Cubs Assessment

MLB Trade Rumors has put out a fairly brief but cogent analysis of the Cubs roster situation going into the off-season and some possible scenarios.  On the whole a pretty fair assessment of things. 
Don't read the comments, which are effectively hijacked by idiots who want the Cubs to trade several of their more talented young players and half the minor league system to the White Sox for Chris Sale.  I'm not exactly certain what motivates people like this.  Perhaps they did not notice that despite having Chris Sale, the Sox won 75 games last season and finished next to last in their division.

Actually, many sportswriters and pundits, as well as misguided fans, have kind of gone nuts speculating on possible post-season moves the Cubs might make.  Most of these proposals border on delusional.  A favorite seems to be that the Cubs trade Kyle Schwarber to Oakland for Sonny Gray.  So Schwarber misplayed several balls in the post-season.  OK, but during the regular season, Schwarber played an adequate left field and nobody really said anything about his defensive skills.  Schwarber hit 16 home runs in 69 games, 232 ABs.  Project that out to a full season and you are looking at something near 40 home runs or more.  Nobody trades that kind of power for a 14 game winner.  Furthermore, Schwarber is under team control for the better part of the decade.  So is Gray, and nobody trades a pitcher who is under team control for just as long, especially when you figure your team is unlikely to become a contender for several years.

Epstein pretty much said what the Cubs are likely to do in the off-season.  They are going to try to bring back Fowler as a free agent unless his demands are too great or someone offers him off the chart money.  Their fallback is going to be signing Jackson, which will be a cheaper alternative.  Jackson is a better defensive outfielder, but, of course, Fowler was such a great catalyst to the offense that you have to believe they will go all-out to retain him or pick up someone with similar skills to lead off.

Epstein also said the team would like to keep the nucleus of young talent they have developed intact, and that were the Cubs to engineer a trade, it would be from position players where they have a surplus or strength.  The Cubs have three starting shortstops on the major league roster, so the focus of this statement must be there.

Their real need is another starting pitcher.  I'm guessing Price is the first choice, but, of course, Price is going to break the bank.  Failing that, the Cubs could always focus on one of the second tier arms like Cueto, or even a project like Samardzija.  They probably also would be willing to trade Baez or Castro for someone like Carrasco or Ross, but there are issues with this.  First off, you don't know which one to trade.  Castro has the weakest upside, but the worry there is whether his overall performance has lessened his trade value, which had taken an enormous hit before his September resurrection.

One possible trade I don't want them to make is Soler.  Soler has been hurt a lot during his career, but after the show he put on in late September and into the playoffs, his potential is off the charts.  Plus, he is also signed cheap for quite a long time.

World Series Update

The Mets are down 2-0 after Wednesday's game, which causes no great grief, though I was rather hoping that after the first game, we might have the series go six or seven games.  Game 2, as well as Game 1, for that matter, exposed what I have always thought was the Mets big Achilles Heel, which is their defense.  Infield defense, in particular.  When you think about it, Duda is pretty much of an oaf at first base, Wright has a back ailment, and Flores and Murphy have limited range.

The Mets get by because their pitchers strike out a lot of hitters.  So they skated past the Cubs in some sense because the Cubs strike out a lot, limiting the chances the Mets defense has to mess things up.  The Royals, on the other hand, do not strike out that much.  They have struck out 10 times in 22 innings so far, only 3 times in Game 2.  The Cubs, on the other hand, strike out 8 or 10 times a game even when they are going well.

So that means the Mets have to make a lot more plays versus the Royals than they did versus the Cubs.  Putting the ball in play with some regularity, even if a ball is weakly hit, can present some problems for the Mets, as it did late in Tuesday's game, and pretty much throughout Wednesday's.

World Series Quandaries

So the World Series begins tonight after what I rather think are completely unnecessary delays built into the schedule to satisfy television.  I'm beginning to question, as many analysts are doing, the whole playoff structure right now.  OK, the wild card races add excitement, as does the playoff structure, but do we need, for example, to drag this thing out so that there are so many delays premised on each series going the full length and providing built-in rest periods to realign rosters and pitching match-ups?  Not to mention the unconventional local starting times for many of the games.

I don't want to sound like a cantankerous old fart, but teams play every day during the season with one off-day a week.  Before expansion, the season ended and the World Series started a day later.  Now, with all the delays, the likelihood is the deciding game will be played in Kansas City in the first week of November.  How does this make sense?

