There has been rampant speculation that the Cubs will attempt to sign BJ Ryan, a move that, in itself, is a good idea. It would be a huge mistake, however, if adding Ryan to the bullpen were coupled with putting Sean Marshall back into the starting rotation. Why?

Well, first of all, Marshall’s splits this year show that he has been more effective as a reliever.

Second, because Marshall has been working exclusively out of the bullpen, he would need to "stretch out" his arm to be a starter again. This, then, implies that either Ryan would immediately take Marshall’s place on the roster or that someone like Jason Waddell, who was recently sent back to minors after spending time on the DL, would have to be called up as the lone lefty reliever until Ryan is ready to return to major league action. Neither of these options is a sound move. Besides, the entire bullpen would be stronger if it contained two lefties.

Third, it is very difficult to shuffle Marshall, or any pitcher, from the bullpen to the rotation multiple times. Without a doubt, Marshall has been a "good soldier" and has done everything that his team has asked of him, but one imagines that constantly shifting roles takes both a physical and a psychological toll on a pitcher. Marshall has settled into his bullpen role and should stay there.

Fourth and finally, whom do you move out of the rotation (and what will happen to this former starter) when Marshall is removed from the bullpen? One change, like this one, presupposes more changes. Pitching, to this point, has not a problem for the Cubs in 2009, and it would be wise not to tinker with it too much.

BJ Ryan’s addition to the Cubs would be great. Keeping Sean Marshall in the bullpen, with Ryan, would be even better.

There’s little doubt that in the macho world of sports many people remain insensitive to what one might call weakness, especially when it applies to an athlete’s emotions. When a player loses his cool, as Carlos Zambrano frequently has, he often is perceived as a loose cannon.

Some armchair psychiatrists, however, take it a step further by diagnosing Zambrano as a "head case" because of his undesirable behavior. Such misguided labeling is harmful to the pitcher in question and to people who suffer from genuine psychological disorders.

In contemporary American society, diseases of the mind (in terms of general respect and financial assistance) exist far below all physical aliments. Stigmas often follow people who struggle with mental health issues on a daily basis. Depressed patients, for example, may become depressed about their depression and how they are viewed by others.

Since we cannot see when something is awry with one’s mind, like we can when someone has a cast on a broken leg, some of us dismiss emotional problems as personal defects and then replace empathy with judgements that originate from fear or ignorance. This needs to stop, but it’s evident that such a change in perception won’t occur soon.

As long as people continue to attach terms with negative connotations to Zambrano’s psychological state, they diminish him as a person and, in the process, increase stereotypes about members of the mental health community.

The other day, I encountered a Cubs fan wearing a 2008 Division Champions hat, which got me thinking about this past 97-win season and my feelings about it.

I wondered just how proud of the Cubs I truly am today. Sure, the team won a ton of regular season games, gave me plenty of thrills and much for which to be thankful, but ultimately let me down with another early playoff exit.

Should I be content with a second-straight division title even though my favorite team recorded zero victories in the NLDS? Does an October collapse detract from all the joys I experienced from April through September?

Of course, I want the Cubs to win the World Series. I invested a lot of energy into the team in 2008 but didn’t get the full return for which I had hoped. This is why I refused to buy any Cubs playoff merchandise; I would do so only when the Cubs won the Fall Classic.

And yet there I was, in the dead of winter, spotting a Cubs Division Champs hat. Perhaps I could learn something from this fan, something about cherishing what has gone well in my life despite my disappointments, and how 97 hard-fought wins outweigh three crushing losses.

In the midst of this exciting pennant race, I began to wonder if rooting for the Cubs has any correlation with my outlook on life.

Does, for example, the hope I bring to every game somehow reflect the hope I have for my life as a whole?  During a tough losing streak, do I maintain faith that the Cubs will endure and pull out a win, much like when I'm treading rough waters in my life and need to paddle back to shore?

Indeed, there is something to be said for sticking with this team.  I believe that rooting for the Cubs shapes my self-concept and view of the world, which, in turn, enhances my attraction to the ball club.

