Goat Riders of the Apocalypse is not going so strong, lately.  But, GOOD LORD?  Can you blame us?

Even the most optimistic, blue sky Cub fans could not possibly enjoy what they are seeing on a daily basis?  Losers of 13 of the last 16?  As it happens, Hendry and Piniella are pretty much doing what I asked them to do earlier this week - treat the rest of this year as if it is Spring Training 2011.  It began when Derrek Lee and Lou himself removed themselves from the proceedings - neither of them are going to Mesa next spring.  We have brought up the freshest produce from the farm.

But, once again, it goes sour, because pretty much everyone we brought up has sucked so far.  It would have been nice to see Micah the Hoff hit a few quick welcome-back dongs, or a Marcos Mateo pitch lights-out.  It is early in our extended Spring Training, but it doesn't appear that any of our recent call-ups are going to help us anytime soon.  So, as was the case going into this season, it appears that most of the heavy lifting in 2011 will be done by the men currently on the roster, a roster, once again, that is last in the majors in one-run losses.

So what have we learned thus far in 2010?

10) Alfonso Soriano may not be the most overpriced sixth hitter in major league history - but then again, he might just be. 

As a longtime student of the intangible and the psychological, I understand why Hendry signed #12 back in 2007.  The interim owner gave him permission to spend whatever it took, and Alf was the premier free agent that winter.  Jim was convinced that the Cubs would win a World Series that year or next, and figured if we had, that people wouldn't care that the club would then owe Soriano $18 million a year for all perpetuity.  It was a crap shoot, and the first two years, Jim shot eights, but then last year, the dice came up seven, and now we're stuck with a number six hitter with degenerative legs, a miserable glove, and absolutely no knowledge of situational baseball.  For the next three years.

9) Carlos Zambrano and Carlos Silva are the yin and yang of miserable free agent pitching judgement

A few years back, officials at two separate organizations took a look at two big, strong, tough Venezuelan guys named Carlos and decided that yes, these guys were Quality, they would eat innings, win games, and lead men.  It would be the wisest thing to sign them to long term contracts worth nearly 8 figures, because everyone knows the work ethic of South Americans is second to none.

Ahem.  So it was inevitable that a few years later, los dos Carloses would both be Cubs, serving as twin anchors, keeping us firmly tethered to the bottom, representing the main sunk costs to the most miserable team contract picture in MLB history.

The difference is: Silva the Hutt is a follower, and Z is a leader.  There is no way to reign in #38 with the Cubs, none.  He appears to respect nobody but himself, which is the very reason why it is going to be so painful when he inevitably moves on to the Yankees a couple of years from now and starts winning games again (hey, Kerry Wood?  How YOU doin'?)  #52, on the other hand, is a follower, and I honestly feel that in the right situation, with the right guidance from the right pitching coach and staff, that Silva could be poked, prodded, and coaxed in a useful direction.  However...

2010 is the death knell of the Larry Rothschild Era

Several of my knowledgeable friends, like the boys over at HJE have called for the head of Rothschild for years now.  I personally was torn.  For every Wood and Prior who caved in, a Dempster or Marmol seemed to rise up.  Maybe, I have always thought, Rothschild wasn't part of the problem.

But lately?  Outside of Dempster, Marmol, Marshall, the first three months of Silva and the occasional Gorzellany outing, Cubs pitching 2010 has been beyond dreadful.  Walks, mistakes, walks, mistakes.  A conveyor belt of arms have made their way back and forth between here and Des Moines. 

Here's my problem with Rothschild - these guys pitch well in Iowa, come here, get blasted, go back to Iowa, pitch well, come back, get blasted.  And it isn't just a function of the quality of the hitters.  It is the command that they seem to lose here.  Is it the pressure?  Shouldn't be any pressure, throwing for a fifth-place team.  And if it is, whose job is it to help these guys acclimate?  As I see it, he is taking good arms and turning them bad once they get here.

When the new manager arrives, he should be allowed to pick his own pitching coach.

7) Marmol is a major league closer

Speaking of Marmol, he hasn't had a lot of opportunities in 2010.  Yes, the team has the worst one-run record in baseball, but curiously enough, it isn't really the closer's fault.  Most of the games have gone the way yesterday's game went - we fall far behind, and either come back to within a run and fall short, or tie it up only to let one of our "middle" guys, usually Cashner, go blow it. 

