First, let’s start with the basics.  The one-hour long primetime special in which James announced his decision to join the Heat was an unsavory spectacle and served to reinforce James reputation as a narcissistic, self-important athlete.  Okay, fair enough.  Nothing surprising about that.  James acted pretty much the way we would expect the self-proclaimed “King” to act.  And ESPN didn’t disappoint either.  Anything to make a buck.

Even so, I have to admit that I felt dirty watching the spectacle.  It was uncomfortable to watch.  The fact that the money raised from advertising revenue for the show (courtesy mostly of the University of Phoenix) went to the Boys and Girls Clubs really didn’t relieve the discomfort much.  It was a nice touch, about equal to having the knowledge that Adolph Hitler liked dogs.  It’s nice, but really doesn’t change anything.

When James finally announced that he was leaving Cleveland to join Miami, the announcement felt anticlimactic to me.  Honestly, I don’t think there was anything he could say that would have lived up to the hype.  A really good basketball player was leaving his hometown team to sign with a different team.  So what?  It’s happened before.  It will happen again.  Nothing special here.  It was a waste of an hour of TV viewing and I’m hopeful that nothing like this will ever happen again, although it probably will.

As for the decision itself, okay, it makes some sense.  James will be teaming up with Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh to form one of the best 1-2-3 punches in all of basketball.  But let’s not hand the championship to the Heat just yet.  Other teams have done this exact same thing and championships have not been the automatic result.  Just ask the Boston Celtics.  One could argue that the Celtics big three (Kevin Garrnett, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen or Rajon Rondo) are not as good as James, Wade and Bosh, but I would argue that the Celtics are much more balanced than the Heat are likely to be.  In fact, one could make a convincing argument that the Heat are far too top heavy to win an NBA championship.

On a personal level, I can somewhat understand James’ desire to leave Cleveland.  Sure, the Cavs are his hometown team, but James has never worked/lived outside of the Cleveland area.  My guess is that it is difficult for one of the most recognizable, marketable players in all of pro sports to have his life confined to one town, especially one as parochial as Cleveland.  I can understand James desire to try something new, especially if that something new can improve his chances of winning a championship and also increase his worldwide brand.  Miami may not be the “big city” like New York, but it is much more international than Cleveland.

The part of the story that really intrigues me is not so much LeBron’s decision to sign with the Heat, but rather Cavs owner Dan Gilbert’s reaction to LeBron turning his back on Cleveland.  In an open letter to Cavs fans that he posted on the Cavs website, Gilbert took several swipes at James.  He called the days leading up to James decision a “several day, narcissistic, self-promotional build up” and called James decision a “cowardly betrayal.”  He also promised Cavs fans that he would be communicating more dirt about LeBron over the next several days and weeks.  Gilbert then closed his letter by guaranteeing that the Cavs would win an NBA championship before James does.  I can only assume Gilbert had been drinking when he made this guarantee.

One of the lines that struck me as a particularly ridiculous was when Gilbert said, “[T]his shocking act of disloyalty from our homegrown ‘chosen one’ sends the exact opposite lesson of what we would want our children to learn.  And ‘who’ we want them to grow up to become.”  Right.  As always, it’s about the children.  And of course, rather than being “disloyal,” we want them to grow up to be whiney bitches like Gilbert.  If you don’t get what you want, just complain about it and call other people names.  Good lesson.

As if this foolish letter wasn’t enough, Gilbert then gave an interview in which he claimed that James completely gave up during the 2010 playoffs.   ”He has gotten a free pass,” Gilbert said in a phone interview with the AP. “People have covered up for [James] for too long. Tonight we saw who he really is.”

Talking about the 2010 NBA playoffs, Gilbert said, “He quit.  Not just in game 5, but in games 2, 4 and 6.  Watch the tape.  The Boston series was unlike anything in the history of sports for a superstar.”  Later in the interview, Gilbert claimed that James also quit on the team during the Cavs playoff series with Orlando in 2009.

Of course, these accusations beg the question, why did Cleveland want James back and why are they so crushed that he is leaving?  If Gilbert really believes what he is saying, it seems logical that he would be happy to see James go.  Instead, he sounds like a teenage girl whose boyfriend has just broken up with her.  Real classy, Gilbert.

Gilbert’s actions make me believe that maybe James wasn’t coddled as much in Cleveland as we have been led to believe.  With the owner of the team feeling so much resentment toward James at least since 2009, would it be surprising to learn that the team wasn’t treating James very well?   

Keep in mind, LeBron James almost single-handedly put Cleveland back on the NBA map.  He gave the team seven years of his life and the Cavs rode him for all he was worth.  He was the face of the franchise and Cleveland marketed him in every possible way they could.  It seems to me that Gilbert would have been much better off simply saying “Thanks for your time and good luck in Miami,” rather than throwing a hissy fit and calling James names. 

