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?

Today, I want to pull it all together, make some predictions on what the Cubs will do to build their 2010 team, and list what I think the Cubs 25 man  roster will look like on opening day.

**********

I don’t expect the Cubs to make too many moves this offseason.  While I would love to see a big blockbuster trade and/or free agent signing, I just don’t think it’s going to happen. 

In the infield, I can see a free agent signing (although not a blockbuster) to fill the hole at second base.  A lot has been said about Jeff Baker taking over second base, but I don’t think the Cubs view him as a starter.  I personally would like to see him used as a super-sub, since he can play several positions.

We can be pretty sure that the second base job will not be given to Mike Fontenot or Aaron Miles.  Fontenot had his chance and didn’t take advantage of it.  Miles not only won’t be the starter at second, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Cubs simply released him. 

There is a chance that Andres Blanco could take over at second.  Or, the Cubs may move Ryan Theriot to second and have Blanco play short.  I like Blanco and there’s part of me that would like to see him get a shot at a starting job.  Unfortunately for Andres, I don’t think that is going to happen.

That leaves a free agent, but who is it going to be?  I expect the Cubs to test the waters with Chone Figgins, but I don’t think they’ll get past preliminary discussions.  Figgins is coming off of a good year and his price is going to be too high.

Then I think they will turn their attention to Orlando Hudson.  Hudson made $3.38 million on a one-year contract last year while hitting .283/.357/.417 with 9 homeruns and 62 RBI.  However, he fell out of favor with the Dodgers at the end of the year and was replaced by Ronnie Belliard.  Both players are free agents, but I expect LA to re-sign Belliard and let Hudson walk. 

The Cubs will also probably take a look at Akinori Iwamura.  I expect the Rays to buy him out rather than exercising his $4.25 million option next year.  He’s an interesting player and I expect the Cubs to “kick the tires.” 

For what it’s worth, I think Iwamura would be a good fit for the Cubs.  He can hit at the top of the order, although he’s not a speed demon.  In three years with the Rays, Iwamura has hit .281/.354/.393.  For my money, Iwamura, who will be 31 years old next season, is the Cubs’ best option at second base.  That’s partly because Iwamura is also an accomplished third basemen, which will come in handy when/if Aramis Ramirez gets injured.  Even so, I don’t expect him to be a Cub in 2010.

In the end, I’m predicting that the Cubs will sign Hudson to a one or two year contract in the neighborhood of $5 million per year.  It wouldn’t surprise me if the Cubs signed Iwamura instead (or arranged for a trade with Tampa Bay before they decline his option), but I expect Hudson to be the Cubs second baseman next year.

The other infield positions will be filled by the current starters; Derrek Lee at first, Ryan Theriot at shortstop, and Aramis Ramirez at third.   Backups will include Jeff Baker, Micah Hoffpauir, Jake Fox, and either Mike Fontenot or Andres Blanco.  I expect Koyie Hill to return as the backup catcher.

In the outfield, we already know that Alfonso Soriano and Kosuke Fukudome will take up two of the three positions.  I expect the third outfielder will come to the Cubs as part of a trade for Milton Bradley.  Names like Pat Burrell and Vernon Wells have been thrown around quite a bit.  I don’t think either has a future with the Cubs.  Instead, I expect Milton Bradley to be traded to San Francisco for Aaron Rowand. 

Rowand is signed through 2012 at $12 million per year.  Bradley is signed through 2011 and is owed a total of $21 million.  I expect the Cubs to agree to take on the extra year and $15 million on Rowand’s contract in order to get the Giants to agree to take on Bradley.  Bradley can take over for Randy Winn in right field for San Francisco.  Winn is a free agent at the end of the year and at age 36 next season, is unlikey to re-sign with the Giants.

Rowand, who will be 33 next year, may not be the player he once was, but he still plays a credible center field.  Acquiring him will allow the Cubs to move Fukudome back to right field where he is more comfortable and effective.  Also, Roward is probably not the middle-of-the-order run producing bat that Piniella covets, but he should do a decent job, especially if he can regain some of the pop he had in his bat in previous years.  Don’t get me wrong,  acquiring Aaron Rowand is not the perfect solution for the Cubs.  I just think it is what they are going to do.

Outfield backups will include Micah Hoffpauir, Jake Fox, Sam Fuld, and Jeff Baker.

We already know that, barring a big surprise, Carlos Zambrano, Ted Lilly, Ryan Dempster, and Randy Wells will be in the starting rotation.  I expect Tom Gorzelanny to snag the fifth starting spot.  I don’t think the Cubs will make any trades or sign any free agents that will impact the starting five.

