Since the season hit what hopefully will turn out to have been its nadir a week ago, things have been going a lot better for the Cubs. First came the blowout win in the final game of the Atlanta series, finally giving Sean Marshall some much deserved offense, and then came a series win at Miller Park (and if Ted Lilly had not gone homer-happy in the second game, it could have been a sweep... but I will take series wins all the way to the bank). Now a dangerous four-game set has started in Atlanta, and while the Brewers series was important, it's the current set that may well make or break the season. If the Cubs win three or (dare I hope) four - and they've already taken the first one thanks mostly to a brilliant outing by Rich Hill - against a team that is currently pretty close to a playoff spot, I think that would solidify the start of a turnaround (knock wood). One scout, as quoted by Jayson Stark yesterday, described the Cubs as having a chance "to rip off about 14 out of 15 one of these days." I don't know if that specifically would happen, but a handful of 8-of-10 strings over the next couple months would be just what the doctor ordered. Winning two would be slightly disappointing, but acceptable for a road series. But if, God forbid, they were to lose the next three, it would be back to the drawing board, back to nine games under, back to everything getting questioned. It would be a disaster.
Personally, watching this team recently, I feel like they're starting to get it. They didn't look great offensively tonight, but at least they didn't have to. Games like that are going to happen sometimes. The trick is minimizing them. If Soriano continues to be a monster at the top of the lineup - when he hit the home run off his shoetops on Monday, I actually yelled at the TV, "That's why we signed you! - I think this team can go a long way. Of course, Ramirez is hurt and Lee has been in a little slump recently, losing 20+ points of BA in about a week, so hopefully those things don't continue.
The big question is whether the Cubs are buyers or sellers at the trade deadline. Personally I doubt it will be either. Traders, perhaps, like just trying to mix things up a bit, but they aren't going to be shipping out prospects for any expensive pieces and I just don't see Hendry dismantling this team. I do wish they could figure out a way to get the money for Zambrano released already - he's never going to be cheaper than right this minute, I think - but I'm starting to really worry that the turnover at the very top is going to cost us this guy. Let's try not to worry about that right now, though.
Tomorrow: Sean Marshall tries to be awesome again. Can the offense get him runs more than once?
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Saturday, June 02, 2007
Sweet and Sour Lou
Braves 5, @Cubs 3
It was a lot closer this time, but in the end, things turned out like they have for the Cubs most of this season: they self-destructed down the stretch. After Rich Hill had one bad inning, giving up three runs, the Cubs scratched back to tie the game at 3-3 through seven. Enter Will Ohman; exit lead. After going 0-2 on the first hitter of the inning, Ohman proceeded to walk him. This despite the fact that Ohman was only brought on because the leadoff hitter was a lefty. Then, despite being a prototypical LOOGY (Lefty One-Out Guy), Ohman was left in, and proceeded to give up the go-ahead run. In the bottom of the eighth, Angel Pagan led off with a double and tried to make third when the ball got away from the catcher; unfortunately, it didn't get far away enough, and Pagan was gunned down in a bang-bang play. Pagan and Quade argued with the third-base umpire, and then out came Piniella, who was almost immediately tossed from the game and spent the next five minutes kicking dirt and his hat and ultimately being restrained by the umpires. For good measure, the game had to be delayed for several additional minutes because the bleacher fans deposited most of their beer cups onto the field at this point.
If yesterday was an embarrassing day to be a Cubs fan, today wasn't much better; for one thing, there's no excuse for throwing stuff onto the field, and for another, at least yesterday there was little belief the Cubs might actually win. When Pagan doubled I thought the tide was turning in our favor. Instead it was just another disappointingly close loss; once the dust settled in the eighth, the Cubs' remaining five outs went pretty smoothly for Atlanta aside from a Soriano single in the ninth. Lee came up as the tying run in the bottom of the ninth and grounded weakly into a fielder's choice. Obviously it's unfair to think he would be able to hit a home run in that situation all the time - no one is going to do that - but this was a big spot for the Cubs' season as a whole. And Lee went down without much fight.
After hitting their 25-33 nadir last year, the Twins turned around and won 21 of their next 23. Before they lost consecutive games again they were already 11 games above .500. I sure don't see that happening with this team. I'm sure Lou's ejection was half to vent his own frustration and half to try and motivate the team. Do you get any sense that it may have worked?
It was a lot closer this time, but in the end, things turned out like they have for the Cubs most of this season: they self-destructed down the stretch. After Rich Hill had one bad inning, giving up three runs, the Cubs scratched back to tie the game at 3-3 through seven. Enter Will Ohman; exit lead. After going 0-2 on the first hitter of the inning, Ohman proceeded to walk him. This despite the fact that Ohman was only brought on because the leadoff hitter was a lefty. Then, despite being a prototypical LOOGY (Lefty One-Out Guy), Ohman was left in, and proceeded to give up the go-ahead run. In the bottom of the eighth, Angel Pagan led off with a double and tried to make third when the ball got away from the catcher; unfortunately, it didn't get far away enough, and Pagan was gunned down in a bang-bang play. Pagan and Quade argued with the third-base umpire, and then out came Piniella, who was almost immediately tossed from the game and spent the next five minutes kicking dirt and his hat and ultimately being restrained by the umpires. For good measure, the game had to be delayed for several additional minutes because the bleacher fans deposited most of their beer cups onto the field at this point.
