Yuck

Not much Cubs news to speak of since the trade.  Lost 8 of 10 before the break, which, as we have noted before, was not unexpected.

There is talk the Yankees might be interested in Edwin Jackson.  Boy, they must be desperate for pitching if this is true.  If it is true, trade this guy right now no matter how bad the return offer is.  Last night was a great example of vintage Jackson.  Super for four or five innings, then disaster.

People keep thinking if this guy could put it together consistently for an entire game, he could be some kind of player.  Here's a clue, folks.  He has been with eight teams now over twelve seasons and he hasn't done it yet.  He can't and he won't.

Last night was also vintage Renteria.  He is carrying 9 relievers right now.  Use them before the game gets out of hand not after and use guys who are likely to get you out of the jam even if it is only the sixth inning.

Also, what is with the lineup and by that I mean why is Sweeney playing and why do you not hit for him in the ninth inning with a man on third and one out?  Oh, I get it, he bats left-handed, but aren't Lake and Olt more likely to hit a fly-ball, or even Wood.

There have been some interesting pieces lately that reflect somewhat on the trade and the Cubs strategy.  Two pieces from fivethirtyeight.com  that pundits have referenced show the apparent correlation between highly regarded prospects and success in terms of WAR.  That's kind of true.  However, a fair amount of the good numbers are the result of a handful of star prospects, guys like Harper and Trout.  The real correlation, as the articles correctly point out, is salary.  The bigger the payroll, the more likely a team is to win.

Another nice article from Fangraphs discusses the apparent logjam of shortstops and infielders the Cubs have accumulated.  It concludes that there is none as these guys are just potential stars not actual ones and the odds of them all succeeding are pretty remote.