The few saves Marmol has blown, his defense helped blow.  Which, speaking of:

6) Our defense utterly sucks

Our catcher is "offensive-minded", a euphemism for a guy who isn't Yadier Molina.  Our third baseman is getting old, frail, and losing what little utility he ever had.  Our shortstop is better than the man he replaced, yes, but is young and may or may not be a major league shortstop.  Our second basemen define 'suck', We got DeWitt because we thought he is better than Theriot, of course, the Dodgers think just the opposite.  Uh oh.  Our fancy hood ornament, DLee has had his worst fielding year.  Soriano has had an Epic Fail year in left.  Our slick fielding right fielder can't hit enough to play, and the guy who can hit in RF should be playing left field. 

5) Marlon Byrd is a nice player

Byrd does everything pretty well.  He is not and will never be an impact major league ballplayer, and his CF play is very average at best.  He is the beneficiary of the "Robbie Gould Syndrome", in which he is surrounded by badness, so his relative competence shines brighter in comparison.  He is a fourth outfielder on a championship team, and although he actually tries to provide the leadership this team so woefully lacks, he really doesn't have the oomph in his game to back it up.

4) Starlin Castro is a major league hitter

The storybooks are full of great men who started off as middle
infielders who committed a ton of errors in the field, and were
converted to other positions so their teams would not lose their bat. 
Mickey Mantle comes immediately to mind, and Alf Soriano is a recent,
close-to-home example.  With Hak-Ju Lee in the low minors, there are
discussions that Lee will eventually be the SS, and Castro will play
2nd.  Or maybe 3rd, since the 24 year old DeWitt is on board, except
that DeWitt has 'utility guy' written all over him, and don't 3rd
basemen usually hit with more power?

It is easy to forget that Castro was born in 1990, and that he will gain
most of his strength in the next seven years.  He will never have
A-Roid power, but maybe Jeter power.  The most pleasant development of
2010 has been that, for once, we can believe the hype.  Starlin Castro
seems to be for real.

3) Here comes Adam Dunn

A couple of years ago, when it was late in the free-agent season
(this was the year we signed Milton Bradley early, remember) and Adam
Dunn still did not have a team.  The only substantial offer for a man
who had averaged 40 homers a year the previous five years was from the
godforesaken Nats, and human nature being what it is, there rose an
effort to find out what, if anything, was wrong with Dunn.

Rumors arose that Dunn did not like playing baseball much, that much of
the conversations that would arise when opposing players would stand on
first base next to the Big Donkey revolved around offseason hunting. 
Growing up, Dunn was a football player first, and teams perhaps
questioned his character when formulating contract offers for a
one-dimensional guy.

So, he has played nearly every day in Washington, has continued to hit
his 40 homers a year, and has weathered two trade deadlines.  You know
what?  The man would rather play football and shoot pheasants.  But he still hits and we are going to sign a first baseman this winter.

And just
our luck, watch us sign the guy and watch him age faster than the Nazi
mope in "Raiders of the Lost Ark".  In my gut, I see us going after
Adrian Gonzalez his off season, and ending up with Adam Dunn.  Because
Dunn has always been one of "Hendry's Guys", like the Marquis Du Suck
and Kosuke Fukudome, and we always seem to end up with Hendry's guys.

2) Since nobody seems to know what is going on, Hendry is staying, I guess

The inmates run the asylum at Wrigley Field.  As bad as the Cubs have performed, and for as much pressure that the General Manager of a team such as ours ought to be under, compounded by the fact that he has a known history of heart trouble, Jim Hendry looks pretty damn healthy.

Is he taking his statins and his red krill oil?  Maybe, but hey, why shouldn't he look healthy?  He has the greatest job in the world.  Where else in American business can you mess up, again and again, and nobody calls you on it?  Wall Street?  Well, yeah, but those guys always have the specter of the SEC (Securities Exchange Commission, not the high-falutin college football conference) breathing down their necks.  Lots of those guys jump off bridges, lock themselves in their garages with their Bentleys running, but not Jim Hendry.  His boss is a failed corporate attorney who doesn't know spit from shinola, who in turn works for a owner who is more concerned with piss troughs and gaudy neon signs than a winning ballclub.

There is only one man on earth who gets to play fantasy baseball for real, and lose all the time, and not get called on the carpet for it.  Until there is some accountability established in the Cubs' organization, what you see this year is what you will continue to get in the future.

1) 2011 is going to look a lot like 2010.

