Hey nineteen, that's 'Retha Franklin

Needlessly in keeping with the Steely Dan lyric in the post title, the Cubs weren't getting much R-E-S-P-E-C-T from the Brewers following Tuesday night's 10-7 loss, the Cubs' third in four games to Milwaukee this year and particularly disappointing since it was a rare example of the Cubs actually getting to Ben Sheets a bit. But things turned around in a big way tonight, with Geovany Soto blasting two three-run homers and the Cubs scoring five runs or more in three separate innings - including six in the first that turned out to be all they needed - as they absolutely rolled to a 19-5 laugher over the Brewers.

Within a couple minutes of the opening pitch, it became clear to me - and I said this to my dad during the first inning, while the score was still 3-0 at most - that Suppan had absolutely nothing. His fastball was topping out at about 89 and he was nibbling like crazy. It was the kind of pitching performance, in other words, that used to give the Cubs absolute fits, as evidenced by his 8-2 win on April 2 or by his career 3.13 ERA against the Cubs, nearly a run and a half below his career total. But these are the new, patient Cubs, and a night after walking eight times in a loss, the Cubs walked nine times, though just one was off Suppan. The key, though, was getting into hitter's counts, making Suppan throw pitches, and waiting for the right pitch - and then thumping those right pitches, to the tune of 11 hits and 11 runs, eight earned, charged to Suppan in just 3.2 innings. Suppan averaged 3.83 pitches per batter faced, and against the Brewers' four relievers it was even better, as they combined to throw 4.67 pitches per batter. Patience at the plate does, indeed, pay off. As I said to my dad a little later in the game, this team is starting to remind me of those immensely successful late 90s Yankees teams (much though I hate to make the comparison), at least on offense - what made those teams devastating was a combination of patience at the plate (they led the AL in OBP in 1997 and 1998 and were second in 1999), good baserunning, timely power, and the fact that pretty much every spot in the lineup was capable of beating you in some way, usually with an obnoxious, back-breaking hit. It's still early, of course, but the Cubs have now drawn 130 walks in 27 games, nearly five walks a game. Sorry for all the italics, but I think they're merited. Five walks a game??? The 2007 Cubs, by comparison, drew 500 walks all year (15th in the NL), just over three a game, and the 2006 Cubs - as you might guess - drew just 395, dead last in the NL and under two and a half per game. You really almost have to try to walk so few times. The 2002 Cubs were the last Cubs team to finish higher than 14th in the NL in walks, and also the last to draw more than 500 (585, with 103 of those belonging to Sammy Sosa). The 2008 Cubs are on pace to draw 780 walks, the most of any Cubs team in the divisional era (1969-present), with only the 1975 and 2000 squads even coming within 150 of that mark. It's likely the Cubs will tail off this pace, of course; only four teams in the last decade in the NL have drawn 700 walks, and three of those made the playoffs. (The fourth was the 2004 Giants for whom Barry Bonds walked 232 times, 120 intentional. The Giants missed the playoffs, in part because he was the only full-time guy on the team who was really good at getting on base, but they did win 91 games in spite of a pitching staff whose 2-4 starters were Brett Tomko, Kirk Rueter, and Jerome Williams.) The point of all this: walks are good.

Of course it bears mentioning that Ryan Dempster and company were probably pretty thankful for the 19 runs of support, since the four Cubs pitchers threw an average of 4.35 pitchers per batter themselves, with Dempster walking five despite holding an enormous lead in every inning but one. I'll grant that the Brewers have good hitters and you can't consider a 6-0 lead totally safe when you just watched them score ten last night, but falling behind 2-0 and 3-1 on guys probably isn't the way to avoid having to throw them a ton of get-'em-over pitches. Dempster didn't do that, of course, allowing just four hits, but that's because he walked five. Probably not the sort of thing you can sustain over the course of an entire season. The Cubs are on pace to walk 576, about the same as last year's number, which isn't great; the NL leaders in 2007, San Diego, walked only 474.

