Cubs-Brewers Game One Thread, By The Numbers

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

Again, after the fact it is easy to see Rea could have done better. And, as I said, I didn’t like the decision to start Boyd when it was done. But he could have just as easily pitched fine. Even had Nico made the play in the first inning, Boyd might have given them a few more without giving up runs. We don’t know. It was a decision without any real good options. And unfortunately this one didn’t work well. 

I don’t see how “Boyd could just has easily pitched fine.” That reasoning could excuse every bad managerial decision ever made. 

19 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

I don’t see how “Boyd could just has easily pitched fine.” That reasoning could excuse every bad managerial decision ever made. 

He threw 56 pitches on Tuesday. It was not irrational to think he could have pitched well on 3 days rest. I believe the though was give us 12’outs. Counsell wasn’t looking for a QS. After the fact that he pitched poorly it is easy to say it was a poor decision. As I have said numerous times now, and I believe looking at my post would inform this, I expected Assad. I believe I said 40% chance Assad, 30% Rea and 30% Soroka.  It prior to the results, Counsell’s decision could have just as easily been fine. And, even this game, if Nico doesn’t make an error Boyd is out of the first with 2 runs scored. Maybe he rights himself and does get 9-12 outs. . 

Edited October 4, 2025 by Rcal10

12 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

I don’t see how “Boyd could just has easily pitched fine.” That reasoning could excuse every bad managerial decision ever made. 

In this case its true. Its not like Colin Rea was the obvious correct decision. It wasnt an egregious decision. 

4 minutes ago, I owned a Suzuki said:

In this case its true. Its not like Colin Rea was the obvious correct decision. It wasnt an egregious decision. 

It wasn’t egregious. Just the wrong one.

4 minutes ago, I owned a Suzuki said:

In this case its true. Its not like Colin Rea was the obvious correct decision. It wasnt an egregious decision. 

That is the entire point. We are looking at it after the fact. And I didn’t like the idea of Boyd pitching. TBH, I am not entirely sure I like him pitching if there is a game 4. But no real obviously good choices. 

2 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

It wasn’t egregious. Just the wrong one.

If you are acknowledging that after the fact you are stating it was the wrong decision, based on results, I absolutely agree. 

51 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

I don’t see a scenario where Rea’s outing went worse than Boyd’s. This is the third time this series where Craig’s decisions have not worked (add in Shota pitching to Machado and trying to get 2 innings from Keller). That’s just too many bad ones in the biggest games of the season.

I also feel like the offense is slipping through criticism. The pitching staff has pitched really well in 3/4 games, while the offense is averaging just over 2 runs a game. Offense, it’s your time to win a game and beat a staff that you should handle the next 3 games.

 

 

Colin Rea has given up 5 or more runs 6 times this year. He has made 32 appearances but 27 were proper starts; hard to give up 5 in a relief outing very often.  Roughly one of every 5 starts had him giving up 5 runs.  Him getting rocked against a team he hasn't faired well against is super in the cards. 

In the playoffs teams have incredibly quick hooks. Maybe he doesn't give up 5, but Rea getting bombed enough against Milwaukee and being pulled early is much more likely than people are wanting to accept. And the outcome of that is almost assuredly the same Soroka to Civale bridge and a game 1 comfortable win for Milwaukee in that scenario.

Hindsight let us know Boyd definitely did. We have no idea what happened to Rea in the same situation. But Counsell doesn't have hindsight as a luxury. 

The reality is there were no good options. 

14 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

If you are acknowledging that after the fact you are stating it was the wrong decision, based on results, I absolutely agree. 

Lol, who is not acknowledging it after the fact?

3 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

Lol, who is not acknowledging it after the fact?

But is that fair? I mean it is easy to say a decision was bad after it goes bad. Kind of like when a pitcher goes 6 innings and is at 80-90 pitches and is winning by a run. If he stays on and give up the lead people bitch that Counsell should have taken him out. Or it he is taken out and the pen blows the lead the same people will bitch that he should have left him in. And when it works nothing is said. Managers don’t have the luxury of hindsight. He picked Boyd from a collection of iffy choices. It didn’t work. Move on. 

11 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Colin Rea has given up 5 or more runs 6 times this year. He has made 32 appearances but 27 were proper starts; hard to give up 5 in a relief outing very often.  Roughly one of every 5 starts had him giving up 5 runs.  Him getting rocked against a team he hasn't faired well against is super in the cards. 

