Quantcast

wrigley bleachersI don’t know what it was about yesterday’s doubleheader sweep. It came after a couple days off, and those days off came after a couple losses in St. Louis, so that was probably what did it.

Folks really started railing on the Cubs and the rebuild. To my mind, yesterday sucked for all of the reasons everyone is saying, but I have a hard time understanding how a crappy performance against two great pitchers and a good team by the 2014 Cubs says much of anything about the long-term rebuilding process. Like I’ve said before – and I get the sense I’ll be banging this drum all year – this kind of thing is what we expected. Sure, it was nice to dream about the surprise upside of a young and versatile roster (it is still those things), but there’s a reason that every projection you could find (including my own, if you pinned me down) had the Cubs barely squeaking out 70 wins this year.

Don’t lose your stuff over days like yesterday. That’s the kind of thing that’s going to happen a lot this year. It is “expected,” even if not “hoped” for.

Being that today’s an off-day, and the aforementioned struggles have parked the Cubs at a lousy 4-10 record so far this year, I thought it would be interesting (or depressing?) to look back on the Cubs’ 14-game record over the past several seasons. There’s no real lesson here – I was just curious.

2013: 5-9 Start, 66-96 Final Record

2012: 3-11 Start, 61-101 Final Record

2011: 7-7 Start, 71-91 Final Record

2010: 5-9 Start, 75-87 Final Record

2009: 8-6 Start, 83-78 Final Record

2008: 9-5 Start, 97-64 Final Record

2007: 5-9 Start, 85-77 Final Record

2006: 9-5 Start, 66-96 Final Record

2005: 7-7 Start, 79-83 Final Record

Man, Cubs fans haven’t had a lot of fun in the first few weeks of the season over the last decade. Just thrice in 10 season the Cubs started with a winning record over the first 14 games. One of those season wound up seeing the Cubs as one of the best teams in baseball; the other saw them as one of the worst. I guess you can’t always tell a lot from 14 games.

As for this season, I don’t think there’s a 2007-like turnaround in the cards. I doubt the Cubs will match their .286 winning percentage for the rest of the year, but it’s probably going to be another slog.

  • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

    ” Just twice in 10 season the Cubs started with a winning record over the first 14 games.”

    Three times. But the point remains. Given the Cubs final record, they have underperformed 3 seasons and all of those under-performances were by more than 1 win (thanks to rounding, each of those are under-performances by 2 wins), last year they underperformed by .7.

    They overperformed, by more than 1 win, 1 time (2006 (3 wins)).

    The rest of the years are all within 1 win of expectations given final record.

    Dear Baseball Gods,
    WHY IN THE HECK DO YOU HATE THE CUBS?
    Sincerely,
    Cubs Fans

    Dear Baseball Devil,
    Can we interest you in a deal? Thinking something along the lines of the one you handed out to the Cardinals.

    • Hee Seop Chode

      I think we signed our Devil deal in 2011…

    • Eternal Pessimist

      He said “thrice” not twice, but i agree with your general sentiment.

      • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

        The power of the edit button.

        • Eternal Pessimist

          Ahh, I arrived to the topic late…and the villainous Bert didn’t come clean on his mis-deed.

  • jp3

    I knew we sucked over the last decade but I thought we had more than 3 years of better than .500 baseball? Now I can’t remember why in a cubs fan

    • Brocktoon

      5 out of 12 if it makes you feel better.

  • Ivy Walls

    Competitive sports all provide a player/team an opportunity to come through or not. Cubs are missing those set ups where they have men in scoring positions and not coming through. Last night Kalish had the count 3-1, one out and men on 2nd/3rd. He was grooved a pitch down the middle belt high. He fouled it off.

    This is a daily thing.

    Pitching and defense is okay, OBP is livable but driving in runs is not there. I can remember coaches telling players up and down the ranks, either produce or you will be replaced, the opportunity is there.

    Playing Sweeney and Kalish in the same game is no where. Got to get some OPS in the game. Got to live with Olt and Lake.

    • Edwin

      The Cubs current OBP is .293, which is 4th worst in all of baseball. That is the main reason the Cubs are not scoring runs. Hitting better in those setups would help, but what would help even more is increasing the number of “setups” they’re in.

    • 70′s Cub

      That is how and why players like Kalish need to get sent back down, RR put him in that position by bunting the two over. A ground ball gets a run in and this guy fouls off two hitters pitches and then swing and misses at ball four. Barney in the nine hole meant end of inning!

