The Cubs are fun to watch again.

The Cubs are fun to watch again.

I know I mentioned it on many occasions over the last couple of seasons, but even for me the Cubs were a tough watch.

Part of it was watching players I really didn’t like (Marlon Byrd, Geovany Soto) or watching players I was ready to see move on (Ryan Dempster), it just was tough.

I always envisioned the Cubs having the guts to go young at some point and rebuild. Except that when I always envisioned it, it was more like when the Marlins did it. It seemed they always would have young, mostly unknown talent that would come in and give the big pay-rolled Cubs fits. I thought I could be on board with watching a young, cost effective, team. I didn't think it would involve stop gaps like Bryan LaHair and Ian Stewart.

The Cubs are becoming fun to watch again.

I am not hung up on wins and losses just yet. However, as I wrote last week, it is ok to root for them to win again. We now have see some glimpses that this thing is going somewhere. You can have fun watching it develop.

Anthony Rizzo is showing you why this front office has had a love affair with him. The kid is the whole package, power, defense, quiet leadership, and charisma.

No matter how rough a ride you want to give Starlin Castro, his talent is undeniable and there is little doubt his game is progressing. Look around and you see other pieces that are fun to watch progress.

Jeff Samardzija and his em..rock star hair, Travis Wood and his "outdoorsman" beard, "Beef" Wellington Castillo, and the scrappy Darwin Barney are all making cases for being a part of (that new catch phrase in Wrigleyville) “the core”.

I always thought I would enjoy this sort of thing. I always look back fondly as a Bulls fan during the 1987-89 years, when the team was growing and you could see something special coming together. There really is no more fun time in sports than watching your team get good.

I thought I would have that chance in the late 80’s, early 90’s with some Cubs teams too. The Cubs were showing the makings of a special nucleus in 1988 before it was demolished by some ownership and front office Cubbie occurrences. Let us digress.

Even the role players on this team are likeable. Including the players that likely aren’t going to be around for the long haul. Players like David DeJesus, Nate Scheirholtz, and yes- even Alfonso Soriano are easy to pull for these days. Don’t look now, but slowly but surely the Cubs are becoming kind of a thing again.

The Twitter chatter is there, the sports talk shows are talking about them again. Pretty soon there wont be so many empty seats either.

Well maybe some of the fans will still stay away until they think it’s the cool thing to do again. They will be missing out.

Filed under: Uncategorized



Leave a comment
  • C'mon now. Don't group Bryan LaHair in with Ian Stewart. At least LaHair showed up and played hard and had a very good half of a season.

    But your point is dead on . Last night I was thinking the same thing that it is fun to watch the Cubs play good baseball.

    Tacking on 3 runs in the 7th was something that hasn't happened in a while and just takes all the pressure off a shaky bullpen.

  • Rizzo will dwarf Mark Grace's level of popularity, when he was playing, in a year or two. I think people forget how popular Grace was.

  • In reply to Carl9730:

    That is a pretty bold prediction but I am confused because you follow it up with a (very true) statement that undermines your prediction? So you're on the fence? You should be because not only could Grace rake (most hits & most doubles in the 90s), he was a great fielder w/4 Gold Gloves, came through in the clutch (see 89 playoffs) and gave some of the best sound bites of any Cub ever. A safer prediction would be to eclipse in popularity the only other Cub's first baseman in the modern era to avg. 300 lifetime at 1st with the Cubs...Derreck Lee (Batting Champ, stellar defense, All-Star & powere til he broke his wrist).
    BTW, I believe Grace & Frank Thomas are two casualties of the 'roids era as they would certainly have garnered more recognition, all-star appearances, awards, etc. if not for the inflated power #s of their competition at that time (w/exception of Gwynn, Kenny Lofton, Barry Larkin, Cal Ripken, Fred McGriff, Paul O'Neil Ken Griffey Jr.& Bernie Williams **only McGriff played 1st) First Basemen McGwire, Palmeiro and Bagwell NO DOUBT guilty of PEDS. I question Albert Belle, Mo Vaughn, Sheffield, Alomar, and it's sad because these guys could all be clean and maybe my exceptions list has some PEDS unfortunate Selig is such a tool.

