicago baseball fans could breathe this morning a sigh of relief. The teams' best pitchers gave the clubs victories.
One line up quirk from each opener:
The Cubs batted Ben Zobrist third. This was done to get three high OBP hitters (Fowler, Heyward and Zobrist) ahead of the big bats of Rizzo, Bryant and Schwarber. That seemed to work last night.
The White Sox put defensively challenged Adam Eaton in RF while putting last year's fielder, Avi Garcia, at DH. Garcia was not the best outfield defender, but Eaton had terrible stats last season. Austin Jackson started in CF and batted 9th.
The Cubs had generated the national hype in spring training; World Series or Bust.
The White Sox had generated the national scorn with the Adam LaRoche sudden retirement.
Both Chicago teams have something to prove this year. The White Sox were supposed to be great (on paper) last year. This off-season, the team added 3/4 of a new infield and a new veteran presence in the locker room.
The Cubs have to prove that last year's 97 wins from the Maddon Magic Bus was no illusion. The Cubs also added veteran players to the core group.
The Cubs rocked the Angels 9-0 with Jake Arrieta in excellent form. Two holdovers drove in the majority of runs: Montero and Sczcur.
The White Sox also won, 4-3 over the A's (who lost their starting pitcher to pre-game food poisoning) behind a solid outing by starter Chris Sale and the bullpen. Newcomer Jimmy Rollins had an RBI.
All Chicago baseball fans could breathe this morning a sigh of relief. The teams' best pitchers gave the clubs victories.
One line up quirk from each opener:
The Cubs batted Ben Zobrist third. This was done to get three high OBP hitters (Fowler, Heyward and Zobrist) ahead of the big bats of Rizzo, Bryant and Schwarber. That seemed to work last night.
The White Sox put defensively challenged Adam Eaton in RF while putting last year's fielder, Avi Garcia, at DH. Garcia was not the best outfield defender, but Eaton had terrible stats last season. Austin Jackson started in CF and batted 9th.
October 5, 2015
THE CUBS SEASON WAR
The 2015 Cubs surprised the world by going 97-65. They ended 20 games better than my pre-season prediction. The Pythagorean record for the Cubs this year was 90-72. I equate the difference in manager Joe Maddon, who would get a 7.0 WAR, for his unique style of getting a team of veterans and youngsters to gel in such a short period of time.
But the Cubs team was really dominated by their starting players, with three who really carried the team on their backs and into the playoffs.
Regular season position players/WAR:
Montero, c 1.8
Rizzo, lf 6.3
Russell, ss 3.4
Castro, 2b 0.7
Bryant, 3b 6.0
Coghlan, lf 1.9
Fowler, cf 2.2
Soler, rf (0.1)
Position starters totaled 22.2 WAR of the team total 23.3 WAR, or 95.3% of total offense WAR.
Regular season starting pitchers and closer/WAR:
Arrieta, sp 8.6
Lester, sp 2.9
Hendricks, sp 1.7
Hammel, sp 1.6
Haren, sp 0.2
Rondon, cl 2.1
These key pitchers totalled 17.1 WAR of the team total 18.5 WAR or 92.4% of total pitching WAR.
Arrieta's individual WAR was 50.3 % of the total team pitching WAR.
Rizzo's individual WAR was 27% of the total team offense WAR.
Bryant's individual WAR was 25.75% of the total team offense WAR.
Arrieta, Rizzo and Bryant carried more than half their position team WAR.
Combined, these three players had 50% of total team WAR.
But the Cubs team was really dominated by their starting players, with three who really carried the team on their backs and into the playoffs.
Regular season position players/WAR:
Montero, c 1.8
Rizzo, lf 6.3
Russell, ss 3.4
Castro, 2b 0.7
Bryant, 3b 6.0
Coghlan, lf 1.9
Fowler, cf 2.2
Soler, rf (0.1)
Position starters totaled 22.2 WAR of the team total 23.3 WAR, or 95.3% of total offense WAR.
Regular season starting pitchers and closer/WAR:
Arrieta, sp 8.6
Lester, sp 2.9
Hendricks, sp 1.7
Hammel, sp 1.6
Haren, sp 0.2
Rondon, cl 2.1
These key pitchers totalled 17.1 WAR of the team total 18.5 WAR or 92.4% of total pitching WAR.
Arrieta's individual WAR was 50.3 % of the total team pitching WAR.
Rizzo's individual WAR was 27% of the total team offense WAR.
Bryant's individual WAR was 25.75% of the total team offense WAR.
Arrieta, Rizzo and Bryant carried more than half their position team WAR.
Combined, these three players had 50% of total team WAR.
August 17, 2015
A MISNOMER
The Cubs are 67-49.
Most people say that the Cubs are 18 games over .500.
That's great.
But I believe it is inaccurate.
The Cubs have played 116 games.
If the Cubs played .500 ball, they would have a record of 58-58.
58 wins is the .500 mark at this point in the season.
The Cubs are better, at 67 wins.
67 wins - 58 wins = 9 games above the .500 mark.
UPDATE 9/2/15
A Cardinal fan gloats that his team is now "40 games over .500." Radio, television and print media are proclaiming the accomplishment.
By Cardinal's "math," the team has 86 wins this season.
They claim that if the team is at 46-46, they are at .500.
46+40=86, so everyone on radio and TV the past 24 hours says the team is 40 games over .500.
They will also tell you that the Cubs are 19 over .500.
"It’s not that difficult to understand; it’s common baseball language and math!"
Again, the statement is inaccurate mathematically wrong because it does not take in account total games played in the equation.
They are only looking at total wins not total games played which is the problem.
The Cardinals are only .500 team if record is 46-46 (after playing 92 games).
After 132 games, if the team is at .500 that means their record is 66-66 not 46-46.
86 wins - 66 wins (for a .500 club) = 20 games over .500.
Most people say that the Cubs are 18 games over .500.
That's great.
But I believe it is inaccurate.
The Cubs have played 116 games.
If the Cubs played .500 ball, they would have a record of 58-58.
58 wins is the .500 mark at this point in the season.
The Cubs are better, at 67 wins.
67 wins - 58 wins = 9 games above the .500 mark.
UPDATE 9/2/15
A Cardinal fan gloats that his team is now "40 games over .500." Radio, television and print media are proclaiming the accomplishment.
By Cardinal's "math," the team has 86 wins this season.
They claim that if the team is at 46-46, they are at .500.
46+40=86, so everyone on radio and TV the past 24 hours says the team is 40 games over .500.
They will also tell you that the Cubs are 19 over .500.
"It’s not that difficult to understand; it’s common baseball language and math!"
Again, the statement is inaccurate mathematically wrong because it does not take in account total games played in the equation.
They are only looking at total wins not total games played which is the problem.
The Cardinals are only .500 team if record is 46-46 (after playing 92 games).
After 132 games, if the team is at .500 that means their record is 66-66 not 46-46.
86 wins - 66 wins (for a .500 club) = 20 games over .500.
August 15, 2015
CUBBERNAUT!
What do you call a Cubs juggernaut?
CUBBERNAUT!!!
I coined this word a couple of weeks ago and it is starting to catch on in my circle of friends.
July 15, 2015
42
Hawk Harrelson made an observation during the Crosstown.
He said that every team in MLB will win 60 games and lost 60 games. He said the difference between clubs is what they do in the remaining 42 contests.
There is nothing more deflating that poor defense. If a team plays poor defense (can't catch or throw the ball), you are giving your opponent more outs in stead of the normal 27. Nothing demoralizes a pitcher more than bad defense behind him. Jon Lester got a little testy after his last start, but would not name names, saying everyone on the team shares blame (but then admitted that he "only" threw three bad pitches that game.)
A team beats itself (and cuts deeply into those 42 key games) by bad defense. The White Sox played most of the first half in zombie motion. But lately, the defense has picked up, especially turning double plays against the Cubs which equated to winning the series. But Harrelson thought that even with the Sox defense improvement, the team may have burned through too many of their 42 swing games as losses.