  • Joshua Edwards

    I’ve heard it often said that every team will win 60 games and lose 60 games, and what they do with the other 42 determines the season.

    I’m just not so sure that every team will win 60 games.

    • Medicos

      Hi Josh: U got that phrase from me During any season each team win at least 60 games and lose at least 60 games. I even heard JD use it after a Cub loss against the Pirates last week. It’s true. If a team can win most of those other 42-games they have a good chance of competing for a playoff berth..

      • Funn Dave

        That saying’s been around for quite a while….

      • 70′s Cub

        Lose 90% of the series you play means 70 something W 90 something L. Cubs keep taking 1 out of 3.

        • Brocktoon

          If you lose 90% of the series you play you’re more like 56-106.

          • Edwin

            Sounds about right. 162 games per season, an average of 3 games per series, so about 54 series per year. 90% means you lose 48.6 series and win 5.4 series. Assuming each lost series means you lose 2/3 and each winning series you lose 1/3, that would be 97.2 losses from losing, and 5.4 losses during the winning series. So a total around 102 losses.

            • Edwin

              So far there has been an average of 132 comments per EBS when the Cubs lose, and 98.5 per EBS when the Cubs win.

              • DarthHater

                Finally, a useful statistic! :-P

                • Edwin

                  Maybe Brett has a hidden agenda.

                  • DarthHater

                    He’s obviously profiting from the Cubs failure. This explains A LOT… ;-)

                    • Edwin

                      Brett’s like that evil painting guy in Ghostbusters 2, thriving off the negativity.

                • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

                  Didn’t tell me anything some Belly Fire and sCRAP+ didn’t already know!

              • http://www.teamfums.org MichiganGoat

                That’s because the same dolts hop on during a loss to continue their complain and then are silent during a win.

                • DarthHater

                  Will someone please give that goat a beer?

                • Brocktoon

                  It has nothing to do with that.

                  It’s because there’s more to argue about over a loss than a win. Everyone lauding how good things went doesn’t lead to nearly as much back and forth as trying to cast blame for the individual game(which undoubtedly leads to casting blame for the season as a whole)

              • Brocktoon

                How much does having Opening Day and the Home Opener be losses skew that?

                • Edwin

                  Who knows. I was just having some fun with numbers. I’m sure that plays into it, as well as whether it’s a day game or night game, week day or weekend, and how soon Brett starts posting other things.

                  If the Cubs could just be more cooperative and win some more games to expand their “Winning” sample size, that would help.

    • Medicos

      Hi Josh: U got that phrase from me During any season each team win at least 60 games and lose at least 60 games. I even heard JD use it after a Cub loss against the Pirates last week. It’s true. If a team can win most of those other 42-games they have a good chance of competing for a playoff berth..

      • Chad

        I’m sure you were the first one to ever come up with that anecdote.

      • candyland07

        The more accurate question should be; Which team will be the first team to reach 60 Loses this season? I would think the Cubs have to be near the top at that list.

        Its true most team will win and lose 60 games , but i tend to think, the Quickest team to 60 loses has to be a pretty.

        My top 5 teams to reach 60 loses Quickly are

        1.Astros ( they might not get 60 wins)
        2.Cubs ( see above ……)
        3.Miami
        4.Twins
        5.Rockies

        • http://www.friendly-confines.com hansman

          More accurate question?

          There was no other question to correct.

          • candyland07

            Just because every team will win and lose 60 games ( although this Cub team makes an argument that they might not get to 60 wins) its what you do with the other 42 games that matter .

            Well i think the teams that loses 60 games the quickest is usually the worst of the worst and this years Cubs team can be at the top of the list.

  • Medicos

    Interesting that in the past decade the Cubs finished over .500 from 2007-2009. Been a fan since 1952 and only 2 other times have they finished plus .500 in consecutive seasons: 1968-1972 (Durocher years) and 2003-2004 (Baker years). The odds of this happening again until 2018 are not too promising.

  • Kyle

    Hipster Kyle was unhappy long before the 4-10 start.

    • Fishin Phil

      I’m guessing Hipster Kyle came out of the womb unhappy.

      • notcubbiewubbie

        amen

        • Jon

          He probably posts using a MAC too

      • JulioZuleta

        To be fair, Phil, I don’t think most babies come out with a smile on their faces.