If yesterday was an embarrassing day to be a Cubs fan, today wasn't much better; for one thing, there's no excuse for throwing stuff onto the field, and for another, at least yesterday there was little belief the Cubs might actually win. When Pagan doubled I thought the tide was turning in our favor. Instead it was just another disappointingly close loss; once the dust settled in the eighth, the Cubs' remaining five outs went pretty smoothly for Atlanta aside from a Soriano single in the ninth. Lee came up as the tying run in the bottom of the ninth and grounded weakly into a fielder's choice. Obviously it's unfair to think he would be able to hit a home run in that situation all the time - no one is going to do that - but this was a big spot for the Cubs' season as a whole. And Lee went down without much fight.
After hitting their 25-33 nadir last year, the Twins turned around and won 21 of their next 23. Before they lost consecutive games again they were already 11 games above .500. I sure don't see that happening with this team. I'm sure Lou's ejection was half to vent his own frustration and half to try and motivate the team. Do you get any sense that it may have worked?
Friday, June 01, 2007
We were dead before the ship even sank
It's June 1, 2007. The Cubs, who committed nine figures to this year's payroll in the hopes of winning now, are 22-30. During today's game, Carlos Zambrano and Michael Barrett got into a fight in the dugout after Barrett passed a ball and then threw wildly to third; Zambrano pointed to his head on TV replays, evidently telling Barrett either that he should have caught the ball or shouldn't have thrown to third, period, after which Barrett appeared to gesture to the scoreboard, most likely pointing out that Zambrano had allowed 13 hits in just five innings. (The Cubs allowed 20 on the day. Frankly it's amazing they only lost 8-5.) After being separated, Zambrano and Barrett went separately into the clubhouse where, out of Piniella's watchful eye (?), they fought again, ending with Barrett getting his lip split. Barrett doesn't even catch Zambrano, but Henry Blanco is on the DL, leading to Barrett getting replaced by Koyie Hill, who I'd never even heard of until I checked the box score to find out who the hell could have replaced Barrett.
There are, of course, two ways of looking at this:
1. This is a good team that needed a kickstart, and maybe this will provide it.
2. This is a bad team venting its frustration with a season that, on June 1, appears already to be hopelessly lost.
Historically, teams that fight with each other are not very good teams. SportsCenter today showed video of a few other dugout fights, and they included the 2006 Kansas City Royals (62-100) and 2006 Toronto Blue Jays (87-75 but never a threat to make the playoffs). They did also include the 2002 San Francisco Giants (95-66), but that was Bonds and Kent, who both hit more than 35 home runs that year. Also Bonds' OPS+ was 275. That was clearly superstar egos. Zambrano might have a superstar ego but he sure doesn't have a 275 ERA+.
This team is not as untalented as it looks, although you could argue that it's benefited from some of the starters pitching above their historical averages thus far. (Key case in point: Jason Marquis and his 2.93 ERA.) Of course, Zambrano has sucked, though he's been the one getting the run support, which is why he has five wins. Offensively it's been pretty much an average showing, with the team OPS+ slightly below average (98), but that's not what you want from a playoff team. (Even the 2005 Padres, arguably the worst playoff team of all-time, had a team OPS+ of 104.) The Cubs have scored more runs than they've allowed, even after the -14 in two games against the Marlins this week, so their Pythagorean W-L is over .500, which suggests that they've been the victims of some exceptionally bad luck. But some consolation that is.
Now, on June 7, 2006, the Minnesota Twins were 25-33. Eight games under .500, just like the Cubs are now, and through more games. In their final 104 games of the season, the Twins went 71-33 and won an exceedingly competitive division in which three teams won 90 games or more.
The Twins also had the league's batting champion, the league MVP, and the AL Cy Young Award winner, of course. Also, a team OBP of .347 (although their OPS+ was a mere 101). Also, a team ERA+ of 113 (the Cubs', right now, is 104, though at least that's above average).
Am I looking for reasons to be optimistic? You're damn right I am. I intentionally lowered my hopes prior to the season because the Cubs had failed me too many times for me to assume they would win just because they spent money. But right now this team is failing to meet even my modest expectations. My thought was that, worst-case, they'd stumble around .500 all year. Right now, .500 is looking pretty sweet - they're on pace for 93 losses, which for $300 million would represent a three-game improvement over last year.
I hate overreacting and tossing blame around. But it's June fucking first. Among the people who need to queue up for some share of the blame:
Carlos Zambrano. Great, he's tied for the team lead in wins. He's also 5-5, has been bailed out by some of the majors' best run support, and has looked like absolute shit in a goddamn contract year. A lot of people have speculated that he's hiding an injury - for his sake, I hope he is, because I don't understand how anyone trying to justify a nine-figure contract could play this badly.
The bullpen. In particular, the holey trinity of Ohman, Howry, and Eyre, who have a combined WHIP of 1.78 through the end of May. It happens every year: the swallows return to Capistrano and the Cubs have a bunch of shitty middle relievers. In typical Cubs fashion, Neal Cotts pitched badly enough to get demoted to Iowa, while the guy for whom Cotts was traded, David Aardsma, is striking out more than a guy an inning. (Although his ERA isn't so hot either, so I guess whatever.)
