Uproar and Heresy (Volume II of The Latecoming West) - A.P. Andes (2023)

At a certain point, when updates become less frequent and the time to read is hard to find, the work here tends to coalesce and odd connections and coincidences form. Of course there was recently the Molly/Albini dichotomy, wherein a book offered similar rhapsodies to my own in the wake of an untimely passing, from an entirely different and prescient context. And similarly separated by one item, we have two Volume Twos in two tetralogies with slow starts that end on higher notes. One is this and the other of course is Authority, and at the time we did not know that Area X Vol IV (Absolution) would be coming on 10/22/24. 

Like Authority, Uproar and Heresy, Vol II of The Latecoming West, started slowly for me. Unlike that work of speculative fiction, it was not a completely new setting with a completely new character--though it actually does include an element of that--but for the most part, it is a continuation of Volume I. 

*

 A.P. Andes is unlikely to reach J.K. Rowling-levels of wealth and fame, or even Jeff VanderMeer-levels, but The Latecoming West surely could be adapted into a powerful limited series, with the right context.  For one it is quasi-religious programming, which has a certain viewership of sometimes incredible numbers. The problem is that this story is not a straightforward depiction of Catholic faith--it is an exploration of the entire religious order, and a dismantling of it to a degree. 

Further relevance could be staked on controversial "rad-trad" beliefs percolating in conservative circles. Such individuals reject the framework of Vatican II and prefer the older traditions of the Catholic Church. This is, understandably, something of a moot point. "Rad trads" do not opine on Pope Joan. In fact, very few people opine on Pope Joan. 

The most famous Joan is St. Joan of Arc and plenty of people know about her. Not all Popes become Saints, but sometimes they do. Pope Joan, in her depiction here at least, is no saint. She is a kind and benevolent and good person, but she is not a saint insofar as she is committing a fraud against the Church and also engaging in "relations" outside of marriage. The Latecoming West asks, to a degree, what is so wrong about that, and why we have these arbitrary rules that are often manipulated by those in power to suit their own sometimes nefarious ends. The hypocrisy of "true believers" subjugating women while they maintain their own authority and dictate rules to live by to all but themselves (in certain cases) is apparently impossible to illuminate, and that persistent frustration remains relevant today. The end result of The Latecoming West could be Catholic reform, and while I am sure Andes would welcome that, I do not believe he has such grandiose goals with his work. 

*

It may sound dismissive to say the first half of the book went more slowly for me, and that it does not break much further new ground than Volume I, but it would have been worse to close out the Lorsch section of the chronicle without providing full context. While some of the material on the Gnostics and other heretical sects of Christianity is a natural outgrowth of those explorations in Volume I, for some reason those studies feel less important to Joan than being with Clovis. And it feels less important to the overall narrative in general. I still enjoyed these sections but they did not "connect" with me quite as strongly as in Vol I, because the "suspicion" narrative overtook it. Vol I. felt more like a bildungsroman for Joan, "worldview-building," for lack of a better term, charting her intellectual growth and assimilation into the monastic life at Lorsch. She has fears of being discovered, but that anxiety is outweighed by the exhilaration she finds in the "hidden texts" of the library. Clovis saves her life, and then helps her make it to Lorsch, and then basically exits the novel, until re-emerging in the opening of Vol II, for a potential tryst which is thwarted by an all-female pagan celebration/ritual ("Samhain") in the night. She is hurt rather badly--beaten and sexually assaulted--and she is mad at Clovis for not realizing the danger of meeting up that night (perhaps a precursor to Halloween), and he is mad at her for flaking on him, until he hears her story. Though this is a traumatic episode that humiliates and frightens her, she goes along with it out of desperation. And later in the novel, this "motif" appears again, in a far more benevolent context (in the character of Alcippe, who feels like an avatar for Sappho, or perhaps a Greek goddess, in a setting that feels like the Island of Lesbos), and introduces a layer of sexual fluidity to her character, which feels inevitable. Joan contains multitudes, and her various journeys and awakenings in this volume more deeply establish her as a Queer archetype. Though the prospect of heterosexual domesticity with Clovis is clearly available, both he and her recognize she is destined for "greater things," and so instead she remains an "imposter" and subsumes pretty much every identity in the LGBT-alphabet while remaining terrified of being "outed."   

At a certain point Clovis obtains a post and a private room at the monastery, part-time, and while it makes sense that he could strike such a bargain (and the scene where he demonstrates his leverage over Father Abbot is one of the best moments in the book), it seems primarily aimed at advancing the plot. Of course, this is the closest Joan comes to having "the best of both worlds," and probably her happiest moments, but they are all suffused with anxiety and ultimately lead to her undoing, through which she once again survives only because of him. For me at least, the impact of that relationship on her feels more prominent than the impact of the scholasticism that made her love the routines of the monastic life as depicted in Volume I. It felt as though the developments of this section of the novel leave her distracted and confused and ambivalent about whatever "God's plan" may hold for her.  

*

John the Angelic included a highly noticeable "WTF" element, with channel changing between the History Channel and VH-1 (albeit more academic musical programming) and 1980's movie scenes, which felt inexplicable, but added a level of intrigue to the novel. I am not sure it "worked" and it seemed to be deployed at random. 

This is noticeably absent from Uproar and Heresy, and in its place is a more fully-realized counternarrative, which is arguably more compelling than the primary one. This is the story of the meet-cute between Rahel and Patek in Germany in 1933 and events unfolding over the next seven or so years of their lives. They are Polish Jews, and they are eventually forced to return there. They witness the rise of Hitler, and while Rahel initially feels exuberant and hopeful about the future of the country, Patek sees the writing on the wall, so to speak, and these portions of the novel feel especially relevant today, not only with the bloodshed between Israel and Palestine, but the presence of an authoritarian impulse in our home country (and many others springing up elsewhere). There is a cliche about history that is often applied to Holocaust narratives, i.e. those that do not know it are doomed to repeat it, and while there has been near-perennial "Oscar bait" that is based in this era in the 30 years since Schindler's List (with The Zone of Interest fulfilling that quota most recently), it sadly bears repeating. The horrors are simply unmatched, and the inhumanity is both astounding and perplexing.

7.5 years ago, we had occasion to review The Paris Architect. I would say it is on equal footing with Uproar & Heresy--if popularity with audiences is on equal footing with artistic merit (a complicated question in 2024, or any time, as the potential return on investment often becomes the key metric in determining whether a work of art can reach a wider audience). On the whole, Uproar has a more profound message, even if it feels a bit muddled. It reaches greater intellectual heights, but its focus is bifurcated. And really, it is more like 80% Joan, and 20% Rahel and Patek. The Paris Architect was not a great novel, but reasonably entertaining with more of a "thriller" element, limited, and neat. It was about an architect building secret rooms to hide Jews in Paris. It was enormously popular. It was optioned for a film adaption in 2016, and that project is either stalled or abandoned. 

