Before you start bitching about Dusty Baker's lineup selection today -- and I agree, it was idiotic -- consider this:
The 1-through-6 hitters in the lineup, supposedly the good ones, went 0-for-22.
The 7-8-9 hitters -- Jose F. Macias, the one we'd love to put anywhere except in the lineup; Henry Blanco, the backup catcher with a lifetime .216 average, and Greg Maddux, the pitcher, had all four Cub hits today.
What's wrong with this picture?
Nothing that a day off for Derrek Lee, and maybe Todd Walker, wouldn't help. With Nomar Garciaparra scheduled to play tomorrow night, maybe it's a good day to give Walker the night off and play Neifi (I'm taking away the ! again, for a while, even though he is 8-for-28, .286, with two walks, in the Cubs' last ten games, even including today's 0-for-4) at second base.
See, this is the sort of thing that does drive me nuts about Dusty Baker. One of his legendary strong points as a manager is supposed to be his loyalty to his players, how they'll all run through a wall for him, and that makes them play better, maybe get that extra little something that'll win a game for you.
The 2003 Cubs accomplished this under Baker. For some reason, this team can't seem to do it.
I've started reading Buzz Bissinger's "Three Nights In August," the book about three days in the managing life of Cardinals manager Tony LaRussa. As Cub fans, we have to have a healthy dislike of Tony, but I caution you -- look at the results. He wins.
And why does he win?
Even in the early parts of this book, the difference between LaRussa and Baker is clear, and it's summed up thus -- Bissinger describing LaRussa:
(Emphasis added by me)
There's the key right there, and the difference between LaRussa and Baker. LaRussa may love his guys, but he'll do what is necessary to win. Baker loves his guys to a fault -- he'll keep on doing the same thing even when it's been proven it doesn't work, and he won't try something new even when the chorus around him is singing loudly to, for example:
Dusty's too loyal. If the players are performing, this loyalty is wonderful, it puts all the players in line behind an inspirational leader, and moves on to glorious victory. But if they stop -- well, then, it's more along the lines of Captain E. J. Smith nobly going down with the Titanic.
At a certain point even a man as loyal as Baker has got to go to Jose Macias and say, "We're trying someone else today."
Two other things struck me in the 66 pages of Bissinger's book that I've read so far. It's about the Cubs/Cardinals series of August, 2003 -- chosen at random, incidentally, by Bissinger; he couldn't have known that he'd get one of the most critical of series of the 2003 pennant race -- and at one point he credits Mark Prior and Kerry Wood for the Cubs' "swagger and success", calling them "punk rockers".
That phrase has a whole new meaning now, just a little less than two years later.
And we'd have all scoffed back then, because we were all anticipating the return of Corey Patterson and his logical development into the star he, and the rest of us, thought he might become -- but perhaps the single worst decision made after the 2003 season ended was not re-signing Kenny Lofton. Even at age 38, Lofton has a far better OBA (.377) than any Cub leadoff man, and Lofton has that certain "swagger" that can help define a winning team.
I don't think it's coincidence that Lofton has played in nine postseasons with five different teams.
Oh, well. Cliche meter on: That was then, this is now.
This is all a roundabout way of saying the Cubs looked like they would have rather been anywhere else but sunny, pleasant (82 degrees) Shea Stadium this afternoon, where the Mets dispatched them easily 2-0.
The only things worth mentioning in this game, besides the scrubs doing all the hard work, are all Greg Maddux:
Walker hit a fly ball, but not deep enough to score a run, and Lee struck out on a pitch that scraped the ground.
This means, that on a road trip on which the Cubs had to go 5-1 or 6-0, the best they can do is 2-4, and they must win tomorrow to do it.
Oddly enough, in this odd season, they have still not lost any ground in the wild-card race. Houston lost again to the Giants for the second day in a row; so even though there are now six teams to climb over, the deficit remains at five games.
I'm not saying to have unrealistic hopes -- I can read the standings as well as anyone.