This year, the wait has been especially troubling, as neither series went to a seventh game.  It has been so long between games that probably most people don't care who wins.  The schedule also works to the disadvantage of hot teams, as the deeper you go, the harder it is to maintain the streak.

This year, the Cubs were the hottest team in baseball from the end of September through the NLDS, winning 13 of 14 games.  Maddon had always maintained that they were a better team the fewer off-days they had.  They advanced on Tuesday and had to wait until Saturday to play the first game of the NLCS.  Did this affect the team?

As far as a rooting interest is concerned, this one is a problem.  Ordinarily, I will root for the NL team from the bluest state that is not the Cardinals or the Mets.  This year, however, Kansas City is from Missouri, which automatically disqualifies them from any affection.  Besides, the whole series will be a nightmare if only because Joe Buck and Harold Reynolds will simply drone on forever about how they play good old-fashioned hard-nosed baseball, etc., etc.

The Mets present similar barriers to admiration, not merely because they are the Mets.  There hottest player, Daniel Murphy, is a gay-bashing Bible-thumper, who has suspiciously or fortuitously blossomed into the reincarnation of Babe Ruth.  I mean, you have got to pull for this guy to fail.  He has seven homers in the post-season, half his regular season output and close to 15% of his career output.  Weird!

Anyway, I suspect I shall just watch this show and wait until next year.

Two Strategies

The post-season for the National League has largely been the consequence of the two different strategies adopted by the Mets and the Cubs at the trade deadline.  The Mets were all-in at the deadline, the Cubs had reservations.

To be clear, I am not criticizing the Cubs decisions even in retrospect.  I would probably have done the same thing.  However, as things worked out, the Mets were successful largely as a result of the moves they made to address their urgent needs at the deadline, irrespective of future concerns.

Everyone knew the Mets had dominant pitching with more coming up through their farm system.  Up to the middle of the season when they got d'Arnaud and Wright back from injuries, they had little offense to speak of.  So they addressed that need by renting Yoenis Cespedes.  Cespedes was something of an afterthought for them after they failed to obtain Gomez from the Brewers, but it was certainly a fortunate one as things turned out.  They gave up two highly-regarded pitching prospects to get him but not their best two, Syndergaard and Matz, who had already been promoted.

The Mets correctly evaluated their position in terms of playoff possibilities.  They saw their best chance as winning their division and behaved accordingly.

The Cubs, on the other hand, behaved conservatively at the deadline.  There were rumors they were after a big name guy like Hamels or Price or Cueto, but in the end, they did not go big, choosing instead to fill perceived holes with role-players like Haren and Jackson, as well as some veteran rehab projects like Cahill and Richard.

It is likely the Cubs were willing to part with either Castro or Baez at the deadline, but, in the case of Castro, his value was destroyed by his awful first half, and, in the case of Baez, he was just coming back off an injury.

Really, though a lot of the Cubs reasoning looked to be based on the assessment that the best they were going to do was to make the wild card game, maybe as the home team, maybe not.  They were right about this.  The Cardinals were so far ahead, they were never going to be caught.

So, given your fate depends upon a single game, do you want to give up big chips for a genuine ace who likely will not even be your starter in the game that decides whether you advance to the NLDS or not and maybe is a rental in any case?  Clearly the answer is no.

The Cubs bet that their pitching and bullpen would hold up with a little tweaking, not a major overhaul, and that their offense would carry them.  By and large, they were right about this.  They had great starting pitching in the first half despite growing pains from Hendricks and the lack of a consistent fifth starter.

Again, I imagine they figured that a journeyman like Haren would address the fifth starter issue, which turned out on the whole to be true.  They also bet that Hendricks would straighten himself out and that Hammel would continue to pitch well.  They were right about Hendricks in the main, but, unfortunately, wrong about Hammel.

Still, they had a great run and they reached the final four and their core prospects nucleus is still intact.  I think they are likely to be perennial pennant contenders for a longer term than the Mets.

Cubs Fall in Four

Some random observations:

Schwarber is a worse outfielder than we realized.  If he is to continue to play at least sometimes in left field, the Cubs might want to send him to the winter leagues for at least some time to get some experience and instruction.  He wasn't nearly as bad in the regular season, but then the pressure is on in the playoffs.  On the other hand, maybe they should try to break him in at his natural position, which is catcher.  Montero is not exactly an All-Star at this stage of his career.

