Ho-hum

I haven't written to this blog lately because, quite honestly, there is nothing to say.  The winter meetings are about to pass into the books and the Cubs have, predictably, done nothing at all, or next to nothing.

As I have noted before, I have nothing against building from the bottom up.  I just think you can do so and still field a team that is marginally competitive and entertaining.  I also think that to the extent you do not at least try to become mediocre, you penalize the handful of genuinely talented players you may have by forcing them to play like losers in games that everybody knows do not matter.

So far then, the Cubs acquired several placeholders of note.  They traded Bogusevic to the Marlins for Ruggiano, a right-handed slugger who presumably will platoon with Nate Schierholtz in RF.  OK, so you are counting on Schierholtz to come back and hit .250, drive in 70 runs and Ruggiano to add some right-handed pop.

This gives you the illusion of having a complete right-fielder who hits 30 homers and drives in 100 runs.  Ruggiano is Hairston revisited.  Looks good on paper, but on the field it is about as meaningless as the great third base tandem that produced similar stats last year but no wins to speak of.

All these guys are journeyman players who do not get on base or hit for average and who strike out a lot.  For the past few years, the Cubs have had the worst outfield in baseball in terms of speed, hitting, and defensive skills.  This year, they go into the season with a likely starting alignment of Lake, Sweeney, and the aforementioned platoon.  Lake is the only player of this group with any genuine potential and he has a skill set more or less akin to that of Starlin Castro when he first came up.

In addition to the Ruggiano pickup, the Cubs added a left-handed hitting catcher, George Kottaras, who can neither hit nor catch and a left-handed pitcher, Wesley Wright, who will definitely help out James Russell in the bullpen, but, whoopty-do, is that all there is?

Renteria

So the choice is Rick Renteria.  We are hearing all the good things it is possible to make up about this guy.  Some of them may be true.  Some may not.  At bottom, unless you are dealing with a proven commodity, you have to defer to management in terms of the choices they make.  In any case, how could he be a worse choice than Dale Sveum?  Of course, on the other side of the ledger, the same team that chose Sveum has chosen Renteria.

In other news, we hear from Theo Epstein that the Cubs will be passionate in their pursuit of quality pitching.  Sounds good, but lets recall that in their brief tenure, Epstein and Hoyer have traded away five starting pitchers of some ability, Cashner, Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, and Garza, only one of whom, Dempster, who is over the hill, would have any difficulty breaking the Cubs current rotation.  In addition, they traded the solid set up man Sean Marshall.

Now they have received a bunch of guys in return and one of more of them might turn out to be keepers, but, so far, in terms of major league talent, they have got back Anthony Rizzo, a first baseman, and Travis Wood, a genuine good pitcher.  Still, I doubt anyone would care to hang their hat on that level of return.

Supposedly the Cubs are all in on the Japanese phenom Masahiro Tanaka.  One hopes this means what it says.  Last time around, the Cubs underbid on two genuine star international free agents, Darvish and Cespedes.  They would have been a different team with either of those players on the field.

Back to Renteria, one legitimate concern, actually two, is his history.  Everybody talks about how great he is in developing young talent, but I cannot recall a single young talent, a real talent, that San Diego has developed recently.  Of equal concern is that San Diego doesn't exactly have the reputation of being a franchise that has a winning tradition.

The Way Forward?

Hey, I don't know about other fans, but I'm a little confused about the "plan."  In the sense of, geez, what is the plan?  So far we have had the firing of Dale Sveum, completely justified, but something that was initially presented to the world as not just a rejection of Sveum's style and methods, but a step toward bringing in a genuinely successful manager who might turn things around, namely, Joe Girardi.

Now maybe that was never in the cards, but no one among the Cubs brass made much of an effort to deny the rumors and it does appear some behind the scenes dealing was going on and the Cubs lost out.  A critical view here is they were played.

So now, in the managerial search, we hear, several hours before he takes the Detroit job, that Brad Ausmus is a serious candidate.  So much for that.  Next we hear that Torey Lovullo of the Red Sox is in the mix, but, unfortunately the Red Sox are invoking some sort of agreement that the Cubs made not to hire any of their people.  Not ever.

That's a little weird because most of the non-competition agreements I know of pertain to the hiring of individuals who are on the payroll at the time of the agreement, not several years after.  Lovullo came over to Boston from the Toronto organization along with John Farrell a year after Theo Epstein left.  In any case, the whole thing is a bit of a shambles.

Other rumors and pronouncement from on high.  The Cubs will not seriously compete in the free agent market this year, primarily because their farm system is so well stocked with prospects who are at least two years away from the majors.  Oh, um, whatever.  The truth is that there are several players who would be an instant upgrade for the Cubs.  The best ones would be expensive, but fact is that teams cannot compete without making an investment in good players, players who make a difference.  The Pirates and Royal, for example, after years of building up their farm systems, only became respectable when they invested resources in players who would make a difference right now at the major league level.

Another random thought.  Jeff Sarmardzija and the Cubs have not been able reach agreement on a contract extension.  So all the experts naturally make him the next Matt Garza.  Got to trade this puppy while we can still land the pick of someone's A ball prospects who are three years off.  I've been critical of Samardzija in the past, but he is a pretty good pitcher and guys of his ability and age get  five year contracts in the range of $13MM-$15MM per year.

Final Thoughts on the Series

Ultimately I think the Red Sox won because they saw more pitches from the Cardinals starters than the Cardinals saw from them.  Post-season ball, especially late in October in northern cities often boils down to pitching.  The one problem with the way the Cards are built is they take a very aggressive approach at the plate.  This worked well for them all season, although you have to question whether that same tactic can be sustained.  They have good hitters, but when it comes down to the crunch, good pitching can silence these bats.  Boston's starters were pitching into the eighth inning most of the time and then turning it over to Uehara.  St. Louis's starters, on the other hand, were up to 100 pitches by the sixth inning.

There is a lesson here for the Cubs.

World Series

So far the Series, with the exception of Game 1, has been an exciting affair, both teams pretty evenly matched.  My only carp is that it has also been pretty sloppily played on the whole.  And there have been some pretty questionable managerial moves, especially by the Red Sox skipper John Farrell, who does not seem to understand the NL rules at all.

I usually root  for the NL team unless it is the Cardinals or the Mets, but I also have a soft spot for Boston since their history somewhat mirrors that of the Cubs.  That said, the ridiculous mountain man beards and constant beard tugging after they make a good play is just plain stupid.  So I am actually neutral right now and I want the Series to extend to seven games.

What I really cannot stand, though, is the coverage by Fox Sports.  I mean, do we have to endure the endless dugout interviews while the game is going on around them, mostly about whose mother survived cancer and who was depressed but feels better now that he has hired a reliable babysitter?

Also the endless replays, some from decades ago and the interminable prattle of Joe Buck and Tim McCarver.  Especially McCarver!  Is this guy ever right about anything?  Tonight was the topper.  After Craig got on base with one out in the ninth, the Cardinals put in the rookie Wong to pinch run.  McCarver just went on and on for ten minutes about how come Napoli was holding the runner and why didn't he just back off and let him take second base and it made no sense for him to hold Wong who was going to steal second anyway and gee, whiz, why on Earth would you hold the runner in that situation, it didn't make sense.

After a while, I was starting to think that maybe this time McCarver was right until I came to my senses.  No, McCarver is always wrong.  No matter how much sense he seems to make.  That is a given.  Seconds later, Uehara picked Wong off first base to end the game, demonstrating in the process why Napoli was indeed holding the runner at first base.

Yanks Keep Girardi, Cubs Sign Sweeney

OK, maybe that's a little sarcastic.  Not that I have anything in particular against Sweeney, by the way.  I think he is a useful enough role-player on a team dominated by role-players and placeholders.

The Girardi thing is bound to be a big disappointment for fans who were looking for some level of competence on the field manager level.  Girardi or his agent played the Cubs and Yanks against each other very well and Girardi comes out with four years at a substantial raise and a job with a team that, however ancient they are and however likely they are not to be serious contenders next year, are committed to winning.

So the search continues.  I read Ricketts letter/apology(?) to Cubs fans and ticket holders.  Not much there to hang a hat on, is there?

Of the potential managers mentioned, I kind of lean towards Dave Martinez.  He has a history of winning on a very young team without any real superstars that pretty much has to recreate itself every year.  Plus he is a pupil of Joe Maddon, one of the best younger managers in the game who seems to get the most out of a team with tight payroll limitations.

The press seems to be viewing the manager search as another interim choice.  OK, maybe so, but who would take a job with that kind of restriction in mind?  I'll tell you, a guy like Dale Sveum.  Lets hope they set their sights a little higher this time around.

Dale Sveum

Readers of this blog will be well-aware of my disdain for the recently fired Cubs manager.  Enough said.  I thought he was a mistake from the beginning, and also that the idea of hiring a placeholder manager and fielding a team of placeholders was a fundamentally dumb idea.

So, anyway, he is gone, and the search for a replacement begins.  I have to assume that the Cubs have at least made some back-channel inquiries about Joe Girardi, who seems a logical choice.  I kind of agree with Gordon Wittenmyer that they need to make this move.

Sveum was undoubtedly the victim of the poor performance and lack of progress of several of the teams showcase "stars," most particularly Starlin Castro, but also Anthony Rizzo, Jeff Samardzija, and Edwin Jackson.

Sveum's demise was also the result of a deeply flawed strategy that is being implemented by Epstein and Hoyer.  I'm convinced that this whole process of rebuilding bottom up doesn't work for a major market team.  You've got to put a hopeful product on the field in order to retain fan interest.  The Cubs have not done so.  They haven't even tried, with the result that their attendance is down so much they are hemorrhaging cash.

