As a type B free agent, the Cubs could have received a sandwich pick between the first and second rounds of the draft if Harden had turned down arbitration and signed with another team.  However, they must have been afraid that Harden would accept arbitration.  I’m not so sure, but if he had, he likely would have recieved an arbitration award in the $8 – $10 million range.

Harden’s health is always a question mark.  His agent insists that he is completely healthy.  However, as Bruce Miles of the Daily Herald points out, no one knows more about Harden’s health than the Cubs.  They worked with him on a day-to-day basis and had full access to his medical records.  Maybe they know something that the rest of us don’t know.

I was disappointed that the Cubs didn’t offer arb to Harden.  I thought it was a no-lose situation for the Cubs.  Either they re-sign Harden, which shores up their starting rotation, or they get an additional draft pick.

One criticism I have heard about Harden (in addition to not being able to stay healthy), is that he is hard on the bullpen.  Harden averages 6.0 or fewer innings per outing, meaning that the bullpen doesn’t get a rest on days he pitches.  Even so, it’s not unreasonable to pencil him in for 25 starts and 150 innings.  Is that worth $8 – $10 million a year.  In today’s climate, it’s not completely out of bounds.

In any case, it appears that Harden will be wearing a different uniform next year.  Boston and Seattle are already showing strong interest in Harden.  Boston is looking for a back-of-the-rotation starter (ala John Smoltz or Brad Penny) who has some health questions and can be signed reasonably.  I’m not sure that describes Harden, but Boston is interested. 

Harden is from Vancouver, BC and Seattle is hoping he’d like to pitch close to home next year.  My guess is that money will play a larger role in Harden’s decision on where to sign than location will.

**********

The Cubs continue to consider Naples, FL to become their Spring Training home.  Tom Rickett’s and other officials from the Cubs visited Florida earlier this week to meet with Florida’s Governor Charlie Crist and representatives from the Naples group trying to lure the Cubs to Naples.

According to Gary Price of Fifth Avenue Advisors, part of the group wanting to develop a new Spring Training facility in Naples for the Cubs, he becomes more confident that the Cubs will move to Florida every time he meets with the team.  He also said that he believes the Cubs interest in Naples is sincere.

I read some opinions in the blogosphere that the Cubs are just using Naples to get more out of Mesa.  I don’t see it.  I think Mesa is going to give the Cubs what they want regardless of whether Naples is in the picture or not.  The Cubs don’t need to pit Naples against Mesa.

Another argument that is being made against Naples is that the Spring Training facilities in Florida are more spread out than those in Arizona.  Travel from Naples to other teams’ Spring Training facilities can be as much as 4-5 hours.  While this is true, I don’t think it is a huge consideration.  I’m sure that the Cubs are much more concerned with the facilities themselves than they are with the travel required for 12-15 Spring Training games.

I still think Naples is a long shot, but I do believe that the Cubs are serious about the possibility of relocating their Spring Training facility there.

**********

The Cubs can scratch Billy Wagner off their wish list.  He signed yesterday with the Braves for a reported $7 million in 2010 and a team option of $6.5 million for 2011.

I wasn’t counting on the Cubs signing (or even pursuing) Wagner, but I have to wonder how the inability to trade Milton Bradley is affecting the Cubs ability to pursue free agents.  If they had an interest in Wagner, could they have pursued him or does trading Milton Bradley stand in the way of the team making any moves?

Joel Sherman of the New York Post (as reported by Bill Chastain of MLB.com) says that the Bradley for Pat Burrell trade possibility with Tampa Bay is still alive and well.  However, according to Chastain, the amount of money the Cubs throw into the deal remains the sticking point.

This got me thinking.  The Braves are anxious to move either Derek Lowe or Javier Vasquez.  They need to trim payroll, they have a deep rotation, and they need a corner outfield bat.  Would Atlanta be interested in trading Lowe straight up for Bradley?

Bradley is owed $21 million over the next two years.  Lowe is owed $45 million over the next three years.  Without throwing any money into the deal, the Cubs would take on an extra year and $24 million.  At first blush, it seems cost prohibitive.  However, the Cubs will likely have to pay a big chunk of money to get another team to take Bradley.  If you factor that money in, the $24 million more they’d have to take on in a Bradley for Lowe trade doesn’t seem so bad.

By the way, this isn’t a rumor.  It’s just me thinking out loud.  Is it workable?  Who knows.  If Jim Hendry is really good, maybe he can get Atlanta to throw some money into the deal.  Can you imagine that?  The Cubs could move Bradley, get a decent pitcher in return, and actually have some cash come back to them.  Ah, now I’m dreaming.

