Fan Duel: Two SI editors on Cubs-Indians World Series, all things Chicago vs. Cleveland
Special time: Watch Game 2 of the World Series tonight on Fox. First pitch is now at 7:08 p.m. ET. Stream the game here.
Sports Illustrated Digital Editor Mark McClusky grew up in western Pennsylvania and has been a Chicago Cubs fan all his life. Mark Bechtel, the managing editor of SI Kids and SI's NBA editor, has rooted for the Indians since he was a kid himself in the suburbs of Cleveland. They'll provide their thoughts and commentary on all things World Series—from the cities to the ballparks to the games—throughout the 112th Fall Classic.
Post-Game 1
Mark McClusky
Well, that didn’t take long. Right about the second inning, as another Cub hitter struck out looking, I was in full meltdown mode. Here were the Cubs doing Cub things, meekly being sat down by an amazing Corey Kluber, and giving up two runs on a hit batter and a ball that Jose Ramirez hit about 10 feet. Throw in two home runs from a backup catcher who hit .183 with three home runs all season, and it would be easy to slide into despair.
So I’m looking for the bright spots. Kyle Schwarber got a hit, and looked like he belonged on the field. The Cubs showed that it is at least possible to get baserunners against Andrew Miller, even though they managed not to convert with the bases loaded and no one out. Miller threw 46 pitches, and if he’s at all human, that might have some effect on his availability or effectiveness tonight. And, uh, well, Kluber isn’t starting for Cleveland again until Game 4.
That two-seam fastball he was working last night was just gross. It reminded me of Greg Maddux when he was at his best—hitters completely giving up on pitches, or even bailing out of the batter’s box—right before the ball darts back over the corner. The difference is that Kluber throws that pitch five miles per hour harder than Maddux ever did, and has that breaking ball to work off of it. I thought that Kluber got more of the strike zone from Larry Vanover than Jon Lester did, but he didn’t need the extra help.
So suddenly, tonight feels like almost a must win for the Cubs. The angst that would be floating around Wrigley if they come back down 2-0 would be off the charts, and if Kluber really is going to throw three times in this series, you have to win when he’s not there (he says, stating the insanely-obvious). They’ve moved the game time up an hour, but it’s going to be a long day waiting for it for me.
How you feeling? Must be nice, I imagine, to have a lead.
Mark Bechtel
Yeah, it’s nice to have a lead, but at the same time, all the Indians did was hold serve. How’s that for refusing to allow myself any measure of enjoyment? (Interesting fact: This is the first time the Indians have led in a Fall Classic since the end of the ’48 Series.)
I spent the first inning in the kitchen making wings (you can see the TV from in there). After they scored twice I realized I couldn’t really move into a different room, so I spent the next three hours standing in the kitchen being mocked by the empty couch five feet away. But if Andrew Miller can throw 90 pitches every day for a month, the least I can do is stay on my feet if it means good luck.
Speaking of which: Interesting situation Tito finds himself in. He has one pitcher, Klubot, who can be expected to go any distance. Even when he’s healthy, Trevor Bauer isn’t the kind of guy who’s going to give you eight strong innings. He’s a nibbler, that’s just the way it is. And Josh Tomlin is on a minuscule leash. So Tito’s got to be thinking, “It’d be nice to have Miller rested for Game 2.” But at the same time, he doesn’t want to either a) run Kluber into the ground, because he needs him on three day’s rest (two times!), or b) lose the game. But not sending him out there for the eighth probably would have meant using Bryan Shaw, who has been a touch shaky in the postseason.
All of which is to say, I wonder how much Francona is managing with an eye toward the future. You don’t want to, but with a rotation as thin as his, he has to. But if anyone can strike that balance and figure it out, I think it’s a guy who’s 9-0 in the World Series.
As for me, I’m watching Game 2 at a bar in town. But I brought a scrap of wallpaper from the kitchen with me. Can’t be too safe.
Pre-Series
Mark McClusky
First of all, congrats to the Cleveland Indians on their American League title. And congrats to you—I know from hearing you shouting at a TV during the ALCS just how deep your love for the team goes.
And in just about any other matchup, I’d join you in rooting for the Indians. I have family from Cleveland—in fact, my mother and sister will be rooting hard for the Tribe. But there’s just one problem for me in this matchup. I had WGN as a kid, and that turned me into a Chicago Cubs fan. And let’s face it: The Cubs deserve to win this World Series.
After all, Cleveland has enjoyed a relatively flush period of massive success compared to the Cubs. Since the Cubs last won the Series in 1908, the Indians have won the Fall Classic twice. Since the Cubs have even won the National League title, in 1945, Cleveland has been in the Series three other times. This year the Indians won their eighth division titles in the past 21 years for crying out loud.
Clevelanders like to paint themselves as uniquely downtrodden when it comes to sports. And in some ways, I can relate. I remember the two of us commiserating when Art Modell betrayed the city and moved our beloved Browns to freaking Baltimore. But Cleveland’s martyr complex can’t stand up to the 108 years of futility that Cubs fans have been born, lived, and died through.
Cubs Hub: Check out all of SI's content as Chicago chases history
Mark Bechtel
I find myself in a strange spot as a Cleveland fan: The city currently has the shortest wait since its last title. (Thanks LeBron!) It’s a little weird to sit here and play the long-suffering fan card. So I won’t. Also, I was told there would be no math, so I’m not going to dispute your statistics.
