The Cubs loss in Cincinnati was eerily similar to the loss I watched them suffer at the hands of the Braves earlier this year.  Ryan Dempster started both games for the Cubs.  He pitched very well in both games.  Leading 3-2 in the 8th in Atlanta, Dempster gave up a double to rookie phenom Jason Heyward.  Lou Pinella pulled him out of the game and replaced him with John Grabow.  The first hitter Grabow faced was Chipper Jones.  Jones promptly hit a home run and the Braves won the game 4-3.

Dempster pitched even better today.  He had only given up three hits as the game moved into the 7th inning and the Cubs were winning 3-2.  Two hitters reached base with first baseman Joey Votto due up and two outs.  Piniella visited the mound, just as he did in Atlanta, but this time he left Dempster in the game.  I mentioned at the time that it was obvious that Piniella did not trust the bullpen.  On Dempster’s very first pitch to Votto, the young first baseman hit a mammoth blast into the right center field seats to give the Reds a 5-3 lead.  They went on to win the game by the same score.

The Cubs could only muster four hits off of Reds starter Mike Leake.  One of those hits was a two-run home run by Tyler Colvin, who started the game in left field to give Alfonso Soriano a day off.  Koyie Hill also started, giving Geovany Soto a rest. 

I know that players need a day off once in a while, but coming into Sunday’s game, the Cubs had lost four of the five games they had played during the road trip.  Wouldn’t it have made sense for the Cubs to have at least one of Soriano or Soto – two of their hottest hitters – in the lineup for their final game of the road trip?  Who knows if it would have made a difference, but I have trouble accepting removing two of the team’s best hitters from the lineup at the same time while the Cubs are having trouble scoring runs.

Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez continue to struggle at the plate.  Lee was 0-4 while Ramirez got a hit in his final at-bat of the game.  Lee is hitting .210 on the year while Ramirez is still below the Mendoza line at .167.

Starlin Castro, AKA the greatest baseball player in the history of the game, was 1-3 with a single.  It was the first game in Castro’s big league career that he has not had at least one extra base hit.  He will make his Wrigley Field debut tomorrow against the Florida Marlins.  God help the Marlins.

The Cubs will now move on to Cincinnati to take on the Reds in a three game weekend series.  I’ll be heading to Cincy too.  I have tickets to Sunday’s game.  Ryan Dempster will take the hill for the Cubs.  He will face-off against Cincinnati’s impressive rookie pitcher Mike Leake.

My sincerest hope is that the tickets to the game arrive in the mail today.  I previously chronicled the horrible service I received  when ordering the tickets from the Reds, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they forgot to send the tickets.  Even so, I don’t want to have to call them to figure this out. 

Next week, I’ll provide all of the details of my visit to Cincinnati.  Hopefully, I’ll also have news of a Cubs three-game sweep.

Before you have a canniption fit, let’s think about this rationally.  Of the Cubs five starters, who has been the weakest thus far this season.  I think it’s fair to say that Zambrano holds that dubious distinction.  I know that you’d expect the answer to be Tom Gorzelanny or Carlos Silva, but that’s not the case.  Both have outpitched Z in the early going.

So if one of the starting pitchers has to be moved to the bullpen to make room for Ted Lilly’s return from the DL, who should it be?  It seems to me that the guy struggling the most in the rotation should be the guy moving to the pen.

But there’s another aspect to this move.  As you probably know, Zambrano is a terrific all-around athlete.  He prides himself on his hitting abilities and despite his heft (which is down considerably this year), he can dunk a basketball.  Plus, Z has the mentality of a kid on a sandlot.  He loves to play, regardless of the game.  A new challenge might just fire him up.

In an article written by Paul Sullivan of Chicago Breaking Sports, Zambrano said he was fine with the move and even thought about it himself before manager Lou Piniella approached him with the idea.  Z said he’s up for the challenge and wants to do whatever he can to help the team.

And here’s the thing that semi-excites me: I think Zambrano is going to be really good in the pen.  I can see him handling the 7th and 8th innings – territory where the Cubs have struggled mightily this season.  I can also see Z being strong enough to handle two innings of relief in back-to-back games. 