So, clearly, still a lot of room for improvement. But with this team on pace to have three 30-homer guys (not including Soriano, who we know can hit them in bunches) and four 100-RBI guys, I'm pretty happy to have a pitching staff that, even when clearly not yet in top form in most cases (Zambrano and Marmol excepted), can at least keep us in games. As long as that improves over the summer, and I would hope it would, and as long as the offense doesn't tail off - and you'd think it would only improve in the warmer months as it has in the past - well, we could be in for a pretty good summer. As it is, the Cubs set a franchise record for wins before May 1 with 17, although it does help when you start playing on March 31.

Rocky Mountain low

Obviously you can't win them all. I'll take a two-game split on the road, and clearly if the Cubs win six of every seven they're going to be juuuuuust fine. But you've gotta be a little disappointed in today's game. Since managing a mere three hits off Cole Hamels and two relievers (just one off Hamels in seven innings) on April 12, the Cubs had banged out at least 8 hits in every game, and in the ten games since, seven games featured double-digit hits (all at least 12) by the Cubs. So I suppose another game like this was probably inevitable. But still. The part that I don't get is, based on his stats so far, Aaron Cook kills lefties. Yet because of all the lefty pitchers waiting in Washington, Piniella gave the lefty platoon guys a start today - and three of the Cubs' four hits off Cook came from Mike Fontenot and Felix Pie. Pie even went 2-for-3! And each had one RBI, of course the only two the Cubs got in the 4-2 loss.

Positives: You have to like Pie going 2-for-3 with an RBI, especially against a guy who notionally kills lefties. Maybe he really is getting it. In addition, Marquis didn't have a great game, but he did chew up seven innings, giving the bullpen a needed rest, and while he allowed eight hits and two walks, he only let in two runs.

Negatives: One day after being the hero, Ramirez was conspicuously absent, going o-for-4 with two Ks. But, it happens. Not a huge negative. The Cubs' non-pitching defense made an error for the first time since the 9-2 loss to the Reds on April 17, and it was a pretty crucial one; rushing to turn a double play, Theriot dropped the ball and no outs were recorded. Theriot said after the game that if he hadn't turned the double play, a run would have scored, so he was rushing; this is true, but the run scored anyway, and the Rockies were able to add a second run as a result of there still only being one out after the play. Of course, Lee, Ramirez and Fukudome couldn't do anything off Fuentes in the ninth, so maybe it didn't really matter. Final negative, however: the Cubs loaded the bases with no outs in the eighth (trailing 2-1 at the time) and were only able to push across a single tying run. Theriot lined into a double play (Fontenot was caught off first), which really is just bad luck, but man, Theriot was kind of the goat of this game, huh?

As I said, can't win 'em all. I'm not broken up about the loss or anything. But it was a pretty winnable game in spite of the offensive struggles, and a couple mistakes gave it away. You hate to lose games that way.

Beat the Mets, beat the Mets

Step right up and sweep the Mets
Start Cedeno, start Pie
Guaranteed to have a heck of a day

Yeah, I know - it was only two games, and it's still just April, and we didn't face Santana. But that was two big wins over the presumptive NL champions (if you listen to sportswriters), and both times it was good pitching combined with timely hitting. Zambrano was strong on Monday, and while the five-run eighth was a gift from Jose Reyes, the Cubs were still able to exploit it. Lilly was as good as he's been all year on Tuesday, though that's kind of praising with faint damn. He did walk four, and had similar problems to what he'd been having - after cruising through three (and one trip around the Mets' lineup), he labored through the fourth and sixth, loading the bases with one out both times and somewhat miraculously giving up just a single run. Howry and Marmol slammed the door in the seventh and eighth, and while Hart was a bit of an adventure in the ninth, he didn't give up a run and it was 8-1 at that point anyway.

Is there anything to complain about from this two-game set? Outscoring the Mets 15-2? Pie going 3-for-6 in the two games including his home run to put Monday's game away? Cedeno going 3-for-9 with seven RBI and a grand slam? The team taking eight walks on Tuesday? About the only dull spot was Soto's 0-for-4 on Monday, and after coming in as a late pinch-hitter in Tuesday's game he reached in both plate appearances and he's still hitting .317.

