PDA

View Full Version : Talking Cubs in 2005


oharewx
02-10-2005, 11:48 PM
this guy also picked the flubs to win their division so i wouldn't get too excited

Realist
02-11-2005, 07:15 AM
this guy also picked the flubs to win their division so i wouldn't get too excited

To be honest, I recently re-assesed the flubs talent and I think that (I'm so sorry to say this) they may be also "under the radar" too. As much as we've improved, you can't take away from the fact that the flubs have unloaded so-so Sosa and Farnsworth. Those guys were total bums and helped to sink their ship the last few years. As a Sox fan I'm really gonna miss those guys.

It really is a very well thought out and researched article though. ESPN will never hire this guy. He never once mentioned the Yankees or Wrong Sox. He's toast.

34 Inch Stick
02-11-2005, 07:33 AM
I take the opposite view of the Cubs. I think they will desperately underachieve. Alou absolutely kept that club going for the first two months of the season and he is gone. Merker was their best left handed reliever in a weak bullpen and he is gone. The outfield situation is going to blow up in their faces. The number 5 starter will be a problem all year which will put a strain on the aforesaid weak bullpen.

They may get 65 wins out of their starters. On the other hand they may get none from their relievers.

Realist
02-11-2005, 07:52 AM
I take the opposite view of the Cubs. I think they will desperately underachieve. Alou absolutely kept that club going for the first two months of the season and he is gone. Merker was their best left handed reliever in a weak bullpen and he is gone. The outfield situation is going to blow up in their faces. The number 5 starter will be a problem all year which will put a strain on the aforesaid weak bullpen.

They may get 65 wins out of their starters. On the other hand they may get none from their relievers.

Gawd I hope you're right. I really hope my "addition by subtraction" theory falls flat on its face.

Ol' No. 2
02-11-2005, 08:45 AM
I take the opposite view of the Cubs. I think they will desperately underachieve. Alou absolutely kept that club going for the first two months of the season and he is gone. Merker was their best left handed reliever in a weak bullpen and he is gone. The outfield situation is going to blow up in their faces. The number 5 starter will be a problem all year which will put a strain on the aforesaid weak bullpen.

They may get 65 wins out of their starters. On the other hand they may get none from their relievers.The Cubs need to find a league where they only play 6 innings. I agree. Unless the 2003 Borowski steps out of a time machine, their bullpen is going to absolutely kill them.

tebman
02-11-2005, 08:52 AM
The Cubs need to find a league where they only play 6 innings. I agree. Unless the 2003 Borowski steps out of a time machine, their bullpen is going to absolutely kill them.

There aren't many things that would be more fun to watch. You think the addled sportswear-clad crowd will stick around for the ninth inning after the bullpen gives up 4 or 5 runs?

- tebman

PAPChiSox729
02-18-2005, 12:06 AM
To be honest, I recently re-assesed the flubs talent and I think that (I'm so sorry to say this) they may be also "under the radar" too. As much as we've improved, you can't take away from the fact that the flubs have unloaded so-so Sosa and Farnsworth. Those guys were total bums and helped to sink their ship the last few years. As a Sox fan I'm really gonna miss those guys.

It really is a very well thought out and researched article though. ESPN will never hire this guy. He never once mentioned the Yankees or Wrong Sox. He's toast.

All this team has going for them is a very, very good starting staff and good corner infielders. The middle infielders are question marks, along with Barrett and the entire outfield. Their bullpen is just atrocious. The two questions that will hang over the Cubs all season are: a) how many games can the starters win and b) how many games will the bullpen blow. I believe the answer to both questions is a lot.

StillMissOzzie
02-18-2005, 12:10 AM
There aren't many things that would be more fun to watch. You think the addled sportswear-clad crowd will stick around for the ninth inning after the bullpen gives up 4 or 5 runs?

- tebman

It might take them that long to figure out that Sosa is not in RF anymore.

SMO
:bandance:

HebrewHammer
02-18-2005, 12:28 AM
I just don't see a team with one of the worst OF's and bullpens in baseball doing much of anything. Any injuries to that IF or rotation and they are sunk.

Watch, Sham-ME carries the O's to the series and they start "The Curse of the Boom Box."