Of course, one of the problems that Cleveland had even before James left was that free agents by-and-large did not want to sign with the Cavs.  Considering all of the towns that have NBA teams, Cleveland is not particularly attractive.  James new teammate, Chris Bosh, was the latest free agent to voice his reluctance to sign with Cleveland.  Now, with James gone and the owner publically lambasting the best player in franchise history within minutes of him signing elsewhere, I don’t think free agents are going to be knocking down the door in Cleveland to join the Cavs.

Without James and without other high profile free agents, it’s going to be very difficult for the Cavs to do good on Gilbert’s promise that Cleveland would win an NBA championship before LeBron does.  After Gilbert’s self-deluded tirade, the smart money is on LeBron.

Thanks to Rob G. at The Cub Reporter for asking me to contribute.  It was an honor to be asked and I was happy to help.

Of course, now I’m old and smart, and I know that “hope springs eternal” are the first three words in Alexander Pope’s poem, An Essay on Man.  The poem was written in 1733, before baseball was even invented.  Although to hear some Cubs fans, you’d think that was the same year the Cubs started training in Mesa.  But I digress.

Despite the fact that I now know the origin of the phrase, I can’t help but associate it with Spring Training.  After all, at the beginning of Spring Training, all team’s are tied for first and fans from each team have reason to hope that this is the year their boys of summer will bring home the prize.  Well, at least that’s how it’s supposed to be.

The truth is that fans for several teams know that their teams don’t stand a chance of making the post-season, let alone win a World Series championship.    That’s not how it’s supposed to be in professional sports.  The rules of the sport are supposed to make the playing field even — or as even as possible — for all teams.  In this respect, baseball fails miserably.

Once again in 2010, the team with the highest payroll (Yankees) will outspend the team with the lowest payroll (Pirates) by more that five times.  Not only does that not create an even playing field, but it creates a situation where the lowest payroll team has absolutely no chance of competing.  Under baseball’s current rules, the Pirates are simply fodder used to fill out the schedule.

And the Pirates are not alone.  They are joined at the bottom of the payroll ladder by the Nationals, Rangers, Athletics, Marlins, and Padres.  All teams that have very little chance of posting a winning record and virtually no chance of making the post-season.

I can hear the naysayers now saying that the Rangers were competitive in the weak AL West just last year.  That’s true, but the AL West is better this year and the Rangers will likely not be as good. 

The naysayers also point to the Marlins who, despite league leading low payrolls have won two World Series titles since 1997.  Again, true, but the Marlins are the exception.  If it takes a miracle for a team to rise to the top, then the playing field probably isn’t very level.

Many fans point to the Yankees for outspending every other team.  I am not a Yankee basher, at least not in this context.  Baseball is flush with money.  At a time when other sports are seeing their revenues decrease (some substantially), baseball actually saw an increase in revenue in 2009.  Attendance was down, but revenue was up.  In fact, according to Maury Brown at The Biz of Baseball,  MLB’s revenues hit a record $6.6 billion in 2009.

That means that teams have more revenue sharing money coming in for the 2010 season.  Even so, teams at the bottom of the payroll ladder continue to spend less on payroll than they receive in revenue sharing.

At one time, I was in favor of a salary cap for MLB that included a minimum amount team’s had to spend on payroll.  I was never completely comfortable with the idea of a salary cap, but I couldn’t think of any other way to even the playing field.

Then last November, I ran across a column by Jayson Stark of ESPN.com in which he did a fantastic job of explaining the problem and offering a solution.  In his article, Stark pointed out that as many as 10 teams (one-third of all MLB teams) receive more in revenue sharing and TV/radio rights (local and national) than they spend on payroll.  (That figure is up to 13 of the 30 teams based on 2010 projected payroll figures)

In my original post on this subject, I explained Stark’s solution to the problem like this:

Stark then offers a solution than I like much better than my original salary cap solution.  Stark suggests that MLB continue to tax the highest spending teams just as they do now, but also start taxing the lowest spending teams.  Set payroll parameters that discourage the wealthiest teams from spending their competitors into oblivion, but which also encourage the “poorest” teams to spend the money they receive from the central fund, revenue sharing, and local TV rights to improve their teams and to compete on the field.

As Stark points out, this proposal will not cure all of MLB’s ills, but it will improve competitive balance and the play on the field.  And once competitive balance is established, many of MLB’s problems will seem much less important.

For years, the NFL has bragged about the parity they have been able to achieve.  On any given Sunday, any one team can beat any other team in the NFL.  Not so in MLB.  Every year, there are teams that don’t stand a chance of being competitive, let alone have hopes for the post-season.  Instead of creating parity, MLB has created a parody of what a competitive, well-run league should look like. 

