Sherman - Cubs (and others obv) expected to be in on Alex Gordon

[UMFan83]

I don't understand how some of you can feel so "set" with our current rotation. If Lackey gets hurt or turns out to be washed up, we are screwed. We are gonna be in the same position we were in this year, which is not having enough good pitchers to win playoff games.

 

Hammel and Hendricks aren't terrible or anything, but guys, we are talking about building a dynasty here. We aren't the Oakland A's. We aren't trying to just get through another year. We're trying to take over the world.

 

I'm sure there will be some NRI's brought in...Theo and co are generally pretty good at adding back end rotation depth options each year. The Cubs had a bunch last year (Jaxon, Wood, Turner, Wada, Dubront were all starting options in camp), they just all got hurt, cut or were moved to the pen). So there will likely be depth, if not all that exciting.

[Felix Leiter]

I don't understand how some of you can feel so "set" with our current rotation. If Lackey gets hurt or turns out to be washed up, we are screwed. We are gonna be in the same position we were in this year, which is not having enough good pitchers to win playoff games.

 

Hammel and Hendricks aren't terrible or anything, but guys, we are talking about building a dynasty here. We aren't the Oakland A's. We aren't trying to just get through another year. We're trying to take over the world.

Please compare our rotation to the WS champs.

 

Thanks.

 

OK, here goes. If our starters at the end were: Arietta, Lester, Hammel, Hendricks and Haren. Here's what KC starters did in the WS.

 

Volquez-3/6

Cueto-1/9

Ventura-5/3.1

Young-2/4

Volquez-2/6

 

Other than Cueto's complete game, the rest were OK. I know the extra pressure on Volquez but he was not lights out. Ventura was bad and Young was so-so. The Royals defense was good and certainly helped.

 

I want at least another starter, probably a solid #3. Trade Castro and a minor leaguer to the Mets for Matz right now.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't understand how some of you can feel so "set" with our current rotation. If Lackey gets hurt or turns out to be washed up, we are screwed. We are gonna be in the same position we were in this year, which is not having enough good pitchers to win playoff games.

 

didn't the Cubs win 4 playoff games this year?

Is that what you call success?

 

Yes.

[Guest]

I don't understand how some of you can feel so "set" with our current rotation. If Lackey gets hurt or turns out to be washed up, we are screwed. We are gonna be in the same position we were in this year, which is not having enough good pitchers to win playoff games.

 

didn't the Cubs win 4 playoff games this year?

Is that what you call success?

 

umm you don't?

[Guest]

oh wait this is the guy who said we needed another ace because trading for tyson ross doesn't win us a world series or something like that

[Little Slide Rooter]

I don't understand how some of you can feel so "set" with our current rotation. If Lackey gets hurt or turns out to be washed up, we are screwed. We are gonna be in the same position we were in this year, which is not having enough good pitchers to win playoff games.

 

Debate able. But there's little doubt that it's good enough to hang until June-July when the trade market begins to take form, and if need be, hopefully be more agressive than we were last summer.

 

It should also be noted that Arietta-Lester were one of the most dominant 1-2 punches in the NL, and they were on the mound for 3 of the 5 playoff games we lost.

[Guest]

And Tim, I know. I'm not saying it's impossible for us to win with this rotation. I'm basically saying we don't totally know what we have. Lackey could suck, Arrieta could regress, etc. Unless you have a rotation like the Mets, there's no reason to be content.

You could do this same thing for any rotation in baseball. You pick the Mets as the standard bearer of great rotations?

 

They only got 170+ innings from four guys last year, two of whom were Bartolo Colon and Jon Niese. They don't have a single guy who is a lock to pitch 200 innings for them. Unless they add someone, they're counting on a guy coming off TJS to provide significant innings for them. Literally every single guy in their projected rotation has had moderate to major injury issues. They could all, as you say with Arrieta, regress.

