Leave it to the 2012 Cubs to accomplish this feat, but they won today by sending only 26 batters to the plate - one less than what you would send if the opposing pitcher threw a perfect game. I'm not sure that anyone's figured how how often this happens, but it seems pretty rare. In order to accomplish this, you have to be the home team, and hold the lead going into the bottom of the 9th. The minimum number of batters a team can send to the plate is actually 25 - the best example being that the opposing pitcher pitches a perfect game outside of a single home run.

What's even more remarkable, is that the Cubs actually had 5 hits/base runners. However, 2 of those were erased with double plays and Castro got thrown out at home. Of course, what's most remarkable of all is that the Cubs held a 1 run lead in innings 8 and 9. Nice win guys.

The Cubs as a team hold a quite impressive .284 batting average, good for 4th in the league.  They are hitting the ball well, but if you get a queasy feeling every time the Cubs get guys past first base with less than two outs, you have good reason.  Their .221 RISP average is near the bottom of the league.  Dating back over the last decade, this is much worse, even,  than their .241 RISP clips in 2009 and 2002 - last year they were actually .262.

On the pitching side of things, their  ERA  with RISP of around 10.00 is also in the cellar, and while it's on par with their pitching overall, it's still at historically bad levels.  The pitching is a different problem, because unlike the offense, our pitchers are struggling across the board, rather than specifically when we have runners in scoring position.

Given all of this, it's actually amazing that the Cubs are at .500 so far..  When I looked more about what was going wrong, and why it wasn't going much, much worse, I found out that it largely depends on what Cub you're talking about:

Continue reading this post »

I'll go first:  I grew up in Missouri, and live in Washington State.  WGN hooked me into the Cubs during those hot midwest Summer afternoons when I was 9 or 10 years old and Ryne Sandberg become my hero. I've been a Cubs fan ever since. The son of a White Sox fan and a Cardinals Fan, I never got to go to Wrigley Field.  However, I  still remember the game at Comiskey park when an umpire called a player out at home to end the game in the bottom of the 9th, and I left drenched in beer.


I joined BCB a couple of years ago when it linked in with Yahoo Sports as part of the SB Nation organization of sports blogs.  Like any blog community, this one has it's differences, but one of the bigger ones is the issue of content on the site.  Since this blog is a mix of  the "old guard" who I assume are mostly Chicago-based, and newer comers like myself who I assume come from all over, I thought I'd do a poll of current participants and how they experience Cubs Baseball. There's a lot of poll questions that could tell me about the target audience, but I just get one so this is the most interesting to me.

  I've also put out some additional questions for discussion about what interests people the most as far as this site goes. For the record, I really enjoy it here, so this isn't a "Why can't Al make this like the Nationals' site" post, but I myself post here sometimes and it's always good to know the audience.  After the jump of course...

Continue reading this post »

You may or may not be surprised by this, but even considering the Cubs projected $135,000,000 2011 payroll, 60% of it is tied up in 5 guys:

Alfonso Soriano - $19 million

Carlos Zambrano - $18.875 million

Aramis Ramirez - $14.6 million

Kosuke Fukudome - $14.5 million

Ryan Dempster - $14.5 million

An additional $45 million , or another 33%, goes to Carlos Pena ($10 million), Carlos Silva ($7.75 million), Matt Garza ($5.95 million), Marlon Byrd ($5.5 million), Carlos Marmol (est $5 million), John Grabow ($4.8 million), Jeff Samardzija ($3.5 million), and Geovanny Soto ($3 million) - 8 more guys.

The remaining roster will cost the Cubs less than $9 million, and includes Castro, Wells, Marshall, Wood, Colvin, Hill,  and whoever else can make the roster at $400k/year.

It's easy to look at this salary structure and think back at what might have been, and get depressed about it. The Cubs signed these contracts (along with Derrek Lee and Ted Lilly) hoping to anchor the pitching staff and middle of the lineup with elite talent, and the failure of many of these players to live up to these contracts, either due to health or performance, is why this team has been so disappointing.

However, it makes no sense for Cubs fans, or more importantly Cubs management and coaches, to dwell on the past.  If the Cubs are going to have a chance of being watchable this year, they have to collectively move beyond what economists call sunk costs.  From Wikidpedia:

Sunk costs are retrospective (past) costs that have already been incurred and cannot be recovered. ... In traditional microeconomic theory, only prospective (future) costs are relevant to an investment decision. Traditional economics proposes that an economic actor not let sunk costs influence one's decisions, because doing so would not be rationally assessing a decision exclusively on its own merits.

One of my least-favorite rants among fans and sportswriters is sitting around and complaining about how a player is not living up to the value of their contract.  Because the contracts are already signed, it is a complete waste of time to complain about Soriano, Fukudome, or Zambrano not living up to previous expectations.  The way I see it, there are two choices here:  Either you can sit around and complain about something that is impossible to change, or you can take what you have and try to make the most of it.