Soler was the revelation of the post-season for the Cubs.  This guy was on throughout the run.  If he can only stay healthy, he will become a formidable force for years to come.  His performance in the playoffs is pretty much on par with Murphy's if you really look at the quality of all his at-bats.

Bryant got his home run.  Rizzo did not show up.  Ditto Montero.  Fowler and Soler were the only hitters to show any consistency aside from the Schwarber and Bryant homers.

Russell is the best shortstop in the National League and his loss was a real blow for the Cubs, not just defensively, but at the plate as well in terms of adding some balance to a lineup that is fairly one-dimensional without him.

The Cubs need to acquire two good starting pitchers to contend and advance next season.  Pretty much everybody knows this.  They can count on Lester, Arrieta, and Hendricks.  That's it.  They do have a fairly solid bullpen core.  However, the way Maddon manages his bullpen does somewhat require the equivalent of a taxi squad between Iowa and Chicago, which may not suit some of the reclamation projects that the Cubs refurbished for the stretch run.  Then again some of them may be gone or they may be given a shot at starting again, Cahill and Richard, for example, if not by the Cubs, then by another team.

Maybe the Cubs should have put Haren on the NLCS roster instead of Berry or Hammel, for that matter.  Haren may not be a stopper, but I doubt he would have been as consistently awful as Hammel and he finished the season strong.

Just in general, I don't always have a problem with Maddon's management of the pitching, but I did rather think he pulled the plug on Hendricks too soon in Game 3 and that that sent a message of a general lack of confidence that nearly everyone picked up on.

Hendricks left after 4 innings with the score tied at 2.  Aside from the Murphy home run, which was not exactly a rarity in the series, he had pitched creditably.  Arguably, he was pitching a lot better than the Mets starter deGrom, who was in constant trouble to that point.  Had Maddon been in the other dugout, would he have pulled deGrom?

The Cubs looked like a team that was up against it all the way, especially after the loss in Game 1.  They were anxious at the plate and in the field.  Not unexpected from such a young team, and probably not a great cause for concern looking to the future, as this will be seen in retrospect as a learning experience.

Finally, myself and probably most fans may find it hard to admit this except in retrospect, but, historically, teams that rely on the long ball, teams full of power hitters who score the majority of their runs via the home run, often do not do well as the playoffs progress, especially when matched against teams with dominant pitching.

Hammel!!!

One is tempted to add a string of expletives to the title, which is something one was tempted to add to most of his starts going back to July.  This guy was just awful from the get-go, and he has been for quite a while.  Give credit to the Mets and all that.  They outplayed and outhit and outpitched the Cubs through the entire series, but if elimination depends upon one pitcher, you know you are finished if that guy is Hammel.  I have no idea what went wrong with him in the second half, but something did.

The fourth game was pretty much over in the first inning, certainly in the second when Hammel was finally removed.

After the game, Hammel revealed that he sucked throughout the second half and blamed it on a knee injury.  That's kind of the first we heard of that, the nagging injury, I mean, we knew he sucked.  Earlier it was thought to be a hamstring.  Anyway, it was nice to know that now, although it would have been nicer earlier.

What is troubling is that the Cubs continued to trot him out there every fifth day and to start him in an elimination game.  I know all about Lester or Arrieta on short rest, but come on, there is some room for legitimate second-guessing here.  Haren could not have been any worse in that situation, by the way, and he pitched a good deal better than Hammel after his acquisition.

Cursed?

Who knows?  But the Cubs have found some novel ways to lose in this series, the latest seeing the ultimate winning run score on a strikeout.  Actually, the Cubs played a pretty sloppy game.  It looked as if they were really uptight from the start.  Some of the mistakes did not affect the outcome, some really did.  The Cubs actually achieved significant misplays and errors from most of the team, beginning with a first inning error by Baez, continuing with the aforementioned strikeout pitch that Montero was unable to block, a double clutch muff by Bryant, a dropped flyball by Schwarber, an ill-advised attempt at a diving catch by Soler, and a kind of weird cautious play from Rizzo that resulted in the final run.

