Omar Minaya and the New York Mets have offered Pedro Martinez a hefty 3-year contract worth about $38 million with an option for a 4th year that would bring the package to a cool $50 mil. No decision yet from Pedro, but it trumps Boston's offer of 2 years for $25.5 million, which seems puny in comparison.

Will this affect Minaya's desire to acquire Sosa? It doesn't really seem like it, since the whole trade centers around dumping bloated contracts on one another- Mets get Sosa, Cubs get Floyd. I think its entirely possible that the Mets could end up with both Sammy and Pedro for 2005, but I doubt it: something tells me the Mets organization got wise to us Cub fans who practically plead for a Sammy trade the instant a rumor appears.

If they do grab both of them, though, I'll sure pay a lot more attention to that other team in New York than I do now.

- posted by Mike J. @ 8:50 PM
|

Since the hot stove has been stuck on simmer since the Jason Kendall trade I've been combing the Cubs website for anything of interest, and I've found some pretty neat info about prospects in the minor leagues. I'll be the first to admit I have no idea if a prospect will make it to the big leagues or not, but as rule number 1 of the Bill James Primer says,

"Minor league batting statistics will predict major league batting performance with essentially the same reliability as previous major league statistics."

I don't think he meant that an amateur sports blogger would be able to predict accurately the future of prospects, but its too late now! Anyway, while checking up on the stats behind the article on Ronny Cedeno, a number jumped off the page at me, a number put up by 25-year-old outfielder Dwaine Bacon- 60.

60 stolen bases in 80 attempts...that's pretty good; good enough to see where this guy came from anyway. A quick check over at the Diamond Jaxx home page revealed that Bacon was drafted in 2001 by the Cubs in the 16th round (eh) and he had 74 stolen bases in 2000 as a sophomore at Florida A&M, good for second best total in D-1 ball (ooh). After browsing the bio, I popped over to Sportsnetwork.com to see if his 60 SB were good enough to sit atop the Southern League in stolen bases, and indeed it was, beating out 2nd place by 9.

Stealing at a 75% clip and being sent 80 times equals speed, but what about the rest of his stats? Is Bacon good enough to ever make it to Wrigley? Well...not next year, at least. In 2004 he batted a so-so .248, struck out 139 times in 444 at-bats, and only had 3 HR and 32 RBI, which aren't offensive numbers that will get you into the majors as an outfielder. However, there are some bright spots- 81 walks were good for a .373 OBP, and while his RBI were low, he scored 80 times, good for 4th in the Southern League and much better than anyone else on the Diamond Jaxx. He's having a hard time making contact, but at the same time can be a patient batter and once he's on base he knows how to score.

While his speed and baserunning ability are excellent, his low batting average and strikeout rate are cause for concern, especially at 25. He's running out of time to get better at the plate, and if he doesn't soon his window to Wrigley will disappear. There is, however, a what-if that might attract him some attention, especially when clubs expand their rosters in September in preparation for the playoffs. I call it the "Dave Roberts" what-if.

Roberts' Game 4, 9th inning pinch-run steal on Mariano Rivera put him in position to tie the game on the following hit and, well, we all know what happened from then on. The pinch runner, lowliest of benchwarmers, changed the outcome of a series and laid the first brick on the path to probably the greatest playoff comeback ever. In the national spotlight, Roberts highlighted how important base stealing can be in tight situations. Maybe Bacon should give Maury Wills a call.

Will Dwaine Bacon ever be good enough to get to the majors? I dunno. Depends on if he can improve his bat more than anything. If he does make it, will he likely have a primary role as a pinch runner to begin with? I'd say definitely yes, if only for lack of another reasonable primary role to put him in at the moment. If the Cubs decide to emphasize the steal more in the following few seasons, its certainly not out of the question that Bacon could be lighting up the basepaths at the Friendly Confines. Until then, we can only wait and see if Bacon improves enough to display his blazing, tantalizing speed in AAA.

