Cubs (Taillon) vs Pirates (Chandler): 5/27/26, 5:40pm

[SpongeWorthy]

8 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Did Jed Hoyer deserve to be fired when the Cubs were 29-16 this year?

is the bar being able to play like a great team in spots or something closer to being able to consistently field a very good team over multiple seasons. he’s never done that as the guy in the big seat. 

in spite of an observable and durable resource advantage compared to the rest of the division.

what is the evidence that jed is the best person in the world (or something approximating that) for this highly compensated, highly desirable, extremely supply constrained job? 

 

Edited 11 hours ago by SpongeWorthy

[PeanutPunch33]

20 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Did Jed Hoyer deserve to be fired when the Cubs were 29-16 this year?

Did the Bulls front office not deserve to get fired since they started last season 5-0?  Or wouldn't you agree that it's pretty relevant that they ended the season 20 games below .500? 

It doesn't matter that the Cubs were 29-16 at one point.  That team doesn't exist anymore.  It's not about how you start, it's about how you finish.  

[abuck1220]

23 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Did Jed Hoyer deserve to be fired when the Cubs were 29-16 this year?

i mean, he shouldn't have this job right now in the first place. zero division titles and one playoff appearance in five seasons. the good first 1/4 of this season doesn't cancel out the other five seasons...

[mul21]

3 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Did the Bulls front office not deserve to get fired since they started last season 5-0?  Or wouldn't you agree that it's pretty relevant that they ended the season 20 games below .500? 

It doesn't matter that the Cubs were 29-16 at one point.  That team doesn't exist anymore.  It's not about how you start, it's about how you finish.  

The Bulls have never gotten past the play in round with their former front office and finished over .500 once in their tenure.  Let's not pretend that's a nearly apples to apples comparison.  They also never consistently trended better in successive seasons like the Cubs have the last 3 years.

[mul21]

Man, the culture of immediate gratification makes people really dumb.  

[Post Count Padder]

30 minutes ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

Aaron Bummer has pitched 15.1 innings this year with an 8.62 FIP. This is what it's come to

Tbf he's mostly been a solid reliever for a few years until this season. Throw him in Iowa and see what happens, Can't hurt. 

That said, the timing and his name just scream joke.

[PeanutPunch33]

8 minutes ago, mul21 said:

The Bulls have never gotten past the play in round with their former front office and finished over .500 once in their tenure.  Let's not pretend that's a nearly apples to apples comparison.  They also never consistently trended better in successive seasons like the Cubs have the last 3 years.

Fair point, but I don't agree that the Cubs have "trended better in consecutive seasons".  Take out Kyle Tucker from last season and it's basically the same results 3 or 4 seasons in a row. 

I also believe this is the 2nd or 3rd year in a row where they are amongst the worst teams in baseball for velocity in the starting rotation.  And how many years in a row where they don't have a talented leadoff hitter or a guy that can consistently slug. 

Last year seems like more and more a fluke.  Suzuki isn't putting up a season like that again anytime soon.  Kyle Tucker isn't walking through that door.  PCA is still young but he's not trending towards another 30/30 season.  

It seems to me like every problem that plagues this team today, plagued them in 2023 and 2024.  

That's why having star talent is so important.  Tucker made the entire lineup better.  Jed still can't find a home grown star after 6 years. 

Edited 10 hours ago by PeanutPunch33

[SpongeWorthy]

7 minutes ago, mul21 said:

The Bulls have never gotten past the play in round with their former front office and finished over .500 once in their tenure.  Let's not pretend that's a nearly apples to apples comparison.  They also never consistently trended better in successive seasons like the Cubs have the last 3 years.

if this continues careening into the side of a mountain and Jed gets fired no one is going to be surprised and his tenure will be as non descript as AKMEs was in the long span of time despite whatever (not really large) differences there were season to season. it’ll be like comparing the John Fox era to the Dave Wannstedt era or something—no one will care enough to parse out the differences 

[Jason Ross]

44 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

So you are saying this mess isn't Jed's fault because.... the guy that HE drafted gave up 8+ runs?  The guys that HE gave huge contracts to are.... not playing very good?  Who else's fault can it be?  

If I squint hard enough, I can maybe see what you're saying about Counsell.  He has a track record of success when given good players.  It's not his fault that his 3 best starting pitchers are injured, or that he's been given a lineup that has 0 slug or star talent.  I get that.  