In the past few weeks, pitching has been dominating both Cubs and White Sox contests. This puts more premium on defense, which the Cubs did not have at critical times. Now, some may bring out excuses that the young players, including Castro, have played a long first half and may be tired from the daily grind. But this is professional baseball, every player taking the field should be ready to perform. The other excuse on the Cubs side of town is that this team is "over achieving" or a "year ahead of schedule." That may be true from an internal planning stand point, but on the field seven games above .500 and in the second wild card means that the team is in a position to win, if fundamentals hold up in the tough second half.
The White Sox play a large chunk of their second half schedule against the AL Central. If the team has any change to make a wild card run, the Sox will have to beat up on their Central rivals. The Tigers are down with injuries, the Indians do not have the depth, but the Royals play the best defense in the league. There is an unlikely chance that the Sox could have a hot streak since it has four quality starting pitchers who can keep games close.
The Cubs sit in third behind the two best teams in the NL, St. Louis and Pittsburgh. The Pirates end the first half on a roll, cutting deep into the Cardinals Central lead. It is unlikely that the Cubs have the depth, especially on the bench, to make a charge past the Pirates. The Cubs won't be able to make much headway against the Cardinals since the teams don't play until September.
It is still possible that both Chicago teams may end the season right around .500.
He said that every team in MLB will win 60 games and lost 60 games. He said the difference between clubs is what they do in the remaining 42 contests.
There is nothing more deflating that poor defense. If a team plays poor defense (can't catch or throw the ball), you are giving your opponent more outs in stead of the normal 27. Nothing demoralizes a pitcher more than bad defense behind him. Jon Lester got a little testy after his last start, but would not name names, saying everyone on the team shares blame (but then admitted that he "only" threw three bad pitches that game.)
A team beats itself (and cuts deeply into those 42 key games) by bad defense. The White Sox played most of the first half in zombie motion. But lately, the defense has picked up, especially turning double plays against the Cubs which equated to winning the series. But Harrelson thought that even with the Sox defense improvement, the team may have burned through too many of their 42 swing games as losses.
In the past few weeks, pitching has been dominating both Cubs and White Sox contests. This puts more premium on defense, which the Cubs did not have at critical times. Now, some may bring out excuses that the young players, including Castro, have played a long first half and may be tired from the daily grind. But this is professional baseball, every player taking the field should be ready to perform. The other excuse on the Cubs side of town is that this team is "over achieving" or a "year ahead of schedule." That may be true from an internal planning stand point, but on the field seven games above .500 and in the second wild card means that the team is in a position to win, if fundamentals hold up in the tough second half.
The White Sox play a large chunk of their second half schedule against the AL Central. If the team has any change to make a wild card run, the Sox will have to beat up on their Central rivals. The Tigers are down with injuries, the Indians do not have the depth, but the Royals play the best defense in the league. There is an unlikely chance that the Sox could have a hot streak since it has four quality starting pitchers who can keep games close.
The Cubs sit in third behind the two best teams in the NL, St. Louis and Pittsburgh. The Pirates end the first half on a roll, cutting deep into the Cardinals Central lead. It is unlikely that the Cubs have the depth, especially on the bench, to make a charge past the Pirates. The Cubs won't be able to make much headway against the Cardinals since the teams don't play until September.
It is still possible that both Chicago teams may end the season right around .500.
May 11, 2015
SIX AND A HALF
The public perception is that the Cubs are doing just fine, even though they are 6.5 games behind the Cardinals.
However, there is panic on the South Side as the White Sox are off to a slow start, a couple of suspensions, and major criticism of its manager, Robin Ventura. The strength of the White Sox, its starting rotation, has faltered (including Chris Sale getting lit up by the lowly Twins) as well as the revamped offense.
But despite all the faults, flaws and losses, the White Sox are also 6.5 games out of first place.
The Cubs are trying to rebuild their bullpen on the fly by bringing back Russell and Grimm. The Cubs have been consistently getting on base and scoring runs, but the bullpen has ballooned to a 7 ERA in the past week. But there is no panic in Wrigleyville. Maddon continues to give the beat reporters his daily quips so everything is ice cream and rainbows.
Meanwhile, the press is looking for hangman's rope for Ventura. But he has a veteran team that should come around as the weather heats up. Carlos Rodon's first start started rocky but smoothed out for his first career victory. It would seem that Rodon will push himself into the Sox rotation earlier than expected as Noesi has an injury.
It is another tale of two teams within one city. The Cubs are getting all the attention since the White Sox have given the press little to cheer. The White Sox have a modern ball park with cheap ticket prices for families but that gets little attention to the Cubs open construction site debris field still draws large crowds.
The perceptions of the teams is completely different. But both teams are basically in the same situation: 6.5 games out of first place.
However, there is panic on the South Side as the White Sox are off to a slow start, a couple of suspensions, and major criticism of its manager, Robin Ventura. The strength of the White Sox, its starting rotation, has faltered (including Chris Sale getting lit up by the lowly Twins) as well as the revamped offense.
But despite all the faults, flaws and losses, the White Sox are also 6.5 games out of first place.
The Cubs are trying to rebuild their bullpen on the fly by bringing back Russell and Grimm. The Cubs have been consistently getting on base and scoring runs, but the bullpen has ballooned to a 7 ERA in the past week. But there is no panic in Wrigleyville. Maddon continues to give the beat reporters his daily quips so everything is ice cream and rainbows.
Meanwhile, the press is looking for hangman's rope for Ventura. But he has a veteran team that should come around as the weather heats up. Carlos Rodon's first start started rocky but smoothed out for his first career victory. It would seem that Rodon will push himself into the Sox rotation earlier than expected as Noesi has an injury.
It is another tale of two teams within one city. The Cubs are getting all the attention since the White Sox have given the press little to cheer. The White Sox have a modern ball park with cheap ticket prices for families but that gets little attention to the Cubs open construction site debris field still draws large crowds.
The perceptions of the teams is completely different. But both teams are basically in the same situation: 6.5 games out of first place.
March 9, 2015
OH-FER
The Cubs have not won a spring contest.
The Joe Maddon era would seem to sputter out of the gate; but in reality, spring training games are meaningless exhibitions where players are trying to sharpen skill sets prior to the real season. Maddon's laid back attitude seems to fall into this philosophy.
However, there have been a few managers in the past who wanted their spring squads to play hard and win. They believed that demanding wins in spring games set the clubhouse tone for an entire season. Winning is expected no matter even if the line up card was filled with replacement level players.
There is something to take away from the hard line approach to setting a winning culture.
The Cubs have had a problem maintaining a winning attitude. In New York, any new Yankee is told from day one that they are expected to win. Period. The Cubs have been so bad for so long, with little accountability, that a culture of losing (the status quo) can set in. In fact, some writers remarked just a few years ago that the Cubs tanking to rebuild could have negative consequences on young players like Castro and Rizzo.
Players are human beings. Human beings, when given even choices, will usually take the easier path. In a clubhouse, when a team expects to lose, players set about in their mind, routine and training that any extra effort is not going to change things. So long as they know they will get their major league paycheck no matter what, players will coast as much as possible.
It is open competition and drive that helps bring a team up to a championship level. If you know that there is someone who can take your job (at any moment), a player has the incentive to do better.
The Cubs still lack the depth to create such position competitions. So the regular starters are not going to be pushed hard until the minor league system starts producing a steady stream of quality talent.
The Joe Maddon era would seem to sputter out of the gate; but in reality, spring training games are meaningless exhibitions where players are trying to sharpen skill sets prior to the real season. Maddon's laid back attitude seems to fall into this philosophy.
However, there have been a few managers in the past who wanted their spring squads to play hard and win. They believed that demanding wins in spring games set the clubhouse tone for an entire season. Winning is expected no matter even if the line up card was filled with replacement level players.
There is something to take away from the hard line approach to setting a winning culture.
The Cubs have had a problem maintaining a winning attitude. In New York, any new Yankee is told from day one that they are expected to win. Period. The Cubs have been so bad for so long, with little accountability, that a culture of losing (the status quo) can set in. In fact, some writers remarked just a few years ago that the Cubs tanking to rebuild could have negative consequences on young players like Castro and Rizzo.
Players are human beings. Human beings, when given even choices, will usually take the easier path. In a clubhouse, when a team expects to lose, players set about in their mind, routine and training that any extra effort is not going to change things. So long as they know they will get their major league paycheck no matter what, players will coast as much as possible.