In the bullpen, I expect to see Sean Marshall, John Grabow, Justin Berg, Esmailin Caridad, Angel Guzman, and Carlos Marmol.  Unfortunately, other than re-signing John Grabow, I don’t think the Cubs will make any moves to shore up the bullpen.  The reason I say “unfortunately” is because I feel strongly that the Cubs should replace Marmol as the closer.  He’s too undependable and the Cubs need dependabilty in the closer role.

The options to replace Marmol are very limited.  I spelled them out in a previous post.  My favorite option is to sign Ben Sheets to close (assuming Sheets would agree to close).  It would allow Sheets to work fewer innings as he recovers from the elbow surgery that kept him out of action in 2009.  Plus, if everything works out, he’ll be available for the starting rotation in 2011 when the Cubs are likely to lose Ted Lilly.  Of course, while I like the idea, I don’t expect it to happen.

You may have noticed that Jeff Samardjzia is nowhere to be found on the Cubs 2010 pitching staff.  That is because I expect the Cubs to keep him in triple-A all year where he can work on a third pitch.  The Cubs are doing everything they can to make Samardjzia into a starter.  But the truth is, he’s much better suited to be a relief pitcher.  I know neither he nor the Cubs want that, but I’m afraid that’s the case.  Perhaps another year in triple-A will help him become the starter he wants to be, but I expect the Cubs to come to the conclusion in the not too distant future that Samardjzia’s destiny  is in the bullpen. 

So, having said all of this, here is my projected roster for 2010:

Infield
1st — Derrek Lee
2nd — Orlando Hudson
SS — Ryan Theriot
3rd — Aramis Ramirez
C — Geovany Soto

Outfield
LF — Alfonso Soriano
CF — Aaron Rowand
RF — Kosuke Fukudome

Pitchers
SP — Carlos Zambrano
SP — Ted Lilly
SP — Ryan Dempster
SP — Randy Wells
SP — Tom Gorzelanny
RP — Sean Marshall
RP — John Grabow
RP — Angel Guzman
RP — Justin Berg
RP — Esmailin Caridad
CL — Carlos Marmol

Bench
Micah Hoffpauir
Sam Fuld
Jeff Baker
Andres Blanco/Mike Fontenot
Jake Fox
Koyie Hill

The 2010 Cubs, at least on paper, should be slightly better than the 2009 team.  If Ramirez annd Soto can stay healthy, and both Soriano and Soto can hit the way they have done in the past, the offense should be in good shape.  The starting rotation looks to be weaker than they were on opening day 2009 when the rotation included Rich Harden, but if Zambrano and Dempster can both stay healthy and rebound in 2010, the rotation should be just fine.

As I stated, I’m afraid that Carlos Marmol is going to be a weak link for this team.  If somehow Marmol can gain some control over his pitches, it will go a long way to helping the Cubs reach the post-season in 2010.

A Look At The Offseason (Part 1 – Infield)

Today, I want to turn my attention to the outfield.  The general concensus has been that Milton Bradley will be traded in the offseason, so the Cubs will either need to replace him in right field or they”ll instead move Kosuke Fukudome back to right and then go shopping for a center fielder.  We’ll look at both possibilities.  But first, let’s take a look at the potential market for Bradley to get a feel for what a trade may bring in return.

In a previous post, I stated that the only way the Cubs are realistically going to be able to trade Bradley is to take back another teams’ bad contract or package Bradley with some other valuable players.  I’ve also thrown out some possible trade scenarios.  Let’s run them down in no particular order here:

Milton Bradley to San Francisco for Aaron Rowand — Bradley is owed $21 million over the next two seasons and Rowand is owed $36 million over the next three years.  San Francisco would like to jettison some payroll in order to make some moves, but at the moment they are hamstrung.  By taking on Bradley, the Giants could reduce payroll a bit and could add a typically high-OBP bat to their lineup.  From the Cubs perspective, Rowand will be 32 years old during the 2010 season.  He is coming off one of the worst seasons in his career, having hit .261/.319/.419 with 15 homeruns and 64 RBI.  Rowand could fill the potential void left in center field, but his defense has taken a hit over the years and the Cubs would be commiting to having him on the team for three years.  Not a perfect trade for the Cubs, but what is?

Milton Bradley to Texas Rangers for Michael Young — In a nutshell, the Texas Rangers are in bad financial trouble.  The team is for sale, but the process is moving slowly.  If owner Tom Hicks can’t unload the team soon, he instead is going to have to unload some payroll just to keep the team afloat.  The Rangers’ highest paid player is Michael Young.  He is owed $64 million over the next four years.  Trading Young for Bradley may not make baseball sense for the Rangers, but it would make financial sense.  From the Cubs perspective, they could take advantage of Texas’ financial woes by unloading Bradley and bringing in the middle-of-the-order run producer they covet.  In 2009, after spending some time on the DL, Young hit .322/.374/.518 with 22 homeruns and 68 RBI.  He currently plays third base, but the Cubs would have to move back to shortstop, which is his preferred position.  This would also force Theriot to second.  The move would also reunite Young with hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo to whom he gives much credit for his hitting ability.

