I think this postseason really exposed Maddon's limitations as an in-game manager, especially with his starter/bullpen management. His players obviously play hard and love having him around, so it's just something that we'll have to live with. The hardest thing to do is to sustain excellence, with squabbles over contracts/playing time as player's egos start to get involved. Montero is just the tip of the iceberg. Maddon is going to have a heck of a time managing PT between the depth of all these young position players
Chicago Cubs 2016 Season
- Status
I think this postseason really exposed Maddon's limitations as an in-game manager, especially with his starter/bullpen management. His players obviously play hard and love having him around, so it's just something that we'll have to live with. The hardest thing to do is to sustain excellence, with squabbles over contracts/playing time as player's egos start to get involved. Montero is just the tip of the iceberg. Maddon is going to have a heck of a time managing PT between the depth of all these young position players
100% agree. He said what every fan was thinking.
"He [Chapman] could be tired?" Montero asked rhetorically. "Of course he was tired. The guy threw 40 pitches two days ago. You have guys in the bullpen doing the job all year -- they should be able to help, too."
Had the offense not bailed Maddon out, we would be talking a managerial mishandling to go along with the likes of Grady Little, Dusty Baker, Buck Showalter, etc...
bdutts
- Houston, Texas
Was he ever considered a great strategic manager? My thought of him with the Rays was that he was more of the intangibles sort of a manager but honestly, I didn't follow him all that closely. That seems to have played out in the World Series.
It's interesting that Francona hasn't caught any heat (as far as I can tell) about his decisions. He burned out Miller and Kluber was less effective in games 4 and 7. If Salazar was healthy enough to pitch, why not get 3 or 4 innings out of him as a starter? Why not use the rookie he used versus Toronto against the Cubs?
Bottom line is, if the guys don't perform, then any move any manager makes will make him look foolish.
EDITED for clarity.
It's interesting that Francona hasn't caught any heat (as far as I can tell) about his decisions. He burned out Miller and Kluber was less effective in games 4 and 7. If Salazar was healthy enough to pitch, why not get 3 or 4 innings out of him as a starter? Why not use the rookie he used versus Toronto against the Cubs?
Bottom line is, if the guys don't perform, then any move any manager makes will make him look foolish.
EDITED for clarity.
Maddon has been known as an excellent season-long manager. He keeps things fresh and interesting for his players. He has a knack for getting the whole team involved and gets them invested in the season. He is also flexible and unafraid to switch up the lineup or bench a struggling vet.
He had not, however, had much success in the playoffs until this year. Part of that may have been that his Rays teams - and arguably the 2015 Cubs - overachieved to get where they were. Part of it may have been that Maddon's long term strengths weren't as vital to playoff success as they are to in-season success.
I think it's notable that Francona, acknowledged Hall of Fame caliber manger with 2 World Series rings - also had his foibles. Particularly game 5, which let the Cubs back in the Series. Point is, in the Series with every pitch so magnified, it's hard not to make a questionable decision.
And some balls did bounce the wrong way for Maddon (literally). If Hendricks didn't get that one bad pitch call, maybe he goes another inning. If that swinging bunt against Lester goes a foot or two in either direction, maybe Lester doesn't give up any runs and he finishes the 8th. Maybe Chapman doesn't come in until the 9th and has a five run lead. And everyone is saying what a genius Maddon is.
He had not, however, had much success in the playoffs until this year. Part of that may have been that his Rays teams - and arguably the 2015 Cubs - overachieved to get where they were. Part of it may have been that Maddon's long term strengths weren't as vital to playoff success as they are to in-season success.
I think it's notable that Francona, acknowledged Hall of Fame caliber manger with 2 World Series rings - also had his foibles. Particularly game 5, which let the Cubs back in the Series. Point is, in the Series with every pitch so magnified, it's hard not to make a questionable decision.
And some balls did bounce the wrong way for Maddon (literally). If Hendricks didn't get that one bad pitch call, maybe he goes another inning. If that swinging bunt against Lester goes a foot or two in either direction, maybe Lester doesn't give up any runs and he finishes the 8th. Maybe Chapman doesn't come in until the 9th and has a five run lead. And everyone is saying what a genius Maddon is.
South Farms
- near Ogden & Rt 83
If the offense didn't bail us out in the 10th, we would be talking about the epic all time choke , and the myth of the curse would be magnified 10fold .
Thank God for the veteran leadership on that team.
I can not imagine the collective angst had we lost
Thank God for the veteran leadership on that team.
I can not imagine the collective angst had we lost
I'm as surprised as anyone that the Cubs didn't pick up Hammel's option. He was a bargain for his price in an offseason with some really crappy options at starting pitching in free agency. He's going to get some ridiculous money. God bless him. If I had to guess, I'd say the Texas Rangers.
Looking at the Cubs roster, they could probably use one "depth" type acquisition in the field. The exact position isn't that important since they have a lot of flexibility with Zobrist, Bryant, etc., but they probably want it to be a left-handed bat. Maybe they re-sign Coghlan or a Coghlan-like player. Luis Valbuena might work. Whoever it is, they won't spend much money to get him.
If they get a starting pitcher, it will be via a trade that will probably involve Soler and a number of prospects. Otherwise I think they go with the returning 4 plus Montgomery who seems to have the Cubs' confidence going forward.
The bullpen needs help. Rondon, Strop, Grimm and Edwards are the only returnees and you can't have much confidence in Rondon given his injury history and second half performance. Figure the Cubs will probably acquire at least two, maybe three, established bullpen arms. You've got to figure they'll be in play for the "big three" of Chapman, Jansen, and Melancon, and will be in talks with Kansas City if they decide to dangle Wade Davis or Kelvin Herrera out there. Lower key guys I like: Brett Cecil and Boone Logan as lefties and Greg Holland coming off of TJS.
I think some poor team will pay way too much for Andrew Cashner, thinking that he can still be a starter, which is too bad because I think he'd be perfect for the Cubs in the Travis Cahill role. Maybe Brett Anderson could slip through the cracks and be that guy.
Looking at the Cubs roster, they could probably use one "depth" type acquisition in the field. The exact position isn't that important since they have a lot of flexibility with Zobrist, Bryant, etc., but they probably want it to be a left-handed bat. Maybe they re-sign Coghlan or a Coghlan-like player. Luis Valbuena might work. Whoever it is, they won't spend much money to get him.
If they get a starting pitcher, it will be via a trade that will probably involve Soler and a number of prospects. Otherwise I think they go with the returning 4 plus Montgomery who seems to have the Cubs' confidence going forward.
The bullpen needs help. Rondon, Strop, Grimm and Edwards are the only returnees and you can't have much confidence in Rondon given his injury history and second half performance. Figure the Cubs will probably acquire at least two, maybe three, established bullpen arms. You've got to figure they'll be in play for the "big three" of Chapman, Jansen, and Melancon, and will be in talks with Kansas City if they decide to dangle Wade Davis or Kelvin Herrera out there. Lower key guys I like: Brett Cecil and Boone Logan as lefties and Greg Holland coming off of TJS.
I think some poor team will pay way too much for Andrew Cashner, thinking that he can still be a starter, which is too bad because I think he'd be perfect for the Cubs in the Travis Cahill role. Maybe Brett Anderson could slip through the cracks and be that guy.
I'd call Anderson's agent on day 1 and offer a one year contract. Then let him shop around. If someone wants to ignore the injuries and give him multi-year, let him take it. But if he can't get one, Chicago would be a great place to regain value. Work with Bosio, huge exposure, and a decent chance of picking up a ring.
He won't. The qualifying offer the Cubs made is to get the draft pick when someone else signs him.
Fowler will be looking for a four plus year contract.
