I applaud JedStein for this signing,  Not only do I think they got a got set-up for a fairly reasonable price (maybe a little more than reasonable), but they also are bringing back a fan favorite and a guy who has been a proven leader in the clubhouse.

It’s good to have Woody back.  Here’s hoping he can stay healthy.

The 29-year old Maholm spent seven season with the Pirates where he put together a 53-73 record and a career ERA of 4.36.  In 2011, he pitched 162.3 inning and had a 6-14 record and an ERA of 3.66.  The lefty projects to be the Cubs #4 or #5 starter.

I’m ambivalent about the move.  On the one hand, he figures to be a decent back-of-the-rotation starter for the Cubs in 2012.  If he impresses, the team has a club option to bring him back at a reasonable salary.  On the other hand, I’m not certain that the team needs another back-of-the-rotation starter.  They already have Travis Wood, Chris Volstad, Randy Wells, and Jeff Samardjzia competing for that honor.  Did they need to spend another $4.75 (2-11 salary plus 2012 buyout) to bring in someone else?

In the end, Maholm is not going to ruin the Cubs 2012 season nor is his contract going to break their budget.  And I guess that’s what the signing comes down to: it is largely inconsequential.  I hope he does well and I hope he helps improve what otherwise looks to be a rather hopeless team.  But if he doesn’t, I don’t think anyone will be surprised.

During his career, Larkin was selected to the all-star team 12 times.  He also won three gold gloves and nine silver slugger awards.  Here’s what I said last week about Larkin’s candidacy for the Hall of Fame:

At first, I wasn’t sold on Barry Larkin. I don’t remember him being as great as he was. Maybe he just had a more quiet career than some other players, but it’s hard to deny that Larkin was a great shortstop. He came along at a time when many shortstops were still weak hitting defensive specialists. But Larkin could hit AND play defense. He hit for average, he had some power, and he got on base. Larkin received 62.1% of the vote last year and is expected to rise about the 75% level this year.  I expect him to be elected to the Hall of Fame in 2012.

Others that I thought should make the Hall of Fame were not quite so lucky.  For instance, here is how the other people I woulds have voted for fared:

• Jeff Bagwell — 56.0%
• Edgar Martinez — 36.5%
• Tim Raines — 48.7%

The rest of the vote went like this:

• Vinny Castillo — 1.0%
• Juan Gonzalez — 4.0%
• Javy Lopez — 0.2%
• Don Mattingly — 17.8%
• Fred McGriff — 23.9%
• Mark McGwire — 19.5%
• Jack Morris — 66.7%
• Bill Mueller — 0.7%
• Dale Murphy — 14.5%
• Rafael Palmiero — 12.6
• Brad Radke — 0.3%
• Tim Salmon — 0.9%
• Lee Smith — 50.6%
• Alan Trammel — 36.8%
• Larry Walker — 22.9%
• Bernie Williams — 9.6%
• Eric Young — 0.2%

Jeremy Burnitz, Brian Jordan, Terry Mulholland, Phil Nevin, Ruben Sierra, and Tony Womack did not receive any votes for the Hall of Fame from the BBWAA.

Rizzo became available after the Padres acquired 1B Yonder Alonso from the Reds earlier this off-season in a deal that sent pitcher Mat Latos to Cincinnati.  Rizzo is 22 years old and mashed the ball in AAA.  Last year, he hit .331/.404/.652 with 26 home runs in 413 plate appearances.  However, he struggled when he was promoted to the big leagues, hitting just .141/.281/.242 in 153 plate appearances.

In 2008, Rizzo was diagnosed with Hodgkins Lymphoma.  However, there doesn’t appear to be any concerns for his health at this point.  He seems to have returned to form over the past few years and many believe that this move sets the stage for Rizzo to become the long-term solution the Cubs seek at first base.  Carrie Murskat of MLB.com spoke to GM Jed Hoyer and he indicated that Bryan Lahair will be the Cubs 1B in 2012 with Rizzo starting the season in AAA.  Of course, that could change depending on how Rizzo and LaHair perform in Spring Training.

