While it's still technically early, and while the 2007 Cubs dug themselves a much deeper early hole, the 2009 season seems to be slipping through our fingers before it could really even get going. The Cubs have followed a season-high five-game winning streak - which brought them to 21-14 and within spitting distance of first place - by losing seven in a row, including a six-game road trip on which they were swept by both St. Louis (somewhat understandable) and San Diego (somewhat unforgivable). Why? Well, it's pretty simple: this team has forgotten how to hit.
The streak has included the Cubs being outscored 28-10. Worse yet, half of those runs came in the first game of the streak, a 6-5 loss to Houston at Wrigley last Sunday. In the six games since, the Cubs have been outscored 22-5. 22 runs in 6 games really isn't that terrible. In fact, in the middle five games of the streak, the Cubs pitchers had an ERA of just 3.15 - but the Cubs only scored three runs in the entire five games in support. As a result, Ted Lilly, Ryan Dempster, and Randy Wells were all saddled with losses despite seven-inning quality starts during that stretch.
During the seven games, the Cubs have just 41 hits in 226 at-bats, a team batting average of .181. Take away their 11-hit "barrage" against Houston, and the six road losses featured just 30 hits in 187 at-bats, a team BA of .160. "But Flax," you might say, "batting average doesn't tell you the whole story!" True. The Cubs have walked 10 times in the six games, itself not a huge number - and when I tell you that six of those came in one game, suddenly things look even worse. Three of the six games featured no walks at all. Worse still, the Cubs aren't even putting the ball in play, striking out 56 times in the seven games. That's a strikeout every four at-bats, nearly one per inning.
Who's to blame? It's not any one player, but I'd say the bulk of the fault lies squarely with the table-setters, Soriano and Theriot. In the six road games, Derrek Lee is hitting .368 (7-for-19) with a .400 OBP. Do you know how many RBI he has? One. And it was a solo home run. The problem is that Soriano and Theriot, at the top of the order, have gone a combined 4-for-45 in the past six games (.089), and neither has walked once. Soriano has struck out nine times in 21 at-bats.
Still, nobody's hitting. In the same six games, here's how everyone else is doing: Fukudome .125 (though he's also taken four walks and a hit-by-pitch for a .333 OBP), Bradley .158, Soto .188, Fontenot .235, Miles .100, Scales .100 (though his OBP is .357 because of three walks and an HBP), Hoffpauir .143 (with seven strikeouts in 14 at-bats). In a six-game span, only one guy has more than four hits (Lee with seven), only two guys have reached base more than five times (Lee 8 and Fukudome 7), and only two guys (Scales and Fukudome) have taken more than one walk. Meanwhile, four guys have struck out at least five times (Soriano 9, Hoffpauir 7, Fukudome 6, Soto 5). It's ugly.
What now? The Cubs are severely limited as far as possible changes they can make to the team - I don't know that there's anyone like a Jim Edmonds last year who could possibly be brought in. People are talking about Jake Fox, who's tearing up the PCL - but it's still the PCL. Fox is apparently a guy who either homers or strikes out, and we've already got Soriano and Hoffpauir, plus Fox can't really play anywhere but first base with anything resembling acceptable defense. As far as outside help, who's there? And perhaps more to the point, who can be replaced? The outfield makes too much to be movable. The only real open space on the infield is second base, perhaps the shallowest position in the game from a hitting perspective. You're not going to fill that spot with anything better than what's already there. And the Cubs' options for trades are limited anyway given how thin the farm system is.
Of course, we should remember that a seven-game losing streak - while it sucks - is hardly cause to start talking about blowing up the team or anything. Lee's bat was cold for weeks without creating significant problems because the rest of the team was hitting better; it seems likely that a team full of professional hitters will be able to turn it around. Still, how much longer can we wait for them to do so? Even the 2007 Cubs never lost more than six in a row. We're not quite at the 2006 Cubs "7-22 in May" point... but even the 2006 Cubs topped out at eight straight losses. Should the Cubs somehow be swept at home by the Pirates - an unlikely occurrence, but at this point I'm ruling nothing out - that would be ten straight losses, the most since the 1997 Cubs lost fourteen straight to start the season (en route to a 68-94 finish). If that happens, I'm going to buy a Bears cap and devote the rest of my summer to miniature golf.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Sunday, May 10, 2009
This may not be the year
I know it's technically still early, and the Brewers beat up on the Cubs in the first two series last year only for the Cubs to flatten them down the stretch (except in games where they had already clinched), but my God - did you ever think you'd see a Brewers/Cubs game where the Cubs' bullpen was so much worse? Let's take a look at the bullpen so far:
Angel Guzman: Perversely, he's been the best of the bunch, with the lowest ERA (4.11) and best strikeout-to-walk ratio (2.67). He's also thrown the most innings (15.1), so at least the guy who's throwing the best is getting the most work. With all due respect, though, when Angel Guzman is your best reliever that probably isn't saying much about your pen.
Carlos Marmol: His injury probably hasn't helped, although he seems to be on the way up - in his last three appearances he hasn't walked anyone, and his ERA is somewhat artificially high thanks to a four-run, 0.1 IP appearance on April 29 in a game that the Cubs were already losing 4-0. Still, his ERA is 4.50, he's already blown two saves, and his K/BB ratio is just 1.42 after being around 2.75 the last two years. At least his numbers aren't too bad aside from his leap in walk rate, which is inflated thanks to four walks in that Arizona game. He'll probably be fine.
Kevin Gregg: Gregg actually seems to have settled down after a rough start, as he's up to five saves and has still blown just the one at Milwaukee on April 10. His ERA has receded to 4.40, and his K/BB in his last six appearances is 6/1. Still, for the year he's allowing 15 W+H/9. That number will probably improve significantly if his current form keeps up, at least.
