Dynasty Gone

Buckner22

New member
Joined:
Sep 3, 2022
Posts:
5
Liked Posts:
-1
I hoped Ross would succeed I’m surprised at how poorly he’s handled the pitching and can’t make out a lineup. But ownership now is all about money and not about winning. A few years ago we put together a dynasty and I’m sick how it’s all been thrown away. I’m new on here but I was here before and left because to much politics and not enough baseball. My first Cubs game was 71 years ago. So I’m ready to talk baseball.
 

Castor76

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2018
Posts:
983
Liked Posts:
239
So who from that 2016 are you pining to have back as a Cub? Between Rizzo, Baez, Bryant, and Schwarber, the only one hitting above .230 is Bryant and he's played all of 42 games this year. Rizzo and Schwarber do each have 30 plus homers, but their OBPs are less than .340.

That team was great and gave us something we never knew we'd ever see. But there wasn't a truly great player on that team. While much less in the HR department, the Cubs have spent less than 10M on the 4 primary replacements while those players are getting 73M this season. The current leaders are about putting a team out there to win when they can and not go crazy spending money trying to win headlines. I'd love it if this team was like the Dodgers and always seemed to get it right in the draft and otherwise not care about the CBT, but remind me again who has more titles in the past 30 years. Wait, they have the same. So for as much as I'd like the Cubs to be like the Dodgers, they actually aren't as far off as you think when the only result that truly matters is winning it all.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
People can want to believe the 2016 team should have been a dynasty but it frankly always had flaws. The 2016 team had a historically great defense which lead to amazing years from Lester, Hendricks and Arrieta. When the team came back to earth a bit so did the results. I wouldn't even say the 2017-2019 teams were bad but they weren't a dynasty. They were a pretty run of the mill playoff contending team.

As for having thrown anything away... the current team isn't even that bad. Pitching injuries and overall lack of depth there this year have hurt the team. but if you look at what they've done in the second half they are 21-20 in the second half with a -13 run dif. In other words, they are a slightly below .500-ish team. I suspect with them saying Heyward is gone they will attach the $22 mil he is due next year to this years payroll when they cut him. If you do that, the cubs have $50 mil committed to 2023 with about another $25 mil in arb expectation.

Simply put the cubs could easily add 2 impact players in FA and still be under $150 mil in payroll and that's to say nothing of the quality depth they've built into their farm system.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
Beck Bryant started out great but injuries caught up to him. Baez sucked at taking pitches. Maddon mishandled Happ and Schwarber which caused both to fail and go back to AAA. It was after Joe left them both that they both started to come into their own.

The team problem is not really David Ross. It is a lack of talent. Jed should call up Davis and let him finish up in CF. Let him get a taste of the 3rd deck in meaningless games. Then call up some pitchers. Shut down Steel and Thompson for the year and get them ready for 2023.

Joe won but he had no legit lead off and he pushed guys into that role. Every experiment failed.
 

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
16,523
Liked Posts:
12,951
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
Beck Bryant started out great but injuries caught up to him. Baez sucked at taking pitches. Maddon mishandled Happ and Schwarber which caused both to fail and go back to AAA. It was after Joe left them both that they both started to come into their own.

The team problem is not really David Ross. It is a lack of talent. Jed should call up Davis and let him finish up in CF. Let him get a taste of the 3rd deck in meaningless games. Then call up some pitchers. Shut down Steel and Thompson for the year and get them ready for 2023.

Joe won but he had no legit lead off and he pushed guys into that role. Every experiment failed
.
And who’s fault is it that Joe didn’t have a legit lead off guy?

He experimented and found Fowler for that spot, but once Fowler left, the cubs didn’t have anyone that could do the job well. The fact that Joe tried numerous people in that spot proves it and also proves Joe was searching for someone whomst could handle the job. It’s not his fault there wasnt anyone on the roster capable.

Also, in regard to Joe “ruining” schwarber and Happ by hitting them lead off…guess what schwarber has been doing some of for the Phillies this season?? That’s right, leading off lol
 

Raskolnikov

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
22,240
Liked Posts:
7,739
Location:
Enemy Territory via southern C
well you traded a good team stuck at the peripheral of playoffs for what will turn out to be a decade of total sucktitude, multiple regimes, persistent desperation…and a peak decade on the south side to boot.