The Cubs continued to swing for the fences most of the time.  They got two home runs, one from Schwarber and a second from Soler, who almost connected a few innings later.  Otherwise, despite working de Grom's pitchcount up early on, they did not mount a significant threat after the Soler homer.  So far the Mets pitching - mostly against their hype, in that they were supposed to feature hard stuff, but have so far served up a steady diet of breaking balls and changeups - has kept the Cubs off-balance.  Only Fowler and Soler have been producing consistently good at-bats.  Schwarber has hit two homers, but has been unimpressive otherwise.  Nothing from Bryant, Rizzo, Castro, or Montero, not to mention Baez who has regressed to 2014 tendencies.

Anything can happen, but things look pretty grim right now.  Hammel has to pitch lights out on Wednesday, something that is possible but has not been in the cards lately.  Hendricks actually pitched pretty well and left with the game tied.  I was a little surprised Maddon lifted him in the fourth inning for Coghlan, especially as there were two outs and no one on base.  It just meant you had to get five solid innings from the bullpen and nothing could go wrong.  As it is the Cubs got only four and even that gives Cahill credit for getting four outs and giving up the winning run.

These guys are trying too hard right now, pressing in the field and at the plate.  Maybe they should follow the Red Sox pattern in 2004 when they were down 3-0 to the Yankees and just have a couple of drinks.

NLCS Game 2

Well, the Cubs are down 2-0 in the series.  Pretty disappointing.  It is not impossible to come back, nor are such comebacks that rare, but still, it is not the position I expected to see after two games.

Game 2 was pretty much decided in the first inning, when Arrieta was not sharp and the Mets rode the first three hitters to a 3-0 lead.  Granderson and Murphy have been carrying their team all through the playoffs and they continued to do so Sunday not, both at the plate and in the field.

Hard stuff dominates hitters under cold conditions, and it was no different in Game 2.  Once the Cubs fell behind in the first inning, they appeared to be pressing.  They did run up Syndergaard's pitch count, but their pitch selection wasn't all that great and the ump was giving him a lot of leeway on the outside corner.

Arrieta did not pitch that badly after the first three hitters, giving up only one run over the next five innings, but the damage was done.  Psychologically, especially with a very young team, falling behind early is a big deal.  It really changes hitters approach in big games, or at least it seemed to do so Sunday night.

The series comes back to Chicago Tuesday night.  The weather forecast is pretty good for late October, so these games are likely to resemble games played under baseball conditions rather than football.  This favors the Cubs in general, especially with the fans behind them.

The matchups for the next two games, however, do not necessarily favor the Cubs.  They will send one capable pitcher and one pitcher who is awful against one very good pitcher and one capable pitcher.

Should the Cubs lose Tuesday, they are going to have to think about bringing back Lester on short rest rather than start Hammel in an elimination game.  Sobering stuff.

As far as the offense goes, over the first two games, no one has been that hot in the sense that Granderson and Murphy have been.  A lot of balls have been hit hard right at someone, but this isn't really an excuse.  The one big disappointment has been Rizzo, who looks all out of sync and seems to be swinging at bad pitches more consistently than the rest of the team and going for the long ball every time.

Game 1 NLCS

 The Cubs lost the first game of the Mets series 4-2.  Matt Harvey pitched very well.  Jon Lester did not.  That's about it.  Not that Lester pitched horribly.  Ordinarily, he would be considered to have turned in a creditable performance, but, just as in the first game of the Cardinals series, he was not good enough to counter a dominant performance by his opponent.

The game was played on a cold night that undoubtedly affected the outcome.  Still, the Cubs were off-balance at the plate all night long.  They just were not on their game.  The speculation before the game was that Harvey would be on a restricted pitch count, but the Cubs in general seemed over-anxious.  They were doing a lot of first pitch swinging early on.

The fifth inning was key.  Behind 1-0 after a first inning homer, the Cubs launched a rally after Rizzo was hit by an 0-2 pitch.  Castro doublec a long fly that was misjudged or misplayed by the Mets center-fielder or just blown over his head.  Rizzo scored.  Castro might have run harder out of the box, but it likely would not have got him to third safely.  After Soler made an out, Baez followed with a sharp single to left.  Evidently feeling a sense of desperation with Ross and Lester due to follow, Castro was sent and thrown out by a good margin at home.