To approach 2011 rationally is to look beyond the contracts and play the best players for the position and situation.  If that means that Zambrano and his untradeable $19 million/year is slightly more productive than Wells $400,000, you start Zambrano and accept that as the best option.  If that means that the $14.5 million Fukudome can best help the team by playing 2-3 days/week in right field, then you cheer the guy when he goes out there because he is better than the next best option, as opposed to booing him because of his contract.  If folks are just hellbent on spending 2011 booing the cubs every time an overpaid player steps on the field, even if he's the best option, then perhaps they should consider supporting another team (say.. college sports) - or at least not sit next to me at the ballpark.

The thing I like about Quade, from what i've seen, is that he understands sunk costs.  His job is simple - to get the best baseball team out on the field no matter what their contract.  I'm pretty sure he's got the edge over Lou on this one, and why the team made a bit of a jump when he took over last year.  Meanwhile, he will go a long way towards salvaging something from this team if he can get the current roster to play to their potential.  Confidence and attitude are really important to baseball, and are more important when you've got a lot of gifted athletes who haven't been living up to their talent for a couple of years.  If a manager has the trust and respect of the players, they may be open to being led there, and by all accounts these players seem to like Quade - another good sign.

The good news?  These guys don't actually suck, contrary to popular opinion.  Soriano, Ramirez, Lee, and Dome accounted for 40% of the Cubs RBI's last year, even though they only had 30% of their AB's.  Zambrano and Dempster alone accounted for 35% of their wins (48% if you include Silva) and had ERA's below 4.00.  Again, because of sunk costs, the only consideration that should matter is whether they're doing better than the best available alternative.  For example, Quade will play Colvin over Dome in a heartbeat if Dome doesn't produce, which I wasn't always sure would happen with Lou.

As for me, I'm still hopeful that all of the above five can bounce back from a bad couple of years and perform at their ability levels, even adjusted for age.  I suppose that this type of hope is what keeps me interested in Cubs baseball.  Instead of wringing my hands over what happened in the past, I choose the think:  "if each of the above 5 simply perform at their career averages in 2011, they might just help the Cubs win in spite of their contracts."  And that winning thing - it's kind of all I care about.

Cubs pitchers and catchers report in 18 days, and of course we have the nifty countdown clocks on the front page getting us excited about the 2011 Cubs Season.  Why get excited about spring training? How about these highlights from last year:

Starlin Castro exploded into legitimacy and Tyler Colvin was a surprise prospect that came out of nowhere to make the roster.  Then there was the whole question of whether the Cubs would stay in Mesa, culminating in a 30-year commitment to new and improved facilities, and a promise of this experience for the foreseeable future.  We are Cubs fans, so there will always be a ray of light each spring when the first sounds of popping mitts or cracking bats hit our ears.  With the incomparable sunlight on green infield grass and Cubs-blue hats and helmets, it is baseball season again, and we remember, almost to our surprise, how much we love this game.

So, what are you guys looking for in this year's spring training?  Here's what I'd like to know:

Can Brett Jackson pull a Tyler Colvin, or better yet can James Russell pull a Randy Wells circa 2009.  Speaking of Randy Wells, was 2010 a sophomore slump or a more permanent return to earth?  Is this the last year I will have to look up the spelling of Samardzija's name, or will he do something he has never done and assert himself as a consistent starting pitcher?  Can Josh Vitters please take more than a baby step this year? Can Soto and Starlin take monster steps this year?

How will the culture in the clubhouse change with Mike Quade in charge and Kerry Wood and Reed Johnson returning to the club?  Will the "fun" return, as opposed to the slog of the last couple of years? 

Are Matt Garza, Carlos Zambrano, and Ryan Dempster looking like a solid top of the rotation? 

Who will be the 25 guys?

Who will be the new color voice of the Cubs?

What are you looking forward to this Spring, besides Spring itself?

I have not watched Division 1 "Post season" football in several years, just on principle.  So if you're looking for something else do do on New Year's day and otherwise, here's a list of ideas:

10.  Watch reruns of the 1986 Superbowl

9.  Devin Harris is ridiculous (sorry.. got carried away there)

8.  Ice fishing

7.  Something involving a cabin, weapons, the guys, and a keg

6.  Something involving a cabin, a cute girlfriend (or wife), and a bottle of wine

5.  Take your kids sledding

4.  Fix the damn dishwasher already

3.  hit the gym, and the bar afterwards to work it all back on (if a game happens to be on, it's ok because it doesn't count for their ratings..

2.  Start researching the 2011 fantasy football season

1.  Make a big deal to your  spouse about giving up on a sporting event an initiate a "family night" activity.

The Cubs crushed the Phillies today and mortalized Roy Halladay, and I think it's no small coincidence that the #1 and #2 guys in the lineup reached base 7 times today and worked counts.  I want this fanpost to initiate a more thoughtful discussion about our top of the order situation than  "just put in Castro/Colvin", or "Roberts!!",  "Bring up Jackson" etc, so I'm going to go into some depth.  My main point is that dysfunction in the Cubs leadoff spot(s) is as much or more to blame for the Cubs situation this year than the unexpected numbers dip from Lee and ARam this year (I have a theory about that too which is described below). So, I have included

 1) The kind of interesting history of the leadoff spot in MLB,  

2) how important it actually is to overall team success, and

3) why our lack of leadoff production is not a failure of any particular player, but of a flawed philosophy in the organization that goes all the way from Lou Piniella to Boise, Idaho.