Soriano will play for the Cubs next year.  Ramirez will play for the Cubs next year.  Fukudome will sit on the bench and take the Cubs' money next year.  Byrd and Colvin and Castro and DeWitt and Soto will play for the Cubs next year.  Jim Hendry has no ability and no gumption to make a blockbuster trade involving young major league talent for impact major leaguers in return.  Could you see him somehow packaging Castro and Colvin in a trade for, say, Albert Pujols?  Maybe not Pujols, because a Cubs-Cardinals trade will NEVER happen, but something of that magnitude?  How about for Miggy Cabrera or Joe Mauer?  Young stars for a superstar?  Never happen.

As for the pitching, good lord.  While the positional outlook seems stale yet static, the pitching outlook is totally fluid, and utterly without direction.  We have a #2 starter, maybe a #4, a closer and a utility guy, a LOOGY who isn't really a LOOGY with a torn knee ligament, and about 20 other guys who have walked a lot of batters and given up a lot of late-game home runs.  You can't fix that.  The only thing you can do is throw a ton of money at it, and HOPE the guys you sign don't get injured or fat-and-sassy. 

And Ricketts is NOT going to spend a lot of money in the offseasons.  So forget about the Ol' Free Agent Injection.

Fans of the Chicago National League Ballclub have survived the past 102 years on one glorious element: hope.  Yep, the same hope that got our president elected, the same hope that is being frittered away by this same president each day.  Hope is perishable.

I ate whole platterfuls of Cubs hope as a kid, and into my early adulthood.  I confess to have spent good money on the all-you-can-eat hope buffet as recently as fall of 2008.  Nowadays, there is very little fresh hope in the steamer, most of it is discolored and spoiled, like the bananas Soriano and the Fukudome skirt steak.

Our third base prospect, Josh Vitters, is rehabbing.  The next great Korean hope is still years away.  Andrew Cashner was supposed to be the next big thing, but I can't figure out what that thing is supposed to be, unless he is supposed to be a Matt Karchner impersonator.  That's something he does quite well.

But hey, Castro went 4-for-5 yesterday.  Rookie of the Year, gotta be?  Right?

The current state of the Cubs:

All you really need to know is that Aramis Ramirez is hitting mistakes again.

At the beginning of the year, he wasn't.  He wasn't hitting anything.  Neither was Derrek Lee.  And outside of the couple of times our bullpen blew leads early in the season, and the other night with Marmol, this was pretty much the story of the year.  Guys would get on base and Lee and Ramirez would strand them.  Over and over again.

Now Ramirez has healed, and is hitting like he always has, and a few days after that, so has Lee and Soto.  The word is that Lee is the clubhouse leader on the Cubs, and that is unfortunate because not only does he not have the personality to truly lead, he is also largely irrelevant offensively.

He has had two monster years with us, 2005 and 2009.  The Cubs finished below .500 both years.  Ramirez has had big years in 2004, 2007 and 2008, all winning years.  As Ramirez goes, so does the Cubs offense.  There is a greater statistical correlation as well as a practical correlation between what Ramirez contributes and what Lee contributes in terms of offense-to-wins.  This is what makes teammates sit up and listen, and only if Aramis could back up his practical relevance with words.

But he chooses to defer, like he did after each of the playoff sweeps, and this is why I went bat feces when he did.  Ramirez SHOULD lead the Chicago Cubs.  When he hits, we win.  As long as he keeps it up, we should have a winning second half, even though the decent starting pitching is beginning to falter.

Lou's retirement announcement, and why we are yawning

This was the biggest non-announcement ever.  Of course Lou is retiring.  Some say he retired 2 years ago.  He did it so people will quit asking him.  Some say he has earned the right to finish this year on his terms, and he will.  I'm not one of them, but there is the sentimental side of me who will give the man his respect.

Besides, Crane Kenney and Jim Hendry aren't going anywhere, so even if they got to choose a new man this afternoon, he would be no better than the last two guys they hired.

There seems to be no accountability in this organization.  Lou has the freedom to do one wild, crazy move after another, and when he is asked to explain himself, he either stutters and/or gets testy.  Jim has developed a decent drafting mechanism, and he is the king of the desperation trade and the fire-sale steals, but he has never made a good value-for-value straight trade in his whole tenure.  Not to mention, of course, his poor free-agent record, as well as his aversion to conflict, which has resulted in avoidance of arbitration - and overpaying players.

But, neither one of these guys can say they have done their job as badly as the Tribune holdover, Crane Kenney.  What exactly DOES he do?  How is the Triangle building doing?  How about the Great Wrigley Field reclamation?  What great marketing angles have we exploited lately?  When can we expect to watch the Cubs Network?  When Jim Hendry sucks, who calls him on it?  And if Hendry were to get fired, who would pick the next guy?