I have no doubt that had Uproar and Heresy maintained focus on this narrative, it would have been superior to The Paris Architect, and would find a larger audience and greater commercial success. But there is no "hook" to give it narrative heft, beyond its apparent connection to the Pope Joan narrative. Even so, being limited perhaps to 40 pages out of the 200 in this book, it is far more compelling in its historical-political accuracy: 

"'Look at how he came to power,' he pointed out, counting out the dates on his fingers. 'The day after he is named chancellor, on the thirty-first of January, 1933, he promises the German people a parliamentary democracy. Yet the very next day, he dissolves Parliament. On the 2nd of February, he forbids all meetings of the Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands and undertakes a systematic search and seizure of their munitions. Two days later, on the fourth of February, Hindenburg--no doubt at Hitler's bidding--restricts freedom of the press." (92)

"'Do you think because he's the head of our government, he won't kill people? Listen--' Patek was furious and started a sentence three different times before taking a breath and speaking with calm deliberation. 'You need to understand how this man looks at human beings, and Jewish human beings in particular. Have you read Mein Kampf?
Rahel shook her head.
'Hitler categorises mankind into three groups: the founders of culture, the bearers of culture and the destroyers of culture. For him, the Aryan race is the sole member of the first group. The Japanese and Latins are examples of the second group, who are capable of maintaining a culture that has already been created but lack the nobility and genius to create one on their own initiative. Then we come to the third group: those who will destroy culture through their greed, malice, cowardice and ineptitude. In this class belongs the Jews and the Negroes. It is in essence a subhuman classification, and the laws that Hitler has put into place are the perfect logical, legal expression of such a status.'" (96-97)

Perhaps being a counter-narrative itself is its own "hook," and in any case, it works better than the "alternative" aspect to Vol I. As the stakes are raised as the 1930's proceed, when the narrative jumps back to Joan, she is finally leaving Lorsch and moving onto the next phase of her journey, which is an expedition to Greece to a new monastery with Clovis. (I am wary of spoiling either narrative and all I will say is that both pick up and the 2nd half of the novel is probably the best overall "section" of the tetralogy to this point, even if certain sections of Vol I. stretch towards more profound heights). But it begs the question, as in its predecessor: what is the connection?

*

One morning in Stockholm with a traveling companion in late August, we were enjoying fika while I perused these pages, and I read from a certain section and asked my friend, who takes deeper academic interest in history, religion and culture than me, what he thought the connection would be. 

Well, he said, the Nazis knew the truth about Pope Joan. They had proof that she had existed and reigned as Pope and been white-washed as Pope Johannes, and they were preparing to release such information until they had been defeated and such proof was discovered and hidden again to protect the Church.

He spoke as if this was common knowledge, or perhaps he was just extrapolating some connection that he could divine from what I had said about the book over the previous days. It is not a spoiler to say such a connection is not depicted in Vol II, and there is not even a "hint" towards the connection. 

Does the plight of Rahel and Patek mirror the plight of Pope Joan, the forced exile from Germany akin to the exile from Lorsch? I don't think so, because the departure from Lorsch is not nearly as involuntary. Are they demonized for their Jewish background as she is demonized for her gender? Not as unthinkably, in her case. Does the German government's treatment of the Jewish people in this era mirror the Catholic Church's treatment of Joan? Not quite because Joan would be more of an "embarrassment," with the Church pretending that never happened, and while there are unhinged Holocaust-deniers out there still, Germany itself has done what it can to disavow its part in the most evil moment on human history--it doesn't pretend it never happened.   

And so my friend's theory--unlikely and fantastical though it may be--is arguably the most plausible, and one that lends itself best to fiction. The problem is it posits such Nazis as champions of truth, which is impossible to believe. I am not clear why they would want to destroy the Church, and what the actual impact would be of such a revelation. It does not seem like it would make a very big difference in 1945, or even in 2024. It would merely force the Church to reckon with its classification of the roles women were allowed to play (i.e. nuns). 

Regardless of how messily it might serve the narrative, certainly, the "discovery of the truth" moment and the consequent dissembling of that once again would be the most powerful connection between the two narratives--Joan's 1st-person narrative, and the third person narrative of the later era, when she is unknown by history but might have been, absent the type of "hiding away" of texts at Lorsch that do not serve the Christian narrative according to the four basic Gospels. History is messy and written by the victors to serve their own ends and mirror their belief systems of right and wrong. This is a theme of The Latecoming West, but it has yet to be fully developed. 

*

Or perhaps I am totally off and it is more about the relationship between Judaism and Christianity going back towards the founding of the Church:

"I already harboured antipathy towards Catholicism from the Church Fathers' writing condemning both women and Jews, but after the Gnostics and Valentinus most of all, my view of the Church was, if anything, softened. Marcion and the Valentinians were worse in their invalidation of the Jewish people and their religion. Valentinus may not have gone quite so far as Montanus, who proclaimed himself the Paraclete, but the different was meaningless, for Valentinus had rendered an unknowable scripture. This was the antithesis of the Word embodied in the spirit and words of Christ." (43)

Earlier, this almost posits Constantine the Great and Tertullian as precursors to Hitler for their "unflinching contempt" towards the Jewish people, but I feel I am oversimplifying, and that is something The Latecoming West does not do. Perhaps the first half is even "headier" than Vol I. and I simply missed it, skimming over some of these deeper contemplations to get towards the "action," which for me at least came in the 1930's narrative, and perhaps only because it felt more relatable to our present day-and-age. For one example, I skirted over the fact that Clovis is not just a "male saviour" that serves as Joan's vehicle towards new settings, but an intellectual influence as well that tempers her adherence to traditional Christian beliefs and expands her worldview: 

"Clovis, who in his twenties had spent several years in Athens and was a fluent reader and speaker of Greek, had introduced me to the ideas of Plutarch, who came after Plato, teaching that God, the Creator of the world, had transformed matter as the vessel for evil into a divine World-Soul, which was however, the source of all evil. Plutarch's cosmos thus exists both as good and evil, in what was called the Dyad. 
'You might think Plutarch's World-Soul inspired the malevolent demiurge of Valentinus,' Clovis had cautioned me. 'But Plutarch, just like Plato has a virtuous World-Soul and its dark side co-governing the universe in concert. Both Plato's and Plutarch's visions are distinct entire from the Gnostic view of a faulty creator fashioning the world as the inherent source of all evil.'" (21)

What follows is an excerpt from Plato's Timaeus (which I had not even heard of before, and which harkens back to Volume I's brilliant Phaedo-redux) interpolated by 2 pages (as in Volume I) that are not words but two abstract color images which may illustrate the creation of the universe or something else entirely. I simply do not know, and I do not think Andes wants us to know, yet (there is another similar page towards the end of the text which feels less abstract). And I am not sure what Volumes III and IV will hold, but I would guess they will have some kind of "WTF" element that accentuates the narrative, and I would hope that the story of Rahel and Patek will be continued. The novel ends on a note not entirely dissimilar to the opening pages of Volume I, where we see Joan in a new setting after attaining a higher-rank, four years later--but in the former case it serves as a "teaser" for her destiny, and in this case, a natural progression and demonstration of revolutionary thought, and recognition. It hints that Volume III will depict Joan's final years before ascending the papacy, and Volume IV will finally deliver on what exactly happened during her reign as Pope.  

Whatever the case, I look forward to them. These are not perfect books, but they seem to be about something very important that goes to the heart of our belief systems and concepts of faith. They are noble attempts at discovering the truth of the nature of our existence, and how we may best love and support others around us (especially those that are irrationally and inhumanely condemned). This is at the very foundation of what it means to be human, and the same intellectual discourse that the Greeks undertook 2400 years ago, when they had very little recorded history on which to reflect. We now have the benefit of witnessing the progress of technology--as well as the turmoil, bloodshed, intolerance and ignorance that have persisted through the present age. We may know more about the nature of the universe, and have gone to the Moon, and have created little computers to keep on our persons at all times, and imaginary robots that sweep up all of human knowledge into a tidy few sentences to determine the truth (or current understanding) about any given subject, but we still fall prey to the baser human instincts of jealousy, envy, competition, dominance, and the dangerous pride that sometimes accompanies ambition. As such, it is fair to look to the Greeks as having just as advanced an understanding of the human heart and mind as we do today--and this is just one among several precepts that The Latecoming West seems to suggest. History is all around us, and we will only advance as a civilization if we are able to peer a little closer and understand what got us here. 