[Guest]

And Tim, I know. I'm not saying it's impossible for us to win with this rotation. I'm basically saying we don't totally know what we have. Lackey could suck, Arrieta could regress, etc. Unless you have a rotation like the Mets, there's no reason to be content.

You could do this same thing for any rotation in baseball. You pick the Mets as the standard bearer of great rotations?

 

They only got 170+ innings from four guys last year, two of whom were Bartolo Colon and Jon Niese. They don't have a single guy who is a lock to pitch 200 innings for them. Unless they add someone, they're counting on a guy coming off TJS to provide significant innings for them. Literally every single guy in their projected rotation has had moderate to major injury issues. They could all, as you say with Arrieta, regress.

 

also, i can be content with a rotation that isn't as good as the mets (mainly subjectively, since the cubs rotation was actually better statistically and will replace haren/wood/wada/richard/beeler/roach with lackey), especially when it's backed by an offense like the cubs have.

 

we didn't lose in the NLCS because our rotation isn't good enough. we lost because baseball and because one of the two teams was going to lose.

Edited December 7, 2015 by David

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

The 2015 Nats want to have a chat with you, Cubbie Swagger. (Not that a single regular season outcome proves anything...let alone a dozen playoff games...so nevermind)

[Cubbie Swagger]

oh wait this is the guy who said we needed another ace because trading for tyson ross doesn't win us a world series or something like that

I did NOT say that. If you want to disagree with me on something, that's fine, but don't disagree with me on things I didn't say. I merely asked the question, "Does adding Ross or someone like that win us a WS?" Basically I was just asking if you guys would be content if adding a Ross-caliber player was our top move this offseason.

 

Nothing the Cubs do will be considered a success until they win a World Series. You guys know that, right? We will still be the joke of the league until we win. We've had plenty of good years. We won 97 games in 2008, and then went right back to being a joke.

[Guest]

oh wait this is the guy who said we needed another ace because trading for tyson ross doesn't win us a world series or something like that

I did NOT say that. If you want to disagree with me on something, that's fine, but don't disagree with me on things I didn't say. I merely asked the question, "Does adding Ross or someone like that win us a WS?" Basically I was just asking if you guys would be content if adding a Ross-caliber player was our top move this offseason.

 

Nothing the Cubs do will be considered a success until they win a World Series. You guys know that, right? We will still be the joke of the league until we win. We've had plenty of good years. We won 97 games in 2008, and then went right back to being a joke.

 

You know that the playoffs are a crapshoot and all we can really do to try to win a world series is to make the playoffs as often as possible, right?

 

And I'm pretty sure nobody who isn't a complete [expletive] moron considers the Cubs a joke right now.

[Cubbie Swagger]

You know that the playoffs are a crapshoot and all we can really do to try to win a world series is to make the playoffs as often as possible, right?

Ehhhhh, yeah. But what does that mean?

 

And I'm pretty sure nobody who isn't a complete [expletive] moron considers the Cubs a joke right now.

I'm not sure if you're getting what I'm saying. Yeah, everybody knows the Cubs are good now. But, if this core of players doesn't win a WS, they will go right back to being the laughing stock of the league. Everybody will say, "See, it's never going to happen".

[Sammy Sofa]

We won 97 games in 2008, and then went right back to being a joke.

 

Because they were a disappointment in 2009 and then flat out stunk until 2015. Not because they didn't win a WS.

[Cubbie Swagger]

We won 97 games in 2008, and then went right back to being a joke.

 

Because they were a disappointment in 2009 and then flat out stunk until 2015. Not because they didn't win a WS.

So you are implying that there is absolutely no correlation between the stigma surrounding the Cubs and our 107 year World Series drought? Come on.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Why should I care about any "stigma" surrounding the Cubs?

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

You know that the playoffs are a crapshoot and all we can really do to try to win a world series is to make the playoffs as often as possible, right?

Ehhhhh, yeah. But what does that mean?

 

It means we should build a team that is good at winning a lot of baseball games instead of tailoring it to fit a made up ideal that will win playoff series.