I'm wordy, so for those of you who want cliffs notes, here they are:  Today's game did not provide a silver bullet solution to our leadoff spot.  Colvin and Castro are not leadoff hitters (at least not yet), and over time will disappoint us there more than they will solidify a solution, but they're, frankly, the best of a bunch of bad options and should stay up there.  MLB history shows that the leadoff position has changed over time, with more recent  trends moving away from the simple light-hitting base-stealers who collect walks (i.e. Ozzie Smith) and towards people who can provide a bit more pop, pep, and strategy (Jeter and, in a former life, Soriano). But, most importantly, It's not just the numbers, but the leadership, of the leadoff spot, and it's strategic integration into an overall offensive strategy that translates into potent overall team offenses and makes such a big difference in W/L records.  The Cubs organization has failed to understand and value this role, and they have failed to develop people who have the specific ability to lead off. It's really inexplicable that the Cub have not used their significant resources to address what is arguably the most important spot in the lineup.  I think this goes a long ways towards explaining the Cubs problems not just in 2009-2010, but in several important games (i.e. 07 and 08 playoffs) before that.

(Warning:  Long attention spans only beyond this point)

Some history.  If you want a great history and discussion of how the leadoff spot has changed in MLB, read this fantastic article in Baseball Digest by Bob Herzog.  This really does a great job of talking about why this spot has moved from just base stealing and walks to something entirely different.  These days, MLB offensive lineups in general are built on the high reward principles of power hitters throughout the lineup, and getting on first base (God, I hope Dusty's not reading this - he'll get all excited) and/or stealing second base is not worth the risk of either missing the chance to hit for extra bases or having a TOOTBLAN moment ala you know who.  But, by far, the most important aspect of this is leadership and secondary objectives of the leadoff spot, best described in this quote from the article: 

"A good leadoff hitter impacts the whole game and the whole lineup," (Larry) Bowa said. "They get on base. They work counts, where that starting pitcher may be out of the game in the sixth inning. They let the other players on their team--when they keep battling and fighting off pitches--see what a pitcher has. A leadoff hitter is very underrated. A good, successful leadoff hitter means a team is going to be pretty successful."

 I wonder what Larry would say about the Cubs' leadoff strategy?  Do Theriot, Soriano, or Fukudome impact the whole lineup?  Do they have the combination of bat control, plate discipline, and specific knowledge about what a lead off hitter is supposed to be doing up there?  I know how I would answer that:  The Cubs have not had a leadoff hitter since Kenny Lofton.

Even during his better years, when Theriot hit for average and could steal bases and maybe draw some walks, he is an average baseball player who simply tries to slap singles to right and get on base (on his better days).  Even the standard  leadoff statistic most people think of - on-base percentage - is sitting at .314 this year, with no power threat to start off any game and not enough bat skills to foul off pitches and work counts.  If you're scratching your head, then you're feelling me.  Dome is actually not a bad hitter when he hasn't lost his confidence, but his inconsitency has shown itself and this is also not the person you want being the "face of the Cubs" that you line up the rest of your offense behind.  Soriano never had super plate discipline, but when his bat skills fell off a few years back he could no longer make up for it in other ways.  Based on Bowa's discussion above and the reduced importance of base-stealing, you could almost argue that Soto would be a better option at leadoff than any of these guys.  That's just sad.

And here's why it's sad - The Cubs have had 8 years since Lofton was here to develop or sign someone - anyone - with legitimate leadoff hitter skills, and they haven't.  They have 8 minor league teams, more financial resources than 90% of the league, and 8 years - and they can't solidify what as arguably the most important position in the offensive lineup?  You can't blame Soriano or Theriot or Fukudome for not pulling this off anymore than you could blame Joakim Noah for not hitting a clutch 3 or Brian Urlacher for not locking down on the opposing team's #1 wide receiver.  The bozos in charge are playing them out of position, from a lineup perspective, because they've backed themselves into a corner by not finding/developing 2 people on the team that know how to set the table for #3-6. 

And I think 2 people is accurate - having these "leadoff type" hitters at BOTH the 1 and 2 positions in the lineup simply doubles the impact up top.  Think Carl Crawford.  Remembering that Colvin and Castro are not the answer (yet)  because they, too, don't have the refined skill set and leadership qualities to do this, you could at least see what happens in todays game whe you have talented hitters with good bat skills at the top of the lineup together.  Until the Cubs ever figure out how to develop and sign talent at the top of the lineup, they will continue to inexplicably lose games regardless of starting pitching or good hitters down the lineup.  People like Lee and Ramirez would flourish in this as well, because the guys above them are flushing out the arsenol of the pitchers with a flurry of fouled off pitches and giving them a chance to succeed.  I would even argue that some (not all) of Lee and Rami's struggles this year are because of problems ahead of them in the lineup.

At the very least, I truly hope the Ryan Theriot experiment is over, and I hope that Lou is smart enough to keep guys like Colvin and Castro at the top of the lineup until something better comes along.  I'm personally kind of tired of waiting until "next season".