    • MightyBear

      Hipster Kyle isn’t happy unless he’s unhappy.

    • DarthHater

      Wait, what happened to D-Bag Kyle?

      • Kyle

        Those are synonymous.

  • Stu

    Cub fans have been told all along to not expect a winning baseball club. So my question to current ticket holders, what do you root for when you go to a game?

    You hope for a win, but if they lose it really isn’t a loss because the future is going to be special? Is that satisfying when you leave the ballpark?

    It will always seem odd to expect fans to pay good money to watch a bad team. And I understand the debt/finances, etc.

    Do you guys care about the financial arrangement of the restaurant that you eat at if the food is bad?

    • Edwin

      Baseball teams aren’t restaurants.

    • Sandberg

      What’s not to understand? If a season ticket holder let’s them go now, if/when the front office is successful, you likely won’t get them back for many, many years. It’ll be just like the Blackhawks, except more insane.

      • Sandberg

        lets* (damn it)

      • Brocktoon

        I let mine go this season, re-signed up for the list and hope I’ll get them back after people keep dumping theirs/turn down their turn in the coming years. If they get good earlier than I expect, cest’ la vie, I can survive without them.

  • itzscott

    I never could understand why this blog chose to trumpet the pick-ups of players like Bonafacio, Sweeney, Kalish, etc as good acquisitions (ie: I like this acquisition!).

    I’d be hard pressed to actually believe that any team starting other team’s castoffs could be anywhere near competitive.

    I get the rah-rah, all things all Cubs all good mentality, but at some point there needs to be an honest perspective.

    • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

      Because they acquired 3 guys who are easily major league players and still have upside for absolutely nothing, what’s so hard to understand?

      • itzscott

        Realistically, what kind of upside???

        What’s hard to understand is how anyone can believe that players that aren’t good enough to make another team, whether that team is good or bad, is collectively going to be good enough to compete with the Cardinals or any other halfway decent team.

        • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

          Sweeney and Kalish both could be very good 4th outfielders/average center fielders and Bonifacio could be an average 2nd baseman or well above average utility guy. It’s all about expectations. These guys weren’t brought in to be saviors, but when you can acquire solid major league talent for nothing, especially when you’re in the position the Cubs are, you do it without hesitation.

          • Jon

            The problem lies when you have a collection of 5 of these guys(4th outfielders), and that’s your starting outfield for the year. That’s bad.

            • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

              Every team still needs depth. This shouldn’t stop you from acquiring talent. The Cubs were not out of the Jacoby Ellsbury and Shin-Soo Choo sweepstakes because they had acquired Kalish and Sweeney.

              • Jon

                I guess the lament should be then not aquirig them, but going into the year with nothing but them.

                I don’t even think they considered Ellsbury or Choo though….

                • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                  That line of thinking is completely reasonable, but the idea that these guys were bad signings is just silly. I agree they didn’t really consider those Choo or Ellsbury, I was just trying to illustrate that having Kalish and Sweeney on the roster didn’t prevent the Cubs from going after better players.

                  • candyland07

                    But the Cubs did not go after better players and did not sign better players . SO….. The players the Cubs did sign are playing pretty horrible and those players are being judge . Those players have played and have contribute to a below replacement level type of player expectation.

                    • Eternal Pessimist

                      But they were still good signings…just not game-changers. The cubs would likely have needed to sign 6 high-end, nearing their decline, signed beyond ttheir peak guys at a price that they couldn’t nearly cover with current revenue levels.

                      Say they sign a 6, hane a pretty good year, but probably no WS rings. Maybe one or two of those signings suffer a major injury. You are still paying beyond your revenue so cannot sign anyone else as your old stars decline.

                      Your window is closing before it had a chance to open. No thanks!

            • itzscott

              >> The problem lies when you have a collection of 5 of these guys(4th outfielders), and that’s your starting outfield for the year. <> Sweeney and Kalish both could be very good 4th outfielders <<

              FCTommy – That may be true, but the Cubs are using them as starters!

              How could anyone realistically expect the Cubs' record to be any better than it is? A mediocre AAA team would likely do as "well". They're a poorly constructed team.

              Forget the genius of Theo & Jedd, the true genius/magician is Bosio and what he's been able to get out of a rag tag pitching staff.

              • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                They were signed to be 4th (or platoon) outfielders and that’s what they have been.

