Have you heard of a “desire path” before? It’s one of those things you’ll instantly recognize once I tell you about it, but maybe didn’t know it was “discussed” enough to have its own Wikipedia Page and subreddit. I bring it up because this concept is a near-perfect metaphor for the shortcomings of Jed Hoyer’s front office and the most recent iteration of the Chicago Cubs.
What is a Desire Path?
In short, the phrase describes an unplanned trail created as a more direct connection between two points. Desire paths are usually more efficient (or desirable), even though they circumvent the deliberately-constructed solution.
Here’s a real-life example, including a sign attempting to deter pedestrians from taking the desire path:
Pretty perfect example there.
So how does this relate to the Chicago Cubs, and why do I bring it up today?
To date, Jed Hoyer’s entire organizational philosophy and general team-building strategy is analogous to the path the planners WANTED the people to take — the paved path on the right, which looks nice and orderly, with its right angles and red bricks, perfectly paralleling the short fence along the side. This is how smart people have built paths for years! And THEORETICALLY, it is the right way to do it! It looks good and feels right. It’s safe and smart. And that’s how the book says it’s supposed to be.
The desire path, by contrast, is sort of like the philosophical approach of the Cubs’ upcoming opponent, the Philadelphia Phillies, who are about to clinch an NL East title.
That’s what made me think about all this stuff today.
Chicago Cubs vs Philadelphia Phillies
This week, the Phillies will welcome the Cubs to Citizens Bank Park, tied for the second-best record in MLB with the best World Series odds of any National League Team. And they’ll do so one year after reaching the NLCS, and two years after reaching the World Series. But they, of course, didn’t do it the “right way.” They didn’t follow the modern book.
The Phillies made bold trades and signed expensive star players like Bryce Harper ($330M), Trea Turner ($300M), Aaron Nola ($172M), J.T. Realmuto ($115.5M), Zack Wheeler ($42M/year), Nick Castellanos ($100M), and Kyle Schwarber ($79M) in consecutive offseasons. The Phillies threw caution to the wind when it came to expected defensive value or even simply long-term organizational stability (whatever that is supposed to mean to fans). And guess what? They’re being rewarded for it. And so are their fans.
Critics might look at the prospects they’ve traded away, the draft picks they’ve lost on qualified free agents, the “over-market” deals they’ve signed, or the positional overlap as a reason to believe a downturn is coming. And maybe it is. Maybe. But I can tell you – for certain – that the Cubs haven’t made the playoffs since the COVID-shortened 2020 season. So then, I ask “Why is three years of POTENTIAL badness for the Phillies three years from now more important than the three years of definite badness we just experienced as the Chicago Cubs rebuilt for a second time?
Someone from the Cubs front office might tell you that the Cubs will have a better shot at sustaining (or at least staving off…) the next downturn. And again, maybe that’s true. But it’s just not a guarantee. Indeed, more often than not, that’s just not how baseball works. Ask the Chicago White Sox, whose young, affordable, and controllable core was the envy of the league just a few years ago. Or, hell, ask the 2016 World Champion Chicago Cubs.
I am not saying that sustainability is a myth or even that it’s unimportant. In fact, I do believe that it should be a PART of the overall calculus. But too often with this recent front office, it has seemed like sustainability is treated both as (1) the final goal and (2) a guarantee. I don’t agree with either of those.
Now, there’s an important distinction here for those who would simply call all of this a “shortcut.”
I am absolutely NOT saying that the Phillies, or any team that operates this way (the Padres or the Mets, for other examples), are taking a shortcut — at least not in the pejorative sense. Desire paths are not merely shortcuts. They are often simply more efficient routes to the desired goal. And more importantly, they keep the actual goal/use-case OF THE WALKER (aka, the fans) in mind.
Because sometimes, a plan might make a whole lot of sense when the architect is putting it down on paper in his big city office, but in practice …
So that’s what will inform my plea to Jed Hoyer and the Chicago Cubs this offseason: Don’t play the odds. Stop trying to be perfect. And start considering and acting on what your actual consumers (Cubs fans, potential Marquee Sports Network subscribers … ) are here to see.
We all understand what you were going for with what has become a second major organizational rebuild in less than 15 years, but sustainability and efficiency should be little more than variables to consider along the way. Not the goals, in and of themselves. That’s not what we path-walkers are paying some of the highest prices in MLB for. And, more importantly, it’s not guaranteed to work anyway.
So abandon the book. Forget the best practices. And lean into the desire path. Sometimes, it’s simply better.