Document the Atrocities - Your 2007 Chicago Cubs

by ttagaris on Jun 13, 2007 9:45 AM CDT Comment 26 comments

April 5: Cubs lead 2 to 1 going into bottom of the 7th. Lose 5 to 2.

April 13: Cubs blow 5 run lead to Reds, losing 6 to 5.

April 15: Kyle Lohse blanks the Cub: 1 - 0. Lohse has a 4.22 ERA so far this year.

April 17: Cubs lose 4 to 3 in 14 at home to Padres. Fail to score at home over the final 9 innings.

April 18: Cubs blow one run lead in 7th, lose 8 to 6 to Braves. This after scoring 4 runs over the 6th and 7th innings to capture a 2 run lead.

April 20: Cubs lead 1-0 going into 7th, lose 2-1 at home against Cardinals.

April 22: Cardinals score 5 runs in 9th and 10th innings -- Cubs lose in extras by 3.

April 23: Cubs lead 4-2 going into the 8th against the Brewers -- lose 5-4 in extra innings.

April 30: Cubs lead 2-1 going into the 7th, lose 3-2 against the Pirates.

May 8: Pirates score in 9th, sending the game into extras where the Cubs go scoreless, losing 4-3 in 15. Cubs fail to score over last 8 innings.

May 12: Cubs score 6 in top of 7th innings -- allow six in the bottom half. Lose 11 to 7.

May 14: Mets score games final 5 runs, win 5 to 4.

May 17: Cubs lead 5 to 1 going into bottom of the 9th against the Mets -- lose 6 to 5.

May 23: Cubs lead 1 to 0 going into 7th, lose 2 to 1.

May 25: 7 run seventh inning gives the Cubs 8 to 5 lead. Dodgers score 4 in bottom of the 8th. Cubs lose 9 to 8.

May 27: Leading 1-0 going into the bottom of the 8th, Dodgers score once, and again in the 11th. Cubs lose 2 to 1.

June 2: Tied at 3 going into top 8, Braves strike once and again in the 9th. Cubs lose 5 to 3.

June 9: Cubs blow a four run lead, lose at Atlanta.

June 10: Cubs up 4 to 2, Braves score 3 times in bottom of the 8th. Cubs lose 5-4.

June 12: Cubs lose 5 to 3 at home against Seattle. Leave baes loaded with no one out in 8th -- lose in 13.

Your 2007 Chicago Cubs.

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 26 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Wow.

You're right. Those games were ALL winnable.

Win half of them -- just half, ten of twenty -- and you'd be 37-25, which not only would be in first place but would be the best record in the NL.

Which brings me to a point -- not only does the Central suck, but the entire league isn't that great. The ENTIRE NATIONAL LEAGUE is only 11 games, top to bottom. (Best: Mets, 36-27; worst: Reds, 26-39.)

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Jun 13, 2007 9:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Not a good trend

and it should tell everybody one thing, this team is not capable of putting a good enouph string together to win this division. Yes, the division does suck, but for those that think the Brewers are going to keep going on a 10-20 clip, are sadly mistaken. IMO, the Cubs have blown a golden opportunity to be in 1st place right now, and they will not be presented with such a bad stretch by the Brewers again this year. The Brewers are not as good as their 24-10 start, but they aren't near as bad as their recent 10-20 stretch. Their starters and pen are good enouph to have them finish at a .500 clip, despite the fact they will struggle to score runs at times.

As coposed today, the Cubs are a couple big moves away from having a legit chance, and I have little faith they can get that done this year.

It's too bad, the division was there for the taking, and it was lost before the season even started.

"I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right ones" Herb Brooks - 1980 USA Hockey Team

by MPH73 on Jun 13, 2007 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, the Cubs have...

... not taken advantage of a golden opportunity.

But to say that all future opportunities to make up ground are "lost", is just plain wrong. There are 99 games left, not 9.

That said, they had better start NOW.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Jun 13, 2007 10:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Al

you said they needed to start winning two weeks ago, and I have seen enouph of this team to know they will continue to take two steps forward and three steps back. What you see, is what you get with this particular group.

Here is the bigger problem for the Cubs:

You have three broken parts to your club - catcher, Jones and the back of the pen. Hendry has done it again, he will be forced to trade guys after their value has gone down to virtually nothing. He did it with Patterson, Sosa and now he will be doing the same with Barrett and Jones.