It is open competition and drive that helps bring a team up to a championship level. If you know that there is someone who can take your job (at any moment), a player has the incentive to do better.
The Cubs still lack the depth to create such position competitions. So the regular starters are not going to be pushed hard until the minor league system starts producing a steady stream of quality talent.
November 1, 2014
TO MEASURE
How does one measure success in baseball?
Championships.
The SF Giants have won three World Series in five years. Some skeptics claim that the Giants were not "the best" team, wild card berths, etc. The bottom line is still the rings.
Victories.
Any team can boast about having a winning season. For some clubs, being over .500 is a "moral victory." It is enough to keep a team's fan base in excitement and expectation mode to continue to be a competitive team. It is enough to sell improvement if you are competitive series to series.
Individual Awards.
This is a participation trophy in the arena of team sports. Individual accomplishments are fine, so long as they support the ultimate fan goal: championships. A batting title champ or a Cy Young award winner are great, but it does not mean a deep play off run - - - the bitter taste in Detroit is the latest example.
So how do we measure Theo Epstein's first three years at the helm?
In the last three years, the Cubs have lost 286 games. That is an average of 95.33 losses per season.
It is nice to have respected drafts, and publications liking your revamped minor league system, but none of that really matters (it is all speculation) until you can get victories at the major league level.
Championships.
The SF Giants have won three World Series in five years. Some skeptics claim that the Giants were not "the best" team, wild card berths, etc. The bottom line is still the rings.
Victories.
Any team can boast about having a winning season. For some clubs, being over .500 is a "moral victory." It is enough to keep a team's fan base in excitement and expectation mode to continue to be a competitive team. It is enough to sell improvement if you are competitive series to series.
Individual Awards.
This is a participation trophy in the arena of team sports. Individual accomplishments are fine, so long as they support the ultimate fan goal: championships. A batting title champ or a Cy Young award winner are great, but it does not mean a deep play off run - - - the bitter taste in Detroit is the latest example.
So how do we measure Theo Epstein's first three years at the helm?
In the last three years, the Cubs have lost 286 games. That is an average of 95.33 losses per season.
It is nice to have respected drafts, and publications liking your revamped minor league system, but none of that really matters (it is all speculation) until you can get victories at the major league level.
October 21, 2014
A MANAGERIAL NOTE
Cardinal fans are ripping their manager, Matheny, for losing the NLCS. It was the way he used his pitching staff which was the most damning for fans, especially putting in Wacha, who had not pitched in 20 days, to throw the 9th in a tie game.
Tommy Lasorda once said, "No matter
how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No
matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's
the other third that makes the difference."
Lasorda is probably overstating his case. Statistically, a good manager may actually win only one or two games for his team by his in-game decisions, but a bad manager could lose a team three to five. Since the game is played on the field, the players executing their assigned tasks are the most important aspect of wins and losses. However, there is recognition that a manager needs to put his players in the best position to succeed. Letting a starter who is out of gas continue to pitch, like Dusty Baker did during the Cubs NLCS, led to a demoralizing team collapse.
Lasorda's take on a long season is based on his experience. Every team will lose at least 54 games. Every team will win at least 54 games. So how a team performs in the remaining 54 games is the key to the season. A .500 team only needs to win 27 of those contests. So for a team to be good to competitive, the season really comes down to those last 27 games.
But those last 27 games are not necessarily at the end of season. Those could be critical contests in April, where teams with great starts tend to be front runners throughout the season. It comes down to about 9 three game series. Even if you go .500 in those 27 games, your team would win 94.5 games.
If you have an ace starter going in those 9 big series, the chances are you are more likely to win. If you have another near ace quality starter also pitching those series, you are more likely to take 2 of 3 games. So that takes the equation down to 18 critical games.
Even if a manager is tuned to this statistical dissection, one cannot manage the post-season like the regular season. In the post-season, you must play each game like it is an elimination game. There is much more pressure on the players. A good manager will try to shift the pressure to the other team, by forcing play on the field with base stealing, bunt hits, long at bats to wear down a pitcher. A good manager will also use his pitching staff differently, especially near the end of a series. An ace starter may be a better option from the pen in a game seven than the set-up man. And these decisions are magnified by the situation; and second guessing becomes a blood sport.
So it is not an exact science to determine whether Matheny deserves any of the fan wrath. On the other side, Ned Yost of the Royals had been considered a terrible manager during his career. But his team, despite his reputation, is in the World Series. This is one of the quirks of baseball. You never know.
September 19, 2014
WINS
Cubs announcer Pat Hughes brought up an interesting observation.
There has been some debate recently on whether "wins" is a good measure for a starting pitcher's performance. In the age of sabermetrics, wins seems to be an unconditional after thought.
Hughes brought up the point that if a starting pitcher has a record of 18-8, that means that his team has won 10 more games with him on the mound. Therefore, if the rest of the team went .500, the team would end up the season 10 games over .500 (and probably in the playoffs)
It would also mean that pitcher would be the team's most valuable player.
Hughes was referencing Johnny Cueto, who was 18-8 at the time. After the loss to the Cubs, Cueto still has a 6.1 WAR for the season. That is six games above replacement value.
Other pitchers with large W-L variables include Clayton Kershaw who is 19-3, with a 7.6 WAR.
Chris Sale is 12-3 with a 6.5 WAR. Felix Hernandez is 14-5 with a 6.8 WAR. Corey Kluber is 16-9 with 6.3 WAR.
The Win Variable to WAR:
Kershaw + 13 = 7.6 WAR
Hernandez +9 = 6.8 WAR
Sale +9 = 6.5 WAR
Kluber +7 = 6.3 WAR
Cueto +9 = 6.1 WAR
The top five pitchers in the majors have a win differential of +47 and WAR of 33.3.
WAR/Win Variable = .709 wins above replacement ratio.
There may be other factors on a starter getting the ability to get wins, foremost, the ability to pitch deep into games. There also may be a psychological team effect that fielders will play better when they know their "ace" is pitching.
What about other good pitchers?
Madison Bumgarner is 18-9 with a 3.7 WAR or .411 wins above replacement ratio.
Jon Lester is 15-10 with a 4.2 WAR or .840 wins above replacement ratio.
While league average changes on a year-to-year basis, replacement level stays the same: a .380 win percentage is the replacement level for starting pitcher.
FanGraphs and Baseball Reference calculate pitching WAR differently.
BA Computing WAR: starts with runs allowed by the pitcher and compares it to the league average pitcher (adjusting for quality of opposition), parks pitched in, and quality of defense behind the pitcher.
WAR = WAR_rep + WAA + WAA_adj
FanGraphs Pitcher WAR:
FG begins with FIP, which is a fielding independent pitching stat comparable in scale to ERA that is computed using only pitcher dependent stats.
FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + lg_specific_constant(around 3.20 or so)
In FIP, hits allowed and non-strikeout outs recorded have no role in the calculation other than in the number of total innings pitched. The assumption is that once the ball is put into play (other than a home run) the entire outcome is determined by random chance and team defensive quality.
So even the stats gurus cannot agree on the best formula to determine how well a starter pitcher is to his team. So maybe Hughes has hit upon the simplest comparison possible: the pitcher's win differential since the single goal in any game is to win.
There has been some debate recently on whether "wins" is a good measure for a starting pitcher's performance. In the age of sabermetrics, wins seems to be an unconditional after thought.
Hughes brought up the point that if a starting pitcher has a record of 18-8, that means that his team has won 10 more games with him on the mound. Therefore, if the rest of the team went .500, the team would end up the season 10 games over .500 (and probably in the playoffs)
It would also mean that pitcher would be the team's most valuable player.
Hughes was referencing Johnny Cueto, who was 18-8 at the time. After the loss to the Cubs, Cueto still has a 6.1 WAR for the season. That is six games above replacement value.
Other pitchers with large W-L variables include Clayton Kershaw who is 19-3, with a 7.6 WAR.
Chris Sale is 12-3 with a 6.5 WAR. Felix Hernandez is 14-5 with a 6.8 WAR. Corey Kluber is 16-9 with 6.3 WAR.