ChiCityHoops34
- DeKalb IL
Yeah there is no way he can turn down what is coming his way. He bet on himself and it couldn't have worked out any better for him.
I just don't see that happening. This FO values innings eaters too much to allow one of them to be the #5
I think the #5 spot is Montgomery's to lose. For 2016 he was acquired to be a lefty in the pen. For 2017 and beyond, he'll battle for a spot in the rotation.
Yeah, if they wanted to shell out for a #5 starter, they would have just exercised the option on Hammel. He's better and would have been cheaper than the options on the free agent market like Hellickson or Doug Fister.
They are going to make a push for a relatively young starter that will be under team control through 2018 or longer. But they'll be doing that through the trade market and it takes two to tango, as they say.
Jorge Soler would make for an interesting trade piece (as much as I like him, it's easy to see the OF logjam).
Shane Walsh
aka "Captain Oblivious"
- Cynthiana, Kentucky
Indeed he would, unfortunately he can't stay healthy long enough to really get other teams interested in acquiring him.
Shane Walsh
aka "Captain Oblivious"
- Cynthiana, Kentucky
Losing Fowler might hurt, a lot, if we don't find that top of the order on base guy. I am sure Theo knows this though and will do what needs to be done.
Zobrist had a .386 OBP last year, he is more than serviceable at the lead off spot.
Which allows Schwarber or Bryant to hit either #2 or #4 in the lineup.
Yup. Probably Schwarber #2 against the right handers and Bryant #2 against the left-handers.
Rizzo 3, the other of Schwarber or Bryant 4, Russell 5, Contreras 6, Heyward 7, Baez 8, pitcher. Montero will start for Arrieta's games and get an additional 2 or 3 starts a month when facing elite right handers with pronounced platoon splits (like Max Scherzer) - hitting 8 and bumping everyone up a spot. Soler will get some starts in left over Schwarber in the opposite situation - elite left-hander with pronounced platoon splits - Bumgarner, for example. LaStella and Szczur are your left and right handed pinch hitters, respectively, just like this year. Almora will be Schwarber's defensive replacement in late innings with the lead. (He'll probably go to center, Heyward to right, and Zobrist to left.)
(They'll also do the Baez to third, Bryant to right, Zobrist to 2B thing when Lester is pitching, but that won't effect the lineup.)
All subject to change with trades and free agent signings. Maybe not quite as deep, not quite as good defensively in the outfield (although with Heyward and Almora in the field at the same time, the third guy could be a stone statue and it wouldn't matter), but with more power and still a historically excellent infield defense.
By the way, you heard it here first, Heyward will not OPS .631 again. He'll play a gold glove center field, give you something a lot closer to his career .760 OPS, and be a 4 or 5 WAR player.
bdutts
- Houston, Texas
A little more from Ken Rosenthal on why the Cubs declined Hammel's option: http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/chicago-cubs-jason-hammel-theo-epstein-option-free-agent-110716
Cy Young voting:
1. Scherzer
2. Lester
3. Hendricks
9. Arrieta
1. Scherzer
2. Lester
3. Hendricks
9. Arrieta
Hard to argue against Scherzer winning. Still, I wonder whether vote splitting is a real thing. This is the third time in recent memory that the guy that didn't have a teammate in the running won a relatively close race.
2015, Arrieta over Kershaw and Greinke and 2011, Kershaw over Halladay and Lee were the other two.
ETA: Before a Cardinal fan can beat me to it, there was also Lincecum over Carpenter and Wainwright in 2009.
Very happy for Scherzer. He's a personal top-3 favorite of current non-Cubs.
I don't see it. Scherzer had 25 firsts, the two Cubs had 3 total. Lester had 16 2nds, Hendricks had 7.
The vote distribution seems pretty clear - the writers thought Scherzer was the best, Lester was 2nd, and Hendricks was the best of the rest.
- Status