But I want to know what you think.  Does cheering for the Cubs affect your outlook on life?  Or, on the flip side, does something about the way you approach life draw you into being a Cubs fan?

Here's the link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2942735

Of course, it's just the Arizona Rookie League, but this is still encouraging.  Lou is a bit cautious, as he should be.

Wouldn't it be great, though, to send a healthy Kerry Wood into a tight ballgame in August?  In September?  In October?

Wood's possible return to the bullpen would be like Dusty used to put it: "It's like making a trade without having to make a trade."  Or something to that effect.

Any thoughts?

Some folks here at BCB have discussed at length possible starting lineups and the bullpen/closer situations; however, we have yet to speculate on the potential 25-man roster with which the Cubs will break camp in 2007.

The following are a few questions about the roster:

1. Should the Cubs start the year with a 4-man rotation and, if so, then which "fifth starter" goes to the bullpen?
2. Should the Cubs go with 14 position players and 11 pitchers or 13 and 12?  (This is related to the above question, of course).
3. How many of the "young pitchers" from last year have a shot at making the final cuts?
4. Why have the Cubs not designated Roberto Novoa for assignment yet?
5. What happens to Michael Wuertz, because right now, I see him as the 13th pitcher when a maxium of 12 should be allowed, as shown here:

This is enough, at least for now.  Please let me know what you think.  Anyone have any answers here or other questions?

http://www.cubs.com

Piniella admits in this article that he has considered putting Alfonso Soriano in CF and keeping Jacque Jones in right.

This is what the Cubs, in my humble opinion, should do.  RF at Wrigley is a tougher spot to play, and that fact that Soriano is not a "natural" outfielder should help ease him into his new home with the Cubs.

Besides, Jones has one-year's worth of expeience in RF as it stands.  To put Jones in CF would complicate matters.

I was almost sold on Theriot as a stopgap in CF but still believe that he should come off the bench (as often as possible, mind you).

Jacque Jones, then, might still be traded at any time before or during this season.  Pie must be "ready," though, before this move is made.  

I believe that, rather than moving Soriano back into RF when Pie joins the team, the Cubs should insert Pie in RF because of his defense.  Of course, this would be worked out at a later date.

As for Floyd, I just feel that he is too "old" and "injury-prone."  These are two traits that our "win-now" Cubbies don't need.

Let us know what you think, BCB!

http://www.cubs.com

Carrie Muskat has written another article.  In it she outlines the following points:

1. "Big Z" will start on opening day, 2007.
   
2. Center field is still, of course, open.
   
3. As many as eight guys will compete for five spots in the rotation.  Wood is not one of them.
   
4. Piniella will stress "fundamentals."
   
5. The Cubs will put in long hours in Mesa.
   
6. A player who misses the 25-man roster but performs well probably will be called up later.

It should be an interesting weekend at the Convention/Cubbie Love Fest.  I'll admire it all from afar.

As numerous folks attempt to "predict" or at least speculate about the Cubs' "gaping hole" in CF, I suggest that Jim Hendry take a good look at the Phillies' Aaron Rowand.

A hard-nosed, speedy CF with a decent bat, Rowand helped that other team from Chicago win it all in 2005 (sigh).

If Hendry were to offer Jacque Jones, then the Phillies, of course, would have to include another player or other considerations.  This could be a great deal for the Cubs.

I am not sure about this, but what if Rowand could move to one of the corner outfield spots once Pie is "ready" for CF?  This would make Murton expendable by the trading deadline, which is not such a bad thing.  (I know that Murton has a lot of upswing and that many people here at BCB really think he's something special, but a Rowand-Pie-Soriano outfield would be a stellar combo from left to right).

Murton, like Eyre, Marshall, Marmol, Guzman, and a few others, could be used as trade bait on or around July 31, 2007.

Rowand just avoided arbitration by signing a one-year deal, but he would be a free agent after this season.  If a trade were considered, then Hendry and company would need to lock Rowand up to a long-term deal.

Of course, we first have to sign Zambrano to a six-year deal worth about $120 million, right?