The Win Variable to WAR:
Kershaw + 13 = 7.6 WAR
Hernandez +9 = 6.8 WAR
Sale +9 = 6.5 WAR
Kluber +7 = 6.3 WAR
Cueto +9 = 6.1 WAR
The top five pitchers in the majors have a win differential of +47 and WAR of 33.3.
WAR/Win Variable = .709 wins above replacement ratio.
There may be other factors on a starter getting the ability to get wins, foremost, the ability to pitch deep into games. There also may be a psychological team effect that fielders will play better when they know their "ace" is pitching.
What about other good pitchers?
Madison Bumgarner is 18-9 with a 3.7 WAR or .411 wins above replacement ratio.
Jon Lester is 15-10 with a 4.2 WAR or .840 wins above replacement ratio.
While league average changes on a year-to-year basis, replacement level stays the same: a .380 win percentage is the replacement level for starting pitcher.
FanGraphs and Baseball Reference calculate pitching WAR differently.
BA Computing WAR: starts with runs allowed by the pitcher and compares it to the league average pitcher (adjusting for quality of opposition), parks pitched in, and quality of defense behind the pitcher.
WAR = WAR_rep + WAA + WAA_adj
FanGraphs Pitcher WAR:
FG begins with FIP, which is a fielding independent pitching stat comparable in scale to ERA that is computed using only pitcher dependent stats.
FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP-IBB))-(2*K))/IP + lg_specific_constant(around 3.20 or so)
In FIP, hits allowed and non-strikeout outs recorded have no role in the calculation other than in the number of total innings pitched. The assumption is that once the ball is put into play (other than a home run) the entire outcome is determined by random chance and team defensive quality.
So even the stats gurus cannot agree on the best formula to determine how well a starter pitcher is to his team. So maybe Hughes has hit upon the simplest comparison possible: the pitcher's win differential since the single goal in any game is to win.
August 29, 2014
HOW THINGS PLAY OUT
The excitement continues to swell like an Off-Broadway production in dress rehearsal as Jorge Soler is promoted to the major league roster.
The Cubs Way is nearly ready to debut.
There are many ways to look at the new way.
First, in the best light, the prospects and young players the Cubs have acquired will play beyond expectations like the championship caliber teams like the Marlins or Rays. Those clubs came out of small market nowhere and won pennants. But even those teams could not sustain themselves purely on their own home grown talent (since most left prior to free agency).
Second, the prospects and young players give us a reasonable expectation of being good, but not great, ball players. Over time, they may gel into the 2005 White Sox, and push through to a championship.
Third, the prospects and young players have statistically average careers. The team can hover around .500 if its pitching holds up. This is like the Kansas City Royals, who are just getting out of another 15 year rebuild cycle. They had touted prospects that got to the majors and did not excel to a juggernaut line up like the big market, big spending teams like the Red Sox or Yankees.
Fourth, the prospects and young players mostly play below average. They follow the cursed string of recent prospects like Brett Jackson, Josh Vitter, Junior Lake. For all the hype, the team as constructed only ebbs and flows around 75 wins per season.
Fifth, the prospects and young players don't pan out long term, due to inability to adapt or being plagued by injury. The total fail scenario is something that no one wants to talk about - - - especially ownership and the front office. If this happens, the risk-reward bet will probably crater the franchise in a huge hole.
It is highly unlikely that the Cubs will hit on all their prospects. It is likely that one or two will be very good players if healthy. But a team needs a balance between veterans and young players, skill and luck, and ways to avoid a culture of losing. Final success will only be objectively measured by the number of wins, number of pennants, and number of championships.
The Cubs Way is nearly ready to debut.
There are many ways to look at the new way.
First, in the best light, the prospects and young players the Cubs have acquired will play beyond expectations like the championship caliber teams like the Marlins or Rays. Those clubs came out of small market nowhere and won pennants. But even those teams could not sustain themselves purely on their own home grown talent (since most left prior to free agency).
Second, the prospects and young players give us a reasonable expectation of being good, but not great, ball players. Over time, they may gel into the 2005 White Sox, and push through to a championship.
Third, the prospects and young players have statistically average careers. The team can hover around .500 if its pitching holds up. This is like the Kansas City Royals, who are just getting out of another 15 year rebuild cycle. They had touted prospects that got to the majors and did not excel to a juggernaut line up like the big market, big spending teams like the Red Sox or Yankees.
Fourth, the prospects and young players mostly play below average. They follow the cursed string of recent prospects like Brett Jackson, Josh Vitter, Junior Lake. For all the hype, the team as constructed only ebbs and flows around 75 wins per season.
Fifth, the prospects and young players don't pan out long term, due to inability to adapt or being plagued by injury. The total fail scenario is something that no one wants to talk about - - - especially ownership and the front office. If this happens, the risk-reward bet will probably crater the franchise in a huge hole.
It is highly unlikely that the Cubs will hit on all their prospects. It is likely that one or two will be very good players if healthy. But a team needs a balance between veterans and young players, skill and luck, and ways to avoid a culture of losing. Final success will only be objectively measured by the number of wins, number of pennants, and number of championships.
August 24, 2014
DUMB ARTICLE
If you write an article in a prestigious publication, readers generally give it credence because of the reputation of the publication. A recent short article in the Wall St. Journal shows that even the best newspaper in the country prints dumb things.
The author tries to connect two facts to glean an absurd conclusion.
He states that when the Tribune owned the Cubs, it treated the team as just another entertainment program. It sold the idea of the Cubs as loveable losers, a drama reality show before reality shows, on the national WGN Superstation. As a result, the author claims that Wrigley Field became a sell-out entertainment (party) venue for many people.
He then states when the Ricketts bought the Cubs, they changed the focus of the team from entertainment to a winning baseball operation. As a result, attendance has dropped dramatically over the years.
Anyone true Cub fan knows what has been going on with the team and new ownership.
First, Tom Ricketts only got his Dad to buy into buying the franchise when he remarked that the Cubs sell out whether they win or lose. That observation was placed at the height of the last economic boom when the 20-something city yuppies found out that spending a day in the bleachers was better than North Avenue Beach because Wrigley offered sunshine and beer.
Second, the party crowd left Wrigley when the financial crisis hit. Chicago has not recovered as fast as the rest of nation. Once the causal drinkers left, baseball fans were left to ponder what was happening to their team.
Third, the Ricketts have systematically cut the team payroll, which is not indicative of building a winning team. Fans realized that for the past three years the Cubs have tanked their seasons to get high draft picks. The Cubs traded away veteran quality pitchers for prospects, leaving the organization without many potential major league caliber starters. The Cubs are the midst of a historic season to season losing records.
Fourth, the declining attendance directly reflects two things: the high cost of Cubs tickets and the quality of baseball shown by the home team. Fans have been asked to pay premium prices for minor league caliber performance. It is not that hardcore fans are turned off by the new front office "trying" to build a winning team.
Sixth, there is a growing feeling that the public has grown tired with the excuses, the political snafus and the penny pinching by ownership. The no-shows have increased more than tickets not being sold. Over Ricketts ownership, the Cubs have lost 1/3 of their gate.
Seventh, the tourist fans who come to see the 100 year old ball park, with its manual scoreboard, ivy covered outfield walls, and landmarked vistas will soon be gone when Ricketts puts up seven outfield scoreboards and signs.
The idea that the Cubs are struggling because Ricketts has tacked the organization to try to win is a ridiculous conclusion. The real cause for the anti-Cub effect squarely points to the Ricketts themselves, who overpaid for the franchise, overplanned their real estate developments, are sidetracked by the fact they want to turn Wrigley from baseball field to a multipurpose entertainment complex and clueless on how to run a business in Chicago.
The author tries to connect two facts to glean an absurd conclusion.
He states that when the Tribune owned the Cubs, it treated the team as just another entertainment program. It sold the idea of the Cubs as loveable losers, a drama reality show before reality shows, on the national WGN Superstation. As a result, the author claims that Wrigley Field became a sell-out entertainment (party) venue for many people.
He then states when the Ricketts bought the Cubs, they changed the focus of the team from entertainment to a winning baseball operation. As a result, attendance has dropped dramatically over the years.