Grade: A-

Chicago Cubs 2024 Year-End Report Card

 A couple days ago, the Cubs were mathematically eliminated from postseason play, and as we have done for now 11 years, we will review the team's performance on an individual player level (to the extent practicable, this often turns into a monumental task) in an attempt to diagnose what went wrong, and what we can do to win in 2025.

This year's report card starts where they sometimes end--with the manager. 

Craig Counsell: C-

In November 2023, the Cubs announced that they had signed Craig Counsell to a 5-year, $40 million contract. This was the most exciting managerial signing since Joe Maddon, which is not really saying much but still, it was a similar clear-cut sign that the team intended to compete seriously for playoff contention. We all know how close we came last year.  

After the results this year, which either will be equivalent or one win better depending on the final game, we may latently acknowledge that David Ross did a pretty good job with this team. He was a first time manager. Counsell is a rather experienced manager at this point and of course not everyone has Joe Maddon's (or to take an example from another sport, Phil Jackson's) ability to transform a clubhouse with gravitas. Counsell was denigrated by a certain contingent of Brewers fans, when a public park bearing his name near where he grew up was vandalized. Some viewed it as an act of betrayal, but more practical people realized it was the result of a cheap front office in Milwaukee--or was it? Whatever the case, it was amusing to see Counsell get booed anytime he came out of the dugout (he almost seemed to relish in it at a certain point), he did get ejected from a couple games, and of all people, he was the one to finally turn me into a "Swiftie" (never forget the candle). 

I think in this case, there were growing pains. Ross knew many on the team personally as former teammates. Counsell knew many on the team as former opponents. The season started off on a brilliant note, and in April it looked like 2015 again. However, May brought us back to reality, and the "June swoon" was in full bloom this year. It wasn't until after the all-star break that the team began to right the ship. 

The team went through various stages of struggles, but the story of the season is defined by two deficiencies: (1) bullpen struggles early on/decline of Alzolay; (b) offensive struggles until the TS rejuvenation. At the end of the year, however, I think more fans have reason to be optimistic for 2025 than they did for 2024, because the pieces have effectively been set, and there are only a few holes left to fill. The rotation was a bright spot, and perhaps it's best to start with the 2nd biggest move of the off season, and unlike Counsell, an unqualified success:

Shota Imanaga: A

Although the Cubs were allegedly involved in the bidding wars for Ohtani and Yamamoto, they were never really serious contenders for either, and instead wound up with the "consolation prize," who no, did not perform better than Ohtani, but yes, did eclipse the flashier and younger one-way player and became an instant celebrity and local hero. Yamamoto went 7-2 with a 3.00 ERA in 18 starts and 90 innings pitched (apparently was injured a bit). Imanaga went 15-3 with a 2.91 ERA in 29 starts and 173.1 innings pitched. He was the Cubs only All-Star and though he won't win the Cy Young or the Rookie of the Year award, he arguably deserves the latter. (He also would have thrown a no-hitter if he had been allowed to go beyond his pitch count, and will need to settle for the combined no-hitter.)

"Mike" Imanaga dressed up as Slinky Dog from Toy Story with his translator and provided at least one quotable moment from every single game he played. Not since Kerry Wood or Mark Prior have the Cubs ever had a rookie pitcher come out of the gates as a full-fledged star. Imanaga seemed to have more fun than they did, and also more than almost everyone else in the MLB this year. That being said, while he dazzled the league at first, he was "figured out" and had a few weaker outings. Still, the overall results speak for themselves. He couldn't have done much better this year, and the only sad thing is it will be a difficult performance to match. Despite being the de-facto Ace on the team throughout the entire year, I do not expect him to be the Opening Day starter in 2025. That would be the guy to maintain that post since roughly the departure of Jon Lester.....

Justin Steele: A-

There was another guy that took over for a couple years in between, but Steele came into the league in 2021 and proved his capability in 2022 and solidified his status as the Ace in 2023. The overarching narrative to Steele's 2024 is that it was very good, and while the numbers do not lie, they do not reflect his overall value. 

Steele "redeemed himself" and finished with a 5-5 record (four of those wins came after August 18th). He finishes the year with a 3.07 ERA in 24 starts and 134.2 innings pitched. Notably, he was the opening day starter, and he was injured that same day. We did not have him for the rest of April, and the team performed well in spite of that. He had some difficulties when he returned, but then soon returned to prior form--but the offense never showed up for him until their 2nd half resurgence. Things looked brighter after that, and Steele also became the only Cub to throw a complete game this season. 

Steele basically is our new Lester at this point, and he wants to have about 50 more innings pitched per year, and he was unhappy with himself for being injured (and we all know he cannot be blamed for that). After all of these years of write-ups I still have not properly educated myself on arbitration and other contract issues, but Steele netted $4 million this year after arbitration, and has earned every penny that he has been paid to this point. I would expect that number to double next year, if not triple. He is under team control for two more years, I think, and when he hits the free agent market, he will be going for 5-7x that amount (if not more). It would be prudent to pursue an extension with him, but the odd thing about this team's "competitive window" is that it may close for this "generation" of players in 2026. I do think that Steele can eventually mean as much to this organization as certain other pitchers reaching the probable end of their Cubs tenure this year, but it will be necessary to reach the post-season to prove that. Steele is a competitor, and will anchor the rotation in 2025 with Imanaga, giving us a strong 1-2 punch. We can be confident with the two of them at the top, and another solid performer slotted right behind them.... 

Jameson Taillon: B

Is it true that Taillon led the team in ERA on the 4th of July at 2.99? It sounds believable, and he ended the year #6 in the NL in ERA at 3.27. He finishes 12-8 in 28 starts and 165 innings pitched. He had a couple small injuries, and the primary narrative on him is that the Cubs did not trade him when he was apparently sought before the deadline. I believe most all fans were relieved. He has been more than serviceable. He is an innings-eater that can occasionally turn in a brilliant performance. More often than not, he was solid, and with two years left on his contract, will maintain a key role in this rotation through this immediate "competitive window." As for the 4th and 5th slots, a couple questions remain....

Jordan Wicks: C-

Again, not really fair to blame a guy for getting injured, but not as easy when the overall performance was a big step back from a very encouraging rookie campaign. Wicks stepped up in a big way in 2023 and nearly helped to carry the team into the postseason, so the rotation looked like it would be strong to start the year. Steele went down, and others needed to step up, but soon, Wicks went down too, and though he came back, he did not catch the kind of groove that he was on in 2023 and maybe we can chalk his 2024 as "marred by injuries." I had real confidence in him, coming into this year, and I kept thinking he was just having bad luck, but at a certain point in early September, I lost faith in him. It remains to be seen what he will do this off-season and how he may prove himself again. Clearly the talent is there and it can be unlocked again, but I do not think he is guaranteed a slot in the 2025 rotation. Potentially, he could be the 5th starter. We might as well say it here: the Cubs need to sign at least one really good starter in the off-season (Corbin Burnes being the first ideal option). If they sign 2 really good starers, maybe Wicks becomes a long reliever, or who knows really. I'd love to see him return to form and deliver on the early promise he showed last year. He is still just 25 and entering his prime playing years, so it can happen. If they only add 1 pitcher, however, they do already have a guy for the 5th slot...

