I want to talk about roster construction in general.

[beckdawg]

So, i was watching a video talking about whether or not you can blame bobby cox for his failure to win more titles and in the video they brought up a fairly natural comparison to the yankees of the late 90s. The point being made was the two teams built differently. And it sparked something in my mind because in a lot of ways I feel like this is an issue some fans have with the cubs. That is to say I feel like they devote resources in a similar fashion to the 90's braves. Those braves teams spent heavy on pitching but ignored their bullpen and had pretty good defensively sound offenses. It's not an exact 1:1 match with the current cubs group but I don't think it's a stretch to see the similarities. By contrast, the 90's yankees team were mostly good bats with iffy defense and they had more emphasis put on their bullpen. Ultimately there's never going to be a team that can have everything. You have to cut corners some where. And honestly that's where I find this debate intriguing.

Before I go further I think it's worth pointing out the Yankees also had huge advantages current teams don't in that back then you could effectively buy better draft picks and IFAs. So, just saying look at who "won more championships" I don't think is fair. In fact, it might be better comparing the 2010-present yankees given they are also built off a dominant bullpen(50.2 fwar 2010-2018 where #2 team has 36.1).

With that being said, where I find this interesting is the question of how you value a bullpen. The absolute strength of the 90's braves teams were that while they did have an iffy bullpen, skimping there meant they consistently had one of the best overall teams for nearly 15 years. And subsequently that meant they were in the playoffs for all of those seasons. The obvious downside there is that often their bullpen let them down in the playoffs. Conversely, the yankees probably have been a better team in the playoffs with their approach but aren't as good in the regular season and if we're using the 2010-present example, they've missed the playoffs several years.

I'm not sure there is a "right" answer here because if there were all teams would do it and then it frankly probably wouldn't be the "right" answer because of game theory. And having said that, given the recent move of teams stacking bullpens there likely is some value going the other way. I guess I'm just curious how other people feel. As a hypothetical what if here, would you rather be a team that makes the playoffs 6 out of 9 years but is built better to win playoff series or would you rather be a team that makes the playoffs 9 straight years and only comes away with one championship?

 

[JimJohnson]

I would argue that Cubs have tried to pay up for an offense and starting pitching. But the FO has had a series of missteps like Heyward and Garbish/Chatwood. So you've got a ton of money tied up in 3 guys who are actually hurting the team.

Swap out Garbish with Arrieta and Heyward with Harper, and this team is in a much different place.

I can live with a crappola bullpen if the rest of the team is doing what they need to do.

 

[beckdawg]

I would argue that Cubs have tried to pay up for an offense and starting pitching. But the FO has had a series of missteps like Heyward and Garbish/Chatwood. So you've got a ton of money tied up in 3 guys who are actually hurting the team.

Swap out Garbish with Arrieta and Heyward with Harper, and this team is in a much different place.

I can live with a crappola bullpen if the rest of the team is doing what they need to do.

Well sure but it's also worth noting you're never going to be 100% on FAs. Hell if you're like 60% on FA you're doing good. I don't have any real issue with the process behind Darvish/Heyward. I mean maybe you argue that there were warning signs on Heyward's bat but he'd been a very productive player and was so young still. As for Darvish, I mean obviously I still am supporting him more than you are here so I don't think he's done. But other than injury risk which he really wasn't that much more of than any other starter, his 2017 was fantastic save for the world series. And in both cases those were huge areas of need. The cubs OF defense was really bad in 2015. And obviously they needed pitching.

Chatwood I never really was that into. I mean I can see the logic behind it. But I don't love tying up that much money in a 5th starter who really wasn't proven. It's basically the argument I was making against Cobb. Thankfully they dodged that bullet only to step in front of a different one. As I recall I wanted Chacin. Granted I wasn't expecting what he did with MIL but he was who I thought was the best buy low type.

Either way, I guess my point here though is the approach the cubs have is similar to the Braves. Keep in mind they signed Terry Pendleton before Maddux so they too were in both the offense/starter markets. The point I was getting at was more of a case where they were pushing money from the bullpen to those two areas.

