Theo Epstein on the Cub’s hitters:
It’s probably time to stop evaluating this in terms of talent and start evaluating it in terms of production
Yes, exactly! Looking forward on the conclusions and actions taken as a result of such an evaluation.
@frankm Have the Cubs slumped back into their long standing role as the loser team, over a century between World Series wins?
@Ron Most Cubs fans around here would probably be happier if they did. They seemed to have lost their raison d’etre after winning. They are so distinctive any more.
@rmcrob Ha ha ha. You're probably right. I grew up a Cards fan and never understand how the Cubs could have such loyal fans. It must be really fun to watch a game in that park, win or lose.
@Ron Heck no! The Cubs of my childhood was happy to fill Wrigley field and really didn't seem to care whether they won or lost or made the playoffs. The current ownership and leadership expect to make the playoffs every year at a minimum.
I think Theo's comment above (Epstein is the team's president) is a fair evaluation of the current situation. They lost the LCS last year because of poor hitting, but having come off a World Series win with the talent they had, line up changes did not appear to be warranted. After a second year of the same performance at the plate, you have to now have to look at changes to make the line more productive.
I am a life long Cubs fan, and not because they were the "lovable losers."
@grayareas Yes, I am, but not with the same fervor as my brother. I lived in CA for fifty years and the last 18 or so years were in the SF Bay Area. Being a night owl, I started listening to the radio replay of Giant games late at night as I worked. The Giant broadcasters were sooooo good, I became a Giants fan too, which was greatly strengthened when they went on their winning ways with Posey, Lincecum and their new ballpark. When the Cards play the Giants, I don't know who to root for,
@frankm So a change at the top! Very interesting. I read that this year the Cubs scored less than two runs in about 1/4 of its games. And of course it's one run in 13 innings that finally did them in. And that one run came in part from the lightning speed of a pinch runner, not a hitter. Are pitchers that much better than batters these days? They were getting hits, but not stringing them together. If you're right, good hitters may be getting fat offers from the Cubs.
@Ron Haha. I root for a lot of teams based on having moved around the country a bit, or because of other allegiances I’ve developed. Sometimes I’m left in a quandary when they play each other, but, mostly, I think it just adds to my love of the various sports and the enjoyment I get from watching (and listening to!) them. ⚾️ 🏀 ⚽️ 😬
@Ron One factor is pitching, particularly more use of bullpens and specialty pitchers. Overall pitching can be more dominating than perhaps 20 years ago. Another big factor is the use of data and shifting. I think the shift has having a big affect on batting averages both in terms of ground ball outs AND a greater emphasis on home runs. (If you can't beat the shift, hit over it.)
The 2018 Cubs had only one player with a .300 BA or higher, and he it .305 and was not an every day player. The Astros have only one player over .300, hitting .316; The Red Sox have two, one at .346 and the other at .330.
@frankm Maybe MLB needs to make some adjustments too, not just individual teams. How about a little narrower strike zone? I think the fans like to watch a lot of hits and especially home runs. Great pitching can be pretty boring from the stands.
@Ron Nice idea. Not going to happen. It took MLB much too long to add instant replay and if you watch any games today you know why. They could introduce rules to limit shifting, perhaps force the second base position to stay within a certain distance from the dirt. Even that, though I doubt seeing changes.
@frankm I agree. MLB has proudly been the no change sport, keeping a mountain of stats that go back a century. Compare to the NFL which has rule changes every year and teams learn to adjust to the new game every year. And which league has had the bigger following in recent years?
As a Red Sox fan there is always a thought in the back of my head everytime the Soxs don’t go as far as they are suppose to, that this is a start of another eighty years of futility. I think the Cub fans are like the Red Sox fans in that they always see a singular bad event as the start of a long series of bad events. No Yankee fan thinks that way, a bad year is just that a bad year and they will be back to being champions next year. @frankm @Ron
@klandwehr @Ron The Cubs of my childhood were own by the Tribune Company, and a corporate owner is not as invested as an individual/family. That changed with the Ricketts bought the team. A lot of investment has been made to upgrade the team, the statdium, and the entire surround neighborhood, primarily to make money, which is driven by winning.
I don't fear the Cubs will revert back to the way they were through the 70s and 80s, at least not with the current ownership and leadership. I do think it is apparent changes are needed in order for the Cubs to keep pace with other teams in their division and league.
@frankm A change of ownership can make a huge difference. The best example is the Warriors. They struggled for a long time, then got new owners in 2010. It took them about four years to rework the team, but look at them since then. Up and up and up. The entire culture of the team changed for the better. So the Cubs might be able to pull it off too.