A GM is supposed to be proactive, and err on the side of trading a guy a year early as opposed to a year late. Hendry does not subscribe to this theory, as he gets exceedingly stubborn, and loses site of what is best for the club in the long run. Both Barrett and Jones had holes in their game before this year, they were there for everybody to see. But now, you will have to deal guys who once had decent value, for a bag of balls.

"I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right ones" Herb Brooks - 1980 USA Hockey Team

by MPH73 on Jun 13, 2007 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Must Win"

The Cubs have lost a lot of must win games this year, but the silver lining is that the rest of the NL is doing the same. So, it was a reprieve of sorts; expecting the rest of the division to play this lousy for the rest of the year is a mistake, so we'd better get moving pronto.

by TMOX on Jun 13, 2007 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rst of the season

With 62 games finished, can the Cubs pull off two stretches of winning 9 of 10 games, then play .500 ball the rest of the way? That would give them 85 wins which might be enough to win the NL Central the way things are.

They have the talent to win a stretch like that, but they haven't shown any consistency over such a period.

by John in DC on Jun 13, 2007 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

11 games separating top to bottom

is about right for this point in the season... we're a little over 1/3 of the way through the season so you're looking at approximately 30 games separating top to bottom if you extrapolate it to a full season

meaning the top team being a 95-100 win team and the bottom team winning 65-70

that's about right.... for any year, this year is no different in that regard

by DartmouthCubsFan on Jun 13, 2007 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No team in this divsion

is going to win 95 games. That is, unless all of their non-divisional games are forfeited to them the rest of the season.

"I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right ones" Herb Brooks - 1980 USA Hockey Team

by MPH73 on Jun 13, 2007 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not every year.

... Standings for this date a year ago.

The league was 16 games top-to-bottom. So this year is a bit unusual, I'd think.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Jun 13, 2007 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i guess you're right

with standings as of June 13th, but if you look back at the last few years the difference has usually ended up around 30-35 games separating the top and bottom teams in a league, which we're currently on pace for

i guess for whatever reason by the end of the season the worst teams over the last few years have won a few more while the top teams pace has slowed

by DartmouthCubsFan on Jun 13, 2007 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for this.

I think Al summed it up well. WOW.

by HIGGY on Jun 13, 2007 10:00 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Isn't this the same story

of 2004, 2005, and at least the first half of 2006?
I know that a few other's here have been blasted for suggesting that Baker may not have been the problem, but it's looking more and more like that may be the case

by LuisSalazar on Jun 13, 2007 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Playing tight without a true on field leader

Sometimes I try to explain this until I am blue in the face. Competitive sports teams are made up more than with players with superior talent they develop an organizational personality. Pat Riley wrote a book on it talking about the 80/20 rule and 20/80 rule. Bob Knight who is someone I know built a science early in career that others took and have built programs with it. Tony LaRusa, Bill Parcells and Mike Krzyzewski, (he being a prtoge)are good professional friends and whenever they individually get together the shop talk is something that should be a special PBS or TLC on the science of team building.

I said this back in late April or early May that the Cubs didn't have the right on field leader who also had the on field performing capital to lead this team. On paper D-Lee is the guy. In personality Barrett is trying to be this person but continually screws up on field play, especially defense.

I have been told that team chemistry or personality is far bigger and far more nebulous to predict or forge than fans think. Each player has a direct effect on the at least three or four others, compound this and two players have an effect on six members of the team, compound this and four players can have effect on the half the club or more.

The Cubs are playing tight, the bases loaded none run scoring opportunities and one run losses are the situations that point to a psychological sign. Lou might be right or correct but is the wrong messenger. Hendry has his hands tied, (some self inflicted, some tied by the ownership situation) so the players know they can go along with the team for the year.

My suggestion is a big move if GD Zell changes his timetable and sells the team during the season. He is probably hoping for a bidding war between Colangelo and Cuban and MCKenna and other unknowns and that is probably going to happen. But if I were the Cubs I would do what Atlanta did 20 years ago.

Move Piniella upstairs and install Trammel. Start selling bad attitudes and non performers.

Start with Barrett and Jones....dump...move to Eyre and see what the effect is.

Harry Carey: 3 & 2, 2-out, no place to put him...tying run on 3rd...winning run on 2nd...THE PITCH....HEE POOOOPPPED....IT UP!

by Ivy Walls on Jun 13, 2007 10:17 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

They need guys who expect to win. These guys do not. Oh... to have a Jeter!!!

