I originally planned to take only a few days around Christmas off from blogging, but a few stretched into almost a week and now its December 31st. Normally I'd feel bad about not updating the site regularly, but since not one goddamn thing has happened, I think I'll get over it.

The offseason isn't split into two sections, but if it were the holidays would be the All-Star break, so a recap of the first half is in order.

• The Cubs shot out of the gates into first place with the pre-winter meeting signings of Nomar and Glendon Rusch. $8 million for a guy that has some health question marks may seem like too much money, but its almost a steal compared to the prices of Edgar Renteria and Orlando Cabrera. Are they worth what they're getting paid? Probably. Would I have wanted the Cubs to sign them to 4-year deals? I'm not so sure.
  
  Rusch's 2-year, $4 million deal was a good one, because if he doesn't maintain his 2004 form, at least he's not that expensive. Even if he slides a little bit, his numbers are third starter-worthy to begin with. I also think having a pitcher that isn't a hard-throwing righthander every so often helps compliment the abilities the starting rotation already has.


• While starting pitching was taken care of, the closer position in the Cubs bullpen existed only in theory. The Cubs watched other teams sign closer after closer and leave nothing behind except the question mark that hangs over the dugout in Wrigley.
  
  They still have no closer, but that's not the worst thing in the world. I'm glad that the Cubs didn't overpay for Armando Benitez or Troy Percival: there's no reason to overpay the bullpen when the closer in 2003 came out of nowhere to save 33 games. Either the stat is overrated or Joe Borowski is a lot better than we all thought: guess which way I'm leaning?
  
  
• Despite not improving the bullpen, the Cubs maintained a lead in the standings by signing Todd Walker to a 1-year, $2.5 million contract. Walker's a solid hitter and will start at 2nd base in 2005 instead of sharing time with Mark Grudzielanik (who was not resigned). This deal solidified the infield and let eyes return to focus on the sulking superstar in right.


• Eager to run away with the division in Cardinals-like fashion, the Cubs hoped to trade Sammy Sosa and offer a mega-deal to Carlos "Wonderboy" Beltran. Having to execute the former before pursuing the latter, they talked and waited. And waited.


• And waited. Waited until they were no longer the favorites to win it all. Waited while everyone else continued to make moves. Waited as Houston improved their offer to Beltran and the New York Mets jumped in on the bidding.
  
  The Cubs are still waiting, and its because they can't seem to dump Sosa's contract without having to pay a hefty chunk of it. There's no reason to make a bad deal only to involve yourself with a potential signing, but its hard to shake the feeling that the Cubs are prudently watching their opportunity to sign Beltran slip away.

The second half remains and while the Cubs don't look to be favorites anymore, that doesn't mean much of anything: during the real season, its why they play the games.

And it's why I'll watch and chew on my lip from all this waiting.

- posted by Mike J. @ 10:06 AM
|

While the Yankees didn't seem to impress Carlos Beltran in their meeting on Tuesday, it seems that the Astros are doing a far better job of encouraging him to resign. This quote from Scott Boras shows how serious the Astros are in their pursuit:

"[Astros owner] Drayton was very clear that he kept a franchise player in Jeff Bagwell in Houston and did so by paying him a top of the market salary and that that history is something that the organization has had and he as an owner has had. He was confident that he could compete for Carlos Beltran."

If they don't sign him, though, the whole thing could blow up in their face:

"The Astros have been focused their full energies on Beltran, which has somewhat thwarted them in terms of seeking other players whether it be via trades or free agency."

For Houston everything is revolving around Beltran, even Roger Clemens potential retirement. I have to admit that right now we could be seeing Beltran in an Astros uniform for a long time to come, but it ain't over yet. Boras and the Cubs appear to be unwitting allies right now, because the longer Boras holds out for a better deal, the longer the Cubs have to jump into the mix.

UPDATED 5:30pm
ESPN's Rumor Central says the Astros offered Beltran at least a six-year, $96 million deal, up from their original offer of five years for $70 million.

- posted by Mike J. @ 1:03 PM
|

Moises Alou is moving back in with his parents, as he'll be wearing a Giants uniform alongside Dad in 2005 to the tune of $13.25 million for 2 years. Despite a career year in 2004 he did in fact take a paycut from his $9.5 million, but since he was bought out by the Cubs for $2 million it works out just fine for him.

This is actually a pretty good move by the Giants: they are not only getting a player who's hit exactly .300 for his career, they'll be getting more pitchers to throw to Bonds. Alou does play left, but Felipe sez he can play right field too. You can tell they're not too concerned about speed in the corners. As long as he stays healthy the Giants will be in pretty good shape.

And so the number of sluggers on the market drops by one. Will Sammy be next? I sure goddamn hope so, because something needs to happen soon.

- posted by Mike J. @ 12:13 AM
|

This entire offseason the Cubs have been trying to trade Sammy Sosa as a means of freeing up space to sign a big name free agent outfielder such as J.D. Drew or Carlos Beltran. Much has been made about whether the Cubs can afford to fit both Sosa and one of those players in the payroll. Many writers and Jim Hendry himself have argued that the Cubs cannot take on a player such as Carlos Beltran without first trading Sosa while many writers have claimed that the Cubs in fact do have enough room to fit both players. Regardless of the money issue, there are many other issues that now point to the fact that Sosa must go, most important being the apparent lack of respect he is now getting from his teammates. However, what if the Cubs are going about this the wrong way? Perhaps the best way to trade Sosa is to sign another player first.


As of right now there are arguably five or six players who are available through free agency or trade who would give a team guaranteed power and RBIs while also providing a bit of star power. Those players include Beltran, Drew, Magglio Ordonez, Moises Alou, Carlos Delgado, and Sammy Sosa. While there are other players possibly available through trade these six players are all available as free agents, or in the case of Sosa, are being heavily shopped for a trade. If you use ESPN's rumor central as a somewhat reputable source, which can be debated, there are 8-10 teams interested in these players, including the Cubs, Yankees, Orioles, Mets, Braves, Royals, Dodgers, Tigers, and others. Obviously there are more teams interested than there are players and so some teams are going to fail in their attempt to find a slugging outfielder.


Because there are a good deal of quality players among that list who are considerably younger and a lesser risk than Sammy Sosa, few teams are willing to go out of their way to make a move at Sosa. If you were say the Mets or the Braves why would you go after an aging, injury prone, slumping Sammy Sosa when you could still make a move at Drew or Beltran. Sosa is still a good player but he is a much greater risk than some of those other players and so it is tough to move him.


My thinking is that if the Cubs can somehow fit both Sosa and another free-agent outfielder in the payroll, and that is still an if, they should go ahead and try and sign that free-agent. If the cubs are able to sign a Beltran or a Drew the market of available power outfielders suddenly gets smaller and teams get a little more desperate. If one of those players is taken off the market, teams might be a little more willing to look at Sammy Sosa knowing that their options are dwindling. In addition, signing a free-agent now would protect the Cubs in the event that they are able to trade Sosa too late when no one good is available anymore.