- posted by Mike J. @ 9:19 AM
|

Digging through the minor league news at cubs.com I found a quote by hopeful leadoff hitter Adam Greenberg, who's playing with the Mesa Solar Sox in the Arizona Fall League-

"They led the league in home runs, but were near the bottom in on-base percentage (11th in the NL)," said Greenberg, who has a career OBP of .384. "Keep putting more people on base and keep hitting home runs, you do the math, you're going to score more runs. If they need a leadoff hitter, that's what I bring to the table. I have to believe that."

If even the prospects know what needs to be fixed with the Cubs offense, surely the front office has to have an inkling.

- posted by Mike J. @ 12:21 PM
|

Its been awfully slow in Cubland the last week or so. Sosa rumors are growing stagnant - although Al Yellon at and another thing! has a juicy rumor from his own Deep Throat involving Luis Castillo and Juan Encarnacion of the Marlins - and Bill James and his historical abstract have been keeping me busy in the meantime. However, when I went home for Thanksgiving I left it on the table, so I've been trolling the blogs and news sites for anything remotely interesting. Cubs.com was the answer, and somewhere down the line, Ronny Cedeno might be too.

Jonathan Mayo wrote an article about the rising Cedeno a week or so ago, and the story is as follows: the talented 21-year-old infielder had never performed all that well until his breakout season in 2004 down in double-A with the Diamond Jaxx. He posted some decent numbers-

384 AB
.279 Avg
6 HR
24 BB
74 SO
10 SB
10 CS

As you can tell from the last four numbers - walks, strikeouts, stolen bases, and times caught stealing - he's not a polished gem just yet. What's important, the article notes, is that his batting average jumped about 50 points and he's got his head together now. It appears that he's got decent speed and a solid bat, and it seems like the Cubs really believe he'll improve in 2005 when his joins the AAA Iowa Cubs.

What's interesting about Cedeno is that he's been in the Cubs' farm system for 5 years already and that his natural position is shortstop, which if you haven't noticed is a glaring problem for the Cubs this offseason. The article says he was good defensively (18 errors last year in 116 games), and while he'd probably be a utility player first rather than shortstop if he makes it to the bigs, its heartening to see a potential solution come from within the organization rather than depending on Jim Hendry to pull off some wizardry to solve the Cubs' problems.

Cedeno's just a prospect right now, and I doubt he'll see much, if any playing time at shortstop if he does make it to the Friendly Confines in 2005. Either Nomar, Edgar Renteria, or Orlando Cabrera will end up captaining the infield next season (I think I'd like Cabrera more personally, but that could be because he's tearing up the bases in my 2004 EA MVP Baseball for XBox season), but given the Cubs' penchant for injuries this season, there's a good chance Cedeno could see some playing time, wherever on the field it may be.

- posted by Mike J. @ 8:41 PM
|

If there's one thing blogging about the Cubs has taught me, its that there's far more to learn about baseball that I believed possible. I picked up a used copy of "The New Bill James Historical Abstract" from Amazon a while back (for 4 bucks! It doesn't even looked used) and I've taken advantage of this nice little Thanksgiving break to do some reading.

I've only glanced at the top 100 players at each position so far, looking up my childhood heroes Ryne Sandberg (7th) and Mark Grace (32nd). James' comments on Grace were interesting, and certainly something I never thought about all that much-

"People think in terms of images. When the Cubs had Grace at first base and Sandberg at second, they used to bat Sandberg second and Grace third. This makes no sense. Grace, who never had much power, was not a good #3 hitter, but would have been a great #2 hitter. With a .308 career average and a lot of walks, he'd be on base, which is the #1 function of a top-of-the-order guy. As a left-handed hitter who could handle the bat, he could hit and run, take advantage of the hole at first if the leadoff man was on, and (as a lefty) be an obstacle to the catcher on stole base tries.

"Sandberg, on the other hand, was a just-fair number two hitter, and much better suited to hitting third- but hit second. Why? Images. We assume, if we don't think about it, that a first baseman hits in the middle of the order, and a second baseman hits at the top of the order if he can hit, the 6-7-8 spots if he doesn't. The Cub managers just never thought about it long enough to get past the images. "

Makes sense- I wonder if Gracey would have been any higher on the all-time list if he did bat ahead of Sandberg.

