With the Cubs off to a good start, the guys break down how it’s happened despite some very unimpressive offensive stats (other than Dexter Fowler). Taking pitches has definitely helped, but pretty amazing to be off to this kind of start when so many players are around the Mendoza line. The Cardinals are coming! Wouldn’t anyone in their right mind want the Cubs roster over the Cardinals roster? The guys discuss. Also, Javy Baez is back on the team and they discuss the benefits of having him vs trading him.
For 60 Seconds with a former Cub, Joel drops some serious A-material on Bob Tewksbury and the guys can’t stop laughing. Well done, Joel. Ryan has the question of the week and Isaac covers the at bat of the week. Can you guess which one he picked? It’s an easy one…
All of the Tewksbury nicknames were great, but Tewksbury beret was my personal fave. Hilarious!
Glad you find us as funny as we find ourselves!
Great podcast. Only one gripe though. You start the Cardinals section off by, correctly, disparaging a Cardinal beat writer for engaging in the logical fallacy that the Cardinals will beat the Cubs, even with a weaker roster, simply because they did so in the past. Shortly after this you then engage in the same fallacy by assuming that the Cardinals will fall off a cliff because teams in the past have (i.e. the Yankees and 90’s Braves). The fallacy is the same in that it is the old “it happened in the past so it will happen now”.
Do I agree with your Cardinals off a cliff conclusion? Yes. However, and perhaps you would have gotten into this if you had more time, it is because there are structural issues with the Cardinals that will cause them to fall off a cliff. They have an aging core without much in the farm system. Furthermore, they seem to have trouble attracting top level talent to the team this year.
Peter,
I appreciate your comment! Yes, if we had planned to delve a bit deeper into the topic we would’ve discussed the more specific reasons why the Cardinals are headed toward an eventual dip in success. However, we had a ton of Tewksbury nicknames to squeeze in.
As for the comparison to the Braves and Yankees, I don’t see it as a logical fallacy to compare to long-term dynasties of the past. All runs come to an end eventually, and they are solid examples of that. What would be a logical fallacy would be to ignore what might be a tremendously talented Cardinals team and say “well, the Braves dynasty ended eventually so the Cardinals’ will now too”.
Thanks for listening and commenting!