                • Funn Dave

                  You can’t have a fourth outfielder if you don’t have first, second, and third outfielders….

                  • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                    Considering that “4th outfielder” is an arbitrary term, you can absolutely have 4th outfielders without having 1/2/3 outfielders. For example, a team can have 2 #1 pitchers or they can have 0 #1 pitchers, it’s just an arbitrary rating.

                    • itzscott

                      Okee-Doke, Tommy

                      All things all Cubs all good. I get it.

                    • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                      I never said they were, but when put in context, I liked the signings. They aren’t going to make the Cubs playoff team, but they are good depth signings and they are young enough to where they could help in the future. I think Darth said it perfectly,

                      “Although it is a minor pick-up that isn’t going to have any earthshaking positive impact, it’s still a good pick-up when appropriately viewed in a reasonable context – i.e. when judged as what it is, not as what it is not and does not purport to be.”

                  • DarthHater

                    Hey, the Cubs just acquired first, second, and third outfielders! Cool!! :-P

      • Brocktoon

        Considering Sweeney and Kalish were signed to minor league deals in the past 375 days, I have a hard time saying they’re “easily major league players”

        • Eternal Pessimist

          That is a fair point.

    • Edwin

      Collectively, no, a team can’t compete with “cast offs” from other teams. But teams like the 2002 A’s, 2011 Diamondbacks, and even 2013 Pirates were able to do pretty well with the help of “castoff” players.

      • itzscott

        >> The problem lies when you have a collection of 5 of these guys(4th outfielders), and that’s your starting outfield for the year. <> Sweeney and Kalish both could be very good 4th outfielders <<

        FCTommy – That may be true, but the Cubs are using them as starters!

        How could anyone realistically expect the Cubs' record to be any better than it is? A mediocre AAA team would likely do as "well". They're a poorly constructed team.

        Forget the genius of Theo & Jedd, the true genius/magician is Bosio and what he's been able to get out of a rag tag pitching staff.

        • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

          If you think a mediocre AAA team would do as well as this Cubs team, then you clearly don’t know a thing about baseball

        • jp3

          I don’t know about a mediocre AAA but I’ve seen plenty of Durham bulls teams that were far more talented over the years. Ironically justin ruggiano struggled for playing time on those Bulls teams too. Considering those teams at times have had Evan longoria, David Price, BJ Upton, Reid Brignac, Ben zobrist, Desmond Jennings it’s not surprising they would’ve won their share of games

          • itzscott

            Didn’t the real Cubs lose to the Iowa Cubs at the end of spring training?

            • Brocktoon

              That means nothing.

    • DarthHater

      “I never could understand why this blog chose to trumpet the pick-ups of players like Bonafacio, Sweeney, Kalish, etc as good acquisitions (ie: I like this acquisition!).”

      “I like this acquisition” does not equal “trumpet[ing] the pick-ups.” when Brett says he likes a minor acquisition, he always includes the nuances about why, although it is a minor pick-up that isn’t going to have any earthshaking positive impact, it’s still a good pick-up when appropriately viewed in a reasonable context – i.e. when judged as what it is, not as what it is not and does not purport to be.

      It’s perfectly reasonable and fair to complain when these kinds of pick-ups — which clearly cannot (individually or collectively) make the Cubs a good team — are the only transactions in sight. But it does not follow that the pick-ups have no value at all and, when Brett posts something that explains what limited value they do have, it is neither reasonable nor fair to mischaracterize what he says and then bitch about the mischaracterization.

      • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

        Context means nothing to these people darth

        • DarthHater

          Life was so much simpler before we had all these civility rules and I could just respond to this kind of crap with a really insulting meme… :-D

          • Fishin Phil

            Yes, I do miss the one that depicted Rectal Migration of the Cranium.

            • DarthHater

              I have it saved for special occasions.

      • itzscott

        Easy there, Action.

        Who mentioned Brett’s name anywhere?

        Additionally, as a former attorney don’t you think he’d be capable of pleading his own case if he felt he needed to defend himself?

        • DarthHater

          You wrote: “why this blog chose to trumpet.”

          Brett is the sole proprietor of “this blog.” Ergo, criticizing choices of the blog is the same as criticizing choices of Brett.

          As for pleading his case, I see no reason not to refute asinine comments just because they happen to be directed at Brett.