For fans of two-thirds of the teams in MLB, hope springs eternal again this year.  Some teams may be long shots, but at least they stand a chance.  Not so for the other one-third of teams.  Before the season even gets started, they are out of the running.  For fans of those teams, “hope springs eternal” doesn’t hold any special meaning.  It’s simply a line from a poem.

Trade Candidates

Melky Cabrera — After trading for Curtis Granderson, the Yankees suddenly have a surplus of good, young outfielders.  They may be interested in trading either Cabrera or Brett Gardner.  If the Cubs could snag Cabrera, they would be getting a guy that hit .274/.336/.416 for the Yankees in 2009 with 13 homeruns and 68 RBI.   The switch hitting Cabrera is just 25-years old and earned $1.4 million in 2009.  As a fielder, UZR/150 says he’s just slightly above average, posting a rating of 2.3.  UPDATE: Cabrera has been traded to the Braves, so he’s now off the board.

Shin-Soo Choo — Choo is a 27-year old outfielder from Korea.  Last year with the Indians, Choo hit .300/.394/.489 with 20 homeruns and 86 RBI.  He also had 21 stolen bases and was caught just twice.  It was the best year of his major league career.  He is currently listed as the Indians starting right fielder, but Matt LaPorte is breathing down his neck and Cleveland may be interested in trading him.  Choo has only played a handful of games in center field, but he’s been an above-average left fielder in his career and an average right fielder, so I’m assuming he can handle center field.  Choo earned $420,300 in 2009 and is likely due for a raise.

Rajai Davis — The Oakland A’s are stock full of outfielders, potentially making Rajai Davis available.  Davis hit .305/.360/.423 with  3 homeruns and 48 RBI in 390 ABs.  he also had 41 stolen bases and was caught stealing 12 times.  UZR/150 likes Davis, giving him a 17.8 rating in center field in 2009.  The 29-year old davis (he’s not a kid) earned $410,000 in 2009 and will likely be in line for an increase in 2010.  Jim Hendry and Billy Beane have worked well together on deals in the past.  Might the get together this off season on Davis? 

Jacoby Ellsbury — Ellsbury could be the odd man out in Boston now that the Red Sox have signed center fielder Mike Cameron.  It’s unclear where Ellsbury will end up playing or even if he’ll be starting.  In 2009, Ellsbury hit .301/.355/.415 with 8 homeruns and 60 RBI.  He also stole an impressive 70 bases while getting caught just 12 times.  He’d look good at the top of the Cubs batting order.  Ellsbury gets gigged for his 2009 UZR/150 rating of  -18.3, but I’m not buying it.  Chris Moore at BaseballAnalysts.com took a look at Ellsbury’s defense and concluded that UZR/150 probably missed the boat.  Ellsbury is just 26-years old and could fill center field for the Cubs for years to come.  And at just $449,500 per year (his 2009 salary), he’s a bargain.

Dexter Fowler — Fowler is a good looking young ballplayer (I sound like Harry Caray) who hit .266/.363/.406 with 4 homeruns and 34 RBI in 2009 for Colorado.  He’s just 23-years old and is coming off his rookie season with a lot of promise.  UZR/150 didn’t like his fielding much, giving him just a -20.3 rating.  Fowler is currently blocked in center field in Colorado by Carlos Gonzalez, another promising youngster.  There’s no guarantee that Fowler is going to follow up his rookie campaign by continuing to develop, but I think it would be a fairly safe risk for the Cubs, especially considering that he is so inexpensive (he earned just $401,000 2009).

Brett Gardner — Who would you take from the Yankees, Melky Cabrera or Brett Gardner?  In 2009, Gardner hit .270/.345/.379 with 3 homeruns, 23 RBI and 26 stolen bases in 248 ABs.  He’s a terrific center fielder with a career UZR/150 rating of 27.6.  In a crowded Yankees line-up, it’s tough to say who will be the odd-man out, but it appears to be either Cabrera or Gardner.  Could Gardner be the Cubs center fielder of 2010 and beyond?

Gary Matthews, Jr — The Angels badly want to trade Matthews.  Here’s what the Cubs should consider:  He’s not much of a hitter anymore, he’s not a very good fielder anymore, and he’s very expensive.  Need I say more?

Nyjer Morgan — Washington acquired Morgan last year from Pittsburgh.  He put together a good year between the two teams, posting a hitting line of .307/.369/.388 with 3 homeruns and 39 RBI.  He also stole 42 bases in 2009.  Unfortunately for Morgan, he was stealing third base on August 28 against the Cubs when he broke his hand and missed the remainder of the season.  In 2009, Morgan posted an impressive 40.5 UZR/150 rating.  Not only could he handle center field at Wrigley, but he could also be the lead-off hitter that the Cubs sorely need.  But why would Washington trade him?  Good question.  Unfortunately, at this moment, I don’t have a good answer.  At 29-years old, Morgan is a bit of a late bloomer.  He made just $411,500 in 2009 and is going to be affordable for some time to come.