Everyone is hitting, in fact, especially if Pie is legitimately finding it. Every Cub with 50 plate appearances who isn't currently on the DL has an OBP of .400 or better. Read that again. Every last one, with the inactive Soriano being the only exception. Seven of the top 23 OBP guys in the NL, with 50 or more PAs, are Cubs.

I mean, look. This probably won't keep up. I doubt seven Cubs regulars will finish the season with OBPs of .400 or better. Frankly, I'd be reasonably shocked if more than two Cubs regulars - specifically Fukudome and Lee - finished the season with OBPs of .400 or better. But you've gotta love it while it's happening.

Am I a little nervous that they might be peaking too early, à la the Brewers last year? Eh, maybe a little, but the Brewers' biggest problem was and continues to be their bullpen, and the Cubs' bullpen is a lot better than Milwaukee's. Like, by several miles. And it's not like I'd rather they got off to a slow start, especially when all the chasing they did clearly seemed to have gassed them by the end of last year. I'd much rather the Cubs be the team with an eight-game lead in June; I've got more confidence in them to hold it, as strange as it sounds to say that. And yes, I know that the Cubs are off to their best 20-game start since 1975, and more importantly I know that that team wasn't very good and eventually finished fifth. I don't think lack of talent is an issue with the current edition. Hell, if Cedeno, Johnson and Pie all keep hitting, surplus of talent is going to be an issue. What does Lou - a noted sucker for the hot hand - do when every last hand is hot?

And here's a thought question: what happens if Soriano comes back and doesn't start hitting within a few days? What if that coincides with the team's hot streak petering out? Surely you can't justify benching Soriano, but could you hit him fifth? Sixth?

(Just for fun, the 20-game starts of the Cubs' playoff teams of my lifetime:
1984: 12-8
1989: 10-10
1998: 12-8
2003: 13-7
2007: 7-13

Man, that last one sticks out like a sore thumb, doesn't it? I think we're all pretty glad they've gotten off to such a hot start this year. Here's to following a 7-1 homestand with a strong road trip.)

Lucky 13s

The Cubs just scored 13 runs in back to back games. Yeah, they were both against the Pirates, but you have to like the way the offense looked - the team seems more patient at the plate, and right now everyone is hitting. Ramirez went 4-for-5 today to raise his average to .275, and every single other player who has been even close to a regular, with the obvious exception of the injured Soriano, is hitting over .300, and most are OBPing .400. Right now I believe the Cubs have six of the top 21 players in the NL in OBP who have at least 25 at-bats. (Sure, that's not many, but it allows us to account for Reed Johnson's hot start.)

The season is 1/9th over, which sounds like a lot more than it actually is with 144 games to go. The Cubs' start has been pretty strong, but I don't want to get too excited, even if they are alone in first at this moment, and even if the first day of 2007 on which that could have been said was August 17. There are a few reasons not to go crazy just yet:

1. Who have we played?
Answer: kinda nobody, or more accurately, we've racked up the wins against nobody. Of the Cubs' twelve wins, fully half have come against the Pirates, who at the moment have given up more runs than any team in baseball (although clearly we've assisted them in this endeavor). Of the other six, four have come against Cincinnati and Houston, the other two teams expected to be in the "second division" of the NL Central. In six games against the only two likely contenders we've faced, we're 2-4 against Milwaukee and Philadelphia. That's a small sample size, but so is 18 games. Derrek Lee will probably not hit 63 home runs and Ryan Dempster is not going to go 27-0.

2. The bullpen has looked kinda lousy so far.
One of the more problematic "x9" extrapolations is that Carlos Marmol is on pace to throw 111 innings. A quick search reveals that no full-time reliever threw as many as 100 innings last year. Generally speaking, it's just not done. Hart has thrown even more innings than Marmol so far (though by just a single out); they both came up as prospective starters, but the routine is so different, as we all know, that you can't just ask a reliever to throw 120 innings just because he has some starting experience. I imagine that Piniella is aware of this, and it's still early, but given Marmol's value you don't want to see him gassed. Of course it doesn't help that he may be the only lights-out guy we have right now; Howry is having yet another miserable start, Wuertz seems to have completely lost it over the last ten days, Hart can be up and down. Wood has looked good for the most part, but he does have two shaky outings out of nine. Lieber has also been stellar thus far but I hesitate to categorize him as "lights-out" since he's certainly not the kind of guy you bring in to blow away the opposition.

