No jose macias? You have to have him otherwise you only have half of the piss poor combo from 2005

No jose macias? You have to have him otherwise you only have half of the piss poor combo from 2005

THAT is definitely an oversight... I suppose I'd bump Luis Gonzalez for him (I include Luis because he was such a piss poor LF bat... until he left the Cubs, chemically enhanced, and became LUIS GONZALEZ! in Arizona).

You know who's a dark horse for me? Joe Girardi. Few things bug me more than crappy players who are lauded for their indispensable clubhouse qualities while playing for crappy teams. I didn't hate him so much during his first tour with the Cubs, but I wasn't sad to see him go, either. Then they brought him back and I could hardly stand him.

Just realized I also forgot Aaron Miles...

You have to draw the line somewhere, though, or you'll be here all day listing crappy infielders.

You have to draw the line somewhere, though, or you'll be here all day listing crappy infielders.

As much as I disliked Stynes, I think I'd bump him for Miles.

Karros, I still blame for ruining Hee Sop Choi (yeah, yeah...)

Oh, *that's* why he's on there. I was wondering.

You have to draw the line somewhere, though, or you'll be here all day listing crappy infielders.

Having a most-hated Cubs team comprised entirely of crappy infielders and imploded relievers would be pretty appropriate, though, I think.

I'm not even going to touch this McCoy stuff, because, frankly, having this same argument over and over again in every Cubs thread ruined my commenting seriously in them for a while over the past season and I don't really want to go back there. Don't mind the signing, his K/9 and BB/9 numbers over the last couple of years were much better than I thought, and hopefully we can get something out of it. Liked Maholm last year, glad it came to something, hope this becomes something similar.

The absence of Paul Noce from the discussion is disappointing.

I think I noted a few times this last season that Coleman had reached the top of my Most Hated Cub list. I was genuinely surprised when someone listed the handful of quality starts he'd had as a starter because I legitimately felt like I'd never seen the guy last more than five innings without either giving up an assload of runs or racking up six walks.

Anyway, my most hated Cubs:

- Casey Coleman
- Jose Macias
- Neifi Perez (I blame Baker for this; I think Perez was a fine utility guy, but not a starter)
- Antonio Alfonseca (So shitty that Steve Stone had to joke that the fans had taken to calling him "Mooooose")
- Kevin Gregg ("Here, hit this slow straightball that's over the heart of the plate")
- Kyle Farnsworth
- Steve Trachsel ("Throw the god damn ball already!")
- Jose Hernandez
- Chad Fox
- Roberto Novoa (I'll never forget him balking in the go-ahead run late in a Cubs-Reds game I attended)
- Cesar Izturis ("Izturis" must have been Spanish for "ground-out")

The absence of Paul Noce from the discussion is disappointing.

I think I disliked Mike Brumley more.

And now that you've got me started on the mid/late 80s, I think we have to find a place for Calvin Schiraldi.

The absence of Paul Noce from the discussion is disappointing.

I liked Noce - but that's another little personal niche for me... way back when, my brother and I used to play 100 game seasons of the old C64 'Microleague baseball', Tigers minor league all-stars vs. Cubs minor league all-stars... Paul Noce had a fine 1986 (as a 26 yo at AA Pittsfield) and somehow became something of 'clutch god' for my Cubs minor league all-stars... hence - he gets a pass... So do Rolando Roomes, Wade Rowden, and a few other forgotten org filler from years gone by.

And now that you've got me started on the mid/late 80s, I think we have to find a place for Calvin Schiraldi.

I considered Schiraldi... but I guess I always felt more sorry for him than hated him. Goose Gossage was my most hated late 80s Cub reliever... former Yankee and White Sox, was on the damned '84 Padres... then comes to the Cubs to promptly suck worse than any suck I've seen to end his career. I still get angry just thinking about him.

You, way back in post 44, unless I'm misreading something.

So declaring one signing as meaningless means I'm saying the entire organization is doing absolutely nothing and is simply spinning their wheels? Gotcha.

I considered Schiraldi... but I guess I always felt more sorry for him than hated him.

I always felt the same way, strangely enough, about Milton Bradley. Was Bradley blameless in the fiasco that was his time with the Cubs? No, of course not. But still, he was given a three-year deal by a guy who clearly wanted no part in actually having Milton Bradley on the team. It was as if Hendry expected all of Bradley's baggage to disappear overnight, and then when it didn't, Hendry just threw his hands up in the air.

Milton was just being Milton, bottom line. That he would implode was on a short list of most predictable things to ever happen in the whole history of the universe, and if the Cubs didn't want to deal with that, they shouldn't have offered him a three-year deal in the first place.