The Cardinals tied the game in the 5th inning and it stayed that way until the bottom of the 9th.  I don’t know why, but Lou Piniella brought in Aaron Heilman to pitch the 9th inning.  I guess he has to pitch sometime, but I sure wouldn’t have trusted him in that situation.  Heilman must have been in a hurry to leave the ballpark because he gave up a homer to Matt Holliday, the first batter he faced.  Cards win 3-2.

Even though the Rockies lost last night, they remain 7.0 games ahead of the Cubs with 17 games remaining in the season.  Realistically (as opposed to mathemetically), the Cubs need to win out in order to have a shot at the post season.  And just to make things a little tougher, they get to face Chris Carpenter and Adam Wainwright, both Cy Young candidates, in the next two games.

**********

Josh Peter at Yahoo Sports has a really interesting article detailing where the Cubs make their money.  The conclusion of the artricle is that even though the Ricketts family just paid $845 million to buy the Cubs, it is somewhat of a bargain.  Who would have thunk?

I found it interesting that Comcast Sports Net pays the Cubs $350,000 for each game that it televises, but WGN only pays the team $200,000 per game.  Now I understand why the Rickettses felt that the Tribune Company had arranged a sweetheart deal  between the Cubs and WGN, both properties of the Trib. 

It will be interesting to see what happens in 2019 when the current television contracts with Comcast Sports Net and WGN end.  There has been speculation that the Rickettes would like to start their own sports network similar to the YES Network owned by the Yankees.  As Peter points out, a sports network owned by and featuring a team can be much more lucrative than the team itself.

**********

Speaking of money, the Wall Street Journal undertook an intensive review of the price of beer at ballparks and how the team’s winning percentage impacts the price of the beer.  What did they find?  The study found that teams with a .600 winning percentage charge $1.30 more for a 16-ounce beer than a team with a .400 winning percentage.

If you’re looking for the best value in ballpark beer look no further than PNC Park in Pittsburgh.  For just $4.75 (cheap by ballpark standards) you’ll be treated to a 21-ounce cold one.  Of course, you also have to watch the Pirates play their “special” brand of baseball.

In contrast, it will set you back $7.25 for just 12-ounces of the liquid gold at Fenway Park.  The Red Sox may be fun to watch, but that’s outrageous.

With the loss, the Cubs drop to 7.0 games behind Wildcard leading Colorado with just 18 games to play.  The team travels to St. Louis to start a three game series this evening against the NL Central leading Cardinals.  Ted Lilly (12-8) takes the mound versus John Smoltz (3-6).

**********

In yesterday’s game, Milton Bradley hit a single in the sixth inning and then pulled up lame at first base.  After a short conversation with first base coach Matt Sinatro, Bradley took himself out of the game.  At first, Lou Piniella seemed to be caught off-guard by the sudden departure of Bradley, and it took some time to get a pinch-runner in the game.  However, Piniella explained after the game that he knew Bradley’s knee was bothering him and it just took a little while for Bobby Scales to get loose in the tunnel before he could take over for Bradley on first base.

For his part, Bradley didn’t do anything to lessen the opinion that he is a whiny, self-centered baby.  This is what Carrie Muskat of MLB.com wrote about Bradley’s post-game pity party:

Bradley did not want to talk about his knee postgame.

“I have knee inflammation,” he said. “I’ve had two knee surgeries. It happens when you have knee surgery, in case you don’t know.”

It’s uncertain whether Bradley will miss Friday’s game in St. Louis. Asked if he was day to day, Bradley snapped.

“What else you got? You got anything significant?” he said. “If you have some baseball questions, I can answer. I’ve got nothing for you.”

The immature, disrespectful display didn’t sit well with Pinella.  The Tribune’s Paul Sullivan wrote this:

A few minutes later, Piniella called reporters into his office. He said Bradley’s mysterious reaction to questions about his injury was uncalled for.

“All he had to say was I talked to (the trainer) in front of the manager, which he did, and he said ‘My patella is bothering me,’” Piniella said. “And when he went over to first base, I motioned to him and he said he couldn’t run, and we just took him out of the ballgame… He was in his perfect rights to come out of the ballgame, and that’s all he needed to say.

“All he’s got to say are the facts. And if he says the facts, nobody is going to dispute anything. That’s all. Just say the facts.”

You don’t have to be a psychic to know that Piniella and Bradley don’t get along.  Think about it.  Piniella is an old school manager who has seen just about every type of player in his career.  He knows who can get the job done and who can’t.  Bradley is a player with a constant massive chip on his shoulder who has created controversy just about everywhere he has gone.  Piniella sees that Bradley is all about Bradley.  He’s not about team and he’s not about winning.  He’s all about doing what he can to increase his precious OBP numbers, often at the expense of doing what is best for the team in a given instance.  Of course they’re going to butt heads.

