Why 3rd place would be great for the Cubs
The folks at Baseball Prospectus released their PECOTA-backed Projected Standings recently, which basically represents their best statistically-based guess at how each team in MLB will fare in 2010. The Cubs were projected to finish third according to those rankings, behind the Cardinals and Reds.
You're welcome to debate all you want about whether or not the Deadbirds or Stinkcinatti (those are the default insulting versions of each team's name, correct?) are more talented than the Cubs. But I don't think anyone will argue that this team looks primed for a World Series run. Our old guys are older, and not getting any less expensive.
On top of that, the team's financial flexibility appears to have run out. With all the debt the team has taken on following the Ricketts purchase, management's hands are tied when it comes to improving the team in any way that costs money.
I'd argue that this is a good thing for the franchise right now. Let me explain.
-----
Remember Felix Pie?
He was the latest can't-miss young stud that had a tough time breaking out while wearing a Cubs uniform. After the five-tooler posted a .637 OPS over 83 at-bats in 2008, Hendry&Co. decided to cut the cord, shipping Pie off to Baltimore in exchange for Garrett Olson and Henry Williamson.
Even while he was in Chicago, Pie's defense and speed were impossible to ignore. If only he could've elevated his batting average from the .240 range.
Having said that, at this point I'd like to direct your attention to the numbers Pie put up in the 2nd half of 2009. Over the course of 145 post-All Star break at bats, Pie posted a .290/.346/.497. In the AL East.
So much for that left-handed hitting, plus-powered center fielder.
------
Do you think Jeff Samardzija should be a starter or a reliever?
There's a question I'd love to ask Jim Hendry. Then again, I have a pretty good idea of what he'd say: something like, "I don't know."
That much is clear from the way he's handled the 10 Million Dollar Baby. Furthermore, not only does Shark keep getting switched from the rotation to the 'pen, it seemed he spent two out of every seven days on the bus between Chicago and Des Moines last year.
In Hendry's defense, there's a reason why the Cubs have insisted on jerking him around so much.
It's because, for the past few years, they've had a decent baseball team. And when you're that close to the playoffs, it's worth it to toy with a 25-year old fireballer's emotions if it means a game or two in the standings.
When you're that close to the playoffs, you can't afford to "waste at-bats" on a 23-year old left-handed hitting, plus-powered center fielder who can't get his average above .240.
When you're a team that hasn't won the World Series in 100 years with a halfway-decent team on the field, you're always going to feel compelled to try to win now.
Which brings us to 2010.
-----
Maybe Soriano and Soto will relocate their respective swings. Maybe D-Lee's neck will hold up, and maybe Aramis will play more than 130 games.
Maybe Theriot will ditch the home run swing and get back to a .300 average by flipping singles into right field again. Maybe Jeff Baker and Mike Fontenot will team up to create an effective offensive platoon at second base. Maybe Kosuke Fukudome and Marlon Byrd will end up being above-average hitters.
Unfortunately, none of those "maybes" are anywhere near sure things. (For the record, the likeliest of the bunch in my mind is a major Soto rebound.) Nonetheless, we find ourselves looking at a team that could -- "maybe" -- win the division. But maybe they'll go .500 instead.
In that case, back to the original issue: how does the team benefit from finishing in the middle of the division?
As soon as the Cubs are out of contention, the team can stop worrying about "wasting at-bats" on young developing players, or rushing live arms up into the majors to stay competitive. The Felix Pies of the world (read: Starlin Castro and Josh Vitters) won't suffer from added pressure, and the Jeff Samadzijas (read: Samardzija himself, Andrew Cashner, Jay Jackson, etc. etc.) can be patiently slotted into either a starting spot or a bullpen role.
Let's not sign any more expensive veterans to huge back-loaded contracts just yet. Instead, why not finally give some young talent the chance to develop, and go from there?
I'm not completely giving up on 2010. Only kinda.
It's hard to have a "preach
It's hard to have a "preach patience" mentality with a team as historically shitty as the Cubs. But I feel like the team will be in a holding pattern at best until they can be rid of some of the turgid contracts that Hendry has issued in the past few years, and I'm prepared to wait for a whole new cast of characters to step in and deliver us a really good team.
Still, the structure is there for THIS year's team to be pretty good. A third place finish would be "acceptable" as much as *anything* less than a World Championship can be.
Deadirds?
I prefer "ratbirds."
3rd place?
The problem I see with your hypothesis is that a club hovering around .500 is still "in contention" in August. Remember last season? The Cubs could have traded Harden to Minneapolis and gotten something in return. Instead, Hendry sat with his thumb up his ass and insisted the team was still in contention. I don't need to remind you gentlemen how that worked out. If the team is in the same position this year, Jim and Lou are going to continue yanking around Samardzija, continue to play vets, and just generally play a full season of mediocre baseball. It sounds like you want the Cubs to engage in some kind of soft rebuilding season, but it isn't going to happen. The team is not good enough to win the division, but its too good to fall way out of contention early. On top of that, the club is massively expensive, and with little opportunity to shed deadweight salary. If I sound pessimistic, its because I am. I just don't see any benefit in finishing 3rd.
Good point on the missed
Good point on the missed opportunity with Harden.
I'll say this: a .500 team may or may not be in contention. It all depends on how well the Cardinals end up doing. Even though the Cubs were mediocre last year, remember how Kurt kept saying, "Dagnabit I won't give up hope 'til they're ten games back!" and how long it took for that to happen?
Yes, divisions are sometimes won by teams with 85 or so wins (usually the NL West or Central). But this year, the Cardinals have a full season of Matt Holliday hitting 4th, potential full seasons of Carp and Waino... Not to mention the potential of the Reds' roster.
Your point is well taken; the Cubs may still be in it if they maintain a .500 clip for long enough. I guess I'm hoping they either kick ass, or completely underwhelm. =/
my nicknames
the Tardinals or Tards for short
the Speds.
One thing to add
So long as the Reds are captained by Johnny Baker, I refuse to believe that they could finish ahead of us in the standings. Look at their recent moves. They signed a declining Orlando Cabrera to block a promising young SS in Paul Janish, and then in the inexplicable move of the offseason, they acquired AAron Miles from Oakland. Dusty has already worked his tragic on Edinson Volquez's arm, and Cueto can't be far behind. For a while there, it looked like he had destroyed Aaron Harang as well. The reds may be physically talented, but with that toothpick chomping fool at the helm, they will finish below .500 again.