andcounting – Page 3 – Obstructed View

Contented – My Cubs Marketing Campaign

I watch Cubs games when I can.

I follow the scores on Gameday most of the time.

I at least check the alerts informing me of lead changes.

I kind of care if the Cubs win.

I read the occasional blog post and news update about the Cubs.

I have had neither the time nor the energy for much else.

I'm in my own personal rebuilding phase.

So I kind of like this phase in the development of the Cubbieverse. Don't get me wrong (or do, I don't really care), I would rather the Cubs were awesome . . . I guess. But if the Cubs were awesome, I'd probably still be missing it. So the fact that the Major League Cubs are playing baseball at a level well below the mediocre mean of Cubness makes me feel one with this team. Even if we barely see each other. I mean, really, how much do either of us care? We both know my passion for the Cubs is just as ineffective as their passion for winning. We might be committed, but we're not fooling anybody. We suck. And we're contentedly waiting out the suckiness. In the National League Central. In life. In general.

I like the fact that September brings no drama for the Cubs. I can't really handle that right now.

But I also like the fact that the Cubs are a no-drama team. Not just in September. Not just in the ever-expanding playoff hunt. In general. No drama.

There have been many developments that would have gone differently in past Cubs regimes. The trading of Alfonso Soriano, for instance, passed with cooperation, admiration, and respect between the Cubs and the now-stellar Yankee left fielder. Fonzy's former team, both his bosses and his colleagues in the clubhouse, spoke fondly of him amid the trade rumors and after the trade. If this happened 10, 5, or even 2 years ago, there would have been a special PR campaign developed by the team to ensure everyone in the English-, Spanish-, and Japanese-speaking worlds (The Fonz is trilingual, let's not forget) knew what a jerk he was.

Not this Cubs team. This year, it was handled with class.

The same thing happened when the Jeff Samardzija rumors started swirling (you're welcome). The team handled it quietly and with honest dignity. Samardzija did the same. It passed like any other rumor without much drama. NBD.

Then there's the Starlin Castro thing. Since he kind of sucks this year, it would have been very easy for his recent surge in mental and performance lapses to turn into something huge. Instead, it was handled pretty much exactly how it should have been handled. He was removed from the game after letting a runner who was closer to him than to home plate score almost uncontested. But not immediately after. He was dropped in the lineup. He was moved to the top. Dale Sveum talked about him in a negative light, but not an overly dramatic one. Castro even expressed his frustrations to the media. In, oh, about one sentence worth of complaining. And then it passed. I don't know, did the media cover it? It seemed less than dramatic to me. Almost boring.

Of course I'm well aware that the Cubs blogonauts have gone through the semiannual routine of freaking out about what it means to be Cubs fans and what the Cubs need to do and what a pain in the ass Al is. Such is life. But the team itself? No drama.

And I'm perfectly happy with that.

For now.

If the Cubs can keep the no-drama approach in the non-baseball side of things and eventually work their way into exciting fall baseball once I'm ready to sit down and watch more than a game or two a month, I shall count myself one lucky fan. It would almost be like we were watching real grown ups do baseball. We're probably not ready for that. But in time we will be. And so will the Superfriend Cubs.

A Two-Week Season: The Dale Sveum Chicago Cubs

I know the numbers don't mean a ton at this point in the season; eleven games does not a representative sample make, especially not for any one player. And as a team, there's still far too little to effectively evaluate how ~~good~~ bad the 2013 Cubs will be . . . as a team. But if you combined all the Cubs' offensive stats from two weeks into the season to form a single player? Well, we've got almost enough stats to Frankenstein together our own utility player, even if all he is really good for is moaning "Fire bad!" and occasionally pinch hitting for Brent Lillibridge.

So far this season, the Cubs have amassed about 400 plate appearances, 11 homers, 35 runs, a 23.9% strikeout rate and a 5.5% walk rate (these numbers are offensive, of course, and, yes, I mean that in multiple ways). All that and more is good for a .635 OPS and a .275 wOBA. In case you're wondering, no, the Cubs position players have not yet attained replacement-level production. With positional, fielding, and baserunning adjustments factored in, they're worth 0.1 wins below a replacement level player. So that's awesome.