The majority of my time so far has been dedicated to the history part of the book, which is broken up into decades. Here are some of the highlights so far-

• Old-timey nicknames are superior to new-timey nicknames. The 1930 Bill James All-Star Nickname team consisted of Gimpy, Wimpy, Blimp, Stinky, Inky, Pinkie, Rowdy Richard, Twitchy, Snooker, and Ducky Wucky. If nicknames now were more indicative of a player's appearance/odor, what would they be like? My guess is that The Big Unit would be Randy "Fugly" Johnson instead.
• There's a reason the Cubs fell apart in the 40s. This is news to me- the reason the Cubs entered six decades of awfulness following their World Series appearance in 1945 is a lack of a productive farm system. They appear to have righted the ship, but clearly it took them a while.

Having heard plenty of good things about the book before I bought it, I can say it hasn't disappointed. There's probably a good many of you bloggers that have already read this book, but to anyone who hasn't, I highly recommend it. In addition to all the history, Bill James explains his win shares system with a good amount of detail and its easy to see why its a excellent, valid way to rate players objectively. Check out Amazon for a used copy- clearly they're going for a good price.

- posted by Mike J. @ 4:02 PM
|

It's a slow news day today- no new trade rumors, only word that the Cubs are trying to install a rotating advertising board behind home plate. The Cubs say this would bring about $3-5 million in a year that would go directly to payroll, and so long as it does, I'm all for it. There's arguments about keeping ads off the field and keeping it "pristine," which is always nice. However, given the choice between a pristine field and expanding payroll for a team that hasn't won a World Series in...yeah, we all know the number. My point is I don't even recognize that ads are actually ads at a ballpark, and if the extra cash can help land the players the Cubs need, then maybe they should have more.

I'm torn on whether the elegant simplicity of the field and the ivy walls of Wrigley still outweigh the ballpark's trough-style urinals and el station feel to the bowels of the stadium in my mind. I think the problem is the history of the place- namely, they don't have one worth mentioning. If the Friendly Confines had hosted a World Series or two (or eight) in the past 90 years, I'm sure I'd love the place. Seeing as how the Cubs still haven't won, I'm less attached.

Ballparks don't make teams win, though, and I don't think I'd be in favor of a North Side "Cell." The Cubbies are making strides and to be honest, I'll watch them wherever they play.

Anyway, you might have noticed there are some design changes being made to the site: I figured it was about time to rethink some things, add some links, etc. I'm open to suggestions for links on the sidebar, and if you know of any particularly good baseball reads, send me an email or leave a comment.

- posted by Mike J. @ 11:16 AM
|

We've got something a little different from our normal format today- more of a dialogue than usual, both Mikes at Old Style Cubs will answer the burning questions that are on all Cubs fans' minds. Or, at least on ours.

***

1) Having signed Glendon Rusch to a 2-year, $4 million contract, the Cubs appear to be ready to make him the 5th starter. Will his 2005 performance as a regular starter be as good as his performance as the Cubs all-purpose emergency starter/reliever?

Mike J: After a breakout season its hard to predict what a pitcher's performance will be like, mostly because there's no precedent to base an opinion on besides the breakout year. Rusch's numbers for 2004 looked like this-

129.2 IP
K/BB - 2.73
3.47 ERA

History makes it even harder to predict because 2003 was his worst season with comparable playing time-

123.1 IP
K/BB - 2.07
6.42 ERA

The strikeout/walk ratio indicates he didn't seem to be doing all that much differently, but his ERA tells a different story. Win-loss record can often indicate how a team plays behind a pitcher, and Rusch's 1-12 record is a pretty good sign that Milwaukee was - surprise - lousy that year.

The K/BB ratios seem to say he's not doing much fundamentally, and the team he's playing behind appears to be making a difference. The last time Rusch pitched for a good team was for the Mets in 2000, when they won the NL pennant, and his 4.01 ERA and 3.57 K/BB was good enough for a 11-11 record. The Cubs are contenders, and I think he can be good enough to be worth the 5th starter title.

