Disciples of Doug Dascenzo

New post over at BTdubs

2006-02-01T13:06:00.000-08:00

For those of you clamoring for the return of the good DJ, there's a new post over at BTdubs. The tie-in to baseball? It's about the Dennis Eckersleys of Dating (e.g. the best closer dates in Chicago). Check it out.

Just when I think you couldn’t be any more stupid, you go and do something like this… And TOTALLY redeem yourself!

2006-01-24T06:31:00.000-08:00

OK, signing Wade Miller to a 1-year, $1 million contract doesn’t totally redeem the fact that Hendry is going into the season with two rookies starting crucial positions, a crappy right fielder, and Neifi Perez still on the roster, but it helps. Miller is another player with a history of injuries, and will likely be out until May recovering from surgery to fix a torn labrum, but this is essentially a win-win situation for the Cubs.

$1 million, in the world of baseball, is dirt cheap, and if Miller can prove he’s healthy, he could be an extremely valuable addition to the starting rotation or even the bullpen. Miller throws in the mid-90s, with a 90 MPH slider, and career numbers of 62-43 with a 3.98 ERA. And he’s only 29. So essentially, we’re looking at a guy very similar to Kerry Wood, and maybe between the two of them the Cubs can get a full season of productivity. If not, it’s a drop in the big bucket known as the Cubs’ 2006 budget.

There are a couple fringe benefits to this signing as well. First, it will force Hendry to trade a guy like Todd Wellemeyer who is a card-carrying member of the Todd Squad, but doesn’t need to be on the Cubs’ roster anymore. It also takes the Cubs out of the derby for the services of Jeff Weaver, who recently turned down a 3-year, $24.5 million offer from the Dodgers. Put simply, Weaver sucks. There’s no way he deserves that kind of money, and it would have been a kick to the nuts to see the Cubs pony over that kind of cash for a guy who will likely go 12-15 with a 4.37 ERA next year.

Overall, this has the potential to be a high-reward, low-cost situation, and if everything works according to plan will put the Cubs in a position to trade excess pitching for a big bat around the trade deadline. Granted, there a lot of “ifs” here, but for $1 million this is still a great deal.

Welcome back, Jimbo. I was getting sick of watching your evil twin run the show.

-----------------------------------------

In other baseball news, the mighty Jose Macias signed with the Nippon Ham Fighters in Japan to be their starting second baseman, and I couldn't be more happy that there's no chance of seeing him in a Cubs uniform this year. Now, if only we could convince Neifi to go start at shortstop for them.

The Curse of the Neckbeard...

2006-01-20T06:41:00.000-08:00

For all of you Bears fans desperately searching for answers over these last few cold, winter months, may I present you the perfect scapegoat - Orton's neckbeard.

After the Bears broke their 8-game winning streak, the good-luck neckbeard actually turned into a curse when Orton refused to shave. And now, because the powers of the neckbeard combined with those of Steve Smith were too overwhelming, the Bears' postseason hopes have been dashed against the rocky shores of Lake Tillman. At least now you have someone, or something, to blame.

Shave Kyle Orton's Neckbeard!

Cubs Convention Notes and Arbitration Updates...

2006-01-18T07:41:00.000-08:00

Some thoughts from the past few days…

I had a chance to attend the Cubs Convention on Saturday, and had some mixed reactions to all the hoopla. This was my first time at the convention, and when I walked in, it felt like my first trip to Disney World as a kid. As soon as we walked through the doors, there was Doug Glanville (my second favorite non-HOFer behind Dascenzo). However, just like Disney World, the fantasy is quickly tainted by the reality – trashy grown men clamoring for autographs, soft-boiled non-answers from management, lines everywhere, etc. Despite all of that, I still had a great time. Some highlights:

- Asking Dusty Baker why management has soured on Todd Walker, and when he gave a typical non-answer, hearing the crowd boo. Such sweet satisfaction.

- Asking bullpen coach Juan “Porky” Lopez what I needed to do to earn a job as a bullpen catcher. Although most of his answer was unintelligible, I did manage to make out one of the main responsibilities – waking the pitchers up on game day.

- The standard fashionably late entrance of Randy “Rebel” Hundley during Cubs Jeopardy, apparently due to a hangover. Gotta love late-stage alcoholism.

- Santo referring to his headphones as “earmuffs.”

- Listening to Rick Sutcliffe talk about how a young Greg Maddux retaliated against a pitch thrown at Andre Dawson, even though it meant he would likely be sent back down to the minors the next day (which he was). Now that’s a teammate.