If the Cubs want to get back to some semblance of relevance, they not only need to get a good manager and good coaches who can recognize and develop real talent, they need to start by improving the team right now with players who will contribute over the long haul and bring some measure of respectability.  Losing cultures get turned around by winning every now and then.

So right now, I would say they should make a run at Shin-Soo Choo and also at least kick the tires on a legitimate #1 starter like David Price.  Choo is a free agent, but Price would cost them at least one solid prospect.  If we are to believe the hype on some of these guys the Cubs are developing in the minor leagues, they can afford it.

Besides that, everyone knows that they are lucky if one or two of these guys lives up to the hype.  Remember Felix Pie?  Five tools, etc., etc.  Another caution about the farm system.  If you notice, with the exception of Alcantara, a switch hitter, and Vogelbach, they are all right-handed hitters who never walk.

Last Night at Wrigley Field

My wife and I went out to the ballpark last night.  Saw a good game marred by the absolute conviction there was no conceivable way to imagine the Cubs would score a run.  Samardzija pitched a good game for a change.

They did manage to squeak in a run in the eighth to tie the score at 1 thanks to some alert base running by Bogusevic and a clutch pinch single by Murphy who actually just hit a routine grounder that got through mostly because Alvarez, the Pirates third baseman, was jumping around so much trying to hold Bogusevic on third base that he vacated the position to which Murphy hit the ball.

Anyway, it was nice to see the Cubs make a game of it, but once again Kevin Gregg rode to the rescue to blow a tie game.  The picture above shows some Pirates fans celebrating the Marte homer in the ninth inning that gave them the win and a slot in the playoffs.

The Cubs had a shot to tie in the bottom of the inning, but Schierholtz was called out on a close play at the plate.  Kind of ironic to win in that fashion for the Pirates as they botched up the play on a routine single twice to open the door.  Schierholtz ran pretty hesitantly on the play and did not turn third well.  Also, the cutoff throw was not as wild by as much as the Cubs may have thought.

The experience at Wrigley is still generally pleasant if you can get over the quality of baseball the team plays.  I haven't been out as often as in the past, but I do catch more than a few games a season.  One annoying thing I have noticed just this year.  Each and every time we have gone to our seats, usually in Terrace Reserved Box, we have found someone squatting there.  It's a little disconcerting to start the experience having to evict someone from the seats you have paid for, especially as the occupiers often act put out about it.

Trainwreck

I suppose all lousy teams face similar issues when it finally dawns on the players and management that they are going nowhere and the light at the end of the tunnel is likely an oncoming train.  So it comes as no surprise that the Cubs are experiencing some late season melodrama.  Actually, given how disappointing the season has been in terms of the already low expectations the team entertained, it is rather a shock that such diversions did not occur sooner.

So, in rather quick succession, you have Edwin Jackson and Dale Sveum blowing up in the dugout after Sveum pinch hit for Jackson after only four innings.  Bear in mind that Jackson was pitching his usual half-assed game, building up his pitch count, in trouble every inning, unable even to throw to first base successfully on a routine play.  One is tempted to suggest maybe having a look in the mirror rather than continue this weird self-absorption is the answer for this guy.

Has Jackson had a bad year in an otherwise stellar career?  No, he has had a bad year in a pretty mediocre career.  Jackson has bullpen stuff, high-end bullpen stuff, but not a bullpen mentality, so it is difficult to see how he fits in other than as a fourth or fifth starter on a mediocre team.  Jackson still does not know how to pitch and he has been in the big leagues for a long time.  God knows why Epstein signed this guy, but, at least as an experiment in whether the Sveum team can effect a turnaround, put him in the "no" column.  (More about the Sveum evaluation later).

The second melodrama, somewhat milder, occurred when Samardzija blew up at infield coach David Bell for moving Anthony Rizzo off the line while he was pitching to Aoki in the Brewers series.  Aoki promptly pulled a triple down the right field line.  Of course, the ace Samardzija was somewhat befuddled by the notion of pitching to your defense, preferring to blame someone else for a mistake pitch.

On the subject of Samardzija, for all the milestones, 200+ innings, 200+ strikeouts, Samardzija is still not a real pitcher.  He has great stuff and no brains.  As far as being a Sveum/Epstein project, an honest observer would conclude he is at best a work in progress and at worst a modest flop.

Which brings us to the third fiasco, Kevin Gregg.  Gregg celebrated his achieving his fiftieth game finished, a big bonus milestone, by allowing four runs in the ninth inning to the Atlanta Braves yesterday.  He explained later that he was somehow distracted by the team deciding to use Pedro Strop once or twice in save situations, something the team has yet to do.

Where do they get these guys?  The Cubs rescued Gregg from the scrapheap when the Orioles cut him loose this spring.  Unaccountably, Gregg had a significant resurgence, at least before the All-Star break.  Since the break, he has rather come down to earth, but, on the whole his season has been a positive one that should have landed him a decent deal in the off-season, more than likely with another team.

Even though Epstein did not release him, which he should have done in my opinion, he has pretty much burned his bridges with the Cubs.  Good riddance.  Gregg gained an outlandish reputation as a setup guy with the Angels, but has never delivered since he moved on, especially in the closer role.  This whole business of feeling slighted by the Cubs honesty is a bit much.  He's 33 years old and the Cubs are looking for youth in the bullpen or another cheap rehab.

Standards on the north side are so low, though, that this kind of pea-brained thinking is the norm.  No more so than in relation to the beleaguered manager Dale Sveum.

Another off-hand remark by Theo and the gang set off a mini-controversy respecting Sveum's future.  If you take Epstein at his word, though, that he will evaluate Sveum and the coaches not on wins and losses but on player development, you more or less have to conclude they should be gone and that the Cubs should jump at the chance of hiring a Joe Girardi or a Ron Gardenhire in the unlikely scenario that such a prospect develops.

Certainly almost everything Sveum says makes little or no sense.  Castro's numbers, for instance, are virtually identically bad batting leadoff.  The third base platoon is not a pleasant surprise.  These guys have hit a lot of home runs at the expense of playing good baseball.  (Valbuena's OBP is around the league average,  Ransom's and Murphy's significantly below average, as are their batting averages).

I could go on and on, but the terrible truth here is that the only players to show significant improvement this year are Travis Wood and Welington Castillo.  The "cornerstone" players, Rizzo and Castro, have gotten worse.

I've never really understood the decision to hire Sveum, nor the decisions with respect to the coaches.  Usually, organizations will pack these spots with people from the GMs past.  The Cubs, for example, became the Phillies West in the 80s.  Is this the Brewers South or something?  Not a grand baseball tradition.

In this case, though, the Cubs have no real personality.  You get a vague impression they would like to have one.  Sveum's remarks about Travis Wood's progress, how he has learned to pitch to a game plan, for instance, give one the feeling that management has something in mind.  Possibly these statements are more meaningful in relation to the players who are not mentioned, the Samardzijas and Jacksons who evidently do not pitch to a game plan.

Still, if you are judging Sveum by any reasonable standard of player development, he has failed pretty badly and so should be gone.  What's more, in the last few weeks, he has pretty clearly lost control of the team and in a fairly public way.

Batting First, the Shortsop, Starlin Castro

I don't know why I take such delight in these strange, actually incomprehensible, evaluations of players that are occasionally given by Cubs leadership, in particular, Dale Sveum.  But here's another set of deep thoughts from Dale, this time in connection with batting Starlin Castro leadoff.

"That was probably as good as he swung the bat all year long in a 10-day, two-week period," Sveum said. "He actually hit into some bad luck, too. I thought he had one or two more home runs if the wind wasn't blowing in. Lined a couple balls in some big situations right at people.  He's not the prototypical on-base guy or anything like that, but right now, if we get him going in a spot that he's obviously flourished in before, it's a way to maybe get him going," Sveum said. "Like I've said before, nobody has a crystal ball for why people hit better in certain spots. Realistically, you just have an at-bat, it doesn't matter. But some people do hit better in different spots. That's the way it is."

Here's a dose of reality.  Castro moved into the leadoff spot on August 21 and has played 18 consecutive games in that position in the batting order.  He is 18 for 78 with 5 walks.  That's a .230 average and an OBP around .277.  Before moving to the leadoff spot, Castro was hitting .240 with an OBP of .275.  For the season, Castro is batting .239 with an OBP of .278.  Castro has 25 walks and 115 strikeouts to date in 2013.

Perhaps I am missing something, but by my reckoning, Castro is actually doing worse as a leadoff hitter or at best pretty much the same.  If the idea here is to stop trying to teach Castro how to bat at a major league level and just let him swing at everything in the hopes he will straighten out, then, OK, I get that even though in terms of developing his talent, it makes no sense.  But lets stop kidding people.  Right now Castro is a mediocre player who is prone to make errors on routine plays in the field and who is pretty much an automatic out.

Sobering Thoughts

Here are a couple of quotes from the aftermath of the Cubs 4-3 victory over the Phillies.

From Starlin Castro:

"These first five months, I don't put them in my mind any more," Castro said. "I was thinking too much about too many things. I was thinking about hitting, thinking about defense, thinking about everything. This last month, I put in my mind to finish strong.

"Be me," Castro said. "That's what I want to be. Be me. If I strike out against a bad pitch, so what? Take [care of] it in the next at-bat. That's the feeling I need. In the beginning, if I miss in the first at-bat, I'm gone. That [shouldn't happen]. If you miss the first at-bat, you have three left. Keep positive every at-bat.