Javier Assad: A-

Does Assad want to be a starting pitcher? Don't all pitchers want to start? That wasn't the idea when he first came up for the Cubs. He was a bullpen guy, and he was one of the most reliable ones. At a certain point in 2023, they needed him to step up as a spot-starter, and well, that just kind of continued throughout the entirety of 2024, and he did about as well as could be expected. In April, briefly, even though Steele went down, Assad was nearly as good as Imanaga. Other pitchers (most notably Ben Brown) also leveled up and helped the team maintain its hold near the top of the division. Unfortunately, a similar situation tended to crop up: starter turns in almost quality start, offense gives them a 1 run lead, bullpen or closer blows lead. No question that Assad can be a very valuable relief pitcher. They could have used him there then, but they needed him more as a starter, and you cannot say a guy that went 7-6 with a 3.73 ERA in 29 starts and 147 innings pitched was incapable in that role. Taillon may have had slightly better numbers, but he was also paid 18x as much as Assad. I don't believe anyone on this team provided greater "value" and that merits recognition (I've accordingly boosted him from a B+ to an A-). I do not know how he would feel about going back to the bullpen, but I am not anticipating the Cubs pursuing more than one new starter and would be totally fine with Assad as the #5. Personally, while it's been all but widely-telegraphed, if I were in charge, I would keep another guy in the rotation, though after 9/28/24, that appears extremely unlikely....

Kyle Hendricks: C+ 

No one was harder on him than himself, and Kyle Hendricks made no excuses for his 2024 performance. He admitted it was "bad" on multiple occasions. We know Kyle and his yearly trajectory. Traditionally, he starts slow. He has weak Aprils, and so-so Mays, but usually by June, he gets it together. He appeared to show some decline in 2022 and 2023, yet would also bounce back and return to "vintage Hendricks" often enough to justify a spot on the rotation. 2024 was his most challenging season yet as a player, and while C+ looks like an unfairly high grade, he earns it because he continued to be a total class act. He was famously demoted to the bullpen, and he took the assignment to heart, and worked his way back into the rotation. After the bullpen stint, he returned (for the most part) to prior form. Oh, there were a couple games after that (maybe a few), where he got seriously lit up. But during the last month of the season (1-2 with 2.89 ERA and 28 innings over 4 starts), he showed that he still has it. He wants to continue playing, and I think he will, but after the way the 9/28/24 game went, it will almost certainly not be on the Cubs, given the retirement-level love that was shown to him by the masses that showed up at Wrigley Field for a meaningless game with the also-eliminated Reds. 

It was an outpouring of love that I did not see coming, because I thought I loved Kyle more than most people. Not true. Everyone did. Everyone knew that he didn't make an all-star team and the travesty of that. And when they showed his cumulative numbers over the past 11 seasons, it became clear that he will rightfully be known as a Cubs legend, arguably a greater one than Lester because he started from the ground up (Arrieta, too, was great, but flamed out faster than Kyle as well). 

Kyle will turn 35 in December. He is exactly the type of pitcher than can remain effective into his late 30s and early 40s. No one is saying that he will be Jamie Moyer and he is not talking about pitching until he is 50 but the comparison is not inapposite. He doesn't rely on power; he relies on finesse, control, location, and baseball intelligence. He has performed at the highest level in the game. I wish he'd stay forever, but since it seems all but impossible, I sincerely hope for a Moyer-like "second act" to his career, even if it is with someone else. I will always be a fan. And I am still a fan of this guy even though I more-or-less lost faith in him this year....

Adbert Alzolay: D+

He was injured, that is the excuse. But there is no excuse for blowing 5 saves, let alone in the first month of the season (okay, first 5 weeks). He didn't derail the season for us, but he did snatch defeat from the jaws of victory a few times, and of course these seasons are often determined by matters of 1-3 games. We ended 2023 as an 83 win team, and we end 2024 as an 83 win team. We should have done better, like 90 wins. Maybe with Grandpa Rossi, we would have, but it does not help to imagine alternate realities. 

Adbert was injured, yes, and he is a wonderful person and has great energy and I think he can be a valuable member of the bullpen, but I do not *believe* in him as a closer--not after last April. The Cubs need to add at least 1 starting pitcher, but just as importantly, they need a stud of a closer. Remember when they brought in Wade Davis in 2017, Craig Kimbrel in 2019, or David Robertson in 2022? Yeah, we need someone on that level. Adbert was awesome in 2023, and had 22 saves, so it made sense that he would get the opportunity. But after just having 4 saves this year, and 5 blown ones, he would need to prove himself in a major way. All that being said, neither Kimbrel nor Robertson did great this year, either. Neither did Adbert's replacement...

Hector Neris: C-

Hector "heart attack" Neris was the biggest offseason signing for the bullpen. He brought much needed experience to the bullpen, having pitched in high leverage situations for years and finding some reasonable degree of success. Very quickly, Neris established his M.O.: walk as many players as possible while not allowing any of them to score. That sounds like a joke but it literally seems like what he was trying to do. (Assad did this to a lesser degree as a starter, and not nearly as annoyingly--and it seems certain relief pitchers do thrive on the tension.) And yet, Hector maintained his track record--to a point. After Alzolay got sent down/to the IL, Neris became the de-facto closer, and he performed similarly. Both Alzolay and Neris blew 5 saves each. Ultimately, Neris was released, which made the "experiment" of using him as the closer appear somewhat more questionable in hindsight. I do not think he made anyone so nervous that it killed them, and perhaps it is inappropriate to joke about that, but Neris seemed aware of his nickname and proudly lived up to it. The photo above is taken from Neris's greatest moment of the season--managing to keep the White Sox from scoring in what was a very stressful moment in the stretch run to overcome the six teams ahead of the Cubs in the wild card race. Neris got the job done, and said, "that's why I'm the man," or something else that was similarly self-congratulatory. I loved the shades and I loved the attitude and I loved the attitude of his teammates (even if they hid their frustration) but Neris was no Andrew Miller (or even Jeremy Jeffress--and definitely not Jeremy Jeffress in 2020) and I was not saddened by his release. The idea behind his signing was good, however, the Cubs should add another veteran reliever to the bullpen, as it is stacked with promising young pitchers with more limited service-time. They did make one pick-up that was the highlight of the year for me.....

Jorge Lopez: A-

Famously, Jorge Lopez began the season on the Mets. There was some kind of incident involving him having a meltdown on the field and throwing his mitt into the stands. In a postgame interview, he acknowledged through broken English that he 'must be playing the worst fucking teammate in the MLB,' which sounded sort of like 'must be playing on the worst fucking team in the MLB.' He was released by the Mets the next day. In 28 games with them, he was 1-2 with a 3.76 ERA over 26.1 innings pitched. 