Such a move would likely require some creative payroll squeezing by Jim Hendry and the Cub's management. But it could be possible to get Drew or Beltran with a deal that is slightly smaller in the first year, 2005, and then gets bigger after Sosa moves on after next year. Then the Cubs would be able to survive if Sosa stayed and they would be in great shape if they could move him. Obviously this is a crazy idea and is probably very unlikely. However, if it were possible it would make the Cubs a better team and would give them a better bargaining position in terms of moving Sosa. Jim Hendry is a creative general manager and if he can find a way to fit both players in the same payroll I am sure he would do it. If the Cubs are intent on moving Sosa their best option might be to close the deal on someone else and give themselves a little more leverage at the table. Otherwise I fear the Cubs could be stuck with Sosa and no one substantial in left or even worse no one substantial in right or left.


[Updated 12:03 AM]
Well, it appears that the Dodgers beat the Cubs to the punch as they have reportedly agreed to terms with free-agent outfielder J.D. Drew. According to ESPN, the Dodgers have signed Drew to a 5 year $55 million dollar deal pending an upcoming physical. While Drew had many question marks I still believed he was the best option other than Carlos Beltran and now that he is gone the Cubs are going to have to get moving. I would hate to see the Cubs just sit here on their hands waiting for someone to call about Sammy Sosa but that seems like what they are doing.

- posted by Mike R. @ 10:38 PM
|

***

Overview

76-86 (4th place)

Offense
-Runs Scored: 750 (10th in NL)
-On Base Percentage: .331 (9th)
-Slugging Percentage: .418 (9th)

Defense/Pitching
-Runs Allowed: 907 (15th)
-ERA: 5.19 (15th)
-WHIP: 1.50 (15th)
-Errors: 113 (12th)

The race for title of best hitter in 2004 is closer than one might think, so before I give my choice I'll lay out the key stats for the two contenders, Sean Casey and Adam Dunn.

	AVG	OBP	SLG	Runs	HR	RBI	SO	BB
Sean Casey	.324	.381	.534	101	24	99	36	46
Adam Dunn	.266	.388	.569	105	46	102	195	108

These two hitters are prime examples of how a similar OPS can show that two hitters are good but not tell you in what way. Casey has good power and makes a lot of contact, and consequently doesn't strike out or walk all that much. Obviously this worked out for him. On the other hand, Dunn has great power and loves to swing, which leads to extreme results: he finished tied for 2nd in home runs and became the all-time single season strikeout leader. Despite all the strikeouts, Dunn somehow managed to draw 108 walks, good for 6th in the NL.

How do you name one a better hitter than the other? Casey can hit about everything that comes his way, which is in fact good, but his walk total comes way down because of his skill with the bat. Besides strikeouts, Casey's stats are lower than Dunn's across the board (not by much, I admit), but can you really call the man who has struck out more than anyone - ever - in a single season the best hitter?

Yes you can. I'd almost give it to him based solely on his tall tale of a home run, where he crushed a ball so far that it landed in the Ohio river, or as some like to call it, in Kentucky. Almost, anyway. The real reason I'll call Dunn the better hitter is that his ability to draw the walk is so great that it outweighs his even greater ability to strike out with his giant swing. He could get better, too- if he learned to know when to swing for the fences (of Kentucky), a relatively easy adjustment it would seem, he could get more plain old hits or even draw some more walks.

Well, that was a digression. Anyway, their best pitcher apparently was Paul Wilson with 11 wins and a 4.36 ERA. That was so impressive the Reds decided to give him a two-year contract for $8.2 million, but we'll get to that later.

Needs to address

Pitching, pitching, pitching. Starting pitching, relief pitching, and, well I guess Danny Graves did a pretty good job as a closer, converting 41 in 50 tries, but I think that demonstrates that closing's not so tough with a 3-run lead more than Graves is an excellent pitcher. The 3.95 ERA and 40 SO in 68 innings won't fool me, Danny Boy.

Their offense isn't great, but it wasn't bad either. Right around average, you could say. If Ken Griffey Jr. were healthy all last season they would've been much better off.


What has been addressed?

The Reds have taken some good strides in strengthening their bullpen, signing four pitchers in the last week or so: starter Ramon Ortiz and relievers David Weathers, Ben Weber, and former Cub Kent Mercker.

Pitching for the Angels in 2004, Ortiz was moved to the bullpen after a shaky start to the season but he's won as many as 16 games in a season in the past and so long as he can find his rhythm right away he should be good addition to the starting rotation.

Weathers pitched for Cincy before in 1998 and ended up with a 6.21 ERA in 62 innings pitched. He's been better since then but his career ERA is 4.46, and I would qualify him only as a proven so-so reliever, which I guess is why the Reds signed him.

Weber also pitched for Anaheim, and quite well until carpal tunnel syndrome severely limited his playing time in 2004 and affected his performance. If you write off 2004 as an aberration, the Reds actually landed a very good reliever. Weber had a 2.54 and 2.69 ERA in 2002 and 2003 while pitching about 80 innings each year. If he is truly healthy again, he could be a big contributor in the bullpen.

As a Cub Mercker will be remembered not for his pitching but for his run-in with the announcing booth. The whole incident smacks of he-said she-said (or he-said he-said I guess) with both sides claiming the other is guilty, and I won't delve into it here. In spite of his 2.55 ERA over 50 innings in 71 games the Cubs decided not to resign Mercker, and considering the ridiculousness of the situation I don't really care that he's gone. I think he'll do fine with the Reds, although I question signing another middle-aged middle reliever.

Like I said before, they resigned Paul Wilson to a deal that seems hard to explain. I won't go over his stats in detail (click here to check them out), but they're not great, and surely there were better starters on the market. You could say it came down to money and their ability to sign a quality free agent pitcher given the deals that have gone down so far this offseason, but why would they spend so much on Wilson then?

All this coming from a guy who roots for a team with one of the best rotations in the bigs. Wilson should be a 4th or 5th starter, but apparently he's all the Reds have. A move like this at the beginning of the offseason probably means they won't be making any blockbuster deals in terms of pitching anytime soon.

Besides the pitchers I've mentioned, that's about it. They signed a couple of guys in the minor league part of the Rule 5 draft, but they've made no trades this offseason so far.

UPDATE: About 2 minutes after I first posted this the Reds signed free agent Joe Randa to play 3rd base. Last year he batted .287 with the Royals and drove in 56 RBI.

What's next?

Just yesterday the Reds offered a contract to their 2B D'Angelo Jimenez who wasn't all that bad but doesn't exactly fall into the top-tier range of second basemen. They didn't offer contracts to several others: you can get the rest of the info here.