A corporate lawyer with no baseball background?

I want a baseball man put in Kenney's place.  Someone who can evaluate Hendry fairly, and determine if he is the man or not.  A new manager needs to be found.  Do we do the popular thing and stick Ryno in there?  Is Joe Girardi the guy?  How about Bob Brenly or Alan Trammel?  I heard Joe Torre mentioned?  Who do you choose?  They all have their own qualities.

There needs to be a organizational direction, which is developed and regulated by the President (the Kenney position), communicated throughout the competitive organization by the GM, and implemented on the field by the manager.  Depending on that direction, it could be Brenly, Torre, Ryno, Girardi, the frozen head of Ted Williams...but we need a direction first, and Kenney is not the guy to set it.

The President needs to see the middling-to-slightly above average health of the farm system, as well as the capabilities of what I am calling the Core of the 2011 Cubs, the guys who will definitely be here.

Soriano, Byrd, Marmol, Dempster, Soto, Ramirez, Castro.  Everyone else, even Zambrano, I could see a scenario where they may not be here next year.  These seven individuals will be, and the direction starts with what we are going to surround these seven guys with.

I don't know if Hendry is or isn't that guy.  I'd really like a real baseball man to evaluate what he has done.  I don't like his results, myself, but then again, he hasn't had much to work with from above.  That's the biggest question going forward for us.

Once again: Cub starter great, Cub offense bad, Cub bullpen not good enough to make up for the difference.

For the sake of naming names, Randy Wells and Sean Marshall combined to pitch eight shutout innings in yesterday's contest, and in the bottom of the seventh, Starlin Castro scored the Cubs' lone run, coming home on a squeeze bunt laid down perfectly by Ryan Theriot.

The team had a one-run lead in the top of the ninth inning when the ball was handed to Carlos Marmol, who would quickly demonstrate that he didn't have his best stuff. Actually, that's not true -- it takes a while to walk five guys, doesn't it? By the time the half-inning was over, the Phillies had scored four runs, despite Marmol's allowing just one hit.

And now, for today's "Just Saying" moment:

Carlos Marmol, thru 43 games in 2010:
2-2, 17 SV, 4 BS, 2.91 ERA, 1.32 WHIP, 82 K

Guess Who, thru 42 games in 2009:
3-2, 16 SV, 3 BS, 3.32 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, 41 K

That's all, just saying. Go Cubs!

With apologies to my fellow goat rider Kurt, who is a great writer and a fantastic Cubs' fan, Randy Wells proved him wrong today and all of those people who have said, incorrectly, that Wells is having a worse year this year than last year. The results have been bad. I mean, coming into today's game, he had an ERA over 4.90 but the truth is, he has done his job better this year than he did last year and probably should have an ERA that is around 1.5 lower than where it is. He was great today against the best hitting team in the NL this year (though like Wells, I think there is a bit of a mirage there also but the Reds are pretty good). He took a no hitter into the 7th and ended up pulled in the 8th for Carlos Marmol.

Marmol is falling off of his historic K pace unfortunately and could use the time off during the all star break. Of course, he won't get it, he will deservedly be selected for the All Star game but he could use the time off. Oh yeah, what about the offense? They were great today but the timing was off. The final was 3-1 Cubs but the Cubs kept cranking out baserunners like Kate Goselin cranking out reality shows only to see them die over and over on the bases.

Finally, Geo came through with a bases loaded double in the 6th. Soto continues to be one of the best hitting catchers in baseball as well as being one of (if not the) most productive hitter on the Cubs. I hope his hit today will result in more playing time.

Anyway, I leave with the following information:

Randy Wells 2009: 5.66K/9 2.50BB/9 76% LOB .294 BABIP
Randy Wells 2010: 7.05K/9 2.58BB/9 67% LOB .354 BABIP

There is no reason to think he won't produce an ERA of around 3.50 or so the second half barring an injury or a sudden collapse in his K rate. Young pitchers with that strikeout to walk rate are NOT to be giving up on by a good organization.

In this weekend's Tribune, there was an article about the "Third founder of Apple".  Really?  There was a third founder of Apple, just like there was a fifth Beatle?  Seems that there was; he was the 'business guru' part of the deal, along with Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak.  You know the Steves; this third guy was in the garage, too, but he got sick of the Steves always turning on and letting their minds wander into fancy thoughts.  This third guy even designed the first Apple logo; but finally he got sick of all the talk about mice and pointing and clicking and let the Steves buy him out for $800.  Now, this guy lives simply, on Social Security, and he says sure, he has 'regrets' because of course, the Steves are now richer than God.  But, as the article explained, not all regrets have to be negative.  He did what he thought was right at the time; all the knowledge he had at his disposal was that the Steves were a couple of burnouts, and that they were just gonna run through whatever little they had, and that would be the end of it.