Mike R: I tend to believe that the Glendon Rusch that the Cubs are getting will be some kind of hybrid between the great 2004 Rusch and the horrible 2003 Rusch. Glendon's struggles in 2003 are well documented but upon inspection, as you can see above, Rusch's numbers in 2003 and 2004 were surprisingly similar. Between these two years, Rusch's strikeouts/9 innings and strikeout/walk ratios were only separated by .7. Despite a slightly higher walk rate in 2003, these two numbers seem very similar, which does not explain why Glendon posted a 3.47 ERA in 2004 and a 6.42 ERA in 2003. Rusch did give up a great deal of hits in 2003 which would explain why his overall ERA looked so bad. While I think the bulk of the problem that year probably was Rusch's fault but I still don't think he pitched as bad as his ERA indicated. I'm not totally sure sure why Rusch posted such similair numbers with the exception of the 50 more hits. What it does tell me though is that it's going to be very hard to project the 2005 Rusch.

Whether Glendon's 2003 implosion was the product of bad luck or bad pitching or both still doesn't predict for us what pitcher the Cubs will be getting in 2005. It seems to me that the Cubs will likely get some middle ground between the 3.47 of 2004 and the 6.42 of 2003. Since 2000, Rusch has posted ERAs of 4.01, 4.63, 4.70, 6.42, and 3.47. Based on these numbers and the fact that he is 30 and doesn't seem to be fundamentally different I think that we will see an ERA closer to mid to low4 than his 2004 or 2003 ERA. Rusch's numbers from 2004 with the exception of opponent's average and slugging were all in line with his career averages. This tells me that his 2004 success was likely a little bit lucky and that he might be hard pressed to repeat his success. Like my partner said though, it is possible Rusch just pitches better for better teams, something like the "Montrealitis" that plagued Orlanndo Cabrera. However, unless Rusch has found something I don't know about I believe that 2004 and 2003 represent anomalies on either end of the spectrum. The real Glendon Rusch is likely the one who had three straight years with an ERA in the 4s. The 2005 Rusch the Cubs will have will not be as bad as 2003 but likely won't be as good as 2004. That being said, a middle to low 4 ERA is definitely not a bad thing for a cheap fifth starter. I still think that Rusch is a much better option than Ryan Dempster or a more expensive fifth starter like Al Leiter. With the Cubs' pitching depth we tend to forget that most teams have bad fifth starters. I don't think Glendon Rusch will be a bad fifth starter.


2) Now that the cubs have signed Glendon Rusch what should the Cubs do about free agent Matt Clement?

Mike R: All indications seem to point to the fact that the Cubs will likely offer Matt Clement arbitration. To be honest I think that this is a good idea because nothing terrible can come from arbitration. If Clement signs with the Cubs it would likely be for around $7 or $8 million which is not horrible for a quality pitcher like Matt Clement. Clement is a good pitcher and would probably be the best fourth or fifth starter in the National League. If Matt does not sign with the Cubs the Cubs would be in line for some nice draft picks. Either scenario in my mind is a good thing. I would prefer to not have Matt Clement back as his salary would be a bit high for my taste but at the same time I would not lose any sleep if Matt Clement was still wearing a Cub jersey in 2005.

Mike J: The problem for the Cubs isn't pitching, its offense. If Matt Clement can post a 3.68 ERA and be 7th in the NL with 190 strikeouts and end up 9-12, it won't really make much difference if a more average pitcher in Rusch takes his place if the offense stays the same. The Cubs are making moves in the right direction, but in the infield/outfield jigsaw puzzle, only the Neifi Perez jig is in place, and that bothers me. $7-8 million isn't what I'd call spare change, and if the Cubs farm teams weren't as fertile I'd be inclined to lean towards the possibility of draft picks. I really like Matt Clement, but the Cubs should let him go and work on shoring up their offensive capabilities.