Cody Ross — Ross is not a kid like a lot of the people on this list.  He’s 29-years old (that’s not that old) and is a bit more of a known quantity than some of the other trade candidates.  What we know is that he hit .270/.321/.484 with 24 homeruns and 90 RBI in 2009 for Florida.  We also know that 2009 was the best year of Ross’ career.  But to be fair, Ross has been coming on strong since 2007.  He primarily plays center field, although he also spent time in right field and is currently listed as the Marlins starting right fielder.  In center field, Ross had a UZR/150 rating of -9.5 in 2009.  Ross earned $2.225 million in 2009 and accepted arbitration for 2010.

Aaron Rowand — San Francisco would like to move Rowand’s contract.  In 2009, the 32-year old center fielder hit .261/.319/.419 with 15 homeruns and 64 RBI.  He had a 1.5 UZR/150 rating and he earned $8 million on a contract that runs through 2012.  He is still owed $36 million.  The Cubs don’t need to bring in an aging outfielder who is on the down-side of his career and making a lot of money.  Although I like Aaron Rowand, I don’t think he is the answer in center field.

Grady Sizemore — To be honest, I don’t think the Indians have any interest in trading Sizemore, but I saw him on another list, so I thought I’d include him.  In 2009, Sizemore hit .248/.338/.445 with 18 homeruns and 64 RBI in what by Sizemore standards was a down year.  Sizemore is signed through 2011 and is owed $13.1 million.  His contract also includes an $8.5 million option in 2012 with a $500,000 buyout.  Sizemore had a -4.0 UZR/150 rating in 2009, but he has a career UZR/150 of 5.4.  I don’t think it matters.  He’s not going anywhere.

Denard Span — Would Minnesota be willing to trade Denard Span?  If so, the Cubs need to get to the front of the line.  In 2009,  the 25-year old Span hit .311/.392/.432 with 8 homeruns and 68 RBI.  And he did it for a cheap $435,000.  UZR/150 gave him a fielding rating of -7.4, but from everything I’ve read, he does a fine job in center field.  He has emerged as one of the top lead-off hitters in baseball and would be a good long-term investment for the Cubs.

Willy Taveras — I’m pretty sure that the Cubs could convince the Reds to trade Taveras for a couple of prospects.  Cincinnati badly needs to cut payroll and the weak hitting Taveras is owed $4 million in 2010.  Trading for Taveras would not be a good move.

Vernon Wells — Okay, I don’t think the Cubs should trade for him and his monster contract either, but I thought he should be listed anyway because he’s available.  I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Wells makes a lot of money.

Chris Young — Young is a 26-year old center fielder for Arizona.  He hit .212/.311/.400 in 2009 with 15 homeruns and 42 RBI.  His UZR/150 rating for 2009 was -9.8.  I’m not as high on Young as some people are.  I do think he has potential, but I’m not convinced he’s ever going to realize that potential.  He’s signed through 2013 and is owed $26.25 million over the next four years.  The contract also includes a club option for 2014 for $11 million with a $1.5 million buyout.  Although I included him in this list, my hope is that the Cubs don’t pursue him.

Eric Young, Jr. – The 24-year old Young is an interesting player for the Cubs.  He plays both second base and center field (just like his dad).  As it turns out, the Cubs need to fill both positions.  At the moment, Young is a reserve for Colorado, but he appears to be ready for prime time.  He only played in 30 games in 2009, and is eligible for Rookie of the Year in 2010.   Trading for Young would be a bit of a risk.  Does he have what it takes to be an all-star caliber big leaguer?

Previously, we looked at the reasons that small market/low-revenue teams might want to consider doing things differently than their competitors.  Today, I want to focus on what types of things they might consider.

One thing that has never made sense to me is the five-man pitching rotation.  Actually, it’s not so much the number of men in the rotation that confuses me, but the inherent belief in the system that all starting pitchers do their best work on five days rest.  That’s almost certainly not true, yet it is followed with almost lock-step precision by all teams. 

Why don’t teams try to switch things up a bit?  If pitcher A thrives on four days rest, pitch him more often than pitcher B who needs six days rest.  I know it won’t work out perfectly.  Pitchers will often be at their optimum rest on the same day.  If that happens, use the better pitcher.  As it stands now, pitchers are used every fifth game regardless of whether or not they have received their optimum rest.

That’s just one simple example.  Joe Posnanski offers an idea that is a little more complicated.  Again, the idea originated with Bill James:

The off-the-wall idea that maybe some team (say the Pittsburgh Pirates) simply decides that they will stop scouting and acquiring anyone who throws 90-plus mph. Just stop. You throw 95? Good for you, we’re not interested.