[Boris]

Stop crying about this team not winning a championship. I called 2016 in 2008. This will be the year. Buckle up. It's gonna be fun.

[Guest]

Why should I care about any "stigma" surrounding the Cubs?

 

thank you

 

if anything, that drought that i didn't experience like 80% of, adds a little intrigue. i'd rather win championships, but my desire to win a WS has just about nothing to do with eliminating the "curse" thing, outside of the cool element it would add to the narrative (i'm sure theo loves this part).

 

i mean, yeah, it sucks that they haven't won one in that long, i guess, but i wouldn't feel any better about the cubs had they won one in 1969 or something (or even 84). i'd almost rather have the drought than a random championship somewhere along the way there...but either way it doesn't matter much.

[sneakypower]

Why should I care about any "stigma"?

kyle's credo

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Why should I care about any "stigma" surrounding the Cubs?

 

thank you

 

if anything, that drought that i didn't experience like 80% of, adds a little intrigue. i'd rather win championships, but my desire to win a WS has just about nothing to do with eliminating the "curse" thing, outside of the cool element it would add to the narrative (i'm sure theo loves this part).

 

i mean, yeah, it sucks that they haven't won one in that long, i guess, but i wouldn't feel any better about the cubs had they won one in 1969 or something (or even 84). i'd almost rather have the drought than a random championship somewhere along the way there...but either way it doesn't matter much.

 

Totally spot on.

 

The people who have a right to bitch are the ones who are in their 90s and early 100s. Otherwise, being a Cubs fan means you are no different than an Indians, Brewers, Pirates, Mariners, Astros or Rangers one.

[UMFan83]

Why should I care about any "stigma" surrounding the Cubs?

 

thank you

 

if anything, that drought that i didn't experience like 80% of, adds a little intrigue. i'd rather win championships, but my desire to win a WS has just about nothing to do with eliminating the "curse" thing, outside of the cool element it would add to the narrative (i'm sure theo loves this part).

 

i mean, yeah, it sucks that they haven't won one in that long, i guess, but i wouldn't feel any better about the cubs had they won one in 1969 or something (or even 84). i'd almost rather have the drought than a random championship somewhere along the way there...but either way it doesn't matter much.

 

Totally spot on.

 

The people who have a right to bitch are the ones who are in their 90s and early 100s. Otherwise, being a Cubs fan means you are no different than an Indians, Brewers, Pirates, Mariners, Astros or Rangers one.

 

I mostly agree but...

 

Indians: At least they can watch video highlights of their team in the World Series...in color. They have memories of their team winning 5 World Series games in the 90's. They have AL Champion banners

Brewers: Same but to a much lesser extent.

Pirates: They've won a title, they had fun memories of "We are family" and Stargell hitting a HR in game 7 of the world series. even if they weren't alive, they can connect with those memories, similar to how Bears fans can with the 85 team even though someone like me was too young to remember

Mariners: OK they can compete with us

Astros: Again they have a recent experience of winning a pennant and playing in a world series. Heck they can watch their pennant winning celebration in HD

Rangers: Same plus they won 4 WS games within the last 5 years

 

Obviously winning a World Series is the end goal and ultimately the only goal that definitively matters, but the Cubs have a longer pennant drought then any other team has a world series drought (among teams that have won a world series)...we don't have 100 years of pain, but we carry 100 years of baggage as fans whether we want to or not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does.

[Sammy Sofa]

We won 97 games in 2008, and then went right back to being a joke.

 

Because they were a disappointment in 2009 and then flat out stunk until 2015. Not because they didn't win a WS.

So you are implying that there is absolutely no correlation between the stigma surrounding the Cubs and our 107 year World Series drought? Come on.

 

I don't care; I'm not going to look at a 97-win season and an exciting playoff run as a failure or a joke because they haven't won a WS in over a century. I enjoy watching the team I'm a fan of do well.