If he had to do it over again, he'd make the same decision, because he went with what his gut said was right, and that is all he could do.  For every Apple success story, there are thousands of other guys who get together for a few weeks, burn through their savings, and have nothing to show for it but a sack of empty beercans.  So he doesn't let his 'regret' eat him up.

A couple of things got me thinking: the first being that we may now possibly have the oxymoron for 2010 - "Positive Regret", to go along with "negative success", one of my favorites (/eyes roll) from the past decade.

The second thing has to do with decisions; specifically sports decisions; even more specifically baseball decisions; well, let's get down to it - trading decisions, particularly those involving the Cubs.  Those of you that know me know that I do exist somewhere on the near side of the ol' Autistic Spectrum, and that I love me some categorizations.  Some kids played with Hot Wheels; I sorted them in boxes by color; then make and model. 

Today I am going to sort some of the Cubs' trades over the years, in terms of regret levels, from positive regret (yo, don't let the door hitcha where the good Lord splitcha) to total Brock-for-Broglio-esque misery.

LEVEL 0: No Regret Whatsoever - total lopsided trades in our favor; ones that might be considered Level 4 or 5 by the other guys.  DeJesus-for-Bowa, with Sandberg thrown in.  Bobby Hill-for-Aramis Ramirez. 

LEVEL 1: Regret as a form of blessed release - Turd Hundley-for-Grudz&Karros in 2003; Sosa-for-Hairston&Font in 2004; Bradley-for-Silva last winter. God help me, these are the trades that feel like curing cancer - chemo that works!

LEVEL 2: Meh-gret: most trades fall into meh-gret: a recent example would be Kevin Hart-for-Grabow and Gorzellany.  What-ever...(NOTE: please do not confuse the trade for Grabow with the subsequent 2-year-contract for Grabow.  That's a whole 'nother topic).  This includes the vast majority of trades that don't work out well for either side.

LEVEL 3: Regret for some; Meh-gret for others: the DeRosa trade falls into this category.  We give up something of value, and whether or not we get like value back, there will be some who will be disappointed for a long time.  In the case of DeRosa, some 'fans' are still pointing to his departure as the crack in the windshield that broke up the 2008 juggernaut, as it were.  Others, such as myself, while admitting that we gave up some measure of value, aren't going to lose a nugget of sleep over it.  There haven't been many other recent Level 3's, unless of course you're one of the ten people left on Earth who still feel Jake Fox can play ball. 

LEVEL 4: Now we're starting to feel the sting; giving up on a major league impact player.  Garland-for-Karchner.  Raffy Palmiero (AND Jamie Moyer!)-for-Wild Thing.  Bill Madlock-for-Steve Ontiveros. Dontrelle Willis (as a throw-in!)-for-Clement & Alfonseca.  You might even throw in Joe Carter-for-Sutcliffe.  I would, you might not.  Carter-for-Sut might be a Level 3 in your world, because 1984 simply does not happen without Sut.  I understand that, and 1984 Chicago might mean more to any franchise than any other season in MLB history where a pennant was NOT won.

But it was pretty clear that Carter was the real deal, he did not immediately impress upon his first callup, we traded him off, and he then spent the next 12 years or so just KILLING fools.

But even considering the regretful nature of Level 4, there is:

LEVEL 5: Brock-for-Broglio.  Letting Maddux walk in 1993, which is not in itself a trade, except in effect, it was when the "Maddux Money" was then given to Jose Guzman and Candy Maldonado.  Letting a Hall-Of-Fame talent go is inexcusible under any circumstances.  These are trades that just kill a franchise, and just EAT into your sleep.

Now then.  Take a good hard look at your team today.  I have recently come out here, myself and others, to accurately note that the offense for the Cubs sucks on toast, and what's more, outside of a couple of guys with large expiring contracts, and of course our "beloved prospects", we had nothing to offer in trade to improve matters any. 

Now and again, someone like Phil Rogers will wonder out loud (in the paper) if there was any possibilities about someone like Fukudome being sent in a 3-way trade with Boston and perhaps Texas.  You may think that Phil Rogers realizes what he does for a living, that if he publishes his idle thoughts, that there will be people who make the implication that there may be some substance behind them. I actually do not think so; I don't think Phil thinks that far ahead.