The downside to this experiment is going to come when it’s time to move Zambrano back into the rotation.  He’s stretched out now to throw 120+ pitches.  I don’t know exactly what toll it will take on Z to be in the pen or how long it will take him to get stretched out again, but I’m fairly certain that spending much time in the bullpen will lessen the number of pitches he is able to throw in an outing.

Of course, that’s a problem for the future.  For now, the Cubs need to win baseball games and they need a capable bullpen in order to do that.  Adding Zambrano to the bullpen makes the bullpen stronger without significantly weakening the starting rotation.

**********

Once Ted Lilly returns from the DL, roster moves are going to have to be made.  We already know that Zambrano will be moving to the bullpen, but who’s going to be leaving the bullpen?

Jeff Samardzjia should be going down to AAA to get his act together.  However, I don’t think that is the move that the Cubs are going to make.  I think we’re probably going to see James Russell make the trip back to Iowa.  This, despite being one of the few effective arms in the bullpen so far this year (notwithstanding his last outing). 

It appears to me (and everyone else on the planet) that the Cubs overspent on Samardjzia and they are giving him every opportunity to earn his keep.  Unfortunately, that hasn’t worked so far and there really is no reason to believe it will happen anytime soon.  Samardjzia has been a bust and the Cubs front office is having a very hard time coming to terms with that bit of reality.

**********

I’m getting ready to go to another Cubs game.  This time I’ll be heading to Cincinnati to see the Cubs take on the Reds on Sunday, May 9.  I’ve never been to Great American Ballpark  before, so I’m really looking forward to the experience.

Let me climb up on my bully pulpit for a moment and blast the Cincinnati Reds for having the absolute worst ticketing system in the world.  It took me three days to order tickets and I had to go through the online ordering system, an automated voice response system, and finally a live person (I didn’t think they had any) to get it done.

Dealing with the automated voice response system was maddening.  I speak at a normal volume (maybe a bit more than normal) and I speak clearly.  Despite that fact, the system couldn’t understand what I was saying.  To add insult to injury, the disembodied voice would occasionally interrupt what I was saying to tell me she couldn’t understand me.

To make the experience just a wee bit worse, when I told “Cindy,” the live person I spoke to about how bad the automated voice response system was, she couldn’t have cared less.  I know she’s just a cog in the wheel and didn’t design the automated voice response system, but that shouldn’t have stopped her from caring (or at least acting like she cared).

Rergardless, I’m going to the game…and hoping I never have to buy tickets from the Reds again.

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?

I was reminded of the need for a salary cap again today when I was reading a rather innocuous post on MLBTradeRumors.com.  In essense, the post said that the Pirates are looking to add one or two low-cost free agents, but again this off season, they won’t be a player for any big name free agents.  The same is likely true for the Marlins, Twins, Rays, Royals and Padres, and maybe a few other teams as well.

Imagine if you were a fan of the Pirates (or any of the other teams listed).  Every off season, you get to watch other more well-healed teams compete for big name free agents — the type of player that can make a huge difference for a team — while your team quietly sits on the sideline waiting to possibly scoop up the leftovers.  It must be a hopeless feeling.

Once the off season is over and the season is about to begin, the hopeless feeling you had in the off season is doubled because you know that your favorite team has virtually no chance of competing.  For the Pirates, their only hope for the 2010 season is that they might be able to finish ahead of the Reds in the standings, especially since the Reds are under pressure to cut payroll and will likely field a worse team in 2010 than they did in 2009.

Honestly, why would any sport want to run a league in a way that allows a team in it’s largest market to outspend a small market team like the Pirates by a factor of five-to-one?  Money may not buy championships, but it sure makes it a lot easier.

The Yankees payroll allows them to put an all-star at almost every position.  And when one player underperforms, they go out in the off season and sign a free agent to replace them or trade with a lesser-payroll team to get the best player at that position.  They are constantly reloading.  I’m not a Yankees fan nor am I privy to the philosophy of their front office, but I have to believe that the Yankees (and to a lesser extent the Red Sox) view the rest of Major League Baseball as an extension of their minor league sytstem.  When they need a player, if he’s not in their farm system, they can just go to Cleveland, or Florida, or Pittsburgh and trade for the player they need.