Baseball is an emotional game, which is an obvious thing to say to my fellow Cub fans, given both the legacy of this team, and the players we have recently witnessed wear Cubbie Blue.  Too much emotion has it's obvious problems.  It disrupts clubhouses, gets in the way of a players talent, and creates a buzzkill for players and fans alike.  I don't have to name our recent examples, but the pictures in the links above are worth a thousand words.  Too little emotion, however, can be just as much of a problem Whether it's from overpaid players who have lost interest, or dejected teams that have just given up, or just a lack of fire in the interpersonal culture of the team.  If a team has enough talent, the emotional character of a team is the key ingredient to championships.

And this team has the talent.  Soriano, Lee, Ramirez, Fukudome, and Soto  have enough proven talent that poor performance is flukish, not the rule.  And guys like Byrd and Theriot (can't bring myself to put any of our 2b guys here, but it could be argued) are capable of handling everyday playing duties just as well or better than, say, Robinson Cano and Nick Swisher.  The Cubs starting pitching has been consistently spectacular for several years, and are starting 2010 off better than ever... they could be truly special.  People like Marmol and Marshall and Zambrano (for now) are good enough to anchor a pen at a very high level. Plus the Cubs have a wealth of capable, if young, relievers on the team and in the system that are plenty talented.  The pen will be even better when they pick up another reliever later on this year (and they give up on the Samardjiza experiment - which is Hendry's emotional problem).

Even with the few holes in this team, and  inexperienced bullpen arms and a big yawn at second base and leadoff spot, this team has enough talent, right now, to win a championship.  And this is not any different than last year, or the two years before that.  As usual, for the 2010 Cubs, it's not a talent thing, it's an emotional thing. 

That's why I'm going to make the point, if you're still reading this, that moving Zambrano to the bullpen was a very, very good move.  I think it solved two emotional problems at once.  I thought this when I saw this picture.  Baseball teams, it's easy to forget, have two dugouts - the one where the starting pitchers and players all hang out, and the bullpen.  They're all both different cultures.that work towards the same goal, but are only connected by a telephone.  If you look at our pen, there is a freakishly talented closer who isn't very talkative in Marmol, a similarly soft-spoken and talented releiver in Marshall, a couple of recent callups and recent acquisitions with wobbly knees, and not a lot of glue. 

Enter Zambrano.  He's a joker, he's always in the game, he's an established veteran, and he cares - a lot - about winning.  He's also bilingual, and I don't know how well he gets along with the other Carlos, but he can definitely keep him, and all of the other guys, loose and involved in the game.  He's also a scary-ass pitcher - I know for certain that if I was watching the Cubs go into the 7th or 8th inning 1-2 runs down and someone like CC sabathia came in, i'd be a lot less hopeful.  I think Zambrano can infuse a tentative bullpen with confidence, and I think he will.

Back at the club house, there's enough leadership and personalities already, and a bored non-starting (or starting for that matter) Zambrano may not always be the best glue.  I think, emotionally, his departure from the dugout is addition by subtraction.

Lou's move (which remember, does not have to be permanent) is not panic - it's emotional management.  The ONLY way Zambrano's not starting at the end of the year is if we have 5 ptichers contiuning to pitch like world beaters and his presence in the pen makes the combo of him, Marshall, and Marmol so unbelievable that the Cubs are consistently playing .700 baseball. 

When a team has as much talent as this one, I think a little emotional management can go along way.  And I applaud Lou's instincts here.

Not everyone likes Al Yellon, but I think he's doing a hell of a job running this blog and providing a backdrop for our debates, pontifiications, neuroses, and Cubs lovin' in general.  He doesn't have to, and shouldn't have to, say everything all the time that everyone agrees with to give us a high quality hitching post for online Cubs fans.  Straight up, the guy deserves a big Thank You.

So, thank you Al, for being such a great student of the game and history of baseball and bringing such a depth of information to gameposts and discussion.

Thank you for giving us the depth of Cubs coverage, from Spring Training updates, to interviews with management, to inside views of progress at Wrigley field, to all the antecdotes about modern and past stories of the Cubs fan experience.

Thank you for loving baseball, and bringing your passion for the game, and this team, to us every day.

We don't pay a penny to come here and participate in the site you tend so well for our benefit, and you do a lot of things to keep this site going that you don't get paid enough pennies for.

Just thought you should know.  Thanks!

I think we can all agree that, outside of playing in the 4th quarter with the Bears up by 4 touchdowns, none of us want to see much of Caleb Hanie this year.  However, there has been quite a bit of trepidation about what would happen if He Who Need Not Be Named ever was injured.  Many of us keyboard prognosticators have openly speculated about the wisdom of not acquiring a veteran backup QB, fueled by the worry that Caleb Hanie and (God help us) Basenez are somewhere between a division III college redshirt freshman and a practice squad-caliber signal caller. 