But back to our trade prospects now in 2010.  I don't think we are going to be able to get rid of Fukudome, or Ramirez, or Lee, or Soriano, or Zambrano.  Someone may try Lilly (especially after last night) or perhaps Nady.  Neither one will bring much.  Neither will the rest of the rabble: the Cajun boys; Tracy and Baker; the 10 or so feeble bullpen arms we've shuffled in and out so far this year; Three-Finger Hill.  Any trades containing any of them falls under Meh-gret.

But what about Castro?  Cashner?  Colvin?  Josh Vitters?  What about Marmol and Soto?  Could we possibly bring in a decent-hitting infielder, at any position, for one or more of them?  Is it as easy as that?

This is the main point of today's column: any trade has risk.  We could, hypothetically, trade Castro, Colvin, and Cashner for Albert Pujols today, and quite possibly once he puts on a Cub uniform, Pujols forgets how to swing a bat for the rest of his natural life.  If that happened, there would be regret.  The question is, how much?

Look at each one of our prospects.  Are they certain future Hall-of-Famers?  Are they certain impact big-leaguers?  Are they even certain major-league contributors?  How much regret would we feel if one or more of our so-called top prospects were dealt, in an attempt to make something out of this offense the next couple of years?

My take?  I don't feel I am watching certain Greatness when I see Colvin, Castro, Cashner and Soto play.  Marmol?  Heh heh, God only knows.  He has a unique gift - it may stay with him 10 more years, or it may leave him tomorrow.  I wouldn't mess with him right now. 

The rest of them?  Aren't going to cost me any sleep, ever.

In light of a few numbers that were thrown around in the shoutbox recently, I decided to further investigate some statistics that may or may not be trends. Most of these things are probably unrelated, but some of them are very interesting to know. So without further adieu… Fun With Statistics!

We’ll start out with a couple of team-centric warm-ups

The Cubs are:

• 8-12 in One-Run games
• 9-7 in blowouts (5+ runs)

• 3-24 when they score 3 runs or less (!)
• 23-7 when they score 4 runs or more
• 11-0 when they score 7 runs or more

• 12-2 when they allow 2 runs or less
• 14-29 when they allow 3 runs or more
• 7-14 when they allow 3 or 4 runs (What!?)

Ok… So from that we can accurately say if we score 4 runs or more, we’ll probably win and if we allow 2 runs or less, we’ll probably win. Jeez, not too much margin for error there.

Alright, next let’s look at some situational statistics for the team

The Cubs are:

• 26-1 when they start the 9th inning with the lead or tied (damn, alright, that’s actually pretty great)
• 0-30 when they start the 9th inning behind (Holy. Shit.)

The Cubs have:

• 8 comeback wins with the largest deficit overcome being 3 runs (sigh, remember that Rockies game in magical 2008?)
• 14 blown leads (for comparison, we had only 22 in all of 2009.)
• 2 walk-off wins
• 0 walk-off losses (Hey! An improvement! We had 13 in 2009)

Wow. Alright. Those are some pretty polarizing numbers. Let’s move on.

Time to pick on some individual contributors (or, probably more than likely, “lack of” contributors)

The Cubs are:

• 10-1 in games started by King Carlos Silva (this is my personal favorite and the one that spawned this post)
• 16-30 in games started by anyone else

• 11-12 in games where John Grabow pitches (I assumed worse)
• 20-6 in games where Carlos Marmol pitches (Only 12 being Saves)

• 7-3 in games where Aramis Ramirez does not play
• 9-16 in games where Aramis Ramirez does play AND has a hit

• 5-14 in games Derrek Lee goes hitless
• 19-17 in games Derrek Lee has at least 1 Hit
• 12-5 in games Derrek Lee has at least 1 RBI

Ya know, I could probably go on and on, but let’s sum up what we’ve learned here.

- The Cubs do not do well in close games
- They will, however, win most every game they score 4 or more runs
- Unfortunately, if they give up more than 2 runs, they will probably lose

- If we have the lead in the 9th, you can chalk that baby up in the W column.
- If we’re losing in the 9th, you might as well turn the game off.

- Carlos Silva and Carlos Marmol have saved this team.
- John Grabow and Aramis Ramirez have killed this team.
- Derrek Lee may or may not be expendable.

Go Cubs.

