“We should try to be building 90-win teams here.”
Yesterday turned into post-mortem day at Wrigley Field, or at least the first round of it. After the Cubs dropped two of three to the A’s, helping the Brewers clinch the Central, Craig Counsell’s pregame interview wasn’t exactly focused on the Nationals. Instead, he talked about needing to get better “on and off the field,” saying the Brewers are “ahead of us by a lot.”
I’m curious what Counsell meant by this, and how much Counsell meant by this. His statements could be interpreted in a lot of different ways. Was he putting the blame on Jed Hoyer and the front office? Was he trying to take responsibility himself? Was he charging the players with finding those five to ten extra wins this offseason?
The way we see it, there are four things Counsell might have meant, none of which are mutually exclusive:
- Possibility number one: The roster isn’t good enough to make the playoffs.
- Possibility number two: The roster isn’t as good as the Brewers’.
- Possibility number three: The organization isn’t setting the roster up for success.
- Possibility number four: Craig Counsell and/or player leadership isn’t setting the roster up for success.
The first two are about player personnel. The third is about infrastructure, for lack of a better word. The fourth is about managing and the clubhouse culture.
On the first two:
We don’t disagree with the 90-win team comment. We’re relieved to hear somebody say it after two straight offseasons of wondering on this site why the Cubs were pushing so much optimism in the media. We expected a losing record last year and a record this year slightly above .500. Our expectations weren’t far off on the Cubs’ performance in 2024. We were more worried about the Cardinals than the Brewers, so we certainly got that wrong, but we trusted the 84-win Cubs projection and we’re headed to a number damn near that total. It’s nice to hear someone acknowledge that the fourth-most valuable MLB franchise isn’t building 90-win teams.
The Brewers, though?
On paper, the Brewers’ roster is not ten games better than the Cubs’. The Cubs’ roster isn’t good enough, but the Brewers’ shouldn’t be either. At catcher and in the bullpen, Milwaukee enjoyed a significant edge this year. Across the infield, outfield, and rotation, the Cubs were better, on the whole. This is why the Brewers were such longshots to open the season. The roster didn’t raise many eyebrows. To be honest, it still doesn’t, which is probably why the Brewers are still such longshots, even heading into the playoffs as the NL’s likely 3-seed.
It’s possible the Brewers’ roster is ten games better than the Cubs’, and that the Brewers’ internal projections or the Cubs’ internal projections or Counsell’s preferred systems indicate as much. It’s possible that publicly available systems, those leaned on so heavily by betting markets, underrate the Brewers’ roster construction. It’s possible Counsell believes the Brewers’ roster is ten games better than the Cubs’. But the generally acceptable truth is that the Cubs’ roster isn’t good enough, the Brewers’ isn’t either, and the Brewers made it work while the Cubs did not.
On the third:
We’ve made no secret of our belief that the Cubs’ hitting coaches have been a problem in recent years. We’re not out on Dustin Kelly, but 2018 through 2021 were four rough seasons for offenses which should have been good.
It’s not just hitting coaches either. The organizational infrastructure—sleep, psychology, nutrition, training, all of these things—is probably more valuable than fans can see. When fans backseat drive, we tend to focus on the areas where video games give us a lot of choices. We chirp about roster construction and we chirp about in-game management decisions. There’s a lot more to managing professional athletes than that, though. Back in 2016, the Cubs were supposed to be on the cutting edge. Remember all those stories about the sensory deprivation tanks? Maybe the Cubs still lead the sport in this field, but we don’t know one way or the other whether they do.
The point is: There are probably wins that can be gained through off-field training. There might be wins that can be gained through littler things as well. In what should be music to ownership’s ears, investing in these littler things might provide a lot of bang per buck, and they aren’t subject to the luxury tax.
On the fourth:
You know what else was supposed to provide a lot of bang for his buck? You know who else isn’t subject to the luxury tax?
Craig Counsell’s eight-million-dollar salary should have been a steal. If he’s worth even one more win than David Ross, that salary should be worth it. Eight million dollars is roughly the amount teams expect to pay per win in free agent markets. Eight million dollars should be a great price if someone’s really the best manager in the game.
I didn’t have a problem with much of Counsell’s in-game management this year. Where I did disagree with decisions, I generally assumed he knew better than I. With the Cubs and in-game stuff, that’s often been the safe bet since back when Theo Epstein took over. They generally know what they’re doing.
