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.

Dear Tom Ricketts,

You are a douche bag. Now, it isn’t personal. You may or may not be a guy I would like to share a beer. It isn’t what you have done. You have bought the Chicago Cubs. You ownership group controls a team I love dearly. It is what you haven’t done. That is winning a World Series for the long suffering fans of the North Side. Is it fair to demand a World Series trophy despite this is the first year of your ownership? In any other business such a turnaround would be considered absurd. Unfortunately, we are taking about a sports team. You will be a douche bag just like all of Chicago sports ownership save the Blackhawks franchise (Five years ago I would have laughed out loud after reading that statement) until you bring the trophy to Wrigleyville.  

I realize you are a fan yourself having met your wife in the bleachers. However, as it stands many of us look at you like you are a hipster, someone who goes to Wrigley Field because it is the place to be. Let’s face it there are hundreds of thousands of fans who sit along the ivy strewn walls not knowing who the starting pitcher is or who is in the starting lineup. Unfortunately, as it stands I have to count you among those lost and delirious. There were a number of issues this offseason; a more knowledgeable owner could have stepped in asked for those to be handled. You didn’t. Instead you have taken up the task to beautify Wrigley Field. You have brought in a pseudo-vegan dietician for the players. You have imported freetrade wheat grass just in case the players who wanted colon cleansing enemas would be reassured that the purchase helped indigenous people of wherever. All of these things are fine and well, but how will it bring a winner to Chicago? That is why I think you are douche. It’s just part of the baggage of owning a team with long suffering fans. Maybe you will turn around the team. Maybe you will bring a championship to this city. Unfortunately, as it stands as an owner Rocky Wirtz has made you his bitch. Here is too hoping that you get things done and that fans don’t hope for your demise like they did for Dollar Bill Wirtz. Give them a title or they may just wish for that to happen. 

One of our readers/commenters/writers/whatever responded to yesterday's visceral demand for immediate action by noting that at this point in the season, in the position we're in, nearly anything done by Cubs management would be construed as desperation.

Correct.  And?

He then continued that he would rather see us stay on course of the Ricketts five-year plan, which actually doesn't start until Lee's, Fukudome's, Lilly's, Dempster's, Silva's and Ramirez's contracts come off the books.  That, my friends, is in 2012. 

Which is two years from now using the new math.

He mentioned that this particular team is built for the now, and it is pretty much written in stone that the men who are here are the men that will be here until the end of next year.  Which is absolutely true.  I said that myself a few times this offseason, but please understand.  I was doing it just to make myself feel better, because I saw other teams improving all around us, or at least trying to improve, and all we could do is stand around and tell one Milton Bradley story after another to each other, to justify s-canning our incoming 2009 Savior after one season.

Look, he is right on all counts.  Nobody is trading anything of value right now, at least not explicitly.  There are a few GMs that will deal anytime, anywhere, but it is still just entering Mid-May, and there are many teams that rightfully feel the whole 2010 season still lies before them.

It's just, that, we're not among them. 

Bob Brenly said the other night that he thought the key to 2010 was for Soto and Soriano to bounce back to their 'old selves', and to his thinking, they have, and we're still losing.  Well, Bobba-looie, not so fast.  Soriano and Soto ARE doing better, but they have not returned to their 2008 form.  Soto had more offensive impact in terms of power, as did Soriano.  Their averages are up, and sure, I'd rather have this, now, than what both of them managed to pump out last year.  But, except for a few days last week, neither one of them have truly carried us the way they did for stretches in 2008.

Marlon Byrd has been playing better than expected, but he was never expected to be a major impact guy.  He's been as big an impact guy as any, but if I had to put a number on it, I'd say so far the 2010 Byrd is about 50% of the 2008 Ramirez, which is as I have said, not too bad.

Theriot and Fukudome have been getting on base.  Once again, this is Fookie Time, we'll see if this carries on into June and beyond.  Same with The Riot - he tends to lose steam as the season drags.  Colvin is stuck in a bad place, Font has been Font, which is to say short and limited, and Nady, Baker, and Tracy are not very good.

