So the Cubs break out with an 11-7 windblown victory Monday. Today, however, they face a mediocre left-handed pitcher, which, of course, means the right-handed lineup of doom.
We noted yesterday the results of this lineup, but some guys can't figure this out, can they? There is some sort of truism linking the repetition of the same action in the expectation of different results as a form of mental illness.
It's the fifth inning now and the Cubs are down 1-0. The wind is howling out, but short of the Cubs knocking out Eric Stultz and turning over the lineup, this game is probably out of reach already. Hope I'm wrong.
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Monday, May 28, 2012
Twelve
By now, pretty much everyone agrees the recent skid is due to the perennial Cubs problem, not scoring runs. Which, of course, is due to their whole approach at the plate which is characterized, in the main, by terminal impatience and dumbness.
Not to belabor the obvious, but this is really a dumb team and has been for years. Lets take Garza, who in addition to not being able to throw the ball to first base, has now become afflicted with ideas. Apparently, Garza thought that he could fool the Pirates by sneaking in a couple of change-ups, his fourth best pitch, when he was throwing upwards of 95 mph all day. All of them got deposited in the seats, resulting in seven unanswered runs.
But not to worry, Garza is now aware of this and thinks, on balance, these pitches were not a good idea. The thing that is bothersome, however, is how he was even allowed to throw these pitches in the first place. I had always supposed that the catcher was in control of the game, kind of like in Bull Durham when Crash Davis comes out and tells Nuke that he is doing the thinking, not Nuke.
The point here is not to just make a joke, but to note that the Cubs decline is coincidental to the spate of injuries to all the Cubs legitimate catchers. Not that Soto, Castillo, and Clevinger are in Yadier Molina's league, but the catcher is so important in controlling the game, and it just seems the Cubs are sadly deficient in this respect. For example, the Marmol situation. Sure, he doesn't like to throw his fastball, but somebody has to make him do it, and that duty, I'm afraid, belongs to the catcher.
The other instance of terminal dumbness has to do with the lineup. I had some hopes when Epstein and Hoyer took over that we would see some change of philosophy here, but unfortunately we got Dale Sveum at the helm. Sveum seems sadly out of step with what one supposed was to be the prevailing approach of the front office.
I don't want to beat this to death, but somebody is supposed to be looking at numbers. Here's an interesting set of numbers. The Cubs have one of the worst batting averages against left-handed pitching in all of baseball. They invariably start a right-handed hitting lineup against lefties. Their record this year is 1-9. Draw your own conclusions.
The thing is that when he explains all this, Sveum sounds like a replay of Quade who sounded like a replay of Lou Piniella. I don't expect this team to contend, but you can at least pretend you are able to think your way out of a paper bag. Right-handed hitters are supposed to have an advantage against left-handed pitching. Cubs right-handed hitters, however, clearly do not. Time to stop pretending that a superficial generalization has anything to do with real world performance and maybe dig a little deeper.
Not to belabor the obvious, but this is really a dumb team and has been for years. Lets take Garza, who in addition to not being able to throw the ball to first base, has now become afflicted with ideas. Apparently, Garza thought that he could fool the Pirates by sneaking in a couple of change-ups, his fourth best pitch, when he was throwing upwards of 95 mph all day. All of them got deposited in the seats, resulting in seven unanswered runs.
But not to worry, Garza is now aware of this and thinks, on balance, these pitches were not a good idea. The thing that is bothersome, however, is how he was even allowed to throw these pitches in the first place. I had always supposed that the catcher was in control of the game, kind of like in Bull Durham when Crash Davis comes out and tells Nuke that he is doing the thinking, not Nuke.
The point here is not to just make a joke, but to note that the Cubs decline is coincidental to the spate of injuries to all the Cubs legitimate catchers. Not that Soto, Castillo, and Clevinger are in Yadier Molina's league, but the catcher is so important in controlling the game, and it just seems the Cubs are sadly deficient in this respect. For example, the Marmol situation. Sure, he doesn't like to throw his fastball, but somebody has to make him do it, and that duty, I'm afraid, belongs to the catcher.
The other instance of terminal dumbness has to do with the lineup. I had some hopes when Epstein and Hoyer took over that we would see some change of philosophy here, but unfortunately we got Dale Sveum at the helm. Sveum seems sadly out of step with what one supposed was to be the prevailing approach of the front office.
I don't want to beat this to death, but somebody is supposed to be looking at numbers. Here's an interesting set of numbers. The Cubs have one of the worst batting averages against left-handed pitching in all of baseball. They invariably start a right-handed hitting lineup against lefties. Their record this year is 1-9. Draw your own conclusions.
The thing is that when he explains all this, Sveum sounds like a replay of Quade who sounded like a replay of Lou Piniella. I don't expect this team to contend, but you can at least pretend you are able to think your way out of a paper bag. Right-handed hitters are supposed to have an advantage against left-handed pitching. Cubs right-handed hitters, however, clearly do not. Time to stop pretending that a superficial generalization has anything to do with real world performance and maybe dig a little deeper.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Has Sveum Lost the Team Already?
Listening to some post-game analysis and browsing through some blogs and on-line sites, it is apparent some people are wondering whether the Cubs manager has just lost the team this early in his career. He has certainly lost the fans, and I have to say it is just possible he has lost the team as well. If so, it is something of an achievement. It took Lou Piniella two and one-half years, and Quade three months or so if you count his audition in 2010. Two months might be some kind of record.
The Cubs lost their twelfth in a row today at Pittsburgh and there were precious signs of life on the bench, in the field, and in Sveum's head. Once again, the anemic right-handed lineup that cannot hit left-handed pitching. With predicable results. Another great throw by Matt Garza on the second play of the game. OK, I could go on and on.
Here's the thing, though, this team was approaching respectability when the wheels came off in St. Louis on May 17. Paul Maholm pitched badly in this start, but the Cubs came back to tie the game at 6 going to the bottom of the ninth. The Cubs put Rafael Dolis, who had then for some unaccountable reason been designated the closer, in to pitch.
Matt Holliday singled. After Dolis struck out Craig, Freese grounded out to Stewart, but Holliday advanced to second base. Sveum could have and should have walked Molina intentionally. Instead he decided to pitch to him. He moved the second baseman Barney over toward the middle of the infield. Molina hit a sharp grounder directly to the spot that Barney had vacated. Barney got a glove on it but it got by him and the game was over.
They haven't won since, nor have they shown much interest in winning. Sveum has avowed that he would have made the same move again, that he wasn't going to think about the what-ifs, and so on. He didn't linger on about thinking and analyzing decisions. What happened, happened.
OK, I can see the positioning move being unlucky. What I can't see is pitching to Molina, which even Brenly avowed at the time was dumb. I don't have any evidence of this, but the players can see this stuff too and it is not too far-fetched for them to make the logical conclusion that their leader is more or less brainless. That and the fact that this team is built to lose and you get a twelve game losing streak.
The Cubs lost their twelfth in a row today at Pittsburgh and there were precious signs of life on the bench, in the field, and in Sveum's head. Once again, the anemic right-handed lineup that cannot hit left-handed pitching. With predicable results. Another great throw by Matt Garza on the second play of the game. OK, I could go on and on.
Here's the thing, though, this team was approaching respectability when the wheels came off in St. Louis on May 17. Paul Maholm pitched badly in this start, but the Cubs came back to tie the game at 6 going to the bottom of the ninth. The Cubs put Rafael Dolis, who had then for some unaccountable reason been designated the closer, in to pitch.
Matt Holliday singled. After Dolis struck out Craig, Freese grounded out to Stewart, but Holliday advanced to second base. Sveum could have and should have walked Molina intentionally. Instead he decided to pitch to him. He moved the second baseman Barney over toward the middle of the infield. Molina hit a sharp grounder directly to the spot that Barney had vacated. Barney got a glove on it but it got by him and the game was over.
They haven't won since, nor have they shown much interest in winning. Sveum has avowed that he would have made the same move again, that he wasn't going to think about the what-ifs, and so on. He didn't linger on about thinking and analyzing decisions. What happened, happened.