          • candyland07

            ”Brett is the sole proprietor of “this blog.” Ergo, criticizing choices of the blog is the same as criticizing choices of Brett”

            Get of your high horse , comments are made idea are given and I for one will not just roll over cause you say so.

            • Patrick W.

              What if he offers to pat your belly?

            • mjhurdle

              if you won’t just roll over, could you at least be persuaded to use proper punctuation?

              • candyland07

                i doubt it – just skip when i write.

                • mjhurdle

                  I don’t skip, so I am probably not going to start skipping around simply because you are writing something.

            • DarthHater

              (a) I didn’t say anything to you

              (b) I made a comment and gave my ideas. That’s what we’re here for, isn’t it? So take your own high horse and shove it.

              • Patrick W.

                [img]http://www.visualphotos.com/photo/1×7775793/white_horse_rolling_over_grass_in_field_NP01001794.jpg[/img]

              • Patrick W.

                Doh

                [img]http://www.dolorex.info/images/horse-rolling-over.jpg[/img]

  • Rebuilding

    Wasn’t it 1997 that we started 0-14? Now that was demoralizing

  • cubmig

    I know what’s been said about the numbers saying this season being no “different” than last year. Still, in the light of the new FO, its approach to building in flexibility, the signings, new manager, it still boggles the mind that those changes are predicted to have little or no effect for moving the team forward (demonstrated by a respectable final W-L record). I, for one, don’t accept the low expectation outlook. Against the big picture, this year is a critical one; one that should show a moving forward—a coalescing of ability and strategy that are producing signs affirming “The Plan” is headed in an up direction. If the last ten year starts are any indication of this year’s end, what does that say about progress to that end? And when the kids come on board, what kind of predictions will we be reading? Will we be reading about how much maturing time will be needed to hone the new into a single well-oiled team? Will that be an issue? For that reason this year takes on an even more relevant importance in the scheme of things.

    I say the FO must do something to change what we’re seeing as well as cause us to change our level of expectations.

    Something’s gotta’ change to

  • ari gold

    It’s always been obvious that we weren’t going to compete this year, so this is what I would call a “successful” season:

    1. Castro and Rizzo have good seasons and cement themselves as part of the core.
    2. The top prospects have healty and successful seasons
    3. Hopefully someone on the roster takes a step forward and becomes part of the core
    4. Some of our lower level prospects take big steps forward like Alcantara did last year. Think guys like Tseng or Blackburn.

    • candyland07

      I would not call that success i would call that expectations regardless of the product on the field. I expect Castro and Rizzo to have better 2014 season -in part 2013 was horrible lets just skip the line stats ( they did nothing over all / for every stat that shows hope / a different stat can show regression)

      2. top prospects have healty and successful seasons . I would hope that is an expectation anything less is why coaches are hired and adjustment are made.

      3.. Hopefully someone … step forward = Kalish nuff said Sweeny nuff said.

      4.Some of our lower level prospects take big steps ….. every year in every organization some lower prospect will take big steps – i just dont understand how that translate to success.

      • ari gold

        1. Yeah that is the expectation, but regardless I would deem that as a successful season if they met expectation.

        2. Top prospects flame out all the time or get injured. Look at Soler.

        3. Maybe someone like Arietta?

        4. That wouldn’t translate to success at the major league level at least not yet. By big steps I mean become top 100 players. It happens every year, but doesn’t happen in every organization every year.

        • candyland07

          i hear ya , Its really a pity when this front office makes its fans look hard at what success means. Is a 100 near loss season a failure or just a successful way in rebuilding. Playing platoon baseball a successful way to win at baseball games or a cheap act to save money while calling it fun .Praising the farm system while destroying and not improving major league team so we can continue to praise farm system.

          Success – the end product, the Cubs still lose -nothing successful in that..

          • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

            “Playing platoon baseball a successful way to win at baseball games or a cheap act to save money while calling it fun”

            The Oakland A’s say hi

            • Jon

              Billy needs to give Theo a few tips on how to do it right though….because what we got is ugly.

            • candyland07

              and the yankess say Hi to oakland back. The A’s front office plays platoons cause they can identify which players need to be platoon and they do with care and thought and bring the right personal in . Moss sits against certain players . If a regular player gets hurt / they can substitute that player with a different player that roster spot is not hurt by the production level. The Cubs dont do that.

              • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                What do the Yankees have to do with anything??