I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Piniella has told Jim Hendry, if you want me back next year, move Bradley this off-season.  If I were in Piniella’s shoes, there’s no way I would want to put up with another year of Bradley and his drama.

**********

Bruce Levine of WMVP – AM 1000 in Chicago writes on his ESPN Chicago blog that new Cubs owner-in-waiting Tom Ricketts, team president Crane Kenney, and vice president of business operations Mark McGuire traveled to Mesa, AZ to scope out potential sites for a new Cubs Spring Training home.  The mayor of Mesa, AZ and other Arizona officials met with the Cubs trio to discuss options and to beg the Cubs on bended knee not to move to Florida.

It’s just my opinion, but I think the Cubs should move to Florida.  The Cubs are the biggest draw in Arizona, but they have some of the worst facilities. In the past, Mesa has been somewhat reluctant to commit funds to keep them in town while Florida has been chomping at the bit to spend money to bring the Cubs into the Grapefruit League.  Florida has been losing teams to Arizona over the past several years and they would like to reverse that trend.

Of even more importance is the fact that I often travel to Florida, but rarely get to Arizona.  Whatever other considerations there may be, this one should take precedence.

**********

I enjoy reading Murray Chass, but I rarely agree with him.  This is primarily due to the fact that Chass writes about baseball, but hasn’t liked anything about the game since Ducky Medwick hung up his uniform for the last time.  Of course I’m exaggerating badly, but you get the idea.  He is the sterotypical curmudgeon of a writer who looks at anything that is new or different as automatically bad.

Anyway, he recently wrote an article about the Pittsburgh Pirates, a team he knows a little bit about.  He doesn’t like what is happening there and makes a good case for why fans of the team shouldn’t like it either.  He writes:

When the Pirates completed their roster cleansing July 30, they had a 43-58 record (.426) and were 11 ½ games from first place. Since then, through Monday’s games, they had a 12-29 record (.293) and had tumbled 28 ½ games from first.

In the interim they set a major league record by insuring their 17^th successive losing season, but they were going to get that record with the players they traded away; it would just have taken them longer. 

If the Pirates incur losses in their last 20 games at the same rate they have lost since July 30, they will finish with a 60-102 record (.370), their worst record in the 17-season stretch and their second worst record since the early 1950s and the days of Vic Janowicz, the O’Brien twins Johnny and Eddie and Joe Garagiola.

On the one hand, the Pirates have been a horribly run organization for the better part of two decades, so I at least applaud them for now having a plan and following it.  On the other hand, trading away Nyjer Morgan, Freddie Sanchez, and maybe Jack Wilson made little sense to me.  I understand that the team is in rebuild mode, but what are they building around?  At their current pace, they are going to develop players over the course of three or four years who, when ready to really contrbute, will be too expensive to keep.  It seems like a viscous cycle to me.

But the part I liked best about Chass’ article is when he talked about the fact that the Pirates current payroll is less than the amount the team receives in revenue sharing.  He writes:

Perhaps the most striking figures are the payroll numbers. The Pirates opened the season with a $48.7 million payroll. They are closing it with a payroll (based on the Aug. 31 roster and disabled list) of $20 million. The players they traded during the season have salaries totaling $31 million.

Now for the kicker. The Pirates, one of the smallest revenue teams in the majors, received approximately $40 million in revenue sharing last year and most likely will get at least that much, despite the economy, for this year. One thing we know for sure. They aren’t spending the money to pay players.

Chass has hit on my pet peeve.  I’ve advocated for a salary cap in the past partly to control spending, but also to force lower revenue teams to spend a minimum amount on player payroll.  The Pirates are a perfect example of how the current system is not working.  The Pirates (and Royals, and Marlins) are not the Washington Generals, the perennial foes of the Harlem Globetrotters.  They are (or should be) a legitimate major league baseball team and it is a travesty that their payroll is less than 1/10th of the team with the highest payroll.

Chass continues:

Under the collective bargaining agreement, teams that receive money have to notify the commissioner’s office each April what they did with the money the previous year. “They’re going to have some explaining to do,” a baseball official said. “It’s going to be difficult for them absent some substantial moves between now and April.”

High-revenue teams don’t appreciate revenue recipients that don’t spend the money to improve themselves but pocket it instead. The commissioner’s office is supposed to monitor the spending to make sure teams use the money as they’re supposed to, but no team has ever been disciplined or even reprimanded for not using it correctly.