OK, I can see the positioning move being unlucky. What I can't see is pitching to Molina, which even Brenly avowed at the time was dumb. I don't have any evidence of this, but the players can see this stuff too and it is not too far-fetched for them to make the logical conclusion that their leader is more or less brainless. That and the fact that this team is built to lose and you get a twelve game losing streak.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Ten and Counting
The Cubs losing streak hit ten yesterday night. The Pirates, who make rather a specialty of not scoring runs at all, managed one run off Ryan Dempster. Actually, the run scored early in the game rather fittingly off a muffed double play grounder straight at Ryan Dempster, which, of course, he messed up, managing finally to get one out on the play.
There are three things that have characterized this latest streak. One is the fact that Cubs pitchers simply cannot field their position and make routine plays when they count. I don't know what it is, but it is getting a little tiresome to watch Matt Garza throw wildly to first or Ryan Dempster get the ball stuck in his glove every time he fields a ground ball.
The Cubs tried desperately to give the Pirates more chances, including two errors by the seemingly useless Adrian Cardenas, but their opponents resolutely refused to take advantage.
The second trend here is, of course, the lack of timely hitting. For a while, when LaHair was not mired in a terrible slump, the Cubs could count on getting an intelligent at-bat from at least one player. It is not that the Cubs don't get men on base, although they could get more men on base if they were more patient. They had twelve base-runners last night and left eleven on base. The other, Joe Mather, was picked off.
What happens is this. Once they get a runner on base, they change their whole approach. The result is consistent failure. Last night, they were 0 for 12 with runners in scoring position. The thing is that this seems to be something of a Cubs trademark. No matter who is on the team and who is playing, sooner or later, you get the same result. Are these guys just dumb or what? Anyway, go figure. It's just there and it seems to be contagious.
The third consistent feature of the streak is strategy. This obviously has to do with what happens when men get on base. The obvious solution, for Sveum, is to give up an out. What you are saying there is that you do not trust your hitter to put the ball in play as either a base hit or a well-directed grounder. The obvious question and the obvious message is, why, then, is this guy batting?
Last night, the Cubs got a runner on base in the top of the ninth. Unfortunately, Koyie Hill was due up. Hill, is, of course, an automatic out. So Sveum has Hill bunt into a force play. Johnson, then, comes up and delivers a hit to right field. Now the question arises, why wasn't Johnson pinch-hitting for Hill with the Pirates closer on the ropes? Not that it mattered, as DeJesus and Castro struck out to end the game.
It goes a little deeper than just inning management, though. At another level, there simply is very little thought given to the batting order. I won't even mention the infamous all right-handed lineup that is guaranteed not to score runs ever. But last night, we got the long-awaited shuffle that moved Castro out of the #3 spot. Castro hit second, Mather third. Why Mather would hit third is a matter of some conjecture, but I suppose it beats a blank. Campana, who is a threat if he manages to get on base - and he actually gets on base more often than Castro - was promptly benched. This is probably because Stewart is hurt and Cardenas, not Mather, was slotted to play third.
Having Campana in the lineup would have exceeded the unwritten Sveum rule that, if possible, everyone playing against a lefty should bat right-handed, whereas, one can never have more than four left-handed hitters in the lineup against a right-hander, presumably to assure balance.
Now I know it is hard to fill out a lineup card with placeholders, which is essentially what the Cubs team is right now. And that is especially hard when all three of your major league catchers are hurt. But there needs to be some thought involved. One suggestion might be to hit Campana first on the odd chance he can get on base. DeJesus is patient enough to give him a chance to steal. I suppose you could have Mather hit third if you wanted, but Castro should drop down to sixth where he might relax and also provide some protection for Soriano when he doesn't make the third out. Barney could bat seventh, after which it is pretty much nothing until one of the regular catchers can come back. Just a thought, in any case.
There are three things that have characterized this latest streak. One is the fact that Cubs pitchers simply cannot field their position and make routine plays when they count. I don't know what it is, but it is getting a little tiresome to watch Matt Garza throw wildly to first or Ryan Dempster get the ball stuck in his glove every time he fields a ground ball.
The Cubs tried desperately to give the Pirates more chances, including two errors by the seemingly useless Adrian Cardenas, but their opponents resolutely refused to take advantage.
The second trend here is, of course, the lack of timely hitting. For a while, when LaHair was not mired in a terrible slump, the Cubs could count on getting an intelligent at-bat from at least one player. It is not that the Cubs don't get men on base, although they could get more men on base if they were more patient. They had twelve base-runners last night and left eleven on base. The other, Joe Mather, was picked off.
What happens is this. Once they get a runner on base, they change their whole approach. The result is consistent failure. Last night, they were 0 for 12 with runners in scoring position. The thing is that this seems to be something of a Cubs trademark. No matter who is on the team and who is playing, sooner or later, you get the same result. Are these guys just dumb or what? Anyway, go figure. It's just there and it seems to be contagious.
The third consistent feature of the streak is strategy. This obviously has to do with what happens when men get on base. The obvious solution, for Sveum, is to give up an out. What you are saying there is that you do not trust your hitter to put the ball in play as either a base hit or a well-directed grounder. The obvious question and the obvious message is, why, then, is this guy batting?
Last night, the Cubs got a runner on base in the top of the ninth. Unfortunately, Koyie Hill was due up. Hill, is, of course, an automatic out. So Sveum has Hill bunt into a force play. Johnson, then, comes up and delivers a hit to right field. Now the question arises, why wasn't Johnson pinch-hitting for Hill with the Pirates closer on the ropes? Not that it mattered, as DeJesus and Castro struck out to end the game.
It goes a little deeper than just inning management, though. At another level, there simply is very little thought given to the batting order. I won't even mention the infamous all right-handed lineup that is guaranteed not to score runs ever. But last night, we got the long-awaited shuffle that moved Castro out of the #3 spot. Castro hit second, Mather third. Why Mather would hit third is a matter of some conjecture, but I suppose it beats a blank. Campana, who is a threat if he manages to get on base - and he actually gets on base more often than Castro - was promptly benched. This is probably because Stewart is hurt and Cardenas, not Mather, was slotted to play third.
Having Campana in the lineup would have exceeded the unwritten Sveum rule that, if possible, everyone playing against a lefty should bat right-handed, whereas, one can never have more than four left-handed hitters in the lineup against a right-hander, presumably to assure balance.
Now I know it is hard to fill out a lineup card with placeholders, which is essentially what the Cubs team is right now. And that is especially hard when all three of your major league catchers are hurt. But there needs to be some thought involved. One suggestion might be to hit Campana first on the odd chance he can get on base. DeJesus is patient enough to give him a chance to steal. I suppose you could have Mather hit third if you wanted, but Castro should drop down to sixth where he might relax and also provide some protection for Soriano when he doesn't make the third out. Barney could bat seventh, after which it is pretty much nothing until one of the regular catchers can come back. Just a thought, in any case.
Monday, May 21, 2012
A Really Bad Homestand
The Cubs lost all five games at home last week, as well as the finale of a two-game set in St. Louis. What's wrong?
Well, first off, their pitching came down to Earth and their defense disintegrated. And their bullpen is just a shambles in need of a total makeover. But really what's wrong is they don't score runs. They don't score runs because they are, by and large, an impatient team at the plate that swings at pitcher's pitches.
This isn't likely to change until there are more personnel changes. It is also unlikely to change so long as Rudy Jaramillo is their hitting coach. Look at the record. Their run production has steadily declined since he was hired. Also, the Rangers run production and OBP has steadily increased since he left the team. This guy is sadly overrated.
Dale Sveum is thinking about shuffling the lineup. Good luck with that if he isn't willing to face some unpleasant truths. One is that you have to stop playing for one run and start playing for a big inning. This means taking pitches and not bunting.