Lester failed to shut the door in the bottom of the inning. Granted he got himself in trouble allowing some dinky hits, but he had to retire Granderson and he did not.  That was the tale of the game.  The Cubs were unable to mount another challenge, having to settle for a long Scwarber homer in the eighth that made no real difference.

Well, it is just the first game, and Arrieta starts Sunday night, but it does somewhat illustrate potential chinks in the team's armor.  When Lester pitches, the offense does suffer because he and Ross are virtually automatic outs.  This matters in close games.  So does Lester's absolute inabilty to hold runners close.  I had no idea it was this bad when they signed him.  It definitely played a role in the Mets final run.

After the game, Lester pretty much beat himself up for his performance.  Nothing he said was not true, but, of course, he was not the only reason they lost.  Fans seemed livid on the talk shows, but they need to realize Lester is not the pitcher he was in 2013 and earlier in his career.

Fans also need to realize it is possible to win these series with a single dominant pitcher, just a little harder.  My guess is that in the off-season, no matter what happens, the Cubs are likely to go out and get another one in free agency.

Cubs Advance

OK, these guys are really good, that is all you can say, and, unlike any Cubs team anyone alive can even imagine, they do not choke.  Hammel was shaky from the start, which one rather expected, lasting three innings before the early hook.  The Cubs used seven relief pitchers to finish the game, which was kind of weird, but also not that unusual for Maddon.  Both managers pulled out all the stops, Maddon with an obvious aim of eliminating the Cardinals at home, and Matheny with a view to extending the series against the inconsistent Hammel even though he pretty much had no one to put up against Lester should the series reach a deciding game.

Matheny sent out his ace John Lackey on short rest in what looked like an advantageous matchup, but after being staked to a 2-0 lead before his team even made an out, he completely lost his composure in the second inning, giving up a hit to Schwarber after walking Castro.  He struck out Montero, but then served up a lollipop to the Cubs pitcher Hammel that resulted in a single.  Lackey was so upset that he promptly threw a gopher ball to Javier Baez on the next pitch.

The game swayed back and forth from there on out with each side emptying their benches and bullpens.  Each time the Cards pulled even, they were unable to shut the Cubs down and that was the story.  The Cubs got a terrific defensive throw from Jorge Soler to nip the potential go-ahead run at home to end the sixth inning, after which the Cardinals could not mount a significant threat against the meat of the Cubs bullpen.  Rizzo decided the game with a home run in the bottom of the sixth, and Schwarber launched a ball over the right field scoreboard in the following inning to seal the deal.

By some quirk of the scoring rules, Trevor Cahill, the least effective of the Cubs relievers, wound up as the winning pitcher.

On to wherever, New York or Los Angeles depending on the outcome of the deciding game between the two Thursday night.  Both the remaining teams won five or seven games fewer than the Cubs.  I kind of think Major League Baseball will need to tweak the post-season rules a little as a minimum.  There really is no reason that teams that would have finished well behind the second wild card team, in this case, should have home-field advantage at this point.  But it is what it is.

A Wild One

The Cubs won a slugfest to take a 2-1 lead over St. Louis in the first playoff round.  The wind was howling out, so you would expect some home runs, but the Cubs six were pretty ridiculous.  Actually, they hit all of them pretty hard, so you kind of wonder whether the wind had anything to do with any of them.  Maybe Schwarber's a little bit, certainly Piscotty's for the Cards in the ninth which looked like a high flyball off the bat.

On the pitching side of things, Arrieta did not look really sharp from the start.  Maybe the wind got into his head.  It seemed to me it certainly affected Wacha, though, to be honest, Wacha has really stunk in September, so you wonder whether he is just in a bad streak and would have been hammered anyway.

Maddon made all the right moves with his pitching, pulling Arrieta in the sixth and riding his bullpen the rest of the way.  I hope Russell is not seriously hurt.  Hamstring injuries are tricky things.  The Cubs might sit Russell in Tuesday's game even if he looks all right.  Theoretically, they do not lose much with Baez at shortstop, but, of course, that is theoretical.  In practice, Baez botched up two plays he should have made.  He looked really nervous in the field.  Maddon has two options if Russell sits, the one being letting Baez play short, the other moving Castro to short and starting LaStella.  I'm not a big fan of moving Castro back to short, so I kind of think Maddon will go the same route and start Baez there.