- posted by Mike J. @ 11:32 PM
|

"The Cubs won't make it official until today, but they've agreed with left-handed pitcher Glendon Rusch on a two-year contract worth about $4 million guaranteed plus incentives that could make the deal worth about $6 million depending on how many games Rusch starts."

-The Arlington Daily Herald

- posted by Mike J. @ 1:27 PM
|

Without a doubt the Pacers v. Fans brawl in The Palace last night was one of the craziest, most disturbing, shocking, and secretly awesome events I've ever seen take place in professional sports. I'm not going to lay blame on anyone in particular because, well, they're all idiots and all deserve a portion.

Is there anyone I feel particularly sorry for? Well, yeah- the poor sucker who didn't throw the first beer that Artest pummeled, Fred Jones, who got attacked from behind by a very large man with very large fists when he went into the stands to help out, and the referee that got hit in the side of the head with a full plastic beer bottle.

Is there anyone who got what they deserved? Hell yes- Beer thrower #2, who chucked a full beer at Artest after he jumped into the crowd and then proceeded to get clocked by Stephen Jackson, and Pistons fans Tweedledee and Tweedledum, who ran up to Artest on the basketball court after the melee had died down some. If you're a short pudgy guy, what makes you think that charging an NBA player who has clearly demonstrated that he's crazy as hell won't punch you in the face? Of the two, the guy on the receiving end of Jermaine O'Neal's sliding mega-punch got it the worst, but then again, you can't say he wasn't asking for it.

Anyway, the whole thing brings back memories of Franky Francisco's chair-throwing and the shirtless fans who bum rushed the umpire at a White Sox game, and it made me wonder if an event of this magnitude could ever happen in a baseball game. The answer I think is no, and for several reasons-

• With the exception of some bullpens, the fans are pretty far away from the players. Basketball fans are ridiculously close to the players, and thinking back on the one game I attended with courtside seats, it must take a lot of beer to think you can fight a player- they're massive human beings.
• Even when they are close to the bullpens, relievers seem to be a pretty docile group of people, considering they just sit around most of the game. There are some exceptions (I'm pretty sure Steve Kline is insane), but I think it holds true for most.
• Bats. Any group of people that has easy access to hundreds of bats is likely more intimidating than a similar group of people that lacks bats.

In addition to the bedlam in basketball, rumors started to pick up as well. New York Daily News reports that

"Several baseball officials speculated that Johnson's eventual landing place will be in St. Louis - a team that obviously fits the description of "contender" since it won the National League pennant. The Cards saw their starting pitching collapse against the Red Sox in the World Series and GM Walt Jocketty has made no secret of his desire to upgrade the rotation this winter.

"Jocketty was one of several executives (including Brian Cashman) to ask Diamondbacks GM Joe Garagiola about Johnson at the GM meetings last week and executives say the Cards have more than enough resources in their farm system to appease Arizona's desire for top prospects and major-league ready players. "

Uh, crap? Randy Johnson could have easily been the Cy Young winner this year if he had been on any team other than the Diamondbacks, and he'd certainly have a chance at the award again with the Cardinals' run support capabilities. If he does land with the Cardinals it will, as reported, cost them dearly in prospects that could possibly pay off well in the future for the D-Backs since Johnson only has one or two years left in him anyway. This, however, is not much of a consolation for Cubs fans.

The Cubs are working on a lefty of their own in Glendon Rusch, which I personally would like to see in the rotation now that Clement is a free agent. Given the chance I think he could do well again for the Cubs, but then again pitching isn't the problem- consistent run support is. Be it Glendon or Matt, the 5th starter's success will depend largely on the additions to the offense the front office makes this offseason.

- posted by Mike J. @ 1:13 PM
|

In case you haven't heard the Cubs lost out on the Troy Percival race when the Detroit Tigers signed him yesterday to a two-year deal reportedly worth $12 million. This news came as a surprise to Cubs fans as reports claimed that Percival was expected to talk with the Cubs about a potential deal later this week. To be honest I don't think I will lose any sleep over this non-deal. Percival is arguably the second best free-agent closer currently on the market but that doesn't say much when that market includes Shawn Chacon and facial hair challenged Dustin Hermanson. I for one think the Cubs did the right thing in passing on the fading Percival. However, since closer is one of the gaping holes that currently plagues the Cubs it would be wise to take a look at the Cubs options.