"I want to be an aggressive hitter," Castro said. "If I strike out on a bad pitch, so what? [The pitcher] has to throw a strike, no matter what. I can strike out, but the next at-bat, do an adjustment."

Actually, for the record, pitchers rarely if ever need to throw a strike to get Starlin out.  Also, if he is determined to avoid thinking at all, why are the Cubs paying him $5MM this year escalating to $11MM in the final year of his eight-year deal?  Eight years of dumb is hard to take.

From Dale Sveum:

"He's been swinging the bat with a lot more authority lately," Cubs manager Dale Sveum said, "and to see him put that kind of swing on that ball to center field with the wind blowing in, that was nice, especially a game-winner.
It's nice the ball is coming off his bat like it did a couple years ago and last year," Sveum said.

Maybe I'm being hypersensitive, but doesn't it strike you these two are channeling Alfonso Soriano and Mike Quade here?

OK, it's nice to see Castro get a hit every now and then, but he has a .281 OBP so far with 112 K's, so just shut up and play baseball already.  Even when he hit for average, he had no business batting leadoff.  At least Soriano had power and base-stealing speed when he insisted on hitting first.  Castro has neither.

This "I just got to be me attitude" seems to be pervasive among the Cubs players.  Sveum seems to encourage it, perhaps inadvertently with all his talk about recognizing pitches and hitting your pitch hard and so on.  I rather think what the players hear is "blah, blah, blah, wait for your pitch, blah, blah, blah, hit a home run, blah, blah, blah."

Home runs are nice and the Cubs hit a lot of home runs, but they do not score a lot of runs and they lose a lot of ballgames as a result.  Too bad, some of these guys have a little bit of talent that could be developed.

It won't be so long as the Cubs current system is in place.  That's the sad part of watching this team being molded.  Try as I might, I see progress only from Welington Castillo among the young position players.

Based on the quotes I referenced above, I'd say it is time to bid farewell to both Castro and Sveum.

Rock Bottom

How on Earth can you lose a game when you score six runs in the first inning before you even make a single out?  I'll answer that with another question.  Why on Earth is Earnest Jackson pitching into the seventh inning when he has blown a six run lead?

I think the answer to the second question is pretty simple.  Dale Sveum allows his starters to throw at least 100 pitches if they are ahead or tied, whatever the quality of the pitches they are throwing.  Sveum never deviates from the game plan, no matter what.  It is like having an automaton in the dugout.

The answer to the first question is a little more complicated, but it has a lot to do with expectations and knowing how to win, or, in this case, not giving a damn whether you win or lose.  Surely fans have noticed that whenever the Cubs jump out to an early lead, they just seem to quit.  Short, quick at-bats, etc.  In their minds, the game is over.  The same syndrome is manifested in another observation, namely, how much better their at-bats seem to be late in the game, taking pitches, making tough outs, executing basic baseball strategies, etc.

In short, in these situations, some if not all of the players are paying attention.  Something they do not do most of the time.  So, some of this has to do with the players' ability and makeup for sure, but a lot has to do with the environment and the coaching.

I don't know the answer here, but one thing I do know is there is a big difference between being competitive and expecting to be competitive and expecting to lose all the time.  In the latter case, how you mess up doesn't much matter because no matter what you do, you will still lose.

So this so-called plan the Cubs have is theoretically fine, but in practice, without the presence of a serious manager and coaching staff and genuine expectations, the result is what you see on the field now.  The Cubs major league team is built and is being managed as a AAA affiliate.  There are a few legitimate prospects who are being "developed" and a number of placeholders who are being kept aboard to fill perceived holes in the roster.  Right now, the guys the team has invested in, Castro and Rizzo in particular, are still playing as if they were in AAA.

Going back to last night's game illustrates my point in another way.  Why was Jackson still in the game?  This is how you manage when you are in the minor leagues, when the goal is to get in your work and expose players to game situations and so on.  The big problem is what do you do when the prospects don't develop and meet expectations, major league expectations.

Here's another example of Sveum-think and Cub-think that I saw recently.  Sveum was waxing on about how great Donnie Murphy has been since they called him up from Iowa, eight home runs in seventeen games, blah, blah, blah.  Where would the team be without him?  I'll tell you where the team would be.  They are 5-12 in that stretch.  They would be 4-13.  Big deal.  It is this kind of thinking that shows you how far away the Cubs really are from being a major league team.

Same Old Stuff

I haven't written on the blog lately, mainly because there is not much to say.  Although the Cubs broke out with 11 runs yesterday, it should be noted that 10 of them were the result of home runs.  Home runs alone are not an offense.  Also, one game means very little.  Of more significance is the fact they were shut out five times in the month of August, all at home, and on two other occasions, scored only a single run.

Some encouraging notes:

• Maybe the Feldman trade was a clear plus for the Cubs.  Arrieta has pitched well in two starts and Strop has pitched creditably in relief.  Feldman, on the other hand, has been so-so with the Orioles, 3-3, ERA 1.4 more than with the Cubs.

• Castillo has been impressive since the All-Star break and looks like he is developing into a pretty good catcher.  Junior Lake also looks like he has some potential as well, but, in his case, this must be tempered with the realization that this is his first time through the league.  He is maybe not quite the hacker one was led to believe from his minor league stats, although he is not exactly a patient hitter.  Schierholtz has been looking very good lately and has even picked it up somewhat against left-handed pitching.

• Chris Rusin has pitched quite well since his call-up from AAA.

 Some discouraging notes:

• Castro is still an awful player and his mental lapses continue to cause concern.

• Rizzo's numbers continue to slide and he doesn't look like he knows what he is doing at the plate.

• Jackson is just plain inconsistent bordering on awful.

• Samardzija has been inconsistent as well, although he pitched very well last night.

On a final note, maybe someone can explain the DeJesus "trade", at least from the Nationals point-of-view.  For the Cubs, it is simple.  They dump an aging player whose skills are clearly heading downhill and who is a weak defender in CF, the only position his offensive stats entitle him to play.  DeJesus has become almost entirely a platoon player, and notwithstanding the consensus that he is a professional hitter, he is basically a .260 hitter who does not get on base enough to bat leadoff anymore.

Plus the Cubs save a bundle of money in terms of this year's remaining salary and the team buyout of his option.  Lets face it, nobody is going to pay DeJesus $6.5MM next year.  Now the Cubs save the $1.5MM they would have had to shell out to be rid of him.  The scary thing is the Cubs are willing to consider bringing him back at a discount in 2014.  Time to move on from this placeholder.  The Cubs have the worst outfield, defensively and offensively, that I can remember.  One of the reasons they do not score runs.

But for the Nats, you wonder what this buys them.  They are not going to reach the playoffs by any realistic conjecture.  So what do they want with a fourth outfielder this year when they have a solid starting three and some decent prospects in reserve?

I suppose the Nats answered that question by immediately putting DeJesus back on waivers.  Perhaps they are looking to flip him right away.  Maybe DeJesus is the player to be named later.  This one is a puzzler.

The Trade Deadline Has Passed

Now it is time to lose and keep losing in order to guarantee a high draft choice.  Or so it would appear were we to follow the dictates of guys like Dave Kaplan and company who continually blare out this mantra on sports radio.

The Cubs have been only too happy to comply.  After an encouraging road trip where they compiled a 6-4 record primarily on the strength of their starting pitching, they have won only one game on the current home stand, much of which has taken place after the trade deadline when everyone can relax and just play baseball, Cubbie style.

Dale Sveum finally snapped after Friday's game.  Down 6-2 in the bottom of the ninth against Carlos Marmol, Julio Borbon doubled to lead off the inning, then managed to get thrown out at third trying to advance on a ball in the dirt.  Of course, this was a really dumb play given the game situation - no outs, down four runs, Marmol pitching - but, hey, it wasn't atypical for the Cubs.  Stalwarts like Soriano, when he was here, Castro, and Rizzo seem to make bonehead mistakes like this every day with little notice.

However, Borbon's mistake was the last straw for our savvy manager, who promptly launched into a vituperative diatribe about the incident, after which Borbon, who was hardly used anyway, was designated for assignment.  So it goes.

The Cubs brought up the perennial second rate utility infielder Donnie Murphy.  Kind of a poor man's Cody Ransom.  The Brewers and the Dodgers seem to have rediscovered the old formula for beating the Cubs, namely, keep those lefties coming and keep the right-handed platoon on the field.

Incidentally, the Cubs have been pretty boastful of the apparent success of some of their platoons, but lately the numbers have been coming down to earth.  The aforementioned Ransom is batting .059 in the second half with a .309 OPS.  Luis Valbuena is hitting .159 over roughly the same span.  Valbuena is headed for the DL with an oblique strain, so he is out until at least September and maybe for the season.

The rest of the platoons are not faring much better.  With the departure of Soriano, the Cubs are essentially platooning Cole Gillespie and DeJesus and playing Schierholtz every day.  Gillespie's numbers as a Cub are OK.  The odd thing is his BA against righties is 100 points worse than against lefties.  Schierholtz has never been up to much against left-handed pitching, .189 this year, so the results have been predictable.  However, given the prior platoons in right field that involved Hairston and Sappelt, he is not doing appreciably worse.

Goodbye, Soriano

The Cubs finally managed to extricate themselves from the Soriano albatross after nearly seven seasons.  I suppose this is something of an achievement for the front office.  I was really surprised to see all the tearful farewells and tributes from the players.