A couple of changes they could make right now. Get Campana out of the #2 spot. He never takes pitches and he seems to bunt every other time at bat. This is good if he is bunting for a hit, but he is not very good at it. Even if he gets on - and he is almost a sure thing to steal - he always runs and everybody knows it. If he is in the lineup, he needs a patient hitter behind him who will give him the opportunity to steal. That hitter is not Starlin Castro who almost never takes a pitch with a runner on base. Campana, to my mind, doesn't get on base enough to bat high up in the order. However, if you are going to hit him up there, he should be flipped with DeJesus who will take pitches.
I was of two minds about the experiment of batting Castro third. Now I'm convinced it is a big mistake. Castro is not learning in the position. I'm afraid the pressure of hitting third is just aggravating his already over-aggressive tendencies. As of today, Castro is batting .311 with an OBP of .324. That OBP is just terrible. He has four walks all year, which means he is on a pace to walk fewer than twenty times all season.
Castro has 25 RBI, but that doesn't mean that much simply because he has had a lot of opportunities to hit with men on base, and also, because he has shown very limited power so far this season, his style right now is not at all suited to the #3 hole. Another telling factor is how often he makes the final out of the inning and forces LaHair, a legitimate power threat, to lead off an inning.
After the #4 slot, the Cubs have pretty much a series of automatic outs, at least until they get back one or two of their injured catchers. Stewart and Barney can sometimes be tough outs with men on base, but they haven't really consistently produced down in the order.
There probably isn't a solution to these problems until the Cubs feel their best prospects, Rizzo and Jackson, are ready. I'd like to see more of Joe Mather either at 3B or in CF. Rizzo would be a natural #3 hitter. Maybe they should move LaHair up and drop Castro down in the order to take some pressure off.
It will be interesting to see if Sveum does shake up the lineup and it will offer some insight into how he is thinking or whether he is thinking at all.
Well, first off, their pitching came down to Earth and their defense disintegrated. And their bullpen is just a shambles in need of a total makeover. But really what's wrong is they don't score runs. They don't score runs because they are, by and large, an impatient team at the plate that swings at pitcher's pitches.
This isn't likely to change until there are more personnel changes. It is also unlikely to change so long as Rudy Jaramillo is their hitting coach. Look at the record. Their run production has steadily declined since he was hired. Also, the Rangers run production and OBP has steadily increased since he left the team. This guy is sadly overrated.
Dale Sveum is thinking about shuffling the lineup. Good luck with that if he isn't willing to face some unpleasant truths. One is that you have to stop playing for one run and start playing for a big inning. This means taking pitches and not bunting.
A couple of changes they could make right now. Get Campana out of the #2 spot. He never takes pitches and he seems to bunt every other time at bat. This is good if he is bunting for a hit, but he is not very good at it. Even if he gets on - and he is almost a sure thing to steal - he always runs and everybody knows it. If he is in the lineup, he needs a patient hitter behind him who will give him the opportunity to steal. That hitter is not Starlin Castro who almost never takes a pitch with a runner on base. Campana, to my mind, doesn't get on base enough to bat high up in the order. However, if you are going to hit him up there, he should be flipped with DeJesus who will take pitches.
I was of two minds about the experiment of batting Castro third. Now I'm convinced it is a big mistake. Castro is not learning in the position. I'm afraid the pressure of hitting third is just aggravating his already over-aggressive tendencies. As of today, Castro is batting .311 with an OBP of .324. That OBP is just terrible. He has four walks all year, which means he is on a pace to walk fewer than twenty times all season.
Castro has 25 RBI, but that doesn't mean that much simply because he has had a lot of opportunities to hit with men on base, and also, because he has shown very limited power so far this season, his style right now is not at all suited to the #3 hole. Another telling factor is how often he makes the final out of the inning and forces LaHair, a legitimate power threat, to lead off an inning.
After the #4 slot, the Cubs have pretty much a series of automatic outs, at least until they get back one or two of their injured catchers. Stewart and Barney can sometimes be tough outs with men on base, but they haven't really consistently produced down in the order.
There probably isn't a solution to these problems until the Cubs feel their best prospects, Rizzo and Jackson, are ready. I'd like to see more of Joe Mather either at 3B or in CF. Rizzo would be a natural #3 hitter. Maybe they should move LaHair up and drop Castro down in the order to take some pressure off.
It will be interesting to see if Sveum does shake up the lineup and it will offer some insight into how he is thinking or whether he is thinking at all.
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Kerry Wood
I have to confess that I have never understood the Kerry Wood phenomenon among Cubs fans. I mean, Wood seems like a nice guy and a talented pitcher who, largely because of injuries and colossal mismanagement of his career by the Cubs organization, never really fulfilled his potential.
Some of the idolatry was no doubt the result of Wood's abbreviated rookie year, especially the Kid-K game where he struck out 20 Astros in a single game. That year Wood was hurt toward mid-season. One of the dumbest things the Cubs and Wood did was to try to come back at the end of the season and for the playoffs. He aggravated his injuries and had to have reconstructive elbow surgery. As a result, he missed all of the 1999 season.
After that, the magic was really gone. He came back to pitch pretty well for bad teams in 2001 and 2002, then very well for a good team in 2003. After that, he was hurt again, tried to come back again, etc. This time, after numerous tentative diagnoses, it turned out to be his shoulder. He made another comeback, this time as a reliever and had a decent season in 2008 as the Cubs closer.
For what he accomplished - and I grant you that he had to overcome a lot of adversity - Wood was overpaid for most of his career. He cashed in on a free agent deal with Cleveland in 2009, but he was plagued by injuries again. In his career away from Chicago, he had about a month with the Yankees in 2010 when he was a dominant setup guy. That's about it. Unfortunately in his Yankees stint, he fell in love with the cut fastball and never stopped throwing it to the detriment of his live fastball and excellent curve.
He came back to the Cubs on a discount deal for 2011. You cannot really say he was anywhere near consistently effective, on and off the DL, finally knee surgery in September.
This year, for reasons known only to Ricketts and Epstein, Wood was brought back to town in a blatant PR stunt at the Cubs convention. Once the season started, Wood was just awful.
I have to say I was a little surprised that Wood threw in the towel. Maybe there was a quid pro quo that if things didn't work, the team would provide him some kind of sinecure if he agreed to leave graciously. Whatever it was, he decided to call it quits.
His departure, to my mind, smacked of the blatant PR mania that has dominated his career since his 2011 return. I don't know what the point was in pitching to one more hitter in one more game. It says more about the Cubs organization and the Cubs fans than it does about Wood's character or career.
Though maybe it does. It smacks not a little of ego to do a final curtain call. After his morning announcement, it was obvious that the only person who had his head in the game they incidentally played against the White Sox was Jeff Samardzija. The Cubs saw all of 93 pitches all afternoon from four White Sox pitchers. Everybody was itching to get into the media room for the post-game.
Wood, though, has always been lionized by the Chicago media and Cubs fans. As I noted earlier, this says something more about that media and those fans than it does about their fallen heroes. What it mainly says is that personality, sometimes an undeserved reputation, and effort count for more in their eyes than results.
The Cubs had the most dominant starting pitching in a long time in 2003. Wood pitched really well, maybe not as well as he did in 1998, but he was good. Mark Prior had a totally dominant season, and Carlos Zambrano was just starting to flash signs of his future stardom. Plus they had Matt Clement as their #4 starter.
Of course, it all went awry. For Cubs fans and media, Mark Prior became a selfish wuss when he complained about arm and shoulder trouble. His career was essentially over the next year and he got precious sympathy for it. Zambrano became a dominant force through several seasons, but, for the fans and media, his considerable abilities were always overshadowed by his temperament. Arguably, he was a better pitcher than the other two members of that indomitable trio. Sadly, he was pretty much run out of town.
Wood, however, endured, ceaselessly reinventing himself and shining like some sort of valorous but doomed knight in the eyes of Cubs faithful. Sadly for him. Sadly for us all.
Some of the idolatry was no doubt the result of Wood's abbreviated rookie year, especially the Kid-K game where he struck out 20 Astros in a single game. That year Wood was hurt toward mid-season. One of the dumbest things the Cubs and Wood did was to try to come back at the end of the season and for the playoffs. He aggravated his injuries and had to have reconstructive elbow surgery. As a result, he missed all of the 1999 season.