I will repeat: Bill (James) wasn’t saying a team should actually do this. He was saying that a team COULD do this, though. I mean, seriously, what would happen? Let’s run a little thought experiment: You’re running the Pirates. And let’s say this was true:

50% of all potential big league pitchers who throw 95 mph will be good big league pitchers.

2% of all potential big league pitchers who throw 83 mph will be good big league pitchers.

I’m sure those percentages are way skewed — no way that half the 95-mph throwers are good big league pitchers, and I have no way of knowing about the 2%. But you can fill in any number you want … the point is we say there are 100 potential pitchers who throw 95, and in this scenario 50 of them will be good pitchers. OK, well, you’re the Pittsburgh Pirates. How many of those 50 do you think you’re going to get? You are competing against 29 other teams that also want guys who can light up the radar gun. The vast majority of those 29 teams have more resources than you do, more scouts poking and prodding those prospects, more money to sign them, more clout to draw them in, more status among players and their families and their agents.

So — my guess? You’re not getting any of those 50. Zero. Oh, you might get some of the 95-mph throwers who WILL NOT be good big league pitchers. And, sure, there’s a chance you could luck into one. But it would take luck. Best bet: A big fat zero.

No, look at the other side. There is much larger pool of pitchers to pick from who top out at 83 mph, or 81 or whatever. Say there are 500 of those. By this formula, 2 percent of them could pitch effectively in the big leagues — that would be 10 pitchers (maybe you don’t believe ANY of them will be good … we’ll get to that in a second). Now, you’re the Pittsburgh Pirates — what are the chances you would get any of those 10?

Well, again, I’m guessing here: But my feeling is that if you have decided to just stop looking at the 95 mph guys and focused ALL YOUR ENERGIES on these slow-throwing guys, well, I think the chances are pretty good that you would get some, most or even all of those 10 pitchers. Why? Because, generally speaking, other teams are not investing much effort in scouting people who top out at 83. They are not scouting those players, they are not making much effort sign those players, they’re not spending draft picks on those players. They simply do not VALUE those players. if you focus all of your effort on it — and you believe in what you’re doing — you will probably figure out which of those slow-throwers has the command, quirkiness, control or movement necessary to get big leaguers out. And if you choose to value command and quirkiness and control and utterly devalue the radar gun, you should be able to corner that market.

Now, there would be people who would say this is a pointless market to corner — that 83 mph pitchers is a dry well. Maybe that’s true. But MAYBE it’s not true. Maybe you can find a cool study that suggests an 83-mph fastball down and away is just as effective a pitch as an 94-mph fastball down and away. Maybe you can point to a collection of ineffective pitchers who can throw really hard (Exhibit A: The Kansas City Royals bullpen) and conclude that speed isn’t all that compelling when it comes to getting out big league hitters. Maybe you would do the math and find that the best slow-throwers would make a better staff than one filled with bottom-third hard-throwers.

See, I just think that’s brilliant.  Would it work?  I don’t know, but that’s not the important point.  The important point is that there are a million different ways to run a baseball team, yet all teams stay within the same narrow parameters in the way they do things.  Thinking of radical, unorthadox ways to run a team is the easy part.  Well, it’s not easy, but it is easier than giving those ideas a try.  Actually taking action on the ideas is the much harder part.

Here are a few other unconventional ideas, some from Pos, some from Bill James, and some from me:

• Fill your roster with great defenders.  Don’t worry about how well they can hit.  Just make sure they are among the best defensively at their postion.
• Rather than look for starting pitchers who can routinely go six or more innings, create “teams” of pitchers that can routinely throw three strong innings and pair them up.  If a team did this, they conceivably would have to carry fewer pitchers, and the pitchers they do carry could pitch more often.
• Why do teams look for “five tool” players?  Dump the idea of the five tool player and create another, more effective way to scout players.
• Tradition says you should hit your best hitter third in the line up.  Why not take your two best hitters and hit them second and fourth? 
• Stock your roster with high OBP guys who are also outstanding base runners.  Become the strongest team in baseball at going first to third or second to home.
• Sign pitchers who don’t walk hitters.  Reward pitchers who have the lowest BB/9  in baseball.  Look for pitchers that throw the highest percentage of strikes.
• Stack your line-up with all switch hitters. 
• Bat the pitcher eighth (Tony LaRussa does this often and he’s considered a genius.  Why isn’t anyone else giving a try?)
• If shortstops are the best fielders on a team (not always true), why not put shortstops at every position?
• Why not sign pitchers who can also play another position with some proficiency?  In high school (and to a lesser extent in college), the best position players are often also the best pitchers.  Why not cultivate this instead of insisting that pitchers only pitch?
• Push the fences back at your home park and build a team based on speed and fielding.
• Develop knuckleball pitchers.  There are so few and they are so relatively underappreciated, you could corner the market.

