2015: The Back To The Future Season

[Yeti]

Their 91st win tops the 1998 Cubs for third winningest Cubs team of my lifetime, and it came off of the bat of Chris Denorfia.  I love this team.

The fifth-winningest frranchise since 1946:
1. 2008 Cubs, 98
2. 1984 Cubs, 96
3. 1989 Cubs, 93
4. 1969 Cubs, 92
5. 2015 Cubs, 91
6. 1998 Cubs, 90
7. 2004 Cubs, 89
8 (tie). 2003 Cubs, 88
8 (tie). 2001 Cubs, 88
10. 1967 Cubs, 87
11 (tie) 1972 Cubs, 85
11 (tie) 2007 Cubs, 85
12 (tie) 1993 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1970 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1968 Cubs, 84
15 (tie) 2009 Cubs, 83
15 (tie) 1971 Cubs, 83
16 (tie) 1946 Cubs, 82
16 (tie) 1963 Cubs, 82
The 1995 Cubs were the only other over .500 team (73-71)

Additionally, 14 Cubs teams prior to 1946 won as many as 91 games, putting this team as one of the 20th winningest editions of the Cubs over 140 years of baseball. Keep in mind they won 91 or more every season 1904-1912.

Seems plausible that they move into 3rd place, too.

[Quality Start Machine]

Their 91st win tops the 1998 Cubs for third winningest Cubs team of my lifetime, and it came off of the bat of Chris Denorfia.  I love this team.

The fifth-winningest frranchise since 1946:
1. 2008 Cubs, 98
2. 1984 Cubs, 96
3. 1989 Cubs, 93
4. 1969 Cubs, 92
5. 2015 Cubs, 91
6. 1998 Cubs, 90
7. 2004 Cubs, 89
8 (tie). 2003 Cubs, 88
8 (tie). 2001 Cubs, 88
10. 1967 Cubs, 87
11 (tie) 1972 Cubs, 85
11 (tie) 2007 Cubs, 85
12 (tie) 1993 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1970 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1968 Cubs, 84
15 (tie) 2009 Cubs, 83
15 (tie) 1971 Cubs, 83
16 (tie) 1946 Cubs, 82
16 (tie) 1963 Cubs, 82
The 1995 Cubs were the only other over .500 team (73-71)

Additionally, 14 Cubs teams prior to 1946 won as many as 91 games, putting this team as one of the 20th winningest editions of the Cubs over 140 years of baseball. Keep in mind they won 91 or more every season 1904-1912.

What's really strange is that in my mind the 1972 team was the best of the Durocher Cubs.

[Canadouche]

Their 91st win tops the 1998 Cubs for third winningest Cubs team of my lifetime, and it came off of the bat of Chris Denorfia.  I love this team.

The fifth-winningest frranchise since 1946:
1. 2008 Cubs, 98
2. 1984 Cubs, 96
3. 1989 Cubs, 93
4. 1969 Cubs, 92
5. 2015 Cubs, 91
6. 1998 Cubs, 90
7. 2004 Cubs, 89
8 (tie). 2003 Cubs, 88
8 (tie). 2001 Cubs, 88
10. 1967 Cubs, 87
11 (tie) 1972 Cubs, 85
11 (tie) 2007 Cubs, 85
12 (tie) 1993 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1970 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1968 Cubs, 84
15 (tie) 2009 Cubs, 83
15 (tie) 1971 Cubs, 83
16 (tie) 1946 Cubs, 82
16 (tie) 1963 Cubs, 82
The 1995 Cubs were the only other over .500 team (73-71)

Additionally, 14 Cubs teams prior to 1946 won as many as 91 games, putting this team as one of the 20th winningest editions of the Cubs over 140 years of baseball. Keep in mind they won 91 or more every season 1904-1912.

God, this organization was horrible for a long time.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish. 

[Quality Start Machine]

Their 91st win tops the 1998 Cubs for third winningest Cubs team of my lifetime, and it came off of the bat of Chris Denorfia.  I love this team.

In the weird-assed specific stats world...

Last night was the first time in MLB history that there was a pinch-hit walkoff HR in extra innings of a 1-0 game.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Their 91st win tops the 1998 Cubs for third winningest Cubs team of my lifetime, and it came off of the bat of Chris Denorfia.  I love this team.

In the weird-assed specific stats world...

Last night was the first time in MLB history that there was a pinch-hit walkoff HR in extra innings of a 1-0 game.

The Cubs won a game during which they never led or trailed.

[Brownie]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish. 

How was the start bad? They opened the season going into Shea and beat the Mets so badly, it might have made the top 5 home team losses by point differential in Shea Stadium history, and that was a stadium that hosted the Jets for many years.