Anyone true Cub fan knows what has been going on with the team and new ownership.
First, Tom Ricketts only got his Dad to buy into buying the franchise when he remarked that the Cubs sell out whether they win or lose. That observation was placed at the height of the last economic boom when the 20-something city yuppies found out that spending a day in the bleachers was better than North Avenue Beach because Wrigley offered sunshine and beer.
Second, the party crowd left Wrigley when the financial crisis hit. Chicago has not recovered as fast as the rest of nation. Once the causal drinkers left, baseball fans were left to ponder what was happening to their team.
Third, the Ricketts have systematically cut the team payroll, which is not indicative of building a winning team. Fans realized that for the past three years the Cubs have tanked their seasons to get high draft picks. The Cubs traded away veteran quality pitchers for prospects, leaving the organization without many potential major league caliber starters. The Cubs are the midst of a historic season to season losing records.
Fourth, the declining attendance directly reflects two things: the high cost of Cubs tickets and the quality of baseball shown by the home team. Fans have been asked to pay premium prices for minor league caliber performance. It is not that hardcore fans are turned off by the new front office "trying" to build a winning team.
Sixth, there is a growing feeling that the public has grown tired with the excuses, the political snafus and the penny pinching by ownership. The no-shows have increased more than tickets not being sold. Over Ricketts ownership, the Cubs have lost 1/3 of their gate.
Seventh, the tourist fans who come to see the 100 year old ball park, with its manual scoreboard, ivy covered outfield walls, and landmarked vistas will soon be gone when Ricketts puts up seven outfield scoreboards and signs.
The idea that the Cubs are struggling because Ricketts has tacked the organization to try to win is a ridiculous conclusion. The real cause for the anti-Cub effect squarely points to the Ricketts themselves, who overpaid for the franchise, overplanned their real estate developments, are sidetracked by the fact they want to turn Wrigley from baseball field to a multipurpose entertainment complex and clueless on how to run a business in Chicago.
July 9, 2014
PROSPECTS ARE JUST PROSPECTS
The fall out continues on the Samardzija-Hammel trade.
Again, any criticism of the Cubs front office getting prospects in return has been met with vile abuse.
Hammel was signed to be traded for prospects. That was a given.
Samardzija was also going to be traded since the Cubs could not sign him to a long term deal.
The Cubs got the A's best two prospects in Addison Russell and Billy McKinney. That is what excites the pro-Theo crowd. It follows "the Plan" of rebuilding the farm by acquiring quality prospects. That is the way the front office is going to operate.
It is fine that fans buy into the Plan of gathering prospects. Many vocal fans have bought it hook, line and sinker. They have bought into the "hope" that these prospects will be great players, foundational talent that will win championships. Hope is an expectation not a guarantee.
But early on, several people questioned the Plan as being too narrow for a big market club like the Cubs. No one except a few bottom small market teams can expect to compete by just using home grown talent. Statistically, only 6 percent of prospects make the majors. What the Cubs are trying to goose is that percentage by doubling down on prospects via trade in order to boost the percentage. Again, that is a strategy that may work.
People give Epstein and Hoyer the benefit of the doubt because they won championships with the Red Sox. But the foundation of that team was built by Dan Duquette, not Theo. And Boston spent huge on free agent talent, something that Ricketts has not authorized during his tenure. And with ownership set to spend $575 million on real estate developments, with no large new revenue streams like broadcast revenue in the near future, it is doubtful that the Cubs will be able to spend like Boston did on championship caliber free agents.
The vast majority of baseball teams have a balanced approach to creating their rosters. They draft amateur talent. They develop quality baseball players. They trade for players to fill needs. They sign impact free agents to fit needs. The Cubs focus on one aspect of a normal approach to team building makes the plan riskier. Prospects are just prospects until they make significant contributions at the major league level.
The smallest market teams put more emphasis on home grown talent due to budget restrictions of operating in a small media market. But those teams get league money to stay "competitive." Even if you buy into the Theo plan of developing a pipeline of young talent that will be the envy of baseball, consider this: the Royals have been basically in rebuild mode since 1985. The first hard phase came to hit in 1994; and the second phase of the rebuild that continues to today began in 2004. As a result, the Royals have yet to get to the post-season. Royals prospects have been in the top player lists for decades, yet the team has not performed as well as their minor league scouting reports.
The mantra this week is that the Cubs have so many talented athletes that they can move the excess infielders to any position and they will succeed. Perhaps, but in the mental game of baseball each player's comfort level is different. Even veterans like Alfonso Soriano took years to adapt to a new position. The pressure on rookies to hit and learn a new position adds to a stressful situation.
The list of under 25 prospects is large: Baez, Alcantara, Soler, Bryant, Almora, Russell, McKinney, Schwarber, Edwards, Candelario, Vogelbach and Johnson. Not all of them will make it to the Cubs major league roster. But proponents of the plan counter by saying that several of these quality prospects can be used to acquire major leaguers like Giancarlo Stanton via trades. Perhaps, but All-Star caliber talent rarely get moved in trades unless they are about to become expensive free agents, at which point it makes more sense to make the best offer to the FA and keep your top prospects.
The other problem with hanging all your chips on prospects is the unknown time table. With each promotion comes greater competition. A Class A phenom can hit his ceiling in Class AA. There are volumes of Class AAA wunderkinds who turn out to be replacement level major leaguers. Everyone is looking for their own Miguel Cabrera to burst on the scene. But that is as rare as finding diamonds in the beach sand.
The proponents of the prospect plan cover their ears when anyone tries to raise a counter-position to the plan. They will not accept any alternatives because they are fully invested in the promise. The promise was a championship. They don't want to even think about the possibility of the prospect plan being a failure because their is no Plan B. There is no goat, black cat or Bartman to blame for that failure.
We all hope that the Cubs get their act together and bring a great team to the majors. The fan base has been waiting for more than a century. But the mere acquisition of prospects does not automatically equate to success. Fans who pay premium prices for major league games have grown tired of the hope and dream story of prospects. At a certain point in the near future, the prospect story needs to play the big theater at Clark and Addison.
From a baseball business perspective, fans should be concerned about the direction of the team. Theo was hired to bring a championship caliber team to Wrigley Field. The Cubs are a major league franchise. The team is asking its fans to pay major league premium prices for Cubs games. The focus of any business should be customer service today not a promise that customer service will "hopefully" be better in the future. If Theo thought he would have more power and control over the club than he did in Boston, then he made a foolish mistake. The business side run by Crane Kenney controls the budgets and revenue. Theo may be handcuffed but it has been reported that the team has increased its scouting department, used more money to sign amateur talent, upgraded facilities and developed foreign academies. The one thing that has not been fully addressed is the major league team, which fields a small market AAA team on a daily basis. The prospect story does not make the Cubs any better on the field in 2015.
The final problem is that the prospect plan has no end game. Epstein refuses to discuss when the new, quality talent will reach the Cubs and make significant contributions. Is it 2016? 2017? 2018? Or even 2020? Some fans and media commentators question why certain prospects seem to be "held back" year after year in the minor league system. Other teams promote their potential stars quickly. Is it the fear of failure? That if the first prospects that hit the majors do not do well, is their a final fan revolt? Does the plan collapse crumble on the weight of expectations? That is the huge gamble on prospects - - - no one truly knows until they reach the majors whether they are any good.
Again, any criticism of the Cubs front office getting prospects in return has been met with vile abuse.
Hammel was signed to be traded for prospects. That was a given.
Samardzija was also going to be traded since the Cubs could not sign him to a long term deal.
The Cubs got the A's best two prospects in Addison Russell and Billy McKinney. That is what excites the pro-Theo crowd. It follows "the Plan" of rebuilding the farm by acquiring quality prospects. That is the way the front office is going to operate.
It is fine that fans buy into the Plan of gathering prospects. Many vocal fans have bought it hook, line and sinker. They have bought into the "hope" that these prospects will be great players, foundational talent that will win championships. Hope is an expectation not a guarantee.
