Author Topic: Cubs in '20  (Read 49085 times)

Deeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16919
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #270 on: October 10, 2019, 09:36:48 pm »
If what you say is true, simply moving non-leaders out the door doesn’t exactly fix the problem.

chgojhawk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 998
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #271 on: October 11, 2019, 07:08:35 am »
Unless they are bringing leaders back with the returns on the trades.

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17344
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #272 on: October 11, 2019, 08:37:44 am »
Bryant is the most likely to be gone. While he may not be moved, you folks are wrong about Rizzo. He very well may be moved.

The lack of leadership on the team is a big issue. While the public perception of Rizzo is that of a leader, the truth of the matter is that there is no leader on the team.


Interesting.

Maybe it is my lack of imagination, I just don’t see a trade of Bryant where the Cubs come out as a better team.

The Cubs seem to have guys that could be leaders in the clubhouse like Schwarber, Contreras, Heyward or Javy. I wonder how much of Madison’s hands off approach led to this. Maybe just more team activities on the field and team building stuff is the answer. Otherwise it seems like a big reset is in order.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13097
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #273 on: October 11, 2019, 09:31:04 am »
This is probably a dumb question, but I'm uncertain what "leadership" is supposed to impact or resolve on the team.  A hitter is supposed to hit the ball; a fielder is supposed to concentrate and field the ball; a pitcher is supposed to pitch.  What are we wanting leadership to improve in those areas, and how does that play between player versus manager/coaches? 

Is player-leadership going to add velocity and life to Lester's, Q's, Hendricks's, Hamels', Strop's, and Kimbrel's fastballs?  Would better leadership have given Edwards command and composure?  Would leadership have given Mike Montgomery's stuff more spin, and reduced his HR's-allowed?  Theo has prioritized assembling a really old, worn pitching staff with guys on the variably-steep decline-side of their careers.  Would better player-leadership have any impact there?  And the Professor, super tough and over-achiever Lester, and crafty veteran Hamels, their leadership is lacking? 

Would better player-leadership have helped Bote to make fewer errors, and have prevented his upper-body buildup from having cost a little bit of defensive flexibility?  If we had not only Heyward and Descalso but also had a Ross and Fowler providing better leadership, would that cause Almora to hit better, Baez to improve his plate discipline, Contreras to pitch-frame better, and Happ and Schwarber to have better command of the upper half of the strike zone?  Would better leadership make our assembly of baserunners not quite so pokey?   

I guess I'm kinda puzzled as to how much leadership is capable of impacting performance.  I get that there can be some indirects.  Maybe a better culture has guys more attentive and focused defensively, so that a Rizzo never forgets how many outs there are.  Maybe a better culture has guys talking and thinking baseball more, watching more film, getting to bed sooner, and reducing affairs and alcoholism, and somehow they play better as a result?

I guess I just don't really understand how much direct or indirect impact player leadership will have on baseball performance, in a game where each pitch is made by an individual pitcher; each at-bat is individual; and each defensive play is individually executed. 
Agree Agree x 1 View List

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13097
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #274 on: October 11, 2019, 09:42:31 am »
I do wonder whether Theo's emphasis on leadership isn't a talent-evaluation mistake?  Maybe the team just isn't that talented, and is overly dependent on guys overachieving their talent?  But Theo keeps thinking that the talent he believed in should be championship talent; so that when they aren't, he attributes that to lack of effort or energy or focus or leadership or something, rather than to just not being talented enough?  Maybe it has little to do with lack of heart or focus or leadership or energy, and it's just a case of having an 8th-place team because you've assembled 8th-place talent?   And it's not trending favorably because naturally your well-worn veteran pitchers are just naturally getting progressively older and naturally more worn by the year?

I guess I'm just wondering whether by Theo focusing on leadership/focus/energy/heart as the issue and the solution, whether he isn't somewhat misdiagnosing the primary disease?
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Playtwo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8787
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #275 on: October 11, 2019, 10:35:22 am »
In my personal experience, there are usually a few guys on every team that the others look up to because of their personalities and/or talent.  It creates a de facto pecking order that I believe makes everyone more comfortable.  It helps each player better understand their role and place on the team.

Of course, my personal experience is limited to teams of teenagers, and I don't know if this applies to adults in professional sports.  My guess is that it does.

DelMarFan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #276 on: October 11, 2019, 02:03:54 pm »
I think there's something to the leadership argument.  Since 2016, the team has seemed to slip deeper and deeper into complacency.  Sloppy defense, poor baserunning, unsound fundamentals--the kind of stuff Ross was there to yell at players about.  How many times have we heard the "we knew after making a mistake on the field that Ross would be waiting for us in the dugout" kind of story.  The guys viewed as leaders (Rizzo) aren't doing that sort of leadership.

Part of Maddon's thing was that he wasn't going to be that guy.  He said pretty clearly that he wanted that stuff addressed by the players, and so Ross and Maddon worked together well in 2016.  Then Ross left and no one filled the void.  My sense is that the team has been looking for that kind of player-accountability-manager since Ross left. 

chgojhawk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 998
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #277 on: October 11, 2019, 02:12:46 pm »
This is probably a dumb question, but I'm uncertain what "leadership" is supposed to impact or resolve on the team.  A hitter is supposed to hit the ball; a fielder is supposed to concentrate and field the ball; a pitcher is supposed to pitch.  What are we wanting leadership to improve in those areas, and how does that play between player versus manager/coaches? 

Is player-leadership going to add velocity and life to Lester's, Q's, Hendricks's, Hamels', Strop's, and Kimbrel's fastballs?  Would better leadership have given Edwards command and composure?  Would leadership have given Mike Montgomery's stuff more spin, and reduced his HR's-allowed?  Theo has prioritized assembling a really old, worn pitching staff with guys on the variably-steep decline-side of their careers.  Would better player-leadership have any impact there?  And the Professor, super tough and over-achiever Lester, and crafty veteran Hamels, their leadership is lacking? 

Would better player-leadership have helped Bote to make fewer errors, and have prevented his upper-body buildup from having cost a little bit of defensive flexibility?  If we had not only Heyward and Descalso but also had a Ross and Fowler providing better leadership, would that cause Almora to hit better, Baez to improve his plate discipline, Contreras to pitch-frame better, and Happ and Schwarber to have better command of the upper half of the strike zone?  Would better leadership make our assembly of baserunners not quite so pokey?   

I guess I'm kinda puzzled as to how much leadership is capable of impacting performance.  I get that there can be some indirects.  Maybe a better culture has guys more attentive and focused defensively, so that a Rizzo never forgets how many outs there are.  Maybe a better culture has guys talking and thinking baseball more, watching more film, getting to bed sooner, and reducing affairs and alcoholism, and somehow they play better as a result?

I guess I just don't really understand how much direct or indirect impact player leadership will have on baseball performance, in a game where each pitch is made by an individual pitcher; each at-bat is individual; and each defensive play is individually executed.

I don't necessarily disagree.  To me baseball is an individual game within a team concept.  I'm merely passing along what I have heard.  Then again many have given credit to Heyward's rain delay speech as the driving force behind our win (I'm not one of those people).

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13097
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #278 on: October 11, 2019, 02:22:18 pm »
Thanks, delmar, that makes sense.  P2 mentioned "de facto pecking order that ... makes everyone more comfortable."  But in a sense you're talking about making people **less** comfortable, about making mistakes.  That makes sense to me. 

Maybe more "comfortable" in a different way, too?  Somebody is doing something dumb or thoughtless, and I know it... but I'm uncomfortable about whether I should say something about it, who am I to say anything, or how to say it, or when to say it, or how to put it into words...  Perhaps when Ross was there, everybody else could just relax and sit back because they knew Ross would say what needed to be said, and would always somehow would know how to say it right? 

DelMarFan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #279 on: October 11, 2019, 02:37:45 pm »
Ross apparently wasn't afraid to get in guys' faces when they needed/deserved it without being an **** about it.  It's not an easy skill, and I don't think guys like Rizzo, Bryant, and Heyward have the inclination *or* the skill.

And it's been lacking.  The overall sloppiness has gotten worse, while Joe continued to try to keep the guys loose.  Maybe if they'd been able to replace Ross in the clubhouse, Joe would still be there.

I'm not sure I buy into it, but it's an argument.  And it wouldn't surprise me if it's the one driving Ross's candidacy.

method

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4404
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #280 on: October 11, 2019, 04:56:32 pm »
I think there's something to the leadership argument.  Since 2016, the team has seemed to slip deeper and deeper into complacency.  Sloppy defense, poor baserunning, unsound fundamentals--the kind of stuff Ross was there to yell at players about.  How many times have we heard the "we knew after making a mistake on the field that Ross would be waiting for us in the dugout" kind of story.  The guys viewed as leaders (Rizzo) aren't doing that sort of leadership.

Part of Maddon's thing was that he wasn't going to be that guy.  He said pretty clearly that he wanted that stuff addressed by the players, and so Ross and Maddon worked together well in 2016.  Then Ross left and no one filled the void.  My sense is that the team has been looking for that kind of player-accountability-manager since Ross left.

Its the manager's job to lead the team... he's the manager. The manager has to set the tone. Maddon is great at dealing with kids that just got to the majors, and keeping them loose and playing to their talents. Distracting them from the grind and making things fun for them.

He did this with the Rays and the Cubs, and took both teams to the WS. His crappy BP management definitely cost him the WS win with they rays. Francona's idiotic move of sending the same RP back out after a 40 minute rain delay, bailed him out of another WS loss where he managed the BP terribly.

Maddon lost the job in Tampa, because even though he had an absolute crapload of talent after his WS appearance, he couldn't get back there with the same core. Rays won the 08 pennant, in 09 he had a roster that included Longo, Zobrist, Crawford, carlos pena (893 OPS version) Price, Shields, Garza, Wade Davis. The offense featured 4 players that posted a OPS over 130. 

There should be leadership from the players, but to say that Lester/Hamels are lacking in leadership would be contrary to their past reputations. At some point Maddon loses his players with his antics. IMO no amount of player leadership short of Brady/Jordan is going to overcome his passive style.

Jack Birdbath

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4126
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #281 on: October 11, 2019, 05:13:46 pm »
He didn’t lose the job in Tampa. He had an out and he took it.
Like Like x 1 View List

method

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4404
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #282 on: October 11, 2019, 06:10:35 pm »
He didn’t lose the job in Tampa. He had an out and he took it.

Not entirely true, he was not going to be kept around... he took the out much like he didn't get fired from Chicago, his contract was over.

The Rays were going in a different direction, and he was not going to be kept if he didn't opt out. it was a convenient way to end the relationship. If Maddon had signed a 6 year deal with the cubs, do you think he would have been fired this year? or would the cubs have kept him for another year?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2019, 06:12:17 pm by method »
Disagree Disagree x 2 View List

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17344
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #283 on: October 11, 2019, 06:35:57 pm »
The Rays owners reportedly wouldn’t trade with Cubs over Maddon using his opt out.
Like Like x 1 View List

Reb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: Cubs in '20
« Reply #284 on: October 11, 2019, 08:29:23 pm »
Not entirely true, he was not going to be kept around... he took the out much like he didn't get fired from Chicago, his contract was over.

The Rays were going in a different direction, and he was not going to be kept if he didn't opt out. it was a convenient way to end the relationship. If Maddon had signed a 6 year deal with the cubs, do you think he would have been fired this year? or would the cubs have kept him for another year?

Just not true.

Rays offered Maddon an extension and Rays team president tried to retain him.

“I’m surprised by it and disappointed,” Silverman said, adding later, “I can only tell you what I know and what Joe and I spoke about, which was his desire to be a long-term Ray. I shared that desire and worked hard to make it a reality, and it didn’t happen.”