SB Nation - Kosuke Fukudome

The NL Central Offseason Revue: Ursine Children

the red baron — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:43:23 -0000

Sure, I've used it before. It's a good picture, damn it.

But first, a story. (Just so you know it's a Baron post.)

Last weekend, my mother and I went shopping. The Cherokee Street Antique Row Association was holding their annual Cookie Spree, and we go every year. There's always people milling around, free hot apple cider, and most of the shops are decorated.

We met up in South County, deciding it was a better idea to take one car. Mom tends to get motion sickness when not driving, so I generally just ride with her. We headed up 55 toward the city, then exited at the 4500 block of Broadway.

At the bottom of the ramp was an old woman holding a sign. A square of cardboard scrawled all over in black marker, I couldn't read exactly what was written but the message was clear nonetheless. It was cold out, and the ragged old overcoat she was clutching around her looked woefully inadequate. I've been conned before, I'm sure, but this was no panhandler. This was an old woman with no place to go who badly needed help.

We came to a stop at the bottom of the ramp, and I dug out my wallet. Mom reached for her purse, and I told her I would get it. I opened my wallet and grabbed the first two bills in it, a ten and a twenty. Then, guided by some internal calculus I don't at all understand, I put the ten back. I handed my mother the twenty, she motioned the old woman over, and gave it to her. The old woman said something, toothless mouth moving quickly, blessing us and wishing us well, but by then the car was moving and I couldn't entirely tell what it was. We continued on our way, had hot chocolate and apple cider and cookies. I bought an antique light fixture; it seemed like a fine day.

I tell you all this not to make you think I'm some sort of saint for giving this old woman twenty dollars, but because ever since then I haven't been able to stop thinking about the ten dollars I didn't give her. I had almost $300 in my wallet that day, and a credit card nowhere near the limit to boot. In no way, shape, or form would that extra ten dollars have hurt me, yet I put it back. And worst of all, I don't understand why. I like to think I would do whatever it takes to help someone in need, but apparently that only goes so far. Apparently there's a price on my generosity, and it's painfully low. A truly good person would have been willing to hand over everything they had in hand and never thought twice about it; I certainly didn't need another antique to litter my already cluttered house.

We went back the same way later, on the way back to my car, but the old woman was gone. I hope what I gave her was enough to help, but I can't stop thinking about that moment, when I arbitrarily decided the limits of how much I was willing to help another human being.

I've had these posts in mind for a while now, trying to take a look around the division at our rivals and what their offseasons might look like, but simply hadn't had the chance to do so yet. With my inability to post a full post on Wednesday, I thought I might ask Dan if he minded me taking today. He seemed amenable to the idea, unsurprising given the dearth of real meat to work with this time of year and what is undoubtedly a crowded schedule for everyone. So here I am, telling you what the Cubs need to do this winter.

I begin with the Cubs because they are our chief rivals and also because it simply fits. We care more about the Cubs. So here we are.

As the Cubbies head into their first offseason with new ownership, the question of payroll undoubtedly must be raised. Their new owner, Tom Ricketts, has pledged to update the stadium and build a winner, but just how much one will impact the other remains to be seen. For now, it looks as if Ricketts is willing to pour money into the franchise in order to win, and we'll have to operate under that assumption.

Offense

The Cubs' offense took a huge hit last season from the high times of 2008, due to several players underperforming. Alfonso Soriano was the biggest culprit, stumbling to an OPS+ of 84 after three seasons over 115. Geovany Soto went through an awful sophomore slump, falling from a 118 OPS+ to 79. Aramis Ramirez missed significant time with a shoulder injury, and Derrek Lee struggled mightily early in the season before turning it around.

There were bright spots, such as the improvement Kosuke Fukudome made from his first season in the majors or the continued non-suckitude of Ryan Theriot, but overall it was an intensely disappointing season for Chicago at the plate. In 2008 the Cubs scored 855 runs; in 2009 they plated only 707. Enough said.

Starting Pitching

If the Cubs' offense was decidedly disappointing, the pitching was underwhelmingly good. Carlos Zambrano continued his human roller coaster act, yet still managed to post an ERA under 4.00 for the eighth straight year. Nonetheless, the Big Z is no longer quite the intimidating force at the front of a rotation he once was. He's still solid, but he doesn't really scare you anymore. (Well, unless you happen to be something edible or punchable in the dugout, that is.)

Ryan Dempster fell off from his 2008 performance, but was still a plus pitcher for Chicago. He was awful much of the early portion of the year, but came on strong late to lower his ERA to 3.65. Dempster provides much-needed innings, and at a reasonably high level. After Z and Dumpster, though, things get a bit murkier.

Ted Lilly, a relatively unsung contributor to the Cubs' back-to-back division titles, has had shoulder surgery already this offseason. It was minor shoulder surgery, yes, but then again, I'm not entirely sure there is such a thing. Lilly was absolutely brilliant in 2009, posting a 3.61 FIP, but until he can prove his shoulder is unequivocally sound, he has to be a concern.

Perhaps the brightest spot of all for the Cubs in '09 was the performance of their rookie hurler, Randy Wells. He went 12-10, 3.05 in his first extended taste of the majors at 27. His peripherals were mostly in line as well, so it doesn't appear he did it all with smoke and mirrors. Still, Wells is a relatively unknown commodity, and may simply be waiting until the time is right to give up a crippling home run, then rip open his jersey, revealing the Cardinal jersey underneath. So there's that.

The Cubs' fifth starter spot was, for the most part, a disaster. Sean Marshall continued to impersonate Sean Marshall. The Cubs acquired Tom Gorzelanny from the Pirates, and he picked up basically where he left off in Pittsburgh. There were positives in his performance, but for the most part it was another disappointing season for the man once voted Most Likely to Actually Live Up to His Billing among all Pittsburgh left-handed starting prospects.

Relief

Carlos Marmol is sort of the pitching equivalent of a British motorcycle. Yeah, it's a whole lot of fun when it's working, and it certainly looks impressive, but damned if the thing isn't broken down and spilling oil all over your driveway more often than not. Marmol has some of the nastiest stuff in the game, but not much idea where it's going a fair amount of the time. Hitters did a much better job of laying off his slider in 2009, and he had a tough time throwing it for strikes. He still struck out a bunch of hitters (93 in 74 innings), and didn't give up many hits (43), but he also walked 65 hitters, leading to a 1.46 WHIP fueled almost entirely by batters simply standing there and doing nothing.

Kevin Gregg was solid, though not the force the Cubs were undoubtedly hoping for, and he has now departed via free agency. Angel Guzman was impressive, combining a repertoire just a step down from Marmol's with actual control, but he remains very young and was shut down late in the season with an injury. Neal Cotts was, um, how do I put this?- shitty, only to be replaced as the primary lefty by John Grabow. Grabow did what he always does, and should be a definite plus in the 'pen for 2010.

Jeff Samardzija continued his enigmatic career arc, following up his 2.28 ERA in 2008 with a 7.53 in 2009. Sure, he's talented, but at some point Samardzija is going to have to come up with something more than a big fastball and a passing resemblance to Andy Samberg if he wants to succeed at the major league level.