But he has his share of blame for this mess too.  He's stubborn with lineup decisions and too slow to take struggling veteran pitchers out of the game.  He's also butchered the development of young players on this team.  Why is Ballesteros basically a bench warmer at point when he was the team's best player in April?  They will bench a young stud like Ballesteros after he has 1 bad slump across 5 games, but they won't bench Ian Happ after he's been terrible for about 30 days.  What has he done to help PCA take that next step as a player?  You don't think that a young player forgetting how many outs there are in an inning on multiple occasions isn't a reflection of the manager?  What about his base running gaffes or his immaturity? (Sox incident, Dodgers fan comments, slamming his helmet after every strikeout etc.).

You also say that firing Counsell won't make the Cubs suddenly play better.  The Phillies would like to have a word.  Probably the best team in baseball next to the Brewers ever since they fired their manager.  Coaching makes a difference.  Roster construction makes a difference.  There are a lot of problems with this team right now and it can't just be chalked up to injuries.  

 

Do we think the Phillies turnaround is because of Alex Cora? Because two things:

1. I don't think Alex Cora, the not pitcher, fixed Christopher Sanchez and made him throw 42 scoreless innings to set a franchise record

2. The Red Sox who fired Cora are 12-11 since and aren't seeing the same kind of results. 

It's much more likely a scenario in which the Phillies, who faced 13 straight games against the red hot Cubs and the first place Braves upon firing their manager immediately went on to see SF, Miami, the As and Colorado and won 11 of 14 against some bad baseball teams. As well, pitchers like Jesus Luzardo and Brad Keller, as two examples, had inflated ERAs compared to their xFIP, normalized and did what their advanced data said they would. 

Between magic new manager hokum and a favorable schedule and players regressing to the means, I'll take the latter as the correct answer. 

[Jason Ross]

25 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Did the Bulls front office not deserve to get fired since they started last season 5-0?  Or wouldn't you agree that it's pretty relevant that they ended the season 20 games below .500? 

It doesn't matter that the Cubs were 29-16 at one point.  That team doesn't exist anymore.  It's not about how you start, it's about how you finish.  

I have watched exactly zero Bulls games in my life. I don't know. I don't care. The people in charge of the Bulls aren't in charge of the Cubs. 

Jed Hoyer didn't deserve to be fired 10 games ago; not only was the team winning, he had what looked like a successful off-season.

Further more, the Cubs issues this year are injury related and beyond what likely could have been planned for at any given moment. Was it possible all of these players would get hurt? Sure. The likelihood they all went down before the middle May was not. Being on the 10th best SP on your org chart is not anything that could be really planned for. 

Nothing between 29-16 and 29-26 has been specifically a Jed issue. 

[PeanutPunch33]

6 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Do we think the Phillies turnaround is because of Alex Cora? Because two things:

1. I don't think Alex Cora, the not pitcher, fixed Christopher Sanchez and made him throw 42 scoreless innings to set a franchise record

2. The Red Sox who fired Cora are 12-11 since and aren't seeing the same kind of results. 

It's much more likely a scenario in which the Phillies, who faced 13 straight games against the red hot Cubs and the first place Braves immediately went on to see SF, Miami, the As and Colorado and won 11 of 14 against some bad baseball teams. 

I personally think that you under-estimate how certain non-functional things can impact a baseball team.  

Having a coach who isn't a stiff and who can actually connect with the players?  That's important.  A coach who holds people accountable and has the balls to bench a guy for dropping a fly ball on back to back nights?  That's important.  A coach who creates a different vibe and culture in the clubhouse?  That's important.  

The Phillies were like 10+ games under .500 when Thompson got canned.  There is 0 chance that they are playing as great as they are right now without that coaching change.  

Also I'm assuming you meant to say Mattingly and not Cora.  

Edited 10 hours ago by PeanutPunch33

[Jason Ross]

3 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

I personally think that you under-estimate how certain non-functional things can impact a baseball team.  

Having a coach who isn't a stiff and who can actually connect with the players?  That's important.  A coach who holds people accountable and has the balls to bench a guy for dropping a fly ball on back to back nights?  That's important.  A coach who creates a different vibe and culture in the clubhouse?  That's important.  

The Phillies were like 10+ games under .500 when Thompson got canned.  There is 0 chance that they are playing as great as they are right now without that coaching change.  