But early on, several people questioned the Plan as being too narrow for a big market club like the Cubs. No one except a few bottom small market teams can expect to compete by just using home grown talent. Statistically, only 6 percent of prospects make the majors. What the Cubs are trying to goose is that percentage by doubling down on prospects via trade in order to boost the percentage. Again, that is a strategy that may work.
People give Epstein and Hoyer the benefit of the doubt because they won championships with the Red Sox. But the foundation of that team was built by Dan Duquette, not Theo. And Boston spent huge on free agent talent, something that Ricketts has not authorized during his tenure. And with ownership set to spend $575 million on real estate developments, with no large new revenue streams like broadcast revenue in the near future, it is doubtful that the Cubs will be able to spend like Boston did on championship caliber free agents.
The vast majority of baseball teams have a balanced approach to creating their rosters. They draft amateur talent. They develop quality baseball players. They trade for players to fill needs. They sign impact free agents to fit needs. The Cubs focus on one aspect of a normal approach to team building makes the plan riskier. Prospects are just prospects until they make significant contributions at the major league level.
The smallest market teams put more emphasis on home grown talent due to budget restrictions of operating in a small media market. But those teams get league money to stay "competitive." Even if you buy into the Theo plan of developing a pipeline of young talent that will be the envy of baseball, consider this: the Royals have been basically in rebuild mode since 1985. The first hard phase came to hit in 1994; and the second phase of the rebuild that continues to today began in 2004. As a result, the Royals have yet to get to the post-season. Royals prospects have been in the top player lists for decades, yet the team has not performed as well as their minor league scouting reports.
The mantra this week is that the Cubs have so many talented athletes that they can move the excess infielders to any position and they will succeed. Perhaps, but in the mental game of baseball each player's comfort level is different. Even veterans like Alfonso Soriano took years to adapt to a new position. The pressure on rookies to hit and learn a new position adds to a stressful situation.
The list of under 25 prospects is large: Baez, Alcantara, Soler, Bryant, Almora, Russell, McKinney, Schwarber, Edwards, Candelario, Vogelbach and Johnson. Not all of them will make it to the Cubs major league roster. But proponents of the plan counter by saying that several of these quality prospects can be used to acquire major leaguers like Giancarlo Stanton via trades. Perhaps, but All-Star caliber talent rarely get moved in trades unless they are about to become expensive free agents, at which point it makes more sense to make the best offer to the FA and keep your top prospects.
The other problem with hanging all your chips on prospects is the unknown time table. With each promotion comes greater competition. A Class A phenom can hit his ceiling in Class AA. There are volumes of Class AAA wunderkinds who turn out to be replacement level major leaguers. Everyone is looking for their own Miguel Cabrera to burst on the scene. But that is as rare as finding diamonds in the beach sand.
The proponents of the prospect plan cover their ears when anyone tries to raise a counter-position to the plan. They will not accept any alternatives because they are fully invested in the promise. The promise was a championship. They don't want to even think about the possibility of the prospect plan being a failure because their is no Plan B. There is no goat, black cat or Bartman to blame for that failure.
We all hope that the Cubs get their act together and bring a great team to the majors. The fan base has been waiting for more than a century. But the mere acquisition of prospects does not automatically equate to success. Fans who pay premium prices for major league games have grown tired of the hope and dream story of prospects. At a certain point in the near future, the prospect story needs to play the big theater at Clark and Addison.
From a baseball business perspective, fans should be concerned about the direction of the team. Theo was hired to bring a championship caliber team to Wrigley Field. The Cubs are a major league franchise. The team is asking its fans to pay major league premium prices for Cubs games. The focus of any business should be customer service today not a promise that customer service will "hopefully" be better in the future. If Theo thought he would have more power and control over the club than he did in Boston, then he made a foolish mistake. The business side run by Crane Kenney controls the budgets and revenue. Theo may be handcuffed but it has been reported that the team has increased its scouting department, used more money to sign amateur talent, upgraded facilities and developed foreign academies. The one thing that has not been fully addressed is the major league team, which fields a small market AAA team on a daily basis. The prospect story does not make the Cubs any better on the field in 2015.
The final problem is that the prospect plan has no end game. Epstein refuses to discuss when the new, quality talent will reach the Cubs and make significant contributions. Is it 2016? 2017? 2018? Or even 2020? Some fans and media commentators question why certain prospects seem to be "held back" year after year in the minor league system. Other teams promote their potential stars quickly. Is it the fear of failure? That if the first prospects that hit the majors do not do well, is their a final fan revolt? Does the plan collapse crumble on the weight of expectations? That is the huge gamble on prospects - - - no one truly knows until they reach the majors whether they are any good.
May 29, 2014
THE WIN STAT
There has been much grousing about one baseball stat: wins.
Just because Jeff Samardzija is pitching great, but getting no run support, there is no reason to eliminate the win statistic. A pitcher's win stats are not irrelevant. It is a historical base line to compare pitchers from various eras.
A major league starting pitcher comes into the game with a mental state of throwing a complete game victory. At the beginning of professional baseball, pitchers were expected to throw complete games. There were no five man rotations or bullpen specialists. Cy Young started more than 40 games a season throughout his career. He averaged in his 22 years as a major league pitcher more than 334 innings per season, which led to an amazing 511 total victories.
A starter is the one player on the field that has the most control of the game. A commanding starting pitcher can make a bad team look good. Steve Carlton won 27 games in 1972 for a Phillies team that only went 59-97. Carlton was the victor in 45.6 percent of the Phillies wins that season.
Of course, the "win" stat is a "team" stat. But since scoring rules require a starter to throw 5 innings in order to "qualify" for a win, this shows the historic value of starting pitchers to the game. The old saying that a pitcher must keep his team "in the game" is a paramount aspect of the chess match between hitter (offense) and defense (pitching and fielding). Since the pitcher starts each play, what he does has a major impact on whether his team wins or loses.
And it makes sense that a starting pitcher that holds his opponent to three runs or less should be in a good position to lead his team to a win.
There are other stats that help evaluate a pitcher: ERA, WHIP, K/BB.
But wins is an easy stat to understand. It is the purpose of the game itself.
Pitchers put the burden upon themselves to will their teams to victories. As Ferguson Jenkins often tells when he got the ball to pitch, he expected from himself a complete game victory. Anything less was unacceptable. That is the approach he was taught as a young player.
But today, the modern pitcher is one of specialization. A starter is no longer pressured into complete games. Pitch counts plus a rotation of bullpen pitchers diminishes the number of innings a starter is expected to throw. A five man rotation decreases the number of starts. Those factor limit a pitcher's win total more than anything else.
Wins for pitchers is a historical stat which still has value. It is a starting point in comparing pitchers.
It is a starting point to sort good pitchers from bad ones. It is also a factor in determining how well teams play when various pitchers are on the mound. But most of all, win totals are still used as evidence in pitcher arbitration and contract negotiations.
Just because Jeff Samardzija is pitching great, but getting no run support, there is no reason to eliminate the win statistic. A pitcher's win stats are not irrelevant. It is a historical base line to compare pitchers from various eras.
A major league starting pitcher comes into the game with a mental state of throwing a complete game victory. At the beginning of professional baseball, pitchers were expected to throw complete games. There were no five man rotations or bullpen specialists. Cy Young started more than 40 games a season throughout his career. He averaged in his 22 years as a major league pitcher more than 334 innings per season, which led to an amazing 511 total victories.
A starter is the one player on the field that has the most control of the game. A commanding starting pitcher can make a bad team look good. Steve Carlton won 27 games in 1972 for a Phillies team that only went 59-97. Carlton was the victor in 45.6 percent of the Phillies wins that season.
Of course, the "win" stat is a "team" stat. But since scoring rules require a starter to throw 5 innings in order to "qualify" for a win, this shows the historic value of starting pitchers to the game. The old saying that a pitcher must keep his team "in the game" is a paramount aspect of the chess match between hitter (offense) and defense (pitching and fielding). Since the pitcher starts each play, what he does has a major impact on whether his team wins or loses.
And it makes sense that a starting pitcher that holds his opponent to three runs or less should be in a good position to lead his team to a win.
There are other stats that help evaluate a pitcher: ERA, WHIP, K/BB.
But wins is an easy stat to understand. It is the purpose of the game itself.
