I'm not an X's and O's expert, nor have I even looked at the stats.
But we were relatively thin at LB coming into the season, and losing Nate Hall could have been a serious blow to that unit. To my eye, Chris Bergin has been in the right position, quick to the ball, and generally a pretty competent tackler. He's a nice example of what I often refer to as the Kyle Hendricks Effect* - good teams aren't good because of their stars, because most teams generally have a few stars sprinkled throughout their rosters. They're good because guys who are mid-roster, or bench depth, or young and not expected to play much, step up their play when given an opportunity to shine.
Keep it up, Chris "Kyle" Bergin.
(*For those wondering why, it's my personal opinion that Hendricks set the 2016 Cubs apart because Lester and Arrieta were established stars, and Hammel and Lackey were established solid veterans, but Hendricks becoming a third ace in that rotation as opposed to a #5 starter made that team's pitching staff so damn good.)
But we were relatively thin at LB coming into the season, and losing Nate Hall could have been a serious blow to that unit. To my eye, Chris Bergin has been in the right position, quick to the ball, and generally a pretty competent tackler. He's a nice example of what I often refer to as the Kyle Hendricks Effect* - good teams aren't good because of their stars, because most teams generally have a few stars sprinkled throughout their rosters. They're good because guys who are mid-roster, or bench depth, or young and not expected to play much, step up their play when given an opportunity to shine.
Keep it up, Chris "Kyle" Bergin.
(*For those wondering why, it's my personal opinion that Hendricks set the 2016 Cubs apart because Lester and Arrieta were established stars, and Hammel and Lackey were established solid veterans, but Hendricks becoming a third ace in that rotation as opposed to a #5 starter made that team's pitching staff so damn good.)