I’m curious, though, about the mindset piece, especially as the Brewers overachieved so dramatically this season under Pat Murphy, someone who was there through all of Counsell’s Milwaukee success. Again, this is something we’ve written about before. You’ll hear all Division Series, and maybe all postseason, about Brandon Marsh pouring water on his hair to keep himself focused and aggressive. You’ll hear about Kyle Schwarber’s value to the Phillies as a clubhouse leader. You’ll hear about Pat Murphy’s piss and vinegar, his college baseball mentality that’s clicked so well for the NL Central champs.
I’m fine with a cautious and calculating front office. There’s a time for swashbuckling and a place for cowboys, but I don’t personally dislike Jed Hoyer’s approach (I just wish the Cubs had been more realistic about what kind of roster they had). I wonder, though, if the team on the field could use a little more fire. Joe Maddon was a loose manager. David Ross was a fairly loose manager. Craig Counsell is a pulseless, calculating manager. Paired with someone like Murphy, I can see how Counsell’s approach could work. Paired with a lot of guys used to being loose, I’m worried about complacency. There are a lot of managing philosophies that work, and different approaches work differently in different situations. I’m not sure Counsell’s worked this year.
It’s worth noting that the Cubs did perform better this year at the plate in high-leverage situations. That perplexingly terrible seven-year performance abated to an extent this summer. The Cubs will finish the season in the top half of FanGraphs’s “Clutch” statistic for hitters (how much better/worse a team hits depending on the leverage), a major departure from their 29th-place ranking in it since winning the World Series, fractions of a point ahead of the Mets. If there was a psychological issue at play there, maybe Counsell helped solve it. Of course, the bullpen had a terrible run in high-leverage situations, so maybe a new issue arose. But given the rather large sample of abysmal high-leverage performance at the plate (eight years!), a good season is at least worth noting.
**
We’ll have a lot of time this offseason to talk about what the Cubs should do this offseason. At a high level, though, my personal feelings on the Cubs right now are these:
- Tom Ricketts’s payrolls don’t keep pace with the valuation of his team. The Cubs tied for seventh this year in payroll despite being the fourth-most valuable franchise. They haven’t had a top-five payroll since 2019. Their 26-man Opening Day roster was paid less than Milwaukee’s in 2022. This doesn’t have to be a huge problem, but it would’ve been nice to sign Sonny Gray last winter. Complaints about not signing Shohei Ohtani are absurd. But the Cubs should’ve gotten at least one more front-end starter.
- Jed Hoyer’s wins aren’t keeping pace with his payroll. Again, payroll and wins are always loosely tied, but the moneyball hasn’t paid off yet. The free agents he acquires and the players he trades for tend to perform very well. There were key contributions from youth this year. But is there enough? Where are the dollars going? The simplest metric—wins per dollar—doesn’t look great.
- I really like almost all of the players.
- I don’t personally like Craig Counsell’s style, but it’s probably fine. What I’m starting to wonder is whether it’s too similar to Hoyer’s style. I’d prefer the piss and vinegar in the dugout rather than in the front office, but Dave Dombrowski hasn’t had a bad career. There’s something to be said for going for it. Anyway, I don’t think they should fire anyone in a key leadership position but I also think they’d be justified if they did. I’m a little worried about the dugout and the front office getting out of alignment, but maybe they’re out of alignment already.
- One more note here, since it came to mind: Maximizing your eternal expected wins is a good strategy if you have an infinite number of years. You only get so many, though. At some point, you have to go for it. I’m surprised the Cubs seem to keep waiting to pull that trigger.
Moves/Injuries/News/Speculation
- In addition to Justin Steele, Jorge López came off the IL this week. Jack Neely and Daniel Palencia—who’d come up in exchange for Trey Wingenter—went down in the corresponding moves.
- Hayden Wesneski’s coming off the IL, resulting in a Shawn Armstrong DFA. Good to see Wesneski back, given the Tommy John fear which accompanies forearm injuries. I don’t feel out of the woods on it or anything, but it’s better to see him back than not.
- Julian Merryweather should be ready by spring training, but he’ll have knee surgery tomorrow for a “right patellar tendon debridement,” a procedure The Internet is telling me involves removing damaged tissue from the tendon and stitching together the healthy parts. Counsell announced that yesterday afternoon.
- Without entirely ruling out retirement, Kyle Hendricks told Patrick Mooney he intends to pitch next season. I would think the Cubs have such a full stable of young arms they’re hoping pan out that they won’t bring Hendricks back, which means we’ll probably have another tribute video to watch sometime next summer. I wonder if an expected non-contender might be interested in him as a fifth starter/veteran presence. Someone like the…oh jeez, no, I’m not going to say White Sox.
Games
- Thursday: Cubs 7, Nationals 6
- Friday, 1:20 PM CDT: Cubs vs. Washington (Marquee)
- Saturday, 1:20 PM CDT: Cubs vs. Washington (Marquee)
- Sunday, 1:20 PM CDT: Cubs vs. Washington (Marquee)
Everyone who pitches this weekend should still get one more start this year, and Hendricks currently lines up to pitch at home next weekend. So, tomorrow’s game shouldn’t be his last at Wrigley Field. Shōta Imanaga pitches on Sunday.
Good Thing They Got Those Wide Receivers
Once upon a time, the Bears caught a break, and through a shrewd trade finally acquired their franchise quarterback. Quickly, they assembled weapons around him, pairing him with a fierce defense and talent at the skill positions, including an established number one wide receiver. Then, they put him back there behind a porous offensive line and watched while that line and an overmatched coaching staff slowly beat him into the ground.
It’s too early to call Shane Waldron overmatched. He’s done this job before in Seattle, and one of those three years went moderately well. The offensive line is another story. It stinks. It is a bad offensive line. We knew this might be coming. We’re far from Chicago Bears experts here, and even we knew enough to write about the possibility three separate times this summer:
June 10th: The message the last decade has taught is that offensive lines are more important than running backs. A bizarrely common response to this revelation goes, “Got it. Wide receivers are more important than running backs.”
June 24th: It’s hard to see how the line could fit within the league’s top ten. It’s easy to see how it could fit within the league’s bottom five.
July 26th: Sure, fans are excited, but can the team win in the trenches? Yes, the Bears are pretending to try to build a lakefront stadium, but how’s the team going to do in the trenches? Agreed, Caleb Williams won a Heisman Trophy two years ago and only has one significant issue with his game, but given that issue is holding the ball too long, how do we think the Bears are going to do in the trenches?
Did the Bears know this was coming? I don’t know. They wasted a top-ten pick on a wide receiver (Odunze should be great, he’s just not what the Bears needed) and traded for a veteran receiver with injury problems. Then, after watching this line through training camp, their lone preseason reinforcement was Chris Glaser, a third-year player with one career start who’s now on the practice squad. They offered a trade for Matthew Judon. Efforts at major improvement were made. If they pursued any offensive linemen, we haven’t heard about it.
Kiran Amegadjie did practice in full yesterday, so maybe some reinforcements are coming from within. The interior of the line has been worse than the exterior, and Amegadjie’s supposed to provide depth inside. So, maybe that’s the plan. But man, it really seems like they’re setting Caleb Williams up to get the absolute shit beat out of him every Sunday. It’s like a mashup of the worst things they did with Jay Cutler and the worst things they did with Justin Fields. A remarkable tribute to the franchise’s past.
Moves/Injuries/News/Speculation
- Teven Jenkins missed practice Wednesday but was back yesterday. Keenan Allen, Zacch Pickens, and Khari Blasingame haven’t practiced yet this week.
- This is not actually a bad thing to do, but it is very funny to go check the transaction log after typing all of that and see the team added a wide receiver to the practice squad. John Jackson, welcome to Chicago. (They also picked up Dashaun Mallory, now on the practice squad defensive line.)
The Game
- Sunday, 12:00 PM CDT: Bears at Indianapolis (CBS)
The Colts are the narrow favorites here, but only narrowly. They’re looking for their first win of the season and have issues of their own. Eyes are on the Bears’ rushing game, as that’s an area where Indy’s been vulnerable so far. (But also they just played the Packers, who were starting a quarterback still learning the offense and played a play with puke all over the football. Meaning: Of course they gave up a big total rushing number.)
Jerry’s World
Brittany Ghiroli and Ken Rosenthal published an article with a lot of sources yesterday blasting Jerry Reinsdorf. This was about the White Sox’ Jerry Reinsdorf, not the Bulls’ Jerry Reinsdorf. Unless those are the same guy? (I’m kidding, I promise. I know the Bulls’ Reinsdorf spells Gerry with a G.)
Anyway, the lines from the piece that I found most worthwhile to share:
“They don’t do the little or the big things right,” said a recently departed veteran.
Some of Chicago’s wounds were self-inflicted and immediate, such as hiring Tony La Russa to manage.
Reinsdorf even let popular broadcaster Jason Benetti leave because he didn’t like his style.
In a recent season, while addressing new employees, Reinsdorf was asked which matters more: the Bulls or White Sox winning? Rather than answer diplomatically, Reinsdorf, without hesitation, said the White Sox.
“I’m not sure if any owner loves baseball as much as Jerry,” said another former employee. “That’s why he can’t get out of his own way.”
The 2005 World Series win was the franchise’s crowning achievement under Reinsdorf, but it also gave the organization a false sense of confidence that kept it from evolving. Reinsdorf and a certain faction of the organization felt no pressure to adapt.
Even when they tried to use analytics, the White Sox weren’t sure how.
The Benetti part is, of course, the worst. What kind of monster doesn’t enjoy Jason Benetti?
The part about how much Reinsdorf loves baseball is sad. That’s an angle that reminds you this guy is 88 years old and wants baseball to still be what it was in the 1970’s.
I didn’t include this quote (it’s a broader section) but I’d forgotten how the White Sox sent an email with A.J. Hinch’s signature on it when they announced they’d hired La Russa. I didn’t know (and maybe it was never previously reported) how Hinch was traveling to Chicago for an interview when Reinsdorf made the decision. I forgot La Russa was still with the team.
Overall? Honestly, I don’t think there was anything that surprising in there, besides being reminded that Reinsdorf likes baseball more than basketball. It did crystallize some examples, though.
Moves/Injuries/News/Speculation
- Yoán Moncada’s off the IL, just in time for the playoff push. He pinch ran on Wednesday and struck out in one plate appearance. Corey Julks went down in the corresponding move.
Games
- Friday, 8:40 PM CDT: White Sox at San Diego (NBC Sports Chicago)
- Saturday, 7:40 PM CDT: White Sox at San Diego (NBC Sports Chicago)
- Sunday, 3:10 PM CDT: White Sox at San Diego (NBC Sports Chicago)
Dylan Cease won’t pitch this series, if you were wondering.
Nick Foligno: Captain
Training camp started yesterday for the Blackhawks, and before it did, they announced Nick Foligno as the team’s new captain on Wednesday.
The move was widely praised, and it’s easy to see why. Foligno’s well-liked and well-respected around the league, and captains often have a way of revealing themselves. I do like that the organization didn’t try to rush Connor Bedard into the role or leave the storyline bouncing around of how the role was unfilled and Bedard was waiting in the wings. This is simple, straightforward, and makes it easier for Bedard to focus on developing as an NHL player. Good stuff.
Ten Days ‘Til Bulls Media Day
Camp’s now eleven days away for the Bulls, with Media Day coming first on Wednesday, September 30th. The only other thing that’s happened since we last published Off the Lake was that the Bulls signed E.J. Liddell to an Exhibit 10 spot.
The Good and the Bad for the Sky
The Sky played their regular season finale last night, losing their fifth straight. They’ll miss the playoffs.
The good for the Sky is, of course, that Angel Reese put up big numbers her rookie year and generated a lot of excitement in the Chicago sports world. Her injury was and is bad, but the length of the WNBA offseason and the fact she wasn’t exactly an efficient scorer to begin with make wrist surgery a little less concerning.
The bad is how much worse they were than the league’s title contenders, and how far off a title therefore seems. Reese’s lack of polish inside is concerning through this lens, too. She’s at a point with the rebounding where it’s hard to see those numbers getting better. The woman is grabbing so many rebounds that I’m not sure she can humanly grab more. She needs to get better at the things beyond rebounding, and the Sky need to complement her talents with better scoring from the guards.
We won’t talk much about the Sky this offseason—they’re kind of like the Fire for us, where if we notice them, we notice them—but if there’s big news we’ll definitely include it. The WNBA has longer dry spells in its offseason than the Big Four.