Though all of us are going to see, along with our first sip of real football in too long, a lot of Caleb Hanie live in a matter of days, I thought it'd be fun to expand a little on our #2 backup, which you can read more about in a Nice Article in the Daily Herald that was included in the most recent edition of the Bears Den.  I saw him a few times when I lived in Fort Collins (home of Colorado State University), and hope this discussion will help, at least kill time, if not offer some hope, before cleat hits pigskin to start the game with Buffalo this weekend.

Continue reading this post »

I remember the day clearly.  Heat curled up in waves over the diamond as sweating, chattering infielders danced like mirages before each pitch.  A warm wind sent dandelion seeds swirling around me in the centerfield grass, bringing with them the smell of stale pop and mowed grass.  The AC compressor of the nearby grain elevator hummed in the background, accented by sounds of children laughing and playing in the nearby city pool and park.  The southwest sky behind me had turned ominously dark, but on days like this in rural Missouri, this was always a good omen.

It was a tight game, and a league championship game against our arch-rival across town.  We were clinging to a 5-4 lead with one out in the last inning and a the tying run on third base base.  The batter up was 3 for 3 and their best hitter, driving every fastball thrown to him all over the field that day.  Since none of you were there and I know I have unverifiable poetic license, it was a 3-2 count and most of the town was in the stands - that's how I choose to remember it anyway.   The sky behind me flashed with lightening and thunder rumbled to the "oohs" and "ahhs" of the crowd. A cool gust of the coming storm raised hairs on the back of my neck. And then, there was a crack of the bat.

You always want to be the one who caught the last out, but that is afterwards.  Most who watch a screaming line drive spinning awkwardly towards them with a championship on the line are scared to death, and the rest are lying.  I took a line on the ball, said a quick "Dear Lord, Please don't let me screw up" prayer and, somehow, caught the ball.  By sheer adrenaline, and with no small help from the gusts of the imminent storm, the throw to the plate was more of a strike than any of the pitches I'd thrown in a forgettable releif appearance earlier in the game.  There was a collision at the plate, but our catcher was the toughest guy on the field - he always won collisions, and we won a championship.  What followed can only be understood by people who have ever had an experience like that, at any level, but is part of why I still love this game so much.  This is what baseball is, and what it has always been.

I usually write very meticulous posts, tirelessly researched by facts and figures to make some fascinating point (at least I always think it's fascinating).  But, I don't write posts to make fascinating points, or spend time tracking pitch after pitch so I can go update my statisitical analyses.  I do all of this for the same reason fans and players everywhere make baseball such a part of their life for 8 months out of the year - I love this game.  There is nothing more factual and statistically relevant in all of baseball for me than this one simple fact.

Not only do I love this game, but I respect the talent and heart of the players that are good enough to play it at such a high level - everyone from Albert Pujols to Milton Bradley to Aaron Miles to David Patton.  I respect and value each and every one of them, because I know how good they are to have even gotten out of Low A ball.  And, because I know there's no way a single one of them would be on that field if they didn't have something in common with that rural midwest little leager 25 years ago.  Though there are many distractions in the game today, each of these guys, beneath it all, is a kid playing baseball.  And when  they take the field, they give all of us a chance to relive that dream every day of the summer. 

So the next time a Cubs relief pitcher walks someone, or your kid strikes out in a little league game, or your team loses when you really hoped they would win, remember why YOU'RE there.  Remember that you've chosen to give up your valuable free time over anything else you could have put in your busy schedule, to take your seat at the table of America's pastime.  Why do you buy the tickets, participate in online discussion, coach or watch little league games? 

Why? For the perennial distraction to summer heat, where the crack of a bat holds all the same promise as the crack of thunder after a hot midwest summer day.  For the smiles and gossip over a beer (or soda) and hot dog in bleachers overlooking those green fields.  For the wins as well as the losses, the 14-12 slugfests and 1-0 pitching duels, for the fun and the fandom - For the Love of Baseball.

To get a few things out of the way.. The Cubs are still in this.  They have a lineup full of people who can hit the ball, an elite starting rotation, and a bullpen full of pitchers completely capable of getting people out.  And we're somehow still only a few games out of first in the division and closer in the wildcard.  I'll continue to "jump" into game threads more frequently than I will off of ledges.   But what I'd like to jump into now is an unsurprising discussion about Cubs problems with RISP and bullpen walks and an attempt at a more enlightening take on why I think this is helping them be a better October team.

So, for the bad news we all know, or at least suspected:

CATEGORY:       Numbers        2009 RANK      2008 #'s/RANK

BA (RISP)                 .223               30                       .279/7

Relief BB/INN           .63                 30                       .38/t6

Source: ESPN Aggregate Statistics

Of course, the first thing that sticks out, is that the Cubs were actually very good in both of these categories last year... near the top in all of baseball.  What's even more alarming about this year, is how bad they really are.  The second worst team in baseball RISP is Arizona at .228.  After tonight, the Cubs will drop to .219. Relief BB/INN is actually even a worse story, with the next worse team, Washington at .57 BB/INN.  In these two key categories, the Cubs are in a league by themselves.