I don’t want this post to sound like a slam against the Yankees.  I don’t blame the Yankees in the least for the competitive imbalance that exists in baseball today.  The Yankees are simply playing by the rules and doing it well.  The Yankees are not the problem, the system is the problem.

Joe Posnanski of Sports Illustrated wrote a terrific article recently highlighting the inequities in baseball.  Posnanski writes that everyone knows the Yankees outspend every other team, but they may not fully comprehend how bad the problem really is.

“This is much starker than people think, by the way. I quickly went back and looked at the numbers before writing my column for SI.com, and I’m going to reprint them here because even as someone who has also grown sick of hearing about the Yankees payroll, I found them to be stunning:

In 2002, the Yankees spent $17 million more in payroll than any other team.

In 2003, the Yankees spent $35 million more in payroll than any other team.

In 2004, the Yankees spent $57 million more in payroll than any other team. I mean, it’s ridiculous from the start but this is pure absurdity. Basically, this is like the Yankees saying: “OK, let’s spend exactly as much as the second-highest payroll in baseball. OK, we’re spending exactly as much. And now … let’s add the Oakland A’s. No, I mean let’s add their whole team, the whole payroll, add it on top and let’s play some ball!”

In 2005, the Yankees spent $85 million more than any other team. Not a misprint. Eight five.

In 2006, the Yankees spent $74 million more than any other team.

In 2007, the Yankees spent $40 million more than any other team — cutbacks, you know.

In 2008, the Yankees spent $72 million more than any other team.

In 2009, the Yankees spent $52 million more than any other team…

So how can the commissioner of baseball promote such nonsense as Hope on Opening Day when the game is set up for one team to spend tens of millions more than anyone else?”

Joel Sherman of the New York Post writes that Texas continues to be a possible landing spot for Bradley, but only if the Cubs pick up a “sizable portion” of Bradley’s contract.  Jon Heyman of Sports Illustrated suggests that the Cubs may have to eat $16 million of the $21 million owed to Bradley over the next two years.  Is that really the best the Cubs can get for Bradley?

Bringing Bradley back next year seems highly unlikely.  According Heyman, Many Cubs players, including Aramis Ramirez and Carlos Zambrano, won’t even talk to Bradley.  Others reportedly applauded when it was announced that Bradley had been suspended late last season. 

Early in the week there was a rumor of a three-team trade that would send Bradley to Toronto, Lyle Overbay to the Mets, and second baseman Luis Castillo to the Cubs.  However, according to Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune (writing in the Boston Herald), Toronto wants no part of Bradley.  Who can blame them?

Most reports seem to consider Texas, Tampa Bay, and San Francisco as the most likely trade partners for Bradley.  There’s been a lot of talk about how much of Bradley’s contract the Cubs would have to eat in a trade with the Rangers, but virtually nothing has been said about who the Cubs might receive in return.  I had previously suggested that a Bradley for Michael Young trade might make sense from a financial perspective for the cash-strapped Rangers, but that doesn’t appear to be the deal the Rangers are interested in making.

Trade rumors with Tampa Bay and San Francisco involve one bad contract for another.  With Tampa Bay, the trade rumor involves Bradley’s remaining two-years at a total of $21 million for Pat Burrell’s one remaining year and $9 million.  Obviously, the Cubs would have to kick in some money.

The Bradley-to-San-Francisco rumor involves sending Bradley’s remaining contract to the Giants for Aaron Rowand’s remaining three years and $36 million.

Of the three possibilities, the rumored deal with San Francisco makes the most sense to me.  Assuming the Cubs would not have to kick in any money, they would be taking on an additional year and an additional $16 million in payroll obligation, but at least they’ll be getting a player they can use.  With Texas and Tampa Bay, their are either just paying another team to take Bradley off their hands or they are taking on a player (Burrell) that they can’t use (or both).  Adding Aaron Rowand to the line-up isn’t the perfect solution, but it is better than the other rumors currently floating around.

Whatever happens, Jim Hendry would be well-advised to make it happen fast.  Bradley is and will continue to be a distraction until the Cubs are rid of him.  There will be no “perfect deals” coming along that will allow the Cubs to dump Bradley.  What they need to do is choose the least bad option and move on.

UPDATE: Well, you can cross the Giants off the list of potential trade partners for Milton Bradley.  In an article by Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune, Giants GM Brian Sabean said:

“A deal like that? For a player like that?” Giants general manager Brian Sabean said. “No. Is that succinct enough? I don’t know that addition by subtraction would work. Smarter people than us have tried that.”

Oh well.  Never say never, but it looks like any potential deal with San Francisco is dead.

Sullivan’s article also says that for the privilege of paying the Rangers $16 million or so to take Milton Bradley, the Cubs would receive a couple of unnamed, mid-level prospects to the Cubs.  Ouch…

***********

Tim Dierkes at MLBTradeRumors.com has an interesting post up concerning where he thinks the top 50 free agents will end up this off season.  Of particular interest is that he thinks Rich Harden will sign with the Red Sox and the Cubs will sign Billy Wagner.

In his post, Dierkes suggests that Boston will take a risk and sign Harden to a one-year, $7 million contract.  He compares the signing to what Boston did last year when they signed Brad Penney and John Smoltz.

I believe that now that Ted Lilly is a bit of a question mark for the start of the 2010 season, the Cubs will offer Harden arbitration.  If he is looking for another deal in the $7 million range, I think he’ll accept.  However, I believe he is looking for something closer to $10 million per year and would naturally prefer a multi-year deal. 

If he hits the open market (the Cubs have until December 1 to offer arbitration), Harden will initially hold out for a multi-year contract.  If one is not forthcoming, he may agree to a one-year deal, but I have to believe it is going to be closer to $10 million than $7 million.  So if Tim is right and Boston signs Harden, it will have to be late in the off season when Harden has tested all of the other options. 

For what it’s worth, Harden says he really liked Chicago and his agent, Arn Tellem, says Harden is 100% healthy.  Even so, Harden’s injury history does not inspire confidence.  His is an interesting case, particularly in an ecomony where most teams don’t seem to be open to taking on too much risk unless the price is right.

On Billy Wagner, Tim says:

37.  Billy Wagner – Cubs.  The Cubs don’t have much payroll space, and they may prefer to go with Carlos Marmol as their closer.  Then again, they wouldn’t do so a year ago when Marmol was coming off a good season.  The Cubs could offer Wagner a chance to close, as could the Orioles, Rays, Tigers, Angels, and Braves.  Even Wagner’s old teams, the Phillies and Astros, have back-end bullpen concerns.

Tim makes a great point here.  If the Cubs weren’t willing to hand the closer’s job to Marmol in 2009 after he had a really good 2008, why would they in 2010 after a 2009 season that saw Marmol lead all NL relievers in walks and hit batters?  Of course, Wagner’s contract expectations remain an issue.  He earned $10.5 million in 2010 and will likely be looking for a two or three year contract with a similar annual salary.  That’s a little rich for the Cubs’ blood.

Of course, this may be a moot point.  The Red Sox could offer Wagner arbitration and he could accept.  It seemed like a long-shot a week ago, but Wagner says that he enjoyed his time in Boston and his agent says he would possibly be open to accepting an arbitration offer.  As part of their trade with the Mets for Wagner, the Red Sox agreed not to exercise Wagner’s $8 million option for 2010, but they are free to offer the lefty arbitration.

Whatever happens, I strongly feel that the Cubs must address the closer role if they want to be a legitimate World Series contender in 2010.  If Wagner is not the answer, who is?

I previously mentioned Huston Street as a possibility.  He will receive an increase in arbitration from his 2009 salary of $4.5 million.  The Rockies don’t want to deal him, but may have to consider a trade in order to reach their budget goals.  Street would be one of their more marketable players and the Cubs would be one of several teams interested in the closer.

Another possibility is Francisco Cordero of the Reds.  The Reds are reportedly going to have to cut their budget from $71 million in 2009 to $65 to $70 million in 2010.  That might not seem like a big cut, but the Reds have contractual obligations totaling $66 million to just 10 players.  They are going to have to make some trades just to be able to field a full team.

Cordero is one of their most expensive players.  He’s signed through 2011 for $12 million per year with another $12 million club option for 2012 ($1 million buyout).  That’s expensive, but there are unfortunately no good, cheap options for the Cubs.

 **********

Ken Rosenthal reports that the Cubs are nearing a deal to re-sign John Grabow.  Rosenthal says the deal could be for two years.  It could also be for 100 years, but probably not. 

**********

The GM meetings end today.  Will Milton Bradley be traded?  More tomorrow…

A Look At The Offseason (Part 1 – Infield)

A Look At The Offseason (Part 2 – Outfield)

Today, I’d like to focus on the Cubs’ starting and relief pitching.

**********

Four of the five positions in the Cubs starting rotation are pretty well set.  Barring an unforessen trade, the Cubs starters will include Carlos Zambrano, Ted Lilly, Ryan Dempster, and Randy Wells.  Lefties Tom Gorzelanny and Sean Marshall, along with right-hander Jeff Samardjzia will compete for the fifth starter position.  So the Cubs are set with starting pitching, right?  Maybe.

I don’t expect the Cubs to add another starter, but there are a couple of scenarios that make some sense.  First, I’ve previously set out a scenario where a Milton Bradley (and others) trade to Toronto could return Roy Halladay.  If that happened, then you can count Gorzelanny, Marshall, and Samardjzia among the faces in the bullpen.  It’s unlikely, but it would work.

If the Cubs are looking for a free agent starting pitcher (which I don’t think they are), there are two different targets I would suggest.  First is current Dodgers pitcher Randy Wolf.  In 2009, Wolf was 11-7 with a 3.23 ERA.  He earned $5 million last year, plus $500,000 for pitching more than 200 innings.  He’ll be 34 years old in 2010.

The other free agent target I’d like the Cubs to consider is former Brewers starter, Ben Sheets.  Sheets missed the past year while recovering from surgery to repair a torn flexor tendon in his elbow.  He thought he’d be ready to pitch again by mid-season this past year, but his recovery took longer than anticipated.  From all reports, Sheets will be ready by Spring Training.

Sheets is a buy low, high potential target.  When he’s right, Sheets is very good.  Of course, his health and durability are a question, so he shouldn’t cost too much on a one year deal.

The Cubs bullpen will include two of Gorzelanny, Marshall, and Samardjzia (the two not in the starting rotation). It will also include Angel Guzman and Carlos Marmol.  If the Cubs can re-sign John Grabow (which I expect), he’ll also be part of the bullpen.  Justin Berg, Dave Patton, Jeff Stevens and Mitch Atkins are also bullpen candidates.

The big question for me concerning the bullpen is whether or not the Cubs will be willing to start the year with Marmol as the closer.  All indications from the Cubs are that Marmol will be the closer.  If I were in charge, I’d be looking for someone else.

In 2009, Marmol lead all NL relievers in hit batters (12) and in bb/9 innings (7.90/9).  That’s not what you want from the guy who’s in charge of shutting down the opposing team in the 9th inning of a close game.  In 19 save opportunities, Marmol had 15 saves for a 21.0% blown save rate.  For comparisons sake, the Dodger’s Jonathon Broxton blew 14.3% of his save opportunities, Ryan Franklin of St. Louis blew 11.6% of his save opportunities, and the Rockies’ Huston Street blew 10.8% of his save opportunities.  Even Francisco Rodriguez of the Mets, who had a down year, only blew 16.7% of his save opportunities.  (In all fairness, Brad Lidge blew 21.6% of his saves and the Phillies are in the World Series.)

Marmol has been a great story for the Cubs up until now.  He joined the club as a catcher, was converted to a pitcher and at times has been dominant.  But he’s too wild and too unpredictable.  The Cubs need a closer they can count on.

Rob G. of The Cub Reporter has thrown out the idea of the Cubs signing free agent Kelvim Escobar.  Although he’s missed the past two years with injuries, Escobar is expected to be healthy going into next year.  Because of his past injury issues, he shouldn’t cost much and he could be brought in with the idea of either setting up Marmol or taking on the closer role. 

The Cubs could also decide to go after Billy Wagner.  After returning from injury last year, Wagner, who will be 39 years old next season,  looked like his old self.  He probably won’t come cheap, but he has the potential to be a dominant closer.  In 2009, between the Mets and Red Sox, Wagner only pitched 15.2 innings, but he posted a 1-1 record with a 1.72 ERA.  It’s a small sample size, but impressive nonetheless considering the circumstances.

The Red Sox have an $8 million option on Wagner for 2010, but they agreed not to exercise it in order to get him to waive his no-trade clause when he was traded from the Mets to Boston.  That must mean that Wagner thinks he can get more than $8 million per year and/or more years as a free agent. 

The latest news on Wagner is that he told a reporter that he is considering retiement and doesn’t plan to talk to teams when he hits free agency.  The next day, his agent said that Wagner’s statement was “premature.”  If he’s available, the Cubs should inquire, but my personal feeling is that his price tag is going to be too high.

There are a couple of other free agent candidates that are longshots, but possibilities.  If John Smoltz would be willing to return to the bullpen in 2010, then the Cubs should look at him to be their closer.  At the moment, it looks like Smoltz wants to start and St. Louis is willing to give him a chance, but we’ll have to see how it plays out.

The other option is of my own creation.  I mentioned earlier that free agent Ben Sheets is a pitcher the Cubs should consider.  Although he’s never closed before, it might be the perfect role for him coming off of a missed year due to injury.  It would allow him to pitch fewer innings and build his strength back up if his goal is to eventually be a starter again.  He has shown in the past that he has the mentality to be a closer.  Although I like the idea, I’m not so sure either Sheets or the Cubs would like it as much.

Other free agents to consider are Brandan Donnelly, Jason Isringhausen, Troy Percival, JJ Putz, and Takashi Saito.  I’m not suggesting any of them would be a good fit for the Cubs, but they do have experience closing and all are available. 

There are a couple of intriguing trade candidates that may be available.  The Cincinnati Reds owe Francisco Cordero $12 million per year in 2010 and 2011.  The team also holds a $12 million option for 2012 with a $1 million buy-out.  In fact, he is the highest paid player on a team with many needs and very little payroll flexibility.

In 2009, Cordero was 2-6 with a 2.16 ERA.  He had 39 saves in 43 save opportunities (9.3% blown saves).  He’s expensive, but could probably be had for a couple of good prospects.  On the other hand, I doubt if either team would be overly excited about making a deal within the division.  It happens, but it’s not preferred.

There is also a chance that Colorado may make Huston Street available.  Personally, I think this is a longshot, but the fact is that Street made $4.5 million in 2009 and is due for a hefty increase via arbitration.  The Rockies have a couple of  other cheaper (albeit, not as good) options at closer, including Manny Corpas who is returning from injury.  It seems to me that the only way the Rockies would trade Street is if they are really in a money crunch.  I know their budget is tight, but I’m not sure it is tight enough to trade such a valuable player.

In a nutshell, I don’t think the Cubs should count on Marmol to be their closer, but I have to admit that the options to replace him are rather limited.  The bottom line for me is that the Cubs have a top-of-the-line starting rotation and they need to have a dependable arm closing out games for them.  I don’t know for sure who that steady arm will be, but I do know that Carlos Marmol is anything but steady.

In my next report, I’ll wrap up this series and put together a proposed 25 man roster for the 2010 Cubs.

“I don’t know who is starting that (rumor that Bradley is going to return to the Cubs in 2010), but the Cubs are working to trade Bradley. Milton has been with how many teams over the years? That means he’s worked with about that many hitting coaches. So sooner or later, the Cubs might hire somebody who might have worked with Bradley at some point. The imminent hiring of Jaramillo is in no way related to mending fences with Bradley…But once again, don’t look for Milton back with the Cubs.”

As you know, I trust Bruce’s opinion.  If he says Bradley is leaving, then I believe Bradley is leaving.  But where will he end up?  One of Bruce’s readers suggested Cincinnati in exchangfe for Bronson Arroyo or Aaron Harang.  The reader opined that Dusty Baker might be able to control Bradley.  Bruce disagreed:

“As to other teams, I had not heard the Reds. A few years ago at the winter meetings, I got a tip that Dusty had met with Milton when Dusty was still the Cubs manager. I’ve heard even Dusty came away with doubts about Milton, and Dusty would seem to be the perfect guy to handle him.”

I never thought that Cincinnati would be a good trading partner for the Cubs on Bradley to begin with.  Bruce just strengthened my belief.

**********

One of the reasons that has been given to back up the “Milton is staying rumor” is the Cubs’ interest in Rudy Jaramillo becoming the team’s hitting coach.  Jaramillo was the hitting coah for Texas in 2008 when Bradley had the best year of his career.

What is less remembered is that Jaramillo was also the hitting coach when Alfonso Soriano was with the Rangers in 2004-05.   In 2004, Soriano hit .280/.324/.484 with 28 homeruns and 98 RBI.  In 2005 he hit .268/.309/.512 with 36 homeruns and 104 RBI.   It’s been reported that Soriano had a great relationship with Jaramillo and has been very positive about reuniting with him.  

According to Jon Heyman at SportsIllustrated.com:

“Rudy Jaramillo will be the perfect choice as hitting coach for the Cubs. He is expected to sign a multiyear deal for about $800,000 a year, which would make him easily the sport’s best-paid hitting coach. Not only is he a highly respected hitting coach, but he got great results in Texas with both Alfonso Soriano and Milton Bradley (though Bradley won’t be back if the Cubs can figure out where to send him).”

**********

Is Starlin Castro the Cubs shorstop of the future?  There’s a really good chance he is, but when might he make it to the big leagues?  Carrie Muskat from MLB.com says it could be as early as next year.

He was drafted by the Cubs in 2006 out of the Dominican Republic when he was just 16-years old.  He played Rookie B all in 2008 and showed so much promised that the Cubs promoted him to high-A ball in Daytona in 2009.  Again, he excelled and was moved to Double A in the middle of the 2009 season.  At Double-A, in only his second professional season, Castro hit .288 and impressed everyone who saw him play.  Now, he is the youngest player in the Arizona Fall League and is currently hitting .500.

Even though he’s only 19-years old, Cubs minor league infield coordinator Frankin Font thinks he almost ready for the big time.  Castro feels like sometime next year will be his time to shine with the Cubs.  Dave Keller, Cubs minor league hitting instructor agrees.

“He’s a very confident kid, but not arrogant,” andKeller said. “For him, it’s just a matter of getting repetitions.”

So what does that mean for the Cubs this off season?   The Cubs have said that they are happy with Ryan Theriot at shortstop and are more insterested in finding a second baseman than they are in replacing Theriot.  However, Castro fast ascent may alter those plans.  Could the Cubs move Theriot over to second and then bring in a one-year fill-in type shortstop?  Miguel Tejada maybe?  Could Andres Blanco play short for a year and hold the spot for Castro?  Does Theriot have a future with the Cubs now that both Blanco and Castro are waiting in the wings?  All good questions.  Unfortunately, there are no answers, at least not yet.

I personally like the idea of Ryan Theriot moving over to second.  Blanco has impressed with the glove everywhere he has been.  The good news is he’s starting to show some promise with the bat now that he is 100% healthy.  I think I’d rather the Cubs give him a shot in 2010 instead of bringing in a free agent on a one-year contract.  Whatever they do, it sure is a nice change to have options at shortstop.

Now let me throw a wet blanket on the whole party.  Even if Castro can play at the big league level next year, should he?  He’s only 19-years old.  What’s the rush?  I understand that it is exciting that the Cubs have a legit shortstop prospect, but why fast track him?  Give him the time to learn his craft and grow into his body.  Let him get stronger and add a little power to his game.  Give him another year or two in the minors and make absolutely sure that he is ready for the big stage.  Then, when he is ready, bring him up and give him every opportunity to succeed.