  • fb_avatar

    My fear with this team is what Theo talked about over the off-season: that they're good enough to be okay. That is, in the 75-78 wins area, which isn't close to good enough qualify for the playoffs, but also means you lose your first round pick if you go after a guy who has a qualifying offer.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    Mike, by the time Theo gets done dealing at the deadline..I doubt this team will have to worry about being good enough record wise to be affected by losing the first round pick/qualifying offer...I'd wager that Garza, Feldman, DeJesus, Villanueva, Marmol and Soriano among others will be gone by July 31st and that although the last 2 months won't be as bad as last year, they won't sniff 500 after doing one more purge for prospects

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Luigi Ziccarelli:

    I'm not so sure Garza will be gone, or that we should wish for him to be. I think this team could contend in 2014, but I think, for that to happen, Garza is going to have to still be around. Maybe that means an extension. Maybe that means he accepts a qualifying offer.

    Marmol most certainly won't be back, and I don't think Soriano will either. Feldman and DDJ are the biggest trade chips right now. To get anything more than a comp pick for Garza, the cosmic tumblers are going to have to fall into place just right. He's going to have to be pitching his ass off, and some GM is going to have to be desperate enough or rich enough to not care about his lack of time value or comp pick.

  • I like the point about not having to do the rebuild Marlins-style. Another one of the reasons I like this new FO is that they have a knack for picking up useful pieces that fit the long-term plan. Instead of our stop gap being Placido Polanco, who is past useful and utterly unfun to watch, we get the Nate Schierholtz, David Dejesus, Luis Valbuena types. These moves go beyond simply being willing to spend money, they are products of the FO's shrewd understanding of the actual vs. perceived market value of free agents.
    Great observation though. Right now is a rare feeling on the North Side: a blossoming farm system with something like competitive ball being played at the major league level.

  • In reply to Denim Dan:

    Actually I did like the way Marlins restocked first couple of times.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    Ah yes, I misread that line originally. Those were indeed good rebuilds. This current one not so much...

  • fb_avatar

    Just curious, how come you didn't like Byrd & Soto?

    Also, anytime Beef wants t take his 2nd walk of the season is fine with me.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ken Roucka:

    I couldn't stand Byrd and Soto either...Soto was a lazy piece of garbage and Byrd was way overated...still can't believe we got Bowden and Cervenka for him.... I talked to Jody Davis in spring training and he told me that Castillo has all the tools to be great but mentally he's not always into it and if it's behind the plate like Jody said or at the plate , i'm sure the same thing happens..he's got to be focused and stay's not like my kid playing T ball bored out of their skull waiting for a ball to get ot the outield, he's a damn mlb catcher and should ready at and behind the plate and he's not

  • In reply to Ken Roucka:

    I just didn't like their game or personalities. I like a catcher to be defense first and Soto left a lot to be desired. I also heard staff didn't dig his game calling. Byrd was a prickly guy who had a poor approach. Mainly though I just knew they didn't fit going forward.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    I felt just the opposite about Byrd. On a terrible team, he was the only one that consistantly hustled. He ran out every play. Hell, he even ran out home runs.

    I wish every Cub approached the game the way Byrd did. His only flaw was that, at that point, he just didn't have the talent or ability to excel.

  • In reply to DaveP:

    I should've limited his poor approach to the plate. His defense was fine.

  • In reply to Ken Roucka:

    I just have a feeling Beef is going to be a rock behind the plate.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    Keith Moreland was praising Beef's improvement in game calling last night. It's a major deal for the Cubs if they don't have to worry about finding a starting catcher in the future.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    Did you read the article on Grantland about framing pitches? How good is Castillo at framing pitches? It seems like a good market inefficiency to exploit.

  • fb_avatar

    I'm finding myself agreeing with you Tom, and to the point that I'm becoming less concerned with draft position in 2014. Felzzy just go ahead and say it, because I know you want to, but I went into this season expecting about what I expected last year, which was little, and I was okay with that.

    I knew in the middle 2009 the Cubs' window had closed, and that they needed to be completely blown up and rebuilt, even if Jim Hendry didn't. So I was okay with 2012, and I was okay with it happening again in 2013. What I really wanted to see was progress by core players, namely Rizzo and Castro, and I'm seeing it.

    I knew on paper that the 2013 rotation had the potential to be good, and so far, they have been. I'm disappointed in the bullpen, but I can't say that I'm shocked. To paraphrase Denny Green, they are who we thought they were. We didn't know who Fujikawa was, and we still don't know for sure yet, but we all knew about Marmol's ups and downs. Still, there are some guys there to like. You have to like what Russell, Bowden and Rondon have done, and Gregg may just be lightning in a bottle, though it remains to be seen if he will buck his trend.