 

[chibears55]

If you're going to survive with a mediocre/crappy bullpen then the starting rotation has to be that much better to offset it..
Basically starters need to go deeper into games and keep bullpen use to a minimum

This is why the cubs had problems last year and will most likely have it more this year, the rotation dont have really have guys in it that can go deep into games consistently and that will burn out a pen and highlite its weakness more

 

[JimJohnson]

If you're going to survive with a mediocre/crappy bullpen then the starting rotation has to be that much better to offset it..
Basically starters need to go deeper into games and keep bullpen use to a minimum

This is why the cubs had problems last year and will most likely have it more this year, the rotation dont have really have guys in it that can go deep into games consistently and that will burn out a pen and highlite its weakness more

Yup it's all a mess unfortunately. A giant heaping pile of poop.

 

[beckdawg]

If you're going to survive with a mediocre/crappy bullpen then the starting rotation has to be that much better to offset it..
Basically starters need to go deeper into games and keep bullpen use to a minimum

This is why the cubs had problems last year and will most likely have it more this year, the rotation dont have really have guys in it that can go deep into games consistently and that will burn out a pen and highlite its weakness more

I don't agree that the cubs don't have the guys. I mean maybe it's splitting hairs but I think the reason they don't go longer is joe not the pitchers. Now whether or not that is FO backed or himself I think it's a legit thing because rarely does anyone go longer than 100 pitches unless they are totally cruising. But realistically do we have any reason to believe Lester Hamels Q and Hendricks can't throw 220 innings?

 

[JimJohnson]

Beck is there anything about the Cubs you're super negative about?

 

[beckdawg]

Beck is there anything about the Cubs you're super negative about?

With this current team? Not really. The vast majority of it won 95 games last year. Keep in mind that team had injuries to Darvish who I think will be better than you do and also had Chatwood throw a lot of bad baseball. Their starters were 16th in fWAR and had a 3.84/4.30 ERA/FIP. Plus Hamels should make an impact and I think Q can be better than he was last year too. Are they the 90's braves with Smoltz/Glavin/Maddux? No but do they have an outside shot at being a top 10 staff? Sure. Their bullpen last year second in baseball with a 3.35 ERA and I think overall the bullpen in 2019 is better than the 2018 bullpen. And in terms of hitting, I just generally think a healthy Bryant and a bit more seasoning will make the hitters overall better than 2018.

So, if you're asking if there's something I'm super negative about I'm saying no because I think this is a very good team. And what frustrates me is people conflate playing poorly with being bad. They aren't the same thing. The final 2 months of the 2018 season the cubs played bad but they aren't an untalented team because they finished tied for the best record over 162 games in the NL.

What I think you really should be asking is if there's anything I think the cubs do poorly. I make this distinction because unlike others I recognize that whatever warts the team may have this is still a team that has enough talent to win a world series should things go right. And when I bitch about people complaining it's not because I'm against people pointing out things the cubs do poorly. I bitch because they phrase it as though they are shit players when they clearly aren't.

To that end, if you're asking me to critique the cubs and point out where they could do with improvement the first place I'd start is situational hitting. It was what broke their back in 2018 and 2017. From a stats point of view there's really not enough data to draw conclusions on 2019 but the offense has looked good so far. It's only 48 PAs but they are hitting .366/.438/.488 with RISP. The second place I would go to is that while I think their bullpen is ok it's by no means ready for the playoffs. Morrow and Strop should they pitch like they are capable is a good start. I think you still need another big arm with K potential. I was hoping that would be Edwards. We'll see how that plays out by july but i mean chances are they were always going to trade for someone in July anyways. It's just the nature of being a playoff caliber team who doesn't spend heavy on relievers. I'd also throw out there that I still would like to see a vet catcher better at farming.