After that, the magic was really gone. He came back to pitch pretty well for bad teams in 2001 and 2002, then very well for a good team in 2003. After that, he was hurt again, tried to come back again, etc. This time, after numerous tentative diagnoses, it turned out to be his shoulder. He made another comeback, this time as a reliever and had a decent season in 2008 as the Cubs closer.
For what he accomplished - and I grant you that he had to overcome a lot of adversity - Wood was overpaid for most of his career. He cashed in on a free agent deal with Cleveland in 2009, but he was plagued by injuries again. In his career away from Chicago, he had about a month with the Yankees in 2010 when he was a dominant setup guy. That's about it. Unfortunately in his Yankees stint, he fell in love with the cut fastball and never stopped throwing it to the detriment of his live fastball and excellent curve.
He came back to the Cubs on a discount deal for 2011. You cannot really say he was anywhere near consistently effective, on and off the DL, finally knee surgery in September.
This year, for reasons known only to Ricketts and Epstein, Wood was brought back to town in a blatant PR stunt at the Cubs convention. Once the season started, Wood was just awful.
I have to say I was a little surprised that Wood threw in the towel. Maybe there was a quid pro quo that if things didn't work, the team would provide him some kind of sinecure if he agreed to leave graciously. Whatever it was, he decided to call it quits.
His departure, to my mind, smacked of the blatant PR mania that has dominated his career since his 2011 return. I don't know what the point was in pitching to one more hitter in one more game. It says more about the Cubs organization and the Cubs fans than it does about Wood's character or career.
Though maybe it does. It smacks not a little of ego to do a final curtain call. After his morning announcement, it was obvious that the only person who had his head in the game they incidentally played against the White Sox was Jeff Samardzija. The Cubs saw all of 93 pitches all afternoon from four White Sox pitchers. Everybody was itching to get into the media room for the post-game.
Wood, though, has always been lionized by the Chicago media and Cubs fans. As I noted earlier, this says something more about that media and those fans than it does about their fallen heroes. What it mainly says is that personality, sometimes an undeserved reputation, and effort count for more in their eyes than results.
The Cubs had the most dominant starting pitching in a long time in 2003. Wood pitched really well, maybe not as well as he did in 1998, but he was good. Mark Prior had a totally dominant season, and Carlos Zambrano was just starting to flash signs of his future stardom. Plus they had Matt Clement as their #4 starter.
Of course, it all went awry. For Cubs fans and media, Mark Prior became a selfish wuss when he complained about arm and shoulder trouble. His career was essentially over the next year and he got precious sympathy for it. Zambrano became a dominant force through several seasons, but, for the fans and media, his considerable abilities were always overshadowed by his temperament. Arguably, he was a better pitcher than the other two members of that indomitable trio. Sadly, he was pretty much run out of town.
Wood, however, endured, ceaselessly reinventing himself and shining like some sort of valorous but doomed knight in the eyes of Cubs faithful. Sadly for him. Sadly for us all.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
What's with the Bunts Already?
I went on a bit of a diatribe in my last post about sacrifices and how useless they generally are in most game situations.
The Cubs have won two of their last three games since that post. One, the final in the Brewers series, was pretty much of a blowout. The other two were tighter games in which managerial strategy played a bigger role.
On Monday night against the Cardinals, Sveum had the Cubs bunting away and, as usual, bad things happened even though the Cubs eventually posted single runs in each inning to put away the game.
In the eighth inning, DeJesus led off with a single. Campana beat out a sacrifice attempt to put runners at first and second. Sveum promptly had his #3 hitter Castro bunt into a double play. Now not only did this strategy result in failure, but it made no sense at all. Had Castro succeeded, there would have been men at second and third and the Cardinals would have walked Bryan LaHair intentionally. Which they did anyway. The Cubs got lucky when Alfonso Soriano managed to single home the lead run.
Not satisfied with the strategy's potentially harmful results in the eighth inning, Sveum went back to the well in the ninth. Soto led off by getting hit by a pitch. Barney then attempted a sacrifice bunt and got lucky when the Cards pitcher messed up the throw. So Mather comes up and also bunts into another potential double play that Freese messes up by throwing wildly to first, plating an insurance run.
The point is that in the late innings, Sveum just seems to be on automatic pilot and his strategy makes no sense whatsoever. On Tuesday, Sveum went to the lifer playbook, choosing to pitch to Yadier Molina with a runner in scoring position and first base open in a tie game. Presumably this was because a left-handed hitter, Carpenter was on deck. OK, Carpenter hit a homer in his previous at-bat, incidentally off a left-handed pitcher, James Russell. But he is a rookie. Molina, on the other hand, is probably one of the best clutch hitters in all of baseball. So naturally the Cubs lose.
I don't mean to pick on Sveum exclusively here, but I had rather expected more from Epstein and co. in choosing him. They know very well that bunts don't make any sense most of the time. The Red Sox bunted only 22 times last year, 19 the year before. The last time they bunted more than 30 times was 2000. In the championship season of 2004, they had only 12 sacrifice bunts, two by pitchers in inter-league games.
So you have got to wonder what's going on here, and when it is going to change.
The Cubs have won two of their last three games since that post. One, the final in the Brewers series, was pretty much of a blowout. The other two were tighter games in which managerial strategy played a bigger role.
On Monday night against the Cardinals, Sveum had the Cubs bunting away and, as usual, bad things happened even though the Cubs eventually posted single runs in each inning to put away the game.
In the eighth inning, DeJesus led off with a single. Campana beat out a sacrifice attempt to put runners at first and second. Sveum promptly had his #3 hitter Castro bunt into a double play. Now not only did this strategy result in failure, but it made no sense at all. Had Castro succeeded, there would have been men at second and third and the Cardinals would have walked Bryan LaHair intentionally. Which they did anyway. The Cubs got lucky when Alfonso Soriano managed to single home the lead run.
Not satisfied with the strategy's potentially harmful results in the eighth inning, Sveum went back to the well in the ninth. Soto led off by getting hit by a pitch. Barney then attempted a sacrifice bunt and got lucky when the Cards pitcher messed up the throw. So Mather comes up and also bunts into another potential double play that Freese messes up by throwing wildly to first, plating an insurance run.
The point is that in the late innings, Sveum just seems to be on automatic pilot and his strategy makes no sense whatsoever. On Tuesday, Sveum went to the lifer playbook, choosing to pitch to Yadier Molina with a runner in scoring position and first base open in a tie game. Presumably this was because a left-handed hitter, Carpenter was on deck. OK, Carpenter hit a homer in his previous at-bat, incidentally off a left-handed pitcher, James Russell. But he is a rookie. Molina, on the other hand, is probably one of the best clutch hitters in all of baseball. So naturally the Cubs lose.
I don't mean to pick on Sveum exclusively here, but I had rather expected more from Epstein and co. in choosing him. They know very well that bunts don't make any sense most of the time. The Red Sox bunted only 22 times last year, 19 the year before. The last time they bunted more than 30 times was 2000. In the championship season of 2004, they had only 12 sacrifice bunts, two by pitchers in inter-league games.
So you have got to wonder what's going on here, and when it is going to change.
Saturday, May 12, 2012
0 for Milwaukee
Don't know when the Cubs last won in Milwaukee, but it has been a while. Before they started to really stink in 2009, the Cubs used to dominate in Milwaukee and people used to call Miller Park Wrigley Field North. So it goes.
Anyway, Saturday's game can be summed up in two words, Chris Volstad. As we have noted before in these pages, this guy really stinks. Lots of people think something can be done to tweak his style and stuff so that he can recover his form. Listen, this guy has no form to recover. He has always been a mediocre pitcher.
I know everyone says the Cubs still had to get rid of Zambrano, but I still regard trading Z and resigning Wood as major mistakes, irrational moves that maybe, to give Epstein and Co. the benefit of the doubt, were dictated by ownership. I certainly hope so. I mean, Zambrano was a powder keg and his fastball had slipped, but the thing is, he knows how to pitch and he has made adjustments. His ERA in Miami, despite some tough luck getting games blown by Heath Bell, is under 2.00. Enough said.