On the other hand, the bullpen ERA as a whole is only 3.48, while the team ERA is 4.00. Which brings us to problem #3:

3. What the fuck is Ted Lilly's problem?
Any pitcher can look bad in a four-start stretch. But 0-3, 9.16 is pretty terrible, and even more so (a) in comparison to the rest of the staff and (b) given Lilly's success last year. As it stands, right now he's responsible for half the Cubs' losses, and with 19 earned runs allowed, he's responsible for 24% of all their earned runs, and 22% of the total, which might be a reasonable percentage if teams didn't have relievers. He's only pitched 11.5% of the innings, of course, which means he's doubling his share of the runs allowed.

To be fair to Ted, the Cubs have scored a total of five runs in his three losses, meaning that you could slash his ERA in half and he'd probably still be 0-3. But then you remember this game, in which he was handed a 7-0 lead after three and still couldn't get out of the fourth, and you think that he could just as easily be 0-4.

The particularly frustrating thing about Lilly so far is that he has a tendency to look more or less lights out the first time through an order, only to get hammered when it comes back around. Here's a quick look at his four starts so far:

April 2 vs. MIL: Lilly gives up a first-pitch home run to Rickie Weeks but otherwise cruises through the first three innings, striking out four and allowing just one other man to reach base (and that on an error). But in the fourth he allows two more runs on three straight hits, and he exits in the fifth after hitting Prince Fielder; he throws 77 pitches in 4.2 IP.

April 7 at PIT: I already referenced this one. Though Lilly allowed three hits in the first three innings, no Pirate got past first. Then came the fourth inning, which went like so: flyout, single, walk, walk (bases loaded), popout, run-scoring single plus throwing error that scores a second run, run-scoring single plus throwing error that scores a second run, run-scoring triple, Lilly yanked. To be fair, again, he was killed by his defense here, what with the back-to-back throwing errors from Cedeno and Ramirez, and he left with a chance to win the game which the bullpen subsequently coughed up. But he also threw 80 pitches in less than four innings.

April 12 at PHI: As in his first start, Lilly gave up an early home run (this one scoring two runs, to Pedro Feliz) and was a little shaky in the second, but had few problems in the first, third and fourth. In the fifth, however, he went single, foulout, double, run-scoring wild pitch, two-run homer. Through 4.1 innings, he threw 86 pitches.

April 17 vs. CIN: Lilly looked good by comparison in this game, going a full six innings (and lowering his ERA by more than three-quarters of a run in the process to its current robust 9.16). But he was plagued by the same issues. After an uneventful first three innings, Lilly struck out Ken Griffey Jr. to start the fourth only to load the bases on a single and two walks and then serve up a bases-clearing double to Joey Votto. After making it through the fifth with little issue, he proceeded to give up a two-run homer to Votto in the sixth. This all came after he struck out Votto his first time up, of course.

You could argue that Lilly has caught some bad breaks, and he has, and you could argue that the sample size is small, and it is. But of course baseball isn't all about stats, and it's pretty obvious from watching the games that he just doesn't have his best stuff right now, which is probably why he can get away with things on his first trip through the order but gets knocked around as soon as the hitters see what he's doing and know which adjustments to make. This could be a really long summer if he doesn't figure things out pretty soon. With his next scheduled start against the Mets on Tuesday, I'm not exactly eager to see what's going to happen if he doesn't.

I hate to be a Gloomy Gus on the day the Cubs took over first place in the Central, but let's be real here - the next two games against the Mets are going to tell us a lot. Is it just a coincidence that the current hot streak (52 runs in six games) has come against the Reds and Pirates, or is this something that can actually be sustained against upcoming opponents of better quality? Of the Cubs' next 19 games - one more than they've played so far - thirteen are against the Mets, Cardinals, Brewers, Rockies and current ML-best Diamondbacks (the remaining six, against the Reds and Nationals, had better be 4-2 at worst). If the Cubs can finish that next 19 games - ending three weeks from now on May 11 - at no worse than 11-8, I will get a lot more excited, especially if the offense keeps looking strong and especially if the pitching improves a bit. Ten wins or worse - especially if at least half those wins are against Cincinnati and Washington - and I will raise my eyebrows a little. (Yes, 10-9 would be over .500 and hardly shameful, but I really want to see this team make a statement when faced with so many contenders, especially after going 2-4 in their only two tests thus far.)