    But getting back to position players, you can't help but root for guys like DDJ, Schierholtz and Valbuena. Perennial All-Star potential they do not have, but they play the game the right way, and they're fun to watch.

    Soriano will never be fun for me to watch, though I don't dislike him as a person. He does play hard. He seems to be a good teammate, unlike Sammy Sosa, but I was never for giving him THAT contract. I can't stand guys who won't work the count, and that is one area I see Castro getting better in.

    Castro may not have great walk totals, and he may never, but he is taking more pitches per plate appearance: 3.85 PPA in 2013 versus 3.46 PPA in 2012. His walk rate is down from last year, but I think it will eventually start to trend up as he gets better at working the count. He is also getting better on defense.

    2014 was the year I looked for marked improvement in the win-loss record. It's also still the earliest I think the Cubs can contend, but I will say this about the 2013 team. I'm no longer rooting for a last place finish and the higher draft pick that goes with it, and I'm no longer thinking about a full blown fire sale between now and July.

    I want to see Garza come back, pitch well and be extended. I also want to see the same from Scott Baker. I think the Cubs, with the right additions over next winter, could contend in 2014, and any moves they make between now and July 31st should be geared towards that as well.

    The farm system is going to be okay no matter where we draft. We have quality people in the scouting department. We always did, but now we have more of them, and we have an owner who will spend to sign the talent. Andy MacPhail and Jim Hendry drafted well for the most part. Where they lacked was in player development. Cubs farm hand never got the direction they needed to succeed in the major leagues. Epstein, Hoyer and McLeod get that, and hence, we have "The Cubs Way."

    So, beginning now, I am officially rooting for anything but a last place finish. Besides, my in-laws are Brewers fans, and I just can't take finishing behind the Brewers again. It makes for some tough holidays.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Yes!!!! I think I broke Michael down! :)

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tom Loxas:

    I'd still like to finish bad enough that we get a protected pick, but with our starting rotation, Rizzo and Castro looking like they might take off and our role players getting it done, it might be hard to do.

    Shin-Soo Choo is going to get a qualifying offer from the Reds, and having that protected pick will make it less painful to sign him. Had he been available winter of 2010-11, Carl Crawford never signs with the Red Sox.

    My other hope is that Brett Jackson finally shows enough to take his place as an every day player in our outfield.

    I also like Moody's idea regarding Chase Utley and third base. Then platoon Valbuena and Barney at second.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    I agree with most of your points. Really, last year was the only time I was kind of rooting for a high draft pick. Looks like there are two premium picks in this draft and a lot of 'maybes'. I think we really lucked out with the #2 pick.

    However, I must disagree with your comment about Hendry & Co. drafting well. There are a crazy amount of first round picks that have been busts and were really questionable the moment the Cubs made their pick. Your points about player development is correct - which I think everyone here agrees with.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Roscoe Village:

    So many of those draft picks busted because there was no decent system for developing them. The only ones that really stands out to me as picks that make you scratch your head were Colvin and Simpson, and Wilken was restricted by the Tribsters as to how much money he could spend in those drafts. Those two were second rounders by all accounts. Wilken took fliers on them because he liked their upside and he knew he could sign them. Had Colvin been drafted by the current regime, he would've gotten all the developmental support he never got from the Cubs, and who knows how Hayden Simpson might have turned out had he not gotten sick or injured.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Fair points. I'd say that Vitters wasn't a great choice - not with Wieters still on the board. Pawelek was a terrible selection. And Ryan Harvey wasn't great. The biggest thing to me is - 4, count them 4 first round picks in 2002. None of whom contributed to the big league club.

    I understand that the MLB draft is by far the hardest, from a talent evaluation standpoint (relative to NBA / NFL, etc.). But you have to ask the question - how do other teams consistently get value out of their selections? I'm thinking Braves, STL, Angels, NYY, Boston - all of which never have a top-10 pick.

    Development is key, but being able to identify undervalued talent has been a huge thorn in our side.

    Hopefully, that is changing...

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Roscoe Village:

    Wieters was off the table. Zell and Co. needed Selig's agreement to sell the team,and Selig made it known that he would be much more flexible if Zell didn't go over slot. Vitters was considered a very good prospect -- and wanted less money. That one simply hasn't worked out.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Great post.

  • Soto wasn't lazy. He was once a promising young star catcher. After all, his rookie season he was not only an ALL STAR, but he won NL ROY.... He's been bothered by nagging injuries, and has never really lived up to that once promising potential he had. That doesn't make him lazy. I get it though, he was frustrating to watch these last two years and our FO did the right thing by moving him.