Needs

Any discussion of the Chicago Cubs' offseason has to begin with the outfield, where they badly need to figure things out. Milton Bradley wasn't a bad player for them in 2009; on the contrary, he was probably still their best outfielder, but all signs point to him being dealt this offseason, and I'm not sure I can blame the Cubs. As much as Bradley wasn't the problem with the team this year, I just don't know if his relationship with the fans, not to mention his teammates, is a tenable one.

If Bradley is dealt, the Cubs will have to come up with someone to try and replicate his offensive contributions, and several names have been floated. Rick Ankiel was thought to be their first choice until fairly recently, but things seem to have cooled slightly on that front since Scott Boras made his comments about multiple years and big dollars for Swingin' Dick's services. The Cubs don't seem to have much interest in Matt Holliday, perhaps being a bit gun shy after witnessing how horribly wrong a seven-year deal for an outfielder can go. They also haven't been mentioned all that much in the Jason Bay sweepstakes, so I have to assume they're looking at lower-hanging fruit.

Beyond the outfield, it's somewhat doubtful the Cubs will be able to make any substantial upgrades to their offense. Both corner infield positions are set, and rightfully so. Soto will be looking for a bounceback season; it's far too early to write him off as a one-year wonder. The only spots the Cubs could look to upgrade are the middle infield positions, but I'm not sure how much help is really available at those spots this offseason. Perhaps the Cubbies get involved in trying to trade for Dan Uggla? They do have an exciting young middle infield prospect in the pipeline named Starlin Castro, who has garnered plenty of comparisons to Edgar Renteria, and could draw interest from Florida, but little beyond that.

The bullpen has to be an area of concern, and priority one has to be sorting out who will at least begin the season as the Chicago closer. Marmol, I'm sure, will have the inside track on the job, but after his 2009 performance it shouldn't be a foregone conclusion. I doubt the Cubs will go outside the organisation to find a stopper, but it's likely they'll try to acquire at least an arm or two to bolster the overall depth of the 'pen.

Priorities

Deal with Milton Bradley situation. Trade is most likely outcome.
Acquire offensive upgrade to replace Bradley's production. Left-handed hitter would be desirable.
Shore up bullpen, likely through trades. (Bradley?)
Look at other possible offensive upgrades, i.e. Uggla or Mark DeRosa as utility player.
Acquire 5th starter/ insurance arm for Ted Lilly.
???
World Series title.

The Bottom Line

The Cubs are by no means in dire straights. They underachieved badly last season, but the offense should receive a boost from a full season from Ramirez and, hopefully, better years from Soriano, Soto, and Lee. The same can't really be said for the pitching, which performed right about where one would expect, given the talent level. The starting rotation will remain their biggest strength, while the bullpen remains somewhat suspect.

At this point, the Cubs have to be considered the Cards' main competition for the division again in 2009. Both teams are clearly a step or two ahead of the pack.

There you go, folks. One in the can, four to go.

The Baron's Playlist for the 11th of December, 2009

"The Blizzard" - Camera Obscura A cover of the Jim Reeves/ Johnny Cash classic. Any CO fans out there (and I know there are some), you might want to check out their holiday 7" release, with the Blizzard backed by Swans.

"My Wife and My Dead Wife" - Robyn Hitchcock and the Egyptians

"Oh You Pretty Things" - Peter Noone I just heard this on Pop! The Beat Bubble Bursts yesterday morning, and I can't stop listening to it. It's a Bowie cover by the former Herman's Hermits frontman, and it has a bit of an early Harry Nilsson vibe to it. Really great.

"Intermezzo Sinfonico" from Mascagni's Cavalleria Rusticana - James Levine

"Take On Me" - A.C. Newman Another tip of the hat to KDHX, this time to Nick Acquisto and the Space Parlour. Outstanding cover of the A-Ha classic.

Edit: And, of course, on the day I write this, some actual news comes down the pipeline, as the Cardinals have now apparently made an official offer to Scott Boras and Matt Holliday. Sigh. They couldn't have waited just one more day? Really?

Cubs close to deal with Mike Cameron?

Eli Greenspan — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 18:37:48 -0000

More photos » by Tom Mihalek - AP

Browse more photos »

The Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that the Cubs' top option for center field is free agent Mike Cameron. Piniella and Cameron have history going back to their time in Seattle together, and there is believed to be mutual interest in a reunion.

''I love the guy,'' Piniella said Friday night in Cincinnati during a reunion event for the 1990 World Series champions at the annual Redsfest. ''Mike is somebody we've talked about. I'm looking forward to Sunday, [when team officials meet before] the meetings over in Indianapolis.''

However, the Cubs need to unload Milton Bradley first, and are hoping to move him before the Winter Meetings kick off on Monday. That way, there will be enough money to ink Cameron.

Cameron would give the Cubs an option in the two spot or in the five spot, based upon where he hit last year. He strikes out a lot, but he gives the Cubs another run producer who has a great feel for the outfield. His addition would push Kosuke Fukudome back to right field.

A Cubs lineup with Cameron would look something like this:

Mike Cameron

Kosuke Fukudome

Jeff Baker/Mike Fontenot

A pretty dangerous lineup on paper if guys like Soto and Soriano can return to form. Sources say the Cubs are not exploring the second base market, but guys like Felipe Lopez are still available.

The team is also looking at outfielder Marlon Byrd.

Discussion: Marlon Byrd vs. Mike Cameron

Al — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:49:09 -0000

More photos » by Luis Alvarez - AP

Browse more photos »

Yesterday, I posted an idea regarding a potential free agent signing for a Cubs bench position in 2010. Admittedly, this wasn't the most important possible addition to the roster for next year -- however, the Cubs had a very poor bench in 2009 and I still think Chad Tracy (at the right price) would be a good addition.

Today, I'm going to analyze two players who have been mentioned as possible center fielders for the Cubs in 2010. Again, for the purposes of this exercise, assume that Milton Bradley has already been traded somewhere and not for another outfielder; that Kosuke Fukudome will be returned to right field, and that the Tigers' Curtis Granderson (who would be my first choice) is either not made available for trade by Detroit or has been dealt somewhere else.

So, let's look at two other choices -- Marlon Byrd and Mike Cameron.

Marlon Byrd has played eight seasons in the major leagues with three teams (the Phillies, the Nationals and the Rangers). He was the Phillies' regular center fielder in 2003, his rookie season; he played well enough to finish fourth in Rookie of the Year voting (behind Dontrelle Willis, Scott Podsednik and Brandon Webb). Declining quickly in his second year, he found himself dumped to the Nats, and signed with the Rangers as a free agent after the 2006 season. He never got full-time playing time again until last year, when he put up a very good .283/.329/.479 year with a career-high 20 HR and 89 RBI, numbers he hadn't come close to previously. His .808 OPS was in the same general area as his other two part-time seasons in Texas; overall he hit .295/.352/.468 (.820 OPS) in his three years as a Ranger.

Further, he seems to have been helped by Rangers Ballpark -- he posted an OPS over 100 points higher at home in each of his three seasons in Texas, although his career OPS is also higher at home (.810) than on the road (.716).

Byrd is 32. He will be 33 in August. His 2009 season appears to be an outlier in terms of power (his 43 doubles tied for 8th in the AL) and these are just the types of numbers that Jim Hendry often gets sucked into giving a three-year backloaded contract to. I'd stay away from Byrd.