I feel I need to further elaborate on Baker’s comments about Todd Walker. Baker claimed that management still likes Todd (which we all know isn’t true), and he would just prefer to make guys compete for a job rather than hand the starting job over to someone before Spring Training. That makes sense, but not when you consider that this game, while a business, involves real people, and Cubs management is being pretty cavalier with a man’s entire career.

Todd Walker came to the Cubs as a career .300 hitter who could have likely started for a number of other teams in the league. He arrived with the understanding that he would back up Grudz, but when Grudz left, he would be given the starting job. That’s only fair for a guy who signed a below-market contract as a back-up just because he wanted to play for the Cubs. However, Hendry and Baker have consistently twisted the knife in his back since his injury early last season.

To insist that he has to compete with Neifi Perez and Jerry Hairston, Jr. for a starting job is an insult. What’s worse is that if they trade him, the Cubs will have made, what I consider, a very unethical move. Walker could have been a free agent this off-season, but the Cubs picked up his option on the cheap. To take away his options as a free agent and then trade him to a team he has no say over would say to every player around the league that the Cubs organization is disloyal to its players and only cares about the bottom line. Todd Walker has given up likely a few million dollars elsewhere over the last couple of seasons specifically to play for the Cubs, and this is how they treat him?

--------------------------------------------

There’s one other thing I wanted to discuss, and that’s the impending arbitration process for 5 Cubs players (Zambrano, Pierre, Prior, Hairston, Ohman). During Andy McPhail’s tenure (since 1994), the Cubs have never taken a player to arbitration. This makes a lot of sense, because going to arbitration means that a player essentially has to listen to his own management badmouth him. That doesn’t build a whole lot of mutual respect. However, with the dollars on a few players this year being somewhat far apart, it wouldn’t surprise me if at least one of those guys did make it to a hearing. Let’s hope not.

The player I particularly want to address is Mark Prior. He is asking for $4 million, while the Cubs are offering $3.3 million. That strikes me as ridiculously cheap. AJ Burnett just signed what, a 5-year, $55 million contract? He’s 28 years old, with a career 49-50 record, 853 IP, and a 3.73 ERA. Contrast that with Mark Prior, who is 25 and has a career 41-23 record, 613 IP, and a 3.24 ERA. Both have injury histories, although it can be argued that most of Prior’s weren’t even related to stress on the arm due to pitching (being run over on the bases, line drive off the elbow). Oh, and last I checked, Burnett never finished 3rd in the Cy Young voting. Who looks like the more attractive pitcher of those two?

I’m certainly not suggesting that Mark Prior should get $11 million per year at this point in his career, but one day he very well might be worth that. Quibbling over $700,000 now, when his services are still incredibly cheap, can only serve to alienate him and discount every ounce of loyalty he might feel towards the Cubs organization. Baseball is a business, but in businesses around the world the name of the game is employee retention. Losing your best employees due to dissatisfaction at the workplace costs companies billions of dollars a year and the Cubs have never seemed to be able to figure that out (read: Maddux, Greg c. 1992).

The Cubs are like the company that, on the surface, looks like it has great perks. Maybe Wrigley Field is to players what a great 401(k) program is to us normal folk, and the sell-out crowds look like a great vacation package. But in the end, no matter how attractive a company looks to prospective employees on the surface, if management treats its people poorly, no one will want to work for them. Doesn’t anyone wonder why the Cubs never seem to be able to lock up big name free agents? Perhaps it’s because they have a reputation of nickel-and-diming their best players.

We can only hope that Mark Prior never reaches free agency, but if he does, let’s also hope that he doesn’t remember this little episode. On the other hand, if they make a few minor concessions now, maybe in the future he’ll still feel those warm, fuzzy feelings about the city of Chicago, and the Cubs organization.

Dusty Baker and "The Art of War"

2006-01-12T11:01:00.000-08:00

This is just about the most boring time of year. Especially for me. College football is done. Baseball’s hot stove has cooled to a simmer, unless you’re actually interested in where Sammy Sosa will sign (Japan). The only college hoops team I care about is Illinois. The Bulls decided to suck again this year. After a wonderful year off, we have to put up with hockey highlights on ESPN again. I’m mildly interested in the NFL playoffs, but as a non-Bears fan in Chicago it’s somewhat disturbing to see everyone walking around the city with permanent wood. Basically, I can’t wait to hear pitchers and catchers are reporting.

Without even looking at the atrocious sports scene, this time of year is no fun in general. The festive rush of the holidays is over, and I find myself looking out on another 3 months of cold, dreary, filthy snow-filled weather with nothing better than Presidents’ Day to look forward to. Also, I’m stuck in Columbus, Ohio five days a week, where – I kid you not – the following was the lead-in for the news last night, “Creepy photo of a one-eyed kitten, up next at 11.” Needless to say, there’s not much going on around here. It’s gotten so bad that I actually found myself watching “Nanny 911” for lack of anything better to do.