Speaking of Schiraldi/Goose --

It's weird how odd games stick with you... but this game was my Schiraldi/Gossage dichotomy... It was June and already looking like the Mets were going to run away with the division, but the Cubs were hanging around near .500.

Schiraldi throws an absolute gem - 9 innings of shutout ball. Berryhill homers in the top of the 10th to put them up 1-0, Gossage comes in to 'close the door' - promptly gives up a single, an SB, another single to tie it, and only escapes because Mazzili gets thrown out trying to steal.

I didn't see the end (HoJo won in 13 on an HR) because I went wild with rage, used an awful lot of language my parents weren't used to hearing from me regarding the sexual proclivities of the @!#@!#!@@$ Goose, and was told that would be enough baseball for me for the night.

Two days later, he blew another save against the hated Mets.

#### him and his stupid mustache.

Goose Gossage was my most hated late 80s Cub reliever... former Yankee and White Sox, was on the damned '84 Padres... then comes to the Cubs to promptly suck worse than any suck I've seen to end his career.

End his career? Gossage pitched five more seasons after that.

Goose Gossage was my most hated late 80s Cub reliever... former Yankee and White Sox, was on the damned '84 Padres... then comes to the Cubs to promptly suck worse than any suck I've seen to end his career.


End his career? Gossage pitched five more seasons after that.

He was dead to me, so those don't count.

Dusty, of course, can manage the thing... I suppose I need another lefty in the pen - but the bullpen is especially hard to put together... so many deserving names I had to leave out.

Shawn Estes says hello, although maybe this game disqualifies him.

As I said they are going to be terrible this year and Baker isn't going to change that...

He's not going to be the difference between the team being terrible or not-terrible, but he's probably going to bring a couple extra wins with him compared to whoever would be pitching in his absence, and if you happen to have tickets to any of those games, that's not a trivial consideration.

What I have said is that this whole notion of signing mediocre major league FA in the belief that they can be traded for value is largely overrated.

That would be a much better argument if the Cubs had not just traded a pitcher comparable to Baker for significant value at the deadline last year. That really can't be stated often enough.

I've also said this whole notion of getting "bargain" FA is stupid and silly. Who cares if Maholm is a deal at 5 million or Baker at 5.5?

The better a deal the Cubs get on free agents, the more money they have left to spend in filling other holes. Money can be exchanged for goods and services. Therefore, it's in the team's best interest to get a good deal on signings, whenever possible.

Money can be exchanged for goods and services.

This still cracks me up whenever I read it. What's the origin of using this as a patronizing statement?

This still cracks me up whenever I read it. What's the origin of using this as a patronizing statement?

Simpsons, what else?

Homer: Twenty dollars? I wanted a peanut!

Homer’s brain : Twenty dollars can buy many peanuts!

Homer : Explain how.

Homer’s brain : Money can be exchanged for goods and services.

Homer: Woohoo!

That would be a much better argument if the Cubs had not just traded a pitcher comparable to Baker for significant value at the deadline last year. That really can't be stated often enough.

Yeah, I'll believe it when I see it.

The better a deal the Cubs get on free agents, the more money they have left to spend in filling other holes. Money can be exchanged for goods and services. Therefore, it's in the team's best interest to get a good deal on signings, whenever possible.

No, not whenever possible. Signing Baker to a good deal today doesn't mean they can sign a FA next year. The deal can only help the Cubs this year and since they aren't going to buy any real FA of value it is meaningless that they got a "deal" on Baker. Secondly they didn't get a "deal" on Baker. Baker came cheap because he is a significant risk to fail. If this team was on the cusp of competing Baker's signing would either be a luxury, insurance, or require the Cubs to commit further resources to protect against the risk that Baker fails.

The deal can only help the Cubs this year and since they aren't going to buy any real FA of value it is meaningless that they got a "deal" on Baker.

Ignoring for a moment the fact that Baker himself is a "FA of value", how do you know that they aren't going to do this? There's a lot of offseason left.

Secondly they didn't get a "deal" on Baker. Baker came cheap because he is a significant risk to fail.

Both are true. He came cheap because he's a significant risk to fail, but even after you consider that fact, they still got an excellent deal.

I'm increasingly warming to Walt's interest in Anibal Sanchez... even if it takes more years and more than I'd like at this point.

Just gaming out rotation possibilities for the next few years, there just isn't much there and not much on the way. I'm a much bigger fan of taking the 'best available player' in the draft, but I just don't see how the Cubs can't spend most of next year's draft on pitching.

Even with Jackson's frightening K numbers - I still think he's got a future (posting a .303 OBP and .342 SLG -- even though you hit .175 and strike out 59 times in 120 ABs has to mean something). Castro did regress a bit - but he's still a plus. Rizzo had a fine season.