HomeFish
02-18-2005, 12:35 AM
Two things I want to point out immediately:

1) They have one of those converted starters as their closer. I don't know the guy's name, nor do I know what sort of pitcher he is, but I am wary of him. A lot of mediocre starters have turned into decent or even dominating closers.

2) The accursed ones have deep pockets and have a lot of farm teams in the lower echelons of the NL. They can always trade for new superstars midseason.

DrCrawdad
02-18-2005, 12:53 AM
Two things I want to point out immediately:

1) They have one of those converted starters as their closer. I don't know the guy's name, nor do I know what sort of pitcher he is, but I am wary of him. A lot of mediocre starters have turned into decent or even dominating closers.

2) The accursed ones have deep pockets and have a lot of farm teams in the lower echelons of the NL. They can always trade for new superstars midseason.

Hopefully midseason the Cubbies will be buried as they were last year.

GO CARDS!

PAPChiSox729
02-18-2005, 09:28 AM
Two things I want to point out immediately:

1) They have one of those converted starters as their closer. I don't know the guy's name, nor do I know what sort of pitcher he is, but I am wary of him. A lot of mediocre starters have turned into decent or even dominating closers.

2) The accursed ones have deep pockets and have a lot of farm teams in the lower echelons of the NL. They can always trade for new superstars midseason.

Eric Gange comes to mind. But I really don't see Dempster turning into a closer of Gange's caliber (or anywhere near for that matter). I think the second point is more likely to happen. Either way, the Cubs need to add more then a good closer to have what I would consider a decent bullpen.

Ol' No. 2
02-18-2005, 09:38 AM
Two things I want to point out immediately:

1) They have one of those converted starters as their closer. I don't know the guy's name, nor do I know what sort of pitcher he is, but I am wary of him. A lot of mediocre starters have turned into decent or even dominating closers.

2) The accursed ones have deep pockets and have a lot of farm teams in the lower echelons of the NL. They can always trade for new superstars midseason.They may have money, but it's pretty clear they're not going to let Hendry spend any of it. His hands were tied all winter, and I see no reason to think they're going to give him a big bag of cash come July. Last I heard they had the highest payroll in the NL. Unless they can get someone for free, they're going to have to make do with what they have.

StillMissOzzie
02-19-2005, 12:38 AM
They may have money, but it's pretty clear they're not going to let Hendry spend any of it. His hands were tied all winter, and I see no reason to think they're going to give him a big bag of cash come July. Last I heard they had the highest payroll in the NL. Unless they can get someone for free, they're going to have to make do with what they have.

Is that true - the sCrUBS payroll is larger than the Mets, even after they sprung for Pedro and Beltran? Or is it including the $15-16M the sCrUBS had to sent to Baltimore to take Sosa off their hands?

And Dr Crawdad, while the sCrUBS were buried by the Cards in the NL Central, their hopes for the post-season wildcard were still alive up to the final week or so of the season, so I don't think "buried by midseason like they were last year" is accurate.

SMO
:gulp:

DrCrawdad
02-19-2005, 01:44 AM
And Dr Crawdad, while the sCrUBS were buried by the Cards in the NL Central, their hopes for the post-season wildcard were still alive up to the final week or so of the season, so I don't think "buried by midseason like they were last year" is accurate.


Well the Cubbies were buried at midseason and had no chance of winning the NL Central two years in a row. They had a chance though for the consolation prize, the Wild-Card but blew that and finished in third place. This of course after all the talk of how with Wood, Prior, Clement, Zambrano and Maddux were the best staph ever assembled in the history of baseball...

The Cubbies lost their best offensive weapon from '04, Alou, and also kicked out Sosa. And very few people are commenting on the loss of Clement. Oh well who cares about Matt Clement when you've got Glendon Rusch.

Everyone talks about how the Sox lost offense with Lee & Magglio leaving. Well, I believe the Cubs offense lost more than the Sox and no one is really talking about the Cubs hobbled offense.

The guy who played the most games for the Sox in RF was Joe Borchard. So basically the Sox are replacing Borchard with Dye. That's an upgrade, not a change to the clubhouse or an 'addition by subtraction,' as Cub fans are proclaiming.

DrCrawdad
02-19-2005, 02:19 AM
Here's another thing too...