Aaron Heilman: Here's where things start to get bad. At 15 IP, Heilman has been the second most active member of the bullpen, but he seems to be going in the wrong direction. In his first eleven appearances this year, Heilman allowed just one earned run; after a scoreless inning and a third on April 26, his ERA stood at 0.82. Today it's 5.40 after just five additional outings. Most of the damage was done on April 30, when he entered a tie game with the Marlins in the top of the tenth and proceeded to get charged with six runs, five earned, without recording a single out. However, he hasn't been much better since then; after two scoreless appearances against Florida and Houston, he's been abused by Milwaukee, allowing The Incredibly Annoying Ryan Braun's game-winning eighth-inning home run on Friday (in a spot that should have been Marmol's, except I guess Lou is trying not to use him every damn day like he did in the early-going last year) and walking three after coming on in relief of the incompetent Chad Fox (about whom more anon) on Saturday. At least, I guess, if you take away the Marlins game he hasn't been that bad - his ERA is only 2.40 if you pull out those five runs.
Neal Cotts: I know Cotts is a lefty, and those are hard to come by, but I don't know what it's going to take to get him run out of town. Luis Vizcaino didn't give up a single run as a Cub and was released; Cotts seems to be allergic to outs. In 14 appearances he's recorded just 20 outs while allowing 18 baserunners (9 hits, 8 walks and a hit batsman). He's actually only given up runs in four of his fourteen appearances, but because he has a tendency to pitch 0.1 innings, his ERA is 6.75. One of the reasons why he hasn't given up that many runs, though, is because he has a lot of outings that look like this:
April 10 @ MIL: brought on to face PH Craig Counsell. Hits him with a pitch; gets yanked. Marmol finishes the inning.
April 11 @ MIL: brought on to face Prince Fielder. Walks him; gets yanked. Heilman finishes the inning.
April 18 vs. STL: brought on to start the 7th. Walks the first two batters he faces; gets yanked. Marmol finishes the inning.
April 21 vs. CIN: brought on to start the 8th. Strikes out the first batter, then allows a single and a walk; gets yanked. Marmol finishes the inning.
It goes on. In fact, only four times this year has Cotts recorded as many as three outs; on the same number of occasions he hasn't recorded any. Don't the Cubs have anyone left-handed at Iowa or even Tennessee? I don't see how they could be any less effective.
David Patton: Speaking of less effective - it's David Patton, everyone! The Rule V draftee was a fun story making the team after never pitching above A ball, but I think it's time to admit that he looked good in the spring because he was pitching in late-inning situations against total nobodies. If I'm a manager, I think I have a few spring games where I throw a few relievers to start the game; if that's what you're basing the team on, you need to know which of these guys can actually face down real big-league hitters. I guess considering Patton spent the last two seasons as a middling high-A reliever, he hasn't been as bad as one might have feared, and his ERA is certainly made worse by his 1.2-inning, five-ER outing on April 25 when he gave up the grand slam to Pujols - but if you take that away it's still over 5.00. Aside from Cotts, he has the worst WHIP of anyone who's pitched more than four innings - really, across the board his stats are second only to Cotts' in their awfulness among the regular relievers. Is it really worth not having to offer him back to Colorado, or is there just no one else in the pipeline? (What about Jose Ascanio, who's been destroying the PCL so far? Albeit he's done so as a starter, and maybe he's being saved for that role.)
Jeff Samardzija: Samardzija is already back down at Iowa, but he wasn't given much of a chance - just five appearances and 3.1 IP. He didn't have a very good start, coming into a game vs. the Reds on April 23 and giving up four hits and two runs in one inning, but since then he'd gotten two Ks in mop-up duty on April 27, another two Ks on April 29 (although between those he gave up a three-run double, all the runs getting charged to Marmol), and gotten out of a bases-loaded spot with a short flyball on May 1. Then on May 5 against the Giants he turned in this string: HBP (to load the bases), two-run double, RBI single, popout, walk. Only one of the three runs was credited to him, but apparently Lou had seen enough and Samardzija was bounced back to Iowa. While he certainly wasn't super-effective in his brief time up, it's worth remembering that Samardzija gave up runs in two of his first three appearances last year, and then went the entire month of August without allowing another one.
Chad Fox: The real reason not to send Samardzija back down is that it resulted in Chad Fox being called up. I would rather Jake Fox come up. To pitch. Here's what Fox has done since returning to the big club:
May 7 @ HOU: enters the game in the bottom of the ninth with the Cubs up 8-2. Jason Michaels walks, Ivan Rodriguez triples (scoring Michaels), Jeff Keppinger grounds out (scoring Rodriguez), Darin Erstad triples (scoring on a sac fly after Kevin Gregg replaces Fox). Final line: 0.1 IP, 3 ER.
May 9 @ MIL: enters the game in the bottom of the eighth with the Cubs down 9-6. Ryan Braun walks, then Fox throws a wild pitch in the middle of walking Prince Fielder and gets yanked mid at-bat. (Aaron Heilman comes in and finishes walking Fielder, then eventually allows both Braun and Fielder to score. Baseball's bizarre scoring system charges Fox with one run but two earned runs.)
So in two appearances, Fox has two walks and half of a third (he's credited with three in the stats), two hits, and five earned runs... and one out (and that an RBI groundout). His ERA? 135.00. His WHIP? 15.00. He makes Chien-Ming Wang look like Bob Gibson. I've gotta think we've seen about all we're going to see of Chad Fox at this point. Whatever he was doing at Iowa - where he had a 1.64 ERA and 1.00 WHIP, along with a 10/3 K/BB in 11.1 IP - he can't seem to replicate it at the major league level. If you can't even get outs in mop-up duty, you need to be out of here.
EDIT: I didn't actually get to see Saturday's game, and after writing this I found out that Fox got injured on the 2-0 wild pitch he threw and that's why he was "yanked" mid at-bat. Most likely he's thrown not just his last Cubs pitch but his last big-league pitch as well. With that in mind I feel kinda bad for the guy, but really it wasn't working out even if he'd stayed uninjured. Jose Ascanio is coming up instead, so hopefully that goes better.
So that's the bullpen so far. I guess the top end really isn't all that bad, but the bottom has just been awful. Last year the bullpen was a relative strength, but it's just looked bad way too often so far. Maybe this is just the result of a few really bad outings, but I don't know.
