Bradley Signs with Cubs 3/$30 million (p. 33)

[Derwood]

what was the difference between the Dodgers team we went 0-3 against in the playoffs and the Dodgers team we went 4-2 against in the regular season?

[17 Seconds]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

 

first of all, it's 6 games. i have no idea why you're talking about the last 3 games of 2003 since only 1 player remains,

 

as for the "flawed" stuff, if by "flawed" you mean they choke, then yes. again, if you want to talk about this group of players not being able to handle the pressure that's fine. i can understand that, but don't act like it's anything other than that. dominant offenses don't have these supposed flaws that go undetected for 162 games and then immediately show up in the playoffs. you have no basis or reasoning for any of this. you're just talking out of your ass and looking for reasons that aren't there.

 

they choked. bottom line. nothing more. they choked. if these same players were "speedy and athletic", they would have still choked.

[17 Seconds]

what was the difference between the Dodgers team we went 0-3 against in the playoffs and the Dodgers team we went 4-2 against in the regular season?

 

they are the opposite of the cubs. instead of flaws being exposed in the postseason, they have special abilities that don't show up until the playoffs. that's just straight up awesome GMing from coletti

[Transmogrified Tiger]

what was the difference between the Dodgers team we went 0-3 against in the playoffs and the Dodgers team we went 4-2 against in the regular season?

 

5-2.

 

And I suspect the answer you'll get is Manny and something about the pitching matchups, although we were 3-3 against Lowe/Billingsley/Kuroda in the regular season, with Gallagher getting 2 of those starts(1-1) for the Cubs.

 

EDIT: And by 3-3 I of course mean 4-2, because it would take a real idiot to claim to lose 3 games against those guys and only 2 against the team overall.

[Derwood]

what was the difference between the Dodgers team we went 0-3 against in the playoffs and the Dodgers team we went 4-2 against in the regular season?

 

5-2.

 

And I suspect the answer you'll get is Manny and something about the pitching matchups, although we were 3-3 against Lowe/Billingsley/Kuroda in the regular season, with Gallagher getting 2 of those starts(1-1) for the Cubs.

 

NO mention from wrigley23 about Dempster walking the ballpark in Game 1......

[USSoccer]

I bet I could pick two 3-game series from the 2007-2008 seasons to illustrate the point that the Cubs have the best offense in baseball history.

 

Because that's what your point is. You're using 6 games spread over 700 days to draw conclusions about a team that won 85 and 97 games over a much more valid sample size.

[davearm2]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

That's not a tough one at all. Anyone with any concept of what constitutes a statistically significant sample would never draw the conclusion you have based on a handful of ballgames.

 

Look there's nothing that Hendry (or any other GM in baseball) can do to make his team...

injury-proof

cold-at-the-wrong-time-proof

choke-proof

were-great-in-the-field-all-year-but-suddenly-cant-catch-a-cold-proof

cant-find-the-plate-and-then-serves-up-a-salami-proof

 

So in light of those basic realities, I'd sure love to see what your plan to "fix" the Cubs, and make them into an invincible postseason force looks like.

[samhainn77]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

 

Fantastic sample size! Why didn't you just use their horrible record in opening day games? Or day before all star break?

[samhainn77]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

 

It's pretty disingenuous to say 9 games in a row, the only hitter from 2003 on either of the 2007 or 2008 teams is Ramirez.

 

And yes, I'd say that it's entirely possible to have 6 poor offensive games in a row, especially when you face good pitching. I don't think speed and athleticism is really the missing piece here, considering the Cubs have good speed and good athletes for the position around most of the diamond(Soto, Fontenot, and Ramirez are the exceptions that come to mind). Plus, the Rockies and Phillies aren't exactly loaded with speed and athletes all around the diamond, and the Rockies should be the textbook example that yes, it is possible to get flukishly hot or cold for a couple series at a time.

 

If you want to say that a big left handed bat would make a nice difference in the playoffs as most (good) pitchers are right handed and the good ones can get our RH heavy lineup out, that's not a terrible argument(I'd also buy that failing to get out to a good start with the expectations of the home crowd in a short series is another factor). However, that's much easier said than done and comes with tradeoffs of health(Bradley) and/or defense(Dunn, Abreu). And most importantly, it's not indicative of some wildly flawed approach at building an offense. For years we've had crummy offenses, and now that we have a very good one we shouldn't go about making wholesale philosophical changes because we didn't do well in two playoff series.

 

Related to the point, where's the call for a different philosophical approach to building the rotation and pen? The Cubs have only averaged 2 runs per game the last 6 playoff games, but they're also giving up 6 runs per game over that timeframe.

 

Good point! Why aren't we cornering the market on "Big Game" pitchers and not these regular season studs? Our focus should be on Oliver Perez or Livan Hernandez!

[samhainn77]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

That's not a tough one at all. Anyone with any concept of what constitutes a statistically significant sample would never draw the conclusion you have based on a handful of ballgames.