This happened around May 29th, which incidentally, is also when the Cubs were hitting the panic button. We needed bullpen help badly, and I wished and wished that the Cubs would pick up Lopez. He was misunderstood. He has a child awaiting a transplant, and has mental health struggles at times. This is a good man that also has the type of energy that flourishes in Chicago. Dudes that throw their mitts into the stands may be unprofessional, perhaps, but never boring and you can never doubt that they care. When I heard that they did actually do that, I rejoiced. The Cubs did not pick up Joey Votto, which was was one of my 12 wishes for the year, but they did answer my prayers with Jorge Lopez, and for the most part I feel it was a match and I hope we hold onto him for 2025.

Basically, he became the closer after Neris was released, along with Porter Hodge. Apart from that, he was basically a setup man, and he pitched in whatever the situation required. He did great. In 24 games with the Cubs, he went 1-1 with a 2.03 ERA in 26.2 innings pitched. I'd give him an A, but I have to knock it down to an A- (if not a B+) for the unfortunate lowlight that came near the end of the season, when he entered the game in the 8th inning with a 3 run lead, and promptly blew it and put us behind (9/2/24 vs. the Pirates). This after Jameson Taillon had just pitched 7 innings of shutout 3-hit ball. This was right around the time of the beginning of the end--because we really needed to win every game--and something here is worth noting, about that stretch between August 23-Sept 1--but it's best kept to the end. Regardless, every game was crucial, and because of that one outing, it may sour everyone on him. I would put that in similar territory to the Seiya Suzuki missed ball last year, though actually that may be making an unfortunate point. I still love Lopez despite that and think he might have been my favorite player on the team. 

Some other relief pitchers no doubt merit mention. 

Smyly was Smyly, going 4-8 with a 3.84 ERA in 58.2 innings pitched, earning $8.5 million doing so, and he's a free agent and I'm not sure he will be back, but he did alright overall (maybe a B or B-).  

Porter Hodge was great, going 3-1 with a 1.88 ERA in 43 innings pitched, many of them increasingly higher-leverage. He could be the closer in 2025, though I'd rather not go into the off-season believing that. He's 23, and relief pitchers are inconsistent, but I think this is his rookie season and based on that he would get an A. 

Mark Leiter, Jr. started off the season on a huge note, basically being perfect for a pretty long time, and making me rue my statement last year that I would not mind if he was traded. Well, he did great, really great, grade A or grade A- stuff, but then he kind of came back down to earth and I didn't mind when he did end up getting traded, though I am not sure the guy we got in return is that much better. In any case, MLJ went 2-4 with a 4.21 ERA over 36.1 innings pitched. He didn't do much better on the Yankees, but it probably doesn't matter as much because the Yankees don't have the same offensive problems. I'm happy for him, I would say that would be a trade most people would be OK with, and especially this year, though I think he did need to shave off his facial hair. Maybe a B- or C+

Tyson Miller was great, and there is pretty much universal agreement that his signing was a bright spot for the team's front office in 2024. Before we got Jorge Lopez, we got Tyson Miller, and he was probably the most consistent pitcher in the bullpen, going 5-1 with a 2.32 ERA over 62 innings pitched. I think he needs to get an A.

Ben Brown arguably deserves his own profile above because he actually fulfilled a huge role on this team in the early part of the season, and it was due in no small part to him that they came out of the gates on all four cylinders, so to speak. He came up huge for them, like Assad had before. But then he got injured and the sample size is pretty small (1-3 with a 3.58 ERA in 15 games over 55.1 innings pitched). He got lit up a few times, too, but overall I think he made a very good impression, and should figure into the plans in 2025 due to his versatility and willingness to show up for whatever job is needed. B+ is probably fair.

There was also Wesneski (inconsistent, sometimes great, weaker down the stretch, thrown into odd roles also, C+, maybe B-, because he actually had more innings pitched (67) than Smyly and a nearly identical ERA), Nate Pearson (about whom you could say practically the same things, with 66 innings pitched and a bit higher ERA), and then there's Luke Little, Ethan Roberts, Keegan Thompson, the other Paredes, Colton Brewer, Yency Almonte, Jose Cuas, and Daniel Palencia, with smaller sample sizes, to varying degrees of success, a few of which I'd rather not comment on, but it seems Palencia is still young and may yet learn how to develop better control of his pitches. Julian Merryweather, too, was not as impressive with a smaller sample size. 

Bottom line: basically, the pitching was good. Imanaga was amazing, and the other starters were good to great and did their part, to the extent they could, and the starting rotation by and large for most of the season was very good (save for Hendricks's performances earlier in the season). And basically, the bullpen was good. They weren't the problem, though they were in April when we were still having some offensive success (though really, not very much!) and living in situations where we went into the later innings with a lead (generally by 1 run). So while the bullpen coach was just fired today on 9/30/24, and some of the decisions weren't always great, in the end, over the long run, the bullpen did well, and the pitching in general was pretty good. It could definitely be better. 

And so could the hitting. We can go in the order of home runs hit. 

Ian Happ: B+

Home runs are not the most important statistic (I think RBIs are more important), but they are an easy thing to measure, and frankly an area where the Cubs could use some help. Perhaps it is unsurprising that Ian Happ finishes the year as the Cubs home run leader (and also the RBI leader). I am not sure it has happened before, and I think if Christopher Morel had not been traded, he would have finished the year with the most. 

Such as it is, Ian Happ is a cornerstone on this team after signing a 3 year contract last year. He made $20 million this year and totally earned it, and will hopefully totally earn the $20 million next year and the $18 million the year after that. He said he compromised on structure and terms because he wanted to be in Chicago and it seems like once that contract is up, he may go elsewhere (maybe Pittsburgh or Cincinnati?), but regardless, he wasn't on the team in 2016 but he basically could have been, and when he came up in 2017, looking back, he was pretty awesome. 

He went back down to the minors in 2019. He was an all-star in 2022. He has 2 Gold Gloves and may get his 3rd shortly. This season he played just about as well as last season. They were very similar performances at the end of the year. He played in 5 more games last year and had 19 more walks and 4 less home runs. His slugging percentage this year was .10 higher but his OPS was .09 lower. His WAR was 0.9 higher this year than last year, so I guess that makes him that much more valuable and I guess he kind of felt that way. 

Happ is an old school ballplayer and my favorite thing he does is make some kind of incredible ridiculous play and then performatively nonchalantly throw the ball back in for the next plate appearance. This is just the job he does. Rizzo has been gone for 3 years now, and no one has assumed the role of captain on the team. Maybe this was already the case but if it hasn't been clear enough yet, what Ian Happ did for Kyle Hendricks on 9/28/24 cements his status. Happ is the Captain now.

He's been effective in the leadoff spot, and maybe that is where he needs to stay in 2025. Of course, Nico or PCA would be reasonable options as well. 

Michael Busch: A- 

A- for a guy that hit .248? It's 2024. That's league-average now. But his numbers were not quite as good as Happ's. He still gets a higher grade because (a) he exceeded expectations, and (b) it was his rookie season. In many other years, he would have a fairly good shot at Rookie of the Year. This is 2024, however, and he is the 2nd best candidate for that award on the team (either the guy on the Padres and or the guy on the Pirates will probably win though).

The Cubs started off hot, and so did Busch, and for a minute, people were saying we had found Rizzo's heir-apparent. And while it is not unreasonable to imagine that Busch could approach Rizzo's production, he is not as good a contact-hitter. He was a mixed bag, at times. But at the beginning of the year he hit home runs in 5 straight games and it was fun to see how long he could keep it going. At first his defense appeared a bit "sus," but by the end, he was excellent (again Rizzo-Gold-Glove excellent, I'm not sure). In any case, trading for Busch was one of the few moves for which Hoyer should be applauded (probably the 2nd best transaction after the Imanaga signing). 