Stop being idiots

By now I assume most of you have heard about Marty Brenneman's anti-Cubs-fan rant during Wednesday's blowout win over the Reds - after an Adam Dunn home run (with the Cubs already ahead by a sizable amount), people in the bleachers threw about 15 baseballs onto the field. Brenneman was, well, not pleased. I won't bother reprinting the remarks since you've probably read them and because they kind of annoy me. Google them if you have to. But I will say that I don't totally disagree with him. The kind of Cubs fans he was talking about? The rest of us hate them too. I had a conversation with a guy at work today who was saying he hates going to games because of all the people who are just there to get drunk, or who show up already drunk, and in general could not care less about the actual baseball game except that it's a convenient excuse for them to be loud and bothersome. You can't escape it when you leave the bleachers, either; I was in the upper deck last time, one row from the roof, and was still sitting next to a guy pouring Captain Morgan into his Coke and asking who was up during every single at-bat.

Real fans of every team hate the bandwagoners, and because of the cachet of Wrigley Field and the amount of college students and other twenty- and thirty-somethings who flock to the biggest city between the coasts, the Cubs have a lot of them. Unfortunately, it's something that the rest of us kind of have to accept. But this kind of goes beyond the pale, don't you think?

I mean, honestly? People find that funny? More importantly, do people think that they're supporting the Cubs' acquisition of Fukudome when they wear something like that? It's like Asians are the last minority that it's still okay to make fun of. Do you think that there is a white person in the world who would be caught dead wearing that shirt if it was a black-face bear with huge lips and the caption "Holy cow, n****r"? I'm going to go ahead and say no. And I love the defense that "an Oriental guy" (nice, by the way) created it - even if true, does that mean that he speaks for how all Asian people would feel about seeing that kind of caricature, or that if one Asian guy thinks it's cool that white people no longer have to worry about it being a stereotype? It's just ridiculous. Anyone who tries to walk into Wrigley wearing that should be tossed out on their ass.

And that's the kind of fans who Marty Brenneman was talking about. And he may have gone a little over-the-top, but you know what? He wasn't really all that wrong.

Who's Sori now?

I'm pretty sure I'm on record about this somewhere, but I never liked Soriano's little hop when he catches the ball in left, and while this isn't an I-told-you-so, he's apparently pulled a Bill Gramatica on us.

For all I know, as I write this, he could end up being day-to-day. But maybe he misses a couple weeks. We survived last August, but I'd rather this not end up being a pattern with the $136-million man, wouldn't you? This is a guy who played in fewer than 156 games just once prior to coming to Chicago (145 in his first year with Texas); last year he only managed 135. Not a promising start, time-wise. Yeah, he still hit 33 home runs (thanks to clubbing what, 14 in September?), and missing 30 games is probably not a big deal if you produce in October (although he didn't, not that anyone else did), but this guy was signed to be the missing piece. So far there's been an awful lot of time where he's just been... missing.

On the bright side, is there any way this means Matt Murton could get some playing time in left? Surely they have to call up an outfielder if Soriano misses much of any time, right? Can this please happen? At the very least it could be a good audition for a trade, since right now we're kind of burying his value.

In other news, can Michael Wuertz please get his head screwed back on? Five pitches, one for a home run and the next four balls? Brilliant. Wasn't this guy lights-out until this weekend?

