Kyle Hendricks shuts out Cardinals on just 81 pitches in Cubs’ 4-0 win |

Kyle Hendricks shuts out Cardinals on just 81 pitches in Cubs’ 4-0 win

Chicago Cubs starting pitcher Kyle Hendricks, center, celebrates with Anthony Rizzo, left, and Willson Contreras, right, after defeating the St. Louis Cardinals in a baseball game, Friday, May 3, 2019, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Kamil Krzaczynski)

CHICAGO — The sun was out at Wrigley Field for Friday’s series opener between the Cubs and Cardinals, though a cold, 12-mph wind was blowing in from left field, making it a pitchers’ day.

Kyle Hendricks made the most of the elements, throwing a complete-game shutout in a 4-0 win.

Hendricks (2-4) needed only 81 pitches in his first shutout and complete game since Aug. 1, 2016, a 5-0 win over the Marlins.

It was the fewest pitches in a shutout by a Cubs pitcher since Jon Lieber needed only 78 in a 3-0 win over the Reds on May 24, 2001.

The Cubs moved to within 1 1/2 games of the first-place Cardinals in the National League Central.

The Cubs built a 3-0 lead in the early going on Anthony Rizzo’s three-run shot in the third off Cardinals starter Jack Flaherty (3-2), who walked two batters before serving up Rizzo’s eighth homer.

Rizzo tied Hank Sauer for ninth place on the Cubs’ all-time home run list with the 198th of his career.

Javier Baez added an RBI single in the seventh to make it 4-0.

Hendricks entered the ninth inning with a pitch count of 71, ensuring he’d be able to get the complete game. After a Dexter Fowler single, Hendricks retired the next three hitters to end it.

Categories: Sports | MLB
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.