A lack of fundamentals. Welcome to another Cub staple. Michael Barrett has seven passed balls this year. Cesar Izturis, the guy who was obtained straight up for Greg Maddux and was touted as a defensive whiz, has a .964 fielding percentage. Remember, he won a Gold Glove in 2004! (For good measure, he's hitting .258 with an OBP of .319 and an SLG that is, in rare fashion, even lower. But when you get a guy with a career OPS+ of 68, you're getting a guy with an OPS+ of 68.) Wednesday's game, the 9-4 loss to the Marlins, featured multiple abysmal baserunning blunders. And this team still can't take walks - they're twelfth in the league and no Cub is on pace to draw even 75 free passes. Dusty Baker may be gone, but his stink remains.
A lack of power. Part of the reason the Cubs have been struggling is that their decent team BA isn't translating to runs, and part of that reason is that there has been a surprising power outage at Wrigley so far. Most years the Cubs hit home runs like crazy - this year they haven't even done that. With 47, they're in the bottom half of the league, and 13 of those have come off the bat of Aramis Ramirez. Alfonso Soriano, who hit 46 last year to get himself a fat contract, has four, putting him on pace for about 13. In Wrigley Field.
Lou Piniella. Sure, it's not Lou's fault that the players on this team do things like hold team meetings before games and then get beaten 9-0, but doesn't it seem like he's just going through the motions? Here's some Lou chatter from today's postgame press conference, much of which has seemed typical of every post-loss press conference in the last month:
So what's the solution, assuming there is one? Some possible alternatives:
1. Trade Barrett.
Between this and last year's Pierzynski fiasco - although who doesn't want to punch A.J. Pierzynski - is he more of a distraction than he's worth? You can't hide Barrett on defense - last year's NL Gold Glove winner, Brad Ausmus had one passed ball, while Barrett had 10, and he's on pace for twice that this year - and his offense, while pretty good for a catcher, isn't irreplaceable. He and Zambrano are both pretty combustible - can you really keep them in the same clubhouse anymore? And remember, this team won the division in 2003 with Damian Miller (bad) and Paul Bako (worse). Ship Barrett out for a good defensive catcher, get some other bat to plug into the lineup... yes?
2. Trade Zambrano.
If the guy's this bad in a contract year, and he's as much of a head case as he is, do you really want to build around him? The problem here - well, one of them - is that Zambrano's stock right now has very likely never been lower, and any trade partner will be well aware of the Cubs' inability to sign Zambrano and may just take their chances in free agency, or at the very least trade as little as possible to get him. And of course if you trade Zambrano, you no longer have an obvious #1 guy (even if Z hasn't pitched like a #1 in more than a couple of games this year). Plus who do you replace him with? Any team trading for Zambrano in midseason probably doesn't have pitching to give away and I'm not exactly relishing another dip into the farm system right now.
3. Do nothing for now and hope this gets the team fired up.
Of course, if it doesn't, either or both guys might get traded in late July anyway.
4. Make a different move altogether.
Ideally, neither Barrett nor Zambrano will be traded, they'll make their peace, and things will be fine. Still, the idea of a trade is appetizing, and if one's going to be made it should be soon. But what trade do you make? Ship the perennially unhappy Jacque Jones out for pitching, which also helps clear up some of that outfield logjam? ...actually, yeah. Go with that one. Jones is hitting .245 with an OPS+ of 68, which makes him the outfield equivalent of Cesar Izturis. Carlos Zambrano is a more valuable hitter right now than Jones is. Of course this raises the question of what you'd get back for Jones... but does it even matter? How about a reliever with a sub-1.6 WHIP? That'd be fine.
Argh. I really hoped this season would be different, you know? And even though there were warning signs, I let myself get talked into it when the pitching started hot... and now it's not as good as it was and no one's hitting. Wonderful.
On the bright side, I discovered possibly the best misery-loves-company Cubs fan site of all time: Hire Jim Essian. Their amusing take on the fight is here.
There are, of course, two ways of looking at this:
1. This is a good team that needed a kickstart, and maybe this will provide it.
2. This is a bad team venting its frustration with a season that, on June 1, appears already to be hopelessly lost.
Historically, teams that fight with each other are not very good teams. SportsCenter today showed video of a few other dugout fights, and they included the 2006 Kansas City Royals (62-100) and 2006 Toronto Blue Jays (87-75 but never a threat to make the playoffs). They did also include the 2002 San Francisco Giants (95-66), but that was Bonds and Kent, who both hit more than 35 home runs that year. Also Bonds' OPS+ was 275. That was clearly superstar egos. Zambrano might have a superstar ego but he sure doesn't have a 275 ERA+.
This team is not as untalented as it looks, although you could argue that it's benefited from some of the starters pitching above their historical averages thus far. (Key case in point: Jason Marquis and his 2.93 ERA.) Of course, Zambrano has sucked, though he's been the one getting the run support, which is why he has five wins. Offensively it's been pretty much an average showing, with the team OPS+ slightly below average (98), but that's not what you want from a playoff team. (Even the 2005 Padres, arguably the worst playoff team of all-time, had a team OPS+ of 104.) The Cubs have scored more runs than they've allowed, even after the -14 in two games against the Marlins this week, so their Pythagorean W-L is over .500, which suggests that they've been the victims of some exceptionally bad luck. But some consolation that is.