Matheny seems to have opted to start Lackey on short rest for the fourth game, while Maddon is sticking with Hammel.  Going with Lackey is a risky move, but I wonder if there is any real alternative.  Lynn was scheduled to start, but the Cubs have hit him at will most of the year and he, like Wacha, is coming off a bad September.  Another risk factor for the Cards in this move is whether Molina will be able to start and how effective he will be at framing pitches if he does.  Lackey did not throw many strikes in Game 1, at least not as many as were called.  If the Cubs are patient, they can run up his pitch count early.  The key, though, is Hammel, and whether he will be on or not.  I imagine he will be on a pretty short leash.

The weather is likely to be a lot cooler and less windy, with the winds shifting around to the northwest, which would be a crosswind to right field.  Should help Hammel, or at least his confidence.  The park should play a lot smaller tomorrow.

Cubs Even Series

The Cubs defeated the Cardinals 6-3, mainly on the strength of a wild second inning that saw them pull off two consecutive squeeze plays.  The Cardinals had something to do with their success, botching up a double play off the bat of Austin Jackson, allowing him to more or less walk into third base on a steal, then throwing away the first bunt off the bat of Kyle Hendricks.  Jorge Soler put the final nail in the coffin with a long home run.

I liked the lineup much better today even though Castro was still batting fifth.  Actually it was his single that started the rally.  However, aside from the gutsy base-running and canny small ball, Soler was the big hero.  Hate to say I told you so.  I'd like to see this guy start the remainder of the series, especially as Bryant and Rizzo are pressing right now.

You have to like the team's chances now with Arrieta starting Monday evening's game.

Nice to see the Cardinals can seriously mess up an inning like everyone else after hearing all the reverent praise from the national announcers.

Hendricks pitched quite well, I thought, and he was certainly a wise choice over Jason Hammel, who looks set to start Game 4.  In an ordinary game, Captain Hook would probably not have pulled him with a three run lead, but in the playoffs it is hard to argue with the decision.  Why on Earth Montero called for the hanging curve for the second home run is anyone's guess.  I mean, Hendricks just does not have a great curve and I think that was the first one he had thrown in the entire game.

Cardinals Win Game One

The game unfolded as quite a pitchers' duel until the eighth inning, the only blemish being Lester surrendering a run in the first inning.  Actually, a lot of the game turned on the home plate umpire Phil Cuzzi's ball and strike calls.  To say he had a liberal or eccentric strike zone would be an understatement.  He seemed to think every pitch that Lackey made that hit the catcher's mitt was a strike, no matter where Molina set up and Molina was setting up a foot outside most of the time.  I'm kind of surprised Maddon did not make more of a big deal about this.  Granted the zone was similar for both sides.  However, because Cuzzi pretty much favored pitches high and away, in practice the bias operated in the Cardinals favor, since Lester pretty much operated down in the zone.  Maybe it is sour grapes, but I hate to see a game unduly influenced by umpiring, and this game certainly was.

Some other observations.  Schwarber has played well in right field, but I do not really like him there.  He and Fowler were again the only Cubs hitters to make consistent contact, however.  Castro seems to have returned to his earlier habit of hitting ground balls to the shortstop in nearly every at-bat.  One assumes he will play tomorrow against the left-hander Garcia, but I cannot stand him in the @5 slot.  I also really do not care much for hitting Lester ninth.  Somehow in my mind, and maybe it is just me, having Ross and Lester, two automatic outs, bat in front of Fowler when the lineup turns over just gives up too much offensive potential.  I'm really hoping Ross does not start at catcher tomorrow even though it gives up the platoon advantage, mainly because Ross does not hit anyone very well.  I'm also hoping Soler gets a shot in right field tomorrow and through the rest of the series.  Soler is potentially an impact player who looks better and better lately in his limited appearances.

Finally, I don't know what is with Strop at Busch Stadium, but perhaps they should leave him at the hotel tomorrow.  They have alternatives even in the eighth inning, especially as the Cardinals do not hit lefties very well in general.

Cubs Advance

The Cubs played another excellent game to defeat the Pirates 4-0 and advance to the next round, a best of five series against the Cardinals.  This should be a helluva ride.

As for the Wild Card Playoff, once the Cubs got out in front, there was little doubt the Pirates were in trouble, given that the Cubs starter, Jake Arrieta, had given up barely enough runs in the final two months of the season to count on your fingers.  Actually, to my mind, the Pirates were in trouble as soon as they turned in the starting lineup.  Clint Hurdle decided to sit two of his biggest offensive threats, Aramis Ramirez and Pedro Alvarez, presumably to put a better defensive team on the field.