With Mike Cameron, you know exactly what you're getting. He will be 37 in January, and over the 11 seasons since he became a fulltime regular in 1999 (not counting the two years prior to that when he had fewer than 500 PA for the White Sox), his OPS has ranged from .759 to .837. He's averaged 22 HR, 75 RBI, 66 walks and 143 strikeouts over those 11 seasons -- and his 2009 season was pretty close to that (24 HR, 70 RBI, 75 BB, 156 K).

At 37, he might have to be rested from time to time and for that, the Cubs have Sam Fuld. In a lineup that has Derrek Lee, Aramis Ramirez and (presumably) a healthy and 2008-style Alfonso Soriano and Geovany Soto, Cameron could hit sixth or seventh, as he did in Milwaukee, and produce the same way he did there. In 138 career PA at Wrigley Field, Cameron has hit .261/.355/.521 with 8 HR, and hits .257/.349/.454 in day games.

At 37 -- well, you wouldn't want to give a longterm deal to a guy like that. But a one-year contract with a mutual option for a second year based on incentives -- I'd do that. Cameron is also familiar to Lou Piniella, who managed him for three years in Seattle -- two of those years the Mariners went to the postseason.

Mike Cameron isn't my first choice; as I wrote last week, that would be Curtis Granderson. But -- if Granderson isn't available, Cameron would be a good second pick.

Why (And How) The Cubs Should Trade For Curtis Granderson

Al — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:39:01 -0000

by Duane Burleson - AP

In addition to a good bat, Curtis Granderson would give the Cubs plus defense in CF.

View full size photo »

I'm not sure I really have to convince anyone here of the premise of the headline of this article; numerous people have already posted here about how useful Curtis Granderson would be in the Cubs' outfield, and several traditional media articles in both Chicago and Detroit have discussed this possibility (and those are just three examples of dozens of such articles). Granderson himself is busy this winter pitching a reality TV series:

The Detroit Tigers player has agreed to host a TV and online series titled "Stadium Secrets" where he takes sports fans on an exploration of stadiums.

The concept is similar to Authentic’s "Cities of the Underworld" on History channel.

"Authentic will be providing an exclusive, VIP experience for fans everywhere – a behind-the-scenes journey that will be exciting for all of us. I am eager to begin working on this project and look forward to a successful partnership," Granderson said.

Sounds interesting. I'm hoping Granderson gets to explore Wrigley Field in detail starting next summer. In the meantime, after the jump I'm going to examine Granderson's numbers in detail, explain why he's a perfect fit for Chicago and the Cubs, and look at who the Cubs might have to give the Tigers in exchange.

We have to first start this discussion with a couple of assumptions. First, we assume that Milton Bradley has been, or will be, traded before any Granderson deal, thus opening up center field for the Cubs (with Kosuke Fukudome moving back to right field, a position he plays better; this would solidify Cubs defense in two positions). It is, of course, possible that Bradley could be part of a deal for Granderson, but I am going to operate here under the assumption that he's not, that Bradley will be dealt to some other team (the Rays?) and that any Granderson trade would be a separate transaction.

Second, I think you have to assume that Granderson has to be, at this stage of his career -- he will be 29 on March 16, not old, but getting toward the end of his "best" year capability -- platooned, at least to some extent. His career splits:

vs. RHP: .292/.367/.528, .894 OPS
vs. LHP: .210/.270/.344, .614 OPS

Last year it was even more extreme:

vs. RHP: .275/.358/.539, .897 OPS
vs. LHP: .183/.245/.239, .484 OPS

Against RHP, Granderson hits almost as well as Aramis Ramirez -- All-Star level. Against LHP... well, he's basically Aaron Miles. So you'd probably want to re-sign Reed Johnson to give Granderson a break against LHP. Johnson doesn't hit righthanders, but against LHP his career line is .313/.378/.463, an OPS of .841, nearly as good as Granderson vs. RHP. These two together would produce outstanding offensive numbers from the CF position and good defense. The Tigers started Granderson in 155 games in 2009 because, well, they really didn't have any other choice. The other eight (remember, the Tigers played 163 games in 2009) games were started by Josh Anderson (1), Clete Thomas (2) and Ryan Raburn (5), and of those guys, only Raburn can hit (he hits LHP pretty well -- the Tigers could have gotten more offense out of CF if they had played Raburn there a bit more often vs. LHP).

So a modified platoon of Granderson and Reed Johnson would be, in my opinion, the ticket to success for the Cubs outfield. I say "modified" because Johnson would also have to spell Fukudome in RF from time to time; on those days, Granderson would have to start in CF vs. LHP. Sam Fuld would stick with the team as the fifth outfielder, someone who could take over in the late innings for Alfonso Soriano. The Cubs' outfield would be very good defensively and close to outstanding offensively.

Granderson's contract, though it has three full years to run (and a 2013 option) is not onerous. Like many Jim Hendry contracts in recent years, it's backloaded. In 2010, Granderson is due to make a somewhat-reasonable $5.5 million; that increases to $8.25 million in 2011 and $10 million in 2012, with a $2 million buyout in 2013 (all figures, as always, from the excellent Cot's Baseball Contracts), that would increase to $13 million (with some escalators to that based on performance) if the option is exercised. That would make the total financial commitment $25.25 million (presuming the buyout is done), spread over four years from 2010-2013. That's not unreasonable for a player of Granderson's ability.

Now -- how do you get him? The Tigers seem to be in partial-sell mode; that is, they'd like to shed some of their big-dollar contracts, but not get into full rebuilding mode. Thus, you'd need to get them at least a couple of players who could step in right now and contribute at the major league level. I can't find the link right now, but in a recent Baseball America online chat, a question was asked to BA's Jim Callis about this type of deal:

Q: Would Josh Vitters, Jake Fox, and Jay Jackson be enough for the Cubs to land Curtis Granderson if he really is available? Would you do that deal if you were the Cubs?

Jim Callis: I would think so. The Tigers have to dump salary, so I might try to hold onto Vitters and see if Detroit would take Ryan Flaherty, or hold onto Jackson and offer a lesser pitcher. But the Cubs are in win-now mode, and I think they'd bite.

I'd do this deal. Starlin Castro may be the flavor-of-the-month after his .376/.396/.491 performance in the Arizona Fall League, but I think he has higher upside than Vitters, who also hit well in the AFL (.353/.380/.455), and I would not trade Castro. It's entirely possible that Vitters will become a good major league player -- but you're getting a good major league player in return. Jake Fox is miscast in the National League; though he worked hard at playing 3B, C, LF and RF, his best position is DH. Throw in the fact that he played college ball at the University of Michigan, and he's a natural for Detroit. Jay Jackson has been up and down in the Cubs organization and while he has talent, I'm not quite sure what role the Cubs have in mind for him. He was exclusively a starter in 2009 after starting and relieving in 2008.

Callis thinks this would get a deal done and I'd do it -- but I suspect the Tigers might ask for Andrew Cashner instead of Jackson. That's a high price to pay -- Cashner has a shot at the major league bullpen for the Cubs in 2010 and he could even be viewed as a closer candidate by the Tigers, who are likely to let Fernando Rodney walk. (Rodney had a decent year in his first full season as closer, but will be 33 in March.)

I'd still do Vitters, Cashner and Fox for Granderson. For those of you who say, "No way! Keep those prospects! We can't give up both Vitters and Cashner!", I say that one of the things you can do with your prospects is turn them into productive major league players. The Cubs did this in acquiring Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez; when D-Lee was acquired he was just about the same age Granderson is now.