Extra, extra

So after the Cubs held on in 12 innings on Monday, everyone said what a good thing it was that they had an off day on Tuesday, so the spent bullpen could rest. This proceeded to become entirely irrelevant as the Cubs blew leads of 2-0 and 4-2 before finally winning 6-4 in fifteen innings. (Oddly, the Cubs' last 15-inning game was also against Pittsburgh, on May 8 of last year. The last 15-or-more-inning game that the Cubs won was an 18-inning defeat of the Astros on 8/15/06.) At least this time the bullpen was more naturally stretched, as Dempster turned in his second straight strong start, allowing just one hit (and two walks) in seven innings. He deserves to be 2-0, but fate had other plans; by which I mean Carlos Marmol allowing a run in the eighth and then Kerry Wood blowing his first save thanks to a Jason Bay solo homer in the bottom of the ninth. Then Aramis Ramirez, in the midst of apparently waking up with a 3-for-7 day, hit a two-run homer in the top of the 14th... which Kevin Hart, trying to save his own win, coughed back up in the bottom of the inning. It took a two-run single by Felix Pie, of all people, in the 15th to finally win it, although we still had to sweat through a newly called-up Sean Marshall giving up a one-out double in the bottom of the inning before closing the deal for his first career save. Mercifully, the Cubs have another off day on the upcoming Monday, but it would be nice if we could get some deep starts in the next few games.

I didn't get to see much of the game, but I was a little stunned to come back from a late-ish dinner to find that it was still going on. What is it about the Pirates lately?

Any which way you can

I'll take the win, of course, but thank God there's an off day tomorrow. It must be something about series openers with the Pirates recently - remember that game from last September at Wrigley where it was 7-7 after three innings, and the Cubs eventually won 13-8? That wasn't as bad as this, though. This game took years off my life. You don't start 7-0 against a team that everyone knows isn't very good and expect to watch that lead get frittered away thanks to some embarrassing defensive lapses. It sounded like Pat and Ron had suddenly started calling a Bad News Bears game. Let's get another round of The Good, The Bad and The Ugly going.

The Good: Once again, Kosuke Fukudome. 3-for-5 with two walks, a stolen base, an RBI and a run scored. Also, Soto was 3-for-7 with 2 RBI and threw out Nyjer Morgan in a huge spot in the bottom of the seventh. Lee continues to hit, going 2-for-5 with two walks, and it sounded like he got hosed on that strikeout in the tenth. I also liked seeing another four stolen bases; it's nice finally getting to watch a team with some speed and that knows how to use it. On the pitching side, Lieber came up huge, going three scoreless innings after the five pitchers preceding him (with some help from the non-Lee infielders, of course) coughed up the 7-0 lead, although he did have to work out of a serious jam in the bottom of the ninth (and if Jose Bautista doesn't stupidly bunt down the first base line without the squeeze being on, we're quite possibly not having this conversation).

The Bad: Lilly struggled for the second straight start, although with some better defense behind him in that fourth inning it might not have come to that. Every starter got a hit, but Soriano and Ramirez were both just 1-for-6 and didn't look very good, although bonus points to Ramirez for managing to hit the game-winning sac fly. I'm not sure what was up with Pignatiello not being able to throw a strike - eight pitches, all balls! - but let's hope that doesn't repeat.

The Ugly: Oh, God, that defense. What the hell happened? I know Lee's the only Gold Glover in that infield (not that Gold Gloves mean much, but we know he's good), but did everyone else have to make an error? Hearing Cedeno and Ramirez go back-to-back was just brutal, and DeRosa's bobble to tie the game was equally painful. Maybe on the off day these guys should just be out there taking grounders.

A win is a win, and maybe good teams have to win games like this from time to time. But on the other hand, good teams probably shouldn't be blowing 7-0 leads to the Pirates. And the Cubs still aren't as good as they should be at stringing hits together to manufacture runs. Aside from the big third inning, there was stuff like Ramirez hitting into a DP in the first with men at the corners; Soto's leadoff double getting wasted in the fifth; second and third with no one out in the sixth netting just one run; second and third with one out in the tenth yielding nothing; and Fukudome singling to lead off the ninth and eleventh innings and getting stranded both times. Obviously over the course of a season you're not going to drive in every single guy who gets on base, but if not for the third inning explosion - which, it might be pointed out, was aided by Gorzelanny's difficulty in finding the strike zone - this might have been yet another game in which the Cubs scored 3-4 runs, and if everything else had happened the same, of course, they would have been buried. Thankfully the Pirates were even more eager to lose this game than the Cubs were. That's not always going to be the case.