In the playoffs teams have incredibly quick hooks. Maybe he doesn't give up 5, but Rea getting bombed enough against Milwaukee and being pulled early is much more likely than people are wanting to accept. And the outcome of that is almost assuredly the same Soroka to Civale bridge and a game 1 comfortable win for Milwaukee in that scenario.

Hindsight let us know Boyd definitely did. We have no idea what happened to Rea in the same situation. But Counsell doesn't have hindsight as a luxury. 

The reality is there were no good options. 

There were no good options, but there were better and worse options. Boyd was right on the edge of a big inning in the WC round, struggled the second half, was not used to this innings load, and was coming off of short rest. Rea looked pretty good in his appearance on the WC round and had a significantly better second half than Boyd.

11 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

There were no good options, but there were better and worse options. Boyd was right on the edge of a big inning in the WC round, struggled the second half, was not used to this innings load, and was coming off of short rest. Rea looked pretty good in his appearance on the WC round and had a significantly better second half than Boyd.

He looked good in a truncated, 5 out sample size against a worse offensive team, in a 3-0 game. He was able to use better stuff and in a far lower stakes environment. He recorded just one strikeout, however and was shielded from the left handed hitters for the most part. The pulled him right before he faced the parade of lefties at the bottom of the lineup.  

He is Colin Rea. A player this forum wanted nothing to do with 7 months ago. The reaction to Boyd getting a short rest start over him is almost entirely tied to hindsight than it is truly logic. Rea had pitched more recently than Boyd, has not been a pitcher who has owned Milwaukee on the year and just isn't a great pitcher on paper. He's Colin Rea. So Boyd was on short rest, all of the true remains true of the other option. 

This idea he was a clearly better option feels very much looking for the scapegoat of the game and pinning it on Counsel. I fully believe had Rea gotten blown up the same discourse would be over why Assad was a better option. 

At the end of the day, players need to perform well. Its that simple. The Cubs first 2 pitchers didn't get the job done. I still like their stuff better than Rea and Civale. I think they are going to be in a bad way all series with starting pitching. Cubs hitters are going to score 5 plus runs a game to have a shot. 

1 hour ago, Wilson A2000 said:

I don’t see a scenario where Rea’s outing went worse than Boyd’s. This is the third time this series where Craig’s decisions have not worked (add in Shota pitching to Machado and trying to get 2 innings from Keller). That’s just too many bad ones in the biggest games of the season.

I also feel like the offense is slipping through criticism. The pitching staff has pitched really well in 3/4 games, while the offense is averaging just over 2 runs a game. Offense, it’s your time to win a game and beat a staff that you should handle the next 3 games.

 

 

Excellent post and I love your username. Had a Wilson A2000 for about 10 years and it was the best glove ever: saw me through High School and American Legion ball after that. 

25 minutes ago, I owned a Suzuki said:

At the end of the day, players need to perform well. Its that simple. The Cubs first 2 pitchers didn't get the job done. I still like their stuff better than Rea and Civale. I think they are going to be in a bad way all series with starting pitching. Cubs hitters are going to score 5 plus runs a game to have a shot. 

Valid point, and if you think about it: what teams in MLB could lose two guys like Steele and Horton and make a serious run? Not any I can think of. It's catching up with us, as you kinda knew it would

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

He threw 56 pitches on Tuesday. It was not irrational to think he could have pitched well on 3 days rest. I believe the though was give us 12’outs. Counsell wasn’t looking for a QS. After the fact that he pitched poorly it is easy to say it was a poor decision. As I have said numerous times now, and I believe looking at my post would inform this, I expected Assad. I believe I said 40% chance Assad, 30% Rea and 30% Soroka.  It prior to the results, Counsell’s decision could have just as easily been fine. And, even this game, if Nico doesn’t make an error Boyd is out of the first with 2 runs scored. Maybe he rights himself and does get 9-12 outs. . 

If Boyd was pitching well then yea, go ahead and take that chance with him on 3 days rest, BUT...

He was laboring for the most part in his last 10+ starts to where everyone was hoping they would find a way to get him extra rest before the playoffs and he was bailed out in his start against the Padres by some terrific defense.

Today game would of been tough to win against Peralta no matter who started but I was in favor with holding Boyd for Game 2 and getting him 5 days rest after a short outing and than have Imanaga in Game 3 after 6 days rest, I think going that route would of benefited both the Starters and the team going forward. 

The real problem is still the offense, this team needs to figure out how to produce runs because 2-3 runs will most likely not get it done 

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

The reality is there were no good options. 

