CubUgly

And to be clear on my end I never said "you're wrong" or that anyone was wrong, I said I would disagree.....I think that is a significant difference. As to defending my position - we have all season, i'll make you a deal maybe during the holidays when nothing is going on for me and I have time for a 50 post discussion, we can discuss until one of us passes out.

Just been there done that before here, it ain't worth the time and effort and neither of will budge.

I think it's a bit of both for me. I could list multiple specifics in my mind and have here before, but that leads to endless and futile back and forths splitting hairs - but a feeling from watching Rossi almost every game for 4 years and Counsel 19 times a year (until this past year 14) I just believe Counsel is better. And I think if you would poll all baseball people most would too. Now to what degree, that would vary I'm sure just as it does here.

I'm not the full blown analytics guy but I agree with you Re: managers DO have impact but that it's really difficult to calculate or attribute how much. If it were not, we'd have WAR for managers you could bet but too many unknowns about what and how a manager might contribute more so than another, etc. So - what we have - and it happens here all the time, one of us - hell sometimes me....will criticize a move the manager makes..heck I guarantee I'll come on here and criticize something Counsel does. Then inevitably you'll have the responses...."baseball is random...these are 50/50 decisions, coin flips, they know things we don't", etc. you all know the stock responses. While I get it and to some degree agree with the premise, I also think the idea that the impact managers is insignificant and that with very few exceptions you can fit one in with another and you're not going to have much variance to be convenient and off base. If you want to argue that in this specific case that Counsel for Rossi has very little impact in a vacuum and that it's not upgrade, I'd disagree...I'd understand the take...but again, I'd disagree.

yeah, we can all deep dive into all the geek stats and probably make a good case for whatever our opinion in this scenario. Bottom line is we'd have to get in the DeLorean - go back to the start of last year, put Rossi on the Brewers and Counsel on the Cubs and see what happens to really know if and how much of difference it is. In my opinion it would make a fairly significant difference in the positive for the Cubs. Some here feel it would not make much of a difference if at all. Personally, I'm ecstatic about the move. I think it's in upgrade in that position and signals we are going for it, to our fans, the organization and to the rest of baseball. I don't think Counsell signs here unless he felt very good the Cubs are going to do so and gave assurances of that.

I'll agree they don't make an enormous difference but IMHO this substitution does game a difference for the positive. And I'm happy not only for the change itself but the direction and attitude I think it signals.

Agreed, folks tend to put their worst fielders in left so typically you get the best of a mediocre group of fielders there winning the GG. Look no further than last year when Yelich who is about as bad a fielder as your gonna get, finished runner up to Happ. Happ was good last year, he regressed back a bit this year, I don't think anyone who watched every day could say differently. I would agree given what you said above Re: Rosario, but I don't know the politics and everything else that comes into play here. Would love to hear from the decision makers on this.

Don't forget the NL had the DH in the Covid season of 2020 and the Cubs very seldom chose to use Schwarbs in that role. Not sure how often the Phils use him in that role but he still seems to be in left a good bit when I saw them in the regular season. Look, I love the guy but it wasn't like his value was off the charts in 2020 and teams were knocking down the Cubs door for him. The fact that he signed a one year prove it deal with the Nats at 8 mil per year shows it his value was not much at that time. Cubs could have gotten significantly more trading him the year before.

Also, not sure how much they expected to get from Cody Heuer, as it turned out of course he re-injured himself, but I do recall the timetable for getting him back seemed to be always listed as June or July. He was throwing 100 mph in the minors before he got re-injured, although the actual pitching numbers that mattered were not very good.

Oh, I know he backs/takes up for the players, I just thought having watched post game pressers for 4 years he seemed pretty at ease and good with the press in years 1-3 and seemed a bit short and snippy with them this year in comparison.

to take this in a different direction, is it just me or did Ross seem much more pissy and short with the press this year than in this previous 3? I did, and given how soft the media that covers the Cubs on a daily basis is relative to other big market teams I was a bit surprised by it. Maybe getting his biggest dose of criticism from the fans this year he took it out on the press?

I think Ross's strength is fostering team culture and in house communication. Now how many wins that gets you? impossible to quantify. His strength is absolutely NOT in game strategy, and lineup/defensive construction, etc.. The counter to this opinion of mine is always that they have info we don't, these 100's of decisions are mostly 50/50 coin flips that the randomness of baseball typical renders these type of decisions and their overall effect on winning and losing very minimal. While I understand and to some degree agree with that - I find a convenient response and honestly a bit of lazy and in this case don't agree with it Re: Rosse. We could list games and decisions and go case by case as we have so many times during the year and argue them and disagree and get nowhere. But in my view to summarily dismiss Ross's overall performance in game/gameplanning/construction issues as insignificant - I just can't sign off on that. So then the question becomes are there better options out there that could make us better on the margins therefore overall? IMHO without question. Could the Cubs get any of them, that I cannot answer, and we should not make a move unless we have an option we can get in our hip pockedt and we likely don't. However, the point is moot, he's going to be here for another year. The good news is he can improve, experience and failure is always the best teacher - he even stated he's going to look in the mirror. I hope he does and I hope he sees the right things.