I used baseball-reference.com's play index to find a player in recent history who had posted a season similar to what the Cubs have accomplished so far this year as a team, and the result was mildly interesting. The player who most closely resembles your 2013 Chicago Cubs to date:

Dale Sveum, circa 1988. Check it out:

	PA	K%	BB%	OBP	SLG	wRC+	wOBA
Chicago Cubs, 2013	397	23.9%	5.5%	.271	.364	73	.275
Dale Sveum, 1988	495	24.6%	4.2%	.274	.347	68	.280

After considering the numbers for quite awhile this morning, I've drawn the following conclusions:

. . .

Yeah, nothing really. I mean, we know neither the Cubs nor a 1988 Dale Sveum are very good, but we know that because of a lot more than just the past two weeks of data and a quick traipse through the annals of baseball-reference.com. I would never suggest that the Cubs are performing this way because of Dale Sveum. It's just a fun coincidence. It would be a more fun coincidence if their current manager was Barry Bonds and their wOBA to-date was .376.

Still . . . come on, Cubs. Would a little plate discipline kill you?

OV Turns Two: Something Terrible This Way Comes.

Two years ago, having been conceived in the minds of commiserative suffering and gestated in the womb of indignant hope, Obstructed View was born. We celebrated the cerebral union of four ~~great~~ ~~genius~~ ~~prize-winning~~ semi-literate minds (operating under our noms de plumes, mb21, aisle 424, berselius, and yours truly, and counting) the way any intellectual quadrumvirate would: with a series of poorly crafted photoshop images. We were the Beatles. We were the cast of Seinfeld. We were the master impressionists. We were South Park.

I was Kenny, because, oh my God, I have a habit of dying every week, most recently for good. But I got better.

If writing about the Cubs were an art form and Cub wins were our payment, we'd be considered starving artists. Not counting the postseason, the Cubs are 132-192 since we launched this site. Fortunately for us, writing about the Cubs is a soulless bed of commercial extravagance, and we're all the sort of rich that makes any sell-out adopt a false sense of dissatisfaction with material possessions.

But before wealth spoiled the innocence of our organic grassroots blogging origins, we never got into this for the money, the fame, the notoriety, or the women. No, we did it on the simple premise that baseball, even Cubs baseball is good. And talking and writing about baseball is fun. And talking about baseball is most fun when done with people who know what they're talking about, people interested in getting it right and willing to admit when they get it wrong . . . hell, even hoping to discover they're wrong. More, better information . . . people who are fans of that and Cubs baseball? They're fun to talk to. Absent that, it's still nice when those who know nothing are at least somewhat entertaining, and absent that, the boring dumb folk who are good sports about their mind-numbing stupidity are pretty cool to discuss baseball with, too, hence my inclusion in this beautiful mess.

Okay, maybe that's not the simplest premise, but it's not exactly genetic engineering. Were it actually genetic engineering, it would still be germaine to most posts on this blog, because we have always welcomed discussions on just about anything. Tongue in cheek, face in palm, mind in the ether, Obstructed View is and always has been a place where discussion both thoughtul and mindless is more or less welcomed.

It's a good place. It's a good blog. I don't mind saying that, especially since I am by no means responsible for it.

The beginning of the baseball season has reminded me, as perhaps it has you, that baseball is good. It is more than a pasttime. It's a hobby. It's a field of knowledge and culture and passion that allows us to witness and measure and analyze the performance of men doing the stuff of which we dream.

Even the worst of teams (and the Cubs just may be that) is comprised of elite baseball players. The team we like, playing the game we love, cheered on by the friends we've made along the way . . . who we may or may not care to meet in real life ever. For two years now, we've been documenting our travails in this hobby, this pasttime, this sick and fruitless love affair, right here on Obstructed View. We've been fans for much longer than that. We'll be pretend Internet friends for much longer still. But nothing compares to the length of time we'll have to wait for a World Series crown on the north side.

In the meantime, we'll enjoy the ride. We'll continue to comment on this sport that distracts us from real life, and we'll continue to comment on the various pursuits that distract us from this shitty team. And I'll continue to intend to post more. But for now, I just want to say thank you to everyone who reads, comments, and writes on this blog. It has been an interesting couple of years. I hope this one surprises us.

Go Cubs. Happy birthday, OV. Thanks, everybody.

5 levels of Cubs involvement

Hi. I'm AC, AndCounting for long, and I am a Cubs blogger. It's been two months since my last post. I stayed clean for as long as I could, but I decided that it was time to get off the wagon. Or on the wagon. Or on the bandwagon. Or onto the main wagon where they let the real fans ride. Honestly, I don't understand the rules about wagons (band or standard), so I'll go ahead and steer clear of wagonisms from this point forward.