But anyone who tells you they know what's going to happen tomorrow -- well, give me some winning lottery numbers. Baseball is full of surprises.
Let's have some good ones for a change.
0 recs | 41 comments
Losing ground
Actually, I think we have fallen behind the Brewers into 4th place in the Central, which also means one more team to leap over in the wild card race. Realistically, this season is over as far as any playoff hopes. Hope springs eternal but the fat lady is certainly warming up her voice.jerry @ Bleed Cubbie Blue - August 6, 2005
Yup
The Cubs are now 4th in the Central. 7th in the Wild card. SiggghhhhBeerCub - August 6, 2005
Team is done, now what?
This team is a dead stick. While the Cubs aren't mathematically eliminated from the WC, unless something drastic happens (like firing Baker, hint hint), this team is going to be lucky to finish .500. So now what? Maybe we should hope that Hendry looks into trading our worthless vets (Macias, Holly, Neifi) and bringing up some younger guys. I'd also leave Hill in the rotation if he's in the plans for the 2006 starting rotation.grifdog - August 6, 2005
Watched Houston last night, was at the game today:
and boy, have they looked like crap. Coming into this series vs. SF, you think Pettitte, Oswalt and Clemens against the reeling Giants--looks like an easy sweep on paper.Of course, Schmidt and Hawkins (!) hold them to three hits, and Lowry And Hawkins (!) hold them to two hits through 8 (before they got two in the 9th.)
Anyway, they're wayyyy overdue for a slump. Maybe this is the start. Hope it continues through next week when we go down there.
bison - August 6, 2005
Tomorrow...
... who's pitching for the Giants? Neither Houston's nor SF's website lists anyone.Al Yellon - August 6, 2005
Yahoo...
... says it's Tomko.Al Yellon - August 6, 2005
Tomko is hurt...
so is Reuter, might be Jeff Fassero or a spot call-up.bison - August 7, 2005
Wow...
... on paper, whoever they pick would be a mismatch.The only thing Fassero and Clemens have in common is that they both used to pitch for the Red Sox.
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
It's Brian Cooper
He's a journeyman type pitcher, mostly a minor league journeyman. Came up with the Angels in '95, bounced up and down for a few years, got let go, landed with Toronto, got let go, hooked up with the Giants, got let go, then re-upped with them again last year. So far today he's held the Astros to one run, three hits and he's in the 5th.BeerCub - August 7, 2005
Of Course, Clemens Is Doing The Same Thing
BeerCub - August 7, 2005
I Know It's A Saturday Night And All..
...but the lack of posts after this latest loss must mean something. Possibly that a majority of people don't figure it's worth it at this stage to invest the energy and emotion it takes to be a Cub fan. I'm still hoping against hope, but it ain't easy. No real sense in hashing out today's game. Out here in L.A. we couldn't see it, so web reports are all we get. As Al said, it was the usual suspects who actually contributed today, i.e. Macias and Blanco. While I agree that nothing can be hurt by having an outfield of Murton, Lawton and Burnitz for the duration, it's time to quit focusing on Macias and realize the problems are much bigger than him. They can still overcome it all, but I doubt anyone is putting money on it.BeerCub - August 6, 2005
I have a feeling...
... that it is just that it's Saturday night, and the weather's nice across most of the country.Al Yellon - August 6, 2005
the fans merely reflect the team
a national t.v. audience got to see a good old fashioned pitcher's duel. it was won by a mini-version of "small ball". cairo singles, steals second, and scores one out later on a double. two innings later reyes singles, advances on a deep-enough fly to center, steals third, and socres on a hit. ball game over.it was, by and large, damn good baseball. too bad the club of choice for us, although never being very far out of the game, were also barely even in it.
just one of those days where the journey was a lot better than the destination. perhaps being philosophical about it all is my defense mechanism; for me denial is a dangerous choice.
given 1,000 years i would never improve on the words of 10man from 2004:
"everything that can be analyzed, has been analyzed.
everything that can be criticized, has been criticized.
everything that can be praised, has been praised."