There are many, many more possibilities, but you get the idea.  Are some of these ideas foolish?  Probably.  Are any of them fool proof?  Of course not.  But one thing is for certain: What the Royals and Pirates and Nationals, and other teams are doing is not working and will not work.  If the goal is to simply save face, then by all means, carry on.  But if these teams want a result that is different from what they are currently experiencing, then they are going to have to risk ridicule and try something different.

Cattle ranchers are among the most self-conscious individuals on the planet.  You wouldn’t think so.  After all, our perception of ranchers is that they are rugged individualists, beating their own path through life.  The truth is, most ranchers are so afraid of doing things differently than their neighbors that they will run their cattle operation into the ground before they will consider changing the way they do things.

The reason for this is that cattle ranchers watch each other.  So if you do anything different than your fellow ranchers, everyone is going to know about it.  And if what you do differently leads to failure (however failure is defined), then you’ll be the laughing stock of the cattle ranching community.

I’m picking on cattle ranchers a little bit because I’ve seen first hand how opposed many of them are to change.  They do things the way they do because it’s the way everyone else is doing it.  It’s also probably the same way their fathers did it, and their father’s fathers, and so on.

Baseball GMs are similar in this regard to cattle ranchers.  Pretty much everyone is using the same formula for success.  The problem is that every organization is different.  Each organization has its own strengths and weaknesses.  Some organizations are good at scouting.  Other have the finances to outspend their competition.  But in the end, every team looks for the same qualities in players and they try to build their organization in exactly the same way.

I have to admit, I never really thought about this until I immersed myself in the writings of Joe Posnanski.  Pos (that’s my little nickname for him) is a tremendous writer and a really smart guy.  He’s funny, self-deprecating, and he has a knack for looking at baseball from perspectives most of us never consider or even imagine.

Here’s a good example of how Pos approaches a given baseball problem:

[T]he Kansas City Royals (or a number of other teams) cannot hope to compete consistently by using the same strategies as other teams. I think we all know that the Pittsburgh Pirates have not had a winning record since 1993, which I believe is a big league record. But what I didn’t know is that the Pirates are just one of several teams in the midst of a long, long, long losing period.

Pittsburgh: Seventeen consecutive losing seasons.

Baltimore: Twelve consecutive losing seasons. (Thanks to BR DJ for reminding me … I forgot to include the Orioles in the original which is funny because Baltimore was the team that really got me thinking that there are several teams that have not won for a LONG time).

Kansas City: On pace for fifth 100-loss season in eight years — losing seasons 14 of last 15 years.

Cincinnati: Nine consecutive losing seasons, and people in Cincinnati tell me this is the worst one yet.

Milwaukee: Made the playoffs last year which was a nice story. And were 83-79 the year before that. But they had 14-consecutive seasons before that where they were .500 or worse (they were .500 once) and they have a losing record at the moment.

Washington Nationals: On pace for back-to-back 100 loss seasons, and 11 seasons leading up to where they did not win more than 83 in a season.

This is just the start.  To compete with the likes of the New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, LA Dodgers, etc., small-market and/or low-revenue teams must apply different strategies and thought processes than the teams they are competing with.

This way of thinking was triggered by a conversation (or conversations) Pos had with Bill James, King of sabermetrics and consultant with the Boston Red Sox.  Pos describes James’ opinion on the matter like this:

The feeling Bill has is that organizations can be bullied into a second class state because they want to be viewed as “professional.” They can’t win playing the game the same way as teams with more resources — repeat: They CANNOT win that way and they ARE NOT winning that way — but they cannot help but succumb to the pressures of professionalism. They don’t want to look unprofessional. That scares them more than the losing.

Sounds like the cattle ranchers, doesn’t it?

Stealing a little bit from Pos and one of his readers, Stuart, there are basically two ways organizations can approach a given situation.  Option 1 is to do what is expected of you; what is the professional thing to do; what everyone else is doing.  Win or lose, at least you won’t get laughed at.

Option 2 is to do something unconventional, knowing that even if you win, you’ll be criticized for doing things differently.  Worse yet, if you don’t succeed, you’ll be the laughing stock of your peers for stepping outside the box and doing things differently.

Pos splits out the second option in the following non-baseball example;

You’re a high school loser (or, wait, no, that was me). You could (A) not ask anyone to the prom and more or less go unnoticed, (B) ask out the most beautiful girl in school (the one you’ve had the crush on since the 5th grade) and maybe have her say yes and make you suddenly the coolest guy around or (C) ask the most beautiful girl in school and become the school punch line.

Option A in Pos’ example corresponds to our Option 1.  Option B and C are the two sides of Option 2.