 

Look there's nothing that Hendry (or any other GM in baseball) can do to make his team...

injury-proof

cold-at-the-wrong-time-proof

choke-proof

were-great-in-the-field-all-year-but-suddenly-cant-catch-a-cold-proof

cant-find-the-plate-and-then-serves-up-a-salami-proof

 

So in light of those basic realities, I'd sure love to see what your plan to "fix" the Cubs, and make them into an invincible postseason force looks like.

 

4 Jim Leyritz clones + 4 Scott Brosius clones!

[17 Seconds]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

 

It's pretty disingenuous to say 9 games in a row, the only hitter from 2003 on either of the 2007 or 2008 teams is Ramirez.

 

And yes, I'd say that it's entirely possible to have 6 poor offensive games in a row, especially when you face good pitching. I don't think speed and athleticism is really the missing piece here, considering the Cubs have good speed and good athletes for the position around most of the diamond(Soto, Fontenot, and Ramirez are the exceptions that come to mind). Plus, the Rockies and Phillies aren't exactly loaded with speed and athletes all around the diamond, and the Rockies should be the textbook example that yes, it is possible to get flukishly hot or cold for a couple series at a time.

 

If you want to say that a big left handed bat would make a nice difference in the playoffs as most (good) pitchers are right handed and the good ones can get our RH heavy lineup out, that's not a terrible argument(I'd also buy that failing to get out to a good start with the expectations of the home crowd in a short series is another factor). However, that's much easier said than done and comes with tradeoffs of health(Bradley) and/or defense(Dunn, Abreu). And most importantly, it's not indicative of some wildly flawed approach at building an offense. For years we've had crummy offenses, and now that we have a very good one we shouldn't go about making wholesale philosophical changes because we didn't do well in two playoff series.

 

Related to the point, where's the call for a different philosophical approach to building the rotation and pen? The Cubs have only averaged 2 runs per game the last 6 playoff games, but they're also giving up 6 runs per game over that timeframe.

 

Good point! Why aren't we cornering the market on "Big Game" pitchers and not these regular season studs? Our focus should be on Oliver Perez or Livan Hernandez!

 

jeff weaver and david eckstein should be priorities

[davearm2]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

That's not a tough one at all. Anyone with any concept of what constitutes a statistically significant sample would never draw the conclusion you have based on a handful of ballgames.

 

Look there's nothing that Hendry (or any other GM in baseball) can do to make his team...

injury-proof

cold-at-the-wrong-time-proof

choke-proof

were-great-in-the-field-all-year-but-suddenly-cant-catch-a-cold-proof

cant-find-the-plate-and-then-serves-up-a-salami-proof

 

So in light of those basic realities, I'd sure love to see what your plan to "fix" the Cubs, and make them into an invincible postseason force looks like.

 

4 Jim Leyritz clones + 4 Scott Brosius clones!

Or maybe Hendry needs to stock the roster completely with hitters that absolutely hammer very good pitching. That ought to play well in the postseason.

 

Not sure it would work in the regular season though, when the pitching isn't as good. So that could be a problem.

[samhainn77]

ok...i'll bite. Try this one. Does the Cub offense lead the league in runs in the postseason the last three appearances? No..in fact, they are the worse...by far. Flawed offense or just 9 bad days in a row. Tough one.

 

It's pretty disingenuous to say 9 games in a row, the only hitter from 2003 on either of the 2007 or 2008 teams is Ramirez.

 

And yes, I'd say that it's entirely possible to have 6 poor offensive games in a row, especially when you face good pitching. I don't think speed and athleticism is really the missing piece here, considering the Cubs have good speed and good athletes for the position around most of the diamond(Soto, Fontenot, and Ramirez are the exceptions that come to mind). Plus, the Rockies and Phillies aren't exactly loaded with speed and athletes all around the diamond, and the Rockies should be the textbook example that yes, it is possible to get flukishly hot or cold for a couple series at a time.

 

If you want to say that a big left handed bat would make a nice difference in the playoffs as most (good) pitchers are right handed and the good ones can get our RH heavy lineup out, that's not a terrible argument(I'd also buy that failing to get out to a good start with the expectations of the home crowd in a short series is another factor). However, that's much easier said than done and comes with tradeoffs of health(Bradley) and/or defense(Dunn, Abreu). And most importantly, it's not indicative of some wildly flawed approach at building an offense. For years we've had crummy offenses, and now that we have a very good one we shouldn't go about making wholesale philosophical changes because we didn't do well in two playoff series.

 

Related to the point, where's the call for a different philosophical approach to building the rotation and pen? The Cubs have only averaged 2 runs per game the last 6 playoff games, but they're also giving up 6 runs per game over that timeframe.

 

Good point! Why aren't we cornering the market on "Big Game" pitchers and not these regular season studs? Our focus should be on Oliver Perez or Livan Hernandez!

 

jeff weaver and david eckstein should be priorities

 

Lol, pipe dream! With our luck Hendry will end up trading for a post-season joke like Arod.

[haubrich91]

Don't forget about Suppan.

 

2006 NLCS MVP.

[SABR Gamer]

when you are 0-9 in the playoffs (which is what ultimately counts) then...yes...i would look at the playoff results & disregard the regular season. Please go back & read the posts that outline why the regular season is irrelevant when you get rick rolled in the playoffs against real teams that are not in your division. The stats & games were overstated when you consider the number of creampuff games in the nl central the last several years.