Add in all the injuries - especially with Ramirez set to miss at least a month and Zambrano on the 15-day DL - and the Cubs will be lucky to hold on until everyone gets healthy, if indeed everyone ever does get healthy at the same time. The worst part with all this is that 2009 was probably the best chance; this team is only getting older, and if guys can't stay healthy now, what chance do they stand in two years when Soto is basically the only guy under 30?
Angel Guzman: Perversely, he's been the best of the bunch, with the lowest ERA (4.11) and best strikeout-to-walk ratio (2.67). He's also thrown the most innings (15.1), so at least the guy who's throwing the best is getting the most work. With all due respect, though, when Angel Guzman is your best reliever that probably isn't saying much about your pen.
Carlos Marmol: His injury probably hasn't helped, although he seems to be on the way up - in his last three appearances he hasn't walked anyone, and his ERA is somewhat artificially high thanks to a four-run, 0.1 IP appearance on April 29 in a game that the Cubs were already losing 4-0. Still, his ERA is 4.50, he's already blown two saves, and his K/BB ratio is just 1.42 after being around 2.75 the last two years. At least his numbers aren't too bad aside from his leap in walk rate, which is inflated thanks to four walks in that Arizona game. He'll probably be fine.
Kevin Gregg: Gregg actually seems to have settled down after a rough start, as he's up to five saves and has still blown just the one at Milwaukee on April 10. His ERA has receded to 4.40, and his K/BB in his last six appearances is 6/1. Still, for the year he's allowing 15 W+H/9. That number will probably improve significantly if his current form keeps up, at least.
Aaron Heilman: Here's where things start to get bad. At 15 IP, Heilman has been the second most active member of the bullpen, but he seems to be going in the wrong direction. In his first eleven appearances this year, Heilman allowed just one earned run; after a scoreless inning and a third on April 26, his ERA stood at 0.82. Today it's 5.40 after just five additional outings. Most of the damage was done on April 30, when he entered a tie game with the Marlins in the top of the tenth and proceeded to get charged with six runs, five earned, without recording a single out. However, he hasn't been much better since then; after two scoreless appearances against Florida and Houston, he's been abused by Milwaukee, allowing The Incredibly Annoying Ryan Braun's game-winning eighth-inning home run on Friday (in a spot that should have been Marmol's, except I guess Lou is trying not to use him every damn day like he did in the early-going last year) and walking three after coming on in relief of the incompetent Chad Fox (about whom more anon) on Saturday. At least, I guess, if you take away the Marlins game he hasn't been that bad - his ERA is only 2.40 if you pull out those five runs.
Neal Cotts: I know Cotts is a lefty, and those are hard to come by, but I don't know what it's going to take to get him run out of town. Luis Vizcaino didn't give up a single run as a Cub and was released; Cotts seems to be allergic to outs. In 14 appearances he's recorded just 20 outs while allowing 18 baserunners (9 hits, 8 walks and a hit batsman). He's actually only given up runs in four of his fourteen appearances, but because he has a tendency to pitch 0.1 innings, his ERA is 6.75. One of the reasons why he hasn't given up that many runs, though, is because he has a lot of outings that look like this:
April 10 @ MIL: brought on to face PH Craig Counsell. Hits him with a pitch; gets yanked. Marmol finishes the inning.
April 11 @ MIL: brought on to face Prince Fielder. Walks him; gets yanked. Heilman finishes the inning.
April 18 vs. STL: brought on to start the 7th. Walks the first two batters he faces; gets yanked. Marmol finishes the inning.
April 21 vs. CIN: brought on to start the 8th. Strikes out the first batter, then allows a single and a walk; gets yanked. Marmol finishes the inning.
It goes on. In fact, only four times this year has Cotts recorded as many as three outs; on the same number of occasions he hasn't recorded any. Don't the Cubs have anyone left-handed at Iowa or even Tennessee? I don't see how they could be any less effective.
David Patton: Speaking of less effective - it's David Patton, everyone! The Rule V draftee was a fun story making the team after never pitching above A ball, but I think it's time to admit that he looked good in the spring because he was pitching in late-inning situations against total nobodies. If I'm a manager, I think I have a few spring games where I throw a few relievers to start the game; if that's what you're basing the team on, you need to know which of these guys can actually face down real big-league hitters. I guess considering Patton spent the last two seasons as a middling high-A reliever, he hasn't been as bad as one might have feared, and his ERA is certainly made worse by his 1.2-inning, five-ER outing on April 25 when he gave up the grand slam to Pujols - but if you take that away it's still over 5.00. Aside from Cotts, he has the worst WHIP of anyone who's pitched more than four innings - really, across the board his stats are second only to Cotts' in their awfulness among the regular relievers. Is it really worth not having to offer him back to Colorado, or is there just no one else in the pipeline? (What about Jose Ascanio, who's been destroying the PCL so far? Albeit he's done so as a starter, and maybe he's being saved for that role.)
Jeff Samardzija: Samardzija is already back down at Iowa, but he wasn't given much of a chance - just five appearances and 3.1 IP. He didn't have a very good start, coming into a game vs. the Reds on April 23 and giving up four hits and two runs in one inning, but since then he'd gotten two Ks in mop-up duty on April 27, another two Ks on April 29 (although between those he gave up a three-run double, all the runs getting charged to Marmol), and gotten out of a bases-loaded spot with a short flyball on May 1. Then on May 5 against the Giants he turned in this string: HBP (to load the bases), two-run double, RBI single, popout, walk. Only one of the three runs was credited to him, but apparently Lou had seen enough and Samardzija was bounced back to Iowa. While he certainly wasn't super-effective in his brief time up, it's worth remembering that Samardzija gave up runs in two of his first three appearances last year, and then went the entire month of August without allowing another one.
Chad Fox: The real reason not to send Samardzija back down is that it resulted in Chad Fox being called up. I would rather Jake Fox come up. To pitch. Here's what Fox has done since returning to the big club:
May 7 @ HOU: enters the game in the bottom of the ninth with the Cubs up 8-2. Jason Michaels walks, Ivan Rodriguez triples (scoring Michaels), Jeff Keppinger grounds out (scoring Rodriguez), Darin Erstad triples (scoring on a sac fly after Kevin Gregg replaces Fox). Final line: 0.1 IP, 3 ER.
