The Yin and the Yang
Despite the title, this isn't going to be another self-indulgent column about non-western mystic philosophy. We'll only meander like that on rain outs, and maybe in the offseason. Right now, there's the matter at hand of appraising the team three weeks into the season, a team struggling through far too much of a roller coaster ride for a mere 19 games.
Over a full baseball season, things even themselves out -- things like luck and talent and skill and fortune. Having had our share of bad fortune, I think that this week is the precise moment that will define the first half of the season. If the Cubs want to feel like early contenders for a pennant, they need to scrap out 3 of the next 4. If they can't, it will be May and they will be 5 games back from St. Louis.
It starts tonight with Cincinnati.
All Photos by KJM.
Of course, I thought that something had to give last week, too, and I was wrong. Instead it was 2 steps forward, 2 steps back, staying right at .500. Twice Maddux pitched brilliant, twice the bullpen gave it back. Instead of Lee & Ramirez each hitting .320 it's Lee at .408 and Ramirez at .229. Barrett suddenly shines as a catcher calling great games and throwing out runners, but he couldn't find a gap in the defense for two weeks. Nomar goes down, Perez steps up. Walker goes down, Hairston steps up. This is how the season has been balanced, with extremes weighing against each other.
Up and down could be how this week goes as well, but if they end up at the end of this week at .500, that will be telling as well. Make no mistake: right now this is the lineup of a .500 ball club, with great starting pitching and a foul bullpen. On the other hand, if they can win 3 of the next 4, either by sweeping the Reds or by splitting the next two and taking the first two in Houston, then we can start feeling some momentum. Otherwise .500 will develop its own momentum.
Last night, Prior was brilliant. Questions surrounding Kerry Wood's short outing notwithstanding, Footnote 1 that means that the starting pitching has given us 6 straight quality starts (and 8 of 9). They should be on a 6 game winning streak, developing an identity. Except that out of those 6, they're only 4-2. LaTroy jobbed Maddux, and the lineup got Dempster 0 runs. So there's no winning streak, and no identity as a winner. This is how it happens in baseball, where single innings sabotage seasons. But it's not too late.
Derrek Lee has been carrying the offense, but now it's time for two people to step up with hits and RBIs from among the threesome of Patterson, Ramirez and Hollandsworth. This will be the difference between threatening 3 innings a game and threatening at least 4 innings a game. That's what it will take. The bullpen is in shambles: Wellemeyer's down in AAA, Fox has an injured elbow, Hawkins has an injured psyche, and Leicster has an injured ERA. Starting pitching can only go so far. It's time for the lineup to win a few more.
Tonight, with the wind blowing out, I think it's time to start. I'm on my way to Wrigley again, to watch them get their first straight 3-game win streak under their belt. Tonight, it starts.
Footnote 1: I don't want to speculate about Wood, but he was throwing 95mph 4-seam fastballs and finally snapping great curveballs on his last start. On the other hand, his fastballs were running in to the right handers -- but they weren't cut fastballs -- which makes me nervous.
3 Comments
Leave a comment
Powered by Ajax Comments
Subscribe
I hope I'm not usurping the thread here, but your comment about baseball's season being long enough to even things out makes me think of a debate that I've had with countless people countless times.
Grant, for the sake of argument here, that the baseball season is long enough to nearly eliminate the effects of luck deciding a national champion. Why, after 162 games between approximatly 15 teams (was even more true before interleague play) do we need
to stick almost 1/3 of the teams into the playoffs? Don't we really know who sucks and who is a contender?
I usually suggest four divisions, with div winners forming a post season. One argument I hear every time I bring this up is that if the top two (or more) teams are in the same division, then the best team in one division would end up playing someone other than the second best team.
My answer to this is twofold. 1) Tough. Win if you want to make the playoffs, 2) Who says this isn't a possibility now, depending where the talent flows?
I also have some ideas on who would play who how many times under the four division setup, but I'm not sure they are relivant here. I'm really looking to hear why we need so many teams in the playoffs. Is my gut reaction of $$$$ too cynical?
Dang work is boring today.
I agree that a 162 game season is long enough to separate it out. I prefer pennant races to wild card races. I've written some of these arguments out before, and I'll treat them again on A&I sometime when I get the chance to lay it all out. That one might spark some good discussion, because I think I'm in the minority for being anti-wild card.
traditionally, i've been anti-wild card also. i liked pennant races better, and i thought the lack of a wild card made the regular season more meaningful.
that said, i think i'm more sympathetic to the wild card that i used to be. it is exciting to have an additional round of playoffs (one more would be too many, but three doesn't seem like overkill). and, if you start from the premise that baseball is not only a game but also a form of entertainment, the wild card does create additional fan interest. that could open a whole can of worms, and the premise has to be applied carefully, but in some cases the things that are entertaining can actually be good for the Game.