Put it this way ... It's August 1, Theo and Jed have just been fired, and McCoy is now GM - who's in the rotation?

Again, I said it was pointless not a negative. If Chris Volstad has a decent 8 game run to end the season I still wouldn't plan on him cracking the rotation next year.

OK, fine, so what? I don't expect much from Volstad either, and I suspect zonk doesn't either. But what do you do?

Not anymore I don't -- but I was fairly optimistic about Volstad when they got him... Like most Marlins pitchers, they rushed him into the rotation - and he was quite good as a 21 yo rookie in half a season. He then stagnated. It's happened to Marlins pitchers before - Sanchez took 4 years to develop into a solid mid-rotation guy; Andrew Miller (yeah, technically only a partial Marlin) never figured it out. Volstad always had decent - but non-stellar BB/K ratios and he's not horrid at keeping the ball down. Based on body type and arsenal, I was (wishfully, more than likely at this point) seeing a bit of Rick Reuschel in him.

However, he is still just 25. Most will tell you that his arsenal of pitches IS of major league quality. He just hasn't translated that into quality MLB pitching -- for the most part -- since his 14 starts as a rookie. If he can stick in the rotation and post a couple quality months - I'm not suggesting he gets a 6 year deal, but I would have no qualms about signing him to a 'prove it' contract this offseason and penciling him into the back-end of the rotation.

Again, I said it was pointless not a negative. If Chris Volstad has a decent 8 game run to end the season I still wouldn't plan on him cracking the rotation next year.

Well I would as much as I would anybody, because the Cubs are unlikely to have any better bets at that point.

Speaking of points, what is yours again? Is it that Chris Volstad is a longshot to be a star?

If Chris Volstad has a decent 8 game run to end the season I still wouldn't plan on him cracking the rotation next year.

Fair enough. I'd certainly agree that he's a strong non-tender candidate this offseason, but as far as I can tell he has another option year. So if he finishes strong enough (unlikely), I see no harm in not giving him another "last chance" next season. Not giving him a rotation spot, mind you, but throwing him in the mix in the spring and letting him fight it out.

Speaking of points, what is yours again? Is it that Chris Volstad is a longshot to be a star?

Chris Volstad is a longshot to be anything other than a crappy pitcher.

Chris Volstad is a longshot to be anything other than a crappy pitcher.

Like Carlos Zambrano is at this point?

Volstad wishes he could be as crappy as Zambrano at this point.

Volstad wishes he could be as crappy as Zambrano at this point.

You must not have been paying much attention to Z since May -- because he had been... He's now walking more than he K's, he lost his rotation spot to the immortal Wade LeBlanc - even after the Fish traded Sanchez. True - miraculously, we haven't yet seen the Fish tanks at Loria Stadium pay a price (much to everyone's disappointment), but I think if you gave me even money on who has a better career from here on out, I think I'd take Volstad.

Volstad has an almost 8.00 ERA. Since the start of June Zambrano has a 6.39 ERA. Even if we go back to May and use his May 23rd game as the start date he has only a 6.71 ERA. Like I said, Volstad wishes he could be that crappy.

But I'm not sure how saying Zambrano has been just as bad as Volstad is proof that Volstad should get a shot at starting when you also mention that Zambrano has lost his starting spot.

The Cubs pitching plan for the season was never going to end either with them having a full staff for September or them having a good staff ready for 2012. They tried out a whole bunch of cheap guys and tried to get a good return on some veterans. Maholm turned into a couple prospects, Samardzija turned into a good pitcher, and the rest of them flopped. Next year they've got Garza and Samardzija, and maybe they can hope on Volstad or Wood (though I didn't realize how bad those guys have been in Iowa). That's not the ideal return on the guys they had to start the season, but it's in the range of reasonable. The Cubs will need to be active in the offseason to build a starting rotation again.

But I'm not sure how saying Zambrano has been just as bad as Volstad is proof that Volstad should get a shot at starting when you also mention that Zambrano has lost his starting spot.

Well ... no one, including you, seems to be saying that Volstad shouldn't be starting at this point. I'm not sure what this argument is even about anymore.

The Cubs pitching plan for the season was never going to end either with them having a full staff for September or them having a good staff ready for 2012. They tried out a whole bunch of cheap guys and tried to get a good return on some veterans. Maholm turned into a couple prospects, Samardzija turned into a good pitcher, and the rest of them flopped. Next year they've got Garza and Samardzija, and maybe they can hope on Volstad or Wood (though I didn't realize how bad those guys have been in Iowa). That's not the ideal return on the guys they had to start the season, but it's in the range of reasonable. The Cubs will need to be active in the offseason to build a starting rotation again.