Also I'm assuming you meant to say Mattingly and not Cora.  

Yeah, meant Mattingly. Regardless, there is a whole lot of "I think" with nothing to support it here. What we have here is anecdotal evidence. We do know this:

Playing 13 games against the Cubs (in their 10 game hot streaks) and Braves is a lot harder than the bottom dwellers they got right afterwards. We also know when players have ERA/xFIP disagreements that the x data eventually wins out. 

If we want to attribute some sort of new manager hokum? Fine. Maybe players are marginally looser or whatever. But whatever marginal looseness we think is occuring and want to add here it doesn't hold a candle to things we know. 

[Outshined_One]

35 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

It doesn't matter that the Cubs were 29-16 at one point.  That team doesn't exist anymore.  It's not about how you start, it's about how you finish.  

Are you even reading what you're writing?  Because we're not even at the halfway point of the season.

All of this hand-wringing could be meaningless in less than two weeks if they go on an 8-2 run.

[chibears55]

1 hour ago, Post Count Padder said:

Ok Jed is pranking us signing a guy named Bummer during a 10-game losing streak.

He wasn't good enough for the Braves, i guess hes an upgrade over Maton 🤷😂

[PeanutPunch33]

1 minute ago, Jason Ross said:

Yeah, meant Mattingly. Regardless, there is a whole lot of "I think" with nothing to support it here. What we have here is anecdotal evidence. We do know this:

Playing 13 games against the Cubs (in their 10 game hot streaks) and Braves is a lot harder than the bottom dwellers they got right afterwards. We also know when players have ERA/xFIP disagreements that the x data eventually wins out. 

If we want to attribute some sort of new manager hokum? Fine. Maybe players are marginally looser or whatever. But whatever marginal looseness we think is occuring and want to add here it doesn't hold a candle to things we know. 

Well it's not really an "I think", and more so a "every person who's ever played sports will tell you the same thing".  Locker room dynamic and coaching matters.  There's more to baseball than spreadsheets.  Same reason why a guy can suck in one place and dominate in another, like JJ Bleday or Kyle Harrison.  

Also, don't pretend like the Cubs didn't benefit from the same thing you mentioned.  They walked off Cincy 3 days in a row, they played the Phillies when they were in crisis mode, then they played the almighty juggernaut New York Mets.  Hardly murderer's row.  The irony is that they are also playing extremely crappy teams on their 10 game losing streak.  I'd say this current version of the Cubs is more relevant than what they did 3 weeks ago. 

[PeanutPunch33]

3 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

Are you even reading what you're writing?  Because we're not even at the halfway point of the season.

All of this hand-wringing could be meaningless in less than two weeks if they go on an 8-2 run.

It was an expression used to illustrate the point.  The point being that nobody gives a horsefeathers on here that they were 29-16 a few weeks ago.  It is completely irrelevant.  

[mul21]

3 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Well it's not really an "I think", and more so a "every person who's ever played sports will tell you the same thing".  Locker room dynamic and coaching matters.  There's more to baseball than spreadsheets.  Same reason why a guy can suck in one place and dominate in another, like JJ Bleday or Kyle Harrison.  

Also, don't pretend like the Cubs didn't benefit from the same thing you mentioned.  They walked off Cincy 3 days in a row, they played the Phillies when they were in crisis mode, then they played the almighty juggernaut New York Mets.  Hardly murderer's row.  The irony is that they are also playing extremely crappy teams on their 10 game losing streak.  I'd say this current version of the Cubs is more relevant than what they did 3 weeks ago. 

Did Counsell forget how to do those things after leading the Brewers to beating the pants off the Cubs for several seasons before he came to Chicago?  Your arguments have no basis in reality.

[CledusSnow]

Maybe a team 80’s theme party or everyone growing a Rollie Fingers style mustache would help.  À la Joe Maddon.

[PeanutPunch33]

Just now, mul21 said:

Did Counsell forget how to do those things after leading the Brewers to beating the pants off the Cubs for several seasons before he came to Chicago?  Your arguments have no basis in reality.

Maybe he was just never as good as advertised?  I'm pretty sure the guy who replaced him has won Manager of the Year in both seasons since Counsell left.  He isn't a difference maker.  

[Bobson Dugnutt]

all you hoyer haters say you want him fired but I haven’t seen any of you pledge one red cent to the fire jed banner. all talk no action.