Cates is also just 22-years old, but he has never pitched above Class A.  He was a third round pick of the Padres in 2010.  During the 2011 season at Class A, Cates threw 118 innings and posted a 4.73 ERA.  He had 8.5 k/9 and gave up 4.0 BB/9. This was what one observer from MLBBonusBaby.com thought of Cates when he was drafted:

Zach Cates is a fast-rising right-handed pitcher from Northeast Texas Community College. Cates is originally from Conway High School in Conway, Arkansas, a town about 30 miles north of Little Rock. He came to NTCC as a two-way player, and he was forced into action as the starting catcher as a freshman due to an injury to the starter, meaning he was limited to seven mop-up innings in relief on the mound. However, he moved into a full-time pitching role this spring, and the result has been absolute domination as a starter. Blessed with a natural pro body and a projectable frame, he has seen his stuff mature into a mid-rotation starter’s arsenal, though he still has work to do with his command and control, which are understandably below-average due to his lack of experience with pitching. His fastball is easily his best current pitch, and it’s already plus, sitting 93-95 in most outings, touching 97 a few times late in the spring. His changeup is his best secondary pitch, and it gets above-average grades with good late fade. His curveball is more of a fringe-average pitch with potential to be simply average with time, but with two above-average pitches, scouts aren’t as reliant on him developing that third pitch, though it would be nice. He has upside as a number three starter, which is quite good at the junior college level, and there have been whispers about him becoming a supplemental first round pick, though he fits better in the second or third rounds, where he should be signable.

I’m disappointed that the Cubs lost Andrew Cashner in this deal, but I completely understand it.  Cashner had a lot of upside, but so far in his short career, he was having trouble staying healthy.  The Cubs insisted on stretching him out to be a starter, but I always felt that he was better equipped for the bullpen.  In fact, I could have seen him as the Cubs set-up man or closer sometime in the future.  Even so, trading him to get Rizzo was the right thing to do.

Losing Na should not pose a huge problem for the Cubs in the future.  He is a terrifically gifted athlete with above-average speed, but never projected to be much of a hitter.

Clearly, the Cubs got the better end of this deal.  Of course, JedStein had some inside info on the main player in this trade, Anthony Rizzo.  They were both with Boston when Rizzo was originally drafted by the Red Sox, and Hoyer was the GM in San Diego when Rizzo was traded from Boston to the Padres for Adrian Gonzalez.

Although it appears that acquiring Rizzo will put an end to any speculation that the Cubs might be in on Prince Fielder, I’m not so sure.  Rizzo is a highly respected prospect, but he has yet to prove himself at the big league level.  It seems to me that going all in on Rizzo, regardless of his upside, is a rather substantial risk.  Obtaining Rizzo certainly gives the Cubs a bit more leverage when negotiating with Fielder (particularly when it comes to the length of the contract), but I don’t think it completely excludes the possibility that the Cubs could still sign the big first baseman.  As with most of these things, time will tell.

WBBM Newsradio in Chicago is reporting that the woman, who is in her 20′s, met Castro in a River North nightclub on the evening of September 29, 2011. The woman and a friend left the bar with Castro at approximately 3:00 AM and went to Castro’s apartment. At the apartment, the woman blacked out and when she woke up at approximately 5:30 AM, she says the Cubs shortstop was sexually assualting her. The woman screamed at Castro and then left the apartment. She did not seek medical attention for approximately 12 hours, at which time the police became involved.

Castro left for the Dominican Republic the day after the alleged attack and has not returned to Chicago since. When he does, police are anxious to discuss the case with him. When asked about the allegations, Castro’s agent Paul Kinzer indicated that he and his client were aware of the allegations, but had no comment.

According to the WBBM report, the police report of the incident is highly redacted. Because of that, very little information about the incident is known.

I don’t mean to downplay the criminal aspect of the allegations. In time, the facts will come out. But from a baseball standpoint, this is exactly the type of thing that could completely derail the Cubs 2012 season, which is on thin ice to begin with. Of course, if the allegations prove to be true, this could turn out to be the beginning of the end of Castro’s short but promising baseball career. I’m sure there will be much more information to come out in the following weeks.

UPDATE:  The Cubs released the following statement concerning the allegations against Starlin Castro:

“We are aware that a police report was filed regarding an incident involving Starlin, but we have received limited information. While this is something we take very seriously, there is not enough information to make any further comment or take action at this time. We are hopeful when the facts are brought to light, Starlin will be cleared of any wrongdoing.”