Other than those 3 issues my only other critique would be a conditional one. I personally don't think the cubs starters will be bad. Lester and Hendricks are so routine year to year it's almost boring. You know what you're getting. Q wasn't amazing last year but prior to that he was another guy I'd put in that category. None of those 3 were really "aces" but they were really good #2 type starters. So, because of that they don't worry me all that much because they are consistent and pretty durable. Hamels probably isn't 2nd half 2018 good but I too think he can be a happy medium between his first and second half which if he's your 4th or 5th starter is more than good enough. However, if you get that and Darvish isn't the front line starter they are paying him as then sure you probably have an issue with your starters come playoff time. I'm not going to sit here and rehash Darvish with you. The stuff is still there. That's not debatable. Can he command his fastball? Hell if I know but when he has in the past he's been one of the 10 best pitchers in baseball.

 

[chibears55]

I don't agree that the cubs don't have the guys. I mean maybe it's splitting hairs but I think the reason they don't go longer is joe not the pitchers. Now whether or not that is FO backed or himself I think it's a legit thing because rarely does anyone go longer than 100 pitches unless they are totally cruising. But realistically do we have any reason to believe Lester Hamels Q and Hendricks can't throw 220 innings?

I don't agree that the cubs don't have the guys. I mean maybe it's splitting hairs but I think the reason they don't go longer is joe not the pitchers. Now whether or not that is FO backed or himself I think it's a legit thing because rarely does anyone go longer than 100 pitches unless they are totally cruising. But realistically do we have any reason to believe Lester Hamels Q and Hendricks can't throw 220 innings?

Did I forget to mention Maddon..
I agree he the biggest culprit to the rotation not going deeper into games for the most part but were also seeing guys pile up their pitches in the first couple innings or start to lose it around the 5th 6th inning alot too..

As far as 220 innings go, no I dont think they can get that high.. were talking consistently going 6-8 innings every start , i dont think those guys are capable of doing that anymore because they haven't had to do it with Maddon and for the most part they just throw too many pitches just to get through 5..

 

[beckdawg]

Did I forget to mention Maddon..
I agree he the biggest culprit to the rotation not going deeper into games for the most part but were also seeing guys pile up their pitches in the first couple innings or start to lose it around the 5th 6th inning alot too..

As far as 220 innings go, no I dont think they can get that high.. were talking consistently going 6-8 innings every start , i dont think those guys are capable of doing that anymore because they haven't had to do it with Maddon and for the most part they just throw too many pitches just to get through 5..

Eh... i mean IMO it's a matter of it being "best" to do it. I don't think throwing 120 pitches is all that more taxing. I think it's a matter of those extra 20 pitches being more tied to bad outcomes. That's my point. I think they can do it were you to ask them. If you want to argue they can't do it and still be effective then I think that's an arguable point. My only point is I don't think they are what's stopping it. Q for example threw 208.0 innings the year prior to coming over and he threw 206 the year prior to that. So throwing another 10-15 innings isn't *that* big a of a difference. It's like half an inning per start.

 

[JimJohnson]

Beck, at what point in the season will you be willing to shit on Darvish?

 

[chibears55]

Eh... i mean IMO it's a matter of it being "best" to do it. I don't think throwing 120 pitches is all that more taxing. I think it's a matter of those extra 20 pitches being more tied to bad outcomes. That's my point. I think they can do it were you to ask them. If you want to argue they can't do it and still be effective then I think that's an arguable point. My only point is I don't think they are what's stopping it. Q for example threw 208.0 innings the year prior to coming over and he threw 206 the year prior to that. So throwing another 10-15 innings isn't *that* big a of a difference. It's like half an inning per start.

I'm not disagreeing that these guys can do it if allowed, just saying for the most part it taking them a ton of pitches to get through the first 3 innings that by the time they get to the 5th 6th inning they seem to lose it..
Lester and Hamels arms aren't as young and flexible as it was..
Quintana seems to lose it by the 4th or 5th inning now..
Hendricks last year and this year seems to get in trouble early now..
Darvish since he been here has had control issues and that piles up the pitches on him..