No, my first salvo is this: You don’t want to win this World Series.
I, too, had WGN as a kid, and like everyone else who had cable and was a baseball fan in 1984, I adopted the Cubs. Now, before you give me any crap about being a fair-weather fan, let me say that it was not especially easy to follow the exploits of the Indians if, as I did, you had recently moved to Alabama. There was no superstation, and they weren’t exactly Game of the Week fodder. You could try to tune in Herb and Ned on WWWE, but unless it was a crystal clear night you were probably out of luck.
I didn’t punt on the Indians, but I had never lived through an actual pennant race before, especially not one I could follow on a daily basis. So I was drawn in by the promise of good baseball—but also by the play-by-play man, whose insane ramblings and penchant for serenading players (“Jo-dy, Jo-dy Davis—King of the National League!”) were fun to watch—unless, perhaps, you were his perpetually put-upon straight man, Cleveland’s own Steve Stone. Harry Caray was a Cubs fan. He was a Bud Man. He broadcast games from the bleachers, where he was getting tanked with the fans. But at the end of the day, the Cubs were losers, lovable losers. What fun!
And now all of that is on the verge of extinction. Four wins and your identity changes. This is a big step. Look what winning did to the Red Sox. Do you really want that?
Mark McClusky
You make a fair point about the Red Sox—never has a fan base gone from long-suffering to insufferable quite so quickly. And given that at least four generations of Cubs fans have never had the chance to practice being a good winner, there’s every chance that we’ll be as bad at it as the Cubs have been at baseball for so long. It’s a risk that I’m prepared to run. After all, there would still be years before the fan base revolts and runs Theo Epstein out of town.
Lovable loser still contains the word “loser,” and it’s really nice to have a Cubs team (and organization) that doesn’t buy into that construction. When the Tribune Corp. owned the team, it always seemed like they weren’t trying quite hard enough to win. Instead, it always seemed like the hope was to put a just-good-enough product out there so that spending a summer afternoon skipping work to catch a game at Wrigley Field at least carried the possibility of seeing the Cubs win. And if they didn’t, well, hey, it was fun to sit in the sun and drink Old Style.
I think that’s what’s been most enjoyable about this team. They aren’t lovable losers; they’re lovable winners. They don’t expect the Cubbish thing to happen to them that all of the fans are waiting for. We’re waiting for Leon Durham or Steve Bartman to reach out of the past and thwart this team, and all that Anthony Rizzo and Kris Bryant and Javier Baez want to do is mash and make great defensive plays.
I watched Game 1 of the NLCS in a Chicago bar, and when the Cubs gave up two runs in the top of the eighth, you could have heard a pennant drop, if not for the muttered (and not-so-muttered) profanity. This was the moment where the Cubs would start doing Cubs things, and they’d find a way to lose and then Clayton Kershaw would be pitching for the Dodgers the next night and then oh my God we’d be down 0-2 going to L.A. and here we go again with this crap.
Or not. Dave Roberts got a little too cute, Joe Blanton threw one of the worst sliders of his life, and the bar nearly tumbled to the ground as Miguel Montero launched his pinch-hit grand slam into the rightfield bleachers. At each moment of the postseason where this Chicago team has had a chance to live down to the franchise’s history, it has instead shown a swagger and confidence that’s rarely inhabited the Friendly Confines.
Don’t play the “it’s better to lose” card. Would you have preferred that Draymond Green wasn’t suspended, and the for the Cavs to have lost the NBA Finals in six? After all, now Cleveland doesn’t have the longest title drought for a city in pro sports any more. You can’t possibly want that honor back.
Mark Bechtel
Mark McClusky
You have to love a beer that built a marketing campaign around the idea of people from New York and L.A. coming to Chicago to steal it. Plus, the ads stared Dennis Farina.
The Cubs were a big-market team that acted with a small-market mindset. Say what you will about curses, but I do believe that part of what’s cursed the Cubs for years is Wrigley Field. It’s such a pilgrimage, such a great place to see a game, that the organization could cruise knowing that it would draw 28,000 fans a game to watch another 77-win team. Like Boston did, though, the Cubs have turned their ancient gem into a money making machine without destroying the essential nature of a game there.
There is the sense that the Indians are a little bit of a fluke, and part of that is because you’re right, all of those guys are having the best seasons of their lives. The Cubs, on the other hand, are built to last. That infield is young and awesome and all signed until 2430 or so, and with that core, there’s the possibility of a lot of postseason baseball on the North Side for years.
But I spent 17 years in the Bay Area, and saw an awful lot of good teams in Oakland that couldn’t get it done. Like Billy Beane said, some times your s*** doesn’t work in the playoffs, and who knows how many chances the Cubs will have. I’d like to think it won’t be 71 years before their next trip to the Series, but I’m sure that they were thinking that back in the late 1940s as well.
Mark Bechtel
OK, I’m not going to say anything bad about Dennis Farina, lest his ghost stab me in the heart with a pencil or bury a telephone in my head.
I agree with you about the Wrigley albatross, though I have to wonder if putting up lights at a field renowned first and foremost for not having lights doesn’t constitute "destroying the essential nature” of the place. At least they didn’t burn down the ivy.
That said, I do have to tip my hat to the Cubs for developing homegrown players at the same time they were splashing out Ricketts family money. I mean this sincerely: Kudos for putting together a team that’s not impossible to root for.