                • candyland07

                  27 championship and the fact that i doubt the A’s have ever been shutout twice in one day by those yankees also the Yanks has a different buisness model that has produce more wins and playoff appearance than the A’s in the last 14 years .

                  I guess if the Cubs are using the A’s model – I cant see anywhere that The A’s have been so terrible to produce 90 plus wins to aid its baseball plan. over long period of time – should i go on………

                  • candyland07

                    opps 90 plus lost seasons to aid its baseball plan.

                  • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                    The Yankees have a business model that is financially impossible for the Cubs to employ so nice try there.

                    From 2006 to 2011 the A’s didn’t have a record better than .500 so good try there

                    No they weren’t as bad as the Cubs have been the last couple years, but there is absolutely zero benefit in having 85 losses instead of 95 losses.

                    • candyland07

                      This no benefit of 85 lost season to a 95 lost season is getting old and dumber by the season. It matters . it matter to the Business side , it matters to the fan . it matters to rating of a TV game . It matters just because you choose to trivialize the difference of ten games it all matters . it matters in payroll, it matters if I should decide to pay for premium tickets to a certain game . it matters

                    • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                      To the simple minded and short sighted, sure it matters

                    • candyland07

                      its not a pissing contest, the Cubs Suck and this front office is a reflection, of that thing that you can not change in the standing Losing breeds losers .

                      You insulting the Oakland front office by comparing to the Cubs is difficult to comprehend but nice try in trying to insinuate the just because the A’s are successful dont mean the Cubs front office can. but nice try .

                    • Jon

                      I think it depends on the context of your roster

                      If you have alot of guys that are older and not part of future plans, yeah, you might want to lose 95. But at some point the losses become of function of young players not panning out or meeting expectations, or inablity to supplement the roster adequatly via FA.

                    • candyland07

                      three years is not short sighted – ask the yankees or ask the A’s if done correctly – Three years of bad baseball is three years of bad baseball that this front office has given Chicago. and this front office are now in a state of lying to its fans

                    • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                      Yes the Cubs are hopeless candy. Theo, Jed, and Jason McLeod are the dumbest front office in baseball history and a homeless guy I find on the corner could do a better job of building an organization.

                      Your constant drubbing of the front office and complete disregard for the positive things they do is old. If it bothers you this much, just don’t follow the Cubs, it’s that easy.

                    • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                      Also very well said Jon, I think that was what 2012 and 13 were for the Cubs, getting rid of the older/not part of the future guys. If Castro and Rizzo continue their good starts, then I think 2015 is a season that you have to look at for team improvement. If not, then there is legitimate gripe, but for now, lets see how it plays out.

                    • http://www.teamfums.org MichiganGoat

                      Tommy your talking to a brick wall that cannot be demolished, best to just go around.

                    • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                      Nice Goat, I laughed haha

                    • candyland07

                      now you gonna revert to sarcasm , The Constant drubbing of the front will change when the product on the field gets better. I do not blindly fall to the alter of the front office and say Yes, yes yes, I ask questions , i ask why , I can be wrong but i can also be right. And this front office has not really given me anything to cheer about in the last three years on the MLB level.

                      When the Cubs win is when the drubbing will stop and the disappointment of not winning rather than the expectation of losing or finding solace in just winning a series as it is today.

                    • DarthHater

                      That brick wall’s a historic landmark, Goat. Been there for over 105 years.

                    • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

                      Should we plant ivy? Award landmark status?

                    • DarthHater

                      “The Constant drubbing of the front will change when the product on the field gets better.”

                      Why don’t you go drub Theo’s email inbox 500 times a day and tell him it won’t stop until the on-field product gets better?

                    • DarthHater

                      “Should we plant ivy? Award landmark status?”

                      If your comment gets lost in the bullshit, it’s a ground rule double. :-D

                    • ssckelley

                      Candyland, so why do you even bother? What drives you to get on this blog every day to bitch about the FO and us fans?

                    • candyland07

                      I do not come on this blog everyday and I do not bitch about the Cubs everyday but I also do not feel this front office is so great that it can not make mistakes. Those mistakes have given the Cubs the worst two year history in this franchise. If you look around and listen to any kind of media and this is one outlet. Cub fans every where are getting frustrated.

                      Yet this site in general is so pro front office that its laughable but if one can get passed all the I love you thrown towards Team Epstein. Brett does a great service by giving Cub fans a central hub to explore and read about Cub news.

