I think this team is better than any other team on the list, with the possible exception of the 1969 team. They've outscored their opponents by more than 100 runs now, and it's no fluke, as they've had ~150 more people on base than their opponents, and healthy advantages in extra base hits. The only fly in the ointment is that BBPro's Adjusted Standings (W3) knocks them down a few pegs (only + 64 runs), ostensibly because of a soft schedule so far.

soft schedule so far.

Funny to think that the Cubs have 10 games remaining against the NL West, 6 against the AL East, 6 against the AL Central, 21 against the NL East, and 49 against the NL Central, and their schedule gets harder from here on out.

Also worth noting: the Cubs are 98-64 in their last 162 games.

From there, they wandered bass-ackwards into a post-season berth,

Wasn't that Neifi's doing?

I love this team.

1977 came to a grinding halt when Sutter went on the DL after being ridden into the ground in the early going. Lou would do well to bear that in mind next time he considers using Marmol in a six-run game.

The only fly in the ointment is that BBPro's Adjusted Standings (W3) knocks them down a few pegs (only + 64 runs), ostensibly because of a soft schedule so far.

Point taken. Still, even W3 has them as the best team in the division by a comfortable margin, and slightly above the Phils for best in the NL.

1977 came to a grinding halt when Sutter went on the DL after being ridden into the ground in the early going. Lou would do well to bear that in mind next time he considers using Marmol in a six-run game.

I'd take Sutter's 1977 performance in total. He was only out a couple of weeks, right?

Anyway, I share your dismay about Marmol.

With the way things are right now, I don't think there's any way Hendry lets the trade deadline pass without acquiring a number two-caliber starter. Sabathia and Burnett are both guys I've heard about in relations to this. I'm not too sure on Burnett because of his injury history, but Sabathia's a guy I think the Cubs would benefit from going after if they're truly in win-now mode. Of course, this only happens if the Indians fall out of contention, but the addition of a Sabathia would all but seal the division for the Cubs and make them a true threat in a short series. As it is, I think the rotation is fine, but you'd like to have a number two who's going to give out very good outings more times than not. Lily hasn't filled that role this year. You add Sabathia and suddenly, a postseason rotation of Zambrano, Sabathia, Lily, and Dempster looks damn good.

It's too early to speculate since the Tribe is far from done, but thoughts? Ideas on what sort of package it would take to make that happen?

There has already been a lot of speculation about Sabathia. If the Indians can't sign him and are still treading water below .500, I think he'll be available. He will obviously be highly sought-after.

Ideas on what sort of package it would take to make that happen?

1) The offer has to have more value than the draft picks/opportunity to resign
2) The offer has to be the best amongst the bidding teams.

I don't know enough about Cleveland's system to figure out what they'd like to get. I guess everyone always wants arms.

Pick a few:
Gallagher, Pie, Cedeno/Theriot, Veal, Vitters, Colvin, Ceda, Marshall, Fontenot

Yes, it'll probably be arms. Not sure they'd be interested in Pie, since CF is locked up for them and Pie's bat would be too valuable in a corner (most likely that covers Colvin also). I think they'd want some major league ready talent, since they'll probably want to compete again next year.

I doubt Theriot would interest them too much, and the Cubs won't want to trade on their everyday regulars. They'd rather not gut the bench, and I don't think anyone sees Fontenot as an everyday option. I'm not sure what value Cedeno has for other teams, but he's definitely a possibility. I could see Gallagher, Marshall, Murton and maybe a low level guy (maybe another arm or someone like Donaldson) being the ideal offer from the Cubs' perspective, considering CC is a FA.

With Wang hurt now, the Cubs will face some serious competition from the Yankees, not to mention any other team that would be looking to add a SP at the deadline. That will seriously drive up the price, but I'm ok with the Cubs completely going for it this year. Outside of CF, the Cubs really won't have a lot of long term holes or immediate needs for upgrades going into next season (depending on your opinion of Theriot).