Now, on June 7, 2006, the Minnesota Twins were 25-33. Eight games under .500, just like the Cubs are now, and through more games. In their final 104 games of the season, the Twins went 71-33 and won an exceedingly competitive division in which three teams won 90 games or more.
The Twins also had the league's batting champion, the league MVP, and the AL Cy Young Award winner, of course. Also, a team OBP of .347 (although their OPS+ was a mere 101). Also, a team ERA+ of 113 (the Cubs', right now, is 104, though at least that's above average).
Am I looking for reasons to be optimistic? You're damn right I am. I intentionally lowered my hopes prior to the season because the Cubs had failed me too many times for me to assume they would win just because they spent money. But right now this team is failing to meet even my modest expectations. My thought was that, worst-case, they'd stumble around .500 all year. Right now, .500 is looking pretty sweet - they're on pace for 93 losses, which for $300 million would represent a three-game improvement over last year.
I hate overreacting and tossing blame around. But it's June fucking first. Among the people who need to queue up for some share of the blame:
Carlos Zambrano. Great, he's tied for the team lead in wins. He's also 5-5, has been bailed out by some of the majors' best run support, and has looked like absolute shit in a goddamn contract year. A lot of people have speculated that he's hiding an injury - for his sake, I hope he is, because I don't understand how anyone trying to justify a nine-figure contract could play this badly.
The bullpen. In particular, the holey trinity of Ohman, Howry, and Eyre, who have a combined WHIP of 1.78 through the end of May. It happens every year: the swallows return to Capistrano and the Cubs have a bunch of shitty middle relievers. In typical Cubs fashion, Neal Cotts pitched badly enough to get demoted to Iowa, while the guy for whom Cotts was traded, David Aardsma, is striking out more than a guy an inning. (Although his ERA isn't so hot either, so I guess whatever.)
A lack of fundamentals. Welcome to another Cub staple. Michael Barrett has seven passed balls this year. Cesar Izturis, the guy who was obtained straight up for Greg Maddux and was touted as a defensive whiz, has a .964 fielding percentage. Remember, he won a Gold Glove in 2004! (For good measure, he's hitting .258 with an OBP of .319 and an SLG that is, in rare fashion, even lower. But when you get a guy with a career OPS+ of 68, you're getting a guy with an OPS+ of 68.) Wednesday's game, the 9-4 loss to the Marlins, featured multiple abysmal baserunning blunders. And this team still can't take walks - they're twelfth in the league and no Cub is on pace to draw even 75 free passes. Dusty Baker may be gone, but his stink remains.
A lack of power. Part of the reason the Cubs have been struggling is that their decent team BA isn't translating to runs, and part of that reason is that there has been a surprising power outage at Wrigley so far. Most years the Cubs hit home runs like crazy - this year they haven't even done that. With 47, they're in the bottom half of the league, and 13 of those have come off the bat of Aramis Ramirez. Alfonso Soriano, who hit 46 last year to get himself a fat contract, has four, putting him on pace for about 13. In Wrigley Field.
Lou Piniella. Sure, it's not Lou's fault that the players on this team do things like hold team meetings before games and then get beaten 9-0, but doesn't it seem like he's just going through the motions? Here's some Lou chatter from today's postgame press conference, much of which has seemed typical of every post-loss press conference in the last month:
"I only have so many players that I can play. You know? And it's about time some of them start playing like major leaguers! Or, get somebody else in here that can catch the damn ball or run the bases properly! All right? That's all I can say!"Also, Lou said "What am I supposed to do?" about 15 times. Hey, Lou? You're the fucking manager. Have you given any thought to managing? We all know this team is better than it's playing right now, but dumping all the blame on your players is not the world's classiest move, even if they're not playing well. Also, way to throw Barrett under the bus, since "catch the damn ball" and "run the bases properly" are both things that Barrett has not done in the last three games.
So what's the solution, assuming there is one? Some possible alternatives:
1. Trade Barrett.
Between this and last year's Pierzynski fiasco - although who doesn't want to punch A.J. Pierzynski - is he more of a distraction than he's worth? You can't hide Barrett on defense - last year's NL Gold Glove winner, Brad Ausmus had one passed ball, while Barrett had 10, and he's on pace for twice that this year - and his offense, while pretty good for a catcher, isn't irreplaceable. He and Zambrano are both pretty combustible - can you really keep them in the same clubhouse anymore? And remember, this team won the division in 2003 with Damian Miller (bad) and Paul Bako (worse). Ship Barrett out for a good defensive catcher, get some other bat to plug into the lineup... yes?
2. Trade Zambrano.
If the guy's this bad in a contract year, and he's as much of a head case as he is, do you really want to build around him? The problem here - well, one of them - is that Zambrano's stock right now has very likely never been lower, and any trade partner will be well aware of the Cubs' inability to sign Zambrano and may just take their chances in free agency, or at the very least trade as little as possible to get him. And of course if you trade Zambrano, you no longer have an obvious #1 guy (even if Z hasn't pitched like a #1 in more than a couple of games this year). Plus who do you replace him with? Any team trading for Zambrano in midseason probably doesn't have pitching to give away and I'm not exactly relishing another dip into the farm system right now.