But, despite the general malaise that typifies January and February, now is not the time to watch idly as the Cubs gear up for another triumphant run at .500 baseball. No sir, there is always news to dissect and moves to criticize. The latest out of the PR mill is that the Cubs will likely offer Jim Hendry, and subsequently Dusty Baker, contract extensions either in the very near future or sometime in early spring.

I don’t disagree with Hendry’s extension. This off-season aside, he’s made some wonderful moves for the Cubs over the past few years, and perhaps his hands are tied by the Trib more than we know in terms of making serious runs at big free agents. As much as I’ve criticized the direction he has taken over the past couple of months, there is something to be said for maintaining the same direction long enough to win. Switching general managers in baseball is a hard thing to overcome in the short-term because each individual has his own ideas of what makes a winning team.

On the other hand, re-upping Baker’s contract is a foolish mistake. While switching GM’s may be difficult to overcome, switching managers really shouldn’t be. Especially when your current manager consistently proves he lacks the mental capacity to successfully manage games or censor himself before making ridiculous comments about how the dark skin of Latin players suits them to playing day games. Let’s face it – the guy is a few balls shy of a full count.

Baker’s biggest selling point throughout his career has been his ability to relate to his players. Supposedly, people love playing for him, and we were assured free agents would flock to the Friendly Confines to bask in the glow of Dusty’s toothpicked brilliance. Three years into the campaign has he ever proven he can lure quality players to the North Side? Not so much. I concede that it’s not entirely his fault, as the Trib Co. consistently low-balls free agents in the belief that they would gladly take less money to play in the shrine that is Wrigley. Unfortunately, baseball is a business in which millions of dollars are involved. Not even Baker’s hippie-ish, “Dude, I’ll let you loaf on the base paths” attitude can overcome the profit-dominated bottom line that FitzSimons and Co. forces down Hendry’s throat.

This may all seem like a disconnected rant, but I assure you there is a point. The point is, Baker’s supposed deft ability to relate to his players and appeal to free agents is meaningless without the dollars and sense (pun intended) to back it up. If the Cubs aren’t going to acquire impact players, they need to make the most out of what they have. A half-baked hippie manager is fine for a team with enough talent to overcome his mental lapses and incessant double-switching, but the Cubs are not that team. This is a team that will need to squeeze out every last run and play fundamentally sound baseball for 162 games, but after three years, we know that is exactly not what to expect out of a Dusty Baker-managed team. As Sun-Tzu stated in The Art of War, “Every battle is won before it is ever fought.”* Unfortunately for the Cubs, the opposite is true as well. With Dusty at the helm, this battle has already been lost.

*OK fine, I lifted that quote from Gordon Gekko in "Wall Street." Sue me.

Reason #19,176 the White Sox are totally gay*

2006-01-10T09:31:00.000-08:00

Their 2005 first round draft pick's name is Lance Broadway. Seriously.

What's even funnier is that the Sox didn't even originally intend on drafting Broadway. They originally tagged someone else as their first round pick, but his agent, Scott Boras, was demanding too large a signing bonus. That player's name? Bruce Manhole.

*Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Cubs trade Patterson to O's, Yosh Kawano receives season-long supply of laundry detergent in return

2006-01-09T13:24:00.000-08:00

Fare thee well, oh bringer of K’s and hostile jeers from the bleachers. We shall reminisce on the days of yesteryear when you showed such promise before an ill-timed, awkward knee blow-out. Always will we remember the waste of talent that once roamed Wrigley’s green pasture for both too short and yet too long a time. You will be missed. Sort of.

Ok, that was my eulogy for Korey Patterson’s Cubs career. Now that he’s gone I think we can finally look at his tenure with the Cubs objectively. No, he did not live up to his potential, but then again, who could have? He was essentially tagged as the second coming of Willie Mays out of high school. I’m fairly certain he’ll amount to a decent big leaguer if he can manage to get his head on straight and actually listen to his coaches. Half a year does not a career make, but for all the hatred spewed towards him this year, it’s easy to forget the stellar partial ’03 season he played before he got hurt.

My initial reaction to the trade (Korey for 2 average minor leaguers) was not pleasant. I didn’t want to give him away for scraps, and if that was all Hendry could get, I would just as soon have kept him. However, right now he’s a $3 million bust. Trading him for scraps was merely a salary dump, and that extra cash might help the Cubs re-sign guys like Zambrano and Prior when they’re due for huge extensions. This is clearly not the way anyone thought this saga would end back in ’98, but I think we can all be happy that we can finally talk about Corey in the past tense.

Perhaps more comments to come, but maybe I'll just let this one fade away. Sometimes, it's best not to dwell on the past...