Ideally the Reds would sign another starter or two, but not much is available and it doesn't seem like they're looking to pull of a big trade. I don't think there's any way they'd deal Dunn or Casey - two of the likeliest fruits to entice a potential trading partner - to add to their rotation. Whatever they're planning on doing I'd like to at least see a hint of where they're headed, but for now we'll have to wait and see.

Second Opinion

Unfortunately the Reds blogger I tried to contact for this section didn't respond in time, so I'll point you to this Cincinnati Reds Blog for further information.

***

Will the Reds pitching be better in 2005? The only way it could be worse is if they played their games in Mile-High Stadium, and all the additions are good steps forward. I honestly think the Reds could go .500 if Griffey stays healthy and produces, but that's a very big if.

Having covered the bottom half of the NL Central so far, its looking like all three teams are taking steps forward and will try to make life difficult for everyone else in the division. Barring injury I don't think there's going to be many lopsided series between any of the Central teams, which is going to make for some very interesting baseball.

- posted by Mike J. @ 2:10 PM
|

This isn't a new feature at OSC, but it is worth checking out if you haven't seen it before. John Dewan, owner of ACTA Sports whichs publishes the Bill James Handbooks, has a stat of the week feature that provides some pretty good insights. For example, he weighed in on Glendon Rusch's ability to replace Matt Clement a few weeks ago:

"When compared to all other fifth starters in baseball, he had the lowest opponent OPS (on-base plus slugging) at .692. In fact, based on his effectiveness, Clement would be considered more like the third starter on the Cubs, and he ranked first among third starters in MLB as well. The problem is, he's on his way to signing with another club through free agency. How does it look like his replacement, Glendon Rusch, might fare in next year's rotation?

"With key injuries during the season to Prior and Wood, Rusch started sixteen games for the Cubs in 2004. Amazingly, as effective as Clement was, Rusch had an even better opponent OPS (.686). This opponent OPS ranks Rusch first among all third, fourth, fifth or sixth starters in baseball."

I already felt pretty good about Rusch as a 5th starter, but now I feel even better.

The link has also found a home on the sidebar in case you forget to bookmark.

- posted by Mike J. @ 8:20 PM
|

The Baltimore Orioles signed former Cardinals' lefty Steve Kline today to a two-year deal. Kline was excellent last year as part of the left-handed odd couple with Ray King in the Cards' bullpen and I'm a little disappointed to see the Cubs pass him by. In 50 innings over 67 games he posted a 1.79 ERA and a 1.07 WHIP.

I still think Kline could have at least contended for the closer spot with the Cubs, and if not there's nothing wrong with having another good lefty. The Orioles did well to acquire him, and in a nod to the Sosa to Baltimore rumors, the article linked to above says,

"Since Kline is a setup man, it could also mean the organization has decided to make [B.J.] Ryan the closer. It could either trade Jorge Julio or make him the primary right-handed setup man to replace the injured Jason Grimsley."

I suppose it is entirely possible that this move by the Orioles is a precursor to a trade for Sammy, but that's a little shaky to be standing all on its own as proof.

- posted by Mike J. @ 7:28 PM
|

Is there a sense of urgency yet in unloading Sosa? The Yankees are meeting with Carlos Beltran on Tuesday and while Boras is supposedly waiting until January 8th, the last day Beltran can sign with the Astros, before making a deal it wouldn't surprise me if Steinbrenner decided to wow him right away with a can't refuse offer.

All the while rumors about Sosa go back and forth and nothing substantial comes out of them. He could go to the Orioles, but only if the Cubs take on a lot of Sosa's salary. How will that help them afford Beltran? If a deal for Beltran goes down before the Cubs can get in on the bidding they won't be out of options entirely, but they might be soon. Assuming the Randy Johnson deal is completed, the Dodgers will have extra payroll with which to pursue J.D. Drew, leaving one less option on the table for the Cubs.

The inability to trade Sosa may come back to haunt them not only in the clubhouse next year, but also in their flexibility to pursue any sort of top-caliber outfielder. As the days tick away I'm getting more and more nervous about the possibility of Jason Dubois or David Kelton in left field and Sammy Sosa brooding in right come 2005, but then again its only December 20th. There is plenty of time left for trades, but if anyone will be left for the Cubs remains to be seen.

- posted by Mike J. @ 2:33 PM
|

Just when you thought the Cardinals were falling apart and losing all of their players and all of the players they were interested in they give you another reason to shake your fist. Last night the Cardinals pulled off a trade with Oakland that sent left-hander Mark Mulder to the Cardinals for Danny Haren, Kiko Calero, and catching prospect Daric Barton. This one hurts just a bit. If you looked at the Cardinals last year you would have seen a team that really had only one weakness and that weakness was a lack of a top of the line ace. Now the Cardinals have a legitimate ace in Mark Mulder who went 17-8 last year and has consistently knocked on the door of an AL Cy Young award. Mulder did struggle in the second half last year but even a struggling Mark Mulder in the NL will probably help the Cardinals.


While the addition of Mark Mulder is great I do think the Cardinals gave up a great deal more than most people would have you believe. Calero was a solid bullpen pitcher last year who finished the season with a 2.78 ERA and on opponent's batting average of .176. Calero was a huge part of what made the Cardinal's bullpen so solid last year and considering that many of the Cardinal's relief pitchers had better than average years last year this move could hurt their bullpen significantly. You could make the argument that a large portion of their bullpen, ahem Julian Tavarez, had career years which will be hard to reproduce in 2005. Losing Calero then becomes even more important because he could have stabilized a still questionable bullpen.


The loss of Danny Haren I think will have to be evaluated a little bit later. Haren was up and down last season and while he has potential he was also awful at times last year. Many people think he has a bright future in a starting rotation but only time will tell if he can achieve that potential. The same wait and see approach is also necessary for catching prospect Daric Barton who is widely regarded as having some great upside but has obviously never played at the major league level.


Overall, I think this was a good trade for the St. Louis Cardinals. While I think that Mulder is a tad bit overrated I still think his addition gives the Cardinals the ace they so badly needed last year. It will be interesting to see how he makes the adjustment to the NL though he will probably thrive a bit more now that he gets to face a pitcher in the nine spot. Mulder also struggled with a troublesome injury last year and it will be interesting to see how he responds. The Cardinals rotation still cannot compete with the Cub's in terms of depth and the number of aces but Mulder will make the Cardinals a better team and it helps a problem that plagued them last year. We all knew that Walt Jocketty would not stand by and let his team be dismantled. The Cardinals still have many holes to fill before I would be willing to say they are the favorites in the NL Central but this deal will make them a little bit better. I hope Jim Hendry is watching and knows that now would be a good time to make a splash.

- posted by Mike R. @ 10:14 AM
|

Its not often that I come across a corporate website that I really like, and its even less often I find a professional sports website besides ESPN that I visit more than once a month. That being said, it sometimes seems like an absolute surprise that MLB.com is as good as it is. Not only is there stellar content and a vast archive of video (mlb.tv sounds great and I'd probably use it if I didn't live in Chicago anyway), the design itself is fantastic.