"i will now be rooting for victory every day with my emotion, but not my intellect. for i can survive a broken heart, but there is no recovery from brain damage."
dc60123 @ Bleed Cubbie Blue - August 6, 2005
thanks DC
i never saw the original statement, and would have never seen it had you not quoted it here.and thanks partner (10man), for this little bit of wisdom which escaped me until tonight!
kjk - August 7, 2005
Friendly advice for Baker
For another perspective on Dusty check out the following article from San Francisco:http://www.sfgate.com/sports/
"In a world gone wrong, Dusty Baker's concern isn't just the St. Louis Cardinals or the National League wild card. It's enduring a tide of sentiment to run him out of town."......
Bruce Jenkins/ San Francisco Chronicle
hank01 - August 6, 2005
Here...
... is the direct link to the article.Al Yellon - August 6, 2005
link
the link is to the on line sports section. You have to open the article.It may be gone by Sunday.Sorry- I should have copied it and posted it. Is one allowed to do that?
hank01 - August 7, 2005
The article...
... is still there.Sure, you can post direct links to articles here.
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
what a bizarre article
i can live with the fact that it's very anti-cub fan and anti-chicago in tone.but what do the last two paragraphs have to do with the rest of the article or the headline? if it's a "notes" piece, then why so much space dedicated to baker?
it seems as if the writer had a mininum word count and ran out of things to say. which might also explain his need to play the race card.
kjk - August 7, 2005
Shame on Bruce Jenkins
for giving that vile Scoop Jackson ESPN column any credence. That column (and Scoop himself) deserve a healthy dose of scorn, followed by a permanent dose of obscurity.Other than that egregious lapse in judgment, though, Jenkins didn't write a bad column. I didn't think it was anti-Cubs-fan or anti-Chicago at all. Jenkins realized, to his credit, that Chicago and San Francisco are two very different sports environments, and he spelled that out for Bay Area readers who might not be aware of that. Yes, he portrayed Cubs fans as demanding and desperate, but ... guess what? We are. The complacent fan base that used to be happy just to show up at the Confines, suck down some brews, grab some rays, and enjoy those cuddly Cubbies win or lose, is changing. And it's changing for the better, I think. People are no longer simply satisfied with just enjoying the Wrigley experience, or with playing along with the "lovable loser" ethos of Cubdom. Cubs fans want the team to win it all -- and they're much more vocal about it than they used to be. We are turning into Red Sox Nation, pre-2004.
Except that we're much more good-looking, of course. ;-)
Gregory - August 8, 2005
i reread it ...
... in case i missed something that you saw. sorry, i can't change my opinion about it.in my comment above, i was mostly criticising the editing, but here are a couple more thoughts:
what i find anti-chicago/cub fan is the way he implies that the criticism baker receives is undeserved. in the article baker is only "partly accountable." the real problems lie with bartman, sosa and racism.
i also think he implies a certain brutality in cubdom.
of course there are all kinds of cub fans because all kinds of people like the cubs. i don't know what kind is in the majority.
for me, i gravitate to sites like Al's because fans are passionate but polite. we disagree but we are not mean. and even now, we are for the most part if not optimistic, at least light-hearted. i also don't see myself as "demanding and desperate."
as an aside, i think those fans who are "not complacent" will go away if we have another couple losing seasons.
kjk - August 8, 2005
Yes, but ...
... "partly accountable" isn't faint praise. It's an indictment, a confession that his boy Johnnie B. is also to blame. Yes, he does stick up for him and insist that a lot of the vituperation sent Baker's way is undeserved. But he connects that vituperation with the fanbase being hungry for a World Series team, and in that respect he hit the nail on the head.As for the stuff about Cubs fans and Chicago in general, I still think he was dead-on. And, like I said, I thought that it was necessary for Jenkins to say these things, because of his audience. He's writing for Bay Area sports fans (and Giants fans in general), and their way of looking at things is vastly different than it is here in Chicago.