The Pirates might be a good place for the commissioner to start. It would be the best win for the fans all year.

Bravo, Murray!  The travesty has been exposed.  Now it is up to Bud Selig and the other owners to take action.

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.

Ted Lilly returned from the DL to pitch 6.0 innings of four hit, no run baseball.  It was beautiful and just what the Cubs needed.  The offense didn’t do much.  They could only muster one run off of San Diego pitching, but at least they had the lead 1-0 going into the bottom of the ninth inning.  Then all herll broke loose thanks to closer Kevin Gregg.

In the bottom of the ninth, Gregg gave up the tying run on a doubled by Chase Headly that drove in David Eckstein.  Eckstein, the mighty midget with a .261 batting average and almost no power, was walked by Gregg to reach base.  Allowing the tying run was bad enough, but Gregg wasn’t done yet.  He intentionally walked Kevin Kouzmanoff to face right fielder Kyle Blanks.  Blanks, in his first big league season, who had just 14 RBI on the season before meeeting Kevin Gregg, hit a three-run home run to win the game in walk-off fashion for San Diego.

After the game, Lou Piniella said that he would be making a change at the closer position, likely meaning that either Carlos Marmol (who can’t find the strike zone most of the time) or Angel Guzman will become the Cubs new closer.  What will become of Kevin Gregg is yet to be seen.  Wouldn’t John Smoltz make sense at the back end of the bullpen?

The Cubs are now 6.0 games behind St. Louis in the NL Central.  They are 4.0 back of Colorado who was idle last night.

**********

My plan from yesterday was for the Cubs to start winning series while the Cardinals fall apart.  I know it’s certainly not fool proof, but do you have a better plan?  I didn’t think so.

I know there has only been one game since my master plan was unveiled, but I had really hoped for a better start than what happened last night.  There is no margin for error.  The Cubs must turn things around immediately or the season will be lost.  Actually, it might be lost already, but I’m too stubborn to throw in the towel yet.

**********

Stephen Strasburg signed last night with the Washington Nationals for a record $15.1 million.  I think the signing is good for everyone involved.  Strasburg signed for a record amount and Washington got the deal done for a “reasonable” amount.  Scott Boras mad a lot of money for himself, so everyone wins.

According to Bill Shaikin annd Dylan Hernandez at the LA Times, Strasburg’s contract breaks down like this:

• $7.5 million signing bonus paid in three installments
• Pro-rated salary of $400,000 for remainder of 2009 season
• $2.0 million guaranteed salary in 2010
• $2.5 million guaranteed salary in 2011
• $3.0 million guaranteed salary in 2012

The next question to be answered is when will Strasburg make his debut for Washington?  Consensus opinion seems to be that with just a little work in the minors, Strasburg will be ready to face big league hitters.  But the minor league season is over in just a couple of weeks (end of August), so that doesn’t give Strasburg much time to get stretched out (he hasn’t pitched in a game since May), get some minor league work, and then get to the majors. 

Washington is probably anxious to showcase their new investment, but I think it makes more sense to get him some work at Washington’s minor league camp with an eye toward having him work his first big league game next year.  Of course, that’s easy for me to say.  I didn’t just spend $15.1 million on the lad.

The Cubs are currently 5.0 games behind St. Louis in the NL Central and 3.5 back of the Rockies in the NL Wild Card race.  Five games behind in the division seems like a lot, but one good series for the Cubs and one bad one for the Cardinals could turn this thing around.  I hope I’m not being a cock-eyed optimist. 

Over the next couple of weeks, the only opponent the Cubs face that is over .500 is the Dodgers.  Otherwise, the Cubs face the Padres, the Nationals, the Mets and the Astros.  Let’s see who the Cardinals face.  D’oh!  With the exception of the Mets, the Cardinals face the same teams that the Cubs do, just in a different order.  We’ll there’s a good idea gone out the window.

It could still happen, but I don’t want to look foolish trying to explain it.

UPDATE: Ryno over at The Cub Reporter (comment #37) must have been thinking the same thing I was thinking when he did this research.  According to Ryno, the winning percentage of the opponents the Cubs face the rest of the season is .475.  The Cardinals opponents have a .482 winning percentage.  Not really much of a difference.

The bottom line is this: The Cubs have to find a way to gain 5.0 games (or more) on the Cardinals in the final 50 or so games of the season.  They can’t afford to lose any series and they have to hope that the Cardinals stumble at some point.  They’ll get started on this quest tonight in San Diego while the Cardinals take on the Dodgers in LA.

