Today’s quote pretty much sums up exactly what I was thinking while watching yesterday’s 4-0 lead somehow evolve into a 7-6 loss to the lowly (not as lowly as last year, but still lowly) Reds in Cincinnati. As usual, it’s from the Chicago Tribune.

After a 7-6 loss to the Reds on a summer-like evening at Great American Ball Park, the Cubs were left to explain the unexplainable.

“We’ve seen a lot of that,” catcher Michael Barrett said. “It’s been pretty baffling for us. I think we’ve had about five games where we’ve been left scratching our heads like, ‘What happened?’ We’re not winning games we should right now, and it’s frustrating.”

He pretty much summed it up: This team, just like last year and the year before, loses winnable games. If you want to be an optimist, you point out that pre-Dusty teams rarely had enough winnable game to make it worth a fan’s time to follow the entire season. If you want to be a pessimist, or even a realist, you must admit that truly good teams do not lose winnable games, aside from the occasional hiccup that happens to everyone.

People usually refer to one-run games as a barometer of a good team versus and almost good team. I don’t have the numbers in front of me, but the Cubs did better in those games in 2003 than in 2004. But, in 2004, they finished with one more win on the year. The difference? The Cardinals, who in 2003 were very competitive also-rans and in 2004 won more than 100 games.

The old adage is that every team will win a third of its games and lose a third of its games. It’s what happens with the last third, 54 games, that makes the difference between a contender and a pretender. If you do the math, 108-54 is a pretty darn good record. If you split the difference on the last 54, you end up at 81 and 81.

Looking at the games since the start of the 2005 season, the Cubs have had games in each category. In the “54 we’d get just by rolling out of bed” we have the opening day win against Arizona (16-6) and Prior’s first start against the Padres last Wednesday (8-3) in game two of the doubleheader. I’d also put Zambrano’s 4-0 one-hit humiliation of the Brewers in this category.

In the “54 times we’re going to lose no matter what” we have game one of that doubleheader, where Kerry Wood got roughed up in the first inning and the Cubs never recovered on their way to a 9-3 loss, and an 8-3 loss to the Diamondbacks in Ryan Dempster’s first start April 6.

That leaves the following games in the toss-up category:

April 5: LOSS 5-4 at Arizona
April 8: LOSS 6-3 vs. Milwaukee (12 innings)
April 10: WIN 6-5 vs. Milwaukee (12 innings)
April 11: LOSS 1-0 vs. San Diego
April 15: LOSS 8-5 at Pittsburgh
April 16: WIN 4-3 at Pittsburgh
April 17: WIN 4-2 at Pittsburgh
April 18: LOSS 7-6 at Cincinnati

Six of those games are against division opponents. The Cubs have to beat up on the Prates, Brewers and Reds because we all know the Astros and Cardinals will. Dropping two of three to teams like Arizona and San Diego doesn’t help, either, but the Padres are a pretty decent squad this year.

Two weeks in to the season, I see pretty much a repeat of the last two years. This team, barring injury, will be good enough to hang around all year. If they are going to make the playoffs, they probably won’t qualify until the last week or two of the season. I know the old adage about once you get in to the postseason anything can happen. But you know what happens to teams like this -- teams that are very, very good but don’t always play to that potential?

They blow 3-1 series leads with their best two pitchers throwing at home and sit at home while another team gets to play the Yankees in the World Series.

All that said, I’m still planning to watch every pitch. I don’t know how it will all turn out in the end. I still hope, despite my better judgment, to be proven wrong come October.

Sure, the Cubs don’t do as well as they should do. But this three-year stretch is still the best three years of Cubs baseball since I’ve been alive. Maybe we’re setting ourselves up for another disappointing era, similar to the Banks-Williams-Santo days. But it’s a lot better than being out of contention by May 1.