The Cubs Tug-Of-War With Perception

The Cubs are having the exact season they should be having, it's just warped by what's around them.

Back in my full-time Cubs writing days, "The Ivy Drip Era," let's call it, the worst day to write anything was after losing a series to St. Louis. It's impossible to be rational, and would be especially so after three nights of listening to three different broadcasts slob all over Yadier Molina because he was loitering in the Cards dugout for some reason. All that was possible was scribbling in an incoherent rage that only produced the written equivalent of grunts and throwing up stomach acid.

It might be only slightly easier now, as one's bile for the Cardinals never subsides even if other devotions do. The sky does seem to be falling around Clark and Addison at the moment. It doesn't help that Milwaukee hasn't lost a game in a month, or at least that's what it feels like. This could be a time when I would point out that the Cubs' front office merely aiming for 92 wins left the door open to some surprise like the Brewers more than they needed to (and I really want to!), but let's leave that for a bit.

The Cubs are still on pace for those 92 wins at the moment. If they played in the other divisions in the NL, they'd be a game behind either the Dodgers or Phillies, which sounds way better than six games behind the Squad Up North That Can't Lose. The fourth-best record in the National League doesn't really sound all that grand, but it's better than those "Fifth Best Record In The NL In The Second Half!" banners they were flying a season or two ago.

Even with my constant harping, if the Cubs had built the team to win 97 or 98 games this season, and if they were on that pace right now, they'd still be three games behind Milwaukee. That sounds way better than six, and could be made up in just one series next week when the Brewers start their residency at Wrigley. It's just a measure of how other worldly Milwaukee has been for a couple months. It's also not a pace anyone would expect them to maintain. But even if they don't, six games is a lot make up, even on a flattening-out team.

The Cubs have been a middling-to-ok team longer than they were a really good one now, following up their two months of brilliance with 9-10 weeks of "meh" to "ehh." They're 31-28 since June 1, which is more games than their 36-22 run to open the season. The truth is they probably aren't either of these teams.

I accidentally broke my policy of not catching any pregame shows, especially national ones, before the Cubs and Cards on Fox on Saturday night. Dontrelle Willis certainly has personality, but I don't know that he comes within a couple blocks of "expert." He was commenting on Pete Crow-Armstrong striking out over 30 percent of the time in the 2nd half with a .283 OBP, "...and we know he's a better player than that."

Well...do we? We know he's capable of stretches where he's much better than this. But we know he's also capable of exactly this for long stretches, too. He did it last season. It's all evened out to a 126 wRC+ and a .823 OPS. Doesn't that sound about what he probably is overall? That might even be on the high-side.

Seiya Suzuki hasn't been able to hit the Terry Boers Memorial bull in the ass with a banjo for a month now. But his wRC+ currently is 129. The previous three seasons, he put up marks of 118, 127, 137. This is who he is, even if he's taken a spikier path to get there.

No one really bought that "Carson Kelly - Professional Doomsday Device" was any kind of long term phenomena. The staff and the lineup both looked one to one and a half players short before the season, and that's kind of how it's proven. This is who they were meant to be, even if they did a seductive dance in April and May.

The thing is, MLB doesn't really want fans to care what the narrative of the regular season is anymore. Let's play out two scenarios, and try to figure out what the perception of the Cubs season would be afterwards.

One, their current course. They remain just enough in the Brewers wake to do some cool wave-running (I was just had some jet ski time, sorry) but never catch them, finish out with 92-93 wins. They host the Padres in the Wildcard Round. It's easy to see that going any of the four possible outcomes. If it goes one of the two Cubs ways, then they head off to Philly or L.A or Milwaukee, though likely the latter, as the standings currently are.

Again, over five games, the Cubs could easily beat any of the three. The Dodgers pitching could be in any kind of shape, and both their and the Phillies lineup are pretty top-heavy. Keep the 1-4 hitters from murdering you, and anyone's got a chance. The Brewers don't have a lot of slug, it gets harder to string singles together in the playoffs, and we know what their history in the Division Series has been.

Let's just say it peters out in the NLCS. That's two rounds won, one step from a World Series, a place the Cubs haven't been in eight years, and a couple weeks of excitement around town. Everyone might feel decently enough about that.

Now go the other way. The Cubs get hot to close the season, the horseshoe that's been up the Brewers ass for months now suddenly gets lodged in their lower intestine, and they start...well, we don't really need to go over those symptoms. You get the idea. The Cubs get up to 97-98 wins, and pip the Brewers in the last week.

They get to skip the Wildcard round, and after it all shakes out it's the Brewers who arrive to start the Division Series. But those annoying singles they have been stringing together all season keep happening, that bullpen remains lights out, and Misiorowski, Peralta, and Woodruff can each get through 4-5 innings in a start to turn it over to that pen. The Cubs go home at the first step, there was barely time to bask in a pretty furious September, and it's over in less than a week in October.

The difference between these two seasons is a couple wins in the playoffs? With the additional round only in one of them? The six or seven game difference in the last six weeks of the season, would anyone remember? It's the greater sample size, but it's also the one that gets far less value put on it. Yet it is the better season, the better team. It just doesn't get defined that way.

There's many saying that the Cubs aren't built to be October-ready, anyway. Maybe. But is there such a thing? The Dodgers certainly weren't planning last season to be led by Tommy Edman and pitchers who didn't throw 100 innings for them during the season.

It's been deflating for the Blue half of the city. But perhaps all it's been is a revealing of what the Cubs actually are. And that could still be anything two months from now.