**********

Midnight tonight is the deadline for signing draft picks.  The Cubs have signed all of their draft picks, but top drafts choice Stephen Strasburg remains unsigned.  I read two different reports, one saying the Nats had offered $17.0 million and another one saying the offer was actually $12.0 million.  In either case, the offer would be the highest in the history of baseball (for a Rule 4 draft pick).

Scott Boras has insisted that Strasburg is a once-in-a-generation pitcher and that his client deserves $50 million.  Of course, it is Boras’ style to ask for the moon and settle for the stars, but $50 million?  That’s nearly five times to amount the Cubs paid Mark Prior in 2001.  That amount stands as the current highest ever for a Rule 4 draft pick.

Ultimately, Strasburg is in charge of these negotiations and the onus is on him to accept or decline Washington’s offer.  As much as Boras may want to shoot for the moon, it’s up to Strasburg to bring him back to Earth.

There’s one angle to this story that I’ve had in my mind, but I haven’t seen it reported anywhere.  Strasburg may be the best, most can’t miss, prospect ever taken in the MLB draft, but he’s not bigger than the game itself.  So Strasburg has to walk a fine line of maximizing his pay day without disrespecting the game.

To be a little clearer, I expect Washington to offer Strasburg in the neighborhood of $20 million, nearly twice the previous record.  If Strasburg walks away from that amount of money, in my opinion, he is making himself bigger than the game.  He’s saying that he is worth more than twice as much what any other player in the history of the game is worth and that he would rather play in Japan or in an independent league for a pittance than to play in MLB for $20 million.  That would not sit well with me and it would not set well with most fans.

Assuming the Nats do offer Strasburg anywhere near $20 million, I don’t think there is anyone that would then point the finger at them and suggest that they did not negotiate in good faith.  At or near $20 million, then the burden to shifts to Strausburg to get the deal done. 

**********

John Fay of the Cincinnati Enquirer writes that the Reds should not do anything in the off season because the needs are too great and the money is too little.  I think Fay is correct, which raises the obvious question, what was the thinking behind the Scott Rolen acquisition? 

With Cincinnati having so many needs, but no ability (or willingness) to spend more money, why would they take on an additional $10 million +/- financial burden in Rolen.  Sure, he’s an upgrade over what the team previously had at third.  but couldn’t that $10 million have been put to better use in the off season?

I thought that the Reds were going to be a force to be reckoned with when Walt Jocketty became their GM.  Jocketty had done an admirable job in St. Louis and I assumed he would do the same in Cincinnati.  But so far, the moves he has made have not been admirable.  He’s tinkered around the edges and then suddenly made a huge, but questionable acquisition in Rolen. 

The Reds currently have a payroll of around $74 million.  About $43.5 million of that is tied up in just four players; Francisco Cordero, Aaron Harang, Bronson Arroyo, and Rolen (assuming Rolen’s full 2009 salary).  In 2010, the payroll is likely to remain the same, but the four highest paid players will take up $46.5 million.  That’s about 63% of the entire budget tied up in just four players.  That’s not a formula for success.

Granted, three of those contracts were signed pre-Jocketty, but he’s certainly not helping things by trading for Rolen.  From the outside, it appears that the Reds really don’t have a plan and their just flailing.  Fay, who has a much closer seat to the action, apparently feels the same way.

***********

John Smoltz was officially released and will be free to sign with another team on Wednesday when he clears release waivers.  According to Jon Paul Morosi at Fox Sports, the Cardinals, Dodgers, Marlins and Rangers all have interest.  Why aren’t the Cubs on that list?  Can anyone seriously argue that Smoltz wouldn’t make the Cubs bullpen better?

The one sticking point to my argument is that the Dodgers may want Smoltz to start.  They lost another pitcher to injury over the weekend when Hiroki Kuroda was hit in the head by a line drive.  So if Smoltz has his heart set on starting, the Dodgers may be the only team that can accommodate him. 

If the only offers available are for bullpen assignments, then the Cubs should definitely be in the mix.  Hopefully, Jim Hendry is just laying low until Smoltz can actually sign elsewhere.

**********

As upset as I am about last night’s game, there are a few things we can learn from it:

• Jeff Samardzjia is not ready for the big leagues.  Maybe he will be some day, but he’s not ready now.
• Carlos Marmol can be a decent pitcher provided he only throws in non-pressure situations.  But when the game is on the line, or the score is close, or the opposition has any chance of winning the game, or people are watching, Marmol can’t throw strikes.
• Milton Bradley got his 30th RBI of the season last night on August 12.  That’s pathetic.
• Ryan Theriot went 3-for-5 last night, raising his season batting average to .300.  Color me surprised by this news.  I still think Theriot would make a good second baseman. 
• Sam Fuld got one at-bat and got a hit.  His is a good story.  Apparently ESPN.com think so too.  Here’s a piece they did about Fuld.
• Prior to pitching last night’s game, Pedro Martinez pitched in a AA game and he was pretty much average for a AA pitcher.  Last night, he held the Cubs in check.  What does that tell you about the Cubs offense?
• This team really needs a healthy Aramis Ramirez.