I might even do Vitters, Fox, Cashner AND Jackson for Granderson. To illustrate why, let me tell you a little story I just read about from Cubs history. Take it for what it's worth, because it came from the new edition of Leo Durocher's (ghostwritten by Ed Linn) autobiography, "Nice Guys Finish Last" (mini-book-review: recommended, for its interesting take on Durocher's era in baseball history). In it, he describes having discussions along with GM John Holland, with the Baltimore Orioles in the winter of 1971 about trading for Frank Robinson. According to the book, the Orioles asked for five young players -- pitchers Earl Stephenson, Jim Colborn, Bill Bonham, Joe Decker and outfielder Brock Davis. Durocher's book says they hedged, asking to make it four-for-one, not wanting to give up both Decker and Bonham.

You know what? They should have offered Baltimore GM Frank Cashen a handshake and done the deal right then and there. The next day, Robinson was traded to the Dodgers -- for four minor leaguers, only one of whom (Doyle Alexander) had a significant major league career.

The day after that, the Cubs traded Stephenson, Colborn and Davis to the Brewers for Jose Cardenal. Stephenson and Davis never had any significant impact in the major leagues. Colborn did have a few decent major league seasons, winning 20 games for the Brewers in 1973. Bill Bonham never became the big winner the Cubs thought he would; eventually he was traded to the Reds for Woodie Fryman and Bill Caudill. Joe Decker was traded to the Twins (with Bill Hands) a year later for Dave LaRoche.

None of those deals would have had the impact that getting Frank Robinson to play right field for the 1972 Cubs would have had. At 35, Robinson was past his best years, but would have been a far better hitter in Wrigley Field than he was in Dodger Stadium that year. (Robinson also got hurt in 1972 and missed almost 60 games; whether that would have happened to him as a Cub is unknown, obviously.)

The 1972 Cubs finished fourth in the league in runs scored and would have been a better offensive team with Frank Robinson than they were with Jose Cardenal; neither Bonham nor Decker had any significant impact on the '72 team.

The point is, that sometimes you have to take team "prospects" -- who may never pan out to what you hope they will -- to win now. Trading Vitters and Jay Jackson -- or even Vitters, Jackson and Cashner -- may provide dividends to the Detroit Tigers two or three years down the road. But acquiring Curtis Granderson, who, in addition to his talent on the field, is also, from all reports, a good clubhouse guy who spends a lot of time giving back to the community (and is a native Chicagoan), would go a long way to helping the 2010 Cubs return to the playoffs and give them a chance to win it all.

And isn't that what we all want?

As we often say here... GETITDON EJIM.

Fantasy Baseball: It's Time for You to Love Kyle Blanks

Ian, yo — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:00:34 -0000

More photos » by Tony Gutierrez - AP

Browse more photos »

With all of the recent talk of the San Diego Padres dealing first baseman Adrian Gonzalez, I decided I'd discuss what would happen if Gonzalez actually were dealt. I'll start with a little background.

In 2004 in the 42nd round (1241st overall) the San Diego Padres drafted Kyle Blanks out of Arizona. During his minor league career, Blanks maxed out with 24 home runs in 2007 and hit another 20 home runs in 2008 in AA. In three of Blanks' five minor league seasons, he posted an OPS of over .900 and with his move to the majors in 2009, put up an OPS of .869. In Blanks short minor league career, he's shown a decent ability to get on base with an average of 10.7 BB% At 6'6, 270 lbs, Blanks has the frame to develop into an excellent power hitter and also has the ability to hit near .300 while being a solid middle of the order producer.

In 2009, Blanks played the first half of his season in AAA Portland where he hit 12 home runs and had over half as many walks as he did strikeouts (38/63.) Later into the season, Blanks was called up by the Padres to play in the outfield. Blanks started 34 games in the outfield (21 in right) where he actually didn't play too poorly. While in San Diego, Blanks hit 10 home runs in 148 ABs and slugged .514. His average of .250 could have been attributed to his lack of experience and moving fairly quickly throughout the system, which may have also had an effect on Blanks' K% (37.2% when his career minor league numbers hovered in the 20's.)

In 2010, if Adrian Gonzalez is still on a San Diego Padre's roster, you can expect to see Blanks getting time in the outfield. If Gonzalez is indeed traded before the open of the 2010 season, Blanks should be playing first base. When I go into my drafts in 2010 and everyone is looking for late-round sleepers, I will be keeping Blanks in my mind as a guy I can target very late that has the upside to put up anywhere from 20-25 home runs with a decent average. If Blanks fails to hit or live up to his ability, have no concerns with dropping him as you'll be getting him late as is. Blanks will probably be drafted near players such as Conor Jackson, J.D. Drew and Kosuke Fukudome and if you are willing to take one of those three, you definitely should be willing to take the risk on Kyle Blanks.

Building A Cubs Champion: 2010 Edition

Al — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:15:22 -0000

by Charles Rex Arbogast - AP

Like it or not, one of the keys to the Cubs' success in 2010 is a resurgence by Alfonso Soriano. Here, he launches his game-winning grand slam vs. the Astros last July 27.

View full size photo »

Last year about this time, I made this post discussing what I thought should be the makeup of the 2009 Cubs.

Brave, isn't it, of me to post that link when I'd just as soon forget about it. I was shouted down and laughed at (people are still giving me grief for the Kevin Millar thing, and they were absolutely correct), and had the Cubs put that 25-man roster on the field last April, they'd undoubtedly have had a much worse season than they did in real life (case in point: Alex Hinshaw, who I thought was an up-and-coming LOOGY, threw only six major league innings in 2009, posting a 12.00 ERA).

So let me go about this project this year in a different sort of way. A year ago (actually, October 20, 2008 was the date I wrote the post about my proposed 2009 roster) we were all still stunned and angry that the 97-win team that had dominated the National League all season went three-and-out in the playoffs. This was before Lou's "we've gotta get more lefthanded" mantra led us to the Milton Bradley disaster, before popular favorites Kerry Wood and Mark DeRosa were let go, and a lot of us were wondering, "How can we make a team that good into one that will win 11 games in October?"

Jim Hendry and Co. were asking themselves the same question, obviously, but came up with the wrong answer. Without rehashing what we've rehashed all summer long, clearly, it didn't work -- and not just because of Hendry's moves, but because players like Alfonso Soriano, Geovany Soto and Mike Fontenot seriously underperformed their 2008 numbers by considerable margins and for various reasons, and because Aramis Ramirez, who is the Cubs' best hitter, missed 50 games with a dislocated shoulder and wasn't at full strength the rest of the season, eventually playing in only 82 games.

I believe in what new owner Tom Ricketts said at his introductory press conference: that the Cubs already have the talent that can win the World Series, and only need a few tweaks to bring the club back to pennant-contending level. I'm also going to assume that what we've heard about player payroll is correct: that it will be increased, if only "slightly", from 2009, and thus will wind up at (approximately) $145 million. That will rank third in baseball, behind the Yankees and Red Sox.

Thus, instead of trying to build a roster simply by picking pieces from here and there, let's use that $145 million to put together a winning team.