The streak continues

With today's game, that makes, by my count, six consecutive Cubs games that I've attended where the Cubs have won. It seems a little odd that that streak runs back to May of 2001, but it does. Weird thing: in the last four games, the Cubs scored a total of ten runs, but they won all four games (three by one run, as you might guess).

I continue to be a bit worried about the offense. They've yet to start really stringing stuff together; of the three runs today, two were solo home runs and the third came when Zambrano grounded into a double play with the bases loaded and no outs. (In other words: they had the bases loaded and no outs in the second inning, and the end result was one run.) On the bright side, this was the first game of the year in which the Cubs actually managed to score first.

Derrek Lee was just four for his first 18, but in the last two games he's looked really good, including going 2-for-3 today with a walk. He powered his game-winning home run to deep left center (if the wind had been blowing out at all, it would have probably ended up on Waveland), and his only out (a fly ball to center) was pretty well-hit. He's slugging .882 right now and yes, it's ridiculously early. But if he has another season even close to 2005 with the pieces he's got around him now... we could be looking at a really special year for the Cubs.

This, of course, presumes that those pieces wake up. Soriano's 357-foot basket job notwithstanding, he still is looking pretty bad at the plate, and while I'm willing to forgive him for this game since he hit a go-ahead home run and helped preserve a scoreless first inning by cutting down the speedy Michael Bourn at home plate, he needs to start hitting a little better than .077 soon. Maybe going to Pittsburgh will be the cure for what ails him - remember, that's where his first HR was last year after going the entire month of April without one. And then he hit 33 despite not playing for most of August. Ramirez was also 2-for-3 with a walk today, so perhaps he's stirring a bit; Fukudome was 0-for-3, but he also walked. I'm not worried about him at all right now. DeRosa also had a pedestrian day but overall he's looked good in the early going. When all these guys are on at once - plus Soto, who was rested in favor of Hank White today - this lineup is going to be really scary, I think. And there will come a point when they're all on at once, I'm sure of it.

Astros 4, Cubs 3

I don't know - is it time to start worrying about Alfonso Soriano? 1-f0r-17 (.059) is a damn slow start, even for him - last year he hit just .200 in the first eight games, but his average never went lower than that. While I've only heard the games so far - I probably won't get to see the Cubs until I'm actually at Wrigley on Sunday - it doesn't sound like he's looked very good either. For example, in the opener, he struck out twice, grounded out to first, and fouled out to the catcher. In game two, he popped out to first, grounded out to third, and struck out swinging with two men on, when a home run would have tied the game. He finally got a hit in the win - but he also struck out swinging to start the game and grounded out twice. Today, he grounded out two more times. All in all, he's only gotten the ball out of the infield six or seven times. It's not very confidence-inspiring. And yes, I know how early it is. I also know how much we're paying this guy, and while I hate to be the type of fan who grouses about every little player failure because of their salaries, as though they aren't humans prone to going into slumps every now and then... well, all I can say is that when you're making as much as this team is, you need to figure out the problem, and fast. Same goes for you, Derrek Lee (.222). You too, Aramis (.154). A couple solo home runs aren't cure-alls.

Though I will say this - Geovany Soto is hitting .167, but he's had more loud outs than anyone on the team, including at least four balls to the warning track that were kept in by the wind. If it were June, he'd probably have six home runs already and we'd be casting his statue right next to Fukudome's. So I think Soto will be fine. But when Soriano, Lee and Ramirez are the expected big boppers and they're all looking kind of lost... that's worrying.

It's particularly dispiriting because we could be at least 3-1 if the team were hitting at all. Both the opener and today's game were right there for the taking; if your pitching staff is only giving up four runs a game for the season, you're doing pretty well (the low in baseball last year was 4.06 by Boston; the Cubs were third at 4.26, second in the NL to, surprise, San Diego - but when you factor in park effects, the Cubs actually had the best ERA+ in the NL at 115). The 8-run quasi-meltdown against Milwaukee notwithstanding, this team has really pitched extremely well so far. I mean, if that keeps up and the hitting comes around sooner rather than later, we're looking at a potential juggernaut. Milwaukee will hit but I don't think their pitching will hold up for a whole season, although stranger things have happened. But that's the million-dollar question: when is the hitting going to come around? It's an awful lot of talent for this to turn into another 2006 (barring another catastrophic injury), but it could easily turn into another 2001, or 2004. I'd rather not see that happen, especially since you know we'd be looking up at Milwaukee and that will just be annoying as shit.