May 9 @ MIL: enters the game in the bottom of the eighth with the Cubs down 9-6. Ryan Braun walks, then Fox throws a wild pitch in the middle of walking Prince Fielder and gets yanked mid at-bat. (Aaron Heilman comes in and finishes walking Fielder, then eventually allows both Braun and Fielder to score. Baseball's bizarre scoring system charges Fox with one run but two earned runs.)
So in two appearances, Fox has two walks and half of a third (he's credited with three in the stats), two hits, and five earned runs... and one out (and that an RBI groundout). His ERA? 135.00. His WHIP? 15.00. He makes Chien-Ming Wang look like Bob Gibson. I've gotta think we've seen about all we're going to see of Chad Fox at this point. Whatever he was doing at Iowa - where he had a 1.64 ERA and 1.00 WHIP, along with a 10/3 K/BB in 11.1 IP - he can't seem to replicate it at the major league level. If you can't even get outs in mop-up duty, you need to be out of here.
EDIT: I didn't actually get to see Saturday's game, and after writing this I found out that Fox got injured on the 2-0 wild pitch he threw and that's why he was "yanked" mid at-bat. Most likely he's thrown not just his last Cubs pitch but his last big-league pitch as well. With that in mind I feel kinda bad for the guy, but really it wasn't working out even if he'd stayed uninjured. Jose Ascanio is coming up instead, so hopefully that goes better.
So that's the bullpen so far. I guess the top end really isn't all that bad, but the bottom has just been awful. Last year the bullpen was a relative strength, but it's just looked bad way too often so far. Maybe this is just the result of a few really bad outings, but I don't know.
Add in all the injuries - especially with Ramirez set to miss at least a month and Zambrano on the 15-day DL - and the Cubs will be lucky to hold on until everyone gets healthy, if indeed everyone ever does get healthy at the same time. The worst part with all this is that 2009 was probably the best chance; this team is only getting older, and if guys can't stay healthy now, what chance do they stand in two years when Soto is basically the only guy under 30?
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
What's the problem?
For some reason, people made a big deal about the Cubs' lineup today. Here it was:
1. Gathright, CF
2. Miles, SS
3. Fukudome, RF
4. Lee, 1B
5. Hoffpauir, LF
6. Fontenot, 3B
7. Scales, 2B
8. Hill, C
On ESPN 1000 they referred to this lineup as "the Iowa Cubs." I'm really not sure why. Aside from Scales - called up (probably just for a couple days) to fill Zambrano's roster spot - the seven remaining starting position players featured three regular starters (Fukudome, Lee and Fontenot), two guys who have been getting regular playing time in the absences of Bradley and Ramirez, and the backup catcher, Hill, in a day game after a night game. Only Gathright's presence in the leadoff spot really stands out as particularly weird.
If Lincecum weren't the opposing pitcher, would anyone have noticed? It sort of looked like the Cubs were punting the game, but you do have to consider that they are in the middle of 20 games in 20 days, and it makes sense to give the regulars some rest in a day game following a night game. The fact that it was Lincecum really doesn't change that much regarding the decision. If anything it does make it a slightly easier decision; since you already want to give your regulars a rest, there's no reason not to do it in a game that is already going to be pretty difficult to win.
I'm much more concerned with the fact that Samardzija appears to be Croatian for "Farnsworth" than with anything else that happened in this game.
1. Gathright, CF
2. Miles, SS
3. Fukudome, RF
4. Lee, 1B
5. Hoffpauir, LF
6. Fontenot, 3B
7. Scales, 2B
8. Hill, C
On ESPN 1000 they referred to this lineup as "the Iowa Cubs." I'm really not sure why. Aside from Scales - called up (probably just for a couple days) to fill Zambrano's roster spot - the seven remaining starting position players featured three regular starters (Fukudome, Lee and Fontenot), two guys who have been getting regular playing time in the absences of Bradley and Ramirez, and the backup catcher, Hill, in a day game after a night game. Only Gathright's presence in the leadoff spot really stands out as particularly weird.
If Lincecum weren't the opposing pitcher, would anyone have noticed? It sort of looked like the Cubs were punting the game, but you do have to consider that they are in the middle of 20 games in 20 days, and it makes sense to give the regulars some rest in a day game following a night game. The fact that it was Lincecum really doesn't change that much regarding the decision. If anything it does make it a slightly easier decision; since you already want to give your regulars a rest, there's no reason not to do it in a game that is already going to be pretty difficult to win.
I'm much more concerned with the fact that Samardzija appears to be Croatian for "Farnsworth" than with anything else that happened in this game.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Cubs 7, Cardinals 5 (11 innings)
I know what I said about recapping series, but fuck it - it's not every day I get to sit and watch a Cubs game at all, let alone one won with a walk-off homer in extras.
I had been out and got in front of a TV in the top of the 7th just after Cotts walked two guys on eight pitches and was yanked for Marmol. (Jesus Christ, by the way. Are the Cubs ever going to have a lefty specialist who actually gets lefties out when called upon? Looking through their history, they basically haven't had a consistently good lefty reliever since Randy Myers, and since he was the closer that doesn't exactly count.) Marmol did a great job cleaning up the mess in the 7th, but somehow fell apart in the 8th against a significantly less dangerous part of the order, blowing the save, and requiring Kevin Gregg's services an inning early.
I have to say I liked what Lou did here, whether it was intentional or not. At this point, Marmol is clearly your best bullpen pitcher and Gregg - for all his early tribulations - is pretty clearly #2. Bill James' concept of the "bullpen ace" recommends using your best guy in whatever situation deems it necessary rather than saving him to "close" a game that may never get to that point if you don't put the best guy in now, and Lou worked that well, bringing in Marmol an inning earlier than he clearly would have liked to put out Cotts' fire, and then bringing in Gregg to put out Marmol's. I was more shocked that Gregg not only proceeded to go two innings (I guess his knee was okay because it was warmer today?), but to look pretty darn good doing it, striking out the first two men he faced in the 8th and mowing down the 2-3-4 in the top of the 9th.