Travis had a really nice run since he came back up -- his June up to basically the ASB was pretty lights out. His last 3 starts have been stinkers, but for 6 weeks - he was pitching as well as anyone in the Cubs rotation not named Dempster (you could say Maholm, too - but Maholm's run doesn't really overlap). I'm comfortable with Wood being among those back-end of the rotation options. Volstad has completely shat the bed, but still -- might as well let him get his brains beat in for the next 10 weeks just on the off chance something clicks.

Samardzija hit a wall a bit back - he's gotten somewhat back on track lately - but his sudden emergence looked like a mirage by mid/late-June.

Still - Jeff and Travis ought to be penciled for 2012.

Garza is the wild card here... I'd be more than willing to move him for a good price, but I've never been averse to signing him long-term... I'd just want it at a good price (i.e., the price you'd expect for a decent #2 or good #3 - not a nominal ace price).

I doubt there's any real hope of him breaking camp with the big club - but Arodys Vizcaino (rehab pending) ought to get a couple of 1st half starts.

Beyond that - the Cubs are really stuck with not a lot to work with... Bowden? Wells - though, he's almost certainly a non-tender. I've have always had this weird predilection for Germano, so I wouldn't mind him having a good few months and signing him on the cheap.

The Cubs are really stuck hitting the bargain bin in 2013 because there's really just nothing even close to ready in the minors... Jay Jackson has regressed to the point of likely being gone. Trey McNutt has stagnated in AA.

The only thing approaching prospectdom at Iowa is Chris Rusin, who looks like he's a fringe AAA lifer. Dallas Beeler has had a mildly decent year at AA and Nathan Struck has come on pretty strong... but Beeler probably needs another full season of minor league ball and Struck definitely does - neither looks like a future rotation front-ender. Eric Jokisch has improved his stock a bit.

The scary thing about the Cubs' deadline deals is probably that you can make a really good argument for Arodys Vizcaino and Kyle Hendricks as now being the Cubs top two SP prospects.

If I was the GM I would not be having Volstad start. It's pointless. I'd rather go waiver wire hunting looking for a soot covered jewel than have Volstad start at this point.

If I was the GM I would not be having Volstad start. It's pointless. I'd rather go waiver wire hunting looking for a soot covered jewel than have Volstad start at this point.

So you'd rather have a half-dozen oranges than six oranges, basically.

Nonetheless, I see no reason to think that the Cubs aren't doing exactly that, which is how Germano ended up on the team.

If Volstad is the bird in hand I'm letting him go in search of better birds in the bushes.

I found this little tidbit amusing.

Since being traded Reed Johnson has started two games for the Braves and has hit .429/.556/.429 for them. According to WAR he has been worth -.2 WAR for the Braves so far. How so? Well, defensively WAR sees him as -3 runs and offensively he has been worth 1 run. He's started one game in left and one game in right. DRS sees Reed as -2 runs in left. In the game Reed started in left the Braves won 6-1 so apparently with an average fielder the Braves would have won 6 to -1.

What happened in that game in left?
Flyball out to left
Line drive to short left field for a single.
Triple to deep LF-CF
Line drive single to short LF

I'm guessing the triple is carrying a lot of the water here and to be fair Reed did look awkward on that play.

I am not going to defend DRS, but the run value of a triple is greater than 1. And the run value of those singles is positive, too. It's possible that an average fielder would have converted some percentage of them to outs or saved a base or whatever. It's also likely that Reed is just unlucky given the sample size.

The point is that it's not absurd on it's face as you seem to suggest. To say that the Braves should have won 6 to -1 is like saying the Cubs actually won a game 1.3 - 0.9 which they actually lost 1-0 despite 11 hits and 2 walks in 9 innings. The run values based on linear weights don't always match the results.

I'm not suggesting it is absurd. I said I found it amusing that after two games DRS found his defense so awful that he is already at -3 runs. I also found it amusing that DRS finds Reed's defense in left so awful in one game that it gives him -2 runs for it despite only having four balls hit to him in that game and the Braves only ended up allowing 1 run to score in that game. I wonder who were the players on that team whose defense and pitching were so great that it offset Reed's terrible defense. If Reed is at -2 runs then that means there should be something like 5 runs or so of defense/pitching to go around in that game.