[Sammy Sofa]

Why should I care about any "stigma" surrounding the Cubs?

 

thank you

 

if anything, that drought that i didn't experience like 80% of, adds a little intrigue. i'd rather win championships, but my desire to win a WS has just about nothing to do with eliminating the "curse" thing, outside of the cool element it would add to the narrative (i'm sure theo loves this part).

 

i mean, yeah, it sucks that they haven't won one in that long, i guess, but i wouldn't feel any better about the cubs had they won one in 1969 or something (or even 84). i'd almost rather have the drought than a random championship somewhere along the way there...but either way it doesn't matter much.

 

Totally spot on.

 

The people who have a right to bitch are the ones who are in their 90s and early 100s. Otherwise, being a Cubs fan means you are no different than an Indians, Brewers, Pirates, Mariners, Astros or Rangers one.

 

I mostly agree but...

 

Indians: At least they can watch video highlights of their team in the World Series...in color. They have memories of their team winning 5 World Series games in the 90's. They have AL Champion banners

Brewers: Same but to a much lesser extent.

Pirates: They've won a title, they had fun memories of "We are family" and Stargell hitting a HR in game 7 of the world series. even if they weren't alive, they can connect with those memories, similar to how Bears fans can with the 85 team even though someone like me was too young to remember

Mariners: OK they can compete with us

Astros: Again they have a recent experience of winning a pennant and playing in a world series. Heck they can watch their pennant winning celebration in HD

Rangers: Same plus they won 4 WS games within the last 5 years

 

Obviously winning a World Series is the end goal and ultimately the only goal that definitively matters, but the Cubs have a longer pennant drought then any other team has a world series drought (among teams that have won a world series)...we don't have 100 years of pain, but we carry 100 years of baggage as fans whether we want to or not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does.

 

This post is almost unbearably lame.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Why should I care about any "stigma" surrounding the Cubs?

 

thank you

 

if anything, that drought that i didn't experience like 80% of, adds a little intrigue. i'd rather win championships, but my desire to win a WS has just about nothing to do with eliminating the "curse" thing, outside of the cool element it would add to the narrative (i'm sure theo loves this part).

 

i mean, yeah, it sucks that they haven't won one in that long, i guess, but i wouldn't feel any better about the cubs had they won one in 1969 or something (or even 84). i'd almost rather have the drought than a random championship somewhere along the way there...but either way it doesn't matter much.

 

Totally spot on.

 

The people who have a right to bitch are the ones who are in their 90s and early 100s. Otherwise, being a Cubs fan means you are no different than an Indians, Brewers, Pirates, Mariners, Astros or Rangers one.

 

I mostly agree but...

 

Indians: At least they can watch video highlights of their team in the World Series...in color. They have memories of their team winning 5 World Series games in the 90's. They have AL Champion banners

Brewers: Same but to a much lesser extent.

Pirates: They've won a title, they had fun memories of "We are family" and Stargell hitting a HR in game 7 of the world series. even if they weren't alive, they can connect with those memories, similar to how Bears fans can with the 85 team even though someone like me was too young to remember

Mariners: OK they can compete with us

Astros: Again they have a recent experience of winning a pennant and playing in a world series. Heck they can watch their pennant winning celebration in HD

Rangers: Same plus they won 4 WS games within the last 5 years

 

Obviously winning a World Series is the end goal and ultimately the only goal that definitively matters, but the Cubs have a longer pennant drought then any other team has a world series drought (among teams that have won a world series)...we don't have 100 years of pain, but we carry 100 years of baggage as fans whether we want to or not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does.

 

Quality counterpoint. I am for sure in the camp that my team has to win it all or there is nothing big to celebrate or brag about, but I do acknowledge that there are different levels of fun and memories in losing come playoff time. This year for the Cubs was much better than in 2008.

[jersey cubs fan]

bunch of people pretending the cubs haven't been more awful than most in their lifetimes.

 

Unless you're 2 you're a dirty little liar.