Before I get ahead of myself, its occurring to me that there's little reason for a baseball blog to give such a rave review for MLB.com, since anyone that comes here likely goes to MLB.com just as often. Makes me wish I were getting paid for this.

Anyway, some of the more interesting features of the site have come to my attention lately. Perfect Game Trivia tests you on some really random bits of knowledge and also reveals that I have very few random bits of knowledge that would help me in the game. Simple probability would suggest that I guess right some of the time, but I've never gotten more than 3 right in one 9-question game. I should probably keep up some sort of facade and claim supremacy at trivia, being a baseball blogger and all, but there's no way I would know 80% of this stuff: you've gotta be hardcore to ace this test.

If you're an AIM addict, add "MLB" to your buddy list. If you send it an IM it'll give you a menu of options ranging from headlines to scores to standings- its nothing you couldn't find on your own, but it sure makes it simple.

Speaking of headlines, the latest one that's not about Randy Johnson is word that Matt Clement is about to sign with the Red Sox for $25 million over 3 years. The Red Sox are getting a great pitcher - one I wish the Cubs could still afford - and I'm really disappointed to see him leave the North Side. I knew it was coming, but it didn't make it any easier finally hearing about it.

When the trade rumors involving Clement for Nomar started in July before the trade deadline, I defended Clement's place on the team vehemently, saying that losing a starter that good in the middle of the season would come back to haunt the Cubs down the road. Of course the Cubs kept him and got Nomar as well in a dazzling piece of orchestration by Jim Hendry, but it appears that in the end it didn't make much difference. I take comfort in the fact that Clement carefully chose the Red Sox from all the suitors, and this quote from his agent Barry Axelrod makes me smile:

"He really worked hard on this decision. I kind of admired his approach. He took it upon himself to call some people that were sort of [unbiased] parties, people like Greg Maddux and Rick Sutcliffe and Mark Grace, and people that have been through this before.

"He did that on his own. Not being recruited, but calling people without a bias, veterans, like Trevor Hoffman, I think he talked to Kerry Wood, just to get different viewpoints. He worked hard at it and he was still talking to people today and it was a tough decision."

Get your brillo pads ready for Clement's starts, Boston fans: with proper run support I can practically guarantee he'll help you forget about Pedro in no time.

- posted by Mike J. @ 3:09 AM
|

Ok, I will admit it. I jumped on and off the Corey Patterson leadoff bandwagon so fast last year that I think I broke my ankle. Ever since I saw Patterson a couple years ago I have always held a special place for him. For some reason I just like Patterson and want him to succeed. I don't really know why Corey Patterson is one of the guys I have always rooted for but that's the way it is. Due to my Corey Patterson love I was one of the guys who fell on Corey the hardest last year when he would struggle for a couple games and picked him up if he hit well for a game or two. Therefore I was naturally one of the many Cub fans who saw Corey rake the ball in the leadoff spot for the first couple weeks or so and of course told all my friends that I was right and Corey was finally getting it. I was wrong. I really wanted him to succeed, but I think it's now time that we put this idea to death.



In 245 ABs last year Corey hit .264 with an OBP of .317. Not only is .317 a bad OBP but it happens to be below the Cub's average of .328 which was good enough for 11th in the NL. To put that those numbers into perspective, of the nine batters in the NL who got enough at-bats to qualify in the leadoff spot, only one, Scott Podsednik, posted a lower OBP (.315) than Patterson. You could thus reasonably say that if a leadoff hitter's job is to get on base then Corey Patterson ranks as one of the worst two leadoff hitters in the NL. Compare those numbers to the other Cub who spent significant time leading off, Todd Walker, and you would find that Walker posted a .370 OBP in his 200+ at bats in the lead off spot. Based on these numbers you could say that the Corey Patterson experiment has failed and it is time to put Corey back into a lineup spot that better suits his abilities. You would say that it looks like a no-brainer that Corey shouldn't be hitting number 1. Unfortunately you are not Dusty Baker. I recently found this quote from Dusty on MLB.com.


"Corey's more like Rickey Henderson than Brett Butler...He's going to hit you 20 home runs and has to learn the art of walking and pitch selection. There's different things that make you an excellent leadoff hitter. He's got some things to learn. We're trying to accelerate the learning curve by putting him in contact with guys." --Dusty Baker, Cubs manager, on outfielder Corey Patterson (MLB.com)



What? Is this the same man who once famously said that walks only clog up the bases? Apparently Dusty can ignore his own insane ideas only to support another one of his insane ideas. Believe me I would love it if Corey Patterson could just turn a switch and suddenly know how to take a pitch every now and then. However, that just isn't going to happen. While Patterson's walk totals did go up last year they are still pretty below average and there doesn't seem to be much evidence that Corey will suddenly turn into Barry Bonds when it comes to plate patience. Yes, Corey Patterson is fast and yes he can steal bases but that does not make him a good leadoff hitter. This seems to me to be another instance of the Cubs trying to turn Patterson into something he is not. Corey has some attributes that would make him a good leadoff guy such as speed and base stealing ability but the problem is he has to actually get on to base. Until Corey learns how to steal first I don't see him as a successful lead off hitter.


We all know how much this team struggled last year with OBP and solo home runs and I don't see much changing next year if Corey Patterson is leading off, as Dusty Baker seems intent on doing. If Corey were able to get on base he might make a good lead off guy but until that days comes he will only hurt the team. If the Cubs cannot find a good leadoff hitter in the Sosa trade or in free agency (and that seems unlikely since we want power in left field, not a leadoff type guy) then it is time to seriously consider returning Todd Walker to the leadoff spot. Granted hitting #1 is not Walker's natural spot either but judging by his stint in that spot last year he is an upgrade from Patterson. I know there is a lot of time left in the offseason and a lot can still happen but if nothing happens can we please make sure Corey Patterson isn't hitting in the number one spot?

- posted by Mike R. @ 8:14 AM
|

It seems like pretty much every team in the league was involved in some kind of transaction today except for the Cubs. A lot of huge deals went down today but still nothing much from the Cubs camp. None of today's deals have any huge bearing on the Cubs other than the fact that the Tim Hudson to Atlanta trade cost the Cardinals another one of their desired starting pitchers. Today was even devoid of more off the wall Sammy Sosa rumors.


I am typically a patient man but I am getting a little antsy now that the off-season is starting to pickup. I have a lot of faith in Jim Hendry and is ability to make something happen but I worry that the Cubs are relying too heavily on Carlos Beltran. If the Cubs are unable to move Sammy Sosa as many experts claim they won't be able to, or if they move him too late, the Cubs might be left out in the cold when it comes to that empty outfield spot. I am not advocating the Cubs going after a mediocre player just they so they aren't left without a chair at the end but I would like to see a greater sense of urgency out of the team. I would hate to suddenly find out Sammy Sosa can be traded only to find Carlos Beltran signs with the Yankees and the Cubs are left with Tom Goodwin or someone equally terrible in left-field.