Aside from the obvious, there was no more exciting play in the game than Soriano's assist to double Duncan off second to end the top of the 10th - he really whipped that thing out of his glove, although it wasn't exactly great baserunning on Duncan's part. But that one roused me as much as anything before the homer. And actually, the bullpen did a pretty decent job after Marmol - neither Gregg, nor Heilman, nor Guzman gave up a hit. I think we'd all like to see some more of that.
As for A-Ram... well, what can you say? He did it again.
The Cubs certainly haven't lacked for drama this season, have they? So far their seven wins include three in which they scored the winning run in their last at-bats (they also have two losses in which the opposing team did the same). Maybe this is part of a plan to make sure they don't fall apart in the playoffs again - play a game with playoff-like intensity every goddamn day, just to get acclimated to it. Come October, it'll be just like any other game! Or maybe everyone playing and watching will be dead of stress-induced heart attacks. Man, this team.
I had been out and got in front of a TV in the top of the 7th just after Cotts walked two guys on eight pitches and was yanked for Marmol. (Jesus Christ, by the way. Are the Cubs ever going to have a lefty specialist who actually gets lefties out when called upon? Looking through their history, they basically haven't had a consistently good lefty reliever since Randy Myers, and since he was the closer that doesn't exactly count.) Marmol did a great job cleaning up the mess in the 7th, but somehow fell apart in the 8th against a significantly less dangerous part of the order, blowing the save, and requiring Kevin Gregg's services an inning early.
I have to say I liked what Lou did here, whether it was intentional or not. At this point, Marmol is clearly your best bullpen pitcher and Gregg - for all his early tribulations - is pretty clearly #2. Bill James' concept of the "bullpen ace" recommends using your best guy in whatever situation deems it necessary rather than saving him to "close" a game that may never get to that point if you don't put the best guy in now, and Lou worked that well, bringing in Marmol an inning earlier than he clearly would have liked to put out Cotts' fire, and then bringing in Gregg to put out Marmol's. I was more shocked that Gregg not only proceeded to go two innings (I guess his knee was okay because it was warmer today?), but to look pretty darn good doing it, striking out the first two men he faced in the 8th and mowing down the 2-3-4 in the top of the 9th.
Aside from the obvious, there was no more exciting play in the game than Soriano's assist to double Duncan off second to end the top of the 10th - he really whipped that thing out of his glove, although it wasn't exactly great baserunning on Duncan's part. But that one roused me as much as anything before the homer. And actually, the bullpen did a pretty decent job after Marmol - neither Gregg, nor Heilman, nor Guzman gave up a hit. I think we'd all like to see some more of that.
As for A-Ram... well, what can you say? He did it again.
The Cubs certainly haven't lacked for drama this season, have they? So far their seven wins include three in which they scored the winning run in their last at-bats (they also have two losses in which the opposing team did the same). Maybe this is part of a plan to make sure they don't fall apart in the playoffs again - play a game with playoff-like intensity every goddamn day, just to get acclimated to it. Come October, it'll be just like any other game! Or maybe everyone playing and watching will be dead of stress-induced heart attacks. Man, this team.
FU-KU-DO-ME
At the risk of "talking during the no-hitter," as it were, remember how crazy we went for Kosuke Fukudome in the first months of the '08 season? Especially right at the start when he came flying out of the gate. Fukudome's stats through the first ten games of 2008:
.333/.447/.487, .934 OPS, 3 2B, 1 HR, 6 RBI, 8/7 BB/K
(And that's bearing in mind that in games 9 and 10 he went a combined o-for-8.)
Of course, we all know what happened next. Over the course of the year, Fukudome's numbers kept dropping; in the second half he went just .217/.314/.326, and in the final two months he hit under .200, getting so bad that he only started 9 games in September.
Coming into this season I said the following:
"[W]hat to expect out of Fukudome is entirely unclear; watching him bat in the second half of last year was pretty depressing given how great he looked the first couple of months. Like most Cubs fans, I still desperately want the guy to hit, and at least he can take a walk now and again (leading the team last year with 81), but the days of thinking he could pop 20 homers out of Wrigley and go for a .400 OBP like last year's PECOTA projected are long gone. (For the record, this year's PECOTA pegs Kosuke at .386, which still seems awfully optimistic. But hey, Hideki Matsui improved in his second year in America.)"
Well, Fukudome may yet turn out to just be a first-half player. There aren't too many of those in the majors that I'm aware of - Alex Rodriguez, despite his reputation, has virtually identical career numbers before and after the break, and while Dave Winfield (once pejoratively described as "Mr. May" by George Steinbrenner) does have better career first half stats, they're nothing along the lines of Fukudome's 2008 dropoff. But the guy has only been in the majors for one year. While a quick check of my copy of BP '09 reveals that the Japanese season is not shorter than the US version - Fukudome had 578 PAs in 2006, compared to 590 with the Cubs last year - it's clearly less strenuous. Every game is indoors in nearly identical stadia, the degree of travel is significantly less (Japan quite obviously has nothing like flying to the West Coast and back within a week), and of course the level of competition isn't exactly identical.
My speculation has been that Fukudome's initial success had to do with him not being a known quantity - you see guys come up and rake all the time because pitchers don't necessarily know how to pitch them yet. Eventually the league caught up with Fukudome, and he had trouble making adjustments, instead overdramatizing his infamous bailout swing and turning into a corkscrew as a result. Come the offseason, it was up to Fukudome to make his own adjustments or risk becoming one of MLB's most expensive pine jockeys.
Well, it's early. But given that pitchers supposedly know how to pitch Fukudome now, maybe he's actually figured it out? Sure, he could just be a first-half guy, but on the other hand, maybe he'll be more adjusted to the rigors of MLB this year and be able to maintain his form. He probably won't do what he's doing in the first ten games all season - small sample sizes and all that. But given the bang with which he exploded onto the scene last year, would you believe his first ten games this year aren't just better, but significantly better?
.371/.477/.771, 1.249 OPS, 5 2B, 3 HR, 9 RBI, 8/6 BB/K
Yeah, he won't do that all year. A .771 slugging percentage would be the seventh-greatest year of all time, trailing only three seasons of Bonds and three seasons of Ruth. More likely than not he won't even turn in a .300/.400/.500, and he probably isn't going to hit 48 home runs and knock in 144. Ten days of stats really doesn't tell you much of anything, all told. (Milton Bradley probably won't hit .056 all year, either.)