A championship is fickle as hell in baseball and you don’t often win even when you are the best team.

They should have tried to stay as good as they could and award their attendance.

You never know what might happen if your close.
 

Chicagosports89

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2018
Posts:
14,259
Liked Posts:
20,392
well you traded a good team stuck at the peripheral of playoffs for what will turn out to be a decade of total sucktitude, multiple regimes, persistent desperation…and a peak decade on the south side to boot.

A championship is fickle as hell in baseball and you don’t often win even when you are the best team.

They should have tried to stay as good as they could and award their attendance.

You never know what might happen if your close.
You're pretty routinely wrong about most things bears, bulls, and cubs. I appreciate the effort though.
 

Castor76

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2018
Posts:
983
Liked Posts:
239
And who’s fault is it that Joe didn’t have a legit lead off guy?

He experimented and found Fowler for that spot, but once Fowler left, the cubs didn’t have anyone that could do the job well. The fact that Joe tried numerous people in that spot proves it and also proves Joe was searching for someone whomst could handle the job. It’s not his fault there wasnt anyone on the roster capable.

Also, in regard to Joe “ruining” schwarber and Happ by hitting them lead off…guess what schwarber has been doing some of for the Phillies this season?? That’s right, leading off lol

You might want to look at some numbers before you post about a guy batting lead off. As the lead off hitter so far this year, Schwarber is hitting .214 with a .301 OBP. He might be "doing it" but I wouldn't say well
 

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
16,523
Liked Posts:
12,951
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
You might want to look at some numbers before you post about a guy batting lead off. As the lead off hitter so far this year, Schwarber is hitting .214 with a .301 OBP. He might be "doing it" but I wouldn't say well
If you’re going to mention stats, it’s pretty convenient you left our the fact he’s 2nd in all of baseball in home runs too. He’s on pace to have his 2nd or 3rd best season depending on where he ends up in WAR.

Also, I never claimed he should be hitting leadoff, just merely pointing out Joe isn’t the only manager that has put Kyle in the leadoff spot and it hasn’t “ruined” him
 

Castor76

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2018
Posts:
983
Liked Posts:
239
If you’re going to mention stats, it’s pretty convenient you left our the fact he’s 2nd in all of baseball in home runs too. He’s on pace to have his 2nd or 3rd best season depending on where he ends up in WAR.

Also, I never claimed he should be hitting leadoff, just merely pointing out Joe isn’t the only manager that has put Kyle in the leadoff spot and it hasn’t “ruined” him

I could care less about where he ranks in HR as a lead off hitter. IMO, WAR is the most useless stats ever thought up. It doesn't tell you how a player is affecting games. Ruin may be the wrong word, but waste isn't when you compare what he does when he's batting in the 5 or 6 slot.
 

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
16,523
Liked Posts:
12,951
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
I could care less about where he ranks in HR as a lead off hitter. IMO, WAR is the most useless stats ever thought up. It doesn't tell you how a player is affecting games. Ruin may be the wrong word, but waste isn't when you compare what he does when he's batting in the 5 or 6 slot.
It literally tells you exactly that lol
 

Castor76

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2018
Posts:
983
Liked Posts:
239
It literally tells you exactly that lol
No it doesn't. It doesn't say if a guy is great at one thing, like Schwarber, what that thing is, or if he's good at a lot of things. Would you rather have Schwarber, WAR right now of 1.5, or Joc Pederson, WAR of 1.3. Schwarber does have 15 more HRs but Joc is batting 50 points higher, gets on base over 30 points better, and slugs nearly 40 points higher.

I look at BA, I know what it actually means, I look at OBP, I know what it actually means. I look at SLG, I know what it actually means. If you have look at other stats to figure out why a player has that stat, the first stat you looked at is pointless.