Cubs and O's close to deal! Headline intentionally misleading!

2006-01-06T07:04:00.000-08:00

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that the Cubs are very close to a deal with the Orioles involving Corey Patterson. As soon as I read that, my heart skipped a beat. Oh joy of joys! The O’s were going to take Corey off our hands, kneel at the altar of Hendry, and package up Miguel Tejada with a pretty little bow. Umm, not quite.

Nope, the Cubs are close to dealing Patterson to the Orioles for some minor leaguer who is “not one of the team’s five or so prospects.” Oh. Yeah, that left me somewhat deflated. I think I’d be more excited if the Cubs traded Patterson for the rights to Camden Yards’ Boog Powell’s BBQ.

Some post-holiday thoughts...

2006-01-03T14:44:00.000-08:00

After a much-needed holiday break, Disciples of Doug Dascenzo is back. That’s the good news. The bad news is that Jim Hendry’s evil twin is still running the Cubs while the real Jim Hendry hasn’t been seen since 2003, and may be locked in a tower wearing an iron mask of some sort.

While I was dreaming of sugar plums and Doug Dascenzo autographed Rated Rookies, Jimbo was trying to deal away Mark Prior for Miguel Tejada. This is one of those trades that can be very polarizing. Either people think it’s great or they hate it. Personally, I hate it. Yeah, I know it’s unfair to expect teams to trade away their superstars for our scraps (cough, Corey, cough), but it’s also ridiculous to trade away a 25-year old who was the second coming of Cy Young himself before a freak collision on the basepaths and a line drive off the funny bone.

I don't hate the trade because I think Prior is far too good to trade for Tejada. In actuality, it seems like it might even be somewhat fair - a guy with amazing potential and youth on his side for a former MVP still in his prime (if you believe his birth certificate). I mean, that's not exactly George Bell for Sammy Sosa or anything like that. But the real reason I hate this trade idea? The Cubs absolutely cannot afford to lose any starting pitching. Kerry Wood won’t be ready by Opening Day, and I’ve got jugs of milk with a longer shelf life than his shoulder. Greg Maddux is no longer a sure bet to win 15 games, and he’ll probably be lucky to get 10 this year. Glendon Rusch is only 2 years removed from a 1-12 season, and is better suited out of the pen. Who’s the 5th starter? Jerome Williams? He has some potential, but I wouldn’t count on him for more than 10 wins in anything except a Competitive Twinkie Eating League. The only guy without a question mark after his name is El Toro, who also happens to be my pick (yet again) to win the Cy Young.

The bottom line? The Cubs need their starting pitching more than they need a big bat at shortstop. As much as I love Tejada, and a Prior-Tejada trade might even be fair, it’s the wrong move for the Cubs now and in the future. The right move would have been making a run at him after the 2003 season when he was a free agent rather than choking on the $5 million owed Alex Gonzalez at the time, but I’d rather not get into that right now.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The other item I wanted to mention today was the absolutely horrifying news that a deal with Marquis Grissom is imminent . Jimbo, you’re really playing with fire here, buddy. We all know how much Dusty loves to play veterans over the youngsters, and we also know how much he loves ex-Giants (see: Perez, Neifi). This is like sticking Bob Marley in a room full of weed and expecting him not to smoke it.* Just plain stupid.

Besides the fact that this essentially means Matt Murton’s freckles will be protected by the shade of the dugout more often than not, it also means Jim Hendry is figuratively walking around holding Dusty “T-Bag” Baker’s pocket. The last thing the Cubs need, yet the first thing Dusty wants, is more old guys who “can catch the ball” but can’t hit. Let’s look at a few numbers for the 39-year old Morgan Freeman look-a-like, shall we?

.212 (Grissom’s batting average in 2005)

.318 (Grissom’s lifetime OBP)

2.24 (His lifetime K/BB ratio)

14.7 (His age, in years, when FDR introduced the New Deal program)

Now before I get all worked up I need to remind myself that this will likely be a non-guaranteed contract and he might not even make the squad, but it’s just disturbing. Why give Dusty more ways to mess up this team? Hendry needs to sign a 19-year old with 1 leg to play left field just to ensure Dusty can’t possibly bench Murton in favor of one of “his guys.”

The one silver lining to this signing? At some point, the Cubs will have the first ever All-Faux French outfield. Something to look forward to.

*Other options for that joke included:
This is like sticking Britney Spears in a room full of trailer trash and expecting her not to get knocked up...
This is like sticking Britney Spears in a room full of Cheetos...
This is like sticking Kobe Bryant in a room full of white chicks...
This is like sticking Kirstie Alley in a room full of Ho-Hos...
This is like sticking R.Kelly in a room full of... Ok that's just too obvious.