                      Luke does a superb job of writing about Cubs prospects and he usually does it with candor and reports it with little fanfare and this site is the best in my opinion in that department.

                      I tend to believe the front office is responsible for the players on the field. and it actually do not matter the actual person in the office. But i do see that because team Epstein is in the front office then – boo hoo to the people that question his judgement. I look at standing , its an embarrassment . just like the Astros except they do not have a team Epstein for a cult to pray to.

                      When the Cubs win – I would probably have better thing to do – like catch a ballgame at Wrigley

                      But i do fundamental disagree with the way the Club is being run and I thought the Cubs would be above to tank seasons and when this season is done to tank seasons after season after season.

                      Will the Cubs ever be good . yes they will as will the Astros one day, any organization that has tanked liked the Astros and Cubs will eventually have the players to be decent.

                      its odd the same way most people in this site make fun of a poor Astro team , well many people make fun of the Cubs.

                      you know what more depressing having a site that caters to the lunacy of certain man that does not wear A Cub uniform .

                      but i overlook all that, cause reading excuse after excuse is comical. But Brett in my opinion works hard to give all Cub fans a hub of news , I just take exception when its always about the how the plan will do this or that ,with out looking whats happening on the field.

                      For a team that has done so poorly these last three years . I am the least of anybodies worries.

                      Soon in a year or two the media and more Cub fans will react , and they already are to some extent. I do not believe in the plan.

                      but the solution is to just win .and prove all those critics and bad people wrong . it has not happen yet/

                    • DarthHater

                      “Those mistakes have given the Cubs the worst two year history in this franchise.”

                      1961-62 was worse. So was 1980-81 (albeit with one strike-shortened season).

                      It is possible to make the point you were making by saying the mistakes have created “one of the worst two-year periods in franchise history” or have created “a horrendous two years.” It’s actually not necessary to pull made-up facts out of your ass just because you think they sound good.

                  • candyland07

                    Don’t choke on that bison dog Darth. The cubs front office in the last two years has given the Cubs it worst two year history.

                    Lie, change facts, do what you must but it is a fact, also the Cubs will lose close to 100 games this year. might not even win 60 games now that is a predictable guess. And I hope wrong and i do look like an ass , but i doubt it .

                    And Darth here is laughing at you…….. go ahead google the Cubs worst two consecutive years , it aint those years.

                    go have a nice bison dog.

                    • BT

                      I don’t know how to answer this without being offensive, but I’ll give it a whirl.

                      Your lack of logic is breathtaking. On one hand, you mock the team for “tanking”. Tanking is, of course, the act of INTENTIONALLY losing games. On the other hand, you rail about the “mistakes” of the front office which has brought about the worst two consecutive years in team history. This, of course, suggests the team was trying to be good, but failed, on an historical scale.

                      Someone with an ounce of internal logical consistancy would see these two approaches are mutually exclusive. You can’t be simultaneously trying to lose and trying to win and failing at both. Yet you find the time to ding the front office for both of them.

                      Of course the truth is neither of these things. The Cubs are not trying to tank, nor are they sacrificing anything in a false (and obviously hopeless) attempt to win now. However, guys like you will either be too dense, or too self satisfied to ever understand this.

                      It’s actually fairly comical.

                    • Brocktoon

                      So your response to him correcting you on your statement is to ignore the correction and spew another falsehood.

      • Chad

        Isn’t the definition of success meeting and exceeding expectations? The only way it is not a success is if they don’t meet the expectations. Anything over that is gravy.

        • DarthHater

          So, if we lower the bar far enough, we’re a dynasty?

          • candyland07

            Wow . that made me laugh. it was a cute reply.

  • Rob_Falk

    Was it 2011 or 2005 when hit hit the .500 record mark every even game until we fell off at game 24?

  • http://bleachernation.com woody

    Can we cut through all the bull crap already. This team is a loser by design and was obviously patched together to aquire another high draft pick in 2015. With the exception of Rizzo and Castro and Beef everybody else on this team currently are fringe players. Olt and Lake are getting their chance and at this point have yet to show anything of note. We can only wait until after this season to see if the FO makes any moves in FA that amount to more than flip candidates and roster fillers. That will be a big indicater of whether they’re ready to end this viscious cycle of tanking and flipping that we have seen for what is now going on the fourth year. It is what it is so don’t get your undies in a bunch.