I guess I am done being pessimist. The Cubs still have plenty of options for the outfield and signs are pointing to the fact that the Cubs might actually be able to move Sammy elsewhere. There is still time for the Cubs to land a great outfielder and I trust that Jim Hendry will do that for this team. So I guess there is no need to panic quite yet...at least not until tomorrow.

- posted by Mike R. @ 8:33 PM
|

Moving to Pittsburgh, we find another team that's made some big moves already this offseason, but like the Brewers the Pirates have a lot of holes to fill to become competitive in 2005.


Overview

72-89 (5th place)

Offense
-Runs Scored: 680 (13th in NL)
-On Base Percentage: .321 (12th)
-Slugging Percentage: .401 (13th)

Defense/Pitching
-Runs Allowed: 744 (9th)
-ERA: 4.29 (10th)
-WHIP: 1.42 (12th)
-Errors: 103 (10th)

Their best hitter in 2004 that isn't now an Athletic was Jack Wilson, who batted .308/.335/.459 and garnered 201 hits. Craig Wilson hit more home runs, scored more runs, and drove in more runs, but Jack W. struck out only 71 times compared to Craig W.'s 169.

Their best pitcher in 2004 was emerging Oliver Perez, who had a 2.98 ERA, 239 strikeouts, and a 10.97 K/9 inning ratio. He pitched the most innings for the Pirates, logging 196 in his 30 starts.

Needs to address

The Pirates had a better season than the Brewers, but not by much. Going into the offseason they needed more offense and more starting pitching. Defense clearly wasn't great and sacrificing what defense they have in order to get better bats shouldn't be an issue.

What has been addressed?

The money issue. Jason Kendall was traded to the Athletics for reliever Arthur Rhodes and consequently $15 million over the next 3 years was freed up. That doesn't seem like a whole lot of money, but the Pirates had the 3rd smallest payroll in 2004, spending only $32.2 million. Unfortunately their small budget forced them to deal their best position player, but progress has been made after the deal.

Since the Kendall trade, the Pirates turned around and dealt Rhodes to Cleveland for Matt Lawton, a 2004 All-Star that batted .277/.366/.421 and stole 23 bases. He will take Kendall's place in the leadoff spot, and while his average isn't nearly as good as Kendall's, he's faster and hit 20 home runs to Kendall's 3.

Besides the offense, the bullpen is in excellent shape for 2005. Jose Mesa, who had a 3.25 ERA and saved 43 last season, signed a one-year contract for $2.5 million. The setup man Salomon Torres will earn $2.6 mil over the next 2 years: he pitched a whopping 92 innings as a reliever while posting a 2.64 ERA.

What's next?

Acquiring Lawton was a good step, but there's still a hole at catcher. They have a young 'un in Humberto Cota, but he's seen limited playing time and hasn't fully developed as a batter: he's hitting .227/.271/.500 and in 66 at bats, he's struck out 20 times. Yikes. The Pirates hope he'll get better, but in the meantime they've been looking into signing a veteran for the full-time position. They looked into Charles Johnson of the Rockies, but their eyes appear to be settling on 74-year-old Benito Santiago of the Kansas City Royals. I'm amazed this guy still has knees, and so are the Pirates: the deal won't go through unless he passes a physical. Anyway, the Pirates would stand to lose pitching prospect Leo Nunez but the Royals would pay part of Santiago's $2.15 mil salary.

For beyond 2005 the Pirates will need to lock up both Jack Wilson and Oliver Perez, a task that could be very difficult given their financial restraints. Perez is incredible and while it'd hurt to lose a guy like Jack Wilson, Jason Bay will still be around to produce some runs.

Second Opinion

I checked in with Honest Wagner to make sure I wasn't totally off base with my comments. A couple quick answers and Mr. ...Wagner confirmed my musings: the Pirates have made the grade with the Kendall trade, not locking up Ollie would be folly, and, well, he thinks that the Pirates will be .500 and I'm not so sure (OK, so the last one didn't rhyme).


The Pirates have gotten better this offseason, but their lack of payroll causes me to think that not many other big moves will come. I'd like to see them get some better starting pitching, because when your ace only has 12 come October the starting rotation isn't in very good shape. The NL Central is going to be a tough division and unless their players start having lots of babies and having career days on the same day (stupid Rob Mackowiak) I don't think they'll break .500 in 2005.


(Note: In regards to the Brewers' trade tracking, I somehow completely neglected to mention the signing of catcher Damian Miller, which a commenter alerted me to. I had good feelings about the Brewers for 2005 anyway, and this solidifies them.)

- posted by Mike J. @ 11:06 AM
|

I know I'm a little late on talking about Monday's Rule 5 draft but I thought I would chime in with my two cents on the subject. The Cubs lost prospects Andy Sisco and Luke Hagerty in Monday's draft. A couple days ago I questioned the decision to leave some of the team's better prospects such as Sisco off of the 40 man roster to give spots to prospects like Ronny Cedeno and Geovany Soto. I still don't believe that either player is good enough yet to remain on the 25 man roster for an entire season though Hagery has probably a better chance because he can spend a good portion of the season on the DL due to his injury. However, Sisco has tremendous upside and could very well perform well enough to keep himself on the roster and out of the Cub's hands.


What bothers me though is how easily it seems the Cubs gave up on the two players. I recently had it pointed out to me by a friend that the Cub's 40 man roster wasn't even full at the time of the Rule 5 draft. That means there were spots on the roster for Sisco and many other prospects. Currently the Cubs have only 35 spots filled on the active roster meaning that someone like Sisco could have been protected. The fact that Jim Hendry and the Cubs gave up so easily on Sisco makes me wonder if they know something about him that we don't. Sisco did struggle last year in Single A but is still widely thought to have tremendous upside. I wonder if maybe the Cubs saw something about Sisco that they didn't like and therefore allowed him to be taken. I obviously have no evidence to back this theory up but I think that something might have been up with Sisco. I guess only time will tell. We will have to wait and see how both Sisco and Hagerty perform and whether they might be headed back to the Cubs later this season.

- posted by Mike R. @ 10:39 PM
|

I can talk about Sosa rumors or the lack of a closer all I want, but 90 of the Cubs' 162 games are played in their own division, so it's probably worth it to take a glance at what they're all doing this offseason. One by one I'll be breaking down those "other" teams' moves so far, starting with a quick overview of the season, what their needs were, what moves have been made, and what needs still have to be addressed. I'll also get the opinion of a fellow blogger that follows each team more closely than myself. To begin, I'll look to the north and start with the Milwaukee Brewers.