    One other fun fact about Soto, he deserves some credit for introducing Hendry & Co to Javier Baez. Javier's older brother played with Soto in P.R. and Javier was being somewhat mentored by Soto as Javier was at that time a promising young Puerto Rican catcher too. He ended moving to Jax, FL to finish HS and to play at ACD....the rest is well... you know.

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    Well if that ends up being Soto's contribution great. I don't think he was lazy but his weight did fluctuate a bit.

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    Yep. Yes, he was. Many of his injuries were due to lack of preparation.

  • Soto was a strange case. Like Jerome Walton, winning rookie of the year got inside his head and he thought he could skate through the rest of his career.

  • In reply to clarkaddison:

    Yep I did like Soto as a hitter however.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    Even his hitting left a lot to be desired the last 2 seasons. I think Clark nailed it, he may have let the success go to his head. Though I have nothing to substantiate that. However, I do know Rick Wilkins personally, and he had a similar story to Soto's. While he didn't win ROY, he was sensational his Rookie season and then sort of just bounced around. Anyways, he has told me personally that when you're young and have that kind of success, it's practically impossible to not take it for granted until it's too late.

    Because of this, I'm not too upset about Baez's recent struggles in Daytona. He performed well against better competition in AZL & ST, sohe needs to learn not to take his physical gifts and success for granted.

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    If that's what happened to Soto, that would be a shame. He spent 7 years in the minors before finally breaking through as a hitter in AAA in 2007 (his 3rd full year at AAA, btw). He certainly had enough experience with struggling to learn to NOT take it for granted. Hopefully Baez has the makeup, pride and drive (plus the humility) to learn that you can never rest on your laurels.

  • In my view, the $64,000 question is whether to move the timetable up to 2014, or to give the farm system one more year to produce.

    From the FO most recent remarks, it sounds like they're leaning toward the latter. If so, then I think there's one more big trade in the offing, something very similar in scale to the deal that sent Cashner to San Diego and brought Rizzo to Chicago. My hunch is that this deal will produce a prospect currently in AAA who can be the LF of the future, a middle-of-the-order hitter who can sit behind Soriano. (Sorry, I'm not convinced that we can deal him for anything that would be worth having, and we'd still be paying his salary, and we'd still need to replace him with a veteran... who is virtually identical to Soriano.)

    Of course, this prospect would have to be blocked in his current team, similar to the way Rizzo was in San Diego. To get him, we'd have to deal Vogelbach, at a minimum, and maybe one of our best starter prospects, like Pierce Johnson. But remember that our system will have been replenished by then, thanks to the 2013 draft and the prospects we get at the 2013 deadline.

    So if we can get a Rizzo-esque LF, then with our excellent pitching staff we could live with less production from 2B, whether that's Barney or Watkins or a journeyman. Same at 3B, where we can wait a year for Baez's arrival. And in CF, if Jackson isn't ready then Borbon can platoon with somebody. I think that would strike a nice balance between nowacrat and buildican.

  • In reply to Taft:

    I would be thrilled with a deal like that. I think we need another bat until the kids are ready.

  • In reply to Taft:

    The window to compete advances signficantly if they are able to find another Rizzo like deal. Especially if Soler moves up to AA in a month and continues to tear it up.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Taft:

    I think the Cubs have the resources to do both. Moody, in another thread, had a very good idea regarding Chase Utley and third base. The Phillies shouldn't make him a qualifying offer, and if they do, Amarro should be fired. In fact, the Phillies should have a fire sale, and Utley should be part of it. If he hits free agency with no chance of losing a draft pick over him, then I'm all for giving him a two year deal with an option for a third year to play third base as long as he doesn't get a NTC. That's a move that makes the Cubs more competitive short term, but doesn't hurt them long term. In fact, it helps them by buying more time for our third base prospects to develop. I would use the same reasoning for bringing Garza and Baker back. If they're healthy and pitching well, there is no need to rush Appel or Gray and Pierce Johnson.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    That is an interesting idea. Of course, Utley will be trade bait this July, but either he or the team that's renting him may have no desire to forge a multi-year contract, and since a traded player can't give his new team draft-pick compensation, he would be a free agent at year's end.

    Of course, then the question is whether the Cubs would want to give a multi-year deal to a 35-year-old infielder who hasn't played a full season since 2009. Presumably, the deal would have lots of incentives, and maybe the Cubs are more willing than other teams to take the risk, considering we have decent fallback options within the system.