Then Castro’s attorneys, Jay K. Reisinger and Michael P. Gillespie,  released this statement:

“We are aware of certain allegations that have been made against our client, Starlin Castro. We have thoroughly investigated this matter, and we are confident that these allegations are baseless. Given the sensitive nature of this matter, we cannot comment any further.”

Update #2:  The original story on this matter from WBBM Newsradio in Chicago indicated that Starlin Castro is wanted by the Chicago Police in connection to this sexual assualt allegation and that when he returns to Chicago they plan on meeting with him.  Two things strike me as odd about this situation.

First, the police don’t seem to have any urgency in meeting with Castro.  If they really took the allegations seriously, it seems to me that they would have asked Castro to return to Chicago to meet with them.  Alternatively, it would not be out of the question for the police to travel to the Dominican Republic to meet with Castro and his attorney.  After all, Castro is a high profile athlete in Chicago and the police certainly don’t want to appear to be giving him special treatment if the allegations are such that they should be taken seriously.

Second, the fact is that Castro has been back to Chicago at least once since the incident took place and the police report was filed.  According to an article in the Sun-Times on November 19, 2011, Castro was in town to meet with team President Theo Epstein.*  My guess is that the Chicago P.D. is not so inept that they just let Castro waltz into town without being aware of it.

*Hat tip to commenter Vorare at The Cub Reporter for digging up the article from the Sun-Times.

There still is too little information to draw an educated conclusion, but my suspicions tell me that the police do not put much credence in the allegations.  They certainly don’t appear to be taking the case very seriously and they are in no particular rush to question the Cubs’ shortstop.

Zambrano has had issues over the past few seasons controlling his emotions. During the 2011 season, the Cubs placed Big Z on the disqualified list after he intentionally threw at the Braves Chipper Jones. The pitch that Zambrano threw at Jones came after the big right hander had given up five home runs and ten runs to the Braves. Following his ejection, Zambrano left the stadium before the game was over and announced that he was retiring. Ultimately, Zambrano sought counseling and missed the remainder of the season.

Volstad is a former  first round pick who has struggled as a major leaguer. In parts of three seasons he has a 4.59 ERA and a penchant for giving up home runs. He has four pitches (fastball in the low 90′s, curve, slider, and change), but none of his pitches are really considered plus pitches. His slider in particular is a work in progress and tends to get him into trouble from time to time. He projects to be the fourth or fifth starter in the Cubs starting rotation.

So why did the Cubs make this move? It’s not a salary dump. Although they saved about $2.5 million on Zambrano, Volstad is projected to earn between $2.5 and $3.0 million through arbitration in 2012. It’s also not because Volstad is considered a better pitcher than Zambrano. In fact, I think it’s pretty clear that the Cubs rotation just got worse after this trade.

It appears that the Cubs made the trade because they do not believe that Zambrano is capable of controlling his emotions in the heat of competition and they do not want a repeat of last year. My guess is that the Cubs front office also liked the fact that Volstad comes with three more years of club control and will likely remain relatively inexpensive during that time.

I understand that the front office wants to do everything possible to assure clubhouse peace in the future. There’s no doubt that Zambrano, while well-liked by his teammates, could occasionally be a disruptive force. Even so, I didn’t expect the Cubs to trade him. I also didn’t expect Zambrano to waive his no-trade clause, although going to Miami where his friend and Venezuelan countryman Ozzie Guillen is manager does make sense.

Perhaps this is a move in the right direction. If you judge the trade purely on baseball terms, then it’s a loss for the Cubs. However, more is in play here than just on-the-field consideration so I’ll give JedStein the benefit of the doubt. At the same time, I’ll remind Theo and Co. that the off-season is becoming short and they still have many more moves to make before the Cubs are legitimate contenders in 2012. I assume that is their short-term goal, so they need to get busy signing Prince Fielder, Huroki Kuroda and one or both of the big name Cubans, Yeonis Cespedes and Jorge Soler. That’s not asking too much, is it?

First, let’s take a look at the players who are on the ballot for the first time this year. Those players are:

• Jeremy Burnitz
• Vinny Castilla
• Brian Jordan
• Javy Lopez
• Bill Mueller
• Terry Mulholland
• Phil Nevin
• Brad Radke
• Tim Salmon
• Rueben Sierra
• Bernie Williams
• Tony Womack
• Eric Young

Do you see any Hall of Famers on that list. No, I don’t either. There are some good players on the list — chief among them would probably be Bernie Williams — but none of them had careers that would rise to the level of serious Hall of Fame consideration. That takes us to the holdovers from previous years.