The problem there is that you are basically telling your team and the opposing pitcher you are not going to score any runs and that you haven't a hope of hitting the ball.  The Cubs, on the other hand, packed their lineup with hitters, left-handed hitters, to be precise, as four of the first five batters hit from the left side.  What Maddon was saying is, yeah, this guy Cole is good, but we can take a shot at him early and bring in defense later on.

Which, of course, is what they did.  Fowler singled to leadoff and before the dust had settled, aggressively stole second base.  Schwarber followed with an opposite field single, a beautiful piece of hitting that scored the first run.  After that, Cole was left to pitch defensively, always straining to measure up to the seemingly invincible Arrieta.  Sooner or later, the Cubs, who again worked the count to their advantage, were going to pounce on a mistake.  In this case, two mistakes that led to a Schwarber two-run homer in the third and a solo home run by Fowler in the fifth.

Meanwhile, Arrieta coasted along in the driver's seat as the Pirates tried desperately to get back in the game.  Even in the sixth and seventh innings when he was missing his spots, he managed to reach back and get the big outs he needed.

I have to say I am kind of intrigued by the philosophical Maddon and especially his post-game analyses.  Most of what he says is pretty simple and logical, but somehow he has managed to teach an almost Zen-like focus on the moment to a bunch of really young players and get them to buy in.  Almost reminds you of the last philosopher-coach to reign in Chicago, Phil Jackson.

Anyway, the Cubs have a real shot at the NL title in the coming weeks.  St. Louis is a big hurdle, but they have not played well down the stretch and the Cubs are pretty hot.  The Lester game Friday will tell us a lot.  A win there, and the series comes back to Chicago with the teams even or the Cubs getting a shot to clinch with Arrieta potentially on the mound.  Whoever wins this series is likely to take the NLCS.

The series might be pretty wild in terms of brawls as well.  The Pirates game was marked by trouble when Watson plunked Arrieta, obviously on purpose.  Remember all the head-hunting in the last Cardinals series at Wrigley Field and you have some real potential for trouble.

All or Nothing

Lots riding on tonight's game to say the least.  I can't quibble about the roster or the starting lineup.  Pretty nervous hours for Cubs fans.  I still like their chances with Arrieta on the mound.  His last start against the Pirates at Wrigley Field was dominant.  He carried a no-hitter into the seventh inning.  Cole is good, but the Cubs can work his pitch count up to their advantage.  Actually the Pirates starter who dominates the Cubs is Liriano.  An unconventional move would have been to start him over Cole.

Cubs Sweep Reds

The Cubs completed a three game sweep of the Reds Thursday afternoon, extending their current winning streak to five games.  In the process, they kept hope alive for the chance to tie the Pirates and host the Wild Card Playoff.  Possibly not the greatest chance.

The Cubs would need to sweep the Brewers in Milwaukee.  That isn't an unreasonable task, as the Brewers are pretty awful these days, maybe not as bad as the Reds, but bad enough.  The other side of the coin is the Reds would have to take two of three in Pittsburgh.  It could happen, one supposes, though this is the less likely part of the scenario.  Stranger things have happened at season's end.  Granted the Reds have lost like twelve straight, or something like that, but, of course, optimistically, they are due to win one.

The Reds series turned out to be the Austin Jackson show, at least the final two games.  Jackson is a pretty good player who has not perhaps lived up to his full potential or at least the hype that was made of it.  He seems to be on quite a streak lately after a slow adjustment to the NL in September.  He is a solid outfielder and must have punched his ticket for a slot on the post-season roster with his recent performance. 

Jackson is also an interesting possibility for next year's roster.  He is a free agent, but he is bound to be cheaper than Fowler for center field and also can probably be signed for a shorter term than Fowler, who, after a strong second half, will likely draw interest at a higher price and over a longer haul, maybe four years.  You wonder if the Cubs are likely to commit to that given the strength of their farm system and the versatility of their current roster.

On another note, Hammel notched a win on Thursday, but he wasn't sharp, so there are still question marks with him.  Haren, on the other hand, looked very good, and Hendricks was especially impressive against a very good Royals team.