All of which points to our so-called big men, the leaders and focal points of our lineup.  Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez, of course.  The scope of this article is not to determine what in the name of Christ is wrong with these two, but they are most of the reason why we are a losing ball club in 2010, and there has been absolutely NO indication at all that either one of them a) accept their responsiblities, b) plan to examine themselves, or c) are going to improve in any way shape or form in the near future. 

I have my theory, you have yours, and yes, past performances do indicate that if they are bound to return to the norm, that means some good times ahead.  Because, Lord, both of them are WAAAAY under their norms.  But you know what?  I see NOTHING that suggests a turnaround soon.  Absolutely nothing but the backs of their bubble gum cards.

So, basically, we are playing .429 ball right now, and that is what I think we are going to do the rest of the year.  And the next - maybe even worse.

Look, I have NO desire to spend this, my 46th summer of my life, and the 40th as a Cub fan, watching a .429 ball club.  Or next summer.  And that just bugs the hell out of me.

The Yahoo! roto writer termed the Zambrano move as "weapons-grade stupid" and then Yahoo!  Big League Stew correctly surmised that whether Sweet Lou Piniella meant to open up the Second Seal or not, he has, and now we Cub fans will now know what kind of owners the Ricketts are.

But first, let's first give you all credit for some excellent discussion about this point.  If taken strictly as a "most recent performance" move, if there were no names (or salaries) attached to the move, it was the best move to make.  That is how I felt as I went to bed last night.  This morning, though, I have further considered the Zambrano issue.

Let's not assume that Lou's motivation behind the move was to hang Jim Hendry's wire out to dry.  It might have played a part, but Lou Piniella's issues are not the scope of this essay.  It can be argued that this move is consistent with his frequently repeated mantra that the best nine players at any given time will play.  But he has completely discounted two things.

The first is, of course, that Zambrano's history is far superior to either Silva the Hutt's or Gorzelanny's.  If left alone, it would not be hard to imagine Zambrano having an ERA under 4 at the All-Star break.  There is NO way, in fact I would bet 50 bucks that Gorzelanny's ERA will exceed 4 at the break.  And while Silva looks good now, if this is all an elaborate con job he is currently pulling, it wouldn't be the first.

The second shouldn't be Piniella's problem, but unfortunately it is.  These are not just lines in a stats book.  These are walking, breathing Corporations that he manages every day.  Sending Z to the pen may very well eff-up his arm, as it would for any starter you send there.  Conditioning yourself to throw every fifth day, then being forced to throw maybe three days in a row can cause damage.

You are risking damaging a $72 million dollar investment when you send Z to the pen.  You are risking damaging a $28 million dollar investment if you send Silva there.  Much less than $72 milldo.  As for Gorzellanny, you are risking a half a million.  Might Z be a better reliever than Silva or Gorzo?  Yeah, maybe.  But Lou is playing with House money.  Ricketts money.

Lou is telling his owners that he doesn't give a monkey's ass about the mega-investment that they, themselves, are forced to cover.  I will risk flushing over 70 million of YOUR dollars to either a) send a psychological message to my team, b) cover up a gap that your crappy GM left in our roster, or c) remind you that I'm 67 years old, and I should be eating pudding with my grandkids on some pier in Clearwater.

All the Ricketts have done on record thus far is: raise ticket prices once again; make the players lounge somewhat less cramped than the last one was; try to install a gaudy sign in left field; install pricier concession stands; and fantasize about a triangular restaurant/museum/parking deck/hotel/day spa to be built on top of the carwash next to the park.  We accused the Tribune of only being concerned about their precious profits - all we've heard about so far from the new owners is revenues, revenues, revenues!

What about your gatdam ballteam?  Your manager is playing hide-and-seek with your $72 million dollar pitcher, and not a public word from any of you?