Putting this into baseball terms, the given is that GMs of small market/low-revenue teams CAN NOT compete using the same strategies as larger, more financially capable teams.  Even so, most GMs insist on doing the same things as their bigger, more well-heeled bretheren.  Why?

Almost certainly, the reason goes back to Bill James assertion that these GM are trying to be “too professional.”  Surely, if they knew it would work, they would try something different (Option 2).  But because they are not assured of success, they choose to guarantee their failure while looking professional rather than taking a chance at succeeding, but looking unprofessional.

This is the premise I will be using as I move forward with this “Thinking Out Of The Box” series.  Posnanski has some more great stuff to offer, which I’ll cover tomorrow.

I don’t have any particular interest in either team.  And yet, I sat transfixed in front of the television as the two teams battled back and forth.  And just as the regular season needed one additional game, that additional game needed extra innings to determine a winner.

The Twins won in 12 innings, but the more important point, at least for me, was how much I loved watching the game.  I didn’t have a rooting interest, so the outcome was less important to me than the gutsy play of both teams.  It was a great game and I loved every minute of it.  I’m just sorry it had to end so soon.

**********

The 29 other MLB owners gave their unanimous approval yesterday for the Ricketts Family to take over the Cubs.  The next step in the process is to take the Cubs through a quick, pre-packaged bankruptcy to make sure there are no liens or liabilities the parties are unaware of.  That should happen next week and the Rickettses should have complete control of the team by the end of October.

What will happen then?  Will Tom Ricketts want to make a big splash going into the family’s first season as owners?  Will he spend a lot of money (more than the $140 million +/- the team is already spending) or will he reign in the spending and go into rebuild mode (doubtful)?  There are a lot of moving pieces with the Cubs right now.  It should make for an interesting and exciting offseason.

**********

Two Chicago sportswriters have put together to-do lists for Jim Hendry.  Both writers agree that moving Milton Bradley will be job one in the offseason for Hendry, but Gordon Wiitenmyer of the Sun-Times seems to be a bit more positive about the situation than the Tribune’s Paul Sullivan. 

Among the things the writers have listed are:

• Trade Milton Bradley
• Get an RBI bat for the middle of the lineup
• Resign John  Grabow
• Resigning Reed Johnson (maybe)
• Retool the bench
• Add a lead-off hitter
• Get and keep Carlos Zambrano in shape

**********

Bruce Miles at the Daily Herald also is starting to think about next year.  He takes a look at the Cubs position players from 2009 and gives his thoughts on what he thinks is going to happen with each player and each position.

Miles is an astute writer who always seems to see through the haze to get the “real” story.  There are two particular passages from his article that give the Ying and Yang of this Cubs team:

3B Aramis Ramirez: Maybe once and for all, people will realize what a potent offensive force Ramirez is. His season was cut to 82 games because of the shoulder. He turned in a hitting line of .317/.389/.516 with 15 homers and 65 RBI.
Nuggets: You may or may not believe there are “clutch” hitters, but Ramirez batted .425 with runners in scoring position (37-for-87). He was 5-for-11 with the bases loaded.

IF Aaron Miles: Somebody has to be the worst player in baseball, or at least the worst veteran, and that dubious distinction may go to Miles, whose hitting line is .185/.224/.242. And to think he completed only the first year of a two-year, $4.9 million contract.
Nuggets: In Baseball Prospectus’ VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) system, Miles ranked 1,018th, at minus-13.4. At least he ranked ahead of Ronny Cedeno.

The thing that amazes me about Aramis Ramirez is that he missed half of the season and still managed to be a more potent offensive force than guys like Alfonso Soriano and Milton Bradley who played the vast majority of the season.  The thing that amazes me about Aaron Miles is that he received a two-year, $4.9 million contract last offseason.  Jim Hendry does love his scrappy little second baseman, doesn’t he?  It wouldn’t surprise me if Miles was released this winter.

**********

If you’re interested in a funny, irreverent, and perhaps completely inappropriate parody column from the frozen head of Ted Williams, then check out the FoxSports website.

Milton Bradley left the game after the first inning complaining of tightness in his legs.  He was already scheduled to sit out Wednesday’s game, and is expected to be ready for this weekend’s series against Cincinnati.

Carlos Zambrano (7-6) will take the hill this afternoon against former Cub Kevin Hart (4-5). 

**********

I got some bad information.  I reported previously that Alfonso Soriano would have surgery and miss the rest of the season.  That’s only partly true.  According to Gordon Wittenmyer at the Sun-Times, Soriano is just resting his knee right now and is expected to be back in the Cubs line-up by the end of the month.  However, at this point the knee is too sore for Soriano to run on it.  Apparently, the surgery will take place in the off-season.  Sorry for the bad info.