Agreed, I'm good with 5 years - more than that I get a bit uneasy - but 5 I can live with.

Yep, this.....most teams put their worst defensive players either at first or left. With the DH you now have another place to hide them but some - even most teams of course have more than one defensively challenged player. And there is a reason they put their worst guy in left, it's because as you say - typically they see fewer balls hit to them than at most positions. Happ was tried at many positions and was below average at all of them - even left, but they left him in left long enough to where he at least became one of the best at a position of mostly bad fielders being hidden in LF - at least last year - this year he regressed back to where he was the year before there, but still probably better than many - so bad is relative. So, Soto probably - for the near future - stays in left/DH role wherever he is. But if I had Soto and could move him to first and put someone else in left who could hit and this helps the team win more games....horsefeathers with the salary . Can move him back down the line if that becomes a salary cap issue. Do what's best to win games in the now.

I predicted 81-81 so not all that far off from what happened, how we got there was not totally expected. Honestly, probably should have been better, for every game we won that we were fortunate to - in my opinion we lost at least two we should not have for many and varied reasons. The roster was flawed and compromised early - that's on Jed...and that issue was compounded by the fact that Rossi doubled down on that in my view and played the pieces (Hosmer/Mancini, etc) way too often and in positions on the field and in the lineup that just really made no sense way too often. We hung on to those two way too long. Then we got hot once we got rid of them and started using Belli at first more, got the bullpen stabilized and went on a hot streak. The bullpen got worn out late and that was really a big factor. I thought at the time of the trade deadline we needed one more lefty bullpen piece. How hard we tried and how close we came to that I have no idea but I see that as a key mistake. Overall a real roller coaster emotionally - high highs and low lows. Anyone here can tell you I'm not a big Rossi fan. I think he's a good culture guy. It's hard to define how many wins that got us but I would concede it's worth some. And I know I've been told here the bench coaching and decisions on the margins are subjective too and I agree but in my opinion he cost us more than the average manager in that regard.

I agree, I told my wife when they brought him in last night - in the 4th - that's way too early to bring in someone who it's obvious is not ready to hit at this level. As for the bunts, seems whenever there's a question of whether to or not Rossi seems to go to the bunt, it doesn't seem to be the 50/50 coin flip situation for him - it's seems to me to fall much higher on the bunt side with most baseball metrics would say it should be the other extreme.

Yeah, after witnessing in person Morel cost us a game in left in Houston this year that's a hard no. I agree part of Morel's defensive issues are never playing in one spot for any significant period of time, that won't be fixed at this stage of a season. Bottom line most teams put their worst fielder either in left or at first base. It's why Dave Kingman, Soriano and Schwarbs played left. It's the reason that Yelich - as bad of a fielder as he is - was the finalist for GG in left with Happ last year. Having the DH allows some leeway now, but still there's always gonna be someone out there who is not great defensively anywhere but you have to get his bat in the lineup and the DH is already taken. Happ improved significantly defensively last year, as he was flat out not good the year before. He's fallen somewhere in between this year. Whatever then numbers say he's botched some plays that really have not been that difficult, plays he made much more often last year.

The Pirates have kind of reminded me of the Cubs last year down the stretch - having a good September.

I've debated the Rossi factor all year with folks here and elsewhere, with my opinion being that even when his options were limited by the personnel he had earlier in the year (specifically the first base issue) that he still lost us games on the margins with very questionable lineup decisions and playing folks in positions on the field that set them up for failure. I have not changed my stance on that...I think if there was a WAR for managers his would be among the worst. Now I know I'll be told you can't quantify that....that there is info they have that we don't....that there are 50/50 decisions they have to make constantly that really are a coin flip, that baseball is just weird, etc., etc. and I concede all of that, but after one concedes all that - you can't exclude the manager from all responsibility - good or bad. I think Rossi is a good culture guy and that counts for something. I think game planning, lineup decisions, both who plays and where and in game strategy - there is ample room to criticize.

To crush to balls like he did last night while getting just one look at live pitching in the last 2 weeks is pretty impressive.

Boog keeps saying MLB average on balls hit over 95 is .500. Not saying I question that - but I ain't seeing it with the Cubs.

Yes, it's a glaring difference Re: Hendricks and it's obvious....and surprising. I mean, I get the new rules change the landscape but he's not coming close on his 1-2 throws he gets and he used to get guys fairly regularly.

Me too, seems the "we are going to play the guys who got us here" quote has been used by Rossi more than once, and specifically when asked about Canario not playing.