3. Do nothing for now and hope this gets the team fired up.
Of course, if it doesn't, either or both guys might get traded in late July anyway.
4. Make a different move altogether.
Ideally, neither Barrett nor Zambrano will be traded, they'll make their peace, and things will be fine. Still, the idea of a trade is appetizing, and if one's going to be made it should be soon. But what trade do you make? Ship the perennially unhappy Jacque Jones out for pitching, which also helps clear up some of that outfield logjam? ...actually, yeah. Go with that one. Jones is hitting .245 with an OPS+ of 68, which makes him the outfield equivalent of Cesar Izturis. Carlos Zambrano is a more valuable hitter right now than Jones is. Of course this raises the question of what you'd get back for Jones... but does it even matter? How about a reliever with a sub-1.6 WHIP? That'd be fine.
Argh. I really hoped this season would be different, you know? And even though there were warning signs, I let myself get talked into it when the pitching started hot... and now it's not as good as it was and no one's hitting. Wonderful.
On the bright side, I discovered possibly the best misery-loves-company Cubs fan site of all time: Hire Jim Essian. Their amusing take on the fight is here.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Let's not go NUTS
Nice job by the Cubs not blowing the rain-suspended game (Rocky Cherry, perhaps the first ever Cubs player to sound like an ice cream flavor, picked up his first major-league win), and great job by Marquis winning the second. To show you the value of April stats, Alfonso Soriano hit better than .500 in the three-game Pirates series and is now hitting .310, just a bit up from where he was a week ago. He also hit his first two Cub home runs. Ah, the value of filling your team with slow starters. Although, oddly, notorious slow starters Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez are both off to pretty good starts (Lee, currently hitting .415 and with a double in eight straight games).
But that's not what I'm here to talk about. Every season begins with an inevitable "how is team X achieving feat Y?" glut of stories, and this year is no different. The Brewers have started the season like a house on fire, standing at 18-9 after beating St. Louis yesterday and currently leading the Central by - this is not a misprint - five games over the Reds. (To show this is still a competitive division on the whole, note that the remaining five teams are bunched within three games of each other.)
Lest any Brewers fans start going nuts, though - and I'm sure they are - let's consider a few things.
Hey, remember last year?
Oh yeah, last year, when the Reds started 18-8 (that's where they stood on May 1, leading the division) and everyone started talking about Cincinnati's resurgence. As of May 1, 2006, the Reds led the majors in runs scored (155). They did only lead the Central by a game, but still: 18-8! Better even than the Brewers' record on May 1 of this year! So, uh, how'd that work out for Cincy?
Oh, they finished 80-82 and in third place. Now to be fair, they still had a shot at the playoffs until the last week or so, but that says more about the suck-job finish the Cardinals had than anything else. The Reds also ended up scoring 749 runs, which means that after averaging 5.96 rpg over the first month, the Reds averaged just 4.37 rpg the entire rest of the way. Meanwhile, they allowed 4.94 rpg over the course of the season. Whoops.
Maybe it's something about playing in Miller Park, since the Indians, who rather famously were forced to play there due to snow in Cleveland in mid-April, are the only other team in the majors right now who can match the Brewers' .667 winning percentage (the Indians, at 16-8, have done so in three fewer games). If these trends continue, both teams will win 108 games, so I think it's safe to say that they won't (last NL team to win that many: 1986 Mets). The Brewers' Pythagorean win-loss record right now is 15-12, so while they're a good team, we can suggest that they're probably overachieving a little bit. (The Cubs actually lead the NL Central in this stat, at 16-10; their currently 0-6 record in one-run games accounts for a lot of the reason they're actually 12-14, but the good news is that they're one of only five teams in baseball who have given up fewer than 100 runs through May 2.) The Brewers are also 14-7 against the Central so far; I doubt they'll continue to blow through the division at quite that rate, don't you?
Don't get me wrong - the Brewers have a good young team that finally seems to be living up to the "up-and-coming" tag they've gotten for three years now, and if it weren't for the fact that their fans desperately want to be rivals with the Cubs (guess what, Johnnies-come-lately? We've already got a divisional arch-rival and a locational arch-rival; we don't really need another one of either), I'd probably be rooting for them. But do we really think this team can possibly stay this hot - or even close to it? Right now their shortstop, J.J. Hardy, is hitting .306 with an OPS of .919. Prior to this season he was a sub-.250 career hitter and his best OPS+ (where 100 is league average) didn't crack 90. Granted, this is a limited sample size as he only had 500 career ABs before this year and he might just be breaking out, but I don't know. How about Geoff Jenkins with an OPS of nearly 1.000 so far? (Career average: .850.) Although really, so far this team has been more about doing everything okay than anything super-well (they rank in the top six in the NL in BA, OBP, SLG, and runs, but not in the top three in any of those). At least from a hitting perspective. Jeff Suppan's ERA so far is two runs below his career average; Chris Capuano's is more than a run below even his best prior season. Many of the Brewers' players are pretty young so it's hard to generalize - they could all be having their breakout season at the same time, and certainly the 2005 White Sox showed us what happens when four starting pitchers have career years all at once (the one thing that does scare me about the Brewers right now is that Ben Sheets, who should be the staff ace, is 2-2 with his highest ERA in four years, which may very well also not continue, but in a better way for him).