This group of players have been on the HOF ballot previously and they received enough votes to stay on the ballot, but not enough to gain entrance into the Hall. The players on this list include;

• Jeff Bagwell
• Juan Gonzalez
• Barry Larkin
• Edgar Martinez
• Don Mattingly
• Fred McGriff
• Mark McGwire
• Jack Morris
• Dale Murphy
• Rafael Palmeiro
• Tim Raines
• Lee Smith
• Alan Trammel
• Larry Walker

Let’s look at each player individually.

Jeff Bagwell

Jeff Bagwell should absolutely not be branded with the steroids tag. Sure, he played during the steroids era, but he was never connected to PED use. His career should be judged on it’s merits, not on rumor and speculation. And when it is judged on it’s merits, it becomes clear that Bagwell is a Hall of Famer. He was a great hitter, hitting .297/.408/.540 over his career. Wait, a .408 OBP?  Yeah, I had to look twice at that, but it’s true. He only played 15 years in the big leagues, but has a very impressive 79.9 WAR. The closer you look at Bagwell, the more impressive his career becomes. He has my vote.

Juan Gonzalez

This is Juan Gone’s second year on the ballot and very well could be his last. In 2010, his first year on the ballot, he only received 5.2% of the vote, far less than any other hold over player on this year’s ballot. On the plus side, Gonzalez won two MVP awards and hit more than 400 home runs in his career. He had a slash line of .295/.343/.561 and an OPS+ of 132, which I have to admit is more impressive than I would have imagined. Even so, to me, Gonzalez fails the “eye test;” did he look like a Hall of Famer. In this case, I say “no.” Gonzalez always seemed lazy to me. He played defense like he preferred to be somewhere else and his base running skills left a lot to be desired.  I don’t recall ever thinking that Gonzalez was one of the best players in MLB during the course of his career.  He was good, but not that good.

Barry Larkin

At first, I wasn’t sold on Barry Larkin. I don’t remember him being as great as he was. Maybe he just had a more quiet career than some other players, but it’s hard to deny that Larkin was a great shortstop. He came along at a time when many shortstops were still weak hitting defensive specialists. But Larkin could hit AND play defense. He hit for average, he had some power, and he got on base. Larkin received 62.1% of the vote last year and is expected to rise about the 75% level this year.  I expect him to be elected to the Hall of Fame in 2012.

Edgar Martinez

Edgar Martinez has kind of become my pet project. In my opinion, he is the greatest DH ever. However, there are a lot of people that don’t believe that a player who spent the vast majority of his career as a DH should ever be allowed into the HOF. I disagree. If baseball is going to have the DH rule, then we should honor the greatest DHs in the HOF. The irony is if Martinez would have continued to play third base, a position he did not field very well, he likely would be a shoe-in for the Hall. Let’s face it, fielding isn’t always taken very seriously when a really good hitter comes up for HOF consideration. So as a poor fielding third baseman, Martinez would likely be elected to the HOF, but as a non-fielding DH, he is being excluded. Does that really make sense? During his career, Martinez hit .312/.418/.515, had an OPS+ of 147 and a WAR of 67.2.  He won two batting titles and led the league in on-base percentage three times. By any measure, those are extremely impressive statistics. Does it really matter that Martinez didn’t play in the field? I’m not a fan of the DH rule, but as long as it exists, then let’s recognize the guys who fill the role the best. For my money, Edgar Martinez was the best and he deserves to be in the HOF.

Don Mattingly

For crying out loud, the man’s nickname is Donnie Baseball. Doesn’t he deserve to be in the HOF just for that? In a word, no. Mattingly had some great years, but he did not have a great career. He hit .307/.358/.471 with an OPS+ of 127 and a WAR (BR) of 39.8. His WAR was so low because he played just 14 seasons and most of them after the age of 27 were not particularly noteworthy. Mattingly was a very good ball player, particularly before his body began to betray him, but for me, he simply did not rise to the level necessary to be inducted into the HOF.