They were hanging around first for most of the first half, and they were a lot more fun to watch than the previous season's team. Hee Seop Choi looked like he might not suck, Corey Patterson played pretty well and this was back before people would tell Chuck to go fuck himself every time Corey did anything of note. Sammy had his cork incident, the Cubs had no third baseman, and some big moves had to come to close the deal.

But by early June, that Yankees series was the balls.

[Brownie]

Their 91st win tops the 1998 Cubs for third winningest Cubs team of my lifetime, and it came off of the bat of Chris Denorfia.  I love this team.

The fifth-winningest frranchise since 1946:
1. 2008 Cubs, 98
2. 1984 Cubs, 96
3. 1989 Cubs, 93
4. 1969 Cubs, 92
5. 2015 Cubs, 91
6. 1998 Cubs, 90
7. 2004 Cubs, 89
8 (tie). 2003 Cubs, 88
8 (tie). 2001 Cubs, 88
10. 1967 Cubs, 87
11 (tie) 1972 Cubs, 85
11 (tie) 2007 Cubs, 85
12 (tie) 1993 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1970 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1968 Cubs, 84
15 (tie) 2009 Cubs, 83
15 (tie) 1971 Cubs, 83
16 (tie) 1946 Cubs, 82
16 (tie) 1963 Cubs, 82
The 1995 Cubs were the only other over .500 team (73-71)

Additionally, 14 Cubs teams prior to 1946 won as many as 91 games, putting this team as one of the 20th winningest editions of the Cubs over 140 years of baseball. Keep in mind they won 91 or more every season 1904-1912.

What's really strange is that in my mind the 1972 team was the best of the Durocher Cubs.

1972 was a strike-shortened season. Seven games evaporated from the strike, but the Cubs still managed to lose 70, the same number as the 1969 club.

[Quality Start Machine]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish. 

How was the start bad? They opened the season going into Shea and beat the Mets so badly, it might have made the top 5 home team losses by point differential in Shea Stadium history, and that was a stadium that hosted the Jets for many years.

They were hanging around first for most of the first half, and they were a lot more fun to watch than the previous season's team. Hee Seop Choi looked like he might not suck, Corey Patterson played pretty well and this was back before people would tell Chuck to go fuck himself every time Corey did anything of note. Sammy had his cork incident, the Cubs had no third baseman, and some big moves had to come to close the deal.

But by early June, that Yankees series was the balls.

That was the 2003 version of this year's San Francisco series, when everyone became believers.

[SKO]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish. 

How was the start bad? They opened the season going into Shea and beat the Mets so badly, it might have made the top 5 home team losses by point differential in Shea Stadium history, and that was a stadium that hosted the Jets for many years.

They were hanging around first for most of the first half, and they were a lot more fun to watch than the previous season's team. Hee Seop Choi looked like he might not suck, Corey Patterson played pretty well and this was back before people would tell Chuck to go fuck himself every time Corey did anything of note. Sammy had his cork incident, the Cubs had no third baseman, and some big moves had to come to close the deal.

But by early June, that Yankees series was the balls.

That was the 2003 version of this year's San Francisco series, when everyone became believers.

That Giants series will definitely be one to remember for a long time. If I had to pick a turning point for this team, though, it's the Bryant walkoff vs. Colorado. That was the start of the surge.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

Their 91st win tops the 1998 Cubs for third winningest Cubs team of my lifetime, and it came off of the bat of Chris Denorfia.  I love this team.

The fifth-winningest frranchise since 1946:
1. 2008 Cubs, 98
2. 1984 Cubs, 96
3. 1989 Cubs, 93
4. 1969 Cubs, 92
5. 2015 Cubs, 91
6. 1998 Cubs, 90
7. 2004 Cubs, 89
8 (tie). 2003 Cubs, 88
8 (tie). 2001 Cubs, 88
10. 1967 Cubs, 87
11 (tie) 1972 Cubs, 85
11 (tie) 2007 Cubs, 85
12 (tie) 1993 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1970 Cubs, 84
12 (tie) 1968 Cubs, 84
15 (tie) 2009 Cubs, 83
15 (tie) 1971 Cubs, 83
16 (tie) 1946 Cubs, 82
16 (tie) 1963 Cubs, 82
The 1995 Cubs were the only other over .500 team (73-71)

Additionally, 14 Cubs teams prior to 1946 won as many as 91 games, putting this team as one of the 20th winningest editions of the Cubs over 140 years of baseball. Keep in mind they won 91 or more every season 1904-1912.

God, this organization was horrible for a long time.