Friday's game was a winnable game for the Cubs and they were a little unlucky to lose it after 13 innings. Marmol had two strikes on Hart before he had to be removed in favor of Bowden who promptly blew the lead. Still, the Cubs came back to take the lead again before the Hart homer in the ninth tied it.
After that things just got strange. I guess this game was another illustration of how baseball lifers can tie themselves in knots with their "strategies". After the game, both managers bemoaned the fact that had their players just been able to execute a simple, fundamental sacrifice, etc. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The sacrifice bunt is one of the dumbest and overused plays in baseball. It almost never makes sense and you can prove this statistically. Maybe it makes sense in the late innings when you want to keep your starter in the game. Maybe.
Anyway, when you think about it, it really makes no sense in an extra inning game for the visiting team. You have three outs then before the game passes out of your control. The home team, on the other hand, has the same three outs, but if they fail to score, the game just extends another inning. Under these circumstances, why would you want to give away one of the three precious outs that stand between you and defeat?
So in almost every frame after the ninth, each team put the leadoff man on base and proceeded to haplessly fail to bunt him over. In one case, Brenly remarked that it was just impossible for Ian Stewart to succeed in bunting the runners over (in this case, men at first and second) given the defense the Brewers had deployed even if he laid down a perfect bunt. Of course, Stewart laid down a perfect bunt that resulted in a force out at third base.
The question is why managers consistently manage this way. I think it is really a matter partly of stupidity and partly of fear. These guys have drilled into their heads the idea that in extra innings you play for one run. Fine. But they also are haunted by the idea of reading in the papers the next day about how if they had just bunted the guy over in the top of the inning, they would have given their team a chance to win, and, now look what happened, they didn't bunt and then the other guys won it in the bottom of the inning, etc.
So, last night the Brewers won it in the bottom of the thirteenth when Castillo hit the first two Milwaukee batters, bringing up Aramis Ramirez who cannot bunt and never bunts. So Ramirez gets a single and Hart wins it with a grounder through a drawn-in infield. Nobody remarks on how this inning played completely against the strategy adopted by both managers in the five predecing half-innings, instead remarking how unfortunate it was nobody could lay down a sacrifice earlier which might have blah, blah, blah. Go figure.
Anyway, Saturday's game can be summed up in two words, Chris Volstad. As we have noted before in these pages, this guy really stinks. Lots of people think something can be done to tweak his style and stuff so that he can recover his form. Listen, this guy has no form to recover. He has always been a mediocre pitcher.
I know everyone says the Cubs still had to get rid of Zambrano, but I still regard trading Z and resigning Wood as major mistakes, irrational moves that maybe, to give Epstein and Co. the benefit of the doubt, were dictated by ownership. I certainly hope so. I mean, Zambrano was a powder keg and his fastball had slipped, but the thing is, he knows how to pitch and he has made adjustments. His ERA in Miami, despite some tough luck getting games blown by Heath Bell, is under 2.00. Enough said.
Friday's game was a winnable game for the Cubs and they were a little unlucky to lose it after 13 innings. Marmol had two strikes on Hart before he had to be removed in favor of Bowden who promptly blew the lead. Still, the Cubs came back to take the lead again before the Hart homer in the ninth tied it.
After that things just got strange. I guess this game was another illustration of how baseball lifers can tie themselves in knots with their "strategies". After the game, both managers bemoaned the fact that had their players just been able to execute a simple, fundamental sacrifice, etc. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The sacrifice bunt is one of the dumbest and overused plays in baseball. It almost never makes sense and you can prove this statistically. Maybe it makes sense in the late innings when you want to keep your starter in the game. Maybe.
Anyway, when you think about it, it really makes no sense in an extra inning game for the visiting team. You have three outs then before the game passes out of your control. The home team, on the other hand, has the same three outs, but if they fail to score, the game just extends another inning. Under these circumstances, why would you want to give away one of the three precious outs that stand between you and defeat?
So in almost every frame after the ninth, each team put the leadoff man on base and proceeded to haplessly fail to bunt him over. In one case, Brenly remarked that it was just impossible for Ian Stewart to succeed in bunting the runners over (in this case, men at first and second) given the defense the Brewers had deployed even if he laid down a perfect bunt. Of course, Stewart laid down a perfect bunt that resulted in a force out at third base.
The question is why managers consistently manage this way. I think it is really a matter partly of stupidity and partly of fear. These guys have drilled into their heads the idea that in extra innings you play for one run. Fine. But they also are haunted by the idea of reading in the papers the next day about how if they had just bunted the guy over in the top of the inning, they would have given their team a chance to win, and, now look what happened, they didn't bunt and then the other guys won it in the bottom of the inning, etc.
So, last night the Brewers won it in the bottom of the thirteenth when Castillo hit the first two Milwaukee batters, bringing up Aramis Ramirez who cannot bunt and never bunts. So Ramirez gets a single and Hart wins it with a grounder through a drawn-in infield. Nobody remarks on how this inning played completely against the strategy adopted by both managers in the five predecing half-innings, instead remarking how unfortunate it was nobody could lay down a sacrifice earlier which might have blah, blah, blah. Go figure.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Braves Series
The Cubs continued to play really good baseball this week. The pitching and defense is carrying the team right now. With the exception of a single miserable inning turned in by Kerry Wood on Tuesday, the Cubs completely shut down the Braves.
I saw a piece that describes the Cubs advanced scouting system that goes some way towards explaining the defensive resurgence. The Cubs employ two advance scouts who report back on the teams they are due to oppose. Evidently these guys know what they are doing because the Cubs are positioning their players a lot better and it is paying off in key plays that are saving games, like the one Barney made Wednesday to rob Chipper Jones.
The Cubs were always considered cheap and backward in their scouting techniques and practices. Maybe this is evidence of real progress from the new regime. Also evidence that Sveum is not afraid to do something new.
On the subject of Sveum, I wish however that he or his coaches would start managing the game with the idea that Bryan LaHair is in the lineup and that he is a pretty good player. I can't even count how many times Starlin Castro has made the last out on the bases recently. On Wednesday, Castro hit a triple down the right field line in a scoreless tie, but was out by a long ways going for the inside-the-park home run.
Right now Castro is a terrific natural hitter. He needs to learn how to hit, though, in certain situations. Notably with men on base and two outs. He is very antsy then and just seems to let the pitcher dictate his at-bat. Even though he is a rookie, LaHair, who is in general a more disciplined hitter, looks more comfortable in these spots.
Castro has a lot of speed, but he is not really a good base-runner yet. This is going to come with experience, but right now it seems to me the Cubs take too many chances with him on the bases and lots of times it costs them runs. This is not a team that is going to score much anyway.
There is quite a controversy about Kerry Wood since his inauspicious return from the DL. I'm on the record as pretty much disapproving of his signing this spring. Wood was returned more or less as a mascot and for sentimental reasons, more likely than not at the insistence of Tom Ricketts, as it is not a Theo Epstein type move.
Even when he is going well, Wood needs to be used very sparingly because he is a walking arsenal of potential injuries, from his shoulder to his back to his knee to his perennial blisters. Wood is a long way removed from his glory days. Actually, even when he was a dominant pitcher in his early days, Wood was a peculiarity among power pitchers in that he only threw his fastball about 60% of the time. He had a great slider and a great curve and these were his out pitches.
I had occasion to look at Fangraphs the other day and this one thing really stood out. Wood hasn't thrown a slider since 2008. I'm sure it has got to do with his mechanics and not wanting to stress his shoulder and all that or maybe he just can't control it anymore. He has replaced that pitch with a cut fastball that he really doesn't consistently command. When he gets control of this pitch, he can deliver a small number of effective innings, usually around July or August after he has recovered from his annual back and blister problems.
I like Kerry Wood and he has had a gutsy career, but it is time to call it quits and his presence on the Cubs roster - though we are stuck with him because he will never be released and he will never quit - is an expensive and sentimental luxury. I suppose his temperamental outburst Tuesday night indicates he is more aware of his situation than he cares to admit to himself.