A brief word may be said about rumors that the Cubs may pursue Pete Alonso, aka Polar Bear, currently on the New York Mets. We do need a serious power hitter and Alonso would probably be the most "affordable" option, but would he be that big of an upgrade over Busch? Rookie Alonso in 2019 with 53 home runs and 120 RBIs? Absolutely a no-brainer. Alonso in 2024 with 34 home runs and 88 RBIs? Closer call. Alonso had 112 more at-bats, and had 13 more home runs and 23 more RBIs than Busch. I think he'd still be an upgrade, and if they go for him I won't complain--but I don't think he should be the primary pursuit in the off-season. (Juan Soto and Corbin Burnes should take priority.)

Seiya Suzuki: B+

Like Happ, Seiya's 2024 was remarkably similar to his 2023. Last year, I gave both players an A-. Maybe I am just being harder on everyone this year. But a B+ is still a good grade, solidly above-average, and Seiya continued to deliver to the extent he was expected.

This picture is taken from when Seiya was placed on the 10-day IL for a strained oblique on 4/15/24. The Cubs recalled Alexander Canario from AAA to fill the roster spot. [We did not see enough of Canario this year. That is one point I wanted to make. He had 25 at-bats and 7 hits and 1 home run and 2 RBIs. That is 4 less than last year, because he had a grand slam in even fewer at-bats (was it his 2nd or 3rd plate appearance in his MLB career when he did it? I think so.) The disregard shown to Canario was one of the canaries in the coal mine when it came to the offensive struggles of this team.]

Back to Seiya--how similar was his performance to 2023? He played in 6 less games this year (138 down to 132). He had two more plate appearances (583 up to 585), three less at-bats (515 down to 512), one less run (75 down to 74), two less hits (147 down to 145), one less RBI (74 down to 73) and one more home run (20 up to 21). Etc. He led the team in .OPS and batting average.

The one area where he was much better was running. Stolen bases went from 6 to 16. He had been caught stealing 7 times last year, and only 6 times this year, which is a bit more respectable. 

The one area where he was much worse was fielding. A few additional gaffes this year built upon the uncertainty that reared its head on that fateful missed ball near the end of last year. There were even rumblings that it might be the dreaded "yips." It was clear how upset Seiya became at himself after that play last year, and though we said we wouldn't be talking about it again a year later, here we are, because sometimes trauma seeps in deeper. By the end of the year, Seiya was in the DH role, and he performed about as well there as he did as a right fielder. I don't think anybody considers him a "bust" because of this, and regardless of whether he is on the field for defense, his status as one of the most consistent hitters on the team assures him a key role in 2025.

Cody Bellinger: B+

The main story a year ago: RESIGN CODY BELLINGER.

The main story this year: IT'S OK IF BELLINGER OPTS OUT AND IT'S OK IF HE OPTS IN BUT *COUGH* PAYROLL FLEXIBILITY

Put me in the "hope he opts in" camp unless they get Juan Soto. At this point, Corbin Burnes is the primary free agent candidate for the Cubs, and he might be the better addition than Soto. Soto plays Left Field and of course he would be an upgrade from Ian Happ and of course certain players could get shifted around on the field but our "hole" is a true power hitter. It seems as though Burnes is not outside the realm of possibility, but Soto probably would be (I know at least one Yankees fan that has said he will never forgive them if they don't extend him). In which case I hope Cody stays, because while he wasn't quite as good as last year, he is a good, disciplined hitter that puts together solid at-bats and constitutes a threat in the lineup. And I don't think a resurgence is out of the question. He took a slight step back in 2018 after a truly remarkable (Trout-like, if not better) rookie season, and then came back in 2019 to do even better than he did in 2017. Last year was the closest he came to a return to form, and yes, this year was a step back, and yes, he struggled with some injuries that may have affected his play.

Appearing in the exact same number of games as last year (130), and in 17 more at-bats and 13 more plate appearances than last year, he has 16 less hits, 8 less home runs, 19 less RBIs, 11 less stolen bases and 41 points lower in batting average. He had 5 more walks than last year, though. 

The key statistic for Bellinger is strikeouts. Happ, Suzuki and Busch (the other biggest power hitters) each had over 160. For reference, the highest number Javier Baez ever had for the Cubs was 167, and that came in his mythic 2018 campaign, the closest he came to MVP. Happ had 168 this year. Bellinger had 89. We have a problem with striking out and leaving runners on base and Bellinger is an antidote to that. He may not have been a "superstar" but he is still a threat in any situation. Whatever happens with Bellinger, he won me over and I will be happy if he chooses to stay on the team. And if he decides to leave, it will not be the end of the world. Last year, it was a real signal from the front office that they listed to fans and prioritized his re-signing. I am optimistic that is a sign of things to come this year.

*EDIT* I forgot I had written the above, and I wrote this today. Leaving it. 

[Cody Bellinger: B

Despite it seeming like he was more bothered by injuries this year, Cody Bellinger played in exactly 130 games both years. He wasn't as good as he was in 2023, I can say that without looking at any stats. He is arguably without a spot in the field, but also a solid versatile replacement option, not unlike the once-great KB. That is probably the fairest comp actually. We lost KB but we got Bellinger as the next best thing. It's safe to say Bellinger has been better than Kris Bryant over the past few seasons, but his performance this year was akin to Bryant's last couple years on the Cubs--certainly above-average and a threatening presence in the lineup, but not setting the world on fire exactly. 

He did have the 3rd best batting average on the team. Doesn't he deserve a B+? Maybe. He got an A last year. He had 8 more home runs and 19 more RBIs in 17 less at-bats last year. I guess maybe because he was so good, his coming back down to not-quite-all-star level is more jarring. It was not unexpected. And by all accounts, Cody is a great teammate and certainly possesses a gravitas of his own. He was perhaps the primary concern of many last off-season, and while his status is still in flux for 2025, there is less commotion around what the Cubs should or should not do. The Cubs did what they did and I think most would view that as a positive move. It's up to Bellinger to decide and while I think most hope he will stay, just as many are indifferent if only because of other players have blossomed (most obviously PCA emerging as an everyday starter). I would expect a slight improvement in 2025 for Bellinger but time will tell (as these posts often chillingly do, years later).]

Dansby Swanson: B+

What is WAR? 

In these write-ups after each year, we tend to focus on the "classic" stats that matter. So many of these newfangled stats are pointless. But this year for the first time, about 15-20 years late to the party, I am actually looking at WAR (maybe next year, I'll learn about WRC+). I know that it means "wins above replacement" and generally measures how valuable they are to the team. I may be completely wrong but I'm going with that for now. 

It stands to reason that a team's highest WAR player will also be the most valuable player on the team. In 2024, that is Dansby Swanson. (This is not quite as strange as David Bote leading the team in RBIs in 2020; Bote, still kicking around and with a short stint in the majors this year after disappearing for the past couple, must be kept for legacy purposes.) I love Dansby and I have his shirt-jersey, but for about half the year, I was one of the very few to keep believing in him, and ultimately that faith paid off. His first half performance was terrible. People are saying now, he may have been injured and Counsell may not have managed that very well.