Milton Bradley to Los Angeles Angels for Gary Matthews, Jr. — At one time not too long ago, Gary Matthews, Jr. was considered a hot commodity.  In 2007 he was signed by the Angels to a 5 year, $50 million contract.  But just one year later, the Angels signed Torii Hunter to play center field and Matthews became the highest paid 4th outfielder in baseball.  At the moment, Matthews is still owed $23 million over the next two years.  In limited action in 2009, Matthews hit .250/.336/.361 with four homeruns and 50 RBI.  My guess is that the Cubs would jump at this trade.  The contracts are basically a wash and Matthews could fill a need in center field.  He may not be the power threat that Michael Young is, but I think it is fair to say that his power numbers will increase if he is getting regular playing time, which could make him the middle-of-the-0rder run producer the Cubs are looking for.  Plus, he’d be reunited with Rudy Jaramillo who was his hitting coach in 2006 when he had the best offensive year of his career.  The real question is, would the Angels take on Bradley?  The Angels and Mike Scioscia  have a history of not putting up with player misbehavior.  But they are under some pressure to trade Matthews, both because he has asked for a trade and because they pay him a lot of money to be a 4th outfielder.  There’s a chance Vlad Guerrero could be leaving the Angels, so Bradley could step in as a DH.  If I had to guess, I would guess that the Angels would not go for this trade.

Milton Bradley to Tampa Bay Rays forPat Burrell — According to Bruce Levine with ESPN Chicago, the Cubs are still talking to Tampa about a Bradley for Burrell trade.  Just typing that makes my head hurt.  Burrell is a DH.  Don’t the Cubs realize that there is no DH in the NL?  When he does play in the field, he plays left field.  We have one of those already.  This trade make no sense to me, but it looks like it’s a possibility.

Milton Bradley (and others) to Toronto Blue Jays for Vernon Wells and Roy Halladay — Toronto is in a world of hurt.  They need to rebuild their team in order to compete in the AL East, but they are saddled with such big contracts that they can’t make any moves.  Vernon Wells is owed $98.5 million over the next five years, plus another $8.5 million in 2010 that is the third installment of his signing bonus.  Halladay is owed $15.75 million in 2010 and then he becomes a free agent.  Together, that’s a ton of money.  Is there any scenario where this would make sense for the Cubs?  Maybe.  The only way I see it working out is if the Cubs are given the opportunity to work out an extension with Halladay before the deal is made.  Even if this happened, it still might not be enough for the trade make sense for the Cubs.  Vernon Wells contract is just too crazy.

Milton Bradley to Detroit Tigers for Curtis Granderson or Magglio Ordonez — I have to admit, I don’t completely understand this rumor.  I don’t see why Detroit would trade either Granderson or Ordonez for Bradley.  Even so, the rumors have been persistent.  Granderson is signed through 2012 and is owed a total of $14.75 million.  Considering his production, he has a rather reasonable contract.  He also has a club option for 2013 for $13 million and a $2 million buyout.  In 2009, Granderson hit .249/.327/.453 with 30 homeruns and 70 RBI.  He also stole 20 bases on a team that generally does not steal many bases.  Ordonez is owed $18 million for 2010.  There is also a vesting option for 2011 for $15 million.  Ordonez struggled at the plate for a good part of 2009, and still managed to put up a hitting line of .310/.376/.428 with 9 homeruns and 50 RBI.  Granderson will be  29 years old in 2010 and Ordonez will be 36.  Honestly, I don’t know why the Tigers would trade either guy for Bradley, but if they’ll do it, the Cubs should jump at the chance.

Milton Bradley (and others) to Baltimore Orioles for Brian Roberts and Luke Scott — If Baltimore would go for this trade, it could fill the Cubs two biggest offseason needs all at once.  Roberts would be the lead-off man they have lacked for years and Scott is the middle-of-the-order run producer they are looking for.  But would Baltimore really go for it?  My opinion is that they should.  Let’s face it, the Orioles are not in a position to compete in the AL East.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the only way the Orioles win the East is if they decide to rank the teams alphabetically next year.  Since that’s the case, why would the Orioles hang on to two guys that are a) expensive, and b) not going to be around in a few years when the Orioles will be in a better position to compete.  Roberts is owed $40 million over the next four years and Scott’s 2010 salary will be set via arbitration, but it’s safe to say that he’ll be getting a raise from the $2.4 million he made in 2009.  If I was in Baltimore’s shoes, I would look to jettison payroll now and bring in young players who they can put around Matt Weiters and can help them compete in a few years.  Of course, Andy MacPhail hasn’t asked for my advice.