If this were a confessional, it would include details like, oh, I don't know, that I have no clue who the Cubs have traded for or signed or not signed, that I don't know who Rant Sports is, and that I have neither confidence nor a clue why that might be funny. But this is not a confessional. It's not about me, per se, or my lack of involvement on this blog or Cubdom in general.

This is about what it is like to be involved on any level with the Cubs. And it’s about how there are five of them.

1. Cub level

If you are on the Chicago Cubs, you’re on this list. Now, there are probably sublevels to this and all the levels. There are starting players, bench players, guys on the 40-man roster, front office staff, scouts, varying levels of Ricketts. But, you get it. If you’re part of the team, you’re part of the team. And that’s pretty involved.

2. Season ticket holder level

This is not just season ticket holders. Actually, there are season ticket holders who I really wouldn’t include in this list. The gist behind this list is the type of passion that compels someone to buy tickets to and/or attend as many Cubs games as possible. That passion is shared by many people who never attend Cubs games. It is lacking in many season ticket holders (I’m speaking specifically about those corporate/commercial entrants in the STH market; I’m not calling into question the loyalty of fans who attend the games).

I don’t give a flying bison burger how much money you spend on the Cubs. This STH-level of involvement is what some people consider die-hard and what others consider idiotic. If you spend eight hours on a Cubs blog every day, you’re in this category. If you call in to every post-game show, you’re in this category. If you spend more time on a typical day discussing or thinking about the Cubs than an actual Cub spends doing his job, you’re probably in this category.

The bottom line: if you’re involved with the Cubs on a level-2 basis, you spend way too much time and/or money worrying about this crap team. And that’s okay. I’ve been there. That’s who I am. Or who I was. Who I intend to be again.

Again, there are sublevels. If your blood is actually blue in color, great. If you live, breathe, eat, sleep, and shit Cubs baseball, fine. If you just talk about them a lot, that’s cool, too. We can all share a category. The thing we all hold in common is that the plight of the Cubs has stricken us with some skewed emotional connection that causes to actually try to devote our resources to seeing them do well and actually figuring out ways that they could improve. We’ve somehow associated an inordinate part of our well-being with the results of their games and seasons. It’s disgusting and awesome.

3. Viewer level

These people watch the games and care. They do. But when the game is over, the grieving process (or rare period of jubilation) ends relatively soon after. A category-3 fan doesn’t know what time the game is, but he or she will ask someone occasionally. Seeing games is a distraction from life, not the other way around.

For beginning of this year, this was about where I was at, a bummer of a stretch for a Cubs blogger. I know, I know, it’s not about me, but I use myself as in illustration (and maybe not for the last time). I tried to watch the games, and I was glad when I could. Cubs baseball was a nice little getaway, but it was not the Disneyland of my escapism. More like a Six Flags or maybe just the merry-go-round at the mall.

These people still get pissed when the Cubs lose and happy when the Cubs win, but the game is just a game. Except when it’s a really awesome come-from-behind game or the Cardinals and umpires and the ghost of Mike Quade conspire to screw us in the ninth.

4. Nominal Cubs fan level

This is when you have to have an answer for “who’s your team?” and “the Cubs” is your answer. You didn’t see the game. You don’t know who won. You don’t know how to spell Samardzija. Samardzijia? Samardziajia? Is he even still on the team? Was he ever? Who’s coaching these days?

This is where I am right now. There’s just too much. Baseball isn’t even a distraction. It’s a big fat pile of wanton neglect. I’m too lazy regarding baseball to even bother to look up wanton to see if I used it properly. Stuff like changing your faith, leaving your job, going through a divorce, and recommitting yourself to everything you believe is true in this world will do that to a person.

I imagine James Earl Jones has a speech for these people. For me. There must be some earth-shaking words to conjure up the spirit of baseball past or to instill some passion for the game the way Ryne Sandberg tells us it is meant to be played, or . . . or . . . I don’t know, lend me a shit, so I can pretend to give it. But for class-4 fans, the fire just ain’t there, not even a candle. On our hearts, there’s a picture of a dim light bulb with a Cubs logo on it. Woo. Hoo.

5. Not Cubs fans

I mean, seriously. Just plain not liking them at all is actually an option. It works for some people.