Mark McGwire

Mark McGwire was a lot of fun to watch. I still have very fond memories of the home run race between him and Sammy Sosa in 1998. I know all about the steroids, but that does not diminish my memories of that year. However, it’s hard to separate McGwire’s career from his use of steroids. In fact, many writers simply refuse to vote for him because he admitted to using steroids. I believe we need to judge the player by the era in which he played, otherwise no one from the so-called “steroids era” will ever make it into the HOF no matter how great they may have been. Having said that, I still don’t believe McGwire had a HOF career.  Sure, he was the most prodigious home run hitter in history, hitting a home run every 10.6 at-bats. However, his game was too one-dimensional for me. He was a tremendous home run hitter, but I found the rest of his game lacking. I have to admit that I am closer to voting for him now than I was in 2005 when he first came on the ballot, but I’m still not there yet.

Fred McGriff

McGriff is another one of those guys who had a terrific career, but never rose to the level of HOFer. He was always one of the better hitting first basemen, but he was never an elite hitter. He was always one of the guys you would want on your team if you couldn’t have one of the very best guys, but he was never considered to be among the very best. McGriff had a very nice career, but it wasn’t good enough for the HOF.

Jack Morris

So much could be written about Jack Morris. Of all of the players on the HOF ballot in recent years, Morris just might have the most rabid supporters. The problem those supporters run into is the fact that their arguments for Morris being included in the HOF are often wrong. For instance, Morris supporters love to make the claim that, while his ERA was not great, it was because he had the rare ability to pitch to the score. In other words, he bared down when the game was close, and eased up when he had room for error. It’s a nice argument, but it’s not based in fact. The facts are that Morris was a very good pitcher who was a bulldog on the mound and compiled some respectable stats, including a W-L record of 254-186. He also threw an incredible game 7 in the World Series for the Twins against the Braves in 1991 that will go down in history. But he had a 3.90 ERA during a pitchers era which is hard to explain away. Morris has been steadily gaining momentum for his HOF bid and garnered 53.5% of the vote last year. He very well may be elected this year, but if he does so, he will have to do it without my vote. (Note: Once again, I do not actually have a vote, so this should not hurt Morris’ chances.)

Dale Murphy

If we were talking about the HOF for nice guys, Dale Murphy would have already gotten in on the first ballot. But that’s not what we are talking about. I have a soft spot in my heart for Murphy. At a time when baseball on TV was a much rarer occurrence, I used to be able to watch him and the Atlanta Braves most nights on WTBS. He was my favorite Brave and I looked forward to watching him play. Even so, in many ways, Murphy is the poster child for players who fade away quickly as they get older. He ended his career just two home runs short of 400, but the vast majority of those were hit before he was 32. After that age, Murphy didn’t do much. He had a couple of good years, but his home runs decreased, his batting average and OBP plummeted, and he became just another struggling player trying to hold on to his career.

Rafael Palmiero

I have more trouble than I should judging Palmeiro’s career. He played for 20 seasons, hit 569 home runs, had a slash line of .288/.371/.515, an OPS+ of 132 and a WAR of 66.0. He also was a terrific fielding first baseman, although he spent the later part of his career as a DH. Despite these very good numbers, Palmiero will forever be remembered for pointing his finger at the camera in those Congressional hearings and stating that he had never taken steroids. Just a few months later, he failed a steroids test. Putting the steroids test aside, I still don’t view Palmiero as a HOFer. He was a good ball player, but was never considered even the best player on the teams he played for, let alone one of the best in MLB. Palmiero only received 11.0% of the vote last year and I don’t see him doing much better this year.  My vote is “no.”

Tim Raines

Tim Raines did everything well. He hit for average, he had some power, he got on base, and he was a prodigious base stealer. He played for 23 seasons and was very good throughout his long career, except for his final year with the Marlins in 2002. During the course of his career he hit .294/.385/.425 with an OPS+ of 149 and a WAR of 64.6. If I was voting, I would vote for Raines. However, he only received 37.5% of the vote last year and I have the feeling that most of the writers still don’t fully appreciate Tim Raines. I think he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, but if I was a betting man, I would bet he doesn’t make it in this year.

Lee Smith

Lee Smith had the benefit of coming along at just the right time. The closer role was becoming much more well defined and Smith took full advantage of it. When he retired, he held the record for most career saves. That record was impressive at the time, but seems less so now as it has fallen again and again. Unlike others who have written on the subject, I definitely think that closers should be in the HOF. However, as time has marched on, I think we see that while Lee Smith was very good, he wasn’t truly great. He just appeared great for a short time because of what he was being compared against. Today, he no longer appears like one of the truly great closers in history.