If I can say something I think we'll all agree on, it doesn't really matter at this point if the Cubs win the regular season - it matters if they win in the post-season.  So, how'd the last couple of years go for that?  I calculated this from the postgame logs on yahoo sports, so I think it's pretty close to this (if someone has better info, feel free to update):

CATEGORY:            08 Postseason     07 Postseason

BA (RISP)                 5/26 (.192)              3/24 (.130)

Relief BB/INN          2/10.2 (.20)             6/12.2 (.47)

From these numbers, you can see that the Cubs did not hit in the clutch in the last two post-seasons, but that their releif pitching didn't walk a lot of guys (at least not in 2008).  Instead, both the starters and relievers got smoked with hits.  This is a team that, under pressure, didn't produce, whether throwing or hitting the ball - and brings me to my next point.

The Cubs are under pressure to win this year - they have a big payroll and bigger expectations.  They play under pressure to win every game, and I do not question the intensity they have demonstrated this year - I think it's been there (look at their response to the walk-off wins last week if you doubt this).  Instead I think they haven't demonstrated that they can consistently perform under this pressure.  They clearly haven't learned how to get the big hits, the big strikeouts, the big rallies, when they need them - at least not yet.

And that is why I think this season, as difficult as it has been to watch, is creating the exact kind of pressure situations that the Cubs will need to learn how to win in October, the only time it really counts.  Based on some very gutsy starting pitching performances and some signs of life in their bullpen (still a work in progress but getting better), I really like our pitching for the most part.  The hitting is obviously another story. 

Games like tonight's very bad loss to Detroit are growing pains.  The take-home message for me?  The Cubs are either going to learn how to respond in these situations and win, or they're not.    If they do, then they will give us an entertaining ride come October.  If they don't learn how to deal with this, I'd rather not see a single game in October - they don't deserve to be there in the first place.

In answering this question, think about what realistic alternatives the Cubs have around the league - perhaps a trade or signing to get somone in here.  Now, imagine the following pitcher is available, given these stats since May 1st (since June 1st in parentheses)

IP - 18.2 (7)

WHIP - 1.18 (.71)

BB - 5 (0)

K - 18 (6)

ERA - 3.36 (2.57)

Saves/Chances 8/9 (2/3)

Team record when the pitcher is in the game for this timeframe is 13-6 and the pitcher has only given up a run in one of those losses - his only blown save in 1 1/2 months.

Of course, if you haven't figured it out yet,  this pitcher is Kevin Gregg .   WHen I look at ths information, perhaps I don't see an elite closer, but I see very acceptable numbers - a pitcher who throws strikes and doesn't lose a lot of games for you.  I also see a pitcher who has steadily improved throughout the year, which can be expected because of his knee issues and adjustment to a new team. 

I for one am pleasantly surprised with Gregg, and believe our bullpen is getting out of it's funk.

Let's be honest with ourselves.  We are Cubs Fans, and Bloggers to boot.  Criticisizing, keyboard coaching and managing, and maintainnig overblown images of our own insights ... this is what we do.  If we had better things to do with our lives, we wouldn't spend so much time here.

SO in honor of the emerging art form of Computer-Aided masochism known as SB Nation blogging, I am providing a short and simple guide to Criticizing your own team.  Think it's a silly exercise?  Well, consider Lou's quote in Today's Tribune online

Manager Lou Piniella said he would stick with slumping players such as Geovany Soto, Milton Bradley and Alfonso Soriano because he expects them all to contribute before long. Bradley went 0-for-6, stranding 10 base-runners.

"What am I going to do?" Piniella said. "You know what's amazing? From a manager's perspective, if you make too many changes, you get criticized for not being patient, and nobody knows where they're hitting.

"And if you wait too long, people say, 'Well, this guy is not doing anything.' To me, this is our best lineup for what we're doing now.

"We're going to stay as constant as we can, assuming we stay healthy. We just have to battle our way out of this thing. We're better than what we've done."

Piniella has endured his fair share of criticism this season, especially after spending his first two years in Chicago on a prolonged honeymoon.

Most of the complaints have centered on Piniella's alleged lack of fire, based on the fact he doesn't get into heated battles with umpires the way did in earlier managerial stints in Cincinnati, Seattle and Tampa Bay.

"I get yelled at because I'm not arguing with the umpires enough," he said.

Who's yelling at Piniella? Is it his boss, Crane Kenney?

Piniella replied it was the fans, not the Cubs' chairman.

"No, the fans [yell] 'Get out there and get these guys going,' " he said. "Anyway, we just have to keep plugging along."

 

See folks.  He really cares about what we think.  Whether behind the Cubs dugout, within earshot of a corner outfielder, or his secret reports from Big Z on the activities of the BCB bloggers (we know you're lurking here Carlos), we're making a difference with all our bitching here.

So, here's some ideas for how we can constructively criticize our team in the forums that do reach our coaches and players, broken up inot "helpful" and "not helpful" as determined by my own supreme expertise on all things on the face of the earth.  Feel free to add some comments if you would like (but please, no criticism - it might hurt my feelings).