It'll be interesting to see how the division race shakes out, since every other team in the Central is currently under .500, and yet I doubt anyone believes the Brewers are very likely to be wire-to-wire winners. Maybe they end up like Detroit last year, another fairly unheralded team driven by decent hitting and outstanding pitching, but remember - that team didn't win its division, either.
But that's not what I'm here to talk about. Every season begins with an inevitable "how is team X achieving feat Y?" glut of stories, and this year is no different. The Brewers have started the season like a house on fire, standing at 18-9 after beating St. Louis yesterday and currently leading the Central by - this is not a misprint - five games over the Reds. (To show this is still a competitive division on the whole, note that the remaining five teams are bunched within three games of each other.)
Lest any Brewers fans start going nuts, though - and I'm sure they are - let's consider a few things.
Hey, remember last year?
Oh yeah, last year, when the Reds started 18-8 (that's where they stood on May 1, leading the division) and everyone started talking about Cincinnati's resurgence. As of May 1, 2006, the Reds led the majors in runs scored (155). They did only lead the Central by a game, but still: 18-8! Better even than the Brewers' record on May 1 of this year! So, uh, how'd that work out for Cincy?
Oh, they finished 80-82 and in third place. Now to be fair, they still had a shot at the playoffs until the last week or so, but that says more about the suck-job finish the Cardinals had than anything else. The Reds also ended up scoring 749 runs, which means that after averaging 5.96 rpg over the first month, the Reds averaged just 4.37 rpg the entire rest of the way. Meanwhile, they allowed 4.94 rpg over the course of the season. Whoops.
Maybe it's something about playing in Miller Park, since the Indians, who rather famously were forced to play there due to snow in Cleveland in mid-April, are the only other team in the majors right now who can match the Brewers' .667 winning percentage (the Indians, at 16-8, have done so in three fewer games). If these trends continue, both teams will win 108 games, so I think it's safe to say that they won't (last NL team to win that many: 1986 Mets). The Brewers' Pythagorean win-loss record right now is 15-12, so while they're a good team, we can suggest that they're probably overachieving a little bit. (The Cubs actually lead the NL Central in this stat, at 16-10; their currently 0-6 record in one-run games accounts for a lot of the reason they're actually 12-14, but the good news is that they're one of only five teams in baseball who have given up fewer than 100 runs through May 2.) The Brewers are also 14-7 against the Central so far; I doubt they'll continue to blow through the division at quite that rate, don't you?
Don't get me wrong - the Brewers have a good young team that finally seems to be living up to the "up-and-coming" tag they've gotten for three years now, and if it weren't for the fact that their fans desperately want to be rivals with the Cubs (guess what, Johnnies-come-lately? We've already got a divisional arch-rival and a locational arch-rival; we don't really need another one of either), I'd probably be rooting for them. But do we really think this team can possibly stay this hot - or even close to it? Right now their shortstop, J.J. Hardy, is hitting .306 with an OPS of .919. Prior to this season he was a sub-.250 career hitter and his best OPS+ (where 100 is league average) didn't crack 90. Granted, this is a limited sample size as he only had 500 career ABs before this year and he might just be breaking out, but I don't know. How about Geoff Jenkins with an OPS of nearly 1.000 so far? (Career average: .850.) Although really, so far this team has been more about doing everything okay than anything super-well (they rank in the top six in the NL in BA, OBP, SLG, and runs, but not in the top three in any of those). At least from a hitting perspective. Jeff Suppan's ERA so far is two runs below his career average; Chris Capuano's is more than a run below even his best prior season. Many of the Brewers' players are pretty young so it's hard to generalize - they could all be having their breakout season at the same time, and certainly the 2005 White Sox showed us what happens when four starting pitchers have career years all at once (the one thing that does scare me about the Brewers right now is that Ben Sheets, who should be the staff ace, is 2-2 with his highest ERA in four years, which may very well also not continue, but in a better way for him).
It'll be interesting to see how the division race shakes out, since every other team in the Central is currently under .500, and yet I doubt anyone believes the Brewers are very likely to be wire-to-wire winners. Maybe they end up like Detroit last year, another fairly unheralded team driven by decent hitting and outstanding pitching, but remember - that team didn't win its division, either.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Z Minus
What do you suppose are the odds that Jim Hendry is watching each new shitty Carlos Zambrano start with secret, unexpressed glee? Because right now Zambrano is saving him a shitload of money. Though he managed not to take the loss thanks to a Cubs rally (later squandered by Scott Eyre), Zambrano gave up five runs on eight hits, with two home runs and five walks, in six innings. He did strike out six, but big fucking deal, really. Amazingly, Zambrano's season up until this point has been so bad that five earned runs in six innings actually lowered his ERA from 7.88 to 7.77.
So, Zambrano this season has pitched 22 innings, struck out 16, walked 16, allowed 19 runs, and gone 1-2. His win (over Milwaukee on April 7) was his only start of four that could even be considered a good start; in his two losses he's struck out a total of four batters.