Alan Trammel

This might be the toughest call I have to make this year. I’ve already said that I would vote for Barry Larkin. If you look at their stats, Larkin and Trammel were very similar. Even so, Trammel falls short of Larkin in almost every way you can compare the two. I’ll admit, it’s a very fine line between the two players, but I’m drawing the line. Larkin is just barely a Hall of Famer and Trammel just barely misses making the Hall.

Larry Walker

Walker was a terrific hitter, but I can’t help but be bothered by the fact that he did most of his hitting in Colorado, a place where video game numbers were being put up at the time. I don’t think Walker should be penalized for where he played the majority of his games, but I don’t think he should be rewarded for it either. There’s no arguing that Walker’s numbers are impressive, but those numbers didn’t really blossom until he left Montreal and went to Colorado. Would he have been a great hitter outside of Colorado? There’s no doubt he would have been good, but it’s unlikely he would have put up the type of numbers he put up during his tenure in Colorado anywhere else. Of course, the short answer is we don’t know and can never know for sure.  But in my gut, I just don’t think Larry Walker was a Hall of Famer.

The Hoyer-Epstein era began by signing David DeJesus to play right field.  DeJesus is an average ball player who has a tendency to get hurt.  Not exactly the type of signing you want to make to kick off the new regime.  Next, the Cubs traded a couple of decent prospects (Tyler Colvin and DJ LaMahieu) to Colorado for third baseman Ian Stewart, a decent, but faltering young player.  The front office has also spent the off-season losing Ryan Flaherty and Marwin Gonzalez in the Rule-5 draft simply because they failed to add the two young prospects to the 40-man roster, signed such difference makers as Manny Corpas and Reed Johnson, and added a couple of young Cuban defectors who are not particularly well respected.  All-in-all, Hoyer and Epstein have had a less than spectacular introduction for their new employer.  All a Cub fan is left to do is scratch their head and ask “why?”

I am at a loss to explain what sort of plan the Cubs brain trust is following.  So far, it doesn’t make any sense to me.  It’s hard for me to accept that the Cubs are simply going to fill the roster with some cheap, warm bodies and mail-in the 2012 season, but if that was their plan, they would be doing exactly what they have done so far.

The one bright spot for Hoyer-Epstein was the trade of Sean Marshall for LHP Travis Wood and two prospects.  At least at the moment, it appears that the Cubs got the better end of that trade.  However, the trade of Marshall might look like a poorly disguised salary dump to a more skeptical observer.  I don’t happen to be that skeptical (yet), but I do understand how someone could draw that conclusion.

There was talk after Theo Epstein was hired that the Cubs planned on building up their farm system.  It sounded good to me.  The farm has been a weak spot for the Cubs for quite some time and committing to improving it seemed like a step in the right direction.  However, at least so far, it seems that what Epstein was really saying was that the farm system is going to be the primary focus of the club for a while, and the big league team will just have to wallow along until things improve in the minors.  To me, that is unacceptable for a large market team like the Cubs.  Building up the farm while also fielding a respectable, competitive big league team are not mutually exclusive goals.  They can (and should) be done at the same time.

I really have to wonder if Tom Ricketts has the money necessary to properly run the Cubs.  I’ve scoffed at this suggestion in the past when I’ve heard it, but it does seem that Ricketts is trying to run the organization on the cheap.  He’s reduced MLB payroll each of the years he has owned the team, and there presently doesn’t appear to be an appetite to spend on a big name free agent.

It’s difficult for me to believe that either Epstein or Hoyer would have joined the Cubs if they had known that their hands would be tied financially.  However, I have to admit that the moves the pair have made so far are more small market in nature than large market.  Although the off-season is far from over, we are now looking at a payroll south of $100 million  and no apparent interest in signing Prince Fielder or making any other type of big splash.  From a fan standpoint, this is disappointing to say the least.  And from a business standpoint, it is looking like Ricketts either can’t or won’t do what is necessary to properly build the organization.

Corpas was a part of the 2007 Colorado Rockies team that went to the World Series.  He had Tommy John Surgery in 2010 and missed the entire 2011 season.  He has a career ERA of 3.93 — which is fairly impressive considering he has spent his career in Colorado — an ERA+ of 121 and a WHIP of 1.336.  Corpas will join a Cubs bullpen that just lost Sean Marshall to the Reds in a trade.  ESPNChicago’s Bruce Levine opined that the addition of Corpas may signal the Cubs willingness to give Jeff Samardjiza an opportunity to join the starting rotation.