An unbiased opinion...

2005-12-22T10:30:00.000-08:00

For another take on Jacque Jones from someone who has no vested interest, check out the Hardball Times. Basically, the article says that his average has dropped because he doesn't hit line drives, and predominantly hits ground balls.

So, going from the turf at the Metrodome to the ridiculously long infield grass at Wrigley probably isn't a good idea for a groundball hitter. ..

Bound for .500 yet again...

2005-12-22T08:12:00.000-08:00

Last night while watching the Illini make a mockery of Quin Snyder’s hair, I got to thinking. I thought, “Boy, people sure are complaining an awful lot about the Cubs and what Jim Hendry’s done this off-season. I wonder if it would be possible to show whether or not he’s actually improved the team?” The task was daunting, to say the least.

Fortunately for me, I’m a huge baseball nerd, and I remembered that Win Shares are a great way to show how each player contributed over the course of a season. If I could show how many Win Shares each member of the 2005 Cubs put up, and then compare that with the projected 2006 roster, I might actually have a somewhat rudimentary method of forecasting the number of wins we should all expect for this upcoming season. With that, I got to work.

First, I’ll give you a brief explanation of what Win Shares are (for a more detailed explanation, click here). Essentially, Win Shares are the number of wins contributed by each player to his team. The formula is extremely complex, and takes into account hitting, fielding, and pitching. The total number of Win Shares for each player on a team’s roster will always equal the number of wins that team had for the season. Well, actually it will be the number of wins multiplied by three just to provide more statistical significance, but you get the idea. So in the table I created, Total WS obviously equals Total Win Shares, and WSP is a Win Shares rate stat that shows each player’s contribution given his amount of playing time (thus equalizing guys like Neifi Perez and Ronny Cedeno).

When trying to compare the 2005 and 2006 rosters, I ran into one snag – obviously more than 25 players played for the Cubs last year due to injury, trades, or call-ups. So, I decided I would only use the players who were on the 2005 Opening Day roster, thus eliminating players like Matt Murton and Ronny Cedeno (I also kind of cheated because I used Mark Prior who was injured at the beginning of the season – sue me). By doing this, the number of total Win Shares I came up with only equals 73 for 2005 rather than the 79 total wins they actually had. This is because some of those other players (Murton, Cedeno, etc) did contribute a few wins over the course of the year. So it’s not perfect. I’m also using what I project to be the Cubs 2006 Opening Day roster, so I had to narrow it down from the current 40-man to the 25 players who will likely make the big squad come April.

One other caveat before I get into the results – the projected 2006 Win Shares are based on last year’s concrete numbers. The numbers reported for 2005 are the actual number of wins each player contributed over an entire year. While this is not a perfect tool for predicting the future, I believe that the results from the previous year are a good indicator of future performance. No, Derrek Lee probably won’t contend for the Triple Crown again and Michael Barrett might not win another Silver Slugger, but on the flip side, Kerry Wood and Mark Prior will likely combine for a better record than 14-11. So, it works both ways, and I think the number of career years and off years will balance each other out.

Also, some of the Win Shares results are artificially small because players didn’t play the whole season. I recognize that as an issue, but the roster can only be 25 players; everyone can’t play all 162 games. So, we’ll assume that replacements due to injury or trade will account for an extra 6 wins as they did last year. However, since Win Shares can also be negative, it would be possible that replacement players (usually not being as good as the players they are replacing unless Neifi Perez is your everyday shortstop) could actually harm the team more than they help. So, we’ll use a number of + or - 6 wins. Fair?

Unfortunately, the results are neither surprising, nor good. Based on the roster as it is likely to be comprised, the 2006 Cubs project at only 82 total wins. Using our + or – 6 wins from the replacement players, we’re looking at a Cubs team in 2006 with anywhere from 76 to 88 wins. Unless Hendry pulls off another big deal that will add a net gain of about 12 – 15 Win Shares, the Cubs don’t look like a playoff contender this year.

However, I’m not bound by Sabermetrics. I do see great value in using statistics, but players aren’t pre-programmed robots. There are other factors involved, like how well the team plays together, how well they are managed, how much they hustle, etc. Hendry has done a pretty good job this off-season of getting some guys who hustle in the field and never dog it to first. I believe those little things play a huge factor in the overall attitude of a team, and over the course of a season will almost certainly turn a few close losses into a few tight wins.

The moral of the story? All is not lost. Yet. In a small way, yes Jim Hendry has improved the Cubs, but I think the numbers show that Hendry still needs to make this team better. At least they shouldn’t be awful. Who knows, an 82-win team by the numbers with a great attitude and a few strokes of luck here and there sometimes can have a successful season. Just look at the ’05 White Sox.