  • Its hard not to think about where this team would be if they had even an average bullpen. Easily could be 3-4 wins better.

    Would be very surprised if Dejesus, Soriano, and Feldman are here in August. Still torn as to whether they should extend or trade Garza.

  • In reply to Ike03:

    Yeah agreed on all points. Garza could be an interesting move.

  • In reply to Ike03:

    I'm open to being convinced that we're going to deal Soriano, and I know that's the conventional wisdom, but I can't construct a realistic scenario where that happens.

    We won't save money, even if that's what the FO wants, which they don't. He's not blocking any prospects, unless you consider Ryan Sweeney or Bryan Bogusevic a prospect. And when (if?) Soriano heats up, he'll be valuable in protecting Rizzo. Finally, even if you found a team that was willing to give you a B-level prospect for Soriano, you'd still have to contend with his NTC.

    No, I still think Soriano plays out his contract here, or that we send him to the AL at the 2014 deadline.

  • In reply to Taft:

    Tom says it's ok to like watching again. As long as we roll out a lineup with 1/3 waiver-wire rejects (Sweeney, Borbon, Ransom)? I will wait until the lineup is mostly home grown

  • Well, don't look now, but Starlin Castro has a .349 obp in May and his fielding % is up to .970.

  • In reply to Caps:

    Haters don't look!

  • This topic reminded me of this:

  • I really like Taft's one more big trade like Cashner/Rizzo for LF. It should be a plan.

  • Sorry for not contributing a little earlier. I read Caldwell not being focused on draft picks anymore and then everything went fuzzy....... What time is it anyway?........ Wow where, did the time go?

    They are more fun. Basically because all the stink of the Hendry Quade team are gone with the exception of Soriano who sort of rebuilt himself last year. This is seen more as a "Sveum/Hoyer/Epstien" team. If Vizcaino or Brett Jackson or "gasp" Josh Vitters or someone could come up and give some hope for the immediate future, that would be awesome.

  • In reply to felzz:

    Unfortunately, this year's Soriano is not repeating last year's performance.

  • He had a better April this year but his May (up until now) has not been as good

  • In reply to Ike03:


  • In reply to felzz:

    My coffee came out of my nose at Starbucks this morning when I saw Mike's comments.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    If you saw Theo there, don't tell anyone.

  • Soriano didn't hit his first home run last year until May 12th. He wound up hitting 32. I think Sori will be fine.

  • In reply to felzz:

    I wonder if he felt bad taking his salary before May 12th last year.

  • Speaking of Brett Jackson that would be nice.

  • OK I know this isn't a draft topic but I have to get this out. I saw Bryant hit his 30th HR yesterday and come close to hitting 2 more with the wind blowing in on him. His scout line looks like this hit tool 55/65 power 80/80 run 40/35 defense 45/ 55 arm 65/65. These are my scout lines and they have been confirmed by a few scouts and other well known media members out side of Keith Law. I would take Bryant over Gray and Appel right now.

    If I were the Cubs I would take Bryant in the 1st, Harsh or Blair in the 2Nd and start hitting some HS arms after that. This is my option but I also think if they draft Bryant it will allow them to use some of their prospects to get a legit #1 through trade if need be.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to KGallo:

    I think if the choice is Bryant or Gray, it gets very interesting. And Bryant is making it more interesting by the day.

  • In reply to KGallo:

    The defense rating is at 3B correct ?

    What are the odds he stay at 3B or get moved to a corner OF spot ?

    Has he played enough OF games to get a rough read on his defense rating there ?


  • In reply to SouthsideB:

    That is the correct rating for 3B.

    To be honest I think whether he moves is how bad he want to stay at 3B. He is one of the hardest workers I have ever seen defensive.

    I have seen him in the OF twice once in fall ball and for half a game during the season.

  • In reply to KGallo:

    Theo and Hoyer have said that they prefer position players at the top of the draft. If Appel is gone, wouldn't surprise me at all to see them take Bryant

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    I'm honestly not sure if they believe that or if they're trying to convince Luhnow to pass on Appel.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Here is the thing I think is funny. The other Clubs aren't going to influence what the Astros do, they aren't ! There is not poker going on people. The Astros are going to take who they want. The Astros are the ones that set the direction for the draft.

  • In reply to KGallo:

    Agreed. They'll pick who they want. They showed they'll do their own thing when they went against the grain and didn't go for the two top rated players.

