81 Wins…And It’s Not Even Labor Day Yet?
.500 seasons are rare for us. It wasn’t until 2004 that the Cubs enjoyed back-to-back .500 seasons for the first time since 1972, which also happened to be the year I was born. In that time, the Cubs finished a season .500 or better a ten times–with last night’s thrashing of Pittsburgh marking the eleventh.
So hitting 81 wins is a nice thing to savor, but the bigger picture of course is the National League pennant, and so far this year Uncle Lou’s crew has been on an unwavering course toward it all season.
For those of us whole live–what?–about 7,000 miles from Chicago and get WGN radio, you may have noticed that, beginning last week, they have begun providing “extended” postgame coverage after the night games. The first one was after last Monday’s series-opening victory over Cincinnati and it was, predictably a love-fest (I mean, we were all pretty giddy ourselves after that game). Dave Kaplan fielded the calls fom joy-poppers everywhere and all was right with the world. After an admittedly frustrating loss in the next game of the series, however, Cory Provus–who, apparently, gets the shaft and has to do these things after Cub losses–had to field calls from all the impatient and lack-of-perspective shrieking nitwits who, still, after following the team all season, act as though they’re entitled to watch an undefeated team.
I was starting to feel sorry for Provus–and imagining Kaplan laughing out of his ass– until one half-wit called up and bemoaned what I have come to discover is possibly the most irrelevant statistic in baseball: teams’ record in 1 -run games.
This caller of course was apopleptic with DOOM. The Cubs, he pointed out, were 17-19 in 1-run games while Dusty’s Reds were 18-10.
Just stop for a second and consider the idiocy of this guy’s argument simply by the examples he’s using. If a team as qualifyingly bad as Cincinnati can “dominate” 1-run games while a team as good as the Cubs struggle, then shouldn’t that immediately tell you that this statistic deserves a closer look?
Of course, what that closer look would reveal is that the Cubs win A LOT of games by a lot of runs. Additionally, as I’ve pointed out several times, the Cubs are simply a difficult team to beat, period. And in order to beat a team as good as the Cubs, you will likely need to battle until the very end and that it will more than likely result in a tight final score.
In fact, forget one-run games. Do you know how many of the Cubs fifty losses have been by more than three runs?
Thirteen. And do you know how many games the Cubs have won by four runs or more?
Forty-one! So in games decided by four or more runs, the Cubs are 41-13. That’s pretty ass-kickingriffic.
Whatever. There are many ways you can break down the ridiculousness of the 1-run argument. It’s one of those statistics that, when you cite it, may make you sound really smart, but it generally doesn’t reflect a team’s strength or weakness like so many other available statistics. Those who know me know that I’m pretty far from being a saber-geek, so when I’m calling out a statistic as stupider than Kyle Farnsworth in a Calculus class, then you know it’s dumb.
Why do I get the feeling that in between calling into the postgame and not using the immediate resource for information that the Internet provides, that this guy pens letters to Carrie Muskat?
Anyway, here was the point when my mild irritation at having to listen to this genius turned into full-blown radio rage. Provus agreed with him, lending credence to this idiot’s vacuous attempt at point-making. I fully expected Provus to talk the guy in from the ledge and point out the flaw in the 1-run argument. Instead, he threw on a life vest, grabbed an oar, and jumped in the guy’s DOOM Boat.
Now I’ll say this for Cory Provus–he’s better than Andy Masur.. But then again, an endless loop of white noise was a more exciting listen than Andy Masur. Still–when Dave Kaplan comes off as the “smart” one, you probably should give more thought to the game you’re paid to cover.
—————————————————————————-
5 to chew on..
It’s only one start, but it looks like Lou may have gotten through to Fukudome. His pinch home run on Sunday may be looked back as the moment he turned his awful slide around.
Prior to last night’s game, the observation was being made in a few places that Edmonds had been struggling. Nothing like the warm, inviting appearance of a Pittsburgh Pirate pitching staff to remedy that.
Speaking of Lassie, while anything short of grudging acknowledgement for his good deeds is frowned upon in many quarters, I have to admit that he is a far better centerfielder than I had long given him credit for. While his showboating theatrics and ESPN-inspired dives over the years have long made me suspicious of his talents, I do not remember a centerfielder on the Cubs looking so fluid out there. And Edmonds is fucking old. Reading a ball off the bat is not something that can not really be taught, and Edmonds is one of those guys that almost always immediately knows where the ball is going to land. Of course, he did did misjudge one last night that fell in, but you can count one one hand the number of times that has happened since became a Cub.
So when does Mark DeRosa get named NL Player of the Week for last week–today or Wednesday?
Does anyone else think that if Jason Marquis can’t get his shit straight against an enfeebled Pittsburgh lineup Wednesday, that Lou’s just gonna bury him in favor of Marshall in September? Just to be on the safe side, I’ll feel a lot better if the Lawnmower takes the second game against Pittsburgh tonight.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to Hire Jim Essian to get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
any major dude I agree with you re: Edmonds. He was a spectacular pick-up. Like this really awesome couch somebody had just thrown away we found by the curb in college. Note to Hendry: When we moved out of the apartment that summer, the couch didn’t come with us. Just wasn’t worth the effort. Never really regretted it. Just something to think about.
Also it isn’t surprising he’s great at judging balls off the bat–he has spent his whole career having to learn how not to just judge where to break for a ball but also exactly when to break such that it looks like the most difficult catch possible. By now, just trying to time it so he catches the ball should be cake.
JayBandit Edmonds may have had a slight miscue last night, but Soriano looked like he was jogging out there on the ground-rule double right in front of the 410 sign. I know he will never be a gold-glover…but he’s so fast at times, it just really frustrates you when he doesn’t put in the effort (this was before the game got out of hand, by the way).
In other news, I sat in the club seats last night on the 3rd base side; the view was one of the best I’ve seen at that park. If you’ve never been to PNC Park, you should definitely take a trip out there. You can buy tickets the day of the game typically with no problem (unless there are fireworks…they’re a simple people out here).
CT
bocaj
BigFlax
StPatrick
TDubbs
Mike, I thought the same thing re: 1-run games. If you want to look at a team poised to make a big improvement from one year to the next, look at their record in 1-run games. If they’re considerably worse in 1-run games than games decided by 3 runs or more, they’re probably the victims of bad luck. Dusty, believe it or not, has been very lucky this year.