But with that said, I think - I hope - that his start to this year being even faster than his start to last year says something about the steps forward he's taken as a player. Because if he falls off the table again, Jim Edmonds and Mark DeRosa won't be there with surprising seasons to pick up the slack, and even if Bradley can stay healthy he'll probably only give you what we were hoping from Kosuke in '08 in the first place. This team needs a .300/.400/.450-like line from Kosuke, with 15-20 homers and maybe 70-80 driven in. Only time will tell if he truly has the ability or if he just really loves hitting in April.
.333/.447/.487, .934 OPS, 3 2B, 1 HR, 6 RBI, 8/7 BB/K
(And that's bearing in mind that in games 9 and 10 he went a combined o-for-8.)
Of course, we all know what happened next. Over the course of the year, Fukudome's numbers kept dropping; in the second half he went just .217/.314/.326, and in the final two months he hit under .200, getting so bad that he only started 9 games in September.
Coming into this season I said the following:
"[W]hat to expect out of Fukudome is entirely unclear; watching him bat in the second half of last year was pretty depressing given how great he looked the first couple of months. Like most Cubs fans, I still desperately want the guy to hit, and at least he can take a walk now and again (leading the team last year with 81), but the days of thinking he could pop 20 homers out of Wrigley and go for a .400 OBP like last year's PECOTA projected are long gone. (For the record, this year's PECOTA pegs Kosuke at .386, which still seems awfully optimistic. But hey, Hideki Matsui improved in his second year in America.)"
Well, Fukudome may yet turn out to just be a first-half player. There aren't too many of those in the majors that I'm aware of - Alex Rodriguez, despite his reputation, has virtually identical career numbers before and after the break, and while Dave Winfield (once pejoratively described as "Mr. May" by George Steinbrenner) does have better career first half stats, they're nothing along the lines of Fukudome's 2008 dropoff. But the guy has only been in the majors for one year. While a quick check of my copy of BP '09 reveals that the Japanese season is not shorter than the US version - Fukudome had 578 PAs in 2006, compared to 590 with the Cubs last year - it's clearly less strenuous. Every game is indoors in nearly identical stadia, the degree of travel is significantly less (Japan quite obviously has nothing like flying to the West Coast and back within a week), and of course the level of competition isn't exactly identical.
My speculation has been that Fukudome's initial success had to do with him not being a known quantity - you see guys come up and rake all the time because pitchers don't necessarily know how to pitch them yet. Eventually the league caught up with Fukudome, and he had trouble making adjustments, instead overdramatizing his infamous bailout swing and turning into a corkscrew as a result. Come the offseason, it was up to Fukudome to make his own adjustments or risk becoming one of MLB's most expensive pine jockeys.
Well, it's early. But given that pitchers supposedly know how to pitch Fukudome now, maybe he's actually figured it out? Sure, he could just be a first-half guy, but on the other hand, maybe he'll be more adjusted to the rigors of MLB this year and be able to maintain his form. He probably won't do what he's doing in the first ten games all season - small sample sizes and all that. But given the bang with which he exploded onto the scene last year, would you believe his first ten games this year aren't just better, but significantly better?
.371/.477/.771, 1.249 OPS, 5 2B, 3 HR, 9 RBI, 8/6 BB/K
Yeah, he won't do that all year. A .771 slugging percentage would be the seventh-greatest year of all time, trailing only three seasons of Bonds and three seasons of Ruth. More likely than not he won't even turn in a .300/.400/.500, and he probably isn't going to hit 48 home runs and knock in 144. Ten days of stats really doesn't tell you much of anything, all told. (Milton Bradley probably won't hit .056 all year, either.)
But with that said, I think - I hope - that his start to this year being even faster than his start to last year says something about the steps forward he's taken as a player. Because if he falls off the table again, Jim Edmonds and Mark DeRosa won't be there with surprising seasons to pick up the slack, and even if Bradley can stay healthy he'll probably only give you what we were hoping from Kosuke in '08 in the first place. This team needs a .300/.400/.450-like line from Kosuke, with 15-20 homers and maybe 70-80 driven in. Only time will tell if he truly has the ability or if he just really loves hitting in April.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Walk the (first base) line
In today's home opener, which the Cubs won 4-0 - more on that after the series concludes - the Cubs drew nine walks from Rockies pitching (six from starter Ubaldo Jimenez) and also took a hit by pitch (Reed Johnson, natch). This made ten free passes for the Cubs, just hours after receiving twelve (ten walks and two HBPs) from the Brewers in an 8-5 win. All told, the Cubs reached base 17 times against the Brewers and 19 times against the Rockies while failing to reach double digits in hits in either game. Recording nine or more walks and nine or fewer hits in consecutive games has only been accomplished 41 times since 1954 by any team; the last and only other Cubs team in that span to do it was the 1974 edition, which won at the Mets 5-4 on 9/15/74 in a game in which they had eight hits but eleven walks (plus an HBP), then won at the Phillies 4-2 two days later, a game in which they walked nine times but had just four hits.
Only once before in Cubs (post-1954) history had they recorded consecutive games with at least 17 times on base but single-digit hits. In 1980, the Cubs visited the Giants in August. On August 1, they had 8 hits, 8 walks, and a hit batsman, and won 5-3. The next day they had 9 hits and 9 walks but lost 8-5, with Dick Tidrow blowing a 5-4 lead by allowing four runs in the bottom of the 7th. Of course, those Cubs lost 98 games, so let's not read too much into this stat either way.
One more walk by the Cubs in today's game would have admitted them to an even more exclusive club of just nine teams (since 1954) with consecutive games featuring double-digit bases on balls but single-digit hits. (Somewhat amazingly, of the nine teams, just two won both games while three lost both.) Last team to do it: the 2002 Phillies, who lost a game 5-3 despite 10 walks and 8 hits (0-for-7 with RISP will do that to you), then won the next day 10-8 with the same walk and hit totals. (This time they went 3-for-14 with RISP, but more crucially, Expos starter Bartolo Colon walked five men in one inning - one intentionally - including three in a row to start the inning and then later one with the bases loaded to give the Phillies three runs in the inning - on one hit.)