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.

If Marmol is the heir-apparent to the closers role in 2010, he’d better show a little more than he did yesterday.  Two walks, two hits, and two runs against an offensively challenged team like Cincinnati isn’t going to get the job done.

On a brighter note, Geovany Soto and Aramis Ramirez both had multi-hit games.  Soto had two doubles and drove in three of the Cubs five runs.

Ted Lilly (11-8) will go for the Cubs today in the series finale against Cincinnati’s Homer Bailey (5-4).

**********

The Cubs have one of the top rotations in the NL.  Carlos Zambrano, Ryan Dempster, Ted Lilly and Randy Wells are all under contract for 2010.  Rich Harden is the only Cubs starter who will be a free agent at the end of the 2009 season.  Should the Cubs resign him?

Jason Stark from ESPN.com looked at the upcoming class of free agent pitchers and concluded that the class is mighty weak.  Here’s what he has to say about Rich Harden:

“If we were making out this list based on stuff alone, Harden might rank No. 1. He has a better strikeout rate (10.88 per 9 IP) than Tim Lincecum, Justin Verlander, or any other starter in baseball with 130 innings or more this year. It’s just tough to know what to make of him. If he makes six more starts, it would be only the second time in his career (and first since 2004) that he’s gone to the post 30 times. He’s visited his friendly neighborhood disabled list five years in a row. And he’s never won more than 11 games in any season. “I’d be scared to death to commit years to this guy,” one AL execs said. “He’s been used kind of like Pedro [Martinez] was used in the past, where they’re always trying to build in an extra day’s rest. And he’s just a five-inning guy, in the National League. He might strike out 10, but he’ll only go five innings, so he still kills your ‘pen. He’ll get some money. I just don’t see anybody giving him more than a year.’”

There’s no doubt that Harden has good stuff.  as Stark points out, it might be the best stuff in the game.  But there’s more to pitching than just having “good stuff.”  Harden has a difficult time staying off the DL.  The fact that the most wins he’s ever had in his career is 11 tells you that he doesn’t make nearly enough starts in a season.

I’d like to see the Cubs offer Harden arbitration.  He’s a reasonable risk on a one-year contract, but I wouldn’t risk a multi-year deal on him.  If he wants to turn down arbitration and go after that multi-year deal, more power to him.  Since he’s a type A free agent, the Cubs will receive two draft picks from whichever team signs him.

If the Cubs wanted to sign a free agent pitcher to replace Harden, my vote would go to Randy Wolf.  Here’s what Stark says about Wolf:

“Wolf’s stock has risen faster this year than IBM’s. He’d be 18-6 if the Dodgers’ bullpen hadn’t blown eight saves for him. He’s ripped off 14 straight starts of six innings or more. And only four pitchers in the whole sport can beat his 19 starts of no more than two earned runs allowed. So one season after the Astros pulled a three-year, $28.5 million offer off his table before he could say yes, it appears that Wolf’s turn has finally arrived to get a multiyear free-agent deal — although, since he’s 33, it almost certainly wouldn’t be longer than three years. He’s “durable, dependable and left-handed,” one GM said. And he’s also “two 190-plus-inning seasons removed from any health issues.” Oh, and he’s also driven in more runs this year (11) than Dewayne Wise or Cameron Maybin. So look for this man to stay in the National League — just so he can keep swinging the old Louisville Slugger.”

If the Cubs are going to hand out a multi-year contract to a starting pitcher, they can do worse than Randy Wolf.

**********

With 22 games left in the season, let’s take a look at how the teams in the NL Wildcard race did yesterday:

• Colorado lost to San Diego 3-2
• San Francisco lost to the Dodgers 9-1
• Florida beat Washington 11-3
• Atlanta beat St. Louis 7-6

The Cubs remain 8.5 games behind the Rockies, but are now all alone in fifth place in the NL wildcard race.