Let's begin with players we know will be with the team next year, and their payroll figures (all numbers from the excellent site Cot's Baseball Contracts). These players are under contract for 2010 and will definitely be on the team, followed by their contract amounts:

Alfonso Soriano, $19,000,000
Carlos Zambrano, $18,875,000
Aramis Ramirez, $16,500,000
Kosuke Fukudome, $14,000,000
Ryan Dempster, $13,500,000
Derrek Lee, $13,000,000
Ted Lilly, $13,000,000

That's $107,875,000 for seven players. The Cubs also owe Jeff Samardzija $1,000,000 on the major league portion of his deal (whether or not he throws a major league inning) and $500,000 to the long-ago-released Luis Vizcaino, who pitched 3.2 innings in a Cub uniform. We're now at $109,375,000, leaving "only" $35,625,000 for 18 more players to fill out the Opening Day 25-man roster. That means there are going to be a fair number of minimum-wage players in 2010, because among the players remaining, a number of them are arbitration-eligible, meaning they will be in line for raises.

The first order of business is to remove Milton Bradley from the premises. We have had many long debates about whether and for whom he should be traded, but I believe this is top priority for Jim Hendry and will happen sooner rather than later. Disagree if you wish, but I think the best of many not-so-great scenarios is to send him -- and Aaron Miles -- to the Giants for Aaron Rowand. Between Bradley and Miles, they are owed a total of $23.7 million; Rowand is owed $36 million. Since in doing a deal like this, you would be relieving the Giants, essentially, of $12 million (approximately) by taking the third year of Rowand's contract, Hendry should ask the Giants to split the difference and pay half of Rowand's 2012 contract, which would split the total dollars (approximately $60 million) between the two teams, about $30 million each.

This would also accomplish equalizing the 2010 payroll -- or come close -- to what Bradley and Miles would have been owed ($11.7 million) and what Rowand is owed ($12 million). I think the Giants would be willing to do this, because you are taking $6 million off their 2012 payroll, while leaving their 2010 and 2011 payrolls where they are now, since Bradley is owed $12 million in 2011.

I concede that Rowand has had two pretty poor offensive seasons in San Francisco (at least in part due to injuries). But in 2007, he had a fine hitting year in Philadelphia, and I believe that he has at least a chance to return to that level in Chicago. If you were looking at the possible acquisition of Rowand in a vacuum, you wouldn't do it -- but the necessity of removing Bradley from the team makes this probably about the best way to accomplish that. At best, this could turn into a Hundley-for-Grudzielanek-and-Karros sort of deal.

So, now the Cubs have a center fielder (with Fukudome moving back to his original position, right field, improving the outfield defense at two spots), but we are now at eight players and have only $23,625,000 left. They're fortunate that Geovany Soto is not yet arbitration-eligible, so let's say the Cubs bump him up to $825,000 from the $575,000 he made in 2009. That's a pretty good raise, given the bad year he had. Now we're at $22,800,000. Backup catcher Koyie Hill made $475,000 in 2009 and had a good year for a backup. Let's move him up to $600,000, leaving $22,200,000.

I'm going to leave the double-play combination alone for 2010. It's likely that by 2011, Starlin Castro will be the Cubs' starting shortstop -- but for now, because Lou and Jim like them, Jeff Baker and Ryan Theriot will return. Baker made $415,000 in 2009 and had a good run after he was acquired from Colorado -- one of Hendry's best moves last year. Let's pay him $500,000, and Theriot $700,000, both up from 2009. That's 12 players, and $21,000,000 remaining for the other 13 -- we're getting to the point where we can actually think about signing a free agent or two or making a deal.

Among our 12 signed players so far are nine hitters -- so, given the current fad of having 12 pitchers on your staff, we have room for four more offensive players. I like Andres Blanco and Sam Fuld -- both performed well in backup roles in 2009. Neither hits much, but both play outstanding defense and neither is going to be expected to start more than a handful of games. Fuld made $401,500 and Blanco $400,000 (the minimum) in 2009, and let's give them both raises to $425,000. We are at 14 players and have $20,050,000 left. We'll need one more outfielder and also a guy who could fill the role that was filled in 2007 and 2008 by Daryle Ward, and in 2009 by Micah Hoffpauir.

Sad to say, I'm non-tendering Micah. He's 30 in March and didn't really do well most of last year -- he's a one-dimensional player, since he's really not a very good outfielder, and didn't do well in the dimension (hitting) he was supposedly good at. Since we're no longer locked in to the "lefthanded" mantra of a year ago, the Cubs can put the minimum-wage Jake Fox -- bumped up to $500,000 for his good performance of a year ago -- in this slot, and re-sign Rowand's close friend Reed Johnson for $3 million to fill in when his buddy hits the brick wall at Wrigley too many times.

So, we now have $16,550,000 left for nine pitchers -- which means we're going to have to fill most of the bullpen with minimum-wage guys. That's actually fine with me -- look at the disaster that was Aaron Heilman last year (in my opinion, Heilman should be non-tendered) -- and the Cubs have a couple of real good prospects, in my opinion, to fill middle-relief roles in Justin Berg and Esmailin Caridad. They get the minimum $400,000 each, leaving $15,750,000 for seven more pitchers. It was reported earlier this week that the Cubs are negotiating a two-year deal with John Grabow; reported figures are "between $6.5 and $7.5 million" for the two years. Let's assume for this post that it's in between, and Grabow gets $3.5 million for 2010. We've got $12,250,000 left and six spots to fill on the pitching staff. Carlos Marmol is going to close; he made $575,000 in 2009, so let's bump him to $800,000. Angel Guzman will be his primary right-handed setup guy (Grabow's the lefty setup guy, or should be, if Lou would ever use him right). Guzman made $421,500 in 2009; he could be renewed at $500,000.

Our payroll drawer is nearly empty (you can almost count the remaining Benjamins, right?); we have $10,950,000 remaining and still need to fill three spots, one in the pen, and two in the starting rotation, and here's where it gets a bit dicey (and this is why I left this part for last). First, you can fill one of the starting spots with Randy Wells, who made the minimum last year and certainly deserves a raise; let's put him at $750,000 (or maybe even a bit less; he's renewable, meaning you don't have to give him that much of a raise until he's arb-eligible next year), leaving $10,200,000. The Cubs have five free agents: Rich Harden, John Grabow, Kevin Gregg, Chad Fox and Reed Johnson. I already re-signed Johnson and Grabow above; Gregg and Fox, thanks for your service, see you in another uniform next year (and please, Jim, not another minor-league invite for Chad Fox. He's done).

But what to do with Harden? If you offer him arbitration, he'll almost certainly accept. To paraphrase Longfellow's nursery rhyme, "When he's good, he's very, very good; when he's bad, he's horrid". If Harden accepts arbitration, he's likely to get pretty close to all the remaining dollars in the drawer -- so reluctantly, we say goodbye to Rich, without the arb offer, unless you can somehow agree ahead of time to get him to sign for $8 million or so. That's not unreasonable given his $7 million salary in 2009 and his mediocre performance.

For the sake of argument, then, let's say we have this $10,950,000 available for our two remaining spots. One of those spots is going to go to Sean Marshall, who, I believe, deserves another shot at the starting rotation after doing a good job as a swingman in 2009. Lou misused him as a LOOGY -- Marshall can clearly do better than getting one LH batter out -- and I'd like to see Sean, now 27 and with four major league seasons under his belt, get a shot at starting. Sean made $450,000 in 2009, and could be paid $600,000 in 2010. In this scenario Samardzija makes the team, likely because the Cubs are paying him the $1 million whether he makes it or not. Otherwise there are other possibilities, including Arizona Fall Leaguers John Gaub and Andrew Cashner, or maybe someone else who will have a good spring (and please, let's not have another David Patton scenario), for this final spot.