We've often heard of pitchers "adding a pitch," usually in the offseason. Sometimes a pitcher will develop a changeup or add a slider, etc. But Carlos Marmol has become more effective this season by eliminating his curveball.

The percentage of pitches thrown by Marmol that were curveballs, since 2007*:

2007: 20%
2008: 13%
2009: 11%
2010: 3%

But his fastball percentage has actually dropped as well, from 46% in 2007 to 41% this year. So what gives? For Marmol, it's all about the slider. His slider percentages:

2007: 31%
2008: 38%
2009: 43%
2010: 56%

To give you some perspective, he throws his slider more often than all but one pitcher in baseball: Luke Gregerson of the Padres (he's having success, too, with a 1.82 ERA in 22 games). I really noticed Marmol's tendency to rely on his slider a couple weeks ago, and now that I'm looking for it, it's completely obvious that he's using his slider to set up his fastball.

This frustrated me for a while. Usually when a pitcher relies heavily on his breaking ball, it's because he's struggling to control his fastball and has no choice but to depend on his secondary pitch. But with Marmol, it almost seems that he'd rather throw his nasty slider and then surprise the hitter with a fastball. And the fact is, it's working. He has a 1.52 ERA, has converted seven of his last eight save opportunities (the only one he blew was against the Rockies when he entered the game in the eighth with the bases already loaded), and his ridiculous 17.49 K/9 is easily the highest in the majors. The all-time leader in this statistic among relievers is Brad Lidge with 12.98 K/9.

So I'm certainly not complaining any more, but it is interesting to watch a pitcher dominate with his slider the way Marmol does. The man's fastball averages 95 mph, yet he throws it just 41 percent of the time. But I'm sure most hitters in the National League--at least those who have faced him this season--would tell you they'd rather see just about anything other than that slider.

*All data courtesy of FanGraphs

Brandon writes at Wait Til This Year, a kick-ass Cubs blog

Ryan Dempster is vindicated! Except not quite. Sigh.

Demp starred in last night's outing, mostly by not crapping his pants and/or giving up any grand slams. No, but seriously, eight innings, seven strikeouts to only one walk, and just three hits. That'll do it.

I was hoping Ryan would get a shot at completing the game, but I'm not going to complain about the opportunity to watch Carlos Marmol make lame-os like Manny Ramirez look compleetly stoopid with his narsty slider.

Derrek Lee knocked in all three Cub runs, taking himself above both the .230 mark in batting average as well as the .700 mark in OPS. He'll keep coming back around, I promise. (For the record, Fangraphs' preferred predictor suggets he'll hit .280/.364/.476 for the rest of the season, which would be fine by me.)

So yeah, see? Winning is easy!

Nice and important win. Cubs take a 4 run lead in the first inning on a few dinks and then a Soriano blast and they hold it thru a less than stellar Carlos Silva and some shaky middle relief. This is the first time the Cubs have pitched both John Grabow and Bob Howry in the same game and they still managed to win!

Soriano made a nice, slightly awkward, diving catch but also saved a run when the Rangers attempted a comeback in the seventh on a double by Ian Kinsler, holding Elvus Andrus, who runs like the wind, at third base. That kept the score 5-4 and some great pitching by Sean Marshall and Carlos Marmol, they managed to keep it that way.

With the win and losses by both the Cardinals and the Reds, the Cubs have parlayed a surprising 3-2 road trip into a 4.5 game deficit in the central. Day off tomorrow. Let's relish all the big close game wins for the Cubs and get ready for a tough Dodgers series on Tuesday.

Looks like it got a little fiesty around here this weekend.  That will happen when your favorite team looks hopeless.  Let me try to sum up this mediocre weekend with the mediocre weather in this sometimes mediocre blog:

- First of all, my sympathies for the fans of the Pirates.  I got the chance to speak with many of them last fall.  Rum Bunter Tom holds us Cub fans up as the picture of loyalty because we pack our park every day, and his own (wonderful) park is mostly empty. 

You're wrong, man.  Most of the people in our park are either families from Iowa on their yearly pilgrimage to the yard, or twenty-somethings from the neighborhood visiting the world's biggest beer garden.  There are some die-hard blue Kool-Aid sippers, and a few of us loyalists who are dying inside the past two seasons.  But your fans WANT to believe, they get hooked year after year with the ARams and the Jason Bays and the Nate McLouths and now the Andrew McCutcheons.  I literally feel terrible knowing that by this time next year, the stiff at first base (Jones) will be making huge bucks and McCutcheon will be playing center for the Red Sox or Rays.  If any fans in the entire world deserve to be disloyal, it's your own.  Don't be so hard on your fellow Pirate fans.

