Instead of taking over other subsequent front-page posts with bemoanings of how this means "fourth place here we come", here's a new thread to talk about it. 

No disrespect meant to those who are upset, but he's a role player.  He is not going to be the next Harmon Killebrew, Albert Pujols or even Mark DeRosa.  Jake seems like a good guy and I hope he has a nice career.  However, he wasn't going to be a factor on the 2010 Cubs.

To everyone who thinks that the Cubs should have gotten more - no one was beating down their door to get Fox.  Hendry shouldn't be trusted with a checkbook, but he generally has made decent trades. 

Quite honestly, people should be happy for both Fox and Miles - Jake is going to get a chance that he wasn't going to get with the Cubs, and Aaron needed a fresh start.

A recent fanpost and the subsequent reaction has me thinking that we need one consolidated repository for all "No bleeping way" trades, much like the most "popular" beat writer to BCB does each year.

Readers should submit them here, and fellow BCB-ers should critique the trades using their friend, the "reply" function.

If this catches on, I'll accept submissions until the end of the week, and then create a poll of the top 10 trades.  Contenders will be chosen by me based on uniqueness, entertainment value and how much alcohol I have in my system when I make the selections.

Trades should be possible, but can be entirely unrealistic.  (Meaning don't propose trades for dead people, fictional characters, etc.)  Favoring the Cubs heavily is always an option, but feel free to mix it up by giving away more than you get in return.  Trade ideas that have been beaten to death are ok, but probably won't prompt a lot of discussion.

Happy Monday.  Have at it.

Continue reading this post »

I've been to many Brewer games over the years, having grown up in SE Wisconsin.  Most of the fans that I've interacted with at Brewer-Cub games have been knowledgeable and friendly (except for a friend of mine that gets surly when the Cubs win).  I suspect that represents the bulk of their fan base.  There have been a handful of militant fans, but every fan base has jerks.

This is about the Brewer organization, though - not the fans.  Several years ago, when a strike was looking like a possibility, I had seats a few rows behind home plate, so I created a sign that was critical (but not vulgar) of Don Fehr and Bud Selig.  When I held it up between innings, it got a lot of attention - and an usher saw it and told me I could not display it - unless I removed the part critical of the Commissioner!  Yes, censorship alive and well at Miller Park.

Now they've gone one better and fueled the inferiortiy complex perception.  I've made several comments on here that I think the "anti-team" t-shirts that street vendors sell are lame - whether they are anti-Cub, Cardinal, Brewer, Packer, Bear, etc.  Well, now the Brewers are selling a t-shirt in their official team store that says "Curse the Cubs" and has a goat on it.  Personally, I find this hilarious on several levels.

It's amusing more than offensive, and if it's supposed to be offensive, it's that much more amusing.

As someone (Josh?) pointed out last year, the curse itself is a myth (and I don't give credence to the concept of a curse in the first place).  Plus, Cub fans don't really buy into it, but fans of other teams insist that we do.  It speaks volumes to me that they need to do this because they think that their fan base is likely to buy an anti-Cub shirt instead of a Brewer shirt . . . one can see anti-Cub shirts in Miller Park when the Cubs aren't even there, but I think that's a vocal minority.  (That's not to say they the "mainstream" fans like the Cubs, but most can show a little more class than that.)  You've got some pretty bush league marketing personnel working for you, Mr. Attanasio!

For months now, we've been reading constant calls to DFA this player or that player.  Now that July 31 is astern, we're hearing daily cries to put one player or another on waivers.

Note - the following paragrah is background information before I get into the main discussion:

I am going to start by saying I have been very critical of Jim Hendry.  I think he spends too much money on mediocre players who draw little interest elsewhere, which contributes a lot more to the Cubs' payroll being inflexible then contracts to legitimate contributors.  I was ok with the Soriano deal, because they needed to change the perception of the Cubs not being interested or able to get the big names.  Yes, Beltran would have been a better move, but at the point in time when Soriano was signed - not before or after - it wasn't the worst thing in the world to do for the franchise.  The deals of J.Jones, Miles, Perez, Rusch, etc., thinking Gathright, Izturis, etc. could be contributors are the decisions that bother me.

Having established that I'm not impressed with Hendry as a GM, I will say that I don't think the man is an idiot.  There are certain things that all GMs do as a matter of course, and I'll get into that later.

Now the main point:

This is not fantasy baseball, Pursue the Pennant, Strat-O-Matic or any other simulated baseball game of your choice.  No one is going to trade their good players for the Cubs' crap, nor should anyone expect to be taken seriously if they suggest such a deal is viable.

DFA is not a wonder drug that cures an underperforming team's ailments.  You don't prescribe the DFA pill to a player and have him magically get better.  You also don't DFA a player in the first half of his first season of a multi-year contract, unless he has done something so egregious as to make a continued relationship with the team untenable.  It simply is not realistic - if you do this, you are likely on the hook for the entire remainder of the contract, less the prorated share of the league minimum IF someone else picks that player up.  A trade is still possible, but it is very much a buyer's market.

On to the flavor of the day:  Put them on waivers!  That'll clear up payroll!

Virtually every player is put on waivers immediately after the trading deadline.  Despite what the cerebral likes of Rob Dibble might think, in addition to being noted in numerous articles, it's common sense.  This is where the Hendry part comes in.  I don't think he's a great GM, but he's not stupid and would not be negligent as to forget to do this - AND HE HAS A STAFF THAT WOULD REMIND HIM.

If you wait until now to put someone on waivers, it's a stronger signal that a deal is imminent - and a signal that someone else might want to think about making a claim if they want to block a deal that would make the team ahead of them stronger.  By placing everyone on waivers right away, it makes it less likely players would be claimed, thus more likely to make deals.

Some of you will cry, "Billy Wagner!"  Well, he was on a rehab assignment.  I'm not saying ALL players are placed on waivers, but most are.  You can pull the waivers back if someone makes a claim, so there is no risk in doing it.

Waivers are not used during the season to send a message to players.  Say again: Waivers are NOT used during the season to send a message to players.

To everyone who chooses to disagree with the above, and thinks this is a clever new way to dump Soriano, I ask you: WHO THE HELL IS GOING TO CLAIM HIM?  If the Cubs don't think that he's worth keeping, do you honestly believe that someone else is going to be stupid enough to take on that contract, given how he has looked most of this year?  Really?   REALLY?

I'm just as frustrated as the rest of you with how the Cubs look.  And I think Al would say that suggestions on improving the team should be part of what BCB is.  But the same non-starter suggestion dozens of times a day . . . it's just not going to happen.