Troy Percival
Percival has been in his career a great closer and potentially could still be a good closer. However, Percival's stats seem to indicate he is fading fast and that it wouldn't suddenly stop were he to start wearing Cubbie blue. Since 2002 Percival has seen his K/9 fall from a very good 10.86 to a very pedestrian 5.98. In 2004 Percival struck out only 33 in 49.2 innings which is not very comforting for a man who you want to rely on to get the big outs. Over that same 2002-2004 span Pericval's opponent's batting average has risen from .188 to .230 and his opponent's slugging percentage from .297 to .374. Combine those stats with an increasing WHIP and declining velocity and you get an old pitcher who is past his glory days. Percival has pitched in the big games and would not likely have too many problems with the pressure of Wrigley but he just doesn't seem to have the stuff anymore and would have been expensive. Let's not even talk about that fact that he is still prone to injury which if he had signed would have likely left the Cubs in the same boat they were last year. All things considered I am glad the Cubs will be looking elsewhere to fill the closer void and am glad the Cubs still have 6 million sitting in the bank.

Armando Benitez
Benitez is far and away the best free agent closer on the market. Benitez is coming off a fantastic season in which he was 47-51 in save opportunities with a 1.29 ERA and a K/9 of 8.01. Benitez was as good on the road as at home, posting a 1.05 ERA and a whip of .87 away from Pro Player which seems to suggest his great season was not hugely helped by pitcher friendly Pro Player stadium. However, despite the good numbers Benitez has several red flags. For one, Benitez can be a bit of a head case and his big game abilities have often been questioned. Many baseball experts attribute a lot of Benitez's success to pitching in a small market. I personally worry how Benitez would handle the stress of pitching in Chicago where blowing one save is enough for fans to call for your head. Benitez will also command a relatively expensive deal and will be the sought after closer now that Percival is off the market. Benitez made only $3.5 million this year but is likely going to ask for more money and would likely ask for a deal similar to Troy Percival. The question then is, are the Cubs willing to pay 6-7 million dollars for a pitcher with good stuff but who might wilt under the Wrigley pressure?

Shawn Chacon
For some unknown reason the Cubs have expressed interest in Shawn Chacon. I hope to god this is some kind of joke or smoke screen by Jim Hendry because unless the Cubs are short a batting practice pitcher I don't want to see Shawn Chacon within three miles of Wrigley Field. That is unless he is pitching for the other team.

Latroy Hawkins
Much like the Shawn Chacon I seriously hope no sane person thinks for more than a millisecond about putting Latroy back out there at closer. Latroy is a fantastic set up man and a truly terrible closer. Hawkins might as well pick "Why Can't We Be Friends" for his entrance song because I do not think there is any sight more frightening than seeing Latroy strolling out of the pen in the ninth with a lead. I advise anyone who thinks Latroy Hawkins can be a successful closer to sit down with a box of tissues and a pint of ice cream and watch the final inning of the Mets game.

Ryan Dempster
I secretly hope that the only reason Ryan Dempster was resigned by the Cubs is so that he can teach the Cub hitters this offseason how to take some walks. Dempster has some good stuff and has the ability to strike people out but unfortunately he also has the ability to walk the stadium. In 2004 Dempster had a strikeout to walk ratio of 1.38 which was good enough to be 227th in the National League among all pitchers. In case anyone thinks that last year was a fluke, Dempster's career K/BB is 1.54 which is only slighter better than his 2004 mark. Also, Dempster struck out 18 batters in 20.2 innings, which is actually pretty decent, in case any one thought his ratio was just low because he doesn't strike guys out. Dempster might have posted a decent ERA and a pretty good strike out rate but his walks are alarming and they indicate a pitcher who is in for some hurt. I personally don't like hurt. The last thing the Cubs or any team needs in the late innings is free passes and Demptser loves to hand out the free pass. I personally would have preferred that the Cubs had not signed Dempster but since that is no longer an option let's just hope he isn't the closer.