    • Jon

      Time is flat circle. We will likely be having this very convo at this time next year.

      • DarthHater

        “The internet is a moebius circle-jerk. We will definitely be having this very convo at this time next year.”

        FTFY :-P

  • Hee Seop Chode

    save, copy, and paste for each of the next 3 seasons when frustrated:

    “Can we cut through all the bull crap already. [sic] This team is a loser by design and was obviously patched together to aquire another high draft pick in 201_. With the exception of Rizzo and Castro and _____ everybody else on this team currently are fringe players. ___ and ____ are getting their chance and at this point have yet to show anything of note. We can only wait until after this season to see if the FO makes any moves in FA that amount to more than flip candidates and roster fillers. That will be a big indicater of whether they’re ready to end this viscious cycle of tanking and flipping that we have seen for what is now going on the ______ year. It is what it is so don’t get your undies in a bunch.”

    PS, great use of It is what it is

  • Medicos

    Since there was no Cubs game today, we went to see DRAFT DAY. Take your wife or girlfriend. Even if they aren’t into sports and pro football, they’ll enjoy the flick. Kevin Costner definitely knows how to act in a sports movie: Tin Cup, Field of Dreams, Love of the Game, Bull Durham. Theo’s relatives Uncle Julius and Grandpa Phil wrote the classic film CASABLANCA. I wonder which Hollywood actor will portray Theo in the movie about our Cubs winning the World Series hopefully sometime in the 21st century????

    • jp3

      Nope. That won’t happen at our current rate. Good to hear about draft day, I was hoping that wouldn’t be a bomb

  • Ill see you at Sluggers.

    So many people sound surprised by our bad start to the season this year….what exactly were you expecting? A turnaround season? A 9-5 start? We’re gonna be bad for the next couple seasons at least. Once we have the $$, a young core, and a renovated stadium, then I believe we will do what it takes in free agency to get the players we need. I also cannot listen anymore to those complaining about the OF. Ellsbury and Choo were overpriced and nothing special. I never wanted to see them on the Cubs, and quite frankly I’m glad we have a AAAA outfield because when Almora, Alcantara, Soler, Bryant, etc get called up I would prefer that an overpriced mid-30′s outfielder is not blocking them. On another note, I think it would be awesome if we tried to sign a high school player with the #4 pick this season who doesn’t sign so that next year we get TWO top five draft picks. That, would be awesome.

    • Jon

      Where do I begin….

      The blocking notion is a bit silly. First off, Bryant is still 3rd baseman, they have said this, and while it’s possible he could move to outfield, I think they will give him every opportunity to stick at 3rd. Almora is still in low A, and nothing is promised with Soler. He’s a walking injury at this point. Furthermore, there is always ways to shuffle lineups and positions. If a player is hitting lights out, he will be in the lineup. The last case of a major prospect being blocked was Ryan Howard, because he couldn’t play any other position, and well the Phillies.

      Ellsbury and Choo certainly are overpriced, but nothing special? Come one now.

      • Jon

        Almora is in high A, my mistake.

      • Brocktoon

        Furthermore, it’s been brought up several times that we’ll likely trade from our hitting to acquire pitching. We’re not getting a pitcher worth a damn for Christian Villanueva and Jae-Hoon Ha. We’re going to have to actually give up something of worth. The likelihood that we develop a 3B and 3 OFers from our current minors is basically nil.

        • Jon

          Could you imagine the nightmare situation of having all this surplus talent and not knowing what to do with it? It would keep me up at night.

    • Edwin

      Why is having 2 top 5 draft picks next year better than having 1 top 5 pick this year and 1 top 5 pick next year?

      • Jon

        I read somewhere where a few experts said that the top 3 last years draft would all be drafted before the top 4 in this draft. So trying that strategy last year really would have backfired this year.

        Having the comp pick is a nice fail safe, but it shouldn’t be standard strategy.

        • http://fullcount1544.blogspot.com FullCountTommy

          Plus it significantly decreases your draft pool money, hurting your chances at signing your 2nd-10th round picks

    • cubmig

      So……let me ask you “Ill see you at Sluggers”.:

      Do you think RR is telling his players: “Guys, don’t worry about winning. Winning doesn’t matter; not right now. Go out there and just have fun and stay healthy. We have the next few years to go before we start to bust our balls to win it all.”

  • Napercal

    The Cubs haven’t finished any of those seasons particularly well either.

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+