Only once before in Cubs (post-1954) history had they recorded consecutive games with at least 17 times on base but single-digit hits. In 1980, the Cubs visited the Giants in August. On August 1, they had 8 hits, 8 walks, and a hit batsman, and won 5-3. The next day they had 9 hits and 9 walks but lost 8-5, with Dick Tidrow blowing a 5-4 lead by allowing four runs in the bottom of the 7th. Of course, those Cubs lost 98 games, so let's not read too much into this stat either way.
One more walk by the Cubs in today's game would have admitted them to an even more exclusive club of just nine teams (since 1954) with consecutive games featuring double-digit bases on balls but single-digit hits. (Somewhat amazingly, of the nine teams, just two won both games while three lost both.) Last team to do it: the 2002 Phillies, who lost a game 5-3 despite 10 walks and 8 hits (0-for-7 with RISP will do that to you), then won the next day 10-8 with the same walk and hit totals. (This time they went 3-for-14 with RISP, but more crucially, Expos starter Bartolo Colon walked five men in one inning - one intentionally - including three in a row to start the inning and then later one with the bases loaded to give the Phillies three runs in the inning - on one hit.)
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Series recap: Cubs at Brewers, April 10-12, 2009
Just win series.
That is the goal. But did we need to get this nerve-wracking this early in the year? Look, I'm ultimately not worried about the Brewers - their lineup is basically the same as last year's but their pitching, as far as I can tell, is significantly worse. But I'd still rather not give games to them in April or any other time.
April 10: Brewers 4, Cubs 3
Saw: None (at work), but was on phone and IM with my dad (who was watching) for most of game and was following on Gamecast
Blech. I may have overreacted a little; at first I thought this loss was more brutal than any of last year's, ignoring all the times Wood gave up three runs in the bottom of the ninth to blow a two-run lead. But it certainly wasn't pleasant. Milton Bradley's first Cub hit being a home run? Nice. Harden striking out ten Brewers in six innings and looking like his exhibition game at Yankee Stadium was, well, just that? Nicer. Koyie Hill homering to give the Cubs the lead in the sixth? Nicest. The Cubs bullpen? Least nice. Some of this I blame Lou for - it shouldn't have taken three pitchers to get out of the seventh and three more to get out of the eighth. Using two lefty specialists against the Brewers seemed particularly unnecessary - the Brewers hit righties so poorly they need Craig Counsell in there to break up their lineup. Really, you had to bring in Cotts just to face Craig Counsell? (And then he hits him and you've burned a pitcher.) Possibly not the best use of resources. And then Gregg adds a horrible ninth to his two appearances in the Astros series in which he got one shaky save and then was on the mound at the time of the ten-inning loss's completion. Good start to the closer tenure there.
April 11: Cubs 6, Brewers 5
Saw: Very little. We were in Culver's and the game was on TV in the background for Milwaukee's two runs in the seventh, but I missed everything else.
Not Z's best outing although it was a "quality start." I did manage to see the walk-happy bullpen show up again in the seventh - given how bad the Brewers' team OBP was last year, I don't know how you walk the bases loaded, even if it is Braun and Fielder and clearly you're terrified to pitch to them. And why even bring in Cotts when he's just going to walk a guy? Heilman sure looked good after giving up the go-ahead runs, though, huh? Reminds me of that game against the Rockies in 2007 when Howry gave up the go-ahead home run and then (after nearly being attacked Randy Myers-style) immediately settled down and worked quickly out of the inning. Soriano - well, what can you say? I just hope he keeps sockin' 'em out.
April 12: Cubs 8, Brewers 5
Saw: Bottom first, top second, bottom sixth through end of game
We went for dinner in the middle of the game, so I missed the ridiculous fourth inning, featuring five walks and a hit by pitch, and four runs scoring despite just one hit. Talk about being handed a game, although if not for Reed Johnson's heroics in the bottom of the fifth - which I didn't see live but which were replayed multiple times later in the game - it would have been handed right back. Truly, "P Fielder hit sacrifice fly to right," as the play-by-play on ESPN.com lists it, doesn't exactly do the encounter justice. Johnson may never be mistaken for an in-their-prime Ken Griffey Jr. or Andruw Jones, but he has made some epic catches for the Cubs since being signed just before the start of '08. Anyway, the Brewers issued 10 walks to the Cubs all told, six by Suppan, the starter, in just 3.2 innings. Just for good measure, they hit two more guys, for a total of twelve free passes. Total Cub hits in the game: five. Now that is called handing over a game. Man. But how about that team OBP for the Cubs!
Bad news: gee, Milton Bradley got injured. On the bright side, Kosuke is hitting .409, and if Bradley hadn't left the game, Johnson doesn't make that catch on Fielder. (I guess Fukudome might have, but hey. It worked out for now.) How about that middle of the Cubs order, huh? Lee hitting .080 and Bradley hitting .059? Heck of a start. (Although Lee did have 2 RBI with a sac fly and bases-loaded walk.)
As for Gregg... the less said, the better. He only looks worse in comparison with Marmol when Marmol blows away the side in the 8th and then Gregg seems like he's going to roll only to give up a two-out homer to make it 8-5, followed by a double and a walk before managing to strike out Fielder as the tying run. Frankly, I'm not sad to see Marmol remain in a setup role - people complain about the firmness of the closer's role when the team's best reliever - say, K-Rod in New York - is locked into "ninth inning with a lead" scenarios and only rarely pitches in any others, rather than being able to throw him into any late-game spot, including in the 7th or 8th, where a big out is needed. Keeping Marmol out of the designated closer spot allows him to do things like he did on Friday, coming into the game in the 7th with two on and one out (he's certainly the guy you want to see there because he gives up so few hits and even so few balls in play). You certainly wouldn't want to see Gregg in that spot, which is what would happen much more frequently were Marmol locked into the ninth. Really, while Gregg's ninth inning struggles have made the early part of the year a lot more heart-stopping than it really ought to be, it's better he's there - because the closer virtually always comes in with no one on base, it's an easier job and better suited for someone who isn't a shutdown reliever with a huge strikeout total and extremely low WHIP the way the Marmot is. It's understandable that Marmol wants the "closer" title - those guys make more money. (As it is, Gregg makes $4.2 million while Marmol makes $575,000.) But if Marmol keeps doing what he's doing, I foresee a nice payday for him down the line whether he gets the "closer" mantle or not. And if I were the Cubs, I'd tell him that (a) we still consider him the likeliest future closer but (b) honestly, we're using him right now in the way we feel gives him the most value. People love saves, but no one is going to miss a reliever who strikes out 114 guys in 87.1 innings.