Pitchers put the burden upon themselves to will their teams to victories. As Ferguson Jenkins often tells when he got the ball to pitch, he expected from himself a complete game victory. Anything less was unacceptable. That is the approach he was taught as a young player.
But today, the modern pitcher is one of specialization. A starter is no longer pressured into complete games. Pitch counts plus a rotation of bullpen pitchers diminishes the number of innings a starter is expected to throw. A five man rotation decreases the number of starts. Those factor limit a pitcher's win total more than anything else.
Wins for pitchers is a historical stat which still has value. It is a starting point in comparing pitchers.
It is a starting point to sort good pitchers from bad ones. It is also a factor in determining how well teams play when various pitchers are on the mound. But most of all, win totals are still used as evidence in pitcher arbitration and contract negotiations.
April 17, 2014
FANS
By its very definition, "fans" is a personal opinion on one's own state of something or someone. Early in this Cubs season, the fan community has started to snark at each other on what it is to be a Cub fan. It is hard to debate conflicting religious tenets, but even for those who believe baseball is their personal savior, one must respect each other's views.
However, there are various aspects of being a baseball and a Cubs fan.
First, you may be just a fan of the game itself. You don't have a rooting interest in any one team or any one player. You watch a baseball contest for its purity. You just want to see a well played but exciting game.
Or, you may be a fan of the team like the Cubs. You may have been indoctrinated as a fan at an early age when a parent or grandparent took you to your first contest at Wrigley Field. You may have marveled at the miracle of a vast green park inside some brick walls of an old building in a tired city residential neighborhood. The game was faster, the players bigger and plays more exciting than the sandlot games back home. Your parent would have told you about the players, what to look for, and the history of the game and the team. And once you liked baseball as a sport, it is easier to follow it by following "your" team.
There are various levels of devotion. A fan may like the players on the team, but dislike their manager. Fans may like the team and the manager, but dislike or mistrust management. Or, the fans may have outright contempt for ownership like many Yankee fans had during the George Steinbrenner era or when Charlie Finley owned the Oakland A's. Then, there were some fans who liked their owner better than the team itself, such as many years when Bill Veeck owned the White Sox. Then, there were times when the fans did not like the players on their team such as when late in the Dusty Baker days, his players started to assault the respected team broadcasters. A fan can oscillate between the various plus and minuses of the entire organizational spectrum. Some fans may hold a grudge against management for not hiring a guy like Ryne Sandberg to manager their club. Some fans may hold a grudge against a manager for benching their favorite player. Some fans may head slap themselves after each odd managerial decision that cost the team a victory.
And of course there will be fans who will remain die-hard fans through the good, the bad and the ugly.
The 2014 Cubs bring out a range of emotions in the fandom. For some, the
Cubs continue to be their beautiful baseball mistress who is having a
serious bout of projectile vomiting. She will get over it some day. Some believe that that the team makeover is trying to put make-up on an old 500 pound sow. It won't work. Some find dark humor in the badness of team play. The players can find work if keystone comedies ever make a come back. Others think that this is a long incubation process that will work in the near future. The same was said in the original Jurassic Park movie. That turned out well, if you were a meat eating dinosaur. A few think the Ricketts are way over their heads; they don't know how to run a baseball team let alone a business in the city. The new ownership may set back the franchise like P.K. Wrigley did - - - extending the non-championship for several more generations. The current roster may be filled with nice guys, but nice guys in life most often finish last. And who is to blame for that? A little bit for everyone associated with the team, including the fans.
If the fans view their baseball team as a civic icon, then the fans should demand better of their players and ownership. If owners truly believe in winning (and not the mere marketing words to sell expensive tickets), then owners should demand better accountability from their employees, from management to the players. It seems obvious that all three elements of the baseball pyramid want the same thing: to win. Owners, managers, players and fans all want to win the World Series. In Chicago, we know how nice that accomplishment feels when the White Sox won in 2005 (going a remarkable 11-1 in the playoffs).
So it not really fair to tell a fan he is not "supportive" enough of the current Cubs. Likewise, it is not unfair to say that the current Cubs have not earned the trust and money of loyal patrons. The sniping between Cub fans at the early stage of this season does not seem productive; it is just another in a long line of distractions which gets us from the true issue confronting everyone: winning games.
In order to keep one's sanity this year, you may be just a fan of the game itself. You don't have a vested interest in the Cubs or its players. You watch a baseball games for the good plays, the bad plays, the comedy of errors and the occasional win. At the very least, you may just want to see a well played game played by some team on the field. Or something unusual like Monday's game in Denver where the Reds and Rockies hit 10 home runs in 6 innings before the game was suspended due to bad weather. If you don't find some alternative pleasure from just rooting for the Cubs to win, you may end up wasting another summer.
However, there are various aspects of being a baseball and a Cubs fan.
First, you may be just a fan of the game itself. You don't have a rooting interest in any one team or any one player. You watch a baseball contest for its purity. You just want to see a well played but exciting game.
Or, you may be a fan of the team like the Cubs. You may have been indoctrinated as a fan at an early age when a parent or grandparent took you to your first contest at Wrigley Field. You may have marveled at the miracle of a vast green park inside some brick walls of an old building in a tired city residential neighborhood. The game was faster, the players bigger and plays more exciting than the sandlot games back home. Your parent would have told you about the players, what to look for, and the history of the game and the team. And once you liked baseball as a sport, it is easier to follow it by following "your" team.
There are various levels of devotion. A fan may like the players on the team, but dislike their manager. Fans may like the team and the manager, but dislike or mistrust management. Or, the fans may have outright contempt for ownership like many Yankee fans had during the George Steinbrenner era or when Charlie Finley owned the Oakland A's. Then, there were some fans who liked their owner better than the team itself, such as many years when Bill Veeck owned the White Sox. Then, there were times when the fans did not like the players on their team such as when late in the Dusty Baker days, his players started to assault the respected team broadcasters. A fan can oscillate between the various plus and minuses of the entire organizational spectrum. Some fans may hold a grudge against management for not hiring a guy like Ryne Sandberg to manager their club. Some fans may hold a grudge against a manager for benching their favorite player. Some fans may head slap themselves after each odd managerial decision that cost the team a victory.
And of course there will be fans who will remain die-hard fans through the good, the bad and the ugly.
If the fans view their baseball team as a civic icon, then the fans should demand better of their players and ownership. If owners truly believe in winning (and not the mere marketing words to sell expensive tickets), then owners should demand better accountability from their employees, from management to the players. It seems obvious that all three elements of the baseball pyramid want the same thing: to win. Owners, managers, players and fans all want to win the World Series. In Chicago, we know how nice that accomplishment feels when the White Sox won in 2005 (going a remarkable 11-1 in the playoffs).
So it not really fair to tell a fan he is not "supportive" enough of the current Cubs. Likewise, it is not unfair to say that the current Cubs have not earned the trust and money of loyal patrons. The sniping between Cub fans at the early stage of this season does not seem productive; it is just another in a long line of distractions which gets us from the true issue confronting everyone: winning games.
In order to keep one's sanity this year, you may be just a fan of the game itself. You don't have a vested interest in the Cubs or its players. You watch a baseball games for the good plays, the bad plays, the comedy of errors and the occasional win. At the very least, you may just want to see a well played game played by some team on the field. Or something unusual like Monday's game in Denver where the Reds and Rockies hit 10 home runs in 6 innings before the game was suspended due to bad weather. If you don't find some alternative pleasure from just rooting for the Cubs to win, you may end up wasting another summer.
April 15, 2014
EVERYONE IS TIRED OF LOSING
At age 29, Jeff Samardzija is nearing his peak pitching years.
And he is clearly frustrated with the position he is in with the Cubs. He has put his house on the market; he has not signed a contract extension; he knows he will likely be traded this season.
He spoke to Dan Patrick this week on his off-day.
In the midst of another rebuilding season, Samardzija acknowledges that his time as Cub could end.
"I don't know, I think it really depends on how this team turns out this season. I think it's looking like it, but I don't want to say anything for sure because I don't want to be traded," he said.
However, the frustration is apparent. "I want to win," Samardzija said. "That's my number one goal. I don't care about anything else but winning."