After being one of the very best franchises (if not the best) for the first 70 years of their existence (1876-1945) they were due for a historic normalization--and that happened as soon as they won their 10th and last pennant--the 1950's was the first sustained period of bad baseball in the history of the franchise.  To wit--between 1876 and 1945 the Northside Chicago ballclub had 19 seasons wherein they finished under .500 (and never more than 3 seasons in a row until they had 5 straight sub-.500 seasons from 1940 and 1944 before winning that last pennant in '45 with a bunch of 4F's that were either too old or enfeebled to go off to war).  Since the 1950's it's been mostly mediocre with a handful of godawful seasons mixed in with some very good ones.  On balance it's been, as Kurt said, pretty awful.

It's funny to think that someone in 1939 would've had a very different historical perspective on the Cubs as someone from today.  But it's true--ask Stew, who grew up hearing about Cuyler and Stephenson and Hartnett, a team that began a run of 4 pennants 10 seasons; this run beginning only 15 or so years removed from Tinkers, Evers and Chance (the '06 club still holds the record for  winningest single season, the '06-'07 clubs the winningest team over a 2-year period and the '06-'08 Cubs the winningest team over a 3-year period).  The early aught Cubs themselves came shortly after the Cap Anson Era, which came after Spaulding.  This was a first-class franchise for multiple successive generations that only  had 19 second-divisions finishes in 75 years, and only once, ONCE did they finish in last place during that time--in 1925, seven years after their last pennant and right before another re-tooling thanks to William Wrigley Jr. and William Veeck Sr.  They were the Yankees before the Yankees.

So history made them pay for this long run of sustained success by a brutal 70 year period with no pennants, 51 (fifty-one)second-division* finishes (20 in a row between 1947 and 1966, which exceeded the 19 second-division finishes in the 71 years of their existence prior to then), and 48 teams that finished under .500 (after having only 19 such seasons between 1876-1945).

Which is why I expect the historical pendulum to swing back, rewarding us with 5 consecutive World Series chammenships at some point in the near future (which has only been done by the '49-'53 Yankees).



*Second-divison finishes doesn't mean as much today, with only 5 teams per division.  This year's Cubs team will be second-division, technically, so it's misleading.  Still, since 1995 they finished 4th or 5th or 6th in a 5 team ('95-'97 and '13-Present) or 6 team ('98-'12) division 12 times since the '95 realignment, with only 1995 (3rd out of 5) and 2015 technically being second-division teams that finished over .500.  For purposes of this exercise, I've excluded these 2 teams from the count.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish. 

How was the start bad? They opened the season going into Shea and beat the Mets so badly, it might have made the top 5 home team losses by point differential in Shea Stadium history, and that was a stadium that hosted the Jets for many years.

They were hanging around first for most of the first half, and they were a lot more fun to watch than the previous season's team. Hee Seop Choi looked like he might not suck, Corey Patterson played pretty well and this was back before people would tell Chuck to go fuck himself every time Corey did anything of note. Sammy had his cork incident, the Cubs had no third baseman, and some big moves had to come to close the deal.

But by early June, that Yankees series was the balls.

That was the 2003 version of this year's San Francisco series, when everyone became believers.

That Giants series will definitely be one to remember for a long time. If I had to pick a turning point for this team, though, it's the Bryant walkoff vs. Colorado. That was the start of the surge.

Agree with this.  Came right on the heels of getting swept (and no-hit) by the worst team in the league at home, then blowing this same game in the top of the 9th.  They've been a different team since then (and Bryant's been on another level as well).

I also agree with the Giants series proving they were legitimate.   More specifically, speaking from my own experience, the one single moment where it crystallized for me was while I was doing stuff around the house and came into the kitchen during the Saturday game just in time to hear Pat Hughes' call of a triple hit by Dexter Fowler which helped them put a stranglehold on that particular game (I have radios and TV's on all over the house when the game's on...drives my wife crazy but a guy's gotta live).  Listening to that call I got goosebumps and at that moment came to the realization that "Holy shit this team's actually probably going to go to the playoffs!"

[Quality Start Machine]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish. 

How was the start bad? They opened the season going into Shea and beat the Mets so badly, it might have made the top 5 home team losses by point differential in Shea Stadium history, and that was a stadium that hosted the Jets for many years.

They were hanging around first for most of the first half, and they were a lot more fun to watch than the previous season's team. Hee Seop Choi looked like he might not suck, Corey Patterson played pretty well and this was back before people would tell Chuck to go fuck himself every time Corey did anything of note. Sammy had his cork incident, the Cubs had no third baseman, and some big moves had to come to close the deal.

But by early June, that Yankees series was the balls.

That was the 2003 version of this year's San Francisco series, when everyone became believers.

That Giants series will definitely be one to remember for a long time. If I had to pick a turning point for this team, though, it's the Bryant walkoff vs. Colorado. That was the start of the surge.

Agree with this.  Came right on the heels of getting swept (and no-hit) by the worst team in the league at home, then blowing this same game in the top of the 9th.  They've been a different team since then (and Bryant's been on another level as well).