But. It’s not me. It’s not you. It’s not us. We’re attached to this team like soft on Tony Campana. And just like the Cubs, we’re not going anywhere.

Daily Facepalm 9.13.2012

Alfonso Soriano is an interesting chap. He had a big day at the plate and in the field. He's going to have a great counting stat year, probably ending the year with 30+ homers, 100+ RBI, and one+ error and 11+ assists. His rate stats aren't awful, but they aren't tremendous. He's gone to a lighter bat. Maybe his knees are better. He's a good player with a contract no one seems to want to touch. I don't need a wire leak to know Soriano has cleared waivers. Basically, here's Soriano in a nutshell:

He's a good player now.

Everyone expects him to become a bad player really soon.

He has two years left on his contract.

He loves playing the game of baseball.

He has some annoying habits.

He's not a dick.

His middle name is Guilleard.

At the end of his career, he'll be remembered as a Chicago Cub, and there probably has been no cubbier Cub than Alfonso Soriano. Right now, in his okay, somewhat likeable, somewhat annoying, not nearly what we've hoped for or what we've paid for, but somewhat pleasing in his rebound from dismal failure way . . . he's at the pinnacle of cubness.

Do the Cubs Have a Game Today?

Nope.

Highlight of the Day

See above.

Thing I Didn't See Coming

The Orioles and the Nationals lead their respective Eastern Divisions. That's crazy to me. But I like it.

Actually Worthwhile Content of the Day

Daily Facepalm – 9.12.2012

The Cubs lost to the Astros 1-0 in what quite possibly could be the worst game of baseball ever played. Between the two teams there were ten hits, six errors, and one meager run. The only reason the otherwise merciless crapfest ended was because Starlin Castro couldn't outrun Dave Sappelt's stupidity, preventing Castro from scoring the tying run before Sappelt made the last out at third. Thank goodness that shit didn't go to extras.

Do the Cubs Have a Game Today?

I'm honestly afraid to look. But I'm pretty sure they do.

Most Valuable Aramis

Aramis Ramirez is having a career year with the Brewers, While it's true that his when-it-doesn't-count production will go for naught for the late-blooming Brewers (it could happen, but it's not gonna happen), imagine what kind of year he could have had for the Cubs. Let's take a look at just how little any of the Cubs' games have mattered this season:

Since the conclusion of the Cubs' very first game, they've never been closer than one game out of first place.
After the first series, they never got closer than two games behind the division leader.
The Cubs haven't trailed in the division by single-digit games since May 22.
They haven't trailed by fewer than 20 games since August 1.
They haven't been within a game of .500 since the end of the first series of the season.
Lest a winning streak were to cause Aramis to feel undue pressure or smell the disgusting whiff of hope, the Cubs haven't won more than four games in a row.

By my calculations, given the minuscule intersection of the sets of Games that Count and Games that Involved the Chicago Cubs, Aramis could have been a 60 WAR Cub this year. And somehow the Cubs would still manage to win fewer than 60 games.

Daily Facepalm 9.8.2012

The Cubs beat the Pirates 12-2 for the irony alone, a day after declaring a five-run lead "piling on." But we've probably beat that dead horse enough.

Play of the Day

Brett "Ghost of Reed Johnson" Jackson didn't adjust his competitive settings to autopilot just because the Cubs had a ridiculous lead (die, dead horse, die more!). He went after this ball with a little extra furious desire due to the fact that he had allowed the Pirates' only other hit in the game (at the time) to slip past his glove in an attempt at a leaping catch at the wall. Take 2 was a bit more difficult, dangerous, and fantastic.

Your browser does not support iframes.

Is Brett Jackson ok?

Yes.

Playoff Race Update

The Cubs are 4.5 games out of the 11th wild card spot. Doesn't look promising.

Is the Site Broke?

No.

Top Ten Formerly Unwritten Rules for Cubs

There has been much talk in recent ~~nadirs on the Cubs' undulating saga of suck~~ years about the unwritten rules of baseball. Don't steal when you're up by ten runs. Don't steal when you're down by ten runs. Don't swing at 3-0 pitches when you're up by five runs. So, since it's Friday and I haven't put up a daily facepalm in a couple of days (let's not explore the paradox hanging between the daily facepalm's moniker and its haphazard occurrence, that's not what this is about), I thought it would be a good time to review some unwritten rules for the Chicago Cubs to follow. I understand that this technically undoes their unwrittenness, but I think it's time we move out of the era of oral tradition as it obviously has its flaws resulting in gross misapplication of unwritten rules. Right, Steve? Of course. Here we go.