With Quintana that the benefit of being in AL, those guys are able to pitch more innings because of the DH..
They can go that extra inning or two because managers dont have to worry about pinch hitting for them..

In the NL if you can get a consistent 7 out of your top 2 starters and at least 6 from the rest, your golden cause then you can get away with just having a decent pen during the season

 

[beckdawg]

Beck, at what point in the season will you be willing to shit on Darvish?

I don't know like 8-10 starts in? Like it depends on what he's doing. If he's still got a 10+ k/9 I'll be real here I'm probably not going to. On the other hand if he has a 8+ bb/9 like chatwood did then sure. I don't look at games the same way most people do. I look at underlying stats. And doing that requires a decent sample size

 

[chibears55]

Sounds to me like a guy seeing the end of the tunnel soon...
Anyone else reading between the lines here

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1113127709553647617

 

[knoxville7]

Those braves teams had wohlers and rocker that gave them some really good years closing.

 

[chibears55]

Those braves teams had wohlers and rocker that gave them some really good years closing.

Yankees had Chapman and Rivera

 

[CSF77]

It comes down to Smoltz developing into a staff ace. As good as Glavin and Madux were they did not have strike out stuff to that extent.

Only Yu has that ability.

So IMO as far as comparing them it comes down to Yu stepping up as a ace then Lester and Hendricks being the stabilizing middle of the rotation .

Hitting talent wise the Cubs have that. It is built to be feast of famine due to their higher strike out rates.

But getting 2 guys in middle relief will go farther than anything right now. Right now the O is pressing to outscore. The D has to be perfect. The starts now feel that they have to extend into late innings to cover a team weakess.

That is the core issue right now. It is not the late innings. It is about Montgomery and Chatwood shitting the bed causing an chain reaction. Stablizing that reverses the course where players start playing at their capacity.

 

[CSF77]

And yes I would DFA Chatwood and promote Mills if needed. Chatwood has nil value and would be forced to accept a Iowa starting role. Maybe he would figure it out in meaningless games.

 

[knoxville7]

Yankees had Chapman and Rivera

Yeah, I was referencing the comparison made between the braves bullpens of that time and the cubs bullpen of today and the last 3 or 4 years

 

[anotheridiot]

When Theo got here, he said develop position players, buy pitching. That was his construction. Now he is in a media war with the manager he could have let go after falling on our face last year.

To me this is like Bowman and Quenville having a pissing contest and the entire locker room getting wet.

Wherever Theo starts, you might as well build a monument to him for what he did. But you really dig into both the boston side and this side, it always boils down to how does he sustain it. Look at the choices in boston, Drew, Crawford, Ramirez. Boston was anchored by those bad deals just like the cubs are now with Yu over Jake, Shitwood, Morrow, and to a part, needing to spend 40 million more on Hamels because of the bad choce of YU over Arrieta, and of course 182 million dollar defender Heyward.

Fine, he HAD to get Chapman for the world series, giving up a superstar in Torreyes. But then resign Chapman for christs sake. That was the one moment the Yankees just shit down his throat, knowing they were not making a run and knowing Chapman was coming back. I wont put all of Chapman not resigning on Theo, since Maddon basically used him like a singapore whore in the playoffs, but you want to talk construction

Lester, Zobrist and Chapman, done 3 seasons ago is what everyone defends Theo with. Its what has he done lately that drowns Theo, and there is history to bad bad choices. How would this team look with Torreyes, Jimininez, Cease, you know, the montra of develop talent and buy pitching.

I dont think Boston fought too hard to keep Theo, and being the guy that broke TWO CURSES was far too much for him to pass up, but that is Theo, curse breaker and not sustained championships. Maybe its time Theo went to Cleveland.

Yeah, go ahead bash, say, its easy to say hindsight has 20/20 vision, but when your best decisions were made three years ago and now you are paying for bad ones without the talent you gave up, there seems to be a valid argument while we wait for bad contracts to expire.