The Cubune ran an article on the Sox as a team of "what ifs." Well, IMHO the same is true and maybe more so with the Cubs.

C - Barrett, '04 was a career year for Barrett. What if Barrett returns previous lows? Barrett is not known for his defense. Blanco, surely won't give opposing pitchers white knuckles.

3B - Ramirez, again '04 was a career year for Ramirez. How will Ramirez respond to having the pressure to perform being put squarely on his shoulders now that Alou and Sosa are gone? What if Ramirez regresses instead of repeating or surpassing his '04 stats?

SS - Nomar, injuries slowed him and he only played in 81 games. In those 81 games he hit only 9 HR with 41 RBI. Nomar's BA dropped when he left Boston and his offensive stats have been declining. What if Nomar sinks further?

2B - Walker at 2nd, Nomar at SS and Barrett behind the plate makes the Cubs weak up the middle defensively. What if Walker doesn't hit, can you tolerate his lousy defense at 2nd?

1B - Lee had one of his best years in '04. As with Ramirez, the burden of carrying the offense falls on Lee too. What if Lee doesn't put-up career numbers again? What if the offensive burden is too heavy for a player who whiffs as frequently as Lee does? What if Lee's stall down the stretch in '04 is a prediction of what's to come this season?

LF - Ok this isn't even a what if. LF is a question mark for the Cubs. Ah, but I'll go ahead, what if Hollandsworth-Hairston-Dubois-Kelton add up to much, much less than Alou? How glaring will Alou's departure be if Hollandsworth-Hairston-Dubois-Kelton are worthless?

CF - Patterson is a huge what if.

RF - Burnitz, hey he hit more HR than Sosa and more RBI and doubles. Burnitz did it in 60 more AB and Burnitz hit in the hitters paradise of Coors Field. What if Burnitz' numbers decrease along with the change in altitude?

As far as the pitchers go, what if Wood and Prior both are nagged again with injuries?

My point with this is not that the Cubs are bad. But just as the Cubune "what if'd" the Sox, if you apply the same skepticism to the Cubs they fare no better.

Jabroni
02-19-2005, 02:35 AM
As far as the pitchers go, what if Wood and Prior both are nagged again with injuries?Don't forget Glendon Rusch who had a career year last season. He has to replace Clement. Also, the Cubs still don't have a closer and they lost Mercker and traded Farnsworth. Their bullpen is significantly weaker than last season.

PAPChiSox729
02-19-2005, 08:49 PM
RF - Burnitz, hey he hit more HR than Sosa and more RBI and doubles. Burnitz did it in 60 more AB and Burnitz hit in the hitters paradise of Coors Field. What if Burnitz' numbers decrease along with the change in altitude?


I don't really think that is even a question. Look at his road splits. (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=5061)

:mg:



(Okay, it isn't that shocking)

Fake Chet Lemon
02-19-2005, 09:06 PM
Hendry is a genious. He has managed to spend $100,000,000 on a team and not have a closer. The "genious" will do it again this year. When you spend that kind of coin, you should have a top flight closer BY ACCIDENT.

Ol' No. 2
02-19-2005, 09:21 PM
Hendry is a genious. He has managed to spend $100,000,000 on a team and not have a closer. The "genious" will do it again this year. When you spend that kind of coin, you should have a top flight closer BY ACCIDENT.If Prior and Wood don't start 30 games each, it's entirely possible that Hendry will have spent $100M on a sub-.500 team.

Banix12
02-19-2005, 09:42 PM
Here's my feelings on the cubs. There is a winning team on that roster but it's a team that requires a lot of in-game managing, which Dusty is not good at. It's not one of those teams that Baker does well with where he can just fill out a lineup card and let them go. I think it their final record will be above .500, at about 85-90 games. I don't think that's enough to win the division and probably not enough to win the wild card.

Baker has guys who will likely be on the bench that can play and he won't play them. Hairston can bat leadoff but he's going with patterson. Hairston is better defensively but he's going with walker. He'll likely be starting off the season with only one lefty in the bullpen in Remlinger and questions at closer. He's got one of the worst defensive teams in baseball and a bench that is above average defensively and can hit ok.

That's not to say this team would be better without dusty, he does motivate players well and gets them to win. This team will just test his in game managing skills, which are limited