I mean, I know it's early, but have you ever seen anyone play worse when playing for a lucrative contract in his prime? If Zambrano had started the season on fire, he would have forced Hendry's hand; with Z struggling out of the gate, Hendry can bide his time, and if Zambrano doesn't right the ship I'm sure Jim will be ready to swoop in with a lower offer. Not that Omar Minaya won't throw nine figures at Zambrano even if he goes 12-18 this year... but you can bet no one else will. And frankly, even Minaya might look cross-eyed at that one. But hey, at least Zambrano leads the team in OPS.
Really, how well could things possibly have worked for Hendry? Sure, the Soriano signing has been something of a bust so far, and that was where all the money went, but if Soriano comes back healthy and can be moved out of center, I think he'll be all right. Meanwhile, the two prizes of the pitching market - which the Cubs needed more desperately than another leadoff guy who can't get on base, even if he hits 45 home runs - were Schmidt and Zito, a combined 2-4 with an ERA over 6.00 through three starts (and Schmidt is now on the DL). At the same time, Ted Lilly and Jason Marquis have a combined ERA of 2.50 and are 2-2 total (due more to bad luck than their pitching), with five quality starts out of their six total appearances. If Zambrano could turn it around, this pitching staff is, somewhat improbably, setting itself up to be something of a force in the NL. If only the hitting and bullpen were more consistent.
So, Zambrano this season has pitched 22 innings, struck out 16, walked 16, allowed 19 runs, and gone 1-2. His win (over Milwaukee on April 7) was his only start of four that could even be considered a good start; in his two losses he's struck out a total of four batters.
I mean, I know it's early, but have you ever seen anyone play worse when playing for a lucrative contract in his prime? If Zambrano had started the season on fire, he would have forced Hendry's hand; with Z struggling out of the gate, Hendry can bide his time, and if Zambrano doesn't right the ship I'm sure Jim will be ready to swoop in with a lower offer. Not that Omar Minaya won't throw nine figures at Zambrano even if he goes 12-18 this year... but you can bet no one else will. And frankly, even Minaya might look cross-eyed at that one. But hey, at least Zambrano leads the team in OPS.
Really, how well could things possibly have worked for Hendry? Sure, the Soriano signing has been something of a bust so far, and that was where all the money went, but if Soriano comes back healthy and can be moved out of center, I think he'll be all right. Meanwhile, the two prizes of the pitching market - which the Cubs needed more desperately than another leadoff guy who can't get on base, even if he hits 45 home runs - were Schmidt and Zito, a combined 2-4 with an ERA over 6.00 through three starts (and Schmidt is now on the DL). At the same time, Ted Lilly and Jason Marquis have a combined ERA of 2.50 and are 2-2 total (due more to bad luck than their pitching), with five quality starts out of their six total appearances. If Zambrano could turn it around, this pitching staff is, somewhat improbably, setting itself up to be something of a force in the NL. If only the hitting and bullpen were more consistent.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Seeing red
I would swear that up until last year or so, the Cubs had owned the Reds for a number of years. The Reds' offense has improved, but their pitching really doesn't seem dramatically better, so I'm not sure why they've suddenly become such a bugaboo. Let's recap the most recent series:
Friday, 4/13: Reds 6, Cubs 5
Zambrano mostly coasts through four innings, then suddenly fails to show up for the top of the fifth, allowing four runs and leaving the bases loaded before being yanked without having recorded a single out. Will Ohman promptly walks the next two guys, saddling Big Z with the loss. My dad speculates that it was all Zambrano's time on the basepaths that wore him out for the fifth - he had just homered in the bottom of the fourth, and in the second he doubled and scored a run. But shouldn't a guy who wants $15 million a year be just a little more of an athlete? Cripes. Of course, the Cubs' inability to score even one more run after the fourth inning isn't exactly inspiring.
Odd note about this game: in one of those weird quirks of baseball's rules, Todd Coffey got the win for the Reds in this game even though the winning run scored in the top of the fifth and Coffey didn't enter the game until the bottom of the seventh.
Saturday, 4/14: Cubs 7, Reds 0
Thank God for Rich Hill. At the risk of jinxing it, he is rapidly becoming the ace of the staff. He did walk four guys, but he still went 7 with just 95 pitches, and lowered his ERA to 0.64. Yeah, it's only two starts, but given how he finished last year it looks like he's finally got it. Fun fact: Hill, at age 27, is a year older than Zambrano.
Sunday, 4/15: Reds 1, Cubs 0
Now this was a traditional Cubs suck-job. Lilly strikes out ten in six innings, gives up two hits, the Reds scratch out a run... and the Cubs lose because the bats go absolutely frigid against Kyle Freaking Lohse of all people, who strikes out a career-high 12 in eight innings. In the sixth, it was first and third with no outs, and then Lohse struck out the next two guys. Almost anything else would have scored a run, but no. Three of the Cubs' hits came off the bat of Ryan Theriot, who is making a really good case to stay in the lineup (although where do you put him when Ramirez comes back?), but that was the only real positive of the day, aside from Lilly having a third good start but having nothing to show for it for the second straight outing.
