The Cards lost to the Dodgers last night, but the Cubs couldn’t take advantage of the situation as they also lost 6-3 to the Padres.  Derrek Lee had two hits, including a home run and a double, but it wasn’t enough to save the game for the Cubs.

You would think that a team in the Cubs’ position would rally-up (a new term coined by me) and play better at this time of the year, especially against sub-.500 teams.  Instead, they continue to plod along like there’s no urgency to the situation.  It’s maddening to watch this group of overpaid underachievers just go through the motions every game.  Is it time to give up on this sorry team?  I don’t know yet.  Ask me tomorrow.

**********

According to Joe Strauss at the St. Louis Post Dispatch, the Cardinals are set to sign John Smoltz to be their fifth starter.  An announcement and press conference will likely happen later today.

I personally don’t think Smoltz has the stuff to be a starter on a contending team, but the Cardinals obviously disagree.  There was talk about Smoltz becoming the set-up man for Ryan Franklin, but for now he’s being brought in to start.

Let’s face it, Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan have a way of making moves like this work.  I wouldn’t be surprised if Duncan spends a few days with Smoltz only to have Smoltz regain the prowess he showed in Atlanta.  That might be asking a little much, but you have to admit that Duncan is good, no matter how much you hate the fact.

**********

The other day, I commented that it doesn’t seem like Walt Jocketty and the Cincinnati Reds have any sort of plan for the future.  So John Fay of the Cincinnati Enquirer completely stole my idea and wrote an article about it.  That’s okay.  I don’t mind.  I’m just here to give.

Anyway, Fay obviously feels the same way I do, but because he has access to Walt Jocketty, he asked Jocketty what his plans are.  Here’s a little of what he said:

“The plan is . . . we have a plan, let’s put it at that. . . The plan is to try and develop quality young players and build a foundation for the organization for the long-term, not just the short-term.”

So how does that explain the acquisition of Scott Rolen?

“We’re also trying to be fair to our fans and be competitive as much as we could this year. I think we were until we were hit with a lot of injuries in the middle of July. We didn’t have the depth to compensate for it.”

The only problem with that is that the Reds got Rolen after the team was hit with injuries.  So Jocketty knew he didn’t have the depth to compete, but he got Rolen and his $10 million/year price tag any way.

It seems to me like Jocketty and the Reds really don’t have a plan.

**********

Jayson Stark at ESPN.com wrote a great piece about how the MLB draft is broken and how he proposes to fix it.  It really is a good article, but there’s one part that I’d like to focus on.

Most of the arguments being put forward for a revamped draft are presented from the owners perspective.  Teams are paying more for draft picks than ever before and the argument is that the owners need some new rules to save them from themselves.  There’s obvious truth to the argument, but I think the players union should be right there with the owners calling for change.

Too often, we think of the players union as nothing more than a foil for the desires of the owners.  But at least in this case, the interests of the owners and the players are aligned.  Think about it, the owners just spent millions upon millions of dollars to sign players that 1) have never played professional baseball, and 2) are not yet members of the union.  If I’m part of the union, I want that money (or a good chunk of it) being paid to my members, not some high school or college kid.

The players union should be breaking down Bud Selig’s door demanding change.  The draft, as currently structured, doesn’t work to the benefit of the players, the majority of the owners, or the game itself.  Changes should be made immediately.  There’s no need to wait until the next collective bargaining agreement.  If everyone involved in the CBA wants the change now, who’s left to complain?

**********

Bill Hall and his $9.5 million contract for 2010 were DFA’d earlier this week and the Brewers have until Friday to trade or release him.  I’m not suggesting that Bill Hall is the answer to the Cubs woes, but I do think he is a decent utility ball player.  The Brewers paid him like he’s a top-of-the-line starting player, but that’s not his fault.

The Cubs have trotted out the likes of  Aaron Miles, Ryan Freel, and Joey Gathright this year.  Hall is a better player than any of these suspects and the Cubs would have the added benefit of having Milwaukee pay the bulk of Hall’s salary in 2010. 

Hall can play a serviceable third base, shortstop, second, and outfield.  He’s the poor man’s Mark DeRosa.  Wouldn’t the Cubs be better off having Hall as a backup and bench player rather than Aaron Miles?  I think so.