Joe Borowski
To me Joe Borowski is the wildcard in the offseason closer search. Borowski was a great story in 2003 as he was 33-37 in save opportunities with a 2.63 ERA. Borowski came out of nowhere to be one of the best closers in the NL in 2003. 2004, was a different story. Borowski struggled with his command as he walked 15 in 21.1 innings and gave up 27 hits. The 2004 Borowski had a noticeable drop off in velocity and he was eventually shut down for the season with a shoulder injury. If Borowski's 2004 troubles can be solely attributed to his injury then it is very possible that he can perhaps find his form again this year. However, if 2003 was only an aberration then the Cubs could be in for some trouble. A healthy Joe Borowski might not be a terrible option at closer as Joe is already under contract for the 2005 season and has the potential to be solid. That being said I would only pencil him in as closer if it could be assured that he was healthy and back to 2003 form. Obviously that cannot be assured and so it comes down to whether the Cubs can afford to take a gamble. The potential for a solid, cheap closer is in Joe Borowski but the potential also exists for a fantastic failure leaving the Cubs with very few options.

Weighing the Options
After looking at many of the viable options I honestly have no idea what the Cubs should do about the closer role. If the Cubs chose to fill the gap in free agency I think that Armando Benitez is the best option so long as it is a reasonable contract. Benitez is the best free agent possibility though I would have serious worries about his mental toughness. If the Cubs chose to stay in house I would prefer Joe Borowski as he has the best chance of succeeding and he is already under contract and would be virtually useless if the Cubs use someone else as a closer. There still exists the possibility of a trade as there are rumors that the Cubs are trying to pry Dan Kolb out of Milwaukee and Ugueth Urbina looks to be tradeable now that Percival has signed with Detroit. If I had to make a choice I would hesitantly chose Benitez but I am really not a fan of any of the choices. I want to believe that Jim Hendry has something up his sleeve but the very fact that I have to debate the merits of Ryan Dempster and Shawn Chacon leaves me wondering about Hendry's sanity. Here's hoping Jim knows what he is doing because if I see any more articles about the Cubs courting Chacon I might get worried.

- posted by Mike R. @ 7:37 AM
|

The Tigers signed Troy Percival this afternoon to a 2 year, $12 million contract. While there's plenty of reason to think that he wouldn't have gotten the job done, most of it convincing, part of me remains slightly disappointed. I think this stems from the fact that, well, the Cubs still don't have a closer.

Plenty of offseason to go, though.

- posted by Mike J. @ 5:01 PM
|

OK, I admit that the article over on Dodger Thoughts on the Disposable Baseball Blogger got me feeling a little guilty about not posting that often during the offseason. I thoroughly intend to stick around even though I'm not acting like it right now. No excuses, either. That being said, let's move on.

Well, not just yet. I'd like to note that Derek Smart, blogger of The Big Red C has moved on to bigger and better things, namely in the form of writing for the Cub Reporter. The Big Red C was the first Cubs blog I ever read, and it enamored me with the possibility of blogging about the Cubs all on my own and actually having someone read what I have to say. I hope he stays at the Cub Reporter for a long time. Now we can move on.

I'm pretty ambivalent about the broadcaster situation the Cubs face for next year. From what I hear Bob Brenly is a good guy, and while I grew up listening to Steve Stone and eventually tolerated Chip Caray, they were never why I watched the games. So long as the Cubs don't hire Ken "He Gone" Harrelson as Brenly's partner, I'll keep the volume on when I watch them on TV.

I've been hoping that Sosa would get traded for a while now, and with the possibilty of the $18 million option being dropped from his contract its looking more likely than ever. The Mets are interested and having some hefty contracts of their own in Cliff Floyd and Mike Piazza, a trade looks likely. I'll keep my fingers crossed, because another year of Sosa is not the answer.