A buddy and I were marveling at the Cubs season so far, just 2 and 1/2 months in - and we sort of settled on the old cliche "They're good, but not this good", meaning, not a 100 win team.

Then, we started walking through the rest of MLB, and were hard-pressed to name a team that is clearly better than the Cubs.

The DBacks? They've got a number of pretty glaring holes - maybe in a year or 2, but right now, I think I'd still take the Cubs 25 man over the DBacks (long term, I'd certainly prefer the DBacks roster, though).

Even over in the AL, I see a lot of aging teams with serious holes.

So far as Hendry making any moves at the deadline, I think he's always done well for himself in-season (results or not - the Nomar trade was still a steal). It's primarily been offseason deals that have come back to haunt us.

What's more - other than Zambrano and Soto, who obviously aren't going anywhere - I don't think there's a single player in the system I particularly care to see labeled untouchable.

Unlike the 2003 season, when I spent the deadline in mortal fear that we'd mortgage our future - I can't think of a single minor leaguer I'm attached to.

That 77 team was not all that talented ... even then I knew that ... and its start was simply miraculous. OK, they weren't .366 awful either. The 76 and 78 teams were both 500-ish teams too. Buckner hit worse than expected; and Murcer though that was just his new level of talent. Overall, the 1B/OF rotation of Buckner, Cardenal, Biittner, Gross, Clines, Morales, Murcer produced about all you could expect out of that bunch. On the pitching side, only Ray Burris seemed a disappointment -- turned out this was the pitcher he really was but coming off his 76 season (123 ERA+), more was expected.

There was perhaps a bit more anticipation. The Cubs were young and promising in the infield. Krukow and Burriss were "top young pitching prospects" (in the Cub fan mind at least). Sutter emerged like a god. But looking back at it, only the last one had any truth to it.

Anyway, the Cubs built a no-speed, low-power though decent on-base offense (4th in the NL) and got pretty much exactly the production you'd have expected.

A couple glimmers of hope down on the farm:

Rich Hill's had two straight good starts in AZL: 4 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 1 BB, 6 Ks and 5 IP, 3 Hs, 0 R, 1 BB, 5 Ks.
Felix Pie has put up a 355/403/548 line in 63 July ABs, including a .413 average over his last ten games.

Will the Cubs even give Hill another chance in the bigs this year or will it be in spring training when he gets his next look?

I don't think the issue is "will the Cubs give Hill a chance," but rather "will Hill be able to right the ship, work out his control issues, and return to the pitcher he once was?" If he can do so, I'm sure the Cubs would love to bring him back ASAP.

Still, encouraging as it is, two straight good starts in Arizona doesn't do it. He's going to need to sustain consistency over several starts, in the high minors as well as the low minors.

Optimistically speaking, in my mind he shouldn't be considered until September, assuming this is a legitimate rebound.

Pie's a different case, in my mind. Unlike Hill, Pie hasn't proved he's capable of success at the MLB level -- even as he has enjoyed success at Iowa. Furthermore, with the emergence of Edmonds, there's really no compelling reason to bring Pie back in the near future. I'm sure he'll be a September call-up, but I would think that the next time he's going to get a serious look would be in spring training . . . and he may very well be dealt before then.

Still, encouraging as it is, two straight good starts in Arizona doesn't do it. He's going to need to sustain consistency over several starts, in the high minors as well as the low minors.

One important thing is that the plate is the same size in Arizona as it is in Chicago. Missing bats has never been Hill's problem. He has shown in the past that he can go down in the middle of the season and come back strong. Hill may very well become our #5 starter when Marquis has his inevitable 2nd half collapse.

Rich had another setback last night after his promotion to Daytona. His walk problems resurfaced, though it looks like he was killed by balls in play: 4.1 IP, 6 Hs, 3 BB, 6 Ks, 6 Rs, 0 HRs.

Cubs traded Eyre for pitcher Brian Schlitter

Schlitter is vaguely interesting... which is more than I thought would come back.

Could have been "traded Eyre for brie and Schlitz" and it would have been a steal.