**********

The Cubs are currently 4.0 games behind St. Louis in the NL Central and 4.0 games back of Colorado in the NL Wildcard race.  I don’t want to overstate the situation nor do I want to sound overly dramatic, but last night’s loss felt like the end of the Cubs chances for 2009.

I’ve followed the Cubs for a long time.  There have been some good years and a lot of bad years.  In the bad years, there always seemed to be a game or a series that was defining and let fans know that they should begin turning their attention to next year.  Last night’s game had that feel for me.

Baseball is a goofy game and some weird things can happen.  Granted, those things would have to be really goofy for the Cubs to get back into the playoff race, but as they say, stranger things have happened.

**********

John Smoltz cleared waivers, refused an assignment to the minors, and has declined an invitation to pitch out of the bullpen for Boston.  I had pushed the idea of the Cubs acquiring Smoltz, but that was with the idea of him working out of the bullpen.  Smoltz’ performance this year as a starter would indicate that his starting days are behind him.

John Smoltz has had a great career; a Hall of Fame career.  It would be a shame for him to end his career under the current circumstances.  For the sake of his legacy, and for the sake of his next contract (provided he decides to play past this year), I’d like to see Smoltz return to the NL and work out of the bullpen for a contender.

**********

I have to admit that I have been a little tough on JP Ricciardi recently.  I thought he mishandled his attempts to trade Roy Halladay and his recent salary dump of Alex Rios just further strengthened my belief that he is not particularly good at his job.  But my criticism was nothing compared to what Joe Posnanski had to say on his blog.

Yesterday, I commented on a blog post by Dave Kaplan in which Kaplan claimed that Carlos Zambrano is the most overpaid player in baseball.  Posnanski did Kaplan one better by listing the 11 worst contracts in baseball
(Zambrano’s is not among them, although he does comment on it).  In the process, Posnanski rips Ricciardi pointing out that Ricciardi’s fingerprints are all over some of the very worst contracts in the game.  

Posnanski’s article/blog post makes for a great read.  It also points out the absurdity of Kaplan’s claim.  As Posnanski illustrates, not only is Zambrano’s contract not one of the worst in baseball, it’s not even the worst on the Cubs.  Alfonso Soriano’s contract takes that honor.

But back to Ricciardi.  Posnanski admits that he just doesn’t understand anything about Ricciardi, yet he comes up with a way to honor the man.  In the future, Posnanski suggests, all bad baseball contracts should be referred to as Ricciardis.  A fitting tribute to the man who has perfected the art of handing out bad contracts to average or worse players.

Before I go, I have to quote my favorite line from Posnanski’s post.  It’s hilarious.

In talking about Vernon Wells contract, which Posnanski deems as the worst in all of baseball, he says this:

“Cot’s Baseball Contracts — the incredibly awesome site where I got these numbers from — is one of my favorite Internet stops. And on occasion, just for fun, I will go to the site just to look up Vernon Wells’ contract. I don’t know why. It gives me hope, somehow. It tells me that in this world, anything is possible. It tells me that good things happen, funny things, unexpected things. Don’t tell me that I won’t win the lottery … just look at Vernon Wells’ contract.

In 2011, Vernon Wells will get paid $23 million. No. Really. He will get paid $23 million.

In 2012, he will have to take a paycut and will only get $21 million. Same in 2013. And same again in 2014.”

And then he adds my favorite line from his piece;

“This isn’t a baseball contract. This is a testament to the power of mankind to do the impossible.”

Brilliant!

Randy Wells allowed three runs in the first inning to put the Cubs in a hole right off the bat.  Wells pitched a total of 5.1 innings, giving up eight hits and five earned runs (seven runs total).  Jeff Stevens came in to replace Wells and proceeded to throw gas on the fire.  He threw 1.o inning, giving up five hits and four earned runs.

The defense was bad on Sunday as well.  The Cubs commited three errors on the day, one each for Alfonso Soriano, Derrek Lee and Koyie Hill.

The offense was explosive, getting 17 hits on the day, but they could only muster five runs on all of those hits.  Milton Bradley led the way going 4-for-5 with a double and an RBI.  Koyie Hill was 3-for-5 with and RBI and a run scored.