**********

We can be sure that Alfonso Soriano will be in left next year for the Cubs and Kosuke Fukudome will either be in center or right.  That leaves one starting position and two back up positions open in the outfield.  I’ve layed out the possible players the Cubs can acquire through a trade of Milton Bradley.  Let’s look at possible free agent targets.

The three most intriguing free agent center fielders to me are Marlon Byrd, Mike Cameron, and Rick Ankiel.  Byrd is expected to sign a two or three year deal for $5+ million.  There’s also been quite a bit of speculation that the Rangers would like to resign him.  Byrd hit .283/.329/.479 with 20 homeruns and 80 RBI.  He’ll turn 33 during the 2010 season.

Mike Cameron will be 37 in 2010, but he has been very steady throughout his career.  In 2009 he hit .250/.342/.452, which is remarkably close to his career averages.  He made $10 million in 2009, but is probably looking at signing a one-year contract for less money.

Rick Ankiel should be a low cost, high upside player.  However, his agent is Scott Boras, so who knows what kind of money he might be looking for.  He hit .231/.285/.387 with 11 homeruns and 38 RBI in 2009 in limited action.  He’d be a risk, but at the right price, could be a good investment.  The problem is, I don’t think his price is going to be right.

Right fielder free agent targets include Bobby Abreu and Jermaine Dye.  I’m fairly certain that Abreau is going to be looking for a multi-year contract (two or three years) for somewhere around $10 million per year.  He’s already turned down a two-year, $16 million contract extension from the Angels.  I like Abreu, but I’m afraid he has priced himself out of the Cubs’ budget.

Jermaine Dye made $11.5 million in 2009 and hit .250/340/.453 with 27 homeruns and 81 RBI.  Even so, Dye may end up walking the same road that Abreau walked last offseason.  I can foresee Dye signing a one year deal for $4 million – $6 million.  Dye has always performed and has not really gotten the credit he deserves.  Signing Dye for one year at $5 million could be a good investment for the Cubs.

The 4th and 5th outfielders are probably with the club already.  They will come from a list of Micah Hoffpauir, Jake Fox, and Sam Fuld.  There’s also the possibility that the Cubs will re-sign Reed Johnson, although my personal opinion is that Johnson would cost too much.  I don’t foresee the Cubs going after a free agent to fill one of the reserve outfielder positions.

**********

Next up is a look at the Cubs pitching staff for 2010.  Are they set or will they go shopping for pitching this offseason.  Stay tuned…

Gene Wojciechowski of ESPN.com wrote an article back in August giving Ricketts a list of things not to do with the Cubs.  It’s an old article, but still has some good thoughts.  Before providing the list, Wojo said:

“This isn’t just any team you’re purchasing. This is the Cubs, a franchise with enough heartbreak and history that it needs its own traveling psychotherapist. What it doesn’t need is an owner who thinks of the Cubs as simply an investment, another expensive car to park in the portfolio garage. It needs someone who has business and baseball sense. (Jerry Reinsdorf isn’t a bad ownership template.) It needs someone who cares if the W flag flies — and not just because it might mean a full house the next day.”

The list Wojchiechowski put together includes:

• Don’t fire Jim Hendry
• Don’t let Crane Kenney be Crane Kenney
• Don’t sit in the front row seats next to the dugout
• Don’t touch the big three (red Wrigley Field marquee sign, center field scoreboard, ivy)
• Don’t continue the faux-tradition of inviting guests to sing the seventh inning stretch
• Don’t forget Greg Maddux
• Don’t wait on Piniella to decide  if he is coming back next year (Done)
• Don’t ditch the Triangle Building
• Don’t retire Sammy Sosa’s number
• Don’t be afraid to eat some salary
• Don’t be afraid to trade Carlos Zambrano
• Don’t be an imitator (of the Boston Red Sox Fenway Rehab)

There are three things on Wojo’s list of 14 “Don’ts” that pertain to Wrigley Field or the area surrounding Wrigley.  That’s interesting.  What other team (other than the Red Sox) would have as much concern about the stadium where the team plays it’s games.  The Texas Rangers are on the market now.  Do you think anyone is concerned about what is going to happen to Arlington Stadium (okay, technically Rangers Ballpark at Arlington) when the new owners take over the team?  Of course not.  But Wrigley Field is special and people treat it like Stonehenge or the Acropolis.

Wrigley Field is special.  It’s a beautiful ballpark.  It’s also a terrible place to go watch a baseball game.  If you’ve ever driving to the ballpark you know what I mean when I say it is nearly impossible to find a place to park that isn’t several blocks/miles away.  And I don’t know anyone who thinks that the urinal troughs in the mens room are a nostalgic reminder of a better time.  They’re disgusting.

I have to admit, I enjoyed going to Wrigley as a young man.  It was fun; an adventure.  When I was old enough to drink, the neighborhood surrounding Wrigley was like heaven.  There’s a bar on every corner and a few in between. 

But as an adult with a family, Wrigley Field is not a pleasant place to go.  It is hard to get to, it’s dirty, outdated, and it takes forever to leave (i.e. not close to the highway).  We’ve been to other stadiums that are easy to get to/easy to leave, have plenty of parking, are cleaner and more modern, and where the seats are more comfortable.  After being at these other stadiums, its hard to go back to Wrigley and enjoy the experience.

Of course, it’s true that the things I’m complaining about haven’t kept the fans away.  The Cubs are among the leaders in attendance among MLB teams every year.  But from a business perspective, that doesn’t mean that Wrigley Field is generating the profits it could.  For instance, there are not enough luxury boxes.  Corporations are big time clients for all baseball teams and the Cubs are unable to accomodate the demand for luxury suites.

Also, like a stately old home, Wrigley Field is a money pit.  Upkeep is expensive and the needed remodeling threatens to break the bank.

Finally, there’s no room to expand.  The Cubs desperately need bigger locker rooms and office space, but they are confined in a well established neighborhood.  The Cubs have proposed building the Triangle Building next to Wrigley Field, but neighbors are protesting because of the height of the building.  In fact, the neighbors complain about everything the team wants to do.  Whenever the Cubs want to make a change, they have to enter into negotiations with the city and their neighbors in Wrigleyville.  It’s a pain.

In many ways, I love Wrigley Field.  It’s a landmark, a baseball museum.  Unfortunately, it is no longer a great place to play MLB games.  Off the top of my head, I don’t know what the best alternative is, but I don’t think that Tom Ricketts should be so consumed with saving Wrigley at all costs that he refuses to consider other options.

**********

What do you think of a Milton Bradley for Vernon Wells trade?  Not much?  Me either, but Joel Koch at BleacherReport.com thinks it’s the Cubs best option.

The entire trade, as proposed by Koch, would send Bradley and Mike Fontenot to Toronto for Wells, RHP Jeremy Accardo, and OF Jose Bautista.  I talked about a potential trade scenario with Toronto previously, but I had Roy Halladay coming to the Cubs in order to make up for the huge and unexplainable contract of Vernon Wells.

It’s my opinion, Toronto would jump at the trade proposal that Joel Koch has layed out.  They’d be nuts not to.  But the Cubs would be nuts to seriously consider it.  Taking on Wells massive contract without getting something valuable to make up for it (no offense to Accardo and Bautista) doesn’t make any sense for the Cubs.  They may need to eat some of Bradley’s contract to move him, but trading a bad contract for potentially the worst contract in baseball history isn’t a good idea.

Bruce Miles of the Daily Herald says that Jim Hendry is focused on hiring Jaramillo, who is technically under contract until the end of October.  In fact, Miles opines that Hendry will go after Jaramillo with “laser beam-like” focus.  Carrie Muskat of MLB.com says on her blog that the Cubs have already contacted the Ranger to request perrmission to talk to Jaramillo.

I had no idea that hitting coaches get paid so much, but Jaramillo was earning $600,000 a year with the Rangers, according to Jon Heyman at Sports Illustrated.com.  Heyman goes on to say that the Cubs may increase his annual pay to $750,000/year.

Considering their poor offensive showing in 2009 (with the exception of Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez), the Cubs can only go up in 2010.  Whoever ends up being the hitting coach will probably look pretty good if the Cubs hitters just get back to their career average levels.

**********

There has been a lot of speculation in the press about where Milton Bradley may end up.  In one sense, I’m surprised more isn’t going on with Bradley.  My guess is that a lot is happening behind the scenes, but not being reported because of MLB’s “ban” on any news that distracts from the playoffs.  I suspect that something concerning Bradley’s future will be announced shortly after the World Series.

Up until now, the speculation has been that Bradley will be traded to San Francisco in exchange for Aaron Rowand or to Tampa Bay for Pat Burrell.  If these are the only two options, I say go for Rowand.  He can fill the spot in center field and will allow Kosuke Fukudome to move back to right.  Even so, I think there are better options.

I think my favorite “proposal” is to trade a package of players (including Bradley) to Baltimore for Brian Roberts and Luke Scott.  Another possibility is to trade Bradley to Texas for Michael Young.  Admittedly, it’s not a good deal for Texas, but they desperately need some payroll relief because of owner Tom Hicks’ financial problems.  Young is the highest paid player on the Rangers, so the move could make financial sense even if it doesn’t make baseball sense.   

I’m less crazy about trading a package of players (including Bradley) to Toronto for Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells.  Having Halladay would be great, but taking on Wells contract could turn into a huge mistake.  From a baseball standpoint, I think you can justfy this trade.  But from a financial standpoint, it could be a disaster.

What other potential trades for Bradley are lurking out there?  It should be an interesting few weeks.

**********

Does anyone own more ugly suits than Craig Sager of TBS?  There should be a law…

San Diego GM Kevin Towers has stepped forward and said the Padres may have an interest in Bradley for next year.

“I haven’t had any calls from Jim (Hendry) about him,” Towers told ESPN.com. “But I think people kind of know what players we target. We have to take chances sometimes. We took a chance on Milton the first time we had him, and he actually played pretty well [before his knee injury]. We could be in the market for an outfielder. I’m not saying it’s necessarily Milton. But our experience with him was rather a positive one. It wasn’t really a negative one.”

That seems like a borderline tampering statement to me, but in any case, what does it mean?  To me, it means that the cheapskate Padres would be willing to provide a safe landing spot for Bradley provided the Cubs pay his contract.  Decent of them, don’t you think?  And what will the Cubs get in return?  Likely a couple of guys who have been minor league lineup filler for the Padres and who will never see the light of day at Wrigley Field without first purchasing a ticket.

Thanks, Kevin (May I call you Kevin?), but I’ve got to believe there are other options out there.  The Trib’s Paul Sullivan suggests the Royals as a potential trading partner.  According to Sullivan, the Royals consider Bradley to be a talented hitter who could potentially thrive in a low-key environment like Kansas City. 

Would the Royals be willing to pick up much, if any, of Bradley’s salary?  Who do they have to trade to the Cubs in exchange for Bradley?  Again, if all the Cubs want to do is a salary dump, then Kansas City might make a good trade partner.  However, I don’t think they are going to pick up much of Bradley’s salary or trade anyone worthwhile to the Cubs.

When it comes to trading Milton Bradley, here’s my philosophy:  The Cubs can either dump Bradley and pick up the majority of his salary, in which case there may be several potential takers out there, or they can trade him to a team that has some bad contracts of their own and just swap bad contracts.  In either case, it is going to cost the Cubs some money to move Bradley.  I prefer the second option to the first because the Cubs get something worthwhile in return.

Two examples of this second option are suggestions I’ve made in the past.  The first possibility is for the Cubs to trade Bradley to Texas for Michael Young.  Texas owner Tom Hicks is in financial trouble and MLB is pressuring him to sell the team and/or cut payroll in order to get his baseball finances in order. 

Young is the highest paid player on the Rangers and is owed $64 milion over the next four years.  Trading a four-year $64 million contract for a two-year $21 million contract makes financial sense for Texas. 

Plus, Bradley gets along well with Rangers manager Ron Washington and the front office seems to like him.  Of course, if Hicks sells the Rangers or otherwise gets a cash infusion, acquiring Bradley for Young may not seem like such a good idea.

My other suggestion is to have the Cubs trade Bradley and a pitcher (Zambrano?  Dempster?  Lilly?) to Toronto for Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells.  Wells has the worst contract in all of MLB and it may end up being the Blue Jays’ only chance to move it. 

This proposed trade would get Bradley to Toronto, where he could potentially do well out of the limelight (and out of the country), and would provide the Blue Jays with a front-of-the-rotation pitcher to fill in the void left by Halladay.  Now that I think about it, Sean Marshall might be a better candidate than the other pitchers listed.   He’s younger and less expensive, both important considerations for a Toronto team the needs to rebuild.

In his article, Sullivan also lists the Giants as a poytential trade partner.  In his scenario, the Cubs would trade Bradley’s bad contract for Aaron Rowand’s bad contract.  Rowand is owed $36 million over the next three years.  I don’t like this idea for a couple of reasons.  First, it costs the Cubs money (about $15 million), but it doesn’t make them better.  Rowand has struggled the past two years in San Francisco and it would appear that his best years are behind him.

Second, the Cubs already have too many Aarons on the team.  I would prefer that they get rid of their Aarons rather than add more.

Another possibility was brought up by a commenter over at The Cub Reporter.  How about a Bradley, Marshall, and Jake Fox trade to Baltimore in exchange for Brian Roberts and Luke Scott? 

I know what you’re thinking, “Not more Brain Roberts rumors.”  But think about it.  The Cubs top two needs going into the off-season will be to 1) add a run producing bat (preferably left-handed) to the middle of the order, and 2) add a speed guy who can get on base to the top of the order.  This trade could fill both needs in one fell swoop.

Roberts is signed through 2013 and is owed $40 million.  He has a full no-trade clause, but would surely waive it to come to Chicago.  Luke Scott is signed through this season and is arbitration eligible.  He made $2.4 million in 2009 and is likely due for a raise after a season that currently stands at .255/.340/.488 with 24 homeruns and 73 RBI.  And (get this), he bats from the left side of the plate.  Is this good or what?

Of course, the Orioles would have to agree to such a deal, which makes these moves more difficult than they have to be.  Baltimore is a tough team to understand.  They are in last place in the tough AL East, 37.5 games behind the Yankees.  They have a record of 60-93.  Even so, they often act like they just need to tweak their roster a bit to be a playoff contender.

This is not a team that is on the verge of contending.  They are not just one or two players away from contending.  Their $67.1 million payroll is $17 million less than it was in 2000 (and about $25 million less than it was just two years ago).  This is not a team that is willing and/or able to compete with the Yankees or Red Sox when it comes to payroll.  The only way the Orioles are going to be able to contend is to go with young talented players.  And the only way they are going to have enough young, talented players is to trade away their more expensive, older players for prospects.

Of course, this raises several questions, chief among them, “How does Milton Bradley fit into this picture?”  Fair enough.  The only way he fits in is 1) if the Orioles believe he can still be an OBP machine, 2) if the Orioles can be made to believe that Baltimore is laid back enough so Bradley will behave himself, and 3) if the Cubs pick up a good portion of his salary.  Remember, Bradley is only 28-years old, so he can still figure into a team’s plans, even if they are rebuilding (and especially if someone else is paying for him).

As for the other two, Marshall could fit into Baltimore’s rotation immediately and Fox could find a home as Scott’s replacement at DH.  There you go.  A nice tidy package (at least in my mind).

Obviously, I don’t know where Bradley will end up.  At this point, my main concern is that the Cubs don’t just dump him and move on.  Bradley has been a distraction and a bitter disappointment, but he still has value.  Take this bad situation and make it into a good situation (I’m suddenly a motivational speaker).  Use the mistake that was made by signing Bradley and turn it into a better team in 2010. 

If Jim Hendry is still the GM after this season (and it appears he will be), this will be perhaps the biggest challenge he has faced in his career.  It’s a one chance, do-or-die situation.  If he can’t trade away Bradley AND make the 2010 Cubs better than they were this year, he will surely be looking for a new job.  But if he can pull this off, he will be able to name his price at his next contract negotiation.

There’ll be no game recap of any of these games.  You can read Carrie Muskat or any of the other beat reporters for that.  The Cubs are just going through the motions, so I’m not going to pretend that the games matter any more.  I’d rather focus on some of the off field stuff that’s going on.  With the Cubs so far out of the playoff picture, the on field stuff just bores me (at least right now).

**********

Milton Bradley has opened his mouth yet again and has once again made it clear that the Cubs have to get rid of him.  This time, he said some silly stuff about not liking extra inning games because he just wants to get away from the ballpark and get home to his family.  Nice thing to say after he signed a $30 million contract to play baseball.  If he wants to be at home with his family 24/7, he should have just retired.

Bradley also said some cryptic nonesense about being the victim of racism, although in all fairness, what he said was that there is no racism in America anymore.  I read that to be a sarcastic statement on Bradley’s part, but I suppose I could be wrong.  Of course, the odds of me being wrong are so infinitesimal, it’s not even worth considering.

When the Cubs signed Bradley to a 3-year/$30 million contract before the 2009 season, there was some real concern about his character.  It seemed that everywhere he went (seven teams in 10 years), there was always a problem.  He had run-ins with umpires, fans, and the media.  He couldn’t stay healthy anywhere he went.  But in 2008 in Texas, Bradley seemed to blossom.  He had a career year at the plate (as a DH) and he didn’t have any flare ups with anyone.  Based on one year of good behavior and on-field production, the Cubs signed Bradley.  Since then, things couldn’t have gone much worse.

During the course of the 2009 season, Bradley has bumped an ump and been suspended, complained numerous times about the umps having a personal vendetta against him, verbally sparred with the fans, got into a verbal altercation with his manager, gotten called out by his teammates (Alfonso Soriano most notably), and said too many stupid and/or controversial things to the media to keep up with.  To make matters worse, he has done all of this while also having a horrible year on the field. 

Phil Rogers from the Chicago Tribune believes the Cubs should just release Bradley.  He still has two years on his contract and is owed $20 million, but Rogers thinks the Cubs should just eat the money and move on. 

Rogers broaches the possibility of trading Bradley, but thinks the possibilities are so remote that releasing Bradley is the most likely option.  I don’t agree and I’d like to look at the trade possibilities a little closer.

In an article by Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times, he concludes that the only two potential trade partners for a Bradley trade would be the Kansas City Royals and the Toronto Blue Jays.  He rules out every other team for various reasons.  He rules out the Texas Rangers simply because Bradley played there before, so they couldn’t possibly want him back.  Not so fast there, Gordo.  When Bradley left Texas, Manager Ron Washington said that he enjoyed working with Bradley and that he would like to have him back on the team.  Bradley enjoyed the best year of his career in Texas and was on his best behavior.  For these reasons, I’m throwing Texas back into the mix.

That’s three teams that the Cubs could potentially work a trade for Bradley.  In a previous post, I mentioned the Los Angeles Angels as a potential trade partner because they have the Gary Matthews, Jr. contract they would like to move.  However, I don’t think Mike Scioscia would put up with Bradley, so let’s cross them off the list.

Let’s start with Kansas City.  I don’t see the synergy here.  The Royals need some help.  They are one of the worst offensive teams in the AL.  In order to be a match, the Royals would have to believe that the 2008 Bradley, not the 2009 Bradley, is the real Bradley.  It’s possible, but I don’t see it happening.

It is my opinion that the only way the Cubs are going to move Bradley is if they are willing to take on another team’s bad contract.  No one is going to offer the Cubs anything for Bradley just so they can have Bradley on their team.  They are only going to take Bradley if the Cubs can relieve them of one of their problems.  This is one of the reasons I think Texas fits the bill so well.

Texas has two problems.  First, they signed Michael Young before the 2009 season to a five-year, $80 million contract.  There are still four-years and $64 million left on the contract.  But here’s the thing, even though Young is not worth $16 million per year, he is still a productive player who plays hard every day.  By all accounts, he’s a good teammate and a good “citizen.” 

I’m suggesting that it would be better to be on the hook for $64 million over the next four years with Young than it is to be on the hook for two years of Milton Bradley at $10 million per year.  Granted, at 32, Young is not the player he once was, but the Cubs would still be better off with him than Bradley.

So why would Texas make the trade?   That brings up point number two.  Texas owner Tom Hicks is in financial trouble.  MLB is loaning/giving him money to keep him afloat.  The Rangers are going to have to cut payroll one way or the other to help their owner balance his books.  Getting rid of a $64 million liability in exchange for a $20 million liability will look good, at least on paper.  Plus, remember what I said earlier.  They actually liked Bradley in Texas.  Granted, they didn’t step to the plate to sign him after his career year, but maybe that’s just because they didn’t want to outbid the Cubs.  A Michael Young for Milton Bradley trade makes sense for both teams.

I also like the possibility of a trade with Toronto.  In fact, I think Jim Hendry has some leverage he can use with Toronto.   Center fielder Vernon Wells is signed through 2014 and is still owed $107 million (including $8.5 million in 2010 which is the third installment on a signing bonus).  Many people feel this contract is by far the worst contract in all of MLB.

Wells is still a productive player, but the time and money difference between the Wells contract and the Bradley contract is just too great.  If the deal was straight up Wells for Bradley, I would say the Cubs would be better off just releasing Bradley (i.e., the Rogers Option). 

But what if the Blue Jays packaged Wells and Roy Halladay together for Bradley (and maybe a prospect or two)?  Toronto can’t compete in the AL East with Wells contract on their books.  They also have conceded that Halladay is going to be too expensive for them to resign him when his contract expires after the 2010 season.  The Blue Jays only hope of ever moving Wells contract is to package it with the best pitcher in the game.  But every day, Halladay’s value decreases as his contract runs it’s course.

If I were Jim Hendry, I would call my buddy JP Ricciardi and make the following offer:  I’ll give you Milton Bradley (and one or two middling prospects) for Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells, provided we can agree on a contract extension with Halladay.  The worst that Ricciardi can do is say “no,” but I’m thinking that he would at least have to consider it since it would free the Blue Jays of the onerous Wells contract.

If you’re paying attention, you should be asking, “Why wouldn’t another team do this same thing?”  It’s a good question, but the truth is that only a few teams could take on Wells contract.  The Yankees and Red Sox are two possibilities, but if I was Ricciardi, I would be loathe to trade Halladay within my own division.  That would just make it harder for the Blue Jays to compete.  The Dodgers are a possibility, but they already owe Manny Ramirez a lot of money and Dodgers owner Frank McCourt is not a fan of outrageous contracts.  The Angels are another possibility.  However, other than these teams, no other teams can afford Wells contract.  The Cubs are in a unique position.  Not to mention that such a trade would make a big splash for the Ricketts family as they take over the Cubs.

Milton Bradley must go.  It doesn’t make fiscal sense to just release him when there are other options.  Trading Bradley to Texas makes so much sense, I don’t see how it can’t happen.  Working a deal with Toronto would be a little trickier, but the Cubs offer the Blue Jays perhaps the only realistic opportunity they’ll ever have to move the Vernon Wells contract that is financially crushing their organization.  Get busy, Jim.  There’s work to do.

**********

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.