Overview

67-94 (6th place)

Offense
-Runs Scored: 634 (14th in NL)
-On Base Percentage: .321 (13th)
-Slugging Percentage: .387 (16th)

Defense/Pitching
-Runs Allowed: 757 (10th)
-ERA: 4.24 (9th)
-WHIP: 1.33 (6th)
-Errors: 117 (14th)

Their best hitter in 2004 by far was Lyle Overbay with a 301/385/478 (AVG/OBP/SLG) line. Their best pitcher by far was strikeout machine Ben Sheets, who had an ERA of 2.70, pitched more innings than anyone else, and struck out nearly as many batters as their #2 and 3 starters Doug Davis and Victor Santos combined. Shining stars indeed, but they were lonely in the Brewers universe in 2004.

Needs to address

Well, pretty much everything. Someone locked up their offense in the NL basement, where it was fed gruel once a day. The 6th best WHIP in the NL took me a bit by surprise as I pored over the stat tables, but the ERA and errors are nothing to write home about. Everything needs help and there's no quick fix.

The biggest need? A bigger budget: I can't possibly see Milwaukee being competitive with so little money to spend. With a payroll of only $27.5 million in a division that includes the Cubs ($90.5), Cardinals ($83.2), and the Astros ($75.4), the 2004 season was no surprise. Manager Ned Yost did a great job with the team up until the All-Star break, but they couldn't keep their momentum and performing to expectations, faded something terrible down the stretch.

What has been addressed?

Perhaps the most important need addressed so far was the lack of an owner not named Bud Selig. Mark Attanasio is the "presumptive" new owner of the Brewers and this almost certainly means more money, because how could it mean less?

The Age of Attanasio appears to have begun, because the Brewers have already made two big, headline-grabbing trades so far this offseason: Dan Kolb to the Braves for Jose Capellan and Alex Zumwalt, and Scott Podsednik and Luis Vizcaino to the White Sox for Carlos Lee.

Jose Capellan was the Braves' #1 pitching prospect. In 2004 he had a 2.32 ERA in the minor leagues, compiled a K/9 inning ratio of 8.17 (139 in 152 2/3), and boats a fastball that has been clocked at 100 mph. They also won't lose him to Tommy John surgery because he already had it in 2002. The Brewers think he's ready to compete for a spot in the starting rotation, and it'll be interesting to see what he can do. Zumwalt isn't all that special and clearly wasn't the main bargaining chip in the trade.

Carlos Lee had a year similar to Overbay's and will be a welcome addition to the lineup. He hit 31 dingers and got 99 RBI in 2004 while batting .305/.365/.525, and at 28 appears to be entering his prime. There are better outfielders, but hell, I would've been happy if he wound up as a Cub. Doug Melvin says it pretty well: "Carlos fills our biggest offseason need. One of our biggest priorities was offense."

What's next?

Although the Brewers got some great players, they gave up some good ones as well. Podsednik isn't that much of a loss, but Kolb and Vizcaino were the best relievers in their bullpen at closer and setup man, and they're going to have trouble replacing those two.

Besides the newly weakened bullpen, the Brewers still need a lot of help with their offense. However, any more moves made will depend a lot on the payroll for 2005 and how creative Doug Melvin can get. Developing prospects and keeping the good pieces in place are about all the Brewers can do, and while more strides can be made (especially if Capellan makes it out of the minors), I admit I'll be surprised if they find themselves in the playoff hunt come September.

Second Opinion

Of course this is all coming from the mouth of a lifelong Cubs fan and admitted non-expert on the subject. I got in touch with Al from Al's Ramblings, an excellent Brewers blog, to answer some questions for me.

1) The two major trades by themselves (Kolb for Capellan, Pods and Vizcaino for Lee) seem like good deals for the Brewers, but the decimation of the bullpen in the process is worrisome. What can they do and who can they go after to get their relief pitching in order?

I assume they will sign some "generic" middle relievers, and do the same thing they've always done, sign good arms and failed starters and give them a chance. Let's look at the bullpen last year:

1. Kolb--signed after being released
2. Vizcaino-traded for a player signed as a minor league FA
3. Adams-signed as an undrafted FA
4. Wise--signed after being released
5. Kieschnick--minor league FA
6. Bennett--Rule 5 draft

And the beat goes on. Relievers need only have 2 effective pitches, and only throw about 70 innings a season. It isn't hard finding guys with those qualities.

2) How much do you think new owner Mark Attanasio will increase the payroll budget, if at all?

Guesses range all over, but the most common seems to be $40-45 million. Supposedly, a firm number has never been named, as Mark A has hinted he'll spend more if a quality player comes along. With Lee added, the minimum would seem to be about $38M.

3) From the two big trades so far, Doug Melvin appears to be a GM capable of getting deals done. Under Attanasio, do you think Melvin can start laying a foundation for a turnaround in the near future?

The foundation has been laid. The #1 ranked farm system of last year only graduated Mike Adams to the bigs. The AAA team in Nashville could have as many as 10-12 actual "prospects" start the '05 campaign there, including Weeks, Fielder, and Hardy. While the team has gone cheap for several years as far as big league payroll, they have spent what it took on the draft, and signed some draft-and-follows for big money as well. This team is one more SP away from being mentioned as a team with a chance...not a 90 win team, but with a chance to be .500 and with some luck and good health, 85 would be possible.

As the kids come up, more vets can be dealt to shore up the weak spots. Prince would seem set at 1B soon, allowing Overbay to either move to LF or be traded. Ditto for Weeks, Spivey may well be dealt at the July deadline this year.

It's a good time to be a Brewers' fan.

I'd have to agree- things are finally looking up for the Brewers as they escape Purgatory Presented By Bud Selig, and it'll interesting to see what they can do during the rest of the offseason and in 2005. Even though they're in the same division as the Cubs, its hard not to root for a small-market team like this, and I hope they get better soon (but not too soon).

- posted by Mike J. @ 11:54 AM
|

There's only rumors of rumors regarding Sammy Sosa today, but there's always some sort of news. A couple more of the free agent backup catchers have been signed: ESPN's Rumor Central say that Einar Diaz was signed by the Cardinals for a $600k, one-year contract and Kelly Stinnett was signed to a minor league contract by the Diamondbacks.

I guess I was a little off when I broke down the options in comparison to Blanco - he was a lot cheaper than I expected him to be - but I'm still not convinced he would have been a better choice than Diaz.

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

As much as I dream about Carlos Beltran roaming the center field grass at Wrigley Field next year it seems more and more unlikely that the Cubs will be able to sign the sought after free agent. I don't necessarily want the cubs to give up on Beltran but I think it is time that the Cubs seriously consider a more reasonable option for the empty outfield spot. The outfield free agent class this offseason may be a bit top heavy but there are still options open to the Cubs.


