110 Losses?

by Molechaser on May 23, 2006 10:44 PM CDT Comment 16 comments

In major-league history, only 15 teams have lost more than 110 games. The Cubs are flirting with becoming the 16th. Pick any length of time and assume the Cubs' record for the rest of the season will be the same as it has been over that period, and here are the results:

Last 5 Games: Season Record 41-121
Last 10 Games: Season Record 53-109
Last 15 Games: Season Record 49-113
Last 20 Games: Season Record 41-121
Last 25 Games: Season Record 46-116
Last 30 Games: Season Record 53-109
Last 35 Games: Season Record 58-104
Last 40 Games: Season Record 62-100
Last 45 Games: Season Record 65-97

At absolute best, the Cubs right now are a 97-loss team. It is much more likely that they will lose between 100 and 110 games, and 115 is still a good possibility.

Al is fond of saying that no team is really as bad as it looks when it is losing, but these statistics seem to show that the 2006 Cubs are a remarkably consistent team. This isn't just a slump, and it can't be shrugged off as a fluke anymore.

How can the team fix this? I'm not sure they can at this point--the damage is just too deep. But a good plan would be to start by getting rid of the coaching staff, both pitching and hitting (Gary Matthews needs to go, too, because he was the hitting coach during the early days of the present regime). If Dusty Baker has to go in order to make this happen, then so be it. As no one on this board gets tired of pointing out, this team lacks fundamentals, and those people who are responsible for teaching and reinforcing those fundamentals have to go. This won't be a panacea, but it may help take this team from a historically awful performer to a merely run-of-the-mill bad team.

[EDIT: I fixed the math error in the "Last 45 games" entry. Sorry; it's late and I can't do simple arithmetic. The basic point remains the same.]

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 16 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Oh dear.

That is all I have to say. I don't know what to say. I'm shocked.

Cubbie Blue will always sPaRkLe in my eyes, but please stop losing. PLEASE!

by sparkles721 on May 23, 2006 10:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Sorry...

Sorry, Sparkles. I didn't mean to bring you down; I really do appreciate the optimism that you and many others have shown and continue to show. I don't want the pendulum to swing too far the other direction. But the continued refusal of the front office to face facts and make some real changes that at least have a chance to make this a better team is really starting to try my patience as a fan.

by Molechaser on May 23, 2006 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree that..

..this is no longer a "fluky stretch" of losses for this team, maybe even as early as the SD series 10 days ago this has been true (the Nationals are NOT a good team.) The "this guy blew a save, made a key error, struck out with 2 on.." excuses look even more irrelevant now. This is just a bad team.

Chicks dig the long ball

by Will23 on May 23, 2006 10:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Bad team

This is the main reason I have a problem with people laying so much blame on Dusty. Joe Torre couldn't make this team much better. Argue with Dusty's lineups, double switches and bullpen management if you like, but the simple fact of the matter is is that a different manager probably makes only a cosmetic difference.

by wicubfan on May 24, 2006 8:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

First, Joe Torre is the luckiest manager alive. Who wouldn't win with that team?

And while the Cubs wouldn't be great with another manager/coaching staff, they would be better. This team continues to have no patience at the plate and this has been the case as long as Dusty's been here. The roster changes every year and the approach at the plate is still the same. You can't tell me this has nothing to do with the coaches. Same goes for the pitchers and their walks. Quit nibbling on the corners and trying to strike everyone out and pitch to get an out. Again, this is almost across the board on this staff.

by BringBackRyno on May 24, 2006 9:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

The roster changes every year and the approach at the plate is still the same.

Hell, the lineup changes every day. And let's not even rehash the subject of plate discipline.

This team is bad, but it would be less so without Dusty. Would it be a winning team? Unlikely, but I think we can all point to at least three games this year where good tactical management at key points in the games would have resulted in wins instead of losses, or at least pushed games to extra innings. If that was the case, we'd be sitting at 20-25, 21-24, or maybe even 22-23 - still under .500, but at least we'd have some hope.

by false cognate on May 24, 2006 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

I think most baseball people will tell you the difference between a good manager and a bad one is only about 4-5 games a year as far as strategic decisions go. The key really is to get as much out of his players as he can. We can all argue about the game strategy. Thats what makes baseball great.

by wicubfan on May 24, 2006 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thats the argument...

Is it the players, or the mangement? Plate discipline and command should be taught all thru the minor league system. The plate discipline was also bad under Baylor. It would be asking alot of Baker and his staff to turn someone like Pierre into a patient hitter when he has never been one in his career.

by wicubfan on May 24, 2006 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

there is no chance we lose

110. The Cubs will get better once Lee and Prior come back. They will still be bad, but not 110 L bad

Shades of Wrigley

by Ienpw on May 23, 2006 11:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Isn't that depressing?

The best thing we can say about these Cubs is that they won't lose 110 games.

by Josh77 on May 24, 2006 12:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re

If you really want to get depressed, track the season with PWins. The Cubs inability to score runs combined with giving them up has them losing a solid 100, and every blowout edges it up a bit more. It's quickly getting to the point that winning 70 will be considered "turning it around".

Visit The Digital Gazette

by Jed Taylor on May 24, 2006 6:14 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

We Won't Lose 110 -- I Don't Think

We may not even lose 100. I mean, how bad do you have to be to do that? You have to play .321 ball all year, and we are at .400 right now. They would have to play .291 from here on out. As fatalistic as Cubs fans can be, even they have to admit that it's really unlikely. I mean, that's historically bad -- the equivalent of a 47-115 season. I will go out on a limb and say they won't do that.

However, It's not hard to see the parallels in the types of teams that the Cubs and the Royals have put together, especially at the plate.

by chasfh on May 24, 2006 11:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

there

isn't much pointing to things getting better however, Lee will be back, but even if he scores us one run a game that won't win many for us. Anyone who counts on Prior or Miller making a huge impact is trying to justify buying their tickets, you can't assume they will come back firing.

by mike bornemann on May 24, 2006 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs