Author Topic: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)  (Read 30395 times)

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10623
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1770 on: November 02, 2015, 08:28:22 pm »

...Cubs leading league in Ks by huge margin in an era of Ks dwarfing other eras in Ks--no, I would not assume that's inevitable. Just get it down to something a bit more manageable.  Reduce Ks by near 200 and you can do this.  ...
Certainly true that Ks going way up in last 10 seasons. Average NL team Ks: 2015:  1278 (Cubs 1518)
....

1.  I'm just thinking that we're not going to both add Baez and reduce K's by 200.  If we're going to play Baez and Bryant regularly, being at least 100K's above league average may need to be accepted as normal.  But yeah, hopefully we can cut back here and there, without sacrificing the good stuff people contribute. 

2.  If we replace some low value low-K Herrera AB's with some better-value high-K Baez AB's, I'm good with that!  :)  Even if the K's go up higher still in those AB's! 

3.  If we replace a lot of good-value Fowler AB's, the K's may well go down but I'm not sure we'll be a better team as a result.  Fowler was a very good contributor for us, as was high-K Montero. The purpose is still to have as good a team as possible, so let's not lose sight of the big goal.  Reducing the K's but weakening the team has limited appeal....

4.  "Denorfia/A. Jackson/Baxter/Lake/Alcantara/Olt had 126 Ks in only 486 Pas".  OK, I'm not contesting the value of replacing Olt/Alcantara/Lake and their no value high-K AB's!  Although I'd be fine if Baez replaced all 486 of those PA's, even if he doesn't reduce the K-rate at all.  (Which I doubt he would, if given that many AB.)  But if LaStella was picking up 250 of those AB while hitting .290, that would be just fine. 

5.  Agree that Bryant might cut down some.  Soler and Russell could each cut down significantly.  I suspect Schwarber could also cut down some if he made that a priority. 

6.  Schwarber, Soler, Russell, as well as Bryant I think all three have the capacity to naturally improve.  Plus each has the capacity to cut down their swings situationally.  Each also has the capacity to adjust approach and swing more aggressively early in counts and reduce their 2-strike counts.  To what degree possibly associated reductions in walks and/or HR's would offset some of the advantages is unclear to me. 

7.  If 1278 is league average, I'd love to get it down to 1400 without otherwise compromising anything good.  Still not sure how realistic that is if the present five youngsters all play full-time.  Not sure 1450, for example, would be unacceptable on a yearly basis if that's the price of doing business and if those five guys are hitting ≥125 HR's with the three infielders all playing good defense. 

8.  Not sure they'll get a deal for Baez that they'll want, or Soler.  Think it's pretty likely both will be back this year, K's and all.  And if Baez and Soler hit like they may be able to to, 97-wins-per-year  with 1500K may be an annual and acceptable thing.   

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1771 on: November 02, 2015, 10:09:11 pm »
And if Baez and Soler hit like they may be able to to, 97-wins-per-year  with 1500K may be an annual and acceptable thing.   



I'll take it.

Playtwo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7769
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1772 on: November 04, 2015, 08:05:13 am »
Excerpt from an article on contact by Sharma:

"So if their offense got better when they were actually making less contact, why should they care about improving that aspect of their team? The fact is they could have been even better if they were a stronger contact-hitting team. If you want to put numbers to it, it’s quite simple. The Cubs were third in the NL with 331 plate appearances with a runner on third and less than two outs. For many of us, this is looked at as a situation where a run must score. The reality is, last season the league average for converting on those opportunities was 51 percent. The Cubs, however, converted at a 40 percent rate, dead last in baseball by a significant margin. Think about that: the Cubs had the third-most opportunities in baseball with a runner on third and failed three-fifths of the time. Not only is that unacceptable, but it really shows us how the Cubs—by rectifying one clear weakness—could go from a very strong offense to an elite one."

The full article:  http://wrigleyville.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2015/11/02/contact-probably-not-key-to-world-peace-might-help-the-cubs-win-anyway/

Ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7782
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1773 on: November 04, 2015, 09:48:39 am »
Thanks for passing that along, Playtwo.

davep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14613
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1774 on: November 04, 2015, 10:40:45 am »
The Cubs had 331 plate appearances with a man at third and less than two outs.  If they drove in the runner at third 40 percent of the time, they scored the man at third 132.4 times, while the league average of 51 percent scored him 168.81 times, a difference of 36.41 runs.  Certainly not an insignificant number.

But it isn't the entire story.  In those 331 plate appearances with a man on third and two outs, a portion of them also had a man on second or first, or sometimes both.  Did the Cubs ever hit a three or even four run home run while the competition hit a single, only scoring one run?  Did they ever get a double scoring the guy from first as well as third, while the others got a single, scoring only one run?

It would be interesting to know how many total runs the Cubs scored after having a runner at third and less than two outs, as well as the merely the number of times they scored one run in that situation.


CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14348
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1775 on: November 04, 2015, 11:02:46 am »
I looked it up and the Cubs K% was 25% in those situations, so roughly what they did during the season.  If they had a K% at 20% it would be an additional 17 balls in play.  17% would be an extra 27 balls in play.  I don't think the striking out explains all of the Cubs trouble.

A lot of this gets into the Ghostbuster don't cross the streams territory.

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1776 on: November 04, 2015, 09:12:26 pm »
Ranod fluctuation and statitical noise likely explains a good part of it.

Reb

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1777 on: November 17, 2015, 12:38:13 pm »
Lifted this from ESPN.

Q: how many pitchouts did Cubs pitchers throw in 2015?

A: three

The game has changed.

Dave23

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10501
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1778 on: November 17, 2015, 12:56:54 pm »
Wow!

CurtOne

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24300
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1779 on: November 17, 2015, 12:59:26 pm »
Lifted this from ESPN.

Q: how many pitchouts did Cubs pitchers throw in 2015?

A: three

The game has changed.
Angel Hernandez called two of them strikes.

AZSteve

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1655
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1780 on: November 17, 2015, 07:16:29 pm »
Lol...good one Curt

Ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7782
Re: Cubs in '15 (8/3 - 12/1)
« Reply #1781 on: December 01, 2015, 12:59:23 pm »

Bob Nightengale ‏@BNightengale  7m7 minutes ago
The #Cubs were only top 10 payroll team to win a playoff series. They were 10th at $155.08 million. http://usat.ly/1HE7Okg