Article: I Think It's Time We Have the Blake Snell Talk

[squally1313]

6 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

They had 63 games where they scored 3 or fewer runs. They did have a pretty good "blow out" record. They did not hit HRs. They were a hot and cold team with long stretches of cold. Scoring a lot of runs in one game is not a knock on them, but it also skews the data when you are looking at aggregate data and measures of central tendency. 

Phillies had 61 games of scoring 3 runs or fewer. 

Dbacks had 64 games

Brewers had 69 games

Orioles had 64 games
 

Do I need to keep going?

[CubinNY]

Just now, squally1313 said:

Phillies had 61 games of scoring 3 runs or fewer. 

Dbacks had 64 games

Brewers had 69 games

Orioles had 64 games
 

Do I need to keep going?

you can keep going until you find a point. 

[Bertz]

Didn't the Cubs also have that preposterous long streak of not getting shut out?  

I remember Sharma putting some decent data around I think it was the 2019 team and how they were beyond the pale, but the vast vast majority of the time this stuff comes out in the wash.

[CubinNY]

8 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

The Dodgers scored 87 more runs than the Cubs and still had 52 games of 3 or fewer.  What do you think is the right number to not be streaky?

That's not the right question. The need more SLG in the lineup. 

[Bertz]

This is incredible 

[squally1313]

The Cubs scored more than 10 runs 24 times this year.

The Braves did it 20 times. 

Hopefully they went into this offseason trying to improve their roster to have the kind of potential to explode offensively in a game like the Cubs did. 

[squally1313]

-Here are a bunch of teams that had a lot of regular season and/or playoff success that put up similar numbers to the Cubs in the stat that you cited. This list excludes the Braves, who put up a 125 wRC in 2023, which has only been matched in the modern era by the 1927 Yankees. 

-Well yeah, but what about the Braves

[squally1313]

Rangers had scored 0-3 runs 63 times in 2023 as well. So the Cubs came in below the average of the World Series teams this year. But it's a big number, so they are Bad. 

[CubinNY]

The Cubs have the makings of consistent offense. They have guys who can get on base, they have high-contact guys, but they don't have the sluggers. This isn't new information or some sort of behind the numbers type thing.  I understand all teams go through hot and cold stretches and a lot is dependent on where the opposite team is in their rotation. But it seems strange to insist that the offense was consistently good last year. 

 

Edited January 17, 2024 by CubinNY

[squally1313]

4 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

The Cubs have the makings of consistent offense. They have guys who can get on base, they have high-contact guys, but they don't have the sluggers. This isn't new information or some sort of behind the numbers type thing.  I understand all teams go through hot and cold stretches and a lot is dependent on where the opposite team is in their rotation. But it seems strange to insist that they were consistently good last year. 

 

I think its more that your expectations of 'consistent offense' are unrealistic in modern baseball outside of the extreme outliers (ie Braves). The 2023 Cubs were not uniquely inconsistent, or uniquely running hot and cold. Yes, they weren't consistently good last year. Neither were 28 of the other 29 teams (and Braves ended up with like, 38 games scoring 3 or less too). 

[mul21]

44 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

The Cubs have the makings of consistent offense. They have guys who can get on base, they have high-contact guys, but they don't have the sluggers. This isn't new information or some sort of behind the numbers type thing.  I understand all teams go through hot and cold stretches and a lot is dependent on where the opposite team is in their rotation. But it seems strange to insist that the offense was consistently good last year. 

 

People are simply insisting that it was no less consistent than many other good teams.  The Astros scored 3 or less 63 times as well.  Your point is moot based on how baseball works.  Just by the nature of the game you're going to have a bunch of games where you don't score much and others where you knock the cover off the ball.  

If your real point was that they need more slug in the lineup as currently constructed, I don't think you'll get much argument but the data point you used was a terrible way to try to demonstrate that.

[Joj]

21 hours ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

The team scored a shitload of runs last year, people underrate the offense. If they sign Bellinger they project to have above-average players comparative to their peers at the position, all across the field. 

They also flopped for weeks at a time and couldn't finish the season.  Last season's offense wasn't good enough.

[squally1313]

8 minutes ago, Joj said:

They also flopped for weeks at a time and couldn't finish the season.  Last season's offense wasn't good enough.

Cubs offense in August: 103 wRC (11th in baseball), 4.1 offensive fWAR (10th in baseball)

Cubs offense in September: 111 wRC (7th in baseball), 5.6 offensive fWAR (7th in baseball)

Cubs for the seaason: 104 wRC (12th in baseball), 24.8 offensive fWAR (9th in baseball)

What about that group didn't "finish the season"?

[Joj]

Lol.  Think he's mad from another thread.

Edited January 17, 2024 by Joj

[mul21]

15 minutes ago, Joj said:

They also flopped for weeks at a time and couldn't finish the season.  Last season's offense wasn't good enough.

The pitching, specifically the bullpen, failed miserably the last few weeks.  The offense was largely just fine.

[Joj]

3 minutes ago, mul21 said:

The pitching, specifically the bullpen, failed miserably the last few weeks.  The offense was largely just fine.

Shall we do the same thing with the same people, expecting a different result? 🙂

[mul21]

1 minute ago, Joj said:

Shall we do the same thing with the same people, expecting a different result? 🙂

What are you talking about?  Everyone agrees, including Tommy Hottovy, that they need more pen help.  I'm not sure what your cryptic post is getting at.

[squally1313]

19 minutes ago, Joj said:

They also flopped for weeks at a time and couldn't finish the season.  Last season's offense wasn't good enough.

As mentioned before, Cubs were offensively above average, if not elite, in April (2nd), July (5th), August (10th), and September (7th). They were bad (or 'flopping') in May (21st) and June (16th). Deeper dive into the May-June stretch:

The Good/Fine (over 100 PAs):

• Morel 147 wRC
• Happ 110 wRC
• Swanson 107 wRC
• Tauchman 106 wRC
• Seiya 104 wRC
• Madrigal 96 wRC
• Hoerner 93 wRC

The Bad (over 99 PAs):

• Mancini 78 wRC
• Gomes 73 wRC
• Wisdom 50 wRC
• Bellinger 54 wRC
• Mervis 46 wRC

[Joj]

2 minutes ago, mul21 said:

What are you talking about?  Everyone agrees, including Tommy Hottovy, that they need more pen help.  I'm not sure what your cryptic post is getting at.

Oh, sure, they need help.  Josh Hader.  I was never talking about the bullpen, you were.

[Joj]

2 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

As mentioned before, Cubs were offensively above average, if not elite, in April (2nd), July (5th), August (10th), and September (7th). They were bad (or 'flopping') in May (21st) and June (16th). Deeper dive into the May-June stretch:

The Good/Fine (over 100 PAs):

• Morel 147 wRC
• Happ 110 wRC
• Swanson 107 wRC
• Tauchman 106 wRC
• Seiya 104 wRC
• Madrigal 96 wRC
• Hoerner 93 wRC

The Bad (over 99 PAs):

• Mancini 78 wRC
• Gomes 73 wRC
• Wisdom 50 wRC
• Bellinger 54 wRC
• Mervis 46 wRC

Ok, so what's your takeaway?  That the offense doesn't need to be upgraded from last year?  Sum it all up for us in a sentence or two.

[squally1313]

2 minutes ago, Joj said:

Ok, so what's your takeaway?  That the offense doesn't need to be upgraded from last year?  Sum it all up for us in a sentence or two.

The takeaway is that if you weren't happy with the offense last year, you likely aren't going to be happy with the offense this year, regardless of the moves they do or do not make, because you're expecting a level of production/consistency that is incredibly rare in modern baseball. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

12 minutes ago, Joj said:

Ok, so what's your takeaway?  That the offense doesn't need to be upgraded from last year?  Sum it all up for us in a sentence or two.

You underrate the offense because you don't follow every team as closely as you do the Cubs

[Tryptamine]

46 minutes ago, Joj said:

Oh, sure, they need help.  Josh Hader.  I was never talking about the bullpen, you were.

I'm all in favor of bullpen help, but dropping 20 million of the remaining 55m on Hader isn't the way. At that point, if they signed Bellinger the money is nearly all gone when you figure they're probably going to save 5ish million for the deadline. I think it's much more prudent to shop in the Stephenson range with the high end being Robertson. 

[Joj]

On 1/17/2024 at 12:52 PM, squally1313 said:

The takeaway is that if you weren't happy with the offense last year, you likely aren't going to be happy with the offense this year, regardless of the moves they do or do not make, because you're expecting a level of production/consistency that is incredibly rare in modern baseball. 

The team's offense came out of nowhere in 2023.  They played over their heads quite a bit.  And, again, we saw the inconsistency in the 2nd half.  There's nothing wrong with admitting that.

By the way, you are completely wrong about my expectations.  You know absolutely nothing about me. 

I disagree with you about offensive consistency so that means I don't know baseball and won't be happy with anything even if they sign everyone?  Classic response right there.  Let me guess...you and 2 other mean girls try to chase everyone away?  Is that why this board is so dead?  I'm just trying to give this place a shot, along with a few others.  Very welcoming.  LOL

[Joj]

On 1/17/2024 at 12:58 PM, We Got The Whole 9 said:

You underrate the offense because you don't follow every team as closely as you do the Cubs

How do you know that?  By the way, I do follow baseball very closely.  Likely closer than you.