Tom Ricketts - you're the point guy, so quit high-fiving mopes and start making some honest-to-God baseball decisions. 

New Cubs owner Tom Ricketts did an appearance on NPR on Saturday morning (here's the related article).  This is great news for Cub fans who are hungry to learn about what his plans are, but it's terrible news for people who were hoping for an exciting interview.  (NPR, I love ya, but you're a little too serious for my tastes.) 

Ricketts apparently has his finger on the vein of Cub Fan Nation (I know, some of you hate that phrase but tough shit, I've been using it for six years) because a lot of what he said is stuff Championship Enthusiasts like me want to hear.

First, he's not 100% right by my take.  I doubt any Cub fan will love everything he says.  In terms of what he's doing that's wrong, he apparently has no intention of firing anybody in the front office.  I get that he doesn't want to immediately shake everything up, but a team can't be run by the same General Manager for seven years now and not have at least one trip to the Series without there being somebody not doing his or her job.  It'd just be nice to see at least one new decision maker swoop in and shake things up a bit.

But what's he doing that's right?  First he sees Wrigley Field not as a shrine, but as a stadium.  According to Ricketts: "First of all, we want this to be the best franchise in baseball, and
you can’t be a world-class franchise and have third-class facilities. . . . There is land that is just adjacent to the
stadium, along Clark Street, that the team owns and we intend to
develop that into a part of the stadium, that will give fans more
options on game day, but as importantly free up space inside of the
stadium to build in some of the clubhouse functionality that other
teams enjoy."

Apparently, this may cause ticket prices to rise.  Ricketts says that fans "should keep in mind is that with family ownership now, we intend
to reinvest all the profits that we can get on the team and put that
back into preserving Wrigley Field and to putting a better team on the
field. So it's not like it's going away to some kind of corporation and
never will be seen again." 

If any of this sounds familiar to you, it's because you've read it here before.

Way back in January, I wrote this:

Please do not feel beholden to the people who run the minor league
system.  They have developed some pitchers, but the bottom line is that
if you fail to develop successful positional players, then you're
going to spend way more money buying what you need on the market.

Regarding Wrigley Field, I wrote:

Sometime in the near future you're going to have to renovate the
ballpark.  Cub fans loathe this idea because it means a year or two in
US Cellular.  I don't think that's a big deal, but I think it'd be
cooler if you could move into Soldier Field.  Regardless, when the
ballpark gets rebuilt I can only ask that you expand the bleachers and
make the upper deck bigger and better.  Also don't forget to improve
the home team's clubhouse ... and leave the visitor's clubhouse as a
hole.  Every advantage, Mr. Ricketts.  Any edge.

Oh, and I'm betting money that the Cubs win the World Series for the
first time while out of Wrigley.  It'd be too funny for it to not
happen.

One other thing while I'm thinking about it - if you choose to
capitalize off the fame of the ballpark by selling naming rights you
will face staunch opposition from the vast majority of the fans.  They
apparently don't realize that Wrigley Field was the first ballpark to be named after a brand.

Crazy talk, huh?  I'm also certain that if I dug through the archives of GROTA, I'd find in various places the expressed opinion that the Cubs should jack up their ticket prices and charge whatever they damn well please, as long as they put the money back into the team.

Does this mean Ricketts has been reading GROTA?  More importantly, does this make Tom Ricketts the right owner for the Cubs? 

No to both.  Time will tell on the lip service he's been paying.  Don Baylor, Dusty Baker, Andy MacPhail, Milton Bradley, Todd Hundley, Ed Lynch, Larry Himes, they have all said the right thing at some point to get to where they got.  But I feel optimistic about Tom Ricketts.  I see good things in our future.  And while I doubt that GROTA is a landing place for Mr. Ricketts on his daily web crawl, we were contacted by his publicity agency way back in January about the shape of things to come.  But the important thing is not the shape, rather it's the reality.  And the reality looks good.