HELPFUL

• When forming a criticism, research a couple of choices that are better than the one that is such a mistake.  For example, "Hey Lou,  Maybe you should limit the playing time or move soto down in the lineup until he's in better shape" (Oh wait.. he's already doing that, but you get the idea).
• Form some sort of fan club or strongly messaged slogan campaign for the preferred option ("We Love Fox!  the "Scales-0-meter" (reference to the "Shawn-0-meter"), etc)
• Think incrementally - that's the only thing that GM's and Coaches will change when they're 2 1/2 games out coming off two division titles anyway. For example, focus criticism on an obvious hole - like "why are you continuing to keep Patton on the Roster if you're not going to pitch him?")
• Make respectful and constructive suggestions - "Why not Guzman as closer?"

NOT SO HELPFUL

• Sweeping and fatalist statements with no background information - "The Cubs Suck"  "Lou doesn't give a shit about this team", "Big Z can't pitch and is taking down this team".
• Name calling or baiting- "Hey Bradley - You're overpaid and you hit like shit".  "Zambrono's a Joke and a headcase".
• Prescriptive solutions based on short term performance with no thought about the alternatives, impacts or contract/financial realities - "We need to get rid of Miles and Freel and Gregg and Patton and Soriano and Bradley, etc" "Trade Lee" "Dump Bradley".  "Send (insert Cubs player currently not playing well) to Iowa and Bring up (insert iowa player who, though totally inexperienced and unproven at the major league level, had a good week last week vs the Sacramento River cats).
• Criticisizing things that have already been done - And this can be fixed.. how?  Managers/Coaches always take risks on players - it's not about going back in time and making different decisions, it's about working with the decisions aready made.

SO, that's the start of the list for the good of the order.  For a veritable PhD thesis on how to criticize your own team by a blogger, check this out..

Happy Bloggin' BCB Brothers and Sisters!

Bold predications are always dangerous in Blogs, especially CUBS blogs.  You can't go back and change things once they've been published, but let's just say I'm making a statistically caculated risk when I say that the last week has led me to believe the Cubs have turned the corner on the 2009 season.  And, in particular, tonight's win 2-1 has led me to believe that the Cubs are finally showing a few signs of looking like the team that can do what we all know they MUST do this year  - win in the post season.

There are a few things that are really important to winning in the post season, at least according to most conventional knowledge:

1.  2 Ace Pitchers that minimize run-scoring opportunities for opposing teams.

2.  A good bullpen that can stop rallies anchored by a lockdown closer

3.  Excellent defense

4.  Big Clutch hits after doing the little things to get guys in scoring position.

Sure, scoring a bunch of runs helps, but consider these things an insurance policy against bad luck.  Good hitters go cold or get injured, fans interfere with critical outs in the 8th innings of close games, opposing teams trot out a pitcher for 7 innings who is virtually unhittable that day. 

I know this is a tough crowd when it comes to unreferenced pontification and TWSS ideas, which I admire.  So, in deference I'll lean on Nate Silver.  At 11, he had figured out how to use multivariate analysis to determine the relationship of stadium size to MLB attendance, and by 13 he had developed his own fantay baseball league with computerized tracking and player assessments.  At 13, I was trying to figure out how to get into the high school parties with free beer, so it's safe to say I'm relying on someone smarter than me.  As some of you may know, he is also the originator of the most widely used formula for predicting post season success in MLB - the Baseball Prospectus "Secret Sauce" Formula

The "secret sauce" formula includes

"[three] key ingredients that strongly correlate with postseason success: a team's [pitchers'] strikeout rate, or Equivalent K/9 (EqK9), adjusted for a team's league and ballpark; its quality of defense, or Fielding Runs Above Average (FRAA), an estimate of the runs a defense has saved or cost its pitchers relative to the league average; and its strength of closer, or Win Expectation Above Replacement (WXRL), which measures the wins the closer has saved versus what a replacement-level alternative would have done.[19] In other words, teams that prevent the ball from going into play, catch it when it does and preserve late-inning leads are likely to excel in the playoffs."[20]

 Nate's the real deal, even if you can poke holes in the Secret Sauce from the left field bleachers there.  He went on to predict the 2008 US elections with such accuracy (His Website is awesome if you're into politics) that he was named one of the Worlds 100 most influential people by Time Magazine in April. 

What does this say about Cubs success in the post season and why I think they're turning the Corner? 

For the answer to that, let's go back to April 27th, when the Cubs were 0-18 in games where they scored less than 4 runs, 8 of which featured the OTHER team scoring less than 4 runs.  Summary:  They were losing close low-scoring games with remarkable consistency.  The next day, Ted Lilly shut down the Dodgers 2-1. They took a step back with the cruel and unusual punsihment of Wells, but then turned around and won two more games, 3-2 and 2-1, the most recent featuring Z's ace-like performance tonight, making them 3-1 in the "less than 4" category in the last week.  I think the importance of this step forward, small and tenuous as it might be right now, cannot be underestimated.  These are the types of games that win championships, and when they learn to win these consistently with this team, they will be a threat.  In short, they have taken a step forward in run-prevention, especially in tight low-scoring games.