References:
The Hardball Times 2005 Win Shares
ESPN

More on Jacque: As they say, "c'est la vie"

2005-12-21T08:20:00.000-08:00

All right, I've semi-recovered from my near-seizure upon waking up to find Jacque Jones waiting underneath the tree this year. But, to prove that I'm not simply pessimistic in general or reactionary when it comes to anyone the Cubs acquire who isn't Bobby Abreu or Carl Crawford, here is an excerpt from an article by Rob Neyer on a certain subscription-only website (shh, don't tell on me) run by the Worldwide Leader:

And then there's Jacque Jones. I know the words above will draw a healthy response for those who consider me a "Yankee-hater" ... but hold your fire, because I've got some truly nasty things to say about Jim Hendry and Jacque Jones.
Last night, I read a long story about the Cubs signing Jones to a three-year deal worth $16 million. Honestly, the money is not a big deal. The Cubs can afford it. The problem is that Jones will, for the next three seasons, be in the lineup nearly every day (notwithstanding trade or injury). In this particular story, I "learned" that:
• According to Cubs general manager Jim Hendry, Jones has "a lot of upside in him" (he's going to be 31 next season);
• Jones is "patient at the plate" (his career high in walks, set last season, is 51);
• Hendry's scouts told him that Jones' struggles in the last two seasons were perhaps because "Jones tried to carry the Twins," who had to deal with injuries to key players such as Torii Hunter and Shannon Stewart.
On the other hand, here's what I learned in three minutes of quality time on the Interweb: Jones batted .300 in 2002 and '03 not because he was relaxed. He batted .300 because he was 27 and 28. He's not at all patient and figures to draw something like 40 walks in 150 games. The Cubs finished second in the National League last season with 194 home runs, but ranked just ninth in scoring. Why? Because their .324 on-base percentage ranked 11th in the league.
Jones' OBP over the last two seasons?
.317
Jones is exactly the sort of player the Cubs don't need, and it's incredibly negligent of Hendry to ignore a fact so evident. "

I couldn't have said it better myself, and Neyer actually makes some points that I've made in the past about the Cubs' proclivity for the long ball yet lack of ability to actually score runs. Anyway, since I probably shouldn't be posting Neyer's pieces for free, I'll throw a link on here for ESPN Insider. I just signed up recently, and while I hate having to pay for certain articles, it is nice to see that little Insider logo next to an article and know I can actually read it for a change.

Also, on a somewhat irrelevant topic, what do people think about the Yankees signing Damon for 4 yrs/$52 million? My take: pretty expensive for a 32-year old, but the Yankees almost always overpay by at least 10 - 15% to make sure they get the guys they want. It seems like the Cubs also employ this method, but only when going after mid-level guys like Howry, Eyre, Jones, Perez, et al. It would have been nice if they had sucked it up and offered 10% more than market for Furcal, but now I'm just getting myself worked up all over again.

Bonus link: The Quickie has a poll related to the Damon signing. Looks like most people in Beantown aren't going to be too cordial when the Yankees come to town.

The Cubs outfield: Now featuring 67% faux-French!

2005-12-21T05:58:00.000-08:00

Well, Jim Hendry finally decided to use all that extra money he's been squirreling away. The only problem is, he blew his wad on Jacque Jones instead of someone who can, ya know, actually hit the ball.

Wow. Not to seem hyperbolic, but I could not possibly be more disappointed with this signing. I think I could have handled it if he were signed as simply a stopgap until the Reign of Felix begins, but he signed him for 3 years, $16 million. That's right, Hendry offered him more than the Royals were offering (3/$15m), rather than the 1 or 2 year deal at $5 million per year that was widely speculated.

A woman mourns the signing of Jacque Jones to play right field for the Cubs.

I'm sorry, but this deal just makes absolutely no sense. Last year it was assumed that since the Cubs missed out on Carlos Beltran, we would have to settle for a year of Jeromy Burnitz in the outfield, which actually didn't go too horribly wrong as a one year filler. However, the second half of that assumption was that this year, Hendry would find someone to permanently fill that role. Maybe we were never going to get '98 - '01 Sosa out there, but surely we can do better than .249 / .319 / .438 with 120 Ks and 23 HRs.

I know I don't have to get into the statistics again, because I'm pretty sure I made my point yesterday when I showed how even Corey Patterson would be a better fit in right field than Jones (younger, better speed, better defense, similar stats). But here are some stats I didn't show you yesterday - last year Jones hit a Mendoza-like .201 against lefties. Unless Hendry is also finding someone really good to platoon out there with him, this has disaster written all over it. And his numbers aren't getting any better over the next three years; the guy is already 31.