That leaves $10,350,000 (or just under $10 million if you use Gaub or Cashner, who would make the minimum). You could consider signing someone like Jon Garland, who just got his option declined by the Dodgers and is a free agent. Garland made $7.25 million in 2009 and had a "typical" Garland year, which is as an inning-eater; you could probably get him for about $8 million for 2010. Garland has made at least 32 starts for eight straight years, and has pitched no fewer than 191.2 innings in any of those eight. Doing that would take the pressure off the staff, especially if Ted Lilly isn't ready for Opening Day, and would let Marshall play the "swingman" role again. Or you could give that last rotation spot to Tom Gorzelanny, who made $433,000 in 2009, and save the money for a midseason acquisition.

Note that I haven't gone all DeRomantic here and proposed bringing back Mark DeRosa, although I think he'd still be a solid addition, even at age 35, for the right price, and a note in this St. Louis Post-Dispatch article indicates the Cubs may indeed make DeRo an offer. I also haven't retained Mike Fontenot, who could probably be traded -- I mentioned above non-tendering Heilman, but it may be possible that both Fontenot and Heilman could be dealt, even for low-level prospects. In fact, my 2010 team as proposed above has only two players (Rowand and Garland) who were not with the Cubs at some point in 2009 -- unless they decided not to go with Jake Fox in the bench role and instead signed a free agent (or one who soon will be) such as Ross Gload or Chad Tracy, whose option was declined by the Diamondbacks yesterday. Still, despite all the travails, injuries and bad performances in 2009, the Cubs won 83 games. With performances returning to career norms, better health and a little luck, just a few tweaks could have us returning to the postseason in 2010.

Milton Bradley: Destination Toronto?

Al — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 15:26:48 -0000

More photos » by David Zalubowski - AP

Browse more photos »

The Toronto Sun reports this morning on a potential Milton Bradley for Vernon Wells swap:

The Chicago Cubs would like to -- have to -- deal disgruntled outfielder Milton Bradley. And one player they are eyeing as a target destination is the Blue Jays, with centre fielder Vernon Wells going to the Cubs in return.

"It's early on, but we think this one has some legs," said one Cubs official. "But they aren't the only team we are talking with."

Yes, "centre" is correct. Remember, the quote's from a Canadian paper. Vernon Wells signed an enormous contract with the Blue Jays before the 2008 season and there are six years left on the deal. How would the Cubs deal with that huge amount of money, given Tom Ricketts' statement yesterday that payroll would go up "slightly" next year, as well as Alfonso Soriano's remaining deal?

The Cubs' idea is to split the difference on monies owed -- Wells' $107 million and Bradley's $21 million for a difference of $86 million. Each team absorbs $43 million.

I was told there would be no math here, but if I have calculated this right -- and correct me, please, if I haven't -- that puts the Cubs on the hook for (approximately) $10.67 million for each of the six remaining years of Wells' deal. According to Cot's Baseball Contracts, Wells has a full no-trade clause that would have to be waived, and he can opt out of the deal after 2011.

Since the departure of Milton Bradley was only going to be made possible by taking on someone else's bad contract, this might be a possible "best of the worst". Wells is about six months younger than Bradley and had a big offensive season as recently as 2006. He can play center field, which would allow the Cubs to move Kosuke Fukudome back to right field, a better position for him. I'm not completely sold on this deal, but remember, the Cubs aren't exactly in the best bargaining position, either. The article concludes:

The Cubs have to deal Bradley. Other possible landing spots: The San Francisco Giants for lefty Barry Zito, who has four years remaining at $83 million; the Indians for Travis Hafner, three years for $40.25 million, Giants' Aaron Rowand, three years at $36 million, the Dodgers for Juan Pierre, two years at $18.5 million, and Tampa Bay's Pat Burrell, one year at $7 million.

Well. There's no way the Cubs ever, ever, EVER take Juan Pierre back. The Burrell possibility has been rumored before; Burrell's a bad outfielder, but at least the Cubs would only be stuck with his deal for one year; we've discussed the Rowand possibility also, I doubt the Giants are dealing Zito now since he had such a good second half, and there would be absolutely no point in acquiring Hafner, who hasn't played a game in the field since 2007 and can only play first base -- the Cubs already have one of those.

We, as ever, await developments.

Bill James Handbook 2010 Projections

Al — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 14:11:01 -0000

More photos » by Duane Burleson - AP

Will Magglio Ordonez be a Cub in 2010?

Browse more photos »

With a day off before game six of the ALCS -- and this series has the chance to go down in history as one of the better league championship series, having already produced at least three "instant classics", let's spend today looking toward next year.

As most of you probably already know, ACTA Sports publishes, each year, the Bill James Handbook, which in addition to having complete stats for all players active in 2009, publishes projections for the following season based on a projection system that they are continually tweaking to attempt to make it as accurate as possible.

The good folks at ACTA sent me an advance copy of the projection pages from the handbook, in which Bill James first runs down the projections they did for 2009; some of them were missed badly (mostly due to injury -- Eric Chavez and Troy Glaus, for example), others (Mark Teixeira, Orlando Hudson and Evan Longoria are the examples they give) were pretty darn close. They projected Mike Fontenot to have 9 HR and 43 RBI -- exactly what he did have, except they thought he'd hit .288, instead of the .236 he actually hit. For Geovany Soto, they missed badly -- the James system had him at .289, with a .499 SLG, 35 doubles, 23 HR and 89 RBI. I think you can imagine how much better the Cubs' season would have been if they had been right about Geo.

Continue after the jump to find some of their projections for 2010. I'm not only going to post a few of the projections for Cubs players that they sent me, but also some projections for some of the possible acquisitions we have discussed here at BCB, mainly some of the hitters that have been talked about in potential Milton Bradley deals. (Note: doing this doesn't mean I'm endorsing any particular acquisition, simply posting some numbers for players we've speculated about.)

Let's start with a few players we know are going to be Cubs in 2010:

Derrek Lee: .291/.378/.516, 40 doubles, 30 HR, 98 RBI, 94 runs
Aramis Ramirez: .292/.364/.514, 32 doubles, 26 HR, 97 RBI, 76 runs
Alfonso Soriano: .263/.320/.487, 35 doubles, 30 HR, 77 RBI, 85 runs
Kosuke Fukudome: .265/.365/.427, 39 doubles, 13 HR, 61 RBI, 76 runs
Geovany Soto: .273/.361/.469, 31 doubles, 20 HR, 79 RBI, 58 runs

Well. If those come true, the Cubs will score a ton of runs in 2010; that's 389 runs from just five players. Now, some of the starting rotation -- acknowledging, as James points out, that pitcher projections are done very differently than hitter projections due to the nature of pitching statistics:

Carlos Zambrano: 29 starts, 180 IP, 80 BB, 151 K, 12-8, 3.60
Ryan Dempster: 30 starts, 195 IP, 81 BB, 167 K, 12-10, 3.83
Ted Lilly: 25 starts, 170 IP, 56 BB, 144 K, 11-8, 3.76
Randy Wells: 30 starts, 188 IP, 60 BB, 147 K, 10-10, 4.16 
Carlos Marmol: 74 games, 73 IP, 45 BB, 84 K, 5-3, 3.45, 34 saves

And, apparently, give up a ton of runs and finish barely over .500. For some reason, they also project Wells to have 14 HBP and 19 other major league pitchers to have 15 or more -- that seems way off, considering that only one pitcher (Dave Bush) had 15 in 2009 and that Wells himself had only 6 HBP in the season just ended.