I also agree with the Giants series proving they were legitimate.   More specifically, speaking from my own experience, the one single moment where it crystallized for me was while I was doing stuff around the house and came into the kitchen during the Saturday game just in time to hear Pat Hughes' call of a triple hit by Dexter Fowler which helped them put a stranglehold on that particular game (I have radios and TV's on all over the house when the game's on...drives my wife crazy but a guy's gotta live).  Listening to that call I got goosebumps and at that moment came to the realization that "Holy shit this team's actually probably going to go to the playoffs!"

And now I have an indelible image of Huard on the thunder mug with a portable black and white TV in his lap.

[R-V]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish. 

How was the start bad? They opened the season going into Shea and beat the Mets so badly, it might have made the top 5 home team losses by point differential in Shea Stadium history, and that was a stadium that hosted the Jets for many years.

They were hanging around first for most of the first half, and they were a lot more fun to watch than the previous season's team. Hee Seop Choi looked like he might not suck, Corey Patterson played pretty well and this was back before people would tell Chuck to go fuck himself every time Corey did anything of note. Sammy had his cork incident, the Cubs had no third baseman, and some big moves had to come to close the deal.

But by early June, that Yankees series was the balls.

That was the 2003 version of this year's San Francisco series, when everyone became believers.

That Giants series will definitely be one to remember for a long time. If I had to pick a turning point for this team, though, it's the Bryant walkoff vs. Colorado. That was the start of the surge.

Agree with this.  Came right on the heels of getting swept (and no-hit) by the worst team in the league at home, then blowing this same game in the top of the 9th.  They've been a different team since then (and Bryant's been on another level as well).

I also agree with the Giants series proving they were legitimate.   More specifically, speaking from my own experience, the one single moment where it crystallized for me was while I was doing stuff around the house and came into the kitchen during the Saturday game just in time to hear Pat Hughes' call of a triple hit by Dexter Fowler which helped them put a stranglehold on that particular game (I have radios and TV's on all over the house when the game's on...drives my wife crazy but a guy's gotta live).  Listening to that call I got goosebumps and at that moment came to the realization that "Holy shit this team's actually probably going to go to the playoffs!"

Validating this statement - Bryant's slash line starting with that Colorado game:

.327/.396/.589/.985 with 15 doubles & 13 HRs in 58 games

Pat has mentioned this quite a bit lately but extremely impressive for a 23 year old rookie who has never played this long of a season before.

[SKO]

Ranked by favorite team:

1. 1989 Cubs
2. 1984 Cubs
3. 2015 Cubs
4. 1998 Cubs
5. 2003 Cubs

The 2003 Cubs were fun in August and September and part of October.  Bad start, bad finish.  

How was the start bad? They opened the season going into Shea and beat the Mets so badly, it might have made the top 5 home team losses by point differential in Shea Stadium history, and that was a stadium that hosted the Jets for many years.

They were hanging around first for most of the first half, and they were a lot more fun to watch than the previous season's team. Hee Seop Choi looked like he might not suck, Corey Patterson played pretty well and this was back before people would tell Chuck to go fuck himself every time Corey did anything of note. Sammy had his cork incident, the Cubs had no third baseman, and some big moves had to come to close the deal.

But by early June, that Yankees series was the balls.

That was the 2003 version of this year's San Francisco series, when everyone became believers.

That Giants series will definitely be one to remember for a long time. If I had to pick a turning point for this team, though, it's the Bryant walkoff vs. Colorado. That was the start of the surge.

Agree with this.  Came right on the heels of getting swept (and no-hit) by the worst team in the league at home, then blowing this same game in the top of the 9th.  They've been a different team since then (and Bryant's been on another level as well).

I also agree with the Giants series proving they were legitimate.   More specifically, speaking from my own experience, the one single moment where it crystallized for me was while I was doing stuff around the house and came into the kitchen during the Saturday game just in time to hear Pat Hughes' call of a triple hit by Dexter Fowler which helped them put a stranglehold on that particular game (I have radios and TV's on all over the house when the game's on...drives my wife crazy but a guy's gotta live).  Listening to that call I got goosebumps and at that moment came to the realization that "Holy shit this team's actually probably going to go to the playoffs!"

Validating this statement - Bryant's slash line starting with that Colorado game:

.327/.396/.589/.985 with 15 doubles & 13 HRs in 58 games

Pat has mentioned this quite a bit lately but extremely impressive for a 23 year old rookie who has never played this long of a season before.

I remember in the spring I believe it was Keith Law who put out an Evan Longoria comp for Bryant. I remember thinking how awesome it would be if Bryant had anything close to as good of a rookie year as Longoria's. He ended up being better (.377 wOBA vs .370, 6.2 WAR vs 5.6, albeit in 24 more games so far). I still can't believe he's a Cub.