"60% of the time, it works EVERY time."

by utcubby on Jun 13, 2007 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What's the point of this thread?

I can understand it at Viva El Birdos, but here? Where's the Great Moments in 2007 Cub History thread? There's been a few great games...

Go Nebraska Football!

by sanantonecub on Jun 13, 2007 11:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I eagerly anticipate

...your forthcoming posting of this suggested diary. I support your project and promise to thoroughly read "Great Moments in Cubs History, April 2007-Present" by sanantonecub!

by Rev Gunia on Jun 13, 2007 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

re: I eagerly anticipate

Remember the game where Lilly threw at Renteria and then...oh, wait, they lost that one, too.

Justice for Ted Lilly! Justice for Mike Fontenot!

by dat cubfan daver on Jun 13, 2007 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I honestly

thought there were more games like this. When you lose games like this weekly or twice a week, this plays on a team. You would have to think getting late in games that this team and including Lou, expect to lose.

by Johnny Callison was a Cub on Jun 13, 2007 1:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Well...

I know we all do. I tell myself that we can win but deep down I know that if we are only up by one or tied or losing coming around the 8th inning or later... we will most likely lose.

by GoCubbies34 on Jun 13, 2007 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Scapegoat Factor

I had a little time this morning so being the stat-geek that I am, thought I would review this sorry list of misadventures presented here and subjectively assign what I call a Scapegoat Factor to those players directly responsible for these losses.

I was looking specifically for:

Poor Relief pitching that led to tying & winning runs
Fielding errors that led to tying & winning runs
Poor base running that eliminated scoring opportunities
Choking at bat with bases loaded

For example, I gave the following players one Scapegoat Factor point for last nights game:

Theriot - bases loaded no outs, ground ball force out at home
Pie - bases loaded, one out, strikes out
Fontenot - bases loaded, two outs, strike out
Barrett - Misplays ball allowing run to score
Ohman - Allows winning runs in 13th inning, loses game

I did this for all games on this list and totaled up the points; here are the guys that are consistently responsible for losing the extra-inning and close games so far this year:

Ohman - 7 points
Barrett - 5 points
Dempster - 4 points
Eyre - 4 points
Howry - 4 points
Wuertz - 3 points
Jones - 3 points
Fontenot -2 points
Theriot - 2 points

Why am I not surprised?

by JFCubFan on Jun 13, 2007 1:51 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

that's an awfully subjective rating

and if you're not surprised i'm guessing there's a bit of observer bias in there....

this tends to happen when you put a subjective stat out there and try to make something quantifiable thats not

for last night for example:

Jones doesnt get a point for his throw?

Murton doesnt get a point for striking out with runners on 1st and 2nd in the first with 1 out and washburn on the ropes?

Rich Hill for balking a run home?

Pagan for a baserunning mistake in the 5th with 2 on and 1 out?

Pineilla for leaving Ohman out there to face multiple RH's with a RH warm in the pen in a tie game in the 13th

the bottom line is this team is losing many close games because of two things:

they're extremely bad at doing the little things
they've been extremely unlucky

by DartmouthCubsFan on Jun 13, 2007 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You are right it is very subjective

with reviewer bias.

However, it is clear that certain players are extremely bad doing the little things, as you say, while others on the team are not. The pattern that arises from this underperformance over the season is very clear and you really don't need a spreadsheet to calculate it. It was fun to do anyway.

by JFCubFan on Jun 13, 2007 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like it

but you have to give more than one point to Dempster for, say, the Mets collapse (5-1) and the Braves collapse.

Same is true for the Dodger collapse. When you are up 8-5 through 7 1/2, you have to win those games.

"60% of the time, it works EVERY time."

by utcubby on Jun 13, 2007 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

IT HURTS

I have only missed three games all year. I love the Cubs but last night I was so frustrated that I decided that I am going to take a 1 week break from the Cubs starting today. It has been too exhausting the to deal with. I told my wife when we didn't score with the bases loaded and no outs in Atlanta, it was over. I told her the same last night.

Not sure what to do but must cut the cancer out. Must get rid of players who are not winners. Barrett is valuable at the plate, but he needs to go, along with JJ, Eyre, Dempster, and maybe even D Lee if he doesn't start competing. I am glad to see us use Fontenot, Theriot, and Pie because they play with emotion and energy. The same is true with Z -- he is a must sign, as well as Lilly and Hill.

"60% of the time, it works EVERY time."

by utcubby on Jun 13, 2007 4:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs