Do You Consider 2025 to Be a Successful Season?

[Outshined_One]

It's funny, I've seen a bit of discussion on this topic over the last few months, but I've been wondering where the board as a whole comes down on it.

On the one hand, they won a playoff series and took the Brewers to the limit in the NLDS despite having an injury-depleted roster, while developing a young core of hitters and pitchers who should make this team competitive in the years to come.

On the other hand, the team flailed throughout the summer despite having World Series aspirations, and it was easy to dream on this team if they had just been willing to open the pocket books for Ohtani/Soto/Yamamoto/etc. or go all-in at the deadline.

[Cuzi]

11 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

On the other hand, the team flailed throughout the summer despite having World Series aspirations

I simply don't believe this any more.

I'm sure the players do, but there's no way I can get behind management having WS aspirations. They simply cant say they are trying to win a WS when they continuously miss out on the best talent the game has to offer because they aren't willing to take a risk and go outside of the comfort zone. The goal of this organization is to compete in their small market division and reach the playoffs, not compete in the playoffs.

2025 was a successful season if you manage to set the bar extremely low, which this organization has seemingly achieved to do with their fans.

Edited December 22, 2025 by Cuzi

[musclemom]

They won more games than I expected, so yes.

[CubinNY]

It was a successful season, but now the bar is raised (at least by me). I also don't believe the ownership group is serious about winning a WS unless it fits their model of team construction. I think that their overall model as a franchise is to build a destination for baseball fans to go to so they can drain their wallets, not to go all Tom on everyone, but let's call it the "Disney model". So their main goal is to make a team capable of winning 82 games. The data are clear that they've perfected the model under Jed. 

[Rcal10]

4 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

It was a successful season, but now the bar is raised (at least by me). I also don't believe the ownership group is serious about winning a WS unless it fits their model of team construction. I think that their overall model as a franchise is to build a destination for baseball fans to go to so they can drain their wallets, not to go all Tom on everyone, but let's call it the "Disney model". So their main goal is to make a team capable of winning 82 games. The data are clear that they've perfected the model under Jed. 

I don’t disagree, except I think their goal is to make a team capable of winning 88 games, not 82. 

[Tryptamine]

It was a successful season results wise, but I don't think it gives me a rosier view of the future 2026+. If I remember correctly, I thought they were an 85-87 win team before last season started. Right now I think they're probably around 85 again. I think there's also a large chance they drop off the table in 2027, if there's a season, because they're going to have an obscene amount of positions to fill after Nico, Seiya, Boyd, etc. etc. all leave.

[Bertz]

The Cubs last year had the 5th best record in the league and the 3rd best run differential.  It sucks that they shared a division with the team 1st in both, but by basically any objective measure they were shoulder to shoulder with the rest of the league's upper crust.

They did this with a backdrop of stellar player development.  They had rookies develop into first division types at SP (Horton), 3B (Shaw), and Closer (Palencia, and I know he wasn't *technically* a rookie).  Two of their fun rookies from last year, Busch and PCA, leveled up significantly.  Moises Ballesteros had a stellar cup of coffee and is one of the favorites for NL ROY next year.  

This fanbase goes insane when the wind blows in so the vibes were pretty crappy most of the year, but this was a very successful season both in isolation and in setting up for subsequent years.  There's very few years where if you offered me 92 wins and three rookies move into the core that I'd choose to re-roll the dice.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Cuzi said:

I simply don't believe this any more.

I'm sure the players do, but there's no way I can get behind management having WS aspirations. They simply cant say they are trying to win a WS when they continuously miss out on the best talent the game has to offer because they aren't willing to take a risk and go outside of the comfort zone. The goal of this organization is to compete in their small market division and reach the playoffs, not compete in the playoffs.

2025 was a successful season if you manage to set the bar extremely low, which this organization has seemingly achieved to do with their fans.

I don't think we should be focusing on the WS; we should be focusing on our division and try to optimize our chances to dominate that instead.

The reason why the Cubs lost to the Brewers is not one--there were a plethora of factors, like injuries, ultimately made them lose. However, economically speaking, the buildup of younger players should increase our sustainability in the future, as we seemed to have developed an entirely new roster of people who have not yet reached their maximum potential (Y*). Although our supply of sustainability may be an upward-sloping line, in time it will reach a vertical line...

...That being said, will we ever reach Y*? Most likely not, as our management refuses to enable deferred money contracts (as it has always done), refuses to sign necessary players (like Imai), and was incredibly silent during the winter meetings, showcasing their inability to take action while other teams willingly supplied enough money. Now that we're signing fools like Tyler Austin and Hoby Milner before acting on Imai as well as inserting Zombro (who I mostly disagree with in terms of his contact-heavy approach) as VP of pitching, I don't think that next year will have as much Y* value as this year, as we seem to focus less on our young players and more on 30-year-olds.

But philosophically? I think that we could say that our year is satisfactory. We have the potential to win the World Series if we are motivated enough, have management who is willing to spend money on players and trades, and if we continue our emphasis on players like Pete Crow-Armstrong who, though volatile, are going to most likely stabilize themselves with more specialized training, which the Cubs seem to excel at.

 

[Cuzi]

Just going back to 2000, division titles:

Cardinals - 12

Brewers - 6

Cubs - 6

Cincinnati - 2

We can sit here and act like the Cubs were great last year and just throw it up to a one off year from the Brewers being the best and tip your cap. Or we can realize the bar is set so damn low for a team that should be dominating this division on a regular basis, that it's ridiculous we are looking at 1 playoff appearance and 1 more year before going into another rebuild with a core of pre-arb players.

[squally1313]

16 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Just going back to 2000, division titles:

Cardinals - 12

Brewers - 6

Cubs - 6

Cincinnati - 2

We can sit here and act like the Cubs were great last year and just throw it up to a one off year from the Brewers being the best and tip your cap. Or we can realize the bar is set so damn low for a team that should be dominating this division on a regular basis, that it's ridiculous we are looking at 1 playoff appearance and 1 more year before going into another rebuild with a core of pre-arb players.

You should start a different poll asking if we've had a successful 21st century. This one is about the 92 win team from 2025. 

[Cuzi]

5 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

You should start a different poll asking if we've had a successful 21st century. This one is about the 92 win team from 2025. 

Ya. And it wasn't successful. Went all in on 1 year of Tucker, sat on a boat load of cash, used the prices at the deadline as an excuse to not get what you said you needed in the off-season to put the team over the top, lost the division to the Brewers, lost in the playoffs to the Brewers.

So, the Cubs lost 3 long term assets, didn't fully commit to the 1 year they had of their superstar, and lost everything to the team with $80M less payroll.

Fans were laughing that the Brewers then got swept by the Dodgers because they held up a "L" flag.

That's the bar for success.

Edited December 22, 2025 by Cuzi

[thawv]

2 hours ago, Cuzi said:

I simply don't believe this any more.

I'm sure the players do, but there's no way I can get behind management having WS aspirations. They simply cant say they are trying to win a WS when they continuously miss out on the best talent the game has to offer because they aren't willing to take a risk and go outside of the comfort zone. The goal of this organization is to compete in their small market division and reach the playoffs, not compete in the playoffs.

2025 was a successful season if you manage to set the bar extremely low, which this organization has seemingly achieved to do with their fans.

All of this!!!

[Gjfificifjdej]

There are 30 teams in MLB and only 1 can win the World Series every year. I will take a playoff appearance and winning a round in that tournament 100/100 times with zero complaint. I watched about 150 games start to finish and saw the majority of about 10 others, and had fun every day. The negativity of “fans” who watch less than 100 games will not change how I remember 2025. 

[Hot Sauce]

3 hours ago, Cuzi said:

Ya. And it wasn't successful. Went all in on 1 year of Tucker, sat on a boat load of cash, used the prices at the deadline as an excuse to not get what you said you needed in the off-season to put the team over the top, lost the division to the Brewers, lost in the playoffs to the Brewers.

So, the Cubs lost 3 long term assets, didn't fully commit to the 1 year they had of their superstar, and lost everything to the team with $80M less payroll.

Fans were laughing that the Brewers then got swept by the Dodgers because they held up a "L" flag.

That's the bar for success.

[Geographyhater8888]

Successful season relative to the bar we’ve set. 6 months of watchable and relevant baseball, met the team’s ceiling of expectations before the season started (92 wins, winning a playoff series), watching PCA, Busch, Shaw and Horton emerge as important future contributors. Between a B and B+.

Tom and Jed would give it an A++.

Edited December 23, 2025 by Geographyhater8888

[Geographyhater8888]

18 hours ago, CubinNY said:

It was a successful season, but now the bar is raised (at least by me). I also don't believe the ownership group is serious about winning a WS unless it fits their model of team construction. I think that their overall model as a franchise is to build a destination for baseball fans to go to so they can drain their wallets, not to go all Tom on everyone, but let's call it the "Disney model". So their main goal is to make a team capable of winning 82 games. The data are clear that they've perfected the model under Jed. 

You’re confusing them with the Reds. Their main goal is to construct a team with a floor of 82 wins. Building a team capable of winning 88 games and maybe or maybe not underachieving your pythag win% by 5 games is the goal.

Tom and Jed are more ambitious than building the 82 win capable Reds.

Edited December 23, 2025 by Geographyhater8888

[Geographyhater8888]

15 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t disagree, except I think their goal is to make a team capable of winning 88 games, not 82. 

Right. 82 wins is the floor. We’re not the Reds at least. 

[CubUgly]

20 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t disagree, except I think their goal is to make a team capable of winning 88 games, not 82. 

This^^^^  I am of the mind of several media outlets on this who have said the goal is to field a roster projected to win 87-90 games each year hoping to exceed those projections and maybe make a Diamondback like run to the WS every 4-5 years or so. 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, CubUgly said:

This^^^^  I am of the mind of several media outlets on this who have said the goal is to field a roster projected to win 87-90 games each year hoping to exceed those projections and maybe make a Diamondback like run to the WS every 4-5 years or so. 

To be fair, it isn’t exactly a Dbacks run that happens every 4-5 years. If you win 90 games you are good. How many did the Blue Jays win last year, 93? Cubs won 92. Every year a team right around 90 wins makes the WS. If they continue to win 90 they will eventually win. And, 90 wins is a good season regardless of what happens in the playoffs. If you only consider AA good season one that gets you to the WS, you are going to have an awful lot of bad seasons, even if they spent a lot of money. 

[CubUgly]

28 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

To be fair, it isn’t exactly a Dbacks run that happens every 4-5 years. If you win 90 games you are good. How many did the Blue Jays win last year, 93? Cubs won 92. Every year a team right around 90 wins makes the WS. If they continue to win 90 they will eventually win. And, 90 wins is a good season regardless of what happens in the playoffs. If you only consider AA good season one that gets you to the WS, you are going to have an awful lot of bad seasons, even if they spent a lot of money. 

I agree, but I did say 87-90 - splitting hairs yes, but honestly to me at least, it seems they would be fine with 87.  But for me if you go in with that projection as a goal, and I kinda think that's really what our front office is shooting for now, you don't always meet or exceed that projection - sometimes you fall short.  We exceeded last year.  That won't always happen. 

[BKHoo]

For me it’s simple - win 90+ and I am very satisfied. That’s a playoff team, maybe a division winner, and it means you have a shot in October. 

[CubUgly]

40 minutes ago, BKHoo said:

For me it’s simple - win 90+ and I am very satisfied. That’s a playoff team, maybe a division winner, and it means you have a shot in October. 

Yes, I'm good with 90 wins in the regular season in a vacuum.  I'll take that every year.  It's just the idea of building a team projectable to 87-88 wins each and every year and hoping on that....and if that's indeed the m.o. of the front office I do have some reservations about it. 

[Irrelevant Dude]

I am surprised by the number of Yes votes.  I voted no.  When you make the Kyle Tucker deal with no intention of re-signing him, it's World Series or bust.  Otherwise, what's the point?

Did the Cubs outperform expectations and play some exciting baseball into October?  Yes.  Was the season a success?  No.

[Cuzi]

Bunch of yes votes because the Cubs have done a masterful job of conditioning the fan base to limit expectations.

It seems all that is needed to appease the fanbase and turn down the heat is to sell out for a year and play a couple games in October. Ignore the fact that everything you did in that year doesn't help the team moving forward and ultimately failed to achieve the entire point of selling out for a single year, just appreciate the playoff badge on the shirt sleeve.

It's brilliant sleight of hand.

Edited December 23, 2025 by Cuzi

[Tryptamine]

I think that calling it world series or bust is absurd for anyone short of the Dodgers. They were one game from the NLCS. Was it the ultimate goal? Nope. However, 90+% of us would have been thrilled with that before the season.