-------------------------------------------------------------

I know Jim Hendry has made some excellent moves in the past. Lee? Ramirez? Both excellent deals, and the other teams involved got swindled. But those flashes of brilliance are becoming scarcer than an Xbox 360 at Best Buy these days. Going into the off-season, the Cubs needed to improve at 6 out of 9 positions (all except 1B, 3B, C). Given a $100 million payroll, all Hendry has managed to improve has been the bullpen and centerfield, while simultaneously handing out bad contracts all over the place. He now has a total of $39 million invested in two aging middle relievers and an aging, powerless right fielder. Way to spend that money wisely, Jimbo. You’re like a hobo getting a welfare check and blowing it on lottery tickets and Mad Dog 20/20.

Only a good year from Aramis and a career year for Lee kept the Cubs remotely close to .500 in 2005, so how can this team, as currently comprised, possibly even hope to compete in 2006? The Cubs are now relying on rookies at shortstop and left field, with zero power coming from center and certainly sub-par power in right. The second baseman will likely end up being Neifi Perez, a man with a slick glove but a piece of wet spaghetti for a bat, while a career .300 hitter in Todd Walker either gets traded away for scraps or rots on the bench.

Jim Hendry has failed to prove he can turn the Cubs into annual contenders, even given one of the largest payrolls in the league. Barring any unforeseen strokes of genius between now and Spring Training, I’m sad to say that this move should be his last. Thanks for 2003, but one good year doesn’t guarantee a job forever. Just ask Don Zimmer.

Read the whole thing before totally writing me off as crazy...

2005-12-20T13:13:00.000-08:00

I’m about to make a pretty crazy statement. Upon reading said statement you might laugh, you might cry, or your head might explode. Whatever happens, know this – while I might be certifiably insane, I’m still entitled to my opinion. So indulge a harmless, old man for a moment and hear my plea before throwing me under the bulldozers currently demolishing Wrigley’s bleachers.

I think I might kinda sorta, given the other options on the table, possibly want Corey Patterson to play right field for the Cubs next year.* (Cringing, shielding face with hands.)

Ok, now that you’ve let that sink in, I’d like to make my case. First, let me say that Corey is certainly not my number one choice (Carl Crawford, Bobby Abreu), nor does he even crack my top 20 (I’d take Chris Burke over him, and I don't mean the one who plays for the Astros). However, given the recent news that Jimbo Hendry is poised to offer Jacque Jones a 2 year contract in the neighborhood of $10 million, I’d like to come out and voice my support for essentially anyone else. Yes, even Corey Patterson.

When I first heard the Cubs were interested in Jones, I immediately drew comparisons to Jeromy Burnitz. Though Jones is not as old as Burnitz, he is still past his baseball prime and their statistics last year were almost identical. Why pay essentially the same player more money for a multi-year contract when you can keep the player you already have for a one-year deal, thus allowing the possibility that phenom Felix Pie could make the big squad by mid-year? Simply comparing the 31-year old Jones to the 36-year old Burnitz does not serve my argument, so I compared both of them to the 26-year old Corey Patterson.

As you can see, Patterson comes out favorably in most statistics, with the notable exception being strikeouts which have plagued him throughout his career. But, both Jones and Burnitz are also prone to the K, so we’re essentially dealing with three very similar offensive players. One of them just happens to be much younger and cheaper, as Corey will likely receive approximately $2.6 million for one year after the arbitration process.

Admittedly, this is the first chink in the armor of my argument since I’m using Corey’s 2004 statistics rather than those of his abysmal 2005. But, that should not totally discredit the point. Yes, he had a terrible 2005 (.215 / 13 HR / 34 RBI in 126 games), but because of his young age and incredible athletic ability, I’ll be optimistic and call this past year an outlier. It is certainly not outside the realm of possibility for Patterson to return to his 2003/2004 form, and I’d even go so far as to say it’s likely that he will.

Baseball has seen this scenario before, and actually very recently. In 2002, Pat Burrell of the Phillies hit .282 with 37 homers and 116 RBIs. By all accounts, that’s a fantastic year. Then, in 2003, he inexplicably plummeted to a BA of .209 with only 21 HRs and 64 RBIs (sound familiar?). Essentially everyone in Philadelphia gave up on him. They called for his head in the newspapers, on the radio, and from the stands, but the story didn’t quite end there. Burrell came back to hit .257 in 2004, with an OBP of .365 (excellent) and 24 home runs. His 2005 campaign was even better, putting up .281 / 32 / 117 – almost exactly back to his 2002 form. It’s not impossible to see Corey Patterson pulling off a similar comeback given that he’ll no longer be forced to bat leadoff and will have much less pressure batting in the 6 or 7 hole.