The Cubs re-signed OF Reed Johnson to a one-year contract.  Just as with Corpas, the terms of the contract were not announced.  However, Johnson earned $900,000 in 2011 with the Cubs and had one of his best seasons, so it is probably safe to assume that he will earn somewhere north of $1 million.

Johnson has spent three of the past four years with the Cubs.  Last year, he hit .309/.348/.467 with 5 home runs and 28 rbi in 246 at-bats.  Johnson played all three outfield positions last year for the Cubs.

Early Wednesday, the deal was finalized, as reported by ESPNChicago’s Bruce Levine via Twitter.  according to Levine, the deal is Marshall for Wood and two unnamed minor leaguers.  As of this writing, we still don’t know who the minor leaguers might be.

At first glance, this trade didn’t make sense to me.  Why would the Cubs trade Marshall, a guy that Epstein referred to as “the best left-handed pitcher in baseball” for a guy apparently not talented enough to break into the Reds starting rotation?  And if the Cubs felt they needed a lefty starter, why not just give Marshall a shot?

Now that I’ve had a chance to give this a little thought, I’m starting to understand how this deal makes sense.  Marshall is set to earn around $3 million (Maybe a little more.  Arbitration is pending) in 2012, after which he will be a free agent.  On the other hand, Wood is cheaper and under team control for the next four years.  In other words, Wood is expected to become a serviceable 5th starter (maybe 4th) for the Cubs.  He’ll also be cheaper than Marshall and around longer.

So I understand the Marshall-for-Wood part of the deal.  I’m not crazy about it, but I understand it.  The reason I’m not crazy about it is that it seems to me that the Cubs could have gotten more for Marshall.  He’s a proven 7th/8th inning pitcher and he has the potential to be a starter.  However, I’ve got to believe that the Hoyer/Epstein brain trust had a good handle on what type of haul they could get for Marshall.  So I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt.

The thing that could really sweeten this deal is the minor leaguers coming from Cincinnati to Chicago.  We don’t know who they are yet, but the Reds have a few promising young players.  We’ll have to wait to see who the minor leaguers are in this deal before we can really judge it.  However, as things stand right now, it’s not a bad deal.  It’s not a great deal either, but it’s not anything that is going to cripple the team in 2012 and it just might end up making the starting rotation better.

This post was original written and posted on Wednesday, 12-21-11

——————————————————————————————————————-

UPDATE (12/22/11) — Still no word on who the minor leaguers might be coming from the Reds in the Marshall-for-Wood trade.  However, there has been some talk that the deal includes a provision that the Reds have to be able to sign Marshall to an extension.  Considering that Marshall is in Cincy right now taking a physical, that makes sense.  How many trades have you heard of that require one of the players being traded to take a physical?

It is odd that this trade is being drug out so much.  It’s odd that the minor leaguers are not being announced and it’s odd that Marshall is being required to take a physical.  It’s weird, but we should know what’s going on soon.

———————————————————————————————————————

UPDATE #2 (12/23/11) — Word has finally come out concerning who the two Reds minor leaguers will be coming over to the Cubs as part of the Sean Marshall trade.  The two names don’t mean much to me, but they are Dave Sappelt and Ronald Torreyes.  According to MLB Trade Rumors:

Sappelt, a 24-year-old outfielder, hit .243/.289/.318 in 118 plate appearances for Cincinnati last year, his big league debut. He produced a .313/.377/.458 batting line in 336 plate appearances for their Triple-A affiliate in 2011. Torreyes, a 19-year-old infielder, hit .356/.398/.457 in 306 plate appearances at the Low Class-A level this past season. Baseball America ranked Sappelt and Torreyes as the Reds’ 20th and 22nd best prospects in last year’s Prospect Handbook, respectively.

While the Cubs haul for Sean Marshall isn’t earth shattering, I think it’s pretty good.  By trading one relief pitcher (albeit a good relief pitcher) who had one year until free agency, the Cubs front office added a starting pitcher with four years of team control who will likely serve at the back of the rotation in 2012, and two good young prospects who will improve the Cubs farm system and could some day help the big league club.  Good job, JedStein!