I think that there is a "certain brutality" in Chicago. I'd use the word "passion" instead of "certain brutality", but it's really two sides of the same coin. Even here on Al's site, which I would argue seems to attract more of a genteel element of Cubs fandom than other sites (a lot of the commentary on other Cubs blogs has long since reached the pitchforks-and-torches stage with regard to Baker), the natives are restless and are not afraid to express it. Chicago is not a town given over to niceties when it comes to sports commentary -- and while the Cubs are a team whose fan base is laden with little old grandmas and small children, they aren't immune to administering a dose of vinegar in their opinions when the team is screwing up, either.
I don't think that you're correct about the "not complacent" fans going away, either. The people I'm seeing that're doing that on various Cubs blogs are making references to 1999, 1985, 1977, etc., and various and sundry other Cubs midseason collapses. These are obviously long-term Cubs fans disgusted with yet another example of the same-old, same-old with regard to a Cubs team fading in late summer.
Gregory - August 8, 2005
I think it's neither:
The way I read the article, it's more an escape hatch for Dusty to use on his way out. In my reading, the writer is saying that Chicago is to blame for not accepting Baker and his fallibility.
I think I understand what you're saying about Chicago vs. San Fancisco, that SF has a more forgiving fan base. Never been there; can't comment on it. I do think Baker does deserve all the criticism he's getting in Chicago. (I'm one of those restless natives.)
As I said above, I think the article says that he is not deserving. And maybe I'm hypersensitive, but as a Chicago native and lifelong Cubs fan I find that the finger pointing is more towards the fans than the manager.
---
Two sides of the same coin: I don't see Passion and Brutality that way. To me they are more like two tones on the same scale. For me, Yin and Yang, Love and Hate are two sides of the same coin.
I used the Passion and Brutality in my comment because I find Al's site passionate, but not brutal. Not extreme.
---
vituperation. You rock Gregory. Thanks for the vocabulary lesson!
---
Fans going away. Only time will tell ...
kjk - August 8, 2005
One more thing:
I think it's the writer's throwing Bartman into the mix is just as irresponsible as throwing in racism.kjk - August 8, 2005
Don't lump me in there.
"we were all anticipating the return of Corey Patterson and his logical development into the star he, and the rest of us, thought he might become"Corey sucked from day one. Sure, eh had flashes and some stretches of even a few weeks that were good. Hell. August 04 was great.
Other than that?
Sucked. Always has above Low A Ball.
Don't say "all" 'casue that's just wrong.
Ivychat - August 6, 2005
Yeah, I know..
... you hated Corey from day one.Note that I didn't write that he "would" become a star, only that we "hoped" so.
Clearly, any such hopes are long gone now.
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
Dusty Wants to be Loved
Al's highlighted passage from Buzz's book is on the mark. A major league manager's job is not complicated. It is to make decisions which give his team the best chance at winning games.Dusty Baker would rather be liked by his players than win. He seeks not to offend, instead of to win. He must go.
perseman - August 6, 2005
Lofton
Everyone I know who follows the Cubs every day wanted Lofton to return in 2004 - we were all surprised when he was not offered a contract at the end of 2003. He wanted to start, and there was no room for him except as the fourth outfielder, or so went the story from that December. It was all about Corey. They should have made Patterson earn that spot against Lofton. The cream will rise to the top. I don't really care if someone is hurt and then loses his starting spot, this is professional sports. If you want your starting spot again, earn it. The Cubs just anointed Patterson as the starting left-fielder after his injury, and frankly, I think we can see he was not yet a sure thing as a pro player. I don't know anyone who wanted to see Patterson given his spot just for having potential, although that seemed to be the consensus on usenet (this was of course before BCB had leMayed ASBCC into near irrelevance for daily discussion).I also must wonder whether the alleged run-ins in the clubhouse between Sosa and Lofton had anything to do with Lofton's departure being accepted so easily.
Tom Mason - August 7, 2005
I hadn't thought of...