It has to be water under the bridge now. The season is over. Swanson redeemed himself by eventually going on a torrid stretch near the end of the season. He was better last year and he is downgraded from A- to B+. Arguably deserves to be downgraded to B. 6 less home runs and 14 less RBIs this year. Batting average basically the same (.244 and .242). Like Seiya, he improved in stolen bases. I am not sure how he has the highest WAR but he does. He gets things done when it's a tense situation and he needs to keep the inning going. He's probably going to win another Gold Glove (despite some highly "sus" fielding earlier in the season). He's still got the biggest contract on the team and isn't going anywhere and that is just fine. A full season of Dansby like he was in the 2nd half = an all-star, and I would expect something close to that type of performance in 2025. 

Christopher Morel: D

We thought Morel was the future. We all loved it when Counsell decided to show faith in him and let him play 3rd base almost every day. He made numerous fielding errors, but regardless--in April, we would take it, because he was hitting better than at any point in his young career. His whiff rate was amongst the best in baseball. He was hitting home runs at a rate akin to Pete Alonso. Had he remained on the team, I have to believe he would have finished with over 30 and be at the top of this hitters list.

Unfortunately May, June and July happened, and Morel was traded for Isaac Paredes, a "true" 3rd baseman that came over from the Tampa Bay Rays. I believe the Cubs also let a relief pitcher go to the Rays in the deal but the write-up on the Marquee Sports Network website does not refer to that person, perhaps because they are a shill for the team (though in fairness, they have to be, that is why they came into being--and even though some of the programming is sometimes amusing, and even though the network was supposed to bring in more revenue to help support a big-market payroll, I do not think I am alone when I say I miss WGN a lot). 

Did I like this deal? No. Morel is the closest thing the Cubs had to Javy Baez since 2021. PCA had not yet emerged when Morel departed, but now we see PCA as that person, and even though he does play with verve and and generates similar excitement, Morel is one-of-a-kind. 

I am sad to have lost him, but perhaps he will flame out in Tampa Bay or get released for some reason and we can pick him back up at a bargain rate. Some players are just meant to be in Chicago and flourish here unlike other places, and he is one of them. That being said, his May, June and July months were terrible, and whatever discipline he was displaying in April seemed to get "figured out" by pitchers and perhaps he had trouble re-adjusting. We heard that Morel might get traded because he was a valuable bargaining chip and we didn't want to believe it would happen.

But it did happen. And so we have Paredes now, and we have to believe the move will ultimately pay off in the end. 

Isaac Paredes: D+

This year, it didn't. Would we have made the playoffs with Morel? The world will never know. And even though Paredes was a disappointment overall, he did display flashes of greatness--perhaps most conspicuously during that last week of August when the team roared back from the brink of despair and turned us all back into temporary believers. 

But if you look at their 2024 stats, Morel and Paredes are fair comps, and the Cubs got the better end of it. Morel hit .196. Paredes hit .238. Paredes had 80 RBIs to Morel's 60. Paredes had 24 more hits than Morel and only had 7 more at-bats. I initially rated him a D- but I am moving him up to a D+. He only hit .223 as a Cub. He did actually have a better first 1/2 of the season and played for the AL in the All-Star game. I think both players will have bright futures. People have already whispered about Paredes as a potential bargaining chip, and many may bemoan that the Cubs did not go for Matt Chapman in the off-season, but I think we need to go into 2025 knowing that Paredes will be playing 3rd base, unless there is some kind of massive free agent signing out of the blue. We have to love and support him, and we hope it will be easy. At least we have a few others that are easy to love....

Pete Crow-Armstrong: A-

I wasn't sure I believed in PCA in 2023 when he came up and batted .000 in 14 at-bats and 19 plate appearances. I gave him a pass because I'm pretty sure my cumulative little league batting average was .000 (but I had an excellent on-base percentage and scored often enough to not be totally useless). We all need to make adjustments. 

He made those in 2024 and he became the player that so many people said we were getting when we lost Javy Baez to the Mets. This year, that trade finally paid off. I don't even need to look up Javy Baez's 2024 numbers to know that PCA did better. I will always miss Javy (did you see when the Cubs did that tribute to him when the Tigers came into town, and it looked like it brought tears to his eyes? We will always love him here. Just as we will always love Hendricks, and even Rizzo despite un-fact-checked political leanings) but PCA is indeed the future, and I think after this year, everyone is totally fine with that. Of all the players the Cubs have, he is the closest thing they have to a potential superstar. 

To be that, his 2025 will need to build on this year, and if he can play like he did in the last 2 months of the season, there is no question that he will make the All-Star team. PCA stole 27 bases this year, good for 2nd on the team, but he can clearly get 50+ next year. He had an inside-the-park HR, and was clocked as one of the fastest runners in the MLB (if not the fastest). He would be a great leadoff hitter, but he seemed to perform well in the bottom half of the lineup, and became a threatening presence as the year wore on. He is probably the most exciting player on the team and the clearest symbol of hope for the future. We can expect him to start in Center Field almost every game in 2025.

Nico Hoerner: B

Nico did what Nico does. In a continuing trend, his 2024 performance largely mirrored his 2023 performance--but slightly worse. 16 less hits and a surprising 20 less RBIs and down from 43 stolen bases to 31. Batting average down from .283 to .273, which is still good for 2nd best on team behind Seiya.

In terms of WAR, it goes Swanson, Happ, Hoerner, Seiya and then finally Shota. Look I think we all know Shota was the most valuable player on the team this year. So I don't think WAR matters. Of course he is only playing every 5th game, so that should be factored in. The other 4 guys at the top probably had more plate appearances than anyone else on the team. I'm glad my guy Dansby is #1, but I don't think it matters as much as the "classic" stats. Nico could just as well be #1 as he basically does the same things that Dansby does while hitting for less power. 

In any case, like Happ, Hoerner represents history. He came in 2019 at the tail end of the year after being anticipated for years, not unlike PCA currently. He has never been a superstar and has never been an all-star. He probably deserved it last year. Maybe those numbers improved in the 2nd half, but his end of the year numbers last year are all-star like. This year, his numbers don't look quite as good, but anecdotally from watching Hoerner, he is far from an automatic out. His OBP is slightly lower than Ian Happ's--but he struck out 102 less times than Happ. 

He struck out just 66 times. Mike Tauchman--just 9 points behind Seiya for #2 on team in OBP--struck out 4 more times. Hoerner had 582 at-bats; Tauchman had 298. Hoerner is the best contact hitter on the team. End of story. 

A brief note on academic prestige: the "smartest" on the team has never really been a consideration. People took it for granted that Hendricks, Dartmouth graduate, the "Professor," was the smartest. But let's be honest, Stanford is a better school than Dartmouth. Where someone went to school doesn't really matter as much in baseball, and similarly in real life jobs, your performance speaks for itself. Still baseball is probably the "nerdiest" sport, even as I think the nerdier stats do not tell a more accurate story than the anecdotal observational one. Suffice to say, if the Professor really is gone, then an understudy needs to step into his shoes.

I said above that Ian Happ is the captain, and Rizzo's heir-apparent in that role. Nico would be second in command. Also, there is no Bryzzo on this team, and no cute name combination with Swanson, but they are effectively the closest thing (except lighter hitting). We will have Nico for at least 2 more seasons. Some people are talking about trading him and even saying they can afford to do so because of some prospect named Shaw coming up. Absent a major free agent signing that crowds up the playing field, this should not be done. Nico--like Happ and Swanson--is a good enough player to be on a World Series team. He needs to "outperform expectations," like so many others on the team, but his consistency and leadership should not be undervalued.