My partner suggested earlier today that the Cubs should go after former White Sox outfielder Magglio Ordonez. To be honest I would not be unhappy if the Cubs ended up with Ordonez as the third outfielder. Ordonez is an extremely consistent player who has had some great years. Until last season and the injury, Ordonez hit at least .300, belted at least 25 home runs, and drove in at least 90 RBIs every season from 1999-2003. Ordonez is a powerful hitter who can get on base and plays solid, if unspectacular defense. Now if you read this you might think that Ordonez would be a nice cheap option for the outfield when compared to Carlos Beltran. The problem is that no one really knows in Ordonez is healthy enough to play. Never much of a injury risk, Ordonez suffered a terrible and debilitating knee injury last year and his health is still questionable. Ordonez was scheduled to have a workout at the winter meetings this past weekend but canceled the workout claiming that everyone could see his healthy knee in spring training. That doesn't seem good to me. I would love a healthy Ordonez but I would not want to risk $8-10 million on someone whose knee could fall out next year. In my mind, Ordonez is too much of a risk.


So if the Cubs can't get Beltran and Ordonez is too big of a risk then who do they get? None other than J.D. Drew. The Cubs still need a left-handed power hitter and could always use a hitter who can get on base and Drew fits all of those characteristics. Last season Drew hit .305 with an whopping .436 OBP and 31 home runs. You could make the argument that Drew's 2004 numbers are the result of a contract year but I would still gladly take his career 2,87 batting average and .391 career OBP. Drew is a powerful left-handed bat who gets on base at a great clip. Drew can draw 100 walks while hitting 30 homers and driving in around 100. There is also no doubt that he would also benefit from hitter friendly Wrigley. Much like Ordonez, in a vacuum, Drew seems to be a great choice for the vacant outfield spot.


Just like Ordonez though, Drew does come with some caveats. Until last season Drew had never played in more than 135 games. Though he did play in 145 games last season Drew is still a significant injury threat. If the Cubs were to sign Drew it would make sense for them to also lock up a solid fourth outfielder such as Todd Hollandsworth an insurance policy if Drew misses some games. Drew also will not come cheap. In 2004 Drew made only $4.2 million but stands to make a great deal more than that in 2005. Drew is rumored to be looking for 4 years at around $10 million a year which is a good deal cheaper than what Beltran would likely get. It seems that the Cubs would be able to fit in $7-10 million next season for Drew but the question is are they wiling to do it?


If the Cubs cannot get Carlos Beltran then I believe that J.D. Drew represents the next best option. For around $8-10 million dollars a year the Cubs could get a left-handed power bat and a hitter who knows how to get on base. If Drew can stay healthy (and that is a big if) that Cubs would be getting a fantastic player who would fill virtually every need. Believe me, I still want the Cubs to get Beltran but I just don't see it happening anymore. In that case J.D. Drew would be a great option to fill the final outfield spot. Now only if he could close games.

- posted by Mike R. @ 8:52 PM
|

News on a closer? Nope. News on Beltran? Yeah right. There's plenty of rumors out there, but I'll leave those for later: if you're looking for the real inside scoop, head over to Rich's BEAT and read about all the elbow-rubbing in Anaheim (parts 1,2, and 3).

For now, I'd like to address an email that was sent to me by Ryan Carpel regarding the current hole in left field that really got me thinking. Ryan thinks speedy Dwaine Bacon could fill void and writes,

"He would be our version of Juan Pierre. Then our dear Corey Patterson can resume the role of the next Sammy Sosa. We need a stolen base threat and a chemical spark and he could give that to us. While at Texas A & M he broke Vince Coleman's records. Also, he has been working with Vince Coleman, the Cubs Roving Base Running Instructor, and has honed his skill to a success rate of 76%."

Bacon's not quite ready for the major leagues yet, even though he's close. His strikeout-to-walk ratio in 2004 was 139/81- he's got discipline at the plate, but there's probably some pretty big holes in his swing still. Still, a 76% success rate running as much as he does is quite appealing regardless of his weaknesses, and hopefully he could be ready in a year.

The idea of filling left field from within the organization is pretty attractive after being exhausted by the free agent rumors. The Cubs did say that they wanted to move in a different direction when they let go of Alou - a speedier direction most likely - and Bacon would fit the bill nicely. Prospect Felix Pie is another option as well, but from within the organization I think the only option in 2005 is Jason Dubois, and Dubois doesn't excite me all that much.

Where does that leave the Cubs then? I don't think the Cubs should rely on Dubois or a platoon for a year, and its likely that they don't want to break the bank trying to fill their outfield. There's enough talent within the organization that someone might rise to the top for 2006, but in the meantime the best solution might be to sign a free agent to a one-year deal. Like who?

Like Magglio! The guy was plagued by knee injuries last year and his status is questionable, but if he looks good during a workout, the Cubs could sign him to an incentive-laden deal similar to Nomar's. If he's not great, they save some money and aren't obligated to anything. If he resumes form, they could decide whether or not to keep him for the following seasons. I would guess that Ordonez has a desire to reestablish his health and productivity, and this sort of deal could be done in spite of Sosa's contract, allowing the potential pursuit of Beltran to continue.

If you've got Ordonez and Patterson, you've got a pretty solid outfield even before you consider the last remaining spot. Of course, Magglio's not the only outfielder available; to me he makes the most sense. The other Mike will weigh in later today on his choice for filling the gap.

- posted by Mike J. @ 10:39 AM
|

Its about 8pm CST as I write this, but there's been a surprisingly small amount of news from Anaheim up to this point. The only point of interest regarding the Cubs - as in it involves the Cardinals - is that apparently the Renteria to the Red Sox trade isn't a done deal yet. While the Red Sox did offer $38 million over 4 years compared to the Cardinals $32 mil per 4, Renteria and his agent are still discussing with both teams as well as the Tigers.

Regarding the dwindling amount of closers (are there any left?), the Kerry Wood idea just seems silly to me. The only thing I'll add to the other Mike's comments is this: a guy that has a 10.43 strikeout/9 innings ratio during his career as a starter shouldn't be a closer. There was, however, an interesting idea regarding using Steve Kline as a closer on the ESPN wire:

With so many teams in need of a closer and many taking chances on guys that are so-so at best, it would not be a bad gamble for a club to take a chance on the fiery Kline. At 32, he is not a guy you can build around but if you are a team looking for a guy for a season or two - he seems like the perfect fit. His ability to serve as a lefthanded setup man makes him even more valuable and he could always be a trade deadline chip. Kline made just $1.7 million with St. Louis in 2004, when he was 2-2 with a 1.79 ERA. A two-year deal worth $6 million almost assuredly would be worth it one way or another.

You know, its not a bad idea. I probably would have balked at it before all the closers had been snapped up, but now it seems pretty reasonable. Any thoughts on Steve Kline as the Cubs closer in 2005, providing he can keep his hat clean?