**********

Here’s what happened in the Wildcard race yesterday:

• Colorado beat Cincinnati 3-1
• San Francisco lost to San Diego 4-3
• Florida beat the Mets 4-2
• Atlanta beat Houston 2-1

The Cubs remain 8.0 games behind the Rockies with 25 games remaining in the season.

**********

Do the Cubs need to just tweak the team for next year or make major changes to be competitive in 2010?  Derrek Lee believes that the Cubs have the makings of a very good team right now.  The only changes needed, according to Lee, are for guys to stay healthy, and for some of the players to turn around what have become some of the worst years in their careers.

Paul Sullivan at the Chicago Tribune backs up DLee’s opinion.  He suggests that the Cubs are in good shape because they are returning four-fifths of the NL’s fifth best rotation in 2010.  He also sees good things happening when Ramirez and Soriano are both healthy.

The one change Sullivan suggests is signing a free agent second baseman, like Chone Figgins.  He believes that Figgins speed and bat at the top of the order may just be what the doctor ordered.  I haven’t given this enough thought to agree or disagree, but I would hate to go into next year with the same basic team and expect a different result.  I’ll give this more thought and have more to say after the season.  (It’s a teaser, like “Who shot J.R.).

Ryne Sandberg went 5-6 on the day including two homeruns and a total of seven RBI.  To make the feat even more impressive, Sandberg hit both homeruns off of future-Hall of Famer Bruce Sutter and both homeruns tied the game for the Cubs after the Cardinals had taken the lead.

For the Cardinals, Willie McGee had a tremendous game.  McGee hit for the cycle, going 4-6 with six RBI and three runs scored.  In the bottom of the 9th, NBC announcer Bob Costas announced that McGee had been named the “player of the game,” only to have Sandberg tie the game with a homerun to lead off the frame.  With the game going into extra innings, McGee would have to wait on his “player of the game” award.

The Cardinals scored two in the top of the 10th inning and Sutter came back out to pitch in the bottom of the 10th.  With two outs, Sutter walked Bobby Dernier to bring Sandberg to the plate.  For the second consecutive inning, Sandberg tied the game with one swing of his bat.  

In the bottom of the 11th innning, with the bases loaded with Cubs, Dave Owen hit a pinch-hit single to right to bring home the winning run.  The Cubs won the game 12-11 and Sandberg was named “player of the game.”

Here are some highlights from the game:

The Cubs went on to make the playoffs in 1984 for the first time since 1945.  Sandberg was awarded the NL MVP award that year and was enshrined in the Hall of Fame in 2005. 

The game had such a profound impact on me that I celebrate the anniversary every year by doing something baseball related.  This year, I’ll be taking the family to Sevierville, TN to watch Ryno lead his Tennessee Smokies against the Huntsville Stars (AA affiliate of the Milwaukee Brewers).

I’ll try to get some video of the stadium to post later this week.  It should be a very good time.

Rnd/Overall       Player                                   School                                           Position

31/950                  Andrew Clark                     University of Louisville                 1B

                Note: Former Indiana High School Player of the Year

32/980                  Trey McNutt                      Shelton State CC                              RHP

33/1010                John Lambert                     North Carolina State                       LHP

34/1040                Rett Varner                     University of Texas-Arlington         RHP/OF

35/1070                Kevin David                       Oklahoma State                              C

36/1100                Brandon May                     University of Alabama                  IF/OF

37/1130                Peter Mooney                    Palm Beach CC                                 SS

38/1160                Bobby Wagner                   Panola Junior College                     3B

39/1190                Nick Struck                         Mt. Hood Junior College                 RHP

40/1220                Eric Whaley                       Cardinal Gibbons HS (FL)               RHP

                Note: Signed NLI with LSU

41/1250                Jake Schmidt                     Concordia University                      RHP

42/1280                Trey Ford                           Chaparral HS (Scottsdale, AZ)        SS

43/1310                Colin Kaepernick               University of Nevada                     RHP

                Note: Hasn’t played baseball since HS.  Is QB on U of Nevada football team.

44/1340                Frank DeJulio                     Daytona State JC                            RHP

45/1370                Addison Dunn                    Warren Area HS (Warren, PA)       RHP

                Note: Signed NLI with Kent State

46/1400                Glenn Cook                        University of Miami                       OF

                Note: 24 year-old who played football at Miami.  Did not play baseball in college.

47/1430                Joey Jocketty                     Watkins HS (Ladue, MO)               3B

                Note: Son of Reds GM Walt Jocketty.

48/1460                John Nasshan                    Niles West HS (Skokie, IL)             RHP

                Note: Signed NLI with Bradley University.

49/1490                Christian Segar                  McQuaid HS (Brighton, NY)           CF

50/1520                Zach Cleveland                  Central Arizona JC                          RHP