I imagine this illustrates the differences between the perceptions of the players and that of the fans and students of the game.  To me, Soriano was always the epitome of a dumb and selfish player.  How many years did it take to persuade this guy to practice fielding flyballs in left field and to consent to bat other than leadoff when it was obvious he never got on base?

In any case, he is gone.  I gather the trade has caused a bit of a controversy in New York where the GM, Brian Cashman, has declared he was opposed to the acquisition from the beginning and it was done only after his strong objections.  I'm glad the Cubs pulled this off, but he is right in the long run and probably in the short run as well.  How old can the Yankees get and still stay competitive?  Are we seeing the invisible hand of Jim Hendry at work behind the scenes in the Bronx?

The Cubs managed to pull out a tough win last night.  This game, like so many others involving teams with serious flaws, turned on luck.  Jackson pitched well, but fell behind when he gave up a bloop double in the seventh.  The Cubs came back and scored on a botched grounder - admittedly hard hit - from Rizzo.

Way to Go, Skipper!

By which I mean, how could a 6-0 laugher go to a nail-biter extra-inning contest in two short (actually agonizingly long) innings?  I'll tell you how in two words.  Dale Sveum.

Some managers have a seemingly innate ability to handle their pitchers and the bullpen.  Some don't.  Dale falls into the latter category.

Last night the Cubs took a 6-0 lead into the bottom of the fifth inning.  With a six run lead, generally all you have to do is throw strikes and hang on, but this is something Jeff Samardzija seems to be incapable of doing.  Maybe it is the principal difference between him and Matt Garza.  I don't know, but Samardzija had struggled all night long and, staked to a big lead, proved once again that he has a long ways to go toward becoming the dominant pitcher people seem to think he can one day become.

Sveum stuck with Samardzija through the fifth, whether it was to give him the chance to notch a win or to give him a learning experience trying to get out of trouble with a big lead, who knows.  Samardzija was both lucky and unlucky to escape with a 6-2 lead, lucky because he pitched so poorly he deserved to get smacked, unlucky because the double-play ball he induced clipped second base causing Barney to muff it with two runs scoring as a result.

What is simply unconscionable was letting Samardzija hit in the top of the sixth and then go back out there.  Needless to say, the result was a disaster.  Samardzija struggled once again and left with runners at second and third and Paul Goldschmidt due up.

I've mentioned before that Sveum is really a rigid and timid sort of manager for all his swagger.  He wants six innings from his starter no matter what.  He also has bullpen guys with assigned roles.  So his sixth inning guy now is Blake Parker, formerly the eighth inning guy until he started getting cuffed around the second time through the league.

Now Samardzija had struck out Goldschmidt, probably the best hitter in the NL West on all five previous encounters.  However, magic Dale pulled Parker out of the hat with predictable results, namely a three-run homer.

For my money, the Cubs cannot trade Gregg soon enough as he is starting to revert to his previous levels which are not at all good.  Gregg blew the save for the umpteenth time in July.  Still, the Cubs pulled it out in the twelfth inning, thanks to a solid AB from Rizzo to draw a key walk and another heroic double from Schierholtz to cap off a career night.

A final bit of news: Alfonso Soriano has asked for a couple of days to think over his options respecting a trade to the Yankees, although he seemed in the pathetic locker room interview they showed on TV to say he had already agreed, sort of, I mean, the Yankees were on the list, right, and he had agreed to the list, or maybe to think about the list and, yes, he had approved the list, so you might say he had agreed to the list or to think about the list, whatever a list is and depending on how you define lists, agreements, and thought.

The Garza Trade

The Cubs finally pulled off the inevitable, sending Matt Garza to the Texas Rangers in exchange for several seemingly attractive prospects plus one or two more players to be named later.

On the surface, both teams got what they wanted.  Whether they should have wanted what they have got is another question altogether.

Texas got a proven major league starter for the final stretch of the season.  Garza bolsters a starting staff beset by injuries.  No question he makes them legitimate contenders for at least a wild card spot and possibly the division title over Oakland if their other starters return from the DL in decent form.  He is worth two to four wins over replacement to them down the stretch, and two to four wins make a lot of difference in a close race.

In return, the Cubs received a package not dissimilar to the one that obtained Garza in the first place.  Mike Olt, perhaps the centerpiece of the deal, was once a key element in the Rangers plans and was regarded as untouchable.  Olt was blocked at third base, his natural position, by Adrian Beltre, but it looked as if the Rangers were likely to try him at first base or right field, where they have legitimate holes to fill for the future.

Olt got a brief taste of the majors last season and didn't deliver.  This isn't a big deal, as many youngsters are overmatched in their first taste of major league pitching.  Of more concern is his performance this season.  He was hit by a pitch in winter ball, suffered a concussion, then experienced vision issues at AAA.  Apparently his right eye was unable to produce tears.

So his record this year is nothing to write home about and there is a legitimate question as to whether the problems have been corrected by eye medication.  The Cubs seem to think so, but the Rangers clearly regard him as expendable.  This is the kind of crapshoot situation you get into when you rebuild the way the Cubs have chosen to go.

In any case, if Olt delivers he solves the third base problem for the future.  In the process, though, he creates other issues for the organization.  The Cubs drafted a third baseman, Chris Bryant, with their first round selection.

Moreover, they have a bunch of third basemen coming though the system, as well as Javier Baez, of whom it was widely thought a change of position was in his future.  So, all in all, it is hard to figure out what need Olt actually fills.  It also probably indicates a lack of confidence in the ability of their existing future third base options.

The rest of the deal consists of pitchers.  Starting pitchers, which the Cubs think they really need even though they have traded five legitimate major league starters in the course of the past two years, namely, Cashner, Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, and now Garza.  I know there are other circumstances at play here, age and cost among them, but there is a certain odd tendency about the so-called plan that is somewhat troubling.  That is, what is the plan anyway?

As far as the rest of the pitchers go, the Rangers thought enough of Jason Grimm to promote him to fill out the rotation when they were hit by several injuries.  He is 7-7 with a really high ERA, mainly due to a couple of really rocky outings in July.  He left his last start with forearm soreness and was to be relegated to the bullpen.  Although the Rangers thought enough of him to bring him up, then again, the Cubs brought up Casey Coleman to fill a spot.  It doesn't necessarily mean he deserved promotion.

The Cubs would be wise to send Grimm down to AAA to recover his confidence and to get healthy.  The other named pitcher was C.J.Edwards.  He is the Chris Archer of this deal.  Edwards has been dynamite in A ball, but, of course, he is at least two and probably three years from the majors.

Apparently the Cubs can pick up another highly regarded prospect who is nearer to the majors, Neil Ramirez.  Ramirez has done well at AA, but kind of flopped when he was advanced to AAA.  He has had shoulder problems, so the hitch there is for the Cubs to determine whether he is healthy.  If he is, he seems like a good acquisition who is near to being able to pitch in the majors.  Otherwise, the Cubs get to pick two pitchers from A ball or lower that no one has ever heard of or is likely to ever hear about.

On a more positive note, it seems to Cubs are talking seriously about trading Alfonso Soriano to the Yankees.  Do it and I'll take back some of the negativity I have expressed in these pages toward the plan.  Some of it, mind you.  Not all.

On another positive note, Junior Lake has been something of a revelation since he was brought up more or less to occupy space after Bogusevic was hurt until the Cubs could activate David DeJesus.  Lake was kind of a strikeout machine in the minors and reminded one of a discount Starlin Castro.

However, so far he has been very impressive, so maybe there is talent down there for the Cubs to exploit.  On the other hand, since you never heard anything about guys like this from the Cubs brass, you wonder whether they know it.  Rusin pitched a nice game last night as well.

Thoughts on the Garza Rumors

Or what's going on behind the curtain?

I'm continually reading about the potential Garza rumors.  Two or three things stand out among all the fluff.

First off, most of them are nonsense.  Garza is available for two months, then he is a free agent.  So acquiring him is only an option to teams that are in desperate need of a quality starter to carry them to the playoffs.  Or to teams that can afford to sign him to an immediate extension.  Or both.  That is to say that, under the best of circumstances, Garza is worth maybe three or four wins over what you have now.  So you have to be that close for it to matter.

So the presence of the Toronto Blue Jays and San Diego Padres in this mix makes little sense.  Similarly the Indians and Pirates make no sense here because, although he would help either of them a lot, the idea they might sign him next year is pretty remote, so they are unlikely to come up with the kind of prospect or prospects that could benefit the Cubs.  Not that the Cubs are above making dumb trades.

So who's left?  The AL East, mainly the Red Sox, Yankees, and Orioles.  Then the Rangers.  Finally the Dodgers and Diamondbacks.  All of these teams are contenders who could use Garza's services and all of them could afford to extend him or sign him next year as a free agent.  However, one wonders who they have in their systems that would make for a reasonable return to the Cubs.  Mike Ott?  Give me a break.

Which brings us to the second point, namely, what is Garza really worth?  And what is what Garza is really worth really worth to the Cubs?

Back in 2010, the Cubs traded away four highly regarded prospects to Tampa Bay in exchange for Garza.  At the time, people, myself included, rather thought the trade made no sense, given the Cubs were a mediocre team tending toward the truly awful team they became.

But actually, it turns out the Cubs gave up relatively little in the deal.  Chirinos, the catcher, was their second best catching prospect, but he hasn't made it.  Similarly Guyer, the outfielder, has flopped.  Fuld, the other outfielder, was kind of a throw in who served as a backup defensive player, but nothing more.  Lee, the Cubs second best shortstop prospect behind Castro, was thought to be a key to the deal.  Although he has shown signs of being ready to make the jump to the bigs, he was hurt this year and has missed the whole season.