~~10. You suck.~~

Wait, never mind. That one's been written many times.

10. If you suck, try not to ruin it for the players that don't.

9. If you throw at Bryce Harper, hit Bryce Harper, not a lonely patch of dirt somewhere in the general vicinity of Bryce Harper's feet.

8. Before criticizing the way an opponent hits, first learn to hit. Either a moving baseball or a stationary Bryce Harper, learn to hit at least one of them.

7. If Team A has the best record in the league and Team B has one of the worst records in the history of baseball, Team A should be criticizing Team B and not the other way around.

6. Unwritten rules are best left unspoken.

5. The fifth inning of last night's game is not the time to be giving up.

4. The appropriate time to give up was May 6 at 3:11 p.m.

3. Don't ever shut down your ace on the brink of the playoffs. You never know when his career might end. (Sorry, that's for the Nationals.)

2. Don't ever overuse your ace in the playoffs. You never know how it might injure them permanently. (Sorry, that's for the 2003 Cubs.)

1. Getting angry at an opposing batter for swinging at pitches is as idiotic as getting angry at an opposing pitcher for continuing to pitch.

Daily Facepalm, Literary Appreciation Edition – 9.5.2012

If a writer of prose knows enough about what he is writing about he may omit things that he knows, and the reader, if the writer is writing truly enough, will have a feeling of those things as strongly as though the writer had stated them. The dignity of movement of an iceberg is due to only one-eighth of it being above water. A writer who omits things because he does not know them only makes hollow places in his writing. A writer who appreciates the seriousness of writing so little that he is anxious to make people see he is formally educated, cultured, or well-bred, is merely a popinjay. —Ernest Hemingway, Death in the Afternoon

Cubs Like White Elephants

I sat in my car last night and listened to the first two innings of the Cubs at Walgreens.

"Ian Desmond goes in standing with an RBI double. His third and fourth RBIs of the day against the rookie Chris Rusin."

"He just can't get ahead of any of these hitters."

"Here comes Dale Sveum."

I changed the radio to auxiliary mode and listened to Spotify.

I stared out the driver's side window. A bird flew overhead and disappeared behind the tree line.

"Let it go. This too shall pass."

Daily Facepalm – 9.4.2012

The Cubs lost to Walgreens in their special Labor Day uniforms, shocking the world yet again. With that defeat, the Cubs have now dropped 49 of their last 66 road games. Yeah. They have won a grand total of 17 road games all year. That's a road wining percntage of .WTF, despite a slightly lower Pythagorean winning percentage of .OMG. They're really lucky they haven't lost 50 road games, yet. But it makes for an interesting bet. Do you think the Cubs can win a total of 20 games on the road in 2012? They have a legitimate shot at failing to do so, which would be the 12th most facepalm-worthy occurence in Cubdom this year. Place your bets now, but in the meantime stay tuned tonight when they try to reach that magical 50-road-loss plateau.

Speaking of 50

The Cubs recently called up Miguel Socolovich to help out in the much beleaguered and little ballyhooed bullpen, and when he finally takes the mound in relief he will become the 50th player to see action as a Chicago Cub in 2012. The record for most players used in a single Cubs season is 51, and if Matt Liston has anything to say about it, the Cubs will at least tie that mark with the help of an old friend we barely got to know.

What's one more Cub?

Adam Greenberg saw one pitch as a major leaguer, but he lost sight of it before it hit him in the back of the helmet and ended his cup of coffee with a single drop. It's been seven years since his major league career effectively ended, but an activist named Matt Liston has started a campaign to get Greenberg one more shot at the big leagues. You can see more details (including a stirring interview from the depths of Hobbiton) and sign the petition on this site. It's a well done effort, and I hope it works out. Greenberg is this generation's Moonlight Graham, racking up but one plate appearance consisting of one pitch and never having registered an actual at bat.

The campaign suggests Greenberg be given a shot against the Astros in the final series of the season, which hardly constitutes major league action. But the record books won't know the difference. My only hope is that Roger Clemens doesn't face him. The last thing the poor guy needs is to have a broken bat shard hurled at him by an old man who thinks there's only room in this town for one patronizing publicity stunt.

Do the Cubs have a game today?

Yes.

Words I Never Imagined I'd Type Today

RIP, Michael Clarke Duncan.