I saw a piece that describes the Cubs advanced scouting system that goes some way towards explaining the defensive resurgence. The Cubs employ two advance scouts who report back on the teams they are due to oppose. Evidently these guys know what they are doing because the Cubs are positioning their players a lot better and it is paying off in key plays that are saving games, like the one Barney made Wednesday to rob Chipper Jones.
The Cubs were always considered cheap and backward in their scouting techniques and practices. Maybe this is evidence of real progress from the new regime. Also evidence that Sveum is not afraid to do something new.
On the subject of Sveum, I wish however that he or his coaches would start managing the game with the idea that Bryan LaHair is in the lineup and that he is a pretty good player. I can't even count how many times Starlin Castro has made the last out on the bases recently. On Wednesday, Castro hit a triple down the right field line in a scoreless tie, but was out by a long ways going for the inside-the-park home run.
Right now Castro is a terrific natural hitter. He needs to learn how to hit, though, in certain situations. Notably with men on base and two outs. He is very antsy then and just seems to let the pitcher dictate his at-bat. Even though he is a rookie, LaHair, who is in general a more disciplined hitter, looks more comfortable in these spots.
Castro has a lot of speed, but he is not really a good base-runner yet. This is going to come with experience, but right now it seems to me the Cubs take too many chances with him on the bases and lots of times it costs them runs. This is not a team that is going to score much anyway.
There is quite a controversy about Kerry Wood since his inauspicious return from the DL. I'm on the record as pretty much disapproving of his signing this spring. Wood was returned more or less as a mascot and for sentimental reasons, more likely than not at the insistence of Tom Ricketts, as it is not a Theo Epstein type move.
Even when he is going well, Wood needs to be used very sparingly because he is a walking arsenal of potential injuries, from his shoulder to his back to his knee to his perennial blisters. Wood is a long way removed from his glory days. Actually, even when he was a dominant pitcher in his early days, Wood was a peculiarity among power pitchers in that he only threw his fastball about 60% of the time. He had a great slider and a great curve and these were his out pitches.
I had occasion to look at Fangraphs the other day and this one thing really stood out. Wood hasn't thrown a slider since 2008. I'm sure it has got to do with his mechanics and not wanting to stress his shoulder and all that or maybe he just can't control it anymore. He has replaced that pitch with a cut fastball that he really doesn't consistently command. When he gets control of this pitch, he can deliver a small number of effective innings, usually around July or August after he has recovered from his annual back and blister problems.
I like Kerry Wood and he has had a gutsy career, but it is time to call it quits and his presence on the Cubs roster - though we are stuck with him because he will never be released and he will never quit - is an expensive and sentimental luxury. I suppose his temperamental outburst Tuesday night indicates he is more aware of his situation than he cares to admit to himself.
Monday, May 7, 2012
The Dodgers Series
The Cubs had a good run against the Dodgers. They won the first game behind Paul Maholm who turned in another good start. On Saturday, of course, Volstad turned in his predictably lousy start and the Cubs fell to the Dodgers in lackluster fashion.
I had my misgivings about Travis Wood in the rubber game, but after a little bit of a shaky start, he settled in to keep the Cubs in the game through six innings. Wood presents an interesting problem for the Cubs. He clearly has a lot more upside than the awful Volstad and I rather thought the Cubs might keep him around and either demote or try to dump Volstad, but no such luck. I read this morning that Wood had been sent back down in favor of calling up the reserve infielder Cardenas to replace the genuinely useless Blake DeWitt.
Back to Sunday's game, which had the sleepy quality of a game played late on a lazy, hazy afternoon under a shadowy light that was neither day or night. Kind of dreamy in a way and not without a certain enchanted quality.
The Cubs seemed determined most of the way it give it up with some oddly aggressive base-running (a less charitable reviewer would characterize it as stupid). I've got to confess I am not a big believer in Sveum's Ty Cobb style of baseball unless you have Ty Cobb on the roster.
A case in point. Tony Campana at second base in the first inning. Right-handed pitcher, one out. Starlin Castro at bat with Bryan LaHair on deck. Steal third base, right. I mean, the element of surprise. Campana doesn't have to steal a base every time he has a chance whether it makes sense or not, does he? So naturally Campana is out and the inning is over when Castro strikes out. I mean, what was the point of that? Just because a guy has a good record stealing bases doesn't mean you have to play as if your team had to manufacture a run when you have two guys who are hitting .370 due up.
The same kind of aggressive tactics backfired a few innings later when Castro drove in two runs with a two-out hit to CF. Lets think about this, don't you want to make the CF throw home with Campana running and no chance to make the play rather than throw behind you and risk being out at second, possibly negating the second run? Of course not, you're running. Castro would have been out by ten feet had the Dodgers fielder not overthrown his cutoff man and forced the catcher, who was not even covering home, to make the play.
Later on, in the ninth inning, the Cubs tied the game on Tony Campana's one-out double with runners at first and second. OK. One out, Castro and LaHair on deck. Game certainly tied. Lets send DeJesus to try and score from first on a ball that doesn't even reach the wall and risk getting thrown out instead of playing for the winning run with your two best hitters up and the infield in, etc. Come on, guys, lets start thinking here.
Fortunately for the Cubs, the relief pitching held up and a somewhat calmer approach took over in the 11th. Barney got a lucky high-hop double over the third baseman's head to start the frame. Sometimes all it takes is a little luck and a little patience. Castillo was walked intentionally. Samardzija was inserted to pinch hit or pinch bunt for the pitcher. I normally question this sort of move, but, in this case, give Sveum the benefit of the doubt. The alternative would have been Jeff Baker, summoned from his hospital bed. Odds are, best scenario, a strikeout. More likely, a double play.
Anyway, Samardzija gets hit by a pitch attempting to bunt. More dumb luck. DeJesus then walked on a 3-2 pitch to win the game. Somewhat anti-climatic. Actually, DeJesus never did see a pitch even close to the strike zone, but at least he was able to curb his enthusiasm and take the last one for his team.
I had my misgivings about Travis Wood in the rubber game, but after a little bit of a shaky start, he settled in to keep the Cubs in the game through six innings. Wood presents an interesting problem for the Cubs. He clearly has a lot more upside than the awful Volstad and I rather thought the Cubs might keep him around and either demote or try to dump Volstad, but no such luck. I read this morning that Wood had been sent back down in favor of calling up the reserve infielder Cardenas to replace the genuinely useless Blake DeWitt.
Back to Sunday's game, which had the sleepy quality of a game played late on a lazy, hazy afternoon under a shadowy light that was neither day or night. Kind of dreamy in a way and not without a certain enchanted quality.
The Cubs seemed determined most of the way it give it up with some oddly aggressive base-running (a less charitable reviewer would characterize it as stupid). I've got to confess I am not a big believer in Sveum's Ty Cobb style of baseball unless you have Ty Cobb on the roster.
A case in point. Tony Campana at second base in the first inning. Right-handed pitcher, one out. Starlin Castro at bat with Bryan LaHair on deck. Steal third base, right. I mean, the element of surprise. Campana doesn't have to steal a base every time he has a chance whether it makes sense or not, does he? So naturally Campana is out and the inning is over when Castro strikes out. I mean, what was the point of that? Just because a guy has a good record stealing bases doesn't mean you have to play as if your team had to manufacture a run when you have two guys who are hitting .370 due up.
The same kind of aggressive tactics backfired a few innings later when Castro drove in two runs with a two-out hit to CF. Lets think about this, don't you want to make the CF throw home with Campana running and no chance to make the play rather than throw behind you and risk being out at second, possibly negating the second run? Of course not, you're running. Castro would have been out by ten feet had the Dodgers fielder not overthrown his cutoff man and forced the catcher, who was not even covering home, to make the play.
Later on, in the ninth inning, the Cubs tied the game on Tony Campana's one-out double with runners at first and second. OK. One out, Castro and LaHair on deck. Game certainly tied. Lets send DeJesus to try and score from first on a ball that doesn't even reach the wall and risk getting thrown out instead of playing for the winning run with your two best hitters up and the infield in, etc. Come on, guys, lets start thinking here.