Sigh. I can't help but wonder if my plan to watch or listen to every Cubs game to the extent possible is biting me in the ass. When I first started the original Diary, back in July 2005, I intended to watch basically every game and write most days; this was derailed in a hurry as, after I started it on July 18 with the Cubs two games over .500 (and 13 games back in the Central, though still in the wild card race), they proceeded to go 7-7 over their next 14 and then suddenly embark on a season-killing eight-game losing streak in mid-August. That'll get you out of the habit fast. You may have noticed that in-season posting on this blog itself has been fairly sporadic. I wanted to change that this year because I'm as into the Cubs as I've ever been in my life, but if they start the season winning like three of their first twelve, I might not make it. Still, I don't think this is another 2005; our leadoff man at the time was Jerry Hairston, for fuck's sake. Things are going to get better. But as long as I'm following every game, it's going to be pretty brutal if they don't start getting better soon.

So, we're cool now?

Win #1 of the season. Are we all calmed down now? I think we can resume freaking out if the Cubs are like, six games under .500 two weeks from now. Dempster looked strong after the rough first inning, Marmol and Wood were both solid, and I liked the four stolen bases. Talk of the bats being "thawed out," as the AP recap suggested, might be a little premature, however. I mean, seven hits is fewer than in yesterday's game - but it helps when the opposing starter tosses out five walks and a hit batsman. That probably won't happen every game, though of course I like the patience. (Two more walks for Fukudome! This could be the best free agent signing the Cubs have made since Andre Dawson, although let's not get ahead of ourselves.) Nevertheless, no one had more than one hit today and Lee has looked pretty bad with the bat in two of the three games so far (though in the middle one he had a double and homer, so go figure that one out). I'm hoping it's just the early season, the cold weather, and really re-adjusting to major league pitching (let us not forget that the majority of pitchers faced in spring training end up being minor-league castoffs). Perhaps the upcoming games against Houston and Pittsburgh will only help matters.

Memo to Rickie Weeks: If, after a game, you have to take pains to tell the media how you're not a dirty player... well, I don't know. Maybe? Yeah, Soto was kind of in the line but I'm not sure that Weeks couldn't have just zipped around him. I forget where I read it, but someone recently was saying, why is baseball not a contact sport except right at the moment where it really matters? I mean, if Soto is obstructing, call Weeks safe at home, but Gwynn doesn't score unless Weeks knocks Soto over and I'm just not sure that's fair.

Whatever. We won the game. I expect a lot more of these.

Trying not to panic.

Okay. See, this is why I was uncomfortable with the preseason expectations. Look at what happened! The Cubs are 0-2, not 0-10. It's way, way too early to get concerned. Yes, it's annoying to lose to the Brewers. And yes, neither the bats nor the bullpen have looked great so far. But it's the second game of the season. If 2007 taught us anything, it's not to get too worked up about falling a couple games behind the Brewers, or losing two in a row.

Yeah, 8-2 sucks. But you know what? The impression I got was that balls were falling in for them that weren't falling in for us. That's the sort of thing that evens out over a long season, as it did last year. So I'm not overly concerned yet. I don't like losing, I don't like losing to the Brewers, I don't like listening to them lose on the radio (and frankly it's kind of annoying hearing Santo go "Oh, jeez!" like a little kid every time something bad happens). But it's not like we were gonna go 162-0, right? Even the most optimistic Cubs fan expected between 60 and 70 losses this year. So, here's two of them. Now let's just start putting some numbers into that win column.

It didn't take Lou long to decide that hitting Soriano second wasn't working; he's back to leadoff. The next question is, how long does Theriot have in the second spot? Well, if he keeps going 2-for-4 he can stay there. We'll see.