The only real acquisition turned out to be Chris Archer, who was probably the Cubs best pitching prospect at AA.  Archer has finally made it to the majors and he is doing pretty well.  He has started nine games, going 4-3 with an ERA under 3 and a really good WHIP.

So actually, the Rays swapped Garza for a potentially equal replacement who made it to the majors in three years time.  Bear in mind, the Rays had plenty of pitching that was close enough to the major leagues they could afford to be patient.  The Cubs would be lucky to get such a player in exchange for Garza now.  At the time of the trade, Garza was under team control for three years, not two months.

Which leads me to the third observation, which is that the Cubs are all about money and making it on their own terms, a kind of business school sports model run off the tracks.  Read the Sullivan interview with Epstein in the Tribune this morning and tell me if I am not right.

Now I know that baseball is a business and all that.  But the Cubs are still the most profitable team in baseball despite declining attendance and the lack of the sort of high-profile amenities other teams have.  And it is possible to retain fan interest and field a reasonably competitive team whilst rebuilding the organization.  Last time I looked the Red Sox were in first place even after picking up the pieces following an epic collapse and a throw-away season.

Anyway, a close reading of the article reveals that the Cubs want to succeed only on their own terms.  They will only act like a major market franchise when they can finance that activity from increased profits.  So as far as the Garza deal goes, if they trade Garza, they are essentially saying they cannot afford to sign him for four years and the $15 or $16MM per year it would take to do it.  Or they don't believe they will be serious contenders in 2015, more like 2017 or 2018, which is bad news for the fans, to say the least.

Breaking Cubs News

The Cubs didn't waste any time after Scott Hairston's late inning near heroics in trading him to the Nationals for an unnamed Class A pitcher.  I can't say I fault this deal, whatever it is worth.  Hairston hit 8 home runs, but he was otherwise not much of a factor.  He was hitting less than .200 and hardly ever played.  When he did play in the field, he was pretty awful.  Plus their minor league system has a whole bunch of right-handed hitting outfielders waiting in the wings, so it is not like they need the guy for even the near-term future.  The Cubs pick up a net savings of between $2.5 and $3MM in the deal, depending on how much of Hairston's salary they have to pick up.  Reports show it isn't much.

Kevin Gregg blew the save, but the Cubs managed to come back in the 11th to pick up the win Sunday.  Despite Gregg's flop, the bullpen, at least temporarily, has benefited from being retooled.  Guerrier has picked up several quality innings, as has Strop.

The Cubs play the White Sox Monday night and then host the Angels for two games before the Cardinals series that leads to the All-Star Break.  With Garza, Wood, and Samardzija set to start the first three games, the Cubs look like they might extend their mini-streak of victories, at least until the Cards come to town.

The Best Damned Dominican Sandlot Team Money Can Buy

OK, I'm being sarcastic here, but lets focus on what is going on here.  The Cubs have added a new wrinkle to the Epstein myth.  Right now they are dumping salary like mad in hopes of acquiring enough international monopoly money credits to avoid substantial penalties they might incur as a result of signing a bunch of sixteen year old kids from the Dominican Republic and Venezuela.

I'm sure these kids project to be awesome prospects and all, but this is rather taking building for the future to a whole new level.  Here is a link to a good summary of the Cubs activity as well as the rules of the game.

I was reflecting a bit the other day while listening to some sports radio talk in the car.  A lot of people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the so-called moneyball strategy, especially as it applies to teams like the Cubs.  Moneyball was really a system devised by Billy Beane to build competitive teams in a small market within a limited budget.

The system takes advantage of market aberrations, some of which no longer exist to the extent they did in the earlier years of the decade simply because other teams have figured out the same imbalances as well.  The whole scheme is based on being able to develop a steady stream of young talent through your minor league system, develop and exploit their talent to the point they become too expensive to retain, then swap them off for similar pieces who are nearly ready to take their places.

The relevance of this setup to a major market team like the Cubs with lots of money and very little marketable talent escapes me.  If anything, Epstein and Hoyer are building an organization that may, in the future, be able to implement a system similar to moneyball.  Bear in mind, of course, that the system itself is entirely irrelevant to their own situation.  If that is the case, Cubs fans are in for some really lean years.

Anyway, in the version of the big leagues that inhabits the friendly confines, the Cubs have suffered two more losses.  In the final game at Oakland, they lost a heart-breaker 1-0.  Wood pitched a shutout through six innings, only to have Guerrier throw it away in his first outing as a Cub.

Castro was thrown out at home plate on a play on which virtually any runner at second would have scored easily.  There is a bit of controversy about whether Castro took the right route or ran hard or got a late jump.  Most of the defensive statements are just fluff.  If you watch the video replay from the Oakland announcers, you know that from right off they recognized Castro was just jogging.  You cannot see what kind of lead or jump he got, but he is a good ten feet from third base when Cespedes closes on the ball.

Yesterday, Castro was caught napping and picked off second base.  Didn't matter to the result, but there is definitely something wrong with this kid.  He is just not paying attention to the game most of the time.  Maybe this is another indication of how hard it is to develop players on a team that is designed to lose or maybe it just means Castro is just not the player or the personality people think he has the potential to become.

Too Clever by Half?

There are some bright sides to the Cubs deals of yesterday.  They picked up guys who are healthy and ready to fail in the majors, so we are spared the expected ordeal of waiting for them to heal or disappoint in the distant future.  Also the Cubs picked up some extra international bonus money, which they promptly invested in three or four of the top five or six prospects on the international market.

The thing here is that these kids are sixteen years old, so even though they look pretty good now, it will undoubtedly be many years before they mature into big league players.  So a lot can happen in the interval.  Anyway, is it just me or is there something a little sinister in building the future on a foundation that can only charitably be perceived as a form of indentured servitude?

The Cubs brass has correctly concluded that the real bargains in impact players are offshore, but you kind of get the impression they must be spending all their time high-fiving each other about how smart they are in pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.  They might want to watch some major league games as an antidote.

Last night the cleverness extended to the embattled Dale Sveum, who snatched defeat from the precipice of victory by inserting the slumping and overused James Russell in the eighth inning with two outs, a two run lead, and a runner at first and the game seemingly well in hand.  A walk and a home run later, the game was for all intents and purposes lost.

I know that Sveum has little to work with, but sometimes you just have to keep it simple and leave well enough alone.  The Cubs are carrying seven relievers, but actually Sveum has shown confidence in only four of them, viz., Russell, Camp, Gregg, and lately Parker.  The confidence shown in Camp has always seemed to be puzzling, as his performance this year has been consistently worse than anyone in the bullpen including Marmol.

Before the game, there was a bit of good news, though, and I do not mean that Guerrier and Strop reported, though to be fair, they cannot be any worse than the rest of the bullpen.  What I do mean is that Sean Camp was designated for assignment.  Sveum was almost tearful before the game making the announcement, which makes you wonder what is going on in his head.

Anyway, in the actual game, Sveum had Garza pitch his arm out for eight innings until he could get to Gregg to save a 3-1 win. He had any number of pitchers warming up in the seventh and eighth, but it now seems his confidence is limited to a single player, Gregg.  Actually, I was rather happy he stuck with Garza.  Granted he was getting tired and had thrown a lot of pitches, but taking the game deep is what money pitchers are supposed to do.  Garza delivered.  Which is also another reason to keep this guy in Chicago if it is at all possible.

The Deals

The Cubs launched Rebuild 2.0 today, not exactly with a big bang.  They traded DFAed relievers with the Dodgers, dumping the much maligned Carlos Marmol for the probably washed up Matt Guerrier.  Guerrier was a decent enough long reliever/setup guy for the Twins, but he has been a complete bust with the Dodgers.  He is 34 years old.  I don't know what the exact financial arrangements are here, but neither guy is signed for next season.  Marmol made about $9MM for the Cubs and Guerrier was taking down $4MM from the Dodgers, so on the surface, the Cubs save the pro-rated difference between the two for the rest of the year.

The Cubs also dealt the surprisingly effective Feldman and the half-decent utility player when he isn't hurt Steve Clevenger to the Orioles in exchange for two pitchers of indifferent ability who earn next to nothing.  Jake Arrieta was once a much-hyped prospect who never amounted to much with the Orioles.  He started the year in the rotation, but was so bad, he got sent down to AAA.

The thing is that Arrieta is 27 years old, which is no spring chicken even for baseball pitchers.  I'm sure the Cubs think he has the potential to become another Travis Wood.  My own inclination is to consider him more likely to be another  Chris Volstad.

The other pickup in the Feldman deal was Pedro Strop, a 28 year old reliever.  Strop had a good year in 2012, but has been a bust this year, more than likely because the Orioles used him in 70 games last year.

The real key to these deals is money.  Feldman was making around $7MM, the other guys were all being paid around the MLB minimum.  Once again, I would argue that irrespective of the potential of any of the players exchanged here, what we are seeing is the playing out of a business scenario that has little if anything to do with building a successful baseball team at the major league level.

It's not You, It's Me!

Theo and Jed have been making the rounds of print and radio media more or less defending their plans and their embattled manager in advance of the launch of Rebuild 2.0, or maybe 4.0, I've lost count.

Rebuild 1.0 saw the Cubs dump veterans Ryan Dempster, Paul Maholm, Geovanny Soto, and Reed Johnson for, essentially, Aroldys Vizcaino, the perpetually injured Atlanta prospect who has yet to throw a pitch, and several bags of baseballs.