In short, I feel decently OK about the future of the lineup. Not done, not set for the foreseeable future, but there are some good young pieces, two of which are already major-league-level pluses, with a chance to be better (don't forget - both Rizzo and Castro are just 22... and Jackson is 23).

However, the rotation and the future of the rotation is just a wasteland... the Cubs are going to have to simply patch the staff until they can build a critical farm mass of arms.

I'm not sure the Cubs have ever been as bereft of farm pitching as they are now... even during some of the previous dark periods in my memory, the system was still pumping out the occasional live relief arm. Beyond Vizcaino and McNutt -- is there anything we'll ever see of value? Jeff Belliveau?

The cheers for Theo around here sound like the screams for Cheap Trick on Live at Budokan.

The cheers for Theo around here sound like the screams for Cheap Trick on Live at Budokan.

I object to this comparison as an implied bad thing, on multiple fronts...

1) Cheap Trick rules, and Budokan is one of the top 10 live albums ever made

2) The Cubs were a creaky, aging team coming off of consecutive sub .500/5th place in a 6 team division when Theo came in -- with an aging core, it's a perfectly reasonable expectation that the bottom had not yet been reached

3) Far from irrational cheering, I'm simply happy that the Cubs are doing something that I've never really seen them do in my lifetime -- undertake an honest, true, and thorough rebuilding, rather than half measures or abandoned rebuilding plans... Yes, the Cubs have had multiple instances where various GMs, Scouting Directors, and VP of bb ops have succeeded in building successful pipelines -- but when those instances have happened, they've been far, far too quick to think "Problem solved! We've arrived -- now, let's trade off the pipeline for more pieces".

Beyond Vizcaino and McNutt -- is there anything we'll ever see of value?

Is McNutt "of value"? How many years will he get in Tennessee to figure things out?

Is McNutt "of value"? How many years will he get in Tennessee to figure things out?

I don't disagree... I was trying to be charitable... I suppose I could have used Concepcion as a Vizcaino pairing, but he was just so gawdawful that McNutt seemed like a better option... sad as that is.

I think you'd be better off using Hendricks or even Struck than McNutt or the pitiful Concepcion.

I think you'd be better off using Hendricks or even Struck than McNutt or the pitiful Concepcion.

I forgot about Struck - yeah, I think he's a darkhorse, but I like him a fair bit to surprise... Kyle Hendricks, I like fairly well, too -- but he's a 22 yo in A ball, so as nice as his numbers are (and I liked him as a part of the trade, but I like Villanueva a lot more), I want to see him in AA this year before I get too excited.

But I'd agree - Nick Struck is probably the best guy to name as an "Arodys and..." all-we-really-have list...

MDRSportsManagement ?@MDRSportsMgmt
We are pleased to announce today that Dioner Navarro is the newest member of the Chicago Cubs! Congratulations! @Cubs

I have a weakness for switch-hitting catchers - even Koyie Hill couldn't break me of that affinity - but I have a hard time seeing how Navarro is anything other than organizational depth....

Seems to me, with Castillo the RHB and Clevenger as the LHB, the Cubs catching corp is pretty much set for next season, even if it's not a straight-up platoon... I see Wellington -- can nickname him Duke? Is that a thing yet? Can it be? -- as the better prospect to be a long-term answer, but catcher isn't a position that concerns me.

I suppose this may be a good thing for Iowa's PCL title hopes...

Ignoring for a moment the fact that Baker himself is a "FA of value", how do you know that they aren't going to do this? There's a lot of offseason left.

Well, Baker is not a free agent of value and Theo has already stated that they aren't going to go out and do much in the FA market. Basically they are going to be doing stuff like signing Baker to a one year contract.

Both are true. He came cheap because he's a significant risk to fail, but even after you consider that fact, they still got an excellent deal.


If his arm falls off tomorrow is it still a good deal? They signed a pitcher for X amount of dollars, what that pitcher can be reasonably expected to do is largely unknown at this point. We can't say whether they got a deal or not because we don't know what kind of shape he is in nor do we know what the FA market is going to look like yet. Hendry was famous for rushing in and signing his players to contracts and that having the FA market go much further south than where he was at. Finally, even if it is a deal it is still a meaningless deal. Saving 4 million dollars by signing Baker to get you 20 odd starts in 2013 doesn't do anything.

Seems to me, with Castillo the RHB and Clevenger as the LHB, the Cubs catching corp is pretty much set for next season, even if it's not a straight-up platoon... I see Wellington -- can nickname him Duke? Is that a thing yet? Can it be?

Go with Beef, it fits better.