Winner, winner.

A healthy Horton and/or Steele would have made today much more palatable, but injuries meant Counsell had to pick from a bunch of bad options.

I'm grateful for the off day, though. Get 'em Monday.

This game was going to be a loss no matter what. They have no viable 4th option at starting pitcher and a taxed bullpen from the wild card series. 

14 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

This game was going to be a loss no matter what. They have no viable 4th option at starting pitcher and a taxed bullpen from the wild card series. 

But they took their best option for Game 2 and turned him into a non-option.

2 hours ago, I owned a Suzuki said:

In this case its true. Its not like Colin Rea was the obvious correct decision. It wasnt an egregious decision. 

He's looking like the ultimate MMQB, it's nausiating at this point just SU lol

4 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

Wouldn’t that have been the case for game 2, as well? Wouldn’t they have analyzed him and just hit him on Monday? I didn’t agree with starting Boyd. But I do acknowledge that there really wasn’t a good option. Yes, apparently this was a bad decision. But we see that now after the results. Has he done 4 innings giving up just the 2 he gave up before the Nico error we wouldn’t be talking like this. And had Nico made the play that may have happened. Easy to call the manager out after his decision doesn’t wkrk(not saying you are doing that, btw), but really starting Boyd in shirt rest when he only threw 58 pitches on Tuesday is not that crazy a decision. He just didn’t get it done. 
One comment I heard from the announced in the very first inning was one of them said, now that the Brewers scored runs in the first inning people will suggest the rest was good. Had they went 3 up and 3 down they would have been flat from not playing. So true that most people comment after the fact. 

Yes exactly..   It's hard to know exactly why Boyd got knocked around.   He also got knocked around by the Brewers throughout the season (7+ ERA) and throughout September by other teams on normal rest.  If it worked out CC would have "made a bold move" and yeah the Brewers were rusty from the week off.  Who knows really.

We have seen the stats about SP starting on 3 days rest vs 4 in the playoffs, but Boyd was pulled after around 50 pitches the previous start so it changes the calculation a bit.

Honestly I just tip my cap to the Brewer hitters, it is what it is.  I don't think Boyd should pitch again this series, looks like they may have his number.

4 hours ago, squally1313 said:

I remember Ross and then Counsell last year getting all sorts of criticism for how they handled the bullpen and supposedly pressing the wrong buttons or whatever, and my opinion then was that they were stuck picking between a bunch of bad options and it wasn’t going to end well regardless. This is kinda where I’m at with this decision and the rotation in general. Which is a Ricketts thing, and a Jed thing. Yeah, I know, they were expensive. I…don’t really care? This needed to get figured out, we knew about it in December, we knew about it in July. And here we are, mad that we picked an exhausted above average starter over Colin horsefeathers Rea? 

Reality is we're down Horton and Steele and Shota hasn't been good lately and Boyd also spotty the last month or so and possibly just regressing to the mean a bit.  Our rotation isn't terrible, we have some depth, but we lack any dominant arm.  The defense, hitting/running, and pen need to carry this team and the rotation needs to keep us in ballgames the first 4-5 innings, which unfortunately it didn't today.

We either need to get some good fortune out of our rotation this series or the offense needs to come alive, especially a guy like Tucker.

2 hours ago, cubfansince77 said:

Valid point, and if you think about it: what teams in MLB could lose two guys like Steele and Horton and make a serious run? Not any I can think of. It's catching up with us, as you kinda knew it would

It's just one bad start from Boyd.  We pitched well vs the Padres, but their offense wasn't as good.  Rea, Taillon, Shota, Assad aren't bad pitchers.  At worst a couple of them are a below-average and Shota has been struggling lately.

What sucks is we now have to win 3 of the next 4 games and we'll be seeing Peralta again.

All of the games that aren't against Peralta are very winnable.

4 hours ago, s2obed said:

Jesse Rogers says he heard Imanaga starts game 2. Offense has to show up in a big way. It ain’t over 💪

Luckily the Brewers don't hit many HR and Shota keeps men off the basepaths.  Don't have a ton of confidence in Shota right now but we'll see how it goes.  The hook needs to be short and someone like Rea or Assad needs to be able to step in.

59 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Luckily the Brewers don't hit many HR and Shota keeps men off the basepaths.  Don't have a ton of confidence in Shota right now but we'll see how it goes.  The hook needs to be short and someone like Rea or Assad needs to be able to step in.

It won’t be Assad. He’s not on the roster.