Even the umps had a bad day.  In the second inning, Clint Barmes was pulled off of second base on a throw from third baseman Ian Stewart.  Everyone in North America saw that Barmes was not close to being on the bag except second base umpire Chris Guccione.  Guccione called Hill out at second on the front end of what turned out to be a double play.  Lou Piniella sprinted out from the dug out (or the closest thing to sprinting that Lou is capable of) and politely disagreed with Guccione’s obviously incorrect call.  Guccione was not in the mood and threw Piniella out of the game.

The Cubs end their 10-game road trip tonight as lefty Tom Gorzellany (4-1) takes on Jorge De La Rosa (9-8) in the last match up of the year between the two teams.

**********

Odd Stat of The Day:  Colorado pitching allowed 17 hits yesterday, but they didn’t give up any walks to Cubs hitters.

********** 

Yesterday I wrote a post giving my thoughts on a possible Cubs acquisition of John Smoltz.   After writing the post, I realized that I wasn’t as clear on waiver transactions as I could have been.  To get some info on the matter, I asked the guys over at The Cub Reporter for some help.  Arizona Phil at TCR proved the needed knowledge:

When a player is “Designated for Assignment” (DFA’d) it actually means he was placed on his club’s Designated List. A player cannot refuse this assignment.

A player on the Designated List is removed from his club’s MLB Active List (25-man roster) and MLB Reserve List (40-man roster), but continues to accrue MLB Service Time and continues to get paid while on the Designated List.

When a club places a player on the Designated List, it has ten days to either trade, release, or outright the player to the minors. (NOTE: If the player is not replaced on the 40-man roster by another player and if the player has minor league options remaining, he could be optioned to the minors, but that is rare).

During the ten days the player is on the Designated List, his club will try and trade the player and get something of value back in return (a player and/or cash). If the player isn’t traded within ten days, the club has to place the player either on Outright Assignment Waivers or Outright Release Waivers, but if the player has at least five years of MLB Service Time, the player MUST be placed on Release Waivers because players with at least five years of MLB Service Time have the right to refuse an Outright Assignment to the minors and be returned to both the 25-man and 40-man roster, which obviously can’t be done if the player was Designated for Assignment. (A player who is Designated for Assignment actually has to be traded within eight days, because it takes two days for a player to clear waivers).

Smoltz has way more than five years of MLB Service Time, so the Red Sox only option would be to trade or release him. So if Smoltz is not traded within eight days (and to get traded now he would also have to clear Trade Assignment Waivers because the July 31st non-waiver trade deadline has passed), he would have to be placed on Release Waivers.

If a player is placed on Release Waivers, he can be claimed for just $1 (one dollar), but the claiming club assumes 100% of the player’s contract. Also, a player can decline a waiver claim off Release Waivers and become a free-agent, so players are almost never claimed off Release Waivers.

If a player is placed on Release Waivers and is not claimed, he becomes a free-agent and can sign with any club (this happened recently with B. J. Ryan), and the player’s former club is responsible for paying the player’s remaining salary minus the pro-rated portion of the MLB minimum salary that is paid by the player’s new club.

Thanks, Arizona Phil!  You are a wealth of information.

**********

The Toronto Blue Jays placed OF Alex Rios on waivers last week and he was claimed.  Rumor has it that the White Sox claimed Rios, but so far, no one in MLB is confirming that.  The question now is, will Toronto pull Rios back, trade him, or just let the claiming team have him?  Danny Knobler at CBSSports.com has some thoughts.

The reason this is important is because Rios is owed nearly $60 million over the next five years.  Rios’ contract is one of the big contracts that is limiting the team’s ability to rebuild and compete in the AL East.  So it would make all the sense in the world for Toronto to just let Rios go.  However, it is not a foregone conclusion.

If JP Ricciardi just let’s Rios go, he is admitting that he made a huge mistake when he signed Rios to the big contract, and Ricciardi is not usually very comfortable admitting that he is wrong.  Sure, it would hurt to just give Rios away without getting something in return, but it will hurt even more to pay him $60 million dollars and tie up that money for the next five years.  If Ricciard is smart, he’ll let Rios go and then turn his attention to trading Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells.  We should find out what is going to happen later today.

UPDATE: I was one day off.  According to a Twitter message from Jon Heyman at Sports Illustrated, the Blue Jays have until tomorrow (Tuesday) at 1:30 PM ET to decide what to do with Alex Rios.  Heyman also reiterates that the White Sox are likely the team that claimed Rios.

As he was warming up for Friday’s game in Colorado, Z again experienced back spasms and had to be scratched from the start.  At the last minute, Sean Marshall was called on to start the game and he didn’t do well.  In just 2.0 innings of work, Marshall gave up five hits and three earned runs and was tagged with the loss.

