How much ass could this Cubs team suck if this Cubs team could suck ass?

Short answer: probably not much more ass than they sucked last year. After all, the Cubs have lost 101 or more games only 2 other times in franchise history. It's not easy being as bad as the 2012 Cubs were.

Long answer?

The 2012 Cubs joined the 1962 and 1966 teams as the only ones in franchise history to lose 100 or more games. The 2012 Cubs can rest assured that they did not post the team's worst record as the other two teams each lost 103. You may say that's not fair becuase they haven't always played 162 games. You'd be correct.

Their .377 winning percentage was 4th worst in history. The two teams from the 60s were worse and so was the strike shortened 1981 Cubs who played only 106 games.

The 1962 Cubs could at least argue they were the youngest in baseball. Their position players were the youngest in baseball and averaged over 2 years younger than the league. The pitchers were the 3rd youngest. There were 9 teams whose position players were younger than the Cubs in 2012 and 13 teams had a younger pitching staff.

You have to go back to 1992 to find a full season in which the Cubs scored fewer runs than the 2012 club did. You then have to look back to 1976 to find another full season that they scored fewer runs.

The Cubs basically did nothing to improve their offense. They re-signed two players who had been non-tendered in Nate Schierholtz and Ian Stewart. Both are essentially replacement level players and the Cubs have the unfortunate luck of paying them more than $4 million combined. To make room for Schierholz in RF, they're going to move David DeJesus to a position in which he'll be a worse fielder.

They haven't done much to improve their pitching either. They replaced Ryan Dempster and Paul Maholm with the Scotts. Scott Baker hasn't made a start since August 8th, 2011 (he did make 2 relief appearances in September of that year) and Scott Feldman. Feldman has a career 4.81 ERA and an FIP over 4.5. He has only thrown 150 or more innings twice in his career (151.1 in 2008 and 189.2 in 2009). Not to mention, the Cubs have a lot more uncertainty with Matt Garza than they did entering last season.

The Cubs probably do suck more ass right now than they did entering last season, but I still think it's unlikely they lose more games. It's damn hard to lose more than 100 games. The Cubs have sucked for most of their existence and have done it only 3 times. It's possible the Cubs lose more games, but I think it's more likely they'll lose fewer while being a worse team.

h/t to Suburban Kid for the idea of this post and mikeakaleroy for the headline

Quantcast