Corey Patterson still has the potential to become the 5-tool player he was projected as when he was made the 3rd overall pick in the ’98 draft. Bringing him back to the Cubs will be difficult considering the hecklers in right field, and both Hendry and Dusty Baker are entering the final year of their contracts. However, using him as a stopgap until Felix Pie can prove himself is not necessarily a bad move. Certainly it’s better than overpaying for essentially the same player five or ten years older.

As fans, we’re often too quick to give up on players when they don’t perform to our expectations. That’s only natural, but when the other options aren’t good either it doesn’t make sense to throw away potential. What if the White Sox had given up on Paul Konerko after he hit .234 in 2003? They almost certainly wouldn’t be World Series champs right now. I’m not saying Corey will turn around and hit back-to-back 40 homer seasons like Konerko or put up the RBI totals of Pat Burrell, but by playing him in right field for the time being, the Cubs will avoid yet another costly, aging mistake, and save a couple million dollars to provide some wiggle room at the trade deadline. Besides, unless the Cubs are trying to set a record for the most French-sounding names in one outfield, they really don’t need Jacque Jones.

*Wow, you really can make an argument for just about anything.

Jimbo, I hope you're listening...

2005-12-19T20:26:00.000-08:00

I think as Cubs fans we've gotten used to the idea that our team never gets the big-name free agents. There is almost a set formula for how the Cubs handle negotiations with talented players: whatever executive is in charge at the time kind of makes a half-hearted pass at the superstars, offering fewer years and fewer dollars than at least one other team, hoping that the allure of Wrigley and the city of Chicago will be sufficient to attract serious talent without paying serious coin. Unfortunately, in a game where countless millions are at stake, cute chicks in the bleachers and ivy on the bricks just won't cut it. If memory serves me, the last big free agent the Cubs signed was Andre Dawson, back in like 1987. Sure, we got Greg Maddux, but only after botched contract negotiations in 1992 forced him to pitch the best 12 years of his career in Atlanta. That's like when Playboy signed Debbie Gibson to a cover shoot, except it was 2004 instead of 1988.

After a near-miss almost every year, we just kind of expect that the big names will go elsewhere. Why aren't the Cubs in the hunt for Manny Ramirez or Bobby Abreu? How about Gary Sheffield a couple years ago? Or Pedro Martinez last year? As fans, we just assume that the superstars cost too much money for our little ol' ballclub, but with a $100 million payroll, our lifeboat can fit more than just the women and children. Where is Rafael Furcal's $50 million going? Did it simply vanish after he decided to head West to a sub-.500 team without a manager (at the time)? Since there aren't any more big free agents left in a pool that was pretty shallow to begin with, Hendry will need to start exploring trades. A trade for a right fielder and a trade for another middle infielder. At the bare minimum.

Because when you think about it, the only position the Cubs have improved at since their 79-win blue ruin (some obscure English slang for y'all) is centerfield. That's pitiful. It's time to start selling the farm. Literally. Give the Devil Rays whatever they want from the farm system for Carl Crawford. I don't care if you have to give up 5 of the Top 10 prospects in the system. Pie, Guzman, Pawalek, Harvey, whoever. Just. Get. It. Done. When futility is closing in on the century mark, you don't get the luxury of keeping a decent farm system.

After giving the D-Rays the rights to the Iowa Cubs, the East Lansing Lugnuts, and a FTTBNL (Farm Team to be Named Later) make a trade for a guy who earns a few bucks, who we should have signed 2 years ago - Miguel Tejada. Dude wants to be traded from Baltimore because they aren't contenders. Regardless of what he's said to cover up the public relations backlash of his original comments (which were pretty clear), he does not want to play for a team destined to finish third every year. Hmm, sounds like Chicago might not be such a great fit after all, but Dusty's nothing if not a salesman. Tejada has 4 years left on a 6 year, $72 million contract. That places him in the $12 million per range, which is just a wee bit more and one year less than was offered Furcal, but Miggy's got pop to spare in that Dominican bat of his - something the Cubs are sorely lacking once you get past Lee and Ramirez. Give the O's Kerry Wood, Korey Patterson, and Todd Walker. I don't know, I'm not the GM, but make something happen. Hendry needs to storm the Bastille de Camden Yards and free Miggy from the shackles of mediocrity.

Is this an outrageous idea? Considering past history, yeah of course. But as long as no one's calling them out on their inexcusable lack of action, they'll just continue the status quo. I am but one man, but maybe if a few thousand more bloggas like me take up arms, something will finally get done. The Tribune monarchy, sitting on their golden thrones at 435 N. Michigan, can only ignore the people for so long before the inevitable revolution. Just ask the French.