Here’s the question I have: Why weren’t the Cubs prepared for something like this happening?  When Zambrano reported that he was having back spasms during warm ups, why were they caught so off guard?  It seems to me that Lou Piniella should have been better prepared by having Marshall warming up or moving up Ryan Dempster’s start one night.  It wasn’t a secret that Zambrano was having trouble with his back, so why wasn’t the team better prepared?

Also, although no one is claiming that Zambrano’s back is bothering him because he swings from the heels every time he comes to the plate or that he tries to put on a homerun exhibition in batting practice before games, maybe it’s time for that nonsense to stop.  I’m one of those people that is impressed with with Zambrano’s athleticism.  Truly, he is a tremendous athlete.  But he also an investment.  The Cubs invested a lot of money in him to be their ace.  Allowing him to pinch hit, swing for the fences every at-bat, play homerun derby in batting practice, and ocassionally pinch run doesn’t seem to be a very smart way to treat the investment.  Perhaps it’s time for the Cubs to start treating Zambrano more like their number one starter rather than as a sideshow attraction.

**********

Ted Lilly is on his way back.  According to Dave Van Dyke of the Chicago Tribune, the Cubs lefty is scheduled to return to the rotation on August 17 when the Cubs take on the Padres in San Diego.  As you may recall, Lilly was sufferring from a knew problem that apparently threw off his mechanics.  The altered mechanics hurt his shoulder and he had to be shut down.  While he was on the DL for his shoulder, Lilly wisely decide to have his knee scoped to try to eliminate any problems with his mechanics (and this his shoulder) when he returns.  Keep your fingers crossed.

**********

The recent fire sales conducted by the Pirates and Indians has gotten everyone talking about the need for changes to try to implement some competitive balance in baseball.  I was one of the people calling for changes.  Phil Rogers at the Baltimore Sun chimes in with his thoughts, including this interesting quote from Paul Dolan, team president of the Indians:

“The big-market teams have manipulated the draft and the international free agent markets,” Dolan told Indians beat writers during a group interview. “So you have a team like Boston that brings in the elite international free agents and also the elite prospects in the draft. There needs to be a worldwide draft with a slotting system similar to what they have in the NBA. That’s going to be a priority in the next collective bargaining agreement. We’ll never get a level playing field, but the gap needs to be closer than it is now.”

In major league sports, as in life, money gives you power.  Big-market, high-dollar teams have the ability to manipulate the system in their favor.  That will never completely change, but it is in MLB’s best interest to change the rules to keep the manipulation to a minimum.

**********

The Boston Red Sox designated pitcher John Smoltz for assignment a couple of days ago.  Ian Brown of MLB.com wrote about it here.  This is just me thinking out loud, but might the Cubs try to pick up Smoltz? 

Obviously, Smoltz has not had a good year.  In eight starts with Boston he is 2-5 with an 8.33 ERA.  Okay, fair enough.  But maybe the Cubs could use him in the bullpen.  I haven’t seen any of his outings this year, but from what I’m told, he hasn’t looked bad the first time through the lineup.  In his eight starts, he has only allowed runs to score in the first inning in two of those games.  Better yet, he’s only allowed a run to score in the second inning in one of those games.

Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, you probably know that at one time, Smoltz was one of the premier closers in the game.  For his career, he has 154 saves in 169 chances.  He was an effective starter who turned effective closer following an injury.  He was coming off of an injury when he signed with Boston this year to again be a starter.  Maybe trying to become a starter again was a mistake.

If the Cubs were to pick up Smoltz, they’d be on the hook for very little money (Boston would have to pay the bulk of his salary) and they could give him a try in the bullpen.  Could he be an effective reliever?  Might he be a good set-up man?  Is it possible he could reclaim some of his previous prowess as a closer?  I don’t know, but considering what the Cubs are working with at the moment, it’s certainly worth a try.

One other thought: Smoltz has a winners mentality and a ton of post-season experience.  That can only help a team like the Cubs that seems to lack fire at times.  Adding a little urgency to the final couple of months of the season would be a good thing.

UPDATE: I’m not as smart as I thought I was.  The Cubs can’t just trade for Smoltz.  In order to be traded to the Cubs, Smoltz must first either 1) clear waivers, or 2) if he doesn’t clear waivers, the Cubs need to be the team that wins the waiver claim. 

Another scenario is for Smoltz to refuse his minor league assignment.  In that case, he’ll become a free agent and will be free to sign with any team.  The down side to this scenario is that whoever signs Smoltz will be on the hook for whatever he signs for.  Boston will no longer be responsible for his contract.  Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.