Vitters and Brett Jackson are being called up.

Well, at least now when they score 1 run a game it'll at least be because they are letting the "kids" play.

Cubs trade Jeff Baker for two PTBNL from the Tigers. So when was Baker put on waivers and were the Tigers the ones who claimed him or did pass through waivers?

Who was the other player droppes from the 25 man to make room?

Who was the other player droppes from the 25 man to make room?

Tony Campana (according to Carrie Muskat's Twitter feed)

Apparwntly jackson will play today and bat 2nd also this may be the almost but not quite infield of the future. Vitters castro barney rizzo and castillo/clevenger platoon. In a few years baez and all sorts of others should be coming up. Remember i never said it would be a good infield

Also that is one cheap infield!

Well, at this point every position out there is cheap except for LF.

I'm really surprised to see Jackson and Vitters. I didn't think there was any way they'd be up until next spring.

Still, I'm not disappointed. At least this makes the last two months of the season interesting.

It gives us a chance to see if vitters can actually play third and give jackson this look and if he fails bring him up next year late june ala rizzo

Mostly a lurker, but now am interested.
Who won the pre-season bet for number of players from opening day active roster who are still in the organization?

Who won the pre-season bet for number of players from opening day active roster who are still in the organization?

Well, I set the over/under at 16.5, and the following players are gone:

Byrd
KWood
Maholm
Johnson
Soto
Dempster
Baker

So, that leaves 18 of 25 who are still around. You can see who guessed what on this page - at first glance, Walt and I are the only ones who took the over, but there's still time left to go.

If the Cubs can somehow jettison both Soriano and DeJesus, they could potentially field a lineup whose youngest player (Castro) is also it's most MLB-experienced.

What is the infield.making? At this point it cant be more rhen 8 million

A full season paycheck for this infield would come to just over 2.5 million dollars. I don't even think it would come to 8 million dollars if you added up all infielders that are on the 40 man roster and DL.

Also that is one cheap infield!

Someone read about all the success Connie Mack had with his famous $100,000 Infield. This should be pretty close to that.

It wouldn't be outside the realm of possible for the Cubs to field this everyday lineup next season:

C - Clevenger/Castillo
1B - Rizzo
2B - Barney
SS - Castro
3B - Vitters
LF - LaHair
CF - Campana
RF - Jackson

It might even project about as well as 2012's team. Are Castro and Barney arb eligible? Even if they are that would be a sub $10 million lineup.

EDIT: If I'm reading everything correctly (not a given) neither Barney nor Castro are likely to be super 2s so that would be a lineup making the minimum across the board.

Well, at least now when they score 1 run a game it'll at least be because they are letting the "kids" play.

Why is kids in scare quotes?

Are they 10 years old?

Garza headed to DL. That sucks.

He hasn't pitched for 16 days so he's eligible to come off at any time. It might not mean much other than he won't be starting Tuesday.

Brooks Raley headed up to start. There's an open spot on the 40-man so I guess that's easy enough.

The drive for 100 losses is back on. 0 for 5 so far in August and on a 6 game losing streak overall. They'd have to go 19-36 from here on out to lose 100 games overall. So they actually have to place worse than a 100 loss pace to lose 100 games this season. Something I think this current team can actually pull off. So is this team, as currently put together, replacement level overall?

They're not losing 100 games.

99 losses?

Nope. They have 15 games left against the 2 worst teams in baseball.

Brooks Raley headed up to start. There's an open spot on the 40-man so I guess that's easy enough.

Might as well... Raley has been decent, though unspectacular, at Iowa and he'll be 25 next year. Looks like Randy Wells lite to me - doesn't really strike people out, but also doesn't walk bunches and generally keeps the ball in the ballpark.

Are you ready for a rotation next year of Jeff Samardzija, Travis Wood, Chris Volstad, Brooks Raley, and Casey Coleman... at least, until Arodys Vizcaino makes it back.

Nope. They have 15 games left against the 2 worst teams in baseball.

A few split-squads thrown in there?

How long's Samardzija under contract?

Looks like Randy Wells lite to me - doesn't really strike people out, but also doesn't walk bunches and generally keeps the ball in the ballpark.

He's a lefty, if that matters.

Well, they can beat somebody 19 times and still lose 100 games this year.

Now they just have to go 19-35 to get to 100 losses.