Dark Cloud or Good Sign?

[CubinNY]

EDIT: This was posted after the Marlins series and at a time when some where complaining that people were overly pessimistic about the Cubs.

 

In the interest of being fair and balanced I'll just post the numbers and let you sort it out.

 

The Cubs had 13 hits in three games and won two of them. As Pat said, "most of the time you'd be lucky to win one if you hit like that."

Edited May 8, 2006 by CubinNY

[Blueheart05]

In the interest of being fair and balanced I'll just post the numbers and let you sort it out.

 

The Cubs had 13 hits in three games and won two of them. As Pat said, "most of the time you'd be lucky to win one if you hit like that."

 

 

It's a good sign because it shows that they can win with minimal hits. Most days, their bullpen will be strong enough to hold off the opposition.

[soccer10k]

In the interest of being fair and balanced I'll just post the numbers and let you sort it out.

 

The Cubs had 13 hits in three games and won two of them. As Pat said, "most of the time you'd be lucky to win one if you hit like that."

 

 

It's a good sign because it shows that they can win with minimal hits. Most days, their bullpen will be strong enough to hold off the opposition.

 

I agree. We'll have our days when we hit. It also shows that our pitching has been stellar with the exception of Williamson's appearance today.

[jtownie]

I think a somewhat good sign is that we managed to walk 15 times in the series. 6 on Mon, 3 Tues, and 6 today. If we aren't going to get a lot of hits the least the lineup can do is produce some walks.

[UMFan83]

Add to that: The Cubs bullpen gave up 8 runs in the last 4 games and won 3 of them.

[CubmanPi]

I think a somewhat good sign is that we managed to walk 15 times in the series. 6 on Mon, 3 Tues, and 6 today. If we aren't going to get a lot of hits the least the lineup can do is produce some walks.

 

I think an equally bad sign is that we managed to walk the Marlins 14 times in this series (4, 2, 8 ). Given season-long trends, the Cubs drawing the walks seems to be the spike that will level out soon.

[CubinNY]

On further reflection, I'd have to say it was a dark cloud.

[CubfaninCA]

Winning 2 out of 3 is always good unless you're playing in the WBC. :)

 

Considering 4 of their 5 best players are either on the DL or AWOL (ARam), 13-10 is good.

[TheDude]

I was going to start a new thread, but saw this one. Maybe a title change would help clue folks into what this discussion is about.

 

I was going to comment that the Cubs are 14-10, but have given up more Runs (113) than they have scored (111).

 

Is it luck or timely performances in the games that matter? This team seems to have great intensity and focus in close games, but little in blowouts.

[biittner77]

II was going to comment that the Cubs are 14-10, but have given up more Runs (113) than they have scored (111).

 

Is it luck or timely performances in the games that matter? This team seems to have great intensity and focus in close games, but little in blowouts.

 

Wouldn't that be true of most teams?

[TheDude]

II was going to comment that the Cubs are 14-10, but have given up more Runs (113) than they have scored (111).

 

Is it luck or timely performances in the games that matter? This team seems to have great intensity and focus in close games, but little in blowouts.

 

Wouldn't that be true of most teams?

 

No, not necessarily. Perhaps I should have changed the wording from blowout to something less dramatic, like 3+ runs.

 

My primary point is that it is not easy to have a winning record with a negative run differential, which makes it vital that the team thrive in close game situations, which it has.

 

Many of us knew this team would have to win a lot of 4-3 or 3-2 type games. And the fact that they are leads me to believe the "good sign" line.

[CubinNY]

II was going to comment that the Cubs are 14-10, but have given up more Runs (113) than they have scored (111).

 

Is it luck or timely performances in the games that matter? This team seems to have great intensity and focus in close games, but little in blowouts.

 

Wouldn't that be true of most teams?

 

No, not necessarily. Perhaps I should have changed the wording from blowout to something less dramatic, like 3+ runs.

 

My primary point is that it is not easy to have a winning record with a negative run differential, which makes it vital that the team thrive in close game situations, which it has.

 

Many of us knew this team would have to win a lot of 4-3 or 3-2 type games. And the fact that they are leads me to believe the "good sign" line.

 

But unless the Cubs can do something about the run differential, over the long haul, the future, she ain't so bright.

[Prolifik]

I was going to start a new thread, but saw this one. Maybe a title change would help clue folks into what this discussion is about.

 

I was going to comment that the Cubs are 14-10, but have given up more Runs (113) than they have scored (111).

 

Is it luck or timely performances in the games that matter? This team seems to have great intensity and focus in close games, but little in blowouts.

 

ESPN's standings has Chicago's runs scored at 108, vice 111.

You always want to have a positive Run Differential. Right now the stats show that your pitching (on average) will give up more runs than your offense (on average) will score. Obviously a formula like this will equal more L's than W's and it is something that will catch up with your sooner rather than later. (see the Nats last year when they were on top of the NLEast for 2 months or so, but their Run Differential stayed in the negative.) You have D Lee out, Rusch sucks and Wood and Prior are not there so you know your pitching should be better and your hitting should be better. Its only a question of getting your injured players back to swing the run differential.

[LeftCoastCubFan]

But unless the Cubs can do something about the run differential, over the long haul, the future, she ain't so bright.

Are you serious? The Cubs had a decent run diferential that took a dip after being outscored by 23 runs on Saturday and Sunday. It's just an anomoly with so few games played. It will even out over the course of the season.

[moorecg]

But unless the Cubs can do something about the run differential, over the long haul, the future, she ain't so bright.

Are you serious? The Cubs had a decent run diferential that took a dip after being outscored by 23 runs on Saturday and Sunday. It's just an anomoly with so few games played. It will even out over the course of the season.

 

At the pace of the last 4 games it will take more than a season to even out. :oops: :cry:

[CubinNY]

Looking back now, it wasn't just a dark cloud but a Level 5 hurricane of the likes Cub fans haven't seen in years.

 

However, it was forcasted about as well as can be during the off-season by some here. Like Bush and Brownie, Hendry and Dusty didn't heed the warning signs and provide the necessary provisions to weather the storm.