Fortunately for the Cubs, the relief pitching held up and a somewhat calmer approach took over in the 11th. Barney got a lucky high-hop double over the third baseman's head to start the frame. Sometimes all it takes is a little luck and a little patience. Castillo was walked intentionally. Samardzija was inserted to pinch hit or pinch bunt for the pitcher. I normally question this sort of move, but, in this case, give Sveum the benefit of the doubt. The alternative would have been Jeff Baker, summoned from his hospital bed. Odds are, best scenario, a strikeout. More likely, a double play.
Anyway, Samardzija gets hit by a pitch attempting to bunt. More dumb luck. DeJesus then walked on a 3-2 pitch to win the game. Somewhat anti-climatic. Actually, DeJesus never did see a pitch even close to the strike zone, but at least he was able to curb his enthusiasm and take the last one for his team.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
The Cincy Series
The Cubs were rained out on Tuesday night. They then played 17 innings of good ball, coasting to a 3-1 win behind Jeff Samardzija on Wednesday night before taking a 3-0 lead into the 9th inning behind Ryan Dempster. Then things totally collapsed.
In this case, collapse, as it has been too frequently over the past two seasons, is spelled Marmol. I honestly do not know what has happened to Marmol, but his confidence is completely shot and he just cannot seem to throw strikes. Nor does he seem to want to throw strikes. He thinks he can somehow fool batters into swinging at really awful pitches.
Marmol has had a lot of success in his early career fooling hitters, but things have caught up to him lately. Mainly, I think, because earlier he threw pitches that looked like strikes and lots of times pitches that broke sharply into the zone. Now he misses most of the time and batters have figured out that they can take pitches and put themselves in a favorable count from which he cannot recover.
On Wednesday night, Marmol got the save, but one must question the wisdom of putting him back out on the mound something like twelve hours or so later, and then allowing him to face five batters without getting a single out. This isn't the first time in the last week we saw this act. Marmol was equally awful on Sunday when he walked three Phillies and gave up a run in a non-save situation.
Somehow or other, Sveum seems to be convinced that putting Marmol out there day after day is going to bolster his confidence. It hasn't and it isn't. I thought Bob Brenly made a good point after the game that was seconded by Todd Hollandsworth. It is one thing to work on your closer's confidence and quite another to destroy the confidence of the other 24 players.
For example, after the two walks that began the inning, Marmol induced a grounder to 3B from Phillips that Stewart, either in his haste to turn a double play or because it took a tricky hop or a combination of both, misplayed to load the bases. The point is that this kind of thing happens when the fielders behind you become desperate. Any chance of an out and they play tense. Deep down, they know you are going to blow the game.
What is really puzzling, though, was that Sveum had both Russell and Dolis warming up, yet he chose to allow Marmol to face not only Bruce, who singled home a run, but Ludwick as well, who walked to tally a second run. This is just dumb.
After the game, Sveum suggested he may finally have run out of patience with his closer. One thing that seemed to tick him off in particular was that Marmol went 3-0 on the first hitter - Willie Harris, who came to the plate batting .088 - and then threw another slider. Yeah, this is dumb, but doesn't Soto have control of this situation as well? So maybe there is a confederacy of dunces operating here. I've never liked the way Soto calls games, especially in the late innings.
Not to be outdone by the dynamic duo of Marmol and Soto, the first mistake really belonged to Sveum. Here's the thing. Three of the first four hitters due up were left-handed, including the two best Reds players, Votto and Bruce. Russell had warmed up in the prior inning. This sets up pretty much as an ideal spot for the left-hander even if Baker had chosen to counter with Rolen off the bench.
However, we all know that Sveum believes in his heart of hearts that left-handed pitchers can only be used to get a key out against a left-handed batter, so they can never be inserted to start an inning even against a left-handed batter. This would destroy the confidence of your closer, and that, of course, is something unthinkable.
I'd like to think that all this is a learning experience for Sveum. It is certainly encouraging to think that he will drop Marmol, at least temporarily, from the closer role. But it shouldn't take this long to think your way out of this bag. In some way, you have to wonder if the right choice for a team in transition isn't a more seasoned or confident manager after all.
In this case, collapse, as it has been too frequently over the past two seasons, is spelled Marmol. I honestly do not know what has happened to Marmol, but his confidence is completely shot and he just cannot seem to throw strikes. Nor does he seem to want to throw strikes. He thinks he can somehow fool batters into swinging at really awful pitches.
Marmol has had a lot of success in his early career fooling hitters, but things have caught up to him lately. Mainly, I think, because earlier he threw pitches that looked like strikes and lots of times pitches that broke sharply into the zone. Now he misses most of the time and batters have figured out that they can take pitches and put themselves in a favorable count from which he cannot recover.
On Wednesday night, Marmol got the save, but one must question the wisdom of putting him back out on the mound something like twelve hours or so later, and then allowing him to face five batters without getting a single out. This isn't the first time in the last week we saw this act. Marmol was equally awful on Sunday when he walked three Phillies and gave up a run in a non-save situation.
Somehow or other, Sveum seems to be convinced that putting Marmol out there day after day is going to bolster his confidence. It hasn't and it isn't. I thought Bob Brenly made a good point after the game that was seconded by Todd Hollandsworth. It is one thing to work on your closer's confidence and quite another to destroy the confidence of the other 24 players.
For example, after the two walks that began the inning, Marmol induced a grounder to 3B from Phillips that Stewart, either in his haste to turn a double play or because it took a tricky hop or a combination of both, misplayed to load the bases. The point is that this kind of thing happens when the fielders behind you become desperate. Any chance of an out and they play tense. Deep down, they know you are going to blow the game.
What is really puzzling, though, was that Sveum had both Russell and Dolis warming up, yet he chose to allow Marmol to face not only Bruce, who singled home a run, but Ludwick as well, who walked to tally a second run. This is just dumb.
After the game, Sveum suggested he may finally have run out of patience with his closer. One thing that seemed to tick him off in particular was that Marmol went 3-0 on the first hitter - Willie Harris, who came to the plate batting .088 - and then threw another slider. Yeah, this is dumb, but doesn't Soto have control of this situation as well? So maybe there is a confederacy of dunces operating here. I've never liked the way Soto calls games, especially in the late innings.
Not to be outdone by the dynamic duo of Marmol and Soto, the first mistake really belonged to Sveum. Here's the thing. Three of the first four hitters due up were left-handed, including the two best Reds players, Votto and Bruce. Russell had warmed up in the prior inning. This sets up pretty much as an ideal spot for the left-hander even if Baker had chosen to counter with Rolen off the bench.
However, we all know that Sveum believes in his heart of hearts that left-handed pitchers can only be used to get a key out against a left-handed batter, so they can never be inserted to start an inning even against a left-handed batter. This would destroy the confidence of your closer, and that, of course, is something unthinkable.
I'd like to think that all this is a learning experience for Sveum. It is certainly encouraging to think that he will drop Marmol, at least temporarily, from the closer role. But it shouldn't take this long to think your way out of this bag. In some way, you have to wonder if the right choice for a team in transition isn't a more seasoned or confident manager after all.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Phillies Series
The Cubs played pretty well against the Phils and gained a split. They might have come back to win the final game, but, as usual, Volstad managed to dig himself a hole the team found it hard to overcome. Volstad was a little unlucky in the first inning, some cheap infield hits, some lucky hits.
Here's the problem with Volstad, though, he is always around the plate and his stuff looks good enough to induce swings and grounders when he is on his game, but it is not quite good enough to induce outs when he needs them, not good enough to reach back for something extra or to shut a team down.
Volstad is in his fifth major league season. He's been the same pitcher virtually throughout his career. It is hard to see much space for improvement despite his relative youth, so it is hard for me to see him as anything but a placeholder, and a pricey one at that, given he is really being paid $19MM when you consider the terms of the Zambrano deal.