As I have noted before in these pages, I have nothing against trading vets for prospects per se, but these guys are just dumping salary and they ought to admit it to everyone and move on from there.  And I think trading Maholm was an short-term error.  (Maholm is 9-6 with an ERA under 4, which is pretty much where he was last year with the Cubs when he was traded).

As for Sveum, you can say what you like about him having been dealt a bad hand - and, of course, this begs the question of who dealt that hand - but all you have to do is study his bullpen management of the Friday Seattle game to realize he is not ready for prime time.  Playing in an American league park, use your long man Villanueva for 2/3rd of an inning, then bring in Russell to face some lefties even though he has appeared in consecutive games, then stick with the rookie Parker for three innings, and turn to the worthless Sean Camp to finish things off.

In any case, the Cubs did take the series in Seattle even though they made heavy weather of the final game and blew the lead in Saturday's game before picking up an extra-inning victory.  Again the bullpen was the ostensible culprit, but really, this team doesn't score runs or add on.  By and large, they are pretty much done by the fourth inning even when they have the lead.

I saw another piece in the press (USA Today) that may point to some internal dissension on the team.  Samardzija is quoted to the effect that all this talk about rebuilding is an insult to the players.

"As a 28-year-old, the word rebuilding sends chills down your spine. The word rebuilding is a total front office-type thing. Those words don't resonate down to the team. To tell you the truth, it's disrespectful to even say to the team."

You have to admit that he has a point.  Garza is a good example of this kind of front office double talk.  Garza is only one year older than Samardzija and, of course, his career is full of significantly more achievement that Samardzija's, yet, almost from Day 1 of the new regime, there has been relentless speculation on where he will be traded and when he will be traded and how obvious it is that he has to be traded.

Give me a break.  This guy is a good pitcher and he is 29 years old.  Plus the Cubs are always talking about how hard it is to get good pitching and how they have no good pitching in the system.  So why don't they just shut up about Garza and sign him to an extension?  Because they are too cheap.

Last Week in Cubs Baseball

Since my last post, the Cubs lost three of four to the Cardinals, won two of three from the really awful Astros, then lost last evening to the really awful Brewers.  There isn't much you can say about these games that has not already been said about most of the other games.  The Cubs were competitive in all but one of the the Cards games, but they could not score runs.

The bigger news occurred off the field.  Earlier in the week, Epstein and Hoyer refused to blame Sveum for losing a bunch of games because of dumb decisions.  Essentially they said it was not his fault that he had an awful team to work with.  Of course, this rather begs the question of whose fault it is then, doesn't it?

The Cubs took one of the major sources of fan frustration off the board by designating Carlos Marmol for assignment.  Evidently the desire to employ his services in situations where the outcome of the game was on the line was something Sveum and his advisers found irresistible.  Better for all concerned to take it away.  I can't argue with the call, though.  Nobody wanted the guy.  Someone might sign him off waivers.

The other guy to suffer management's wrath was Ian Stewart.  I guess I don't understand some of the kerfuffle about his tweets.  I have to assume the Cubs made some promises to Stewart that just got steamrolled by his injuries.  In the same position, I suppose I would have assumed I'd get some playing time at Iowa, especially given the execrable performance of Josh Vitters there and in the big leagues.

Right now speculation is in high gear about who is going to get traded in July.  Everyone's favorite to go is Matt Garza.  Presumably he wants a better deal than Edwin Jackson, so that's got to be it, doesn't it?  I mean, he can pitch when he is healthy.  Jackson cannot.  So the choice is obvious.  Stick with Jackson.

Also, anybody who has had a half-decent first half is on the bubble because he has value that can be exchanged for prospects.  I've got nothing against a shrewd manipulation of your roster to build for lasting success, but, lets face it, Cubs fans, the record so far is pretty bleak for this regime, and no amount of chatter about master plans is going to make it better until we see results instead of promises.

My Problem with the Cubs Plan

The Cubs lost Sunday to the Mets when Carlos Marmol blew a 3-0 lead in the bottom of the ninth inning.  Alfonso Soriano knocked over a garbage can after eating dinner and opined that Marmol used to be a good pitcher.  So it goes.  I remember two years ago when Zambrano made similar remarks and Soriano leaped to Marmol's defense.

Anyway, I didn't catch most of the game, though I gather Garza gave one of his better efforts.  After the game, fans started calling in with bitter feelings, especially concerning Marmol.  The radio "experts" urged them to stay the course.  So it goes.

The fans have a point, though, and I do not know why it is so hard for this message to get through to the experts and the front office.  The Cubs have blown fourteen saves this year, and the bullpen has lost enumerable other games, Marmol and Camp accounting for the most spectacular meltdowns.  So just assuming they might have won half of them, the team would now be three games over .500 and no one would be talking about another July fire sale.

Actually, this is one thing I don't get with respect to the so-called expert opinion and how this is the only way to build a competitive team, from the ground up, keep exchanging assets for younger assets, etc.  Isn't this just what Pittsburgh and Kansas City and Seattle and Cleveland have been doing for the last ten or twenty years?

Cincinnati and St. Louis and Tampa have been successful at renewing themselves from within their farm systems, but even they have to occasionally dip into the free agent market to fill holes.  Also, especially respecting the Cards and the Rays, they have a certain style of play and a rigorous developmental program the Cubs in general lack.

Now the Cubs brass pays lip service to the idea of player development and nurturing both defensive and offensive discipline, but so far there is little evidence of results.  It is probably too early to assess the player development aspect of things, but so far as instilling any idea of fundamental, disciplined, smart baseball habits, a quick look at the minor league stats doesn't seem to show much progress.

Granted these hot shots like Baez and Almora are down in A ball, but year to year they are not taking walks and they are striking out a lot.  I think Almora has walked like five or six times in his professional career.  Looking at the stats, some of the lesser hyped prospects in AA ball strike me as more likely candidates for successful major league careers, maybe not as superstars, but potentially worthwhile players.  I'm thinking here of the outfielders Matt Szczur and Jae-Hoon Ha and the shortstop Arismendy Alcantara.

But anyway, the real problem I have with the so-called plan is that it is basically a business plan, not a baseball plan.  The first assumption is that you are going to stink for two or three years.  Not only is this an insult to the fans who pay good money to see a dreadful product, but it has an adverse effect on the development of the team as a whole.  If you are Starlin Castro and you land a fat, multi-year contract, what's the incentive to continue to improve and become the player people think you are capable of being?  So you hit into a double play with the game on the line after reaching out for a pitch ten inches outside.  You were going to lose anyway, and, if not that game, then the next.  This attitude starts to rub off on everyone around, especially the rentals and stop-gap players who are just waiting around to be traded anyway.  These seasons have become an exercise in learning to lose.

The second assumption is that a way to build a team is to arbitrage assets, mostly by trading them to contenders at the trade deadline.  I'm not saying the Cubs should not trade players of ability if they can get a fair return.  However, if one thing is certain, it is that teams rarely get a fair return at the trade deadline.  What they really get to do is to dump salary.

Think about it, sellers at the deadline invariably engage in trades with buyers or renters, good teams that are contenders and so are not going to give up players who are likely to help them right now or next year.  These are the players the Cubs need.

So the Cubs wind up trading genuine major league players like Dempster and Maholm and Johnson for kids who may or may not ever develop or players who are iffy in some other way, like being disabled and subject to a chancy rehab regime (Vizcaino).

The real deals of veteran talent for near-term prospects happens in the off-season.  So the best trades made by Epstein/Hoyer have been Marshall for Wood and Cashner for Rizzo.  If you look at the deals the masters of this kind of team building make, Beane and Friedman, they are almost always off-season deals.  That's when teams are willing to take near-term chances, and that's when you can deal with anyone, not just the contenders.

It is, incidentally, why I cannot figure out the zeal with which people speculate on the positive worth of trading Matt Garza, a pretty good pitcher who will reach free agency status only at the end of the season.  The time to deal Garza was two years ago when Epstein and Hoyer were hired.  He was worth something then.  Now he is worth nothing.  The Cubs would be better served by extending him or making him a qualifying offer at season's end, which would at least bring them a good draft choice in return.

This is One Awful Team

I actually went out to Wrigley Field last night to see this wretched assortment of AAA rejects go through the motions of playing baseball.  A lovely night, but...

Garza did not have command of his breaking ball, but he did keep them close enough (down 3-1into the sixth inning).  Then Votto hit a line drive directly at Scott Hairston who proceeded to play the ball into a triple (actually scored as a single and a two-base error).  He had misjudged and misplayed a similar ball earlier, but managed to catch it by half kneeling down and bending backwards.  Tried the same thing this time.

I don't know if he saw the ball, but whatever.  Garza was obviously steamed, doing his best impersonation of Carlos Zambrano trying to hold it all in.  Somehow or other, the Cubs bench never seems to pick up on this sort of thing.  You would think they could at least send the catcher out there to calm things down.  Anyway, after that it was all over.  Six runs later, Sveum pulled the plug.

Actually the Cubs made four errors officially on the night, having especial trouble fielding bunts and soft grounders.  Maybe I'm grousing because I am out over $100 on the night even though I got tickets on StubHub, but it seems Cubs fans are just way too understanding of the whole rebuilding process.  Lets face reality: this team is a disgrace.

More about the rebuild later.  In other news, the Cubs finally picked up a decent first round pick to play third base in Chris Bryant.  They have also picked up Henry Rodriguez from the Nats.  He has to be better than the dreck they have in the bullpen currently.  They should also try to claim Zack Duke.  Duke can get lefties out and would allow the Cubs to use Russell in a more adventurous role.