Of course, we have a lot further to go to develop and improve on the consistency of performance in these games, but it's only June.  It's nice to see this new turn of events showing up now, and I can't wait to see if it continues.  The nice thing about this analysis is that I didn't even have to utter the names Soriano, Soto, Lee, Bradley, and Ramirez as critical to our success - that we can win without them - and that is precisely my point.  If we can learn to win when without them, we'll blow away teams when they show up, and still not blow it when they don't.

For those of you who think "Secret Sauce" is bunk, I'll help you out and post the very link the supports your case here.  Last September, the Secret Sauce formula had the Cubs as the highest ranked NL team and gave the Phillies virtually no chance in the post season (aside from Lidge with the #1 WXRL rating while Wood was #16... hmmm?).  Well, we all know how that turned out.

But beware of pointing to exceptions to statistics as proof of their irrelevance - you still don't put your .216 hitter in to pinch hit when you have a .348 hitter available on the bench, even though it is statistically possible that the .216 hitter will hit a game winning double off the right field wall and the .348 hitter will strike out with the winning run at third.  Baseball is a not a game where teams can ever have certainty of outcomes, but it is a game where they can put themselves in situations where they are much more likely to succeed.

Based on the last week, I think the Cubs are showing very good signs of improving their likelihood of success.

I don't feel any better about the losing streak than anyone else, but I'd like to ground the recent ledge-jumping party with some perspective on why things may not be as bad as they seem right now.  This is my first BCB fanpost, which I figures gives me at least a couple free passes on snide comments (if not, what the hell, I can take it!)

Why the season may not be over:

1. Very good starting Pitching/improving relief pitching.  Looking back at the season, the Cubs have allowed four or fewer runs in 24 of their 42 games, going 14-10 in those games.  Their starting rotation is very good, even with the Harden/Zambrano injuries, and as a staff they give up fewer hits than anyone in baseball.  Their starters are still among the best in the league, and the bullpen is quietly getting much better (see above).  Marmol, Guzman, Ascanio, and to some degree the others are reducing walks, and the bullpen has a 2.45 era over the last week.
2. The hitting will not stay this bad, and doesn't need to be really good - This FanPost  by burselius goes into very nice detail about us just being unlucky this year.  The cubs are 21-3 when scoring at least 4 runs, thanks to the good pitching, but 0-18 when scoring less than 4 runs.  Also, looking at the current slump and YTD averages, it would be nearly statistically impossible for it to continue.  Here is a look at every Cubs non-rookie outside of Ramirez (who's hurt) and Dome (whos the only one hitting right now). 

   Player           2009 avg     Career avg      Worst yr avg*

   Theriot           .263              .287                   .266

   Soriano         .257               .281                   .268

   Lee                .248                .282                  .270

   Johnson       .237               .283                  . 236 (2nd  is .270) 

   Fontenot       .208               .273                   .278

   Miles             .204               .285                   .263

   Soto              .202               .277                    .285

   Bradley        .188               .277                   .221 (2008=.321)

   Freel             .100               .270                    .245

   This chart shows that all but 2 veteran cubs are batting 24-100+ points below the career average and  at or below their lowest ever career average.  To explain why it is foolish to suspect this to continue, imagine if it was the other way around, and I told you that Bradley, hitting .366 (the same points above his career average), would sustain it all year.  You would say "no way.. he'll cool off".      My point is.. no way this continues.. the Cubs will heat up, and I think a LOT.  No way ALL of these players continue to have unpredendentedly bad years at the SAME TIME.            *Worst year average is since 2000.

3. It's  EARLY! and they're not in a hole - the cubs are .500 and only 4 1/2 games out of first.  Considering how bad the bullpen has been and how historically awful the hitting has been, we are in unbelievable shape.  Though it's hard to watch a team swoon, there is a silver lining here - this team is learning how to handle adversity in May and developing some character.  WE WILL NEED THIS IN OCTOBER.  Remember, it's not about winning in May - it's about winning in October.

Why the season could be over (but I'm not buying it right now).

1. The cubs have given up - Though I didn't mind Bradley bitching about the umps and being frustrated in general, there was something in the article that bothered me - blame of others.  People in the mental health profession will tell you this is an important sign that people have given up on their own ability to change things for the better.  Also, I don't think MB says this stuff on his own - he just talks more than his teammates and says exactly what he's thinking, and perhaps he is the canary in the mine reflecting that  a lot of Cubs players are losing hope for this year.
2. Pitching in the NL central - It is spectacular.  Top to bottom, there are rotations in this division who have been built to shut down the cubs lineup - as the team to beat, just a little tweaking can ensure that the aces match up against us every time we play in the central.  As shown before, if the cubs can't win close low-scoring games, then 2009 will be very, very difficult.
3. Poor Chemistry - This is actually the most likely culprit, considering all the new faces and the inexplicable lack of hitting and base stealing across the board - hopefully time will help.  However, I think that fans that ALLOW themselves to be positive and generally think good thoughts about the players and the season can't really hurt, can it?  (I mean, if you screw up at work, how would you like to be confronted by that? - these guys are people)
4. We truly are cursed - We have the best starting pitching in the league, an elite closer (even if he's currently only pitching the 8th), and an unbelievably loaded roster full of offensive firepower - and it won't matter.  We are, after all, the Cubs.