  • I'm having a lot of fun watching this team right now. The starting pitching, the defense is solid, and there extra base power now. The only thing missing is OBP.

    Nobody expected this team to contend but at least there looks like there's some progress being made and it wouldn't surprise me to see this team compete next year for a playoff spot.

  • Anyone have any suggestions on Rizzo-like deal for a young OFer? That is clearly a need.
    Rotation will be shaping up nicely, particularly if we draft Appel( as he's ready to go). You hope that Baker and/or Garza do something to warrant being brought back.

    The bullpen needs some help but as has been discussed- as nausueum- that is a fairly easy fix, if creativity & resources are dedicated.

    The area where this team is likely to struggle in the near-term is with the bats. Given BJax's developmental flatline, recent uptick withstanding, we need some impact in the OF. The Utley idea has a ton of merit , IMO. If he can get remotely healthy, he could have Berkman-like impact. I wouldn't be averse to playing him @ 2B and keeping Valbuena @ 3B. For once, there are some intriguing options with the lineups.

    Tom and John, how about some stalled bat ideas?

  • In reply to Carl9730:

    Well, since this is my bright idea, I guess I have to put up or shut up. I'll nominate our old friend Nick Castellanos, who was moved from 3B to the outfield this spring by the Tigers. Detroit's in a nowacrat mode, so they can't really be patient with Castellanos, who's been pretty pedestrian with his numbers in AAA this year.

    We have a number of guys who can help Detroit this year. If Valverde implodes, Gregg might interest them. With Porcello struggling, Feldman could be an option. Even Soriano, since Detroit's had trouble finding a LF, and since Victor Martinez has struggled as their DH. We'd need to throw in a prospect or two, but our system is deep enough that a guy in our top 15 would score close to the Tigers' top 5. We could start the conversation with Vogelbach, who can 1B for the Tigers in a few years, after Fielder's eaten his way into a DH job.

    Meanwhile, Castellanos could toil in the Cubs' system for a few months, similar to the way Rizzo did. And then he can come up to hit in the No. 6 spot first, then eventually move to cleanup, behind Rizzo. Whattaya say, Dave Dombrowski?

  • I don't know Carl, I'd hate to go out and spent a bunch of money when our future outfield has BJax in left, Almora in center and Soler in right. Now, that might not be the 2014 outfield but stranger things have happened. I've been hoping for either Gray to compliment our starters or Bryant as the next 3B. Certainly don't want to over pay for someone past their prime. My 2 cents. Thanks gang for great conversations.

  • Bob,
    I think it's a bit of aggressive to think BJax is anything more than a 4th OFer until he can cut down Ks over a sustained period and regain some of that pop.

    Almora is 2-3 yrs, in a best case scenario, away from contributing at the ML level. We have the time & resources to make some tactical moves(I.e shorter-term commitments) that will help us compete sooner rather than later. We're a long way from worrying about " blocking" guys. Even the Baez-SS hand-wringing has grown tiresome. If he hits like they think he can , who gives a c.... where he plays on defense?

  • Not physically attending these games is not exactly "missing out." Television is still an option from what I understand. It's "fun" trying to figure what station will be broadcasting from one game to the next. "Where's Waldo?" Of note is the luke warm starts teams are off to. With rare exception, scorecards are mandatory to watch these teams. New faces everywhere, not just the Cubs.

  • In reply to Hey Hey:

    I don't disagree you don't have to go. However if they are staying away because they aren't winning yet is a miss out. This team may be getting over the hump soon.

  • Really?

    "The Cubs are becoming fun to watch again.
    I am not hung up on wins and losses just yet."

    The above says it all. I always suspected it of Cubs fans. Winning is not important. So you come out in big numbers to watch a team which hasn't won a championship in over a century because wins and losses are not important. OK, you can have that. Enjoy!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to ABIGSOXFAN:

    This is new, Sox fans trolling this site. Guess you need something to entertain you because your team isn't, huh?

  • And you come out in small numbers to watch a going-nowhere team with huge holes in the roster and a bottom-5 farm system.
    I'll take the Cubs' future -- even the Cubs' present -- over the Pale Hosers' past, present, and future.... all day long.
    And thanks, we DO enjoy !

  • "There really is no more fun time in sports than watching your team get good."

    Really? Compared to when the team is actually good? Sure, it's exciting to know a team is headed in the right direction. Is it more fun now than a few seasons in the future when fans know their team has a legitimate shot at postseason success?

Leave a comment