They claim to have had a great draft and to have populated the minor league system with quality arms.  We'll see.  Right now they are a bunch of guys you never heard of and probably won't hear about again.

Reason for Hope?

After losing every game for an entire week, the Cubs righted the ship at least briefly by coming from behind to beat the Reds in extra innings, then blowing away the White Sox in three straight and knocking off the Diamondbacks on Friday.

The key to the surge has been pitching, actually starting pitching, as well has home runs.  Sooner or later, though, the wind stops blowing out and you find it necessary to do some of the basic things you need to do to win consistently.

That happened last night when the Cubs wasted a nice start from Samardzija.  In this case, it was the bullpen that failed them.  Russell, usually reliable, could not rescue Samardzija.  Then, of course, the Cubs unaccountably called on the execrable Carlos Marmol to pitch the eighth after they evened the game in the bottom of the seventh on a Schierholtz homer.

Bad decision.  And a strange one.  Carlos Villanueva came in to get the last out in the previous inning and was due up first the next, so the need to bring in Marmol is hard to understand.  Obviously it was the wrong move.

Looking at the Cubs now, they are still a mediocre team that will continue to have streaks when, largely due to superior pitching, they will be competitive, and other streaks, largely due to their awful bullpen and lack of discipline at the plate.  Also because they seem to have streaks where they cannot execute routine defensive plays, such as today when they have played appallingly in the field.

I, for one, continue to think the outlook is pretty bleak.  They are likely to continue to trade useful veteran pitching for dubious or distant prospects.  This underlines an obvious pitfall in the Cubs approach.  You don't get real value for players like this at the deadline.  You get it in the off-season.

The other problem is the bullpen.  Teams usually build this through free agency and bringing along strong and young pitchers who lack the repertoire to start.  The Cubs don't have this as they have almost nothing in the minor leagues to develop.  They were unlucky to lose Fujikawa so soon as he seemed to be rounding to form.  Right now, the only relievers they can count on are Villanueva, Russell, and Gregg.  Lean times there, I'm afraid.

Random Thoughts

• Whose side is Dale Sveum on?  Last night, the Cubs claw back to within one run of the Reds in the top of the eighth.  Granted that Chapman is warming up for the save, but, come on, Sveum leaves Rondon in to give up two more runs when he has Fujikawa, Marmol, and Gregg available.  Almost a reprise of Tuesday's loss when Sveum went to the scrubs instead of major leaguers after Garza' brilliant start.

• Sveum and the Cubs are baffled by their apparent inability to perform against left-handed pitching.  This has been a perennial problem for the Cubs.  Even guys who are acquired because they kill lefties, viz., Scott Hairston, stink in this regard.  A few years ago, during the Piniella era, it was revealed the Cubs had no left-handed batting practice pitcher, so they never took BP against lefties.  It appears they now have a left-handed BP pitcher, but they don't feel comfortable with that routine.  Sveum says things like, well, you know, they have a routine, and so on.  OK, they have a routine and a comfort level, but it doesn't work, so maybe they should change their routine or else they don't play.  When Castro was questioned about how badly he was hitting against lefties, he said he had the same approach to hitting against everyone, that he doesn't change his approach, and he does not intend to change it.  That's why he is having a bad year.  Ultimately, these things are not just player issues, they are management issues and management needs to be judged at least equally responsible for failure and lack of progress.

•  I happened to be listening to the early part of the broadcast yesterday.  Len and JD discussed the fact that the Reds had nearly ninety more walks than the Cubs thus far in the season.  That's more than two more men on base per game.  So it is no wonder these guys do not score runs.  The Reds have scored 232 runs to the Cubs 183.  They have 15 more hits thus far.  The difference is in the walks.  As a general rule, teams can expect to score about a third of their base-runners.  So if you consistently have numbers like this, you are going to average around 600 runs a year.  Winning teams score 800 times.  As long as the Cubs recruit and obtain and nurture brainless, impatient hitters, they will continue to lose.

•  If I remember correctly, the Cubs hit the skids around this time last year and then everybody was OK with trading away any veteran talent that might fetch even a minimal return.  There is already a drumbeat to trade Garza and Feldman and DeJesus and just about anyone who is perceived to have value in exchange for low-level prospects.  The Cubs should make some trades, but so far their strategy is just non-productive.  Last year they traded Maholm, Dempster, and Johnson at the deadline in return, essentially, for Aroldys Vizcaino and several marginal low-level prospects.  Trading Dempster was justifiable. He was an aging free agent whom the Cubs were unlikely to sign at a reasonable price.  Trading Johnson was relatively meaningless, though it should be noted that his replacement, Hairston, acquired as a free agent, is a complete bust.  Trading Maholm, a solid pitcher with four or five more seasons in his future and who is performing well for the Braves, was a mistake.  They just had to replace him with similar free agents in the off-season and received no immediate return (Vizcaino).

• The Cubs off-season moves have not been earth-shattering either, though they have added useful talent.  The biggest trades were Marshall for Wood and Cashner for Rizzo, trades that gave up talent for equivalent or more useful talent.  I've got no problem with these deals.  Nor do I really have issues with the mid-level free agents.  By and large they have been useful additions, especially the pitchers.  Their one major foray, Earnest Jackson, is so far a bust.

• The Cubs should either trade Castro while he still has perceived value or send him to the minors until he starts focusing.  I know this is controversial and it is a cardinal tenet of Cubs fans belief that Castro is a major talent, but this just isn't the case at all.  Castro may have all the talent in the world, but he has actually regressed since he was promoted to the majors.

The Garza Start

Garza was dominant for five innings of one-hit, shutout ball.  He left leading 3-0.  Then the master, Dale Sveum, took over.  I wouldn't ordinarily harp on this point, but tonight's game rather illustrates some disturbing trends concerning this year's Cubs.

One thing I neglected in the earlier report card post was Cubs coaching and management.  You would have to give the on-field management and coaching a rating of near zero.  First off, as a game strategist, Dale Sveum is just simply a dunce.  Tonight's game demonstrates this fact.  Garza was sitting around 80 pitches after five innings.  He was supposedly on a pitch count of 90 so you might have allowed him to at least start the sixth.

But OK, he had a tough fifth, so I can see going to the bullpen.  But come on, Hector Rondon, who is a mop up guy?  Three of the next four batters for the Pirates were left-handed, so an obvious choice might have been Russell, but no, we go to the twelfth man Rondon.  Bases loaded.  Russell comes in to pitch around Alvarez and walks in a run.  Then we go to, that's right, to the eleventh man, Shawn Camp, who is having a truly atrocious season, but who is one of Dale's bonafide favorites of all time.  Well, you know what happens, and, of course, no one is warming up so that even after the grand slam puts the Pirates in command, we have to endure another bases loaded jam before the side is finally retired.

There were two moves. actually three if you count leaving Garza in, to be made there.  One was to go straight to Russell.  The other was to bring out Villanueva, whose turn Garza was taking, and who had not pitched in five days.  He might have given you three innings if necessary.  Go figure.

This game is not an isolated instance of certifiable dumbness.  It happens every day.  But it is not limited to just in-game decisions.  By and large, the Cubs are not improving in the field or at the plate.  Some of this must be due not merely to having dumb players, but to having poor instruction as well.  If you watch these games on TV even, you will notice that throws from the outfield rarely go to the right base or the right cutoff man.

You will also notice that the Cubs rarely score unless they hit a home run or the pitcher drives in runners who are on-base.  Similarly you will notice they rarely produce long, gritty, grinding at-bats until the ninth inning when the game is pretty much lost, but you can come in and whine in the post-game interviews about how you nearly pulled that one out, dadgummit.

Report Card

The season is about a quarter done now, so maybe it is time to take stock of the Cubs thus far.  The verdict is probably that they are a little better than last year, but, of course, that makes matters all the more frustrating.  Lets be realistic, this team is still likely to lose ninety games this season, and possibly more if they follow the same strategy as last season and trade veteran players, mainly pitchers, i.e., salary, for marginal prospects.

For what it is worth, however, here is an off-hand evaluation:

Starting Pitching: Better, especially starting pitchers.  Wood has been exceptionally good.  Feldman has been surprisingly good after a slow start.  Jackson has been a disappointment.  Samardzija has been inconsistent after a great start.  Villanueva has pitched badly after a great start.  Villanueva has been relegated to the bullpen with the anticipated return of Matt Garza.  I would have to say the starting pitching is probably the strongest point of their game and likely to keep them reasonably competitive through the remainder of the season were it not for the seeming obsession of current management and the Chicago press that trading veteran pitching for minor league talent that is a long way from being ready for the major leagues is a recipe for long-term success.  The likelihood of the Cubs repeating their July fire sale means we are likely to be giving the same assessment of matters this time next year.

Relief Pitching:  Inconsistent at best, awful at worst.  Marmol has been pretty bad.  Fujikawa was hurt early and has not recovered his Japanese form.  Gregg has been surprisingly good.  I have my doubts about this trend continuing.  Russell has been consistent, but they need another left-hander.  Camp has been awful.  He should have been released in the off-season.  Bowden has rightly been DFAed to make room for Garza.  Rondon is a work in progress .  Villanueva will help stabilize things.  He is, in any case, a substantial upgrade over Bowden.

Catcher:  Another bright spot.  Castillo has been very good defensively and as a hitter.  Navarro is a terrible defensive catcher, but he can hit occasionally and is a decent veteran backup and pinch-hitter.