The Shark has helped his cause in getting traded to a contender. He has a 1.29 ERA and 1.05 WHIP in his first three starts of the season, but has no wins. He knows that his career cannot wait until the Cubs young prospects arrive in 2018 or 2019.With the rash of Tommy John injuries this season, Samardzija value will be high - - - if the Cubs pull the trigger early.
Samardzija is outspoken about the losing ways. This may be a good thing to remind young players that losing is not acceptable at the major league level. But at the same time, executives may classify the attitude as being destructive to long term clubhouse chemistry.
If the Cubs continue their annual strategy of tanking the season for high draft picks, then two Cub starters will be traded by July. Jason Hammel was acquired this off-season for that reason. That leaves Samardzija is the second viable trade chip.
But the Cubs have no one ready to replace either Hammel or Samardzija. You would have to get major league ready AAA pitchers in return to make sense of such trades. Very few teams want to get rid of their quality and controllable pitchers.
We can see Samardzija brew a tempest in a teapot if the season continues on its natural course to a 95 plus loss record. At least the competitive fire still burns within him. And that is a valuable commodity in itself.
And he is clearly frustrated with the position he is in with the Cubs. He has put his house on the market; he has not signed a contract extension; he knows he will likely be traded this season.
He spoke to Dan Patrick this week on his off-day.
In the midst of another rebuilding season, Samardzija acknowledges that his time as Cub could end.
"I don't know, I think it really depends on how this team turns out this season. I think it's looking like it, but I don't want to say anything for sure because I don't want to be traded," he said.
However, the frustration is apparent. "I want to win," Samardzija said. "That's my number one goal. I don't care about anything else but winning."
The Shark has helped his cause in getting traded to a contender. He has a 1.29 ERA and 1.05 WHIP in his first three starts of the season, but has no wins. He knows that his career cannot wait until the Cubs young prospects arrive in 2018 or 2019.With the rash of Tommy John injuries this season, Samardzija value will be high - - - if the Cubs pull the trigger early.
Samardzija is outspoken about the losing ways. This may be a good thing to remind young players that losing is not acceptable at the major league level. But at the same time, executives may classify the attitude as being destructive to long term clubhouse chemistry.
If the Cubs continue their annual strategy of tanking the season for high draft picks, then two Cub starters will be traded by July. Jason Hammel was acquired this off-season for that reason. That leaves Samardzija is the second viable trade chip.
But the Cubs have no one ready to replace either Hammel or Samardzija. You would have to get major league ready AAA pitchers in return to make sense of such trades. Very few teams want to get rid of their quality and controllable pitchers.
We can see Samardzija brew a tempest in a teapot if the season continues on its natural course to a 95 plus loss record. At least the competitive fire still burns within him. And that is a valuable commodity in itself.
January 6, 2014
EARLY 2014 PROJECTION
A Brewers fan site has projected the 2014 NL Central wins based on current roster WAR values.
NL Central Projected 2014 WAR
|
|||||
| Team | Cardinals | Pirates | Reds | Brewers | Cubs |
|
C
|
4.6
|
3.6
|
2.7
|
3.5
|
3.6
|
|
1B
|
3.3
|
1.8
|
5.1
|
0.2
|
3.7
|
|
2B
|
2.7
|
3.6
|
2.5
|
1.6
|
1.3
|
|
SS
|
3
|
2.5
|
1.9
|
2.7
|
2.8
|
|
3B
|
4
|
3.7
|
3
|
3
|
1.6
|
|
LF
|
4.2
|
3.2
|
0.6
|
4.2
|
1.1
|
|
CF
|
3.3
|
6.7
|
1.3
|
4.3
|
1.9
|
|
RF
|
2.9
|
1.7
|
3
|
0.6
|
1.2
|
|
DH
|
-0.5
|
-0.7
|
-1.4
|
-1.5
|
-1.2
|
|
SP
|
12.8
|
11
|
10.9
|
8.2
|
11
|
|
RP
|
1.2
|
1.8
|
2.1
|
0.7
|
0.9
|
|
Total Wins
|
90
|
87
|
80
|
76
|
76
|
December 15, 2013
PREPARE FOR WAR
“ This is no time for ease and comfort. It is the time to dare and endure. ”
Winston Churchill
From a fan's perspective, each season is a war.
Their army is their team. Their foe is their game opponents. Each series is a battle.
Win each series, you will the battle in the standings.
Whether your team is equipped for battle like a superpower like the U.S., Britain or China or like Albania depends upon one's opening day roster. But before any war, there is preparation. Training. Developing. Drafting. Preparation. Strategy. A Plan.
The days of soldiers standing shoulder to shoulder to walk across the battle field to be cut down by their opponent ended in the Revolutionary War with American Indian guerrilla warfare tactics and Pickett's Charge in the Civil War. But the Cubs appear to continue this tradition.
There is a growing unease within the ranks of Cubs fans over the state of the club. Cub fans have been taking fire from rival fans in St. Louis, Milwaukee and Cincinnati over the last few years. It is hard to defend a bad team.
Most military strategists will say that it is either to defend the high ground than climb up the hill to take the high ground. The same is true in the standings. It is much harder to dig out of the hole of last place to fight your way back to the top of the standings than to keep the top of the hill.
The fans are like the fife and drum corps - - - they have no weapons in which to fight - - - but are front and center in the battles. They get a lot of flack from both sides.
The fan unease is coming to the surface as the Cubs do little change the major league roster into a reasonable fighting machine. Fans look at the 5 year tenure of new owner Ricketts as being a descending spiral of doubt. Fans now look at the 3rd year of the new front office as being narrow minded, arrogant and risky. The team is not spending money at the major league level to improve talent. It is filling roster holes with leftovers from other team's AAAA journeymen stock pile (one cannot argue that Kottaras, Ruggiano or Wesley is a significant upgrade over anyone on last year's team.)
The idea that one day the baseball and business sides of the operation will converge into a glorious championship season is an illusion. You can package dog waste in a pretty box with a ribbon and call it Hope. The business side won't receive any jolt in revenue until a new broadcast deal is struck in 2019-2020. But that assumes that the billion dollar cable network deals will still be viable in 6 years with the ever changing landscape of entertainment media. The baseball side won't sign big money free agents because the front office is banking that all their top prospects will make a huge impact when they reach the majors. Prospects are the most unpredictable aspect of a baseball operation, but the front office tells fans that this plan is golden - - - the secret weapon of success. A strategy that no other major market team has ever done. Is this really thinking outside a pine box?
The Cubs have been hard to watch the last two seasons. Fans have begun to lose interest in their team. The club has been aggressively marketing all things Cubs except for a quality product on the field. Frustrated fans are to the point of asking why their team is not doing enough to reverse the horrible record on the field. Answers such as "be patient," "it's a process," "be loyal," "we have a plan," and "you'd be on the ground floor to something great" have nothing to do with fielding a competitive ball team in 2014. Fans are coming to the realization that the future is now when they are paying premium prices for a bad minor league product.
Fans look back at the last three seasons as totally lost opportunities. The team traded away a dozen or so veteran players for two dozen minor league prospects. The turnover has left deep holes in the major league roster filled with journeymen players. It is like a farmer who tills in his field before harvest, then hopes that any random soldier stalks of corn will repopulate all the fields by the next season.
If the Cubs just tried to fix one or two positions each off season, the team could have a competitive roster for 2014. Instead, the holes at 3B, LF, CF, 2B continued to be filled with utility players. The Cubs have turned over their starting rotation and bullpen, but have kept very little major league talent in the process. If a team is unwilling to spend money on free agents to fill needs, then the team will be fighting an uphill battle with very little ammo. Hence, the 2012 and 2013 disasters.
And when the team did make a "core" acquisition, the front office signed SP Edwin Jackson to a long term deal.
Even the world's greatest armies have collapsed when their subjects lost trust in their general's leadership. The Union Army was in disarray and defeatist until President Lincoln installed General Grant in command. It is getting to the point of judgment on the Cubs new front office.
If the Cubs don't care to wage a good fight in the NL Central, they should be aware of the storm clouds of a civil war within its own rank and file fan base if things don't change quickly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)