Anyway, the Cubs won two of the other three games in Philadelphia, coasting behind two fine performances by Paul Maholm, who finally faced a free-swinging team that couldn't hit his off-speed stuff, and Matt Garza, who was dominant again on Sunday.
The Cubs have looked a lot better in the past week against the Cardinals and Phillies than they did at the very beginning of the season. Much of this modest resurgence has been due to two players on the offensive side, namely, Bryan LaHair who has provided many clutch hits and good power, and Tony Campana, who has been hot since his recall from Iowa.
Campana is definitely a factor in the game when he can get on base. This kid is really fast and an excellent base-stealer. He is batting nearly .400 since coming up, so you know this is not going to last. All the more, since he has virtually no plate discipline whatsoever. It is a shame no one has been able to teach him how to use his speed and stature to get on base consistently, as, were someone to take an interest, he could be a very useful player.
As it is, the Cubs would be wise to ride out this streak as long as it lasts. Which makes it all the more surprising that Campana was not in the lineup on Saturday, sitting in favor of the veteran Reed Johnson.
Dale Sveum has declared himself pleased or relatively happy with the team's performance so far, which is kind of weird since they are 8-15 and sitting in last place. Of course, one of the issues I have with this team - and I know it is a rebuilding year and they are experimenting and all that - is with Sveum.
I can't help but compare his lineups and some of his decisions to those of Mike Quade, and damned if they do not look similar. I'm not sure he is the dunce that Quade often appeared to be, but maybe it is just that baseball guys all tend to behave alike when they are managing teams that are challenged by gaps in talent and habits of play, teams like the Cubs.
In some respects, the front office is equally to blame. Guys like Sveum are going to play their veterans and prefer them to younger players as long as they are on the team. They are also going to prefer players who at one time or another showed some proficiency in a given role even if they no longer possess that proficiency. So sometimes the only thing a front office can do to help matters is not to sign guys like this in the first place, or, if they are on the team, get rid of them.
To their credit, Epstein/Hoyer did dump Marlon Byrd. However, the team still carries Reed Johnson, Jeff Baker, Alfonso Soriano, and Kerry Wood. These are veteran players who will have nothing at all to do with building a winning team for the future, and who would likely have nothing to do with winning now based on their performance so far.
So the question in my mind, and the real heart of evaluating Sveum as a manager, is how he uses them. So far, the record is pretty bad. Soriano, who is as useless and ineffectual a player as one is likely to find, plays everyday in LF and bats fifth. His average and production has plummeted in recent days. The Cubs, in effect, released Byrd and Zambrano. The question is, if nobody wants him, why don't they do the same with Soriano?
With respect to Baker and Johnson, it is legitimate to question why they play regularly against lefties and sometimes righties as well when they produce so little in contrast to Joe Mather, who has produced quite well on the few occasions he has been in the lineup. Mather plays all the positions Baker and Johnson play equally or a little better than they do, and he has an upside.
The reason, I can only surmise, is this is how lifers like Sveum think, and this is especially the case when they are still learning the craft and have something to prove. So you can also always assume that managers will use their bullpen guys in their accustomed roles whether it makes any sense of not.
Sveum has not disappointed in this respect. He always uses Marmol as the closer whether he stinks or not and he will leave him in pretty much until the game is irretrievably lost. Wood is his eighth inning guy. Wood's signing was irrational in the first place. Again, Wood is not a piece of the puzzle, so why is he positioned to fail with such regularity.
James Russell, on the other hand, was once considered to have starter's stuff. He has been consistently effective out of the bullpen. When the Cubs traded Marshall, I had supposed they felt he could be dealt because Russell was ready to step into his role. Instead, he is used almost exclusively in the left-handed specialist role, even though his ERA is 0.00 through 7+ innings of work.
Hopefully, with Sveum, these are growing pains. When you hear his post-game analyses, though, you kind of wonder.
Here's the problem with Volstad, though, he is always around the plate and his stuff looks good enough to induce swings and grounders when he is on his game, but it is not quite good enough to induce outs when he needs them, not good enough to reach back for something extra or to shut a team down.
Volstad is in his fifth major league season. He's been the same pitcher virtually throughout his career. It is hard to see much space for improvement despite his relative youth, so it is hard for me to see him as anything but a placeholder, and a pricey one at that, given he is really being paid $19MM when you consider the terms of the Zambrano deal.
Anyway, the Cubs won two of the other three games in Philadelphia, coasting behind two fine performances by Paul Maholm, who finally faced a free-swinging team that couldn't hit his off-speed stuff, and Matt Garza, who was dominant again on Sunday.
The Cubs have looked a lot better in the past week against the Cardinals and Phillies than they did at the very beginning of the season. Much of this modest resurgence has been due to two players on the offensive side, namely, Bryan LaHair who has provided many clutch hits and good power, and Tony Campana, who has been hot since his recall from Iowa.
Campana is definitely a factor in the game when he can get on base. This kid is really fast and an excellent base-stealer. He is batting nearly .400 since coming up, so you know this is not going to last. All the more, since he has virtually no plate discipline whatsoever. It is a shame no one has been able to teach him how to use his speed and stature to get on base consistently, as, were someone to take an interest, he could be a very useful player.
As it is, the Cubs would be wise to ride out this streak as long as it lasts. Which makes it all the more surprising that Campana was not in the lineup on Saturday, sitting in favor of the veteran Reed Johnson.
Dale Sveum has declared himself pleased or relatively happy with the team's performance so far, which is kind of weird since they are 8-15 and sitting in last place. Of course, one of the issues I have with this team - and I know it is a rebuilding year and they are experimenting and all that - is with Sveum.
I can't help but compare his lineups and some of his decisions to those of Mike Quade, and damned if they do not look similar. I'm not sure he is the dunce that Quade often appeared to be, but maybe it is just that baseball guys all tend to behave alike when they are managing teams that are challenged by gaps in talent and habits of play, teams like the Cubs.
In some respects, the front office is equally to blame. Guys like Sveum are going to play their veterans and prefer them to younger players as long as they are on the team. They are also going to prefer players who at one time or another showed some proficiency in a given role even if they no longer possess that proficiency. So sometimes the only thing a front office can do to help matters is not to sign guys like this in the first place, or, if they are on the team, get rid of them.
To their credit, Epstein/Hoyer did dump Marlon Byrd. However, the team still carries Reed Johnson, Jeff Baker, Alfonso Soriano, and Kerry Wood. These are veteran players who will have nothing at all to do with building a winning team for the future, and who would likely have nothing to do with winning now based on their performance so far.
So the question in my mind, and the real heart of evaluating Sveum as a manager, is how he uses them. So far, the record is pretty bad. Soriano, who is as useless and ineffectual a player as one is likely to find, plays everyday in LF and bats fifth. His average and production has plummeted in recent days. The Cubs, in effect, released Byrd and Zambrano. The question is, if nobody wants him, why don't they do the same with Soriano?
With respect to Baker and Johnson, it is legitimate to question why they play regularly against lefties and sometimes righties as well when they produce so little in contrast to Joe Mather, who has produced quite well on the few occasions he has been in the lineup. Mather plays all the positions Baker and Johnson play equally or a little better than they do, and he has an upside.
The reason, I can only surmise, is this is how lifers like Sveum think, and this is especially the case when they are still learning the craft and have something to prove. So you can also always assume that managers will use their bullpen guys in their accustomed roles whether it makes any sense of not.
Sveum has not disappointed in this respect. He always uses Marmol as the closer whether he stinks or not and he will leave him in pretty much until the game is irretrievably lost. Wood is his eighth inning guy. Wood's signing was irrational in the first place. Again, Wood is not a piece of the puzzle, so why is he positioned to fail with such regularity.
James Russell, on the other hand, was once considered to have starter's stuff. He has been consistently effective out of the bullpen. When the Cubs traded Marshall, I had supposed they felt he could be dealt because Russell was ready to step into his role. Instead, he is used almost exclusively in the left-handed specialist role, even though his ERA is 0.00 through 7+ innings of work.
Hopefully, with Sveum, these are growing pains. When you hear his post-game analyses, though, you kind of wonder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)