Miguel Amaya: B

Like Hoerner, Amaya spent enough time in the minor leagues as a prospect with enough buzz for us to get tired of hearing about him and then being underwhelmed. A lot of people dumped on him this year. But as I've said many times, a catcher's offensive numbers are not nearly as important as how they catch the pitching staff, and looking at the way Amaya handled all of the starting pitchers, a huge part of their success can be attributed to him. 

He stepped up this year, taking over the majority of duties that Yan Gomes took last year. Gomes regressed this year and was released, unfortunately. But Amaya stepped up. He caught 117 games this year (up from 53 last year). His numbers may be silly to compare, but he batted 22 points higher--from .214 to .232. Neither is great but in 2024, .232 is probably OK for a catcher. People also noticed that he ramped up his performance near the end, like Swanson and PCA. 

This may have also come at the time when Christhian Bethancourt joined the team and looked like the greatest hitting catcher of all time for a while. Bethancourt had a 7 RBI game. In the MLB, success is contagious. Hot hitters make other hitters hot too. Bethancourt was a major surprise, and his success revealed itself to be something of a fluke after not too long. He would also get a B, however, and I am fine with the 2 of them as our catchers in 2025. There are not many great replacement options for them.

But yeah, combined no-hitters are kind of dumb and Shota might have been able to finish that game, but catching a combined no-hitter is no less an impressive feat, and Amaya seemed to be celebrated just as much for that performance. He probably is not going to make the all-star team next year, but if he can build off that improved performance in the later part of the year, stranger things (like say Rick Wilkins in 1993) have happened. 

Mike Tauchman: B+

 In terms of baseball intelligence mentioned above, it's fair to say that Tauchman is probably at the top. He approaches every single at-bat as an intellectual exercise. He went to a more modest school (Bradley) than Hendricks or Hoerner, but this should prove that doesn't matter. He is also the oldest player on the team now, but he did not look or act like it. 

He ends the year with numbers very similar to last year--and in many cases, just slightly lower--but weirdly enough he seemed better this year, by the anecdotal observational measure. I don't think I am crazy. Maybe it just seemed that way because he was like that when the rest of the team was slumping hard. 

This team's performance in May and June and July basically decimated them. That they came back the way they did in the 2nd half (not hugely different from last year) is a testament to what they can do, and the resilience they have. Tauchman kept their hope burning faintly in the corner, outside the limelight, helping them win a few games during those months that injected bursts of energy and inspired others. By that point I trusted him just about as much as anyone else on the team, and I still would. Unfortunately he is seen as mostly a defensive replacement/utility man. 

Like advanced stats (which maybe I decided today were stupid again), I still don't understand salary/contract/arbitration issues, but Tauchman made $1.95 million this year and is not under contract, but does not become a free agent until 2027. Will he even play after that? I'm not sure but I think if he continues to perform at the level he did this year, he doesn't need to stop. The problem with diagnosing this team is that there are no "holes" in the roster, just areas where they could stand to improve, like power hitting.

Patrick Wisdom: D+ 

Wisdom and Amaya had the same number of home runs (8). Amaya does have some power occasionally, but Wisdom did that in 1/2 the number of at-bats. Last year, we did not think he would be kept on the team this year, but thankfully he was still here and also was the Cubs nominee for the Roberto Clemente award. 

He is a great presence on the team and occasionally made good things happen (may have won a couple games for them) but he did it while hitting .171. Almost 33% of his hits were home runs. He had 27 hits. Granted he effectively became a pinch-hitter and I think he is a likely strikeout victim waiting to happen each time. He wasn't that great but this is what Wisdom does. I believe there was a Cubs auction where one of the items was being read a bedtime story by him and that is hilarious. He is hilarious in general. He is not a major factor on the team but he is a wild card and a secret weapon that can occasionally be deployed for devastating effect. 

He got paid $2.73 M this year, a little more than Tauchman, and Tauchman better earned it, but it was not a huge waste. Again like so many other years I don't want anyone off the team but I see Wisdom's status as similar to last year's. For some reason I won't be quite as surprised if he remains on the team. We do not have a dynasty on our hands. It looked like we might, from 2015-2021, roughly. Wisdom came in after KB was gone, and he was their third baseman for a while, until they decided they needed a more legit starter at that position. I'm not sure Wisdom ever got his fair shake there. He's not terrible defensively. He plays 1B too. In any case, he is in a similar position to Hoerner, Amaya and Happ: an established presence. And one I would not like to lose, because I still think he's capable of breaking out and going on a torrid stretch. He put in a lot of work last off-season and it seemed like it was paying off, briefly. I would still believe in him for another year, though I believe he will also continue to strike out at a robust rate.

He had far less at-bats this year (158 after 268 last year), but do you realize he had 23 home runs last year, behind only Morel and Bellinger? What have I said is the biggest problem on this team? Lack of power. As such, Wisdom deserves to be kept, because he is one of the precious few with access to that commodity.

Bottom line: basically, the hitting was not very good. We lacked power. It's tough, because as mentioned above, we don't have any major holes in the lineup--just a few above-average players that we can't bear to part with because they mean to much to us emotionally and still prove that they belong on a World Series team. 

We need another starter, we need a closer, and we need a good power hitter. Those 3 things.

There are other smaller gaps they can fill, too, but the holes are limited. Jed Hoyer wanted the Cubs to be in the playoffs this year. There were playoff expectations. We didn't make it, and we finished with the exact same record as last year. 

2023 and 2024 were basically the same year, and the playoff stretch run only got settled about a week or two sooner because the teams performed better. There were like 6 teams ahead of the Cubs in the wild card race and they finished one spot out behind the Diamondbacks. They were the only better team not to make it. 

I took a trip to Copenhagen this year on August 23rd. I had mostly given up, but I said, if they went on a tear and won every single game that week, while I was out of the country, it would restore my faith in them.

That is exactly what happened. That week was insane. That was apparently the week when Craig Counsell discovered some kind of Taylor Swift candle in his house and I am totally unclear on the details but I think he brought the candle into the locker room and he lit it and then the team played like the best team in baseball for a week. 

That was the week where Christhian Bethancourt had a 7 RBI game and they scored like 100 runs. They were just so damn good for a minute. They were on a tear. And they had the easiest schedule of their competitors in the wild card race. 

But then they got swept by the Guardians in Cleveland, and that was the beginning of the end. Seemingly. They didn't give up. They still went out and swept the L.A. Dodgers in L.A (it finally did fall apart when they lost to the Rockies and Pirates at the end). The L.A. Dodgers are playing the New York Mets in the NLCS starting tonight. 

I am not supposed to root for the Mets but 1969 was before I was born and and sometimes lifetime grudges are stupid. It's not like the Mets are much better than the Dodgers in terms of "trying to buy a championship," but that just blew up in their faces last year and it was sad to see. That looked like it was still the case this year (see Jorge Lopez incident above, the low point of the Mets season), but they hit a hot streak near the end of the year (shades of Diamondbacks in 2023) and have proved once again that wild card teams make baseball the best sport.

The Cubs are going to try to win the division in 2025. They have made that unmistakably clear. Knowing our luck, that will happen, but it will happen like it did in 2020, and like it did for the Brewers this year: the excitement and feelings of success were short-lived. It might be better to hope for the wild card.