Home opener! Bring on the Rockies.
That is the goal. But did we need to get this nerve-wracking this early in the year? Look, I'm ultimately not worried about the Brewers - their lineup is basically the same as last year's but their pitching, as far as I can tell, is significantly worse. But I'd still rather not give games to them in April or any other time.
April 10: Brewers 4, Cubs 3
Saw: None (at work), but was on phone and IM with my dad (who was watching) for most of game and was following on Gamecast
Blech. I may have overreacted a little; at first I thought this loss was more brutal than any of last year's, ignoring all the times Wood gave up three runs in the bottom of the ninth to blow a two-run lead. But it certainly wasn't pleasant. Milton Bradley's first Cub hit being a home run? Nice. Harden striking out ten Brewers in six innings and looking like his exhibition game at Yankee Stadium was, well, just that? Nicer. Koyie Hill homering to give the Cubs the lead in the sixth? Nicest. The Cubs bullpen? Least nice. Some of this I blame Lou for - it shouldn't have taken three pitchers to get out of the seventh and three more to get out of the eighth. Using two lefty specialists against the Brewers seemed particularly unnecessary - the Brewers hit righties so poorly they need Craig Counsell in there to break up their lineup. Really, you had to bring in Cotts just to face Craig Counsell? (And then he hits him and you've burned a pitcher.) Possibly not the best use of resources. And then Gregg adds a horrible ninth to his two appearances in the Astros series in which he got one shaky save and then was on the mound at the time of the ten-inning loss's completion. Good start to the closer tenure there.
April 11: Cubs 6, Brewers 5
Saw: Very little. We were in Culver's and the game was on TV in the background for Milwaukee's two runs in the seventh, but I missed everything else.
Not Z's best outing although it was a "quality start." I did manage to see the walk-happy bullpen show up again in the seventh - given how bad the Brewers' team OBP was last year, I don't know how you walk the bases loaded, even if it is Braun and Fielder and clearly you're terrified to pitch to them. And why even bring in Cotts when he's just going to walk a guy? Heilman sure looked good after giving up the go-ahead runs, though, huh? Reminds me of that game against the Rockies in 2007 when Howry gave up the go-ahead home run and then (after nearly being attacked Randy Myers-style) immediately settled down and worked quickly out of the inning. Soriano - well, what can you say? I just hope he keeps sockin' 'em out.
April 12: Cubs 8, Brewers 5
Saw: Bottom first, top second, bottom sixth through end of game
We went for dinner in the middle of the game, so I missed the ridiculous fourth inning, featuring five walks and a hit by pitch, and four runs scoring despite just one hit. Talk about being handed a game, although if not for Reed Johnson's heroics in the bottom of the fifth - which I didn't see live but which were replayed multiple times later in the game - it would have been handed right back. Truly, "P Fielder hit sacrifice fly to right," as the play-by-play on ESPN.com lists it, doesn't exactly do the encounter justice. Johnson may never be mistaken for an in-their-prime Ken Griffey Jr. or Andruw Jones, but he has made some epic catches for the Cubs since being signed just before the start of '08. Anyway, the Brewers issued 10 walks to the Cubs all told, six by Suppan, the starter, in just 3.2 innings. Just for good measure, they hit two more guys, for a total of twelve free passes. Total Cub hits in the game: five. Now that is called handing over a game. Man. But how about that team OBP for the Cubs!
Bad news: gee, Milton Bradley got injured. On the bright side, Kosuke is hitting .409, and if Bradley hadn't left the game, Johnson doesn't make that catch on Fielder. (I guess Fukudome might have, but hey. It worked out for now.) How about that middle of the Cubs order, huh? Lee hitting .080 and Bradley hitting .059? Heck of a start. (Although Lee did have 2 RBI with a sac fly and bases-loaded walk.)
As for Gregg... the less said, the better. He only looks worse in comparison with Marmol when Marmol blows away the side in the 8th and then Gregg seems like he's going to roll only to give up a two-out homer to make it 8-5, followed by a double and a walk before managing to strike out Fielder as the tying run. Frankly, I'm not sad to see Marmol remain in a setup role - people complain about the firmness of the closer's role when the team's best reliever - say, K-Rod in New York - is locked into "ninth inning with a lead" scenarios and only rarely pitches in any others, rather than being able to throw him into any late-game spot, including in the 7th or 8th, where a big out is needed. Keeping Marmol out of the designated closer spot allows him to do things like he did on Friday, coming into the game in the 7th with two on and one out (he's certainly the guy you want to see there because he gives up so few hits and even so few balls in play). You certainly wouldn't want to see Gregg in that spot, which is what would happen much more frequently were Marmol locked into the ninth. Really, while Gregg's ninth inning struggles have made the early part of the year a lot more heart-stopping than it really ought to be, it's better he's there - because the closer virtually always comes in with no one on base, it's an easier job and better suited for someone who isn't a shutdown reliever with a huge strikeout total and extremely low WHIP the way the Marmot is. It's understandable that Marmol wants the "closer" title - those guys make more money. (As it is, Gregg makes $4.2 million while Marmol makes $575,000.) But if Marmol keeps doing what he's doing, I foresee a nice payday for him down the line whether he gets the "closer" mantle or not. And if I were the Cubs, I'd tell him that (a) we still consider him the likeliest future closer but (b) honestly, we're using him right now in the way we feel gives him the most value. People love saves, but no one is going to miss a reliever who strikes out 114 guys in 87.1 innings.
Home opener! Bring on the Rockies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)