... the Sosa/Lofton conflict, but at the time, sure, management didn't want to piss off the "big star" (Sosa), so Lofton was let go, even though he was a favorite of Baker's.That, too, was a wrongheaded decision.
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
If Neifi and Nomar
Are in the line up at the same time, I think it should be Nomar playing 2B and Neifi playing SS.As far as it goes, I also think for next year the Cubs should sign Nomar to play 2B everyday, get rid of mental wetard Walker and it's time to see what Cedeno can do on an everyday basis at SS.
I would NEVER re-sign Nomar to play SS.
SoBlueCal - August 7, 2005
Nomar...
... has played exactly one game at 2B in the majors, in his rookie year, 1996.It's not unreasonable to think that he might be convertible into a 2B next year, with Cedeno at SS (or even someone else, if they can make a deal for someone).
But I wouldn't do it now, not with Nomar coming off a serious injury. If you do this, let him have an entire spring training to work on it.
It's also a thought to put him in left field next year.
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
LF Might Be A Better Option
If Nomar is to be moved, much les re-signed. I doubt he'd want to displace his friend Walker at 2B. Walker has a mutual option for '06 which vests after a certain amount of plate appearances this year. I don't know how many appearances that is, but nonetheless, the two guys are tight.BeerCub - August 7, 2005
The Again
Maybe he'll turn out to be a pleasant surprise and do just fine at the plate and SS the rest of the way. Right? Right?BeerCub - August 7, 2005
That's what we are ALL hoping for!
... at least I am.You know, today Mariotti had another one of his moronic columns (no, I won't even give him a link -- look it up yourself if you want) where he said:
Guess Mariotti didn't bother to look up Nomar's 2003 season, where he scored 120 runs, hit 28 HR, drove in 105, had 19 SB and an .869 OPS. That was only two years ago!
This was in terms of saying Nomar shouldn't be re-signed for "the type of money he'll be wanting".
Frankly, I think Nomar realizes he's had two years derailed by injury, and would be willing to sign for heavily incentive-laden money, to prove he's still the player he was. Sure, he may have lost most of his speed -- but I think he has integrity, unlike a certain Sun-Times columnist.
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
Agreed
He signed for less than market price this year and after what's happened, even if he tears up the league the rest of the way (as opposed to his groin, which hurts even to write), he'll likely do the same for next year. Unfortunately for all involved, he's got to prove himself all over yet again in 2006. If he evenhis a halfway decent rest of 2005, I'd be for signing him to a one year in 2006, similar to what he did this year. Just staying healthy would be a really good start.BeerCub - August 7, 2005
I think...
... he'd want some sort of guarantee for a future beyond next year.I'd give him this:
$4 million base salary
Incentives (games played, at-bats) that would bring the deal up to $8 million if he plays a "normal" season -- i.e. about 140-150 games, 500-550 AB.
If he reaches those goals, you could vest an option year at $8-9 million for 2007, and then have a third option year with a buyout -- that protects the Cubs in case he sucks in 2007, but gives him essentially a three-year deal if he's good that year. He'll still be only 34.
What would likely happen if he plays well for 2006, is that Hendry would sign him to an extension.
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
So let's tell Hendry
that we've got it all figured out. Your proposal sounds good. Now what about the rest of 'em?BeerCub - August 7, 2005
The rest of the team?
... sure, I figure between all of us we can get some concrete proposals to Hendry by the end of the season.Anyone else wanna jump in?
Al Yellon - August 7, 2005
Nomar in 2003
Yes, #6 in runs scored and #8 in hits is sure not the numbers of a superstar.Tom Mason - August 7, 2005
NO NO NO
N0mar in LF is hilarious.This stupid team has so many holes....
Lets see the kids....
and ofcouse, fire dusty baker.....PLEASE
SoBlueCal - August 8, 2005
sO WHAT
nomar has played 1 game at 2nd base....So what.
think about it Al.
SoBlueCal - August 8, 2005
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.