The Cubs' prolonged quest for .500 raises a question: Why are we supposed to care?

The Cubs reached .500 Saturday for the first time since June 5, and if I had to offer one word to describe the emotion that accompanied the news, it would be, “yay,’’ but without a perky exclamation point.

Much better: Yay?

As in, what does it really mean?

Or, what do you take us for?

Then, predictably, the Cubs lost Sunday to fall to 65-66. Back to the drawing-even board.

If you’re a Cubs fan, or even an unbiased observer, you have to ask yourself if there’s anything about this team that suggests they have a late-season run in them. After getting to 31-31 in early June, they lost eight of their next 11. They flirted with .500 a few times in the ensuing weeks, only to fall back to something less than average. Up and down, down and up, they were a tease, and, worse, a tease about something that didn’t come with much of a payoff. You’re hovering around .500. Yay?

But back to the question at hand, now that they’re near the summit of Mt. Ordinary again: What does it mean?

If the past 12 weeks signify anything, it’s that the Cubs are much more likely to have another dip or two in them than an extended period of winning.

The Jonathan Toews/Patrick Kane-led Blackhawks were the only teams I know of that seemed to be able to turn it on when needed. They could slump in the regular season or struggle in a playoff series, but when they needed to win, they found another level. It helped them capture three Stanley Cups. Until notified otherwise, it’s probably smart to assume that these Cubs either don’t possess that on/off switch yet or they’ve done an incredible job of hiding it. And my apologies to Toews, et al, who might be surprised to find themselves in a discussion about the commonplace Cubs.

The optimist’s argument for why the North Siders could have a run in them is that they’re better than their record indicates. Their 3.70 earned-run average is fourth in the big leagues, and their bullpen’s ERA (3.58) is also fourth.

But there’s a large body of evidence, over many days, that argues that run-of-the-mill is exactly what the Cubs are. The anomaly is their nice start – they were 17-9 on April 26. Normal is what has come after – a so-so record and a lot of weak hitting.

But let me play angel’s advocate for a moment. The Cubs have 10 regular-season series left, and only three of their upcoming opponents have winning records right now. They’ll have tough back-to-back series against the Yankees and Dodgers in September, but other than a three-game series in Philadelphia later in the month, every other team on the schedule looks like the Cubs or much worse.

As a discerning devil’s advocate would point out, that’s exactly the issue. A true-blue Cubs fan might scoff at all those other .500-or-below teams left on the schedule, forgetting that their team looked like some of them for a chunk of the season. It’s true the Cubs have a 13-8 record in August. In that span, they won two of three against a good Twins team and were swept in a three-game series against the also-good Guardians. I’ll ask again: And? What does it mean?

It means we’re talking about a .500 team.

We’ll find out if momentum means anything, or if the Cubs are actually being powered by a soft schedule, not momentum. They just finished winning two of three from the very bad Marlins. They’re five games out of the last wild-card spot.

In late May, I wrote a column expressing my surprise at the tailspin the Cubs were on after their nice start and wondering what new manager Craig Counsell was going to do about it. The club had given him $8 million a year to leave the Brewers and to figure out problems like the one the Cubs were going through. That column didn’t sit well with some Cubs fans. Too soon to judge, they said. I didn’t hear much from them in the subsequent months of mediocrity. But now that their team is playing better, I’m sure they’re cracking their knuckles before writing back to me.

If you think a manager can win games for a team – I generally don’t – now would be a good time to see Counsell work some magic.

His former team has one of the best records in baseball and has gone 17-11 since its best hitter, Christian Yelich, was lost to a season-ending back injury. Not bad for a club that was expected to struggle under Pat Murphy, Counsell’s replacement. Completely innocent question: How much is Murphy making a year?