4-7 is hardly the end of the world, but given how wide open this division should be, the Cubs cannot afford to lose so many games to division rivals this early in the year. Of course, the team is built almost entirely of slow starters, so come mid-May things may well be all right, but we'd better be careful that things haven't gotten out of control by then. The staff seems all right, assuming Zambrano doesn't flake out - I really hope this isn't extension-related spazzing out - and the team really should hit more than it has. Let's not rush to too many conclusions from 11 games. That said, as they say, pennants aren't won in April but they can be lost. Things need to start getting a bit better.
Friday, 4/13: Reds 6, Cubs 5
Zambrano mostly coasts through four innings, then suddenly fails to show up for the top of the fifth, allowing four runs and leaving the bases loaded before being yanked without having recorded a single out. Will Ohman promptly walks the next two guys, saddling Big Z with the loss. My dad speculates that it was all Zambrano's time on the basepaths that wore him out for the fifth - he had just homered in the bottom of the fourth, and in the second he doubled and scored a run. But shouldn't a guy who wants $15 million a year be just a little more of an athlete? Cripes. Of course, the Cubs' inability to score even one more run after the fourth inning isn't exactly inspiring.
Odd note about this game: in one of those weird quirks of baseball's rules, Todd Coffey got the win for the Reds in this game even though the winning run scored in the top of the fifth and Coffey didn't enter the game until the bottom of the seventh.
Saturday, 4/14: Cubs 7, Reds 0
Thank God for Rich Hill. At the risk of jinxing it, he is rapidly becoming the ace of the staff. He did walk four guys, but he still went 7 with just 95 pitches, and lowered his ERA to 0.64. Yeah, it's only two starts, but given how he finished last year it looks like he's finally got it. Fun fact: Hill, at age 27, is a year older than Zambrano.
Sunday, 4/15: Reds 1, Cubs 0
Now this was a traditional Cubs suck-job. Lilly strikes out ten in six innings, gives up two hits, the Reds scratch out a run... and the Cubs lose because the bats go absolutely frigid against Kyle Freaking Lohse of all people, who strikes out a career-high 12 in eight innings. In the sixth, it was first and third with no outs, and then Lohse struck out the next two guys. Almost anything else would have scored a run, but no. Three of the Cubs' hits came off the bat of Ryan Theriot, who is making a really good case to stay in the lineup (although where do you put him when Ramirez comes back?), but that was the only real positive of the day, aside from Lilly having a third good start but having nothing to show for it for the second straight outing.
4-7 is hardly the end of the world, but given how wide open this division should be, the Cubs cannot afford to lose so many games to division rivals this early in the year. Of course, the team is built almost entirely of slow starters, so come mid-May things may well be all right, but we'd better be careful that things haven't gotten out of control by then. The staff seems all right, assuming Zambrano doesn't flake out - I really hope this isn't extension-related spazzing out - and the team really should hit more than it has. Let's not rush to too many conclusions from 11 games. That said, as they say, pennants aren't won in April but they can be lost. Things need to start getting a bit better.
Sunday, April 01, 2007
A season on the brink
Most years, I go into the new Cubs season with a healthy sense of optimism. I look at what are usually a handful of fairly low-key offseason moves and a few players coming back from injury and say, "Well, if x happens, and y happens, and z happens, I think we could have a shot at the division." And I look forward to the start of the year, whereupon I am optimistic for maybe two and a half months before it (usually) becomes clear that it's not going to happen yet again.
This year, frankly, I'm terrified. Because after all the money that was spent, anything less than a playoff berth will seem like a failure, and god forbid this team fails to break .500 - it'll be a complete and total embarrassment. The one relief - if you'd call it that - is that almost no one is picking the Cubs to win the division or anything else. Who needs that kind of pressure? On the other hand, they're not doing so because despite the money, this team still has obvious flaws. They have too many flyball pitchers in a park where pop-ups find the basket on windy days. Their planned leadoff guy is speedy - when he gets on. But he's also a strikeout machine with a career OBP below .330, not to mention a CF who's never played center and apparently isn't looking that good out there. There's no obvious closer unless Dempster can regain form. Etc.
The thing is, if Zambrano gets signed (and it now seems like he will), this team will have a pretty strong core - Zambrano, Lee, Ramirez, Soriano - for years to come. That should be inspiring. Instead I'm just worried that they'll mess it up. If this were any other team the fans would be turning cartwheels, and here I am just waiting for the other shoe to drop. Isn't being a Cubs fan great?
This year, frankly, I'm terrified. Because after all the money that was spent, anything less than a playoff berth will seem like a failure, and god forbid this team fails to break .500 - it'll be a complete and total embarrassment. The one relief - if you'd call it that - is that almost no one is picking the Cubs to win the division or anything else. Who needs that kind of pressure? On the other hand, they're not doing so because despite the money, this team still has obvious flaws. They have too many flyball pitchers in a park where pop-ups find the basket on windy days. Their planned leadoff guy is speedy - when he gets on. But he's also a strikeout machine with a career OBP below .330, not to mention a CF who's never played center and apparently isn't looking that good out there. There's no obvious closer unless Dempster can regain form. Etc.
The thing is, if Zambrano gets signed (and it now seems like he will), this team will have a pretty strong core - Zambrano, Lee, Ramirez, Soriano - for years to come. That should be inspiring. Instead I'm just worried that they'll mess it up. If this were any other team the fans would be turning cartwheels, and here I am just waiting for the other shoe to drop. Isn't being a Cubs fan great?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)