Without looking at the stats, tell me what difference, if any, Michael Brantley and Jose Iglesias have between them this season. They both have a WAR of 1.3 at the time of this post. You just told me the WAR "literally" tells me how a player is affecting games. You don't need anything else.

You keep on laughing. It's all you got.
 

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
16,523
Liked Posts:
12,951
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
No it doesn't. It doesn't say if a guy is great at one thing, like Schwarber, what that thing is, or if he's good at a lot of things. Would you rather have Schwarber, WAR right now of 1.5, or Joc Pederson, WAR of 1.3. Schwarber does have 15 more HRs but Joc is batting 50 points higher, gets on base over 30 points better, and slugs nearly 40 points higher.

I look at BA, I know what it actually means, I look at OBP, I know what it actually means. I look at SLG, I know what it actually means. If you have look at other stats to figure out why a player has that stat, the first stat you looked at is pointless.

Without looking at the stats, tell me what difference, if any, Michael Brantley and Jose Iglesias have between them this season. They both have a WAR of 1.3 at the time of this post. You just told me the WAR "literally" tells me how a player is affecting games. You don't need anything else.

You keep on laughing. It's all you got.
Tell me what WAR stands for again??
 

Chicagosports89

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2018
Posts:
14,259
Liked Posts:
20,392
No it doesn't. It doesn't say if a guy is great at one thing, like Schwarber, what that thing is, or if he's good at a lot of things. Would you rather have Schwarber, WAR right now of 1.5, or Joc Pederson, WAR of 1.3. Schwarber does have 15 more HRs but Joc is batting 50 points higher, gets on base over 30 points better, and slugs nearly 40 points higher.

I look at BA, I know what it actually means, I look at OBP, I know what it actually means. I look at SLG, I know what it actually means. If you have look at other stats to figure out why a player has that stat, the first stat you looked at is pointless.

Without looking at the stats, tell me what difference, if any, Michael Brantley and Jose Iglesias have between them this season. They both have a WAR of 1.3 at the time of this post. You just told me the WAR "literally" tells me how a player is affecting games. You don't need anything else.

You keep on laughing. It's all you got.
The difference is Brantley has missed a good chunk of the season with injury. I'm actually much more likely to recognize that from his WAR matching Iglesias, than from looking at the BA, OBP or SLG
 

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
16,523
Liked Posts:
12,951
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
When you want to “tell how a player is effecting games” its pretty damn useful to know how many more wins a player helps you get as opposed to having an average replacement player in his place
 

Castor76

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2018
Posts:
983
Liked Posts:
239
Tell me what WAR stands for again??

It's supposed to means Wins Above Replacement. If I'm understanding that correctly, and please correct me if I have this part wrong, but it means the number of more wins your team should expect with this player were on your team versus a traditional replacement player available, typically from the minors.

But that's a what. I've answered your questions.

You have refused to answer my question of how is that players affecting the game.

If WAR is such a great stat, would you feel comfortable with your team signing a guy based solely on that? G guy could accumulate WARs in the mid 2s by being great for 90 games where another guy can be solid for 150 games and only get to the low 2s. I know who I'm choosing, but WAR means sooooooooooooooooooo much and tells sooooooooooooooo much.
 

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
16,523
Liked Posts:
12,951
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
It's supposed to means Wins Above Replacement. If I'm understanding that correctly, and please correct me if I have this part wrong, but it means the number of more wins your team should expect with this player were on your team versus a traditional replacement player available, typically from the minors.

But that's a what. I've answered your questions.

You have refused to answer my question of how is that players affecting the game.

If WAR is such a great stat, would you feel comfortable with your team signing a guy based solely on that? G guy could accumulate WARs in the mid 2s by being great for 90 games where another guy can be solid for 150 games and only get to the low 2s. I know who I'm choosing, but WAR means sooooooooooooooooooo much and tells sooooooooooooooo much.
Somebody’s mad

The answer is in your own statement. It’s a bit perplexing that you don’t see how WAR shows how a player impacts a game.

Never said WAR was the end all be all stat, all I said was it tells you how a player impacts games. You somehow still haven’t grasped that concept.

I’ll let you continue to simmer soooooooooo much longer
 

Top