 

Do you read?

[Bote McBoteface]

You guys could all really benefit from not responding to Wrigley23 anymore. They guy is obviously either mentally incapable of understanding baseball, or he's purposely acting like he is to get people upset and provoke these long, frustrated responses from you guys.

[Little Slide Rooter]

what was the difference between the Dodgers team we went 0-3 against in the playoffs and the Dodgers team we went 4-2 against in the regular season?

 

they are the opposite of the cubs. instead of flaws being exposed in the postseason, they have special abilities that don't show up until the playoffs. that's just straight up awesome GMing from coletti

 

And what happened to said abilites the next round vs. the Phils? The fact is, 2 years in a row, the Cubs not only got swept, but flat out embarassed by teams that were pound for pound inferior, and were quickly disposed of themselves the next round by teams that werent much better in both cases. Theres something about this team that when the time comes, they just arent ready for playoff baseball.

[samhainn77]

what was the difference between the Dodgers team we went 0-3 against in the playoffs and the Dodgers team we went 4-2 against in the regular season?

 

they are the opposite of the cubs. instead of flaws being exposed in the postseason, they have special abilities that don't show up until the playoffs. that's just straight up awesome GMing from coletti

 

And what happened to said abilites the next round vs. the Phils? The fact is, 2 years in a row, the Cubs not only got swept, but flat out embarassed by teams that were pound for pound inferior, and were quickly disposed of themselves the next round by teams that werent much better in both cases. Theres something about this team that when the time comes, they just arent ready for playoff baseball.

 

They also lost June 28-30th. Is there also something about this team that when the time comes, they just arent ready for late June baseball?

[Blue W]

Clearly, this team lacks "grit" and "hustle" and doesn't play the game the way it's "supposed to be played." If only we were more "scrappy" and had some "heart." Some "speedy and athletic players" would certainly make us better as well.

 

Unfortunately, we're stuck with a collection of talented players, the likes of which I haven't seen on the North Side in my lifetime. We have a top offense and a top pitching staff, each the envy of nearly every other club in MLB. We are a playoff contender every year. And, yes, we are subject to choking once we get there.

 

But, by all means, lets take six games over two years totally out of context and make wholesale changes.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Any chance we can get Mark Lemke out of retirement. What about Sid Bream?

[jersey cubs fan]

Clearly, this team lacks "grit" and "hustle" and doesn't play the game the way it's "supposed to be played." If only we were more "scrappy" and had some "heart." Some "speedy and athletic players" would certainly make us better as well.

 

Unfortunately, we're stuck with a collection of talented players, the likes of which I haven't seen on the North Side in my lifetime. We have a top offense and a top pitching staff, each the envy of nearly every other club in MLB. We are a playoff contender every year. And, yes, we are subject to choking once we get there.

 

But, by all means, lets take six games over two years totally out of context and make wholesale changes.

 

Huh? 2 years in a row, big deal.

[Sosa21MVP]

By Cubs standards, 2 years in a row is a long run. :-))

 

If the Cubs can make the playoffs again in 2009, it would be the first 3 year run of playoff appearances since 1906, 1907 & 1908.

[Soul]

By Cubs standards, 2 years in a row is a long run. :-))

 

If the Cubs can make the playoffs again in 2009, it would be the first 3 year run of playoff appearances since 1906, 1907 & 1908.

 

And if they get swept out again, it'll still be rather anticlimactic and ultimately, meaningless.

[Sosa21MVP]

By Cubs standards, 2 years in a row is a long run. :-))

 

If the Cubs can make the playoffs again in 2009, it would be the first 3 year run of playoff appearances since 1906, 1907 & 1908.

 

And if they get swept out again, it'll still be rather anticlimactic and ultimately, meaningless.

 

I'd still take that over 5-10 year droughts between playoff appearances. If they can keep getting to the playoffs with a high level of frequency, sooner or later they are bound to get hot at the right time. At least that is how I look at it.

[Sammy Sofa]

By Cubs standards, 2 years in a row is a long run. :-))

 

If the Cubs can make the playoffs again in 2009, it would be the first 3 year run of playoff appearances since 1906, 1907 & 1908.

 

And if they get swept out again, it'll still be rather anticlimactic and ultimately, meaningless.

 

I'd still take that over 5-10 year droughts between playoff appearances. If they can keep getting to the playoffs with a high level of frequency, sooner or later they are bound to get hot at the right time. At least that is how I look at it.

 

Exactly. I'll take regular or semi-regular playoff heartbreaks like we've had 3 times in the last 5 years (and just barely missed a 4th) than the huge droughts that Cubs had since their last WS appearance. Hell, 5-10 years would have been nice compared to some of the gaps. The more often they go, sure, the more often we could see collapses...but it also drastically increases the odds of them breaking through and winning it all. "Meaningless" implies there's little to no difference between a Cubs team that wins 97 games or 57 games. If the playoffs are all that matters, why even watch or follow baseball before September?