- posted by Mike J. @ 8:00 PM
|

"You need a closer. Where would the Dodgers be without (Eric) Gagne? Where would the Yankees be without Mariano Rivera? That's mandatory in baseball now if you're going to win."
-Dusty Baker, on the Cub's closer situation

Don't look now but it seems that there is great deal of panic gripping the Cub's front office right now. Sure the Cub's executives are trying to play down the loss of Dan Kolb but if you look closely they sure seem to be doing a whole lot of hand wringing. In case you hadn't heard yet, the Atlanta Braves succeeded in trading for Milwaukee closer Dan Kolb in exchange for highly touted pitching prospect Jose Capellan. According to reports, Kolb had been the Cub's number one choice to fill the vacant closer spot and the Cubs were reportedly working hard to pry him away from Milwaukee.


I wasn't sold on Dan Kolb considering he always struck out too few batters. In my opinion if hitters are going to put that many balls in play against you sooner or later those baseballs are going to find holes. However, now that Kolb is out of the equation the Cubs have few external options left. If the Cubs are intent on going outside to find a closer they may be forced to go with either a man whose grandmother is still missing, young inconsistent talent, or a pitcher who hasn't thrown a pitch in two years.

Ignoring the outside options, one of the most talked about and controversial ideas that is being thrown around quite frequently is making Kerry Wood the new closer. Until yesterday the Kerry Wood for closer campaign had really only existed in the minds of fans and sports writers who wanted to create controversy. Now, it seems, the idea has some life. According to Jayson Stark, the Cubs have discussed the idea of moving Kerry Wood into the closer role. Stark even tired to strengthen his claim, including a quote from a baseball scout who claimed the move would make Kerry Wood the next John Smoltz. The fact that it has appeared in a Jayson Stark article does not make it a legitimate possibility but now that is seems the idea is more than just a bar room joke it seems like it would be a good idea to see if the idea has some merit.

While it would probably go too far to claim that Kerry Wood has been a failed starting pitcher you could make the argument, and many would, that Wood has definitely failed to live up to his great potential. Wood has outstanding stuff and there is little doubt that he has the abilities to win a Cy Young award. In his six year career Wood is 67-50 with over 1200 strikeouts and a career 3.63 ERA. Yes Kerry Wood has never won more than fourteen games and no he has never won a Cy Young but I hardly think those number qualify as a failed attempt at starting pitching. While Wood might suffer from a sometimes maddening lack of consistency those numbers seem to indicate he has done anything close to fail as a starter.

Moving Kerry Wood to the closer role would also open up another hole in the starting rotation forcing the Cubs to either move a reliever into the rotation or get another starting pitcher through trade or free-agency. If this free agency period suffers from a lack of good closers it also suffers from a serious lack of cheap quality starting pitching. Maybe the Cubs would be able to lure Matt Clement back but it seems unlikely. Without Clement, the Cubs would be forced to fill the hole with a bad cheaper starter or with an expensive starter like Pedro Martinez. Combine that with the fact that Wood has always struggled in his career in the first inning and you get a solution that ends up being more trouble than it's worth.

Although Kerry Wood could shine in the closer role, it does not seem like the move is necessary right now. Wood has not yet failed as a starter like an Eric Gagne and has not outlasted his worth as a starting pitcher. Wood has always struggled in the first inning, posting a 5.73 first inning ERA and a strikeout to walk ration under 2 in 2004 and his departure would leave a big hole in the starting rotation. Let's not forget that Wood is prone to bouts of tendinitis which might spell trouble when he would be asked to go two or three days in a row without rest. Granted the landscape is looking more and more bare in terms of available closers but it seems to be that moving Wood to closer is an act of desperation. Let's wait and see if Jim Hendry can solve this problem before we give up on a very talented starting pitcher.

- posted by Mike R. @ 10:51 AM
|

While Nomar may be the bigger question mark in terms of health, it turns out signing him as soon as possible turned out to be an even better move for the Cubs. STLtoday.com reports:

Signaling an end to organizational patience, Cardinals general manager Walt Jocketty on Friday imposed a "soft deadline" for free agent shortstop Edgar Renteria to re-sign with the club, a dramatic shift from the optimistic tone Jocketty had upon arriving at Major League Baseball's winter meetings...

Jocketty referred to the sides' differences as "significant" and suggested he is ready to head in another direction.

"We're at a point ... where we need to find out whether we're going to have Edgar or not because we can't keep putting things off," Jocketty said early Friday night. "We've got too many things that we have to try to get done, so we're proceeding in two different directions - one with Edgar on the team and one with Edgar not on the team. Then we'll decide in the end what's the best direction to go in."

Apparently Renteria and his agent are standing strong at $10 million per, while the Cardinals have yet to offer more than $32 mil per 4 years. Frankly I'd like to see him sign for as much money as possible, but that's the archrival hatred coming out in me. Maybe things will take too long and Tim Hudson will go elsewhere, too.

UPDATE- Sportscenter is saying The Red Sox are very close to signing Renteria, apparently willing to give him more money than the Cardinals. Paraphrasing, it was said that Boston's run after Renteria came as a surprise because they said they were looking for a short term deal because of the possible emergence of touted prospect Hanley Ramirez in 2006.

Apparently the Red Sox aren't quite ready to re-assume the cursed team status, as there's also word that Pedro and Jason Varitek are close to signing, but are hammering out details. Of course nothing is substantiated yet, but its looking like a successful offseason for the BoSox.

- posted by Mike J. @ 6:12 PM
|

I spent the day traveling from Evanston to Springfield, IL for the holidays and I'm kinda beat, so I don't have much. However, Rumor Central over at ESPN Insider has this tidbit on Sosa:

"Dec. 10 - ESPN.com's Jayson Stark is hearing the Cubs are becoming so intent on moving Sosa to the Mets they might be willing to pay the lion's share of the money due the slugging outfielder."

After seeing that Stark's Jeff Kent prediction was horribly wrong (I guess he did get the staying in the National League part right, but that's nothing a drunk monkey couldn't do), I hope he has some idea of what he's talking about. If he does, this isn't really a surprise that the Cubs are becoming that eager to move him- while reconciliation is possible, somehow I doubt the tenuous peace would last all season.

Can the Cubs get someone that isn't injury prone, though? I like the idea of Magglio Ordonez over Cliff Floyd or J.D. Drew simply because he doesn't have the history of injury they do, not to mention we'd be replacing a former South Sider with another in Maggs. More to come on the possibilities later, though.

- posted by Mike J. @ 8:45 PM
|

Lost in all of the celebration over the recent free agent signings is a potential problem for the Cubs, a problem which could come back to hurt the organization. That potential problem is Monday's Rule 5 Draft. For those of you not familiar with the Rule 5 draft, it is ironically a draft that consists of minor league players who have been signed by teams for a certain period of years. This article on Baseball America does a terrific job of explaining the process but I will try and sum it up. Basically, the Rule 5 draft exists to give minor leaguers a chance to get playing time in the majors.