Now, here are some projections for some -- not all -- of the players we have discussed here as possible 2010 new Cubs, enough to get some discussion going:

Magglio Ordonez: .311/.376/.476, 32 doubles, 17 HR, 84 RBI, 70 runs
Curtis Granderson: .275/.353/.491, 30 doubles, 11 triples, 27 HR, 76 RBI, 106 runs, 17 SB
Michael Young: .299/.352/.443, 37 doubles, 16 HR, 80 RBI, 88 runs
Vernon Wells: .271/.327/.443, 33 doubles, 19 HR, 77 RBI, 77 runs
Aaron Rowand: .267/.327/.423, 37 doubles, 17 HR, 72 RBI, 74 runs
Carlos Beltran: .282/.375/.490, 33 doubles, 24 HR, 91 RBI, 92 runs
Mark DeRosa: .260/.335/.418, 27 doubles, 17 HR, 71 RBI, 76 runs

And, because you'll ask:

Milton Bradley: .276/.384/.450, 25 doubles, 18 HR, 64 RBI, 74 runs

James' system projects Bradley to play 133 games and have 467 AB; both of those would be the second-highest totals of his career. Note also that (presumably) the projections for players who the Cubs might acquire are based on their current home parks; playing with Wrigley Field as their home park would likely result in different projections.

There are complete projections in the book, which is available November 1 and which you can pre-order at the link at the top of this post -- we can discuss whatever players you want in this post, but I'm not going to spend a lot of time typing out projections for others, so don't ask. Full disclosure: ACTA Sports is sending me a copy of the book.

Insane Trade Ideas Involving Jose Guillen

royalsreview — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:37:52 -0000

More photos » by Ted S. Warren - AP

The Dayton Moore Era has reduced us to this. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)

Browse more photos »

Jose Guillen will earn $12 million dollars next year. He's not a good baseball player: he can't hit anymore and he is probably one of the two or three worst outfielders in the American League. He's in the way. He makes life more complicated for the Royals, and frankly, the Royals don't need things to be any more difficult than they already are.

The Royals need to trade Jose Guillen. Everybody realizes this. The only problem is that there is no real trade market for a terrible and expensive ballplayer with injury history who also happens to have a horrible reputation in the industry (Dayton Moore everyone!).

I don't think we can overstate just how unappealing he is right now, which is why the Royals should simply release him and move on. I really have no sense of how likely this is. Yes, just two years ago Moore voluntarily brought Guillen in, and yes, his bad play is not a recent development. That being said, Moore has shown an ability to cut bait on a failed experiment (Tony Pena Jr., Gload) albeit in a tardy fashion before. It would not stun me if this happened, although it would not stun me if Guillen is the Opening Day starter in right-field either.

There is one way the Royals might be able to trade Guillen, and that is to use him to solve someone else's problem. Many have suggested a seemingly logical Guillen-Bradley trade with the Cubs in just this vein. Bradley's situation in Chicago is certainly toxic, however, he remains an actually good player and, despite a widespread assumption that his contract is a disaster, he's set to earn just $9 million in 2010 and $12 million in 2011. I think the Cubs will hear better offers than a Guillen swap.

The key for the Royals might be finding someone who should be as desperate as they are. I think they can do this by inquiring about overpaid players signed to long-term deals. Can the Royals turn Jose Guillen into someone else's salary dump? The key is to think less about the money and more about the player, if the Royals can turn Jose Guillen into a good player, they should at least consider the move. Granted, I think many of these proposed trades are insane. I'm probably shaming all of us by even giving them the light of day. However, I also think that there's a small bit of "hey, this isn't half bad, maybe there's something to this."

Let's go:

Insane Idea #1- Guillen for Vernon Wells. Wells has a no-trade clause and would probably hate the idea of coming to Kansas City. Nevertheless, the situation in Toronto has soured and he may not want to be a Blue Jay as the team (presumably) rebuilds. In exchange for the last year of Guillen's contract, the Royals would have to take on Wells' deal, which is downright onerous: $12.5 M in 2010, $23 M in 2011, $21 M in 2012, $21 M in 2013, $21 M in 2014. That's $98.5 million, though in effect only $86.5 million after the swap. The catch is that Wells might be a productive player for most of this deal. He had a anti-career year in 2009 and he needs to leave CF. If he does the latter, he'll regain alot of his overall value, which could coincide with a few bounceback years at the plate. Yea, from a pure WAR perspective he will not earn his salary, but if he's a $9 million dollar player earning $23 million, that's not the end of the world. Yea, 2012-2014 are gonna be pretty painful, but if the Royals are gonna try to compete in 2010, an outfield of DeJesus-Someone-Wells has the potential to be really good defensively, with two nice bats. I think the Jays would make this deal right now, so maybe the Royals get greedy and ask for some money back in the swap or even a favorable secondary exchange of prospects. (Wells also has an opt-out option after 2011, which seems unspeakably unlikely to occur, but I thought it was worth mentioning.)
Insane Idea #2- Guillen for Barry Zito. A similar trade as above. Zito has $94 million left on a contract that runs through 2014, if an option for the final year vests. I'd be afraid of Zito returning to the American League, but his mini-comeback season in 2009 makes this trade one you'd at least pause to consider. If you assume the 2013 club option (which is tied to innings) doesn't vest and factor in the Guillen savings, then the Zito contract is equivalent to a four year, $64 million dollar deal. The Royals would head into Spring Training with a rotation of Greinke, Meche, Tejeda/Bannister/Davies/Hochevar #1, Tejeda/Bannister/Davies/Hochevar#2, and Zito. With Tejeda/Bannister/Davies/Hochevar#3 potentially a high-leverage bullpen arm and insurance policy. Zito was overrated as an A and is probably underrated now. Yea, his contract sucks, but it isn't your money.Tell me you're not doing a double take on this one? OK, maybe you aren't.
Insane Idea #3- Guillen for Carlos Silva. Silva is owed $23 million total for 2010-11, which becomes $25 million with a presumed buyout after 2011. Silva's contract is terrible, but he's also much worse than Zito or Wells. Less money, lesser player. However, when you factor in the savings of Guillen's salary, he's only really the next Kyle Farnsworth. I don't want Moore trading with Dr. Z anymore, but this isn't a completely unmerited trade for either side. Maybe Silva even gives you a 0.7 WAR season or something, it could happen.
Insane Idea #4- Guillen for Aaron Rowand. Rowand has three years and $36 million remaining on a fat contract signed two years ago. I'm not sure the Giants view him as a problem, but with his annual salary set to increase, they could be interested in moving him to help their chances of keeping Tiny Tim around. Rowand, like Wells, may eventually need to leave centerfield, but he probably wouldn't be terrible there in 2010. A DDJ-Someone-Rowand outfield would be very strong defensively, which could help make up for Rowand's subpar bat. If you factor in the Guillen savings, this swap would leave the Royals paying Rowand $8 million a year.
Insane Idea #5- Guillen for Gary Matthews Jr. Did you know that Gary Matthews Jr.'s regrettable contract now only has two years remaining? Matthews is owed $23 million total for 2010-11, which is barely anything compared to some of the guys we've seen. The GMJ contract has to go down as one of the worst of the decade, as he's given the Angels nothing from the very beginning. His offensive and defensive numbers are bad, but with regular playing time, I think he can be better. Not good, but vaguely ok. Of course, the Angels seem unlilkely to make this move, given management's long-standing problems with Guillen. When you're dreaming about a Gary Matthews Jr. trade and regretting these difficulties, you realize just what Dayton Moore has done to you.
Insane Idea #6- Guillen for Alfie Soriano. Soriano, incredibly, still has $90 million left on his massive contract, thanks to an $18 million dollar annual salary that runs through 2014. I think I'd rather have Vernon Wells.
Insane Idea #7- Guillen for Kosuke Fukudome. The time to make this deal was last winter, when Guillen may have still had some appeal and Fukudome's contract looked worse. Still, the Cubs would get out of the $26.5 million dollar obligation they have to Fukudome, in exchange for eating Guillen's $12 million. Fukudome's defense rated well in 2008, and was bad in 2009, so his overall value both seasons has been about the same. I wouldn't hesitate to make this deal, which also means the Cubs wouldn't do it. Then again, the Cubs have some massive contracts and (partially) selling off Fukudome could be appealing.
Insane Idea #8- Guillen for Dice K. My original idea was to look at swapping out JD Drew's contract, but its really not that bad, and I think the Boston FO values Drew's game, even if the general public doesn't. Dice-K is a different story, and the Red Sox owe him $28 million over the next three seasons. Guillen would never see the light of day in a Red Sox uniform, but the Red Sox would save $16 million in the process. The question is, would you want Dice-K for three years/$16 million?