Speaking of, what is the answer for the Cubs? Troy Percival? Carlos Beltran? Neifi Perez? In the collapsing optimism of September I declared that I would buy a Perez jersey (sometimes humor is good for dealing with pain), but I never really thought they'd sign him. I would like to see both Percival and Beltran in Cubbie blue, but I can't help think about the "lack of a team leader" talk that circulated Cubs' blogs when things got bad and Alou got whiny. Surely the intangible ability to be a leader won't tip many scales when it comes to combing the market, but having someone like Kenny Lofton around - who led off practically every game the Cubs won in the 2003 playoffs with a hit - would probably go a long way with this ballclub. As far as I know, there's no stat for leadership, though.

Stay tuned, get our RSS feed, whatever, because we will have some more offseason features in the near future.

- posted by Mike J. @ 1:17 PM
|

Allow me first to apologize for my rather long absence from posting. I have been kind of busy as of late and for a short period lost the desire to post after the cubs tanked. I am now back though and better than ever. In case you haven't heard the Cubs announced yesterday the hiring of Bob Brenly as the new color analyst. I personally have no problem with Bob Brenly's announcing skills as I have really only heard him during the playoffs and it wasn't hard to sound to good when the other option was Tim, "a leadoff walk is as good as a home run," McCarver. Brenly seems like a fine color analyst and theoretically a good choice for the job. The problem is that Brenly is a company man and his hiring seems to undermine all of Jim Hendry's offseason attempts to steal power away from Dusty Baker. Brenly worked in the WGN radio booth from 1990-1991 and after that served as a coach with Dusty Baker. The hiring of Brenly seems to be a message to Dusty Baker that his antics with regard to the announcing last year are ok. Instead of getting a fresh face or an outsider the Cubs went and got a friend of Dusty Baker. Any other color analyst on the market would have looked less suspicious than Bob Brenly which is what upsets me the most about this hiring. With the firing of Wendell Kim and trainer Dave Groeschner it seemed that Jim Hendry was reprimanding Dusty and maybe even taking back some control. Now the Cubs have given the big thumbs up to Dusty Baker and his conspiracy theories. Not to mention that this is a massive slap in the face to Steve Stone who was making half of what Bob Brenly was offered despite being a vastly superior color commentator. Steve Stone deserved better than being run out of town by the Cubs for speaking his mind and then seeing his replacement get double the salary.

Perhaps Brenly will be a great color analyst next year and his hiring will be a good one. However, I can't help but see this as a huge victory for Dusty Baker and the other participants in "Stoneygate". Now anytime Brenly avoids saying something potentially controversial he will be accused of being a Dusty Baker puppet. Hey, anything is better than Tim McCarver or Joe Morgan.

- posted by Mike R. @ 9:37 AM
|

ESPN's Rumor Central says "Cubs GM Jim Hendry has been instructed by ownership to move Sammy Sosa" as of today. I for one am glad to hear this, because things have clearly gotten out of hand. At this point I don't care how good Sammy's been, I care about having a contending team next year I can cheer for, and neither side seems willing to pick up the pieces at this point.

Anyway, the Cubs have some pretty interesting options in terms of free agents, and ideally they'd be able to sign all of them.

Troy Percival. Its been announced that the Angels are moving Francisco Rodriguez into the closer position and since Percival rejected the offer of returning as a setup man, a very good closer is now on the market. Note to Jim Hendry- sign him. Now! The Cubs have their trouble spots, but the closer might be the most frustrating of all of them.

Nomar Garciaparra. Nomar's pursuing a one-year deal to prove that he's healthy, and I think its worth it for the Cubs to sign him again. It seems unlikely that Edgar Renteria will be let go by the Cardinals, and there's not a lot of top-tier shortstops out there.

Carlos Beltran. Yeah, he's still here, and this one seems the least likely. I'd hate to see him go to the Yankees, but that would mean the Cubs would have to empty their pockets to get him. Of course, they could do that by trading Sammy.

ESPN also says that Ryan Dempster might be made the closer for next season, which could very well work out. Forgive me if I don't feel like messing around with the closer role, though.

- posted by Mike J. @ 1:25 PM
|