- Besides Castro, Marmol, Soto and Colvin, (who in my mind are totally untouchable), the only other Cubs that would have any trade value are Lilly, Wells, Theriot, and in the right situation, Zambrano.  Z would be a trade deadline move, and it would require United Nations-level negotiations from all parties in terms of clauses, money, roles, and return.  We really don't want that trade to happen.  Not because we love Z so much anymore, but unless his teammates absolutely despise him, which they don't appear to, even this washed-out abortion of a team does not need that kind of distraction.

I think Lilly is the man most likely on the move.  That wouldn't be my personal choice, because I think he hates losing, can't stomach it, and we need more of that around here.  But Wells is a bit too young and resembles a young Greg Maddux a bit too much for Hendry to deal.  Theriot doesn't really have anything specific that other teams really want.  He can hit in the National League, and that's pretty much it.

- Even though I have no candidates in mind to replace him, my pick to be traded for even a bag of balls would be Derrek Lee.  I fully expect his production to increase with the temperature, and to me that's the problem in a nutshell.  It got prickly around here about Lee, and the thing I find so frustrating about him is the fact that he is held in esteem by his teammates as the leader, the barometer that everyone else tries to emulate.

And if THIS is the guy that is the pulse, then we need a pacemaker.  A true stud hoss leader would not struggle in April and May every year.  A real big man would not have spent the last five years taking walks in key clutch situations, leaving the heavy lifting up to Ramirez.  And now, when it is obvious that there is something physically wrong with ARam, a real leader steps up in the time of need and performs.  And if he is going to second-guess his manager, he doesn't do it meekly, mealy-mouthy.  If he doesn't like his guy mixing the order up all the time, then gatdammit, say it like a man!  Don't give us that "well, it's his team" crap. 

- Look, what is most wrong about the 2010 Cubs right now is motivation.  People are taking plays off, or whole innings off.  What does Carlos Marmol's enormous BABIP tell you?  What it says to ME is that, when he steps out on the mound, the rest of the team is not getting to any balls that are hit.  Marmol is not giving up homers, so the balls that are hit are in play.  Now, either the rest of the team are a) letting up or b) all tensed up by the situation. 

Regardless, it is indicative of a totally unprofessional attitude that pervades this team.  The thing Ryne Sandberg always stressed, and the reason why a man with average talents went as far as he did, was because he played every play the same way, all out.  The mistakes he made were physical, and although he was as fiery as a Jello pudding pop, his example rubbed off on certain teammates, which made them somewhat better than they were physically required to be.

Now, I'm not bringing Ryno into the mix here because I want him to take over the Cubs.  I'm not sure he is a long term solution to anyone's managerial situation, because being single-mindedly focused is just one attribute.  The guy the Royals just canned was basically Ryne Sandberg without the Hall-of-Fame career.  But the one thing I do have to admit, grudgingly, is that although I personally declared the season dead last week, and have no reason to believe that this .420 team is going to turn it around...

...the Chicago Cubs are still in the hunt.

It is obvious, though, that if we just leave things alone, as is, nothing is going to happen.  It is totally plausible that Ricketts and Hendry have seen the wild moves Lou Piniella has tried have not worked.  They may choose to do nothing, but I honestly believe they are not THAT lazy.  Maybe so.  Ken Rosenthal expresses what I have heard several times on the national level, that a change is needed, and it could be Ryno (which I say: ugh) or Trammel (Lou once won 116...Alan once LOST 119) or Bob Brenly, which actually kind of speaks to me. 

Me, personally, I'd like to see us trade Lee for a bullpen arm, put Z back in the rotation, put Dempster in the pen (because his last four outings have been worse than Z's last four outings as a starter, and Z has simply sucked in the pen) and see if that doesn't freshen things up a bit.  Who plays first?  Who cares...give Colvin a mitt.  Bring up Hoffpauir.  Play Nady there.  Bring back Chad Tracy.  The Great Jason Dubois is still in the organization.  Whomever, the Grand Master Plan HAS to include bringing in someone new at first base for 2011.  Let's see what else we have in the pipeline, before we overpay this winter for somebody external.

Either way, fact is: the rest of the division seems to be cooperating, making us seem not quite as bad as we really are.  Standing pat is a poor option.  We need more leadership, and more accountability throughout.  Ricketts family - make it happen!

We just need somebody to step up here...anybody.  To paraphrase Dean Wormer, Quiet, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life.