[Jason Ross]

14 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Well it's not really an "I think", and more so a "every person who's ever played sports will tell you the same thing".  Locker room dynamic and coaching matters.  There's more to baseball than spreadsheets.  Same reason why a guy can suck in one place and dominate in another, like JJ Bleday or Kyle Harrison.  

Also, don't pretend like the Cubs didn't benefit from the same thing you mentioned.  They walked off Cincy 3 days in a row, they played the Phillies when they were in crisis mode, then they played the almighty juggernaut New York Mets.  Hardly murderer's row.  The irony is that they are also playing extremely crappy teams on their 10 game losing streak.  I'd say this current version of the Cubs is more relevant than what they did 3 weeks ago. 

I've played 30 years of baseball. I'm about to play my 31st year of baseball. Attributing "everyone" is not a smart choice. I don't subscribe to that.  

I'm not an MLB player. Didn't come close to that. Let's assume you didn't either. Thus, we don't know. And frankly, listening to baseball players talk about what they think about the game isn't a great idea. The appeal to authority here isn't that good.

There is a reason the nerds run the game and not the guys who hit the ball 450 feet. Because those baseball players would still be running teams based on batting average and RBI if we let them. I respect what they think they know, and respect the hell out of their baseball talent. But what they think what is happening and what is actually happening on a baseball field isn't always the same.

And the reason a guy sucks one place and thrives elsewhere is not magic. It's not a uniform color. It's because that team used their data sheets and cameras and fixed something. They add a pitch. They change a swing. They do something tangible. 

[Outshined_One]

1 minute ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

It was an expression used to illustrate the point.  The point being that nobody gives a horsefeathers on here that they were 29-16 a few weeks ago.  It is completely irrelevant.  

Except the illustration actually supports the contrary point.  This season isn't over, and there's a shitload of baseball left to play.

Ten losses in a row suck, but the 2017 Dodgers had a 1-17 run, including 11 losses in a row, they still made the WS that year, and they lost the WS in large part because their opponent engaged in a massive cheating operation (cue the Bregman guy).

There's nothing wrong with criticizing Hoyer's decisions or individual players, but the people who are ready to walk into traffic over this team would benefit from some perspective.

[PeanutPunch33]

1 minute ago, Jason Ross said:

I've played 30 years of baseball. I'm about to play my 31st year of baseball. Attributing "everyone" is not a smart choice. I don't subscribe to that.  

I'm not an MLB player. Didn't come close to that. Let's assume you didn't either. This, we don't know. And frankly, listening to baseball players talk about what they think about the game isn't a great idea. 

There is a reason the nerds run the game and not the guys who hit the ball 450 feet. 

I mean are you really trying to argue that coaching doesn't matter in baseball 😂 that's just an insane position to me.  Not something I believe at all.  I guess we can agree to disagree.  I'm not an MLB player or in a clubhouse but I do understand human psychology and the importance of accountability.  

[PeanutPunch33]

21 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

Except the illustration actually supports the contrary point.  This season isn't over, and there's a shitload of baseball left to play.

Ten losses in a row suck, but the 2017 Dodgers had a 1-17 run, including 11 losses in a row, they still made the WS that year, and they lost the WS in large part because their opponent engaged in a massive cheating operation (cue the Bregman guy).

There's nothing wrong with criticizing Hoyer's decisions or individual players, but the people who are ready to walk into traffic over this team would benefit from some perspective.

I have the right perspective.  I already know that this team will likely make the playoffs as a wildcard.  But unlike most of you, that doesn't get me excited.  For a team of their payroll, that should be more like "the bare minimum".  

My expectations in year 6 of a GM is that the team is ready to contend for a WS.  Or at a minimum, not get consistently outshined by teams with 1/2 their payroll.  

When Jim Hendry was in year 6, the Cubs were considered one of, if not the most dominant team in baseball that 2008 season.  It just didn't work out.  When Theo was in year 6, the Cubs had already won a chip.  In year 6 of Jed, they can't even produce 1 star level talent or a team that can win their division.  

Edited 9 hours ago by PeanutPunch33

[abuck1220]

51 minutes ago, mul21 said:

Man, the culture of immediate gratification makes people really dumb.  

I mean expecting more than zero (0) division titles in a five year span when your payroll is double that of your competition doesn’t seem unreasonable or instant gratification-y to me.