First Base: Rizzo has turned things around since a slow, homer-oriented, start.  He seems to be able to handle left-handed pitching now.  Undoubtedly the Cubs best player.

Second Base: Barney's injury set him and the Cubs back a lot.  He is starting to come around to his usual hitting production, not spectacular, but acceptable enough given his superior defensive skills.

Shortstop: Sveum made a couple of perceptive remarks over the weekend that apply very much to Castro in particular.  He said Castro could be as good a player as he wanted to be and that the Cubs in general should not be considered a young, inexperienced team.  Castro is now in his fourth full season as the Cubs shortstop.  His defense is still as inconsistent as it was when he came up from AA ball.  His hitting approach, I would argue, is worse or, at best, unchanged.  Castro now has a .273 BA with a .304 OBP and a .692 OPS.  This puts him down in Soriano territory in terms of average and OBP without Soriano's home run power.  Lets face it, unless Castro improves, he is a below average player right now.  Maybe changing his position is the answer, but, right now, I would consider trading him while his perceived value and potential are still high.

Third Base: Valbuena and Ransom have provided a decent platoon at this position.  Realistically, though, Valbuena is a good utility infielder and Ransom is likely to bottom out.  If Vitters is the future of the franchise or if they have to rely on Stewart regaining his hitting form, the Cubs are in trouble long-term at this position until one of the lower minors prospects is ready or until Baez, still a lower minors prospect, changes position.  Maybe they should have held on to Ramirez after all.

Right Field: Schierholtz has been a reasonable left-handed platoon player.  Hairston has been an inadequate right-handed counterpart.  This position is another weakness.

Center Field: David DeJesus has been fine here.  He is a pretty good leadoff hitter.  His defense is adequate.  Right now I rather think he is better suited to a corner outfield position.  The Cubs are likely to trade him before the deadline.  Of all the Cubs players, he is probably worth most to a potential contender and the Cubs are well stocked with place-holders at this position in Sweeney and Borbon.  Borbon, if he played everyday, might be more than a short-term solution.

Left Field: Soriano will probably come on as the weather warms up.  If he does so, the Cubs need to get rid of him ASAP.  Soriano is still a defensive liability and his approach to hitting, to the extent it rubs off on other players, is a bad influence, and, in general, an insult to everyone who knows how baseball should be played.

Bench: Adequate.  We've pretty much covered everyone to the extent they are platoon players.  Only good teams need a superior bench anyway.

AAA Call-ups: Not much to write about here.  Vitters is hitting home runs since returning to the lineup, but he did that last year and flopped when he came up to the big leagues.  Jackson has not turned it around either, still strikes out a lot.  They don't seem to have a standout pitching prospect here.

The Surge?

Well, maybe not quite that, but the Cubs have been playing better of late.  After a truly awful effort Friday night in Washington behind Jeff Samardzija, the Cubs took advantage of some Nationals mistakes on Saturday, and then took the rubber match Sunday and the Rockies opener behind excellent pitching efforts from Feldman and Wood.

I have to say that Wood has been a revelation this season.  He is arguably the most consistent starter in the NL.  And I have to eat some crow in the matter of Feldman, who has turned his season around of late.

Actually starting pitching has become the Cubs strength of late.  Their five starters match up very well in terms of performance against anyone in their division, even the Cardinals.  So far, anyway.  Samardzija seems to have taken a step back from his early April dominance and I don't know what to think about Jackson, who just has not delivered at all.  Even his win on Saturday was shaky.

So, at any rate, it gives you something to watch, at least until Epstein and Hoyer break it all up in July.  They will have an interesting problem when Garza comes off the DL.  Who goes to the bullpen?  Logically it has to be Jackson, but then he has the big contract.

Of course, everyone is hell-bent on trading away Garza, who, by the time he settles in will have virtually no trade value whatsoever.  I've never been able to comprehend the notion that Garza is worth a lot in trade or that he should be traded.  If they wanted to dump him, the 2010-12 off-season was the time to do it.  Personally, I would like to see him extended.  He is certainly better than Jackson and probably could be signed for a similar price if he is healthy.

On another front, the Cubs signed Anthony Rizzo to long-term deal.  This, unlike the Castro signing, was a smart move.  Rizzo looks like the professional hitter they have been seeking for a while.  He started out poorly this spring, especially against left-handers, but now he seems to be hitting everyone and taking a good approach.

I expect the Cubs will lock up Wood and Samardzija if they continue to pitch well.  They will likely select one of the stud pitchers, Gray or Appel, with their first round choice in the amateur draft, so that means they will definitely trade one or two of their current starters.  If they keep Garza, it probably means Villanueva and/or Feldman.

The Cubs have nothing coming as far as pitching goes in the high minors, so they might want to think twice about this, especially as the returns are not likely to be that great.  Also, Villanueva and Feldman have been successful swing men, so that given the current state of the bullpen even with Fujikawa coming off the DL and Gregg pitching well.

The best trade chips they have now are DeJesus and Hairston in terms of bringing a decent return, maybe a top ten prospect or two.  None of their current players are likely to bring major talent their way.

Big Mistake

I saw today that Dale Sveum had named Kevin Gregg the official closer.  Big mistake.  Not that Gregg has done badly.  Actually he has done surprisingly well.  I just think that when you do not really have a genuine closer, you are better off using the closer by committee approach.  Tony LaRussa did it for years with the Cardinals.  Not only does it take pressure off the guy who is anointed, it encourages competition for that slot.  If you do not have a player who fits a role, why pretend that you do?

As far as the Cubs play this week, after an awful series against the Reds, the Cubs played well to beat the Rangers in a make-up game.  My apologies to Feldman, he has pitched well of late.  Wood continued to impress against the Cardinals as the Cubs picked up a nice 2-1 win.

Apparently, Sveum failed to clarify some of the other bullpen roles for today's game.  Villanueva certainly deserved a better fate, pitching into the seventh with a 4-3 lead.  Taking him out for the usually reliable Russell with two down proved to be costly as Russell surrendered the tying run.  Michael Bowden must be the new Sean Camp.  Not the guy to go to in the eighth inning, that's for sure.

Lots of questionable decisions in this game, beginning with the lineup.  Bullpen management problematical.  Not pinch hitting for Schierholtz in the eighth inning.  Not going to the bench to start the ninth.

More Bad Baseball

Since my last post, the Cubs lost two of the remaining three games to the Padres and the first game of the Reds series.  It may be time to rethink the premise of this blog, in that it is getting pretty tiresome to say the same things over and over again.

The Wood game is a case in point, a game the team should certainly have won were it not for a total defensive collapse in the eighth inning, one of numerous total defensive collapses this season.  Lost in the shuffle was the key Sveum move of replacing Wood with Camp, who promptly threw a wild pitch and walked the only hitter he faced.

The Cubs had used no relief pitchers in Wednesday's game when Feldman went the distance, so they had Marmol, Russell, and Gregg available on Thursday.  I questioned the wisdom of signing Camp after he had a decent year in 2012.  These journeymen guys in the twilight of their careers rarely bounce back the next season after 70 or more appearances.  Sveum seems to have a peculiar affection for Camp which is a little hard to fathom.

Yesterday was one of the worst performances by the Cubs all year.  Fifteen hits and three walks, but they could manage only five runs, three of which scored in the bottom of the ninth when they decided belatedly to start actually working the count (two of the walks came in the ninth and one drove in a run).

One observation on the bullpen management by Sveum.  They were losing 4-2 after six innings, but they decided to use Bowden and Loe in relief.  These are the guys you use in lost games.  The result was the Reds managed to add two more runs to effectively put the game out of reach.

Now no one expected the Cubs to contend.  The worrisome part, though, is that they still show the same tendencies they have shown through the past lean seasons.  There is no improvement here.  They still fall apart defensively after any kind of tough break.  They still consistently miss the cutoff man on nearly every outfield throw no matter who is playing.  They still fail to deliver with men on base.

Starting pitching has improved, but the worry here is that as the season wears on, pitching under the constant pressure of close games without run support will take its toll and this aspect of the Cubs game will deteriorate as well.

Maybe next time we will discuss what the Cubs need to do to improve, which has nothing to do with threatening to move to Rosemont or building a new scoreboard.

Some Signs of Light

The Cubs have played better in recent days.  They took three of four from the Marlins and won the opening game of the Padres series.  Lets bear in mind, though, that they were playing the Marlins and the Padres, two of the the worst teams in all of baseball.  In the last seven games, in which the Cubs are 5-2, they have scored more than four runs only once, last night, when they scored five.

I saw a stat that basically said the Cubs were the most homer dependent team in baseball so far as scoring runs is concerned.  This is saying something given the fact that the team has only two legitimate home run threats in their everyday starting lineup, Rizzo and Soriano, and that Soriano has only one homer so far this season.

It rather points up two things, both of which we have been asserting for years: one is that the team is not built to score runs, the other that there is something fundamentally wrong with their approach to batting.

Pitching is still the brightest spot.  The Cubs continue to get solid starting pitching even though Samardzija seems to have taken a step backwards in his last few starts.  I didn't think I would ever say this, but the addition of Kevin Gregg looks to have helped solidify the bullpen.  Cameron Loe looks like a guy who is auditioning to be DFAed once Fujikawa is ready to come off the DL.

People keep pressuring Sveum to name a closer, but I kind of like the idea of using Marmol, Russell, and Gregg in the finisher role and adding Fujikawa to the mix once he is healthy.  For one thing, none of these guys except maybe Fujikawa has the genuine mental mindset of a real closer, so it takes a lot of pressure off.  Marmol has pitched noticeably better since he lost the closer designation.