I think you get the idea I'm proposing here: the Royals use their own Guillen salary dump to take on a bigger salary problem of somebody else's making. The key is finding a player who currently has a contract that is now seen is a milestone in his current situation, but is, in reality, not that bad of a deal

I'd make the Guillen for Silva, Guillen for Fukudome, Guillen for GMJ, Guillen for Rowand moves right now. The Guillen for Zito and Guillen for Wells deals, probably the craziest (outside of the Soriano one, which I'm keeping in just to let you know I'm not out of my mind), would be tough to make but have some appeal. The money's pretty close, but I think I'd rather take on Zito than Wells. Dice-K is essentially a reprise of the Silva situation, though he still holds some promise.

There are sound arguments why doing a trade like this is a bad idea. Why compound a problem? Why take on more bad salary? The simplest thing to do would just be to release Guillen. Given the long-term contracts already given to Meche, Soria, & Greinke, the Royals don't really have any building blocks at the moment that need to be locked up with any urgency, save perhaps Billy Butler. Our attitude towards payroll should always be the same: we should only care insomuch as any contract has an ability to affect other moves or grant unjustified playing time. To different extents, all these bad contracts might do so, though I'm tempted to say something about how keeping Dayton Moore off the free agent market might not be a bad thing.

So what do you think?

Start The 2010 Countdown: Cubs Eliminated, But Dempster Shines In 6-0 Shutout Of Pirates

Al — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:30:14 -0000

More photos » by Charles Rex Arbogast - AP

Oustanding, Ryan, just outstanding.

Browse more photos »

It looked for "just a hot minute", as Jack Brickhouse might have said 40+ years ago, that the Cubs would stave off elimination for another day. Ex-Cub Jason Kendall hit a one-out, three-run, game-tying homer for the Brewers against the Rockies in the ninth inning. Two innings later, though, the Rockies' Chris Iannetta hit a homer of his own, a two-run walkoff, and the Cubs' elimination number was reduced to zero.

Thus we begin "wait till next year" once again.

Thankfully, there are still a few games of Cubs baseball to enjoy for the rest of 2009 -- because you know you'll miss it when it's away for the winter -- and a few things yet to play for.

One of those goals was set by Ryan Dempster. He wants to throw 200 innings for the second straight season, and went a long way toward that goal with a masterfully pitched five-hit, 6-0 shutout of the Pirates. Dempster reached 195 innings with one start to go (on Sunday), lowered his ERA to 3.51 -- within range of the 2.96 he had last year -- and threw his first CG shutout since he was a member of the Marlins on July 3, 2001. It was the Cubs' second shutout in four games, and the first thrown by a Cubs pitcher at Wrigley Field since Jason Marquis blanked, coincidentally, the Pirates on May 9, 2007. Odd notes from that game: only one Pirate who played that day remains on the club (Ryan Doumit), and Marquis' opponent that night was current Cub Tom Gorzelanny (John Grabow, who came over from Pittsburgh with Gorzelanny, also pitched in that game).

Dempster was outstanding. Though he gave up two doubles, both leading off innings, those runners were stranded and only one other Pirate (Brandon Moss, who walked and went to third on a Delwyn Young single in the second inning) made it past first base. Dempster threw 120 pitches (81 strikes), which wasn't even his highest total of the season (he threw 121 against the Brewers in a 12-6 loss on May 9) and had the Pirates under control all night.

Meanwhile, the Cubs were taking advantage of Kevin Hart's wildness -- something he exhibited even when he was throwing fairly well in his four Cub starts before the trade to Pittsburgh -- and some shoddy Pirates defense in putting six runs on the board off Hart in the first four innings. The Pirates made three errors, all of them on what appeared to be routine plays, helping the Cubs score two unearned runs out of the six. The Cubs drew seven walks in all, four by Ryan Theriot -- who was an excellent leadoff man last night, reaching base all five times he was at bat. (That's not an endorsement of Theriot for leadoff -- I still believe the job should go to Kosuke Fukudome -- just a note that he did a good job yesterday.)

The win clinched a winning season for the Cubs with their 82nd win. That's the first time the Cubs have had three consecutive winning seasons in 37 years, since 1970-71-72. And it's the first time they have done so in a manager's first three years in 74 years, since the 1933-34-35 Cubs had three straight winning years in Charlie Grimm's first three seasons as manager. There remain other personal goals besides Dempster's 200 innings; Carlos Zambrano goes today for win #10 to finish in double figures, and Sam Fuld still seeks his first major league RBI (only two players, both 100+ years ago, had more plate appearances in a season than Fuld has now -- 103 -- without an RBI). I'd like to see Tyler Colvin get some more playing time in the final six games, too.

Last night's announced crowd was 35,308. That brought the season paid attendance to 2,989,120, so today's first-game attendance will put them past the 3 million mark for the sixth straight year. Last night's opponent, the chilly weather, and postseason chances being basically over kept the in-house count to what appeared to be about 15,000. The bleachers were about half-full (maybe 2500) and the rest of the park about one-third occupied, many of whom left after the seventh-inning stretch. The Cubs will have to make definitive moves to improve the team, and in my opinion not raise ticket prices, to keep drawing in 2010 the way they have the last three seasons.

The first game of today's split doubleheader begins at 1:05 pm CDT -- the first time a game has started at that time at Wrigley Field that I can remember. The game preview thread will be up at 11:30 am CDT.