While we should probably remain concerned about the fiscal abilities of a new owner that took nearly six months to scrape together the necessary cash to seal the deal, it remains freshing to finally have a face to associate with the ownership of the Cubs. Maybe Tom Ricketts will indeed be a super-fan bent on building a winning franchise, or perhaps he'll be an amateur meddler of the Pete Angelos mold and will run the team into the ground. Probably he will be somewhere in the middle -- a little heavy-handed on some things, but overall better than what we've had from the Tribune these last 28 years.

Pending court and MLB ownership approval, the Chicago Cubs will soon belong to the Ricketts family, who spent 845 million for the privilege.  It's been a long  time in coming.

Back when the team's sale was first announced, many of us had hoped it would be a guy like Mark Cuban who would step up and buy the team.  Cuban is the sort who would put product before profit, and while he probably wouldn't go into the red to win he would almost certainly spend more than most.

Still, Tom Ricketts is a Cubs fan.  There's no doubt that he wants his new team to break the drought, although he's going to have a very, very long process ahead of him.  In the next few years he's going to have to deal with some big, untradeable contracts, a crumbling ballpark, and a fanbase that continues to grow more alienated.  Or he could just wait two years and sell the team again and probably make a cool 200 million dollar profit -- the downturned economy may have delayed the family's purchase of the team, but it also aided them in buying the Cubs at a relatively big discount.

Regardless of his plans, we're all still probably a little concerned about what Tom Ricketts will do next.  It seems doubtful that a guy who was barely able to scrounge up the money to buy the team will be able to grow -- or even maintain -- the third largest team payroll in baseball.

Hopefully his next move will be to answer those issues, to calm us in the face of concerns, and his public silence should soon be broken. 

The longest team sale of memory appears to be at an end.  ESPN is reporting that Cubs.com is reporting that the Tribune is reporting that they have reached an agreement with the Ricketts Family.

Of course, it's still not over -- the MLB owners have to approve of the sale. 

So here's the question -- do the Ricketts have any chance of not gaining the approval of MLB?  If not, and if they have been given an inside iggy that things will go smoothly, is it possible for them to give Jim Hendry pre-emptive permission to grow the team's salary before the trade deadline?

It sounds like a lot of "ifs" to me, and history has taught me that the answer will likely be "no."  Besides, we cannot quickly forget that the feet-dragging of this sale occurred primarily because Tom Ricketts had trouble ponying up the cash to finalize the near-$900 million dollar deal. 

As a long-time Cubs fan, I can't help but wonder what happens next.  It's like going to prom with a blind date.  Will she turn out to be a foreign-exchange student studying to be a model back in Mother Russia?  Or will she be revealed to be your best friend's thugly cousin who once started linebacker for the high school football team?

I'd like to think that Tom Ricketts is a baseball genius who will surround himself with verified, certified baseball men who aren't afraid to try new things and will not flinch at hitting the eject button on long-term Cub strategies that obviously do not work.  I'd like to believe that Mr. Ricketts will not only not cut salary on the team but will in fact open his checkbook up even more to help ensure that the Cubs can field a competitive ballclub now and forever. 

I'd like to think all that.  I can't help but be skeptical, though.

I have often said that in baseball there are a handful of teams that are always competitive.  The Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Dodgers, Cardinals, and Giants have immense fan bases, large budgets, and smart people running their organizations.  They don't always make the playoffs, but they are expected to -- and if they fail then their fans are bitterly disappointed.  The Cubs belong in that category based on fan base alone. 

Maybe the Ricketts will build on that fan base and the Cubs will finally ascend into the ranks of Regular Winners.  We can't assume Tom Ricketts will buy the Cubs a World Championship, but we should expect -- nay, demand -- that he puts them in a good position every single year.  And the best way for him to do that is clean house, hire the right guys, and give them the budget to do their hard work.

Will he?  Can he?  I'm almost too nervous to find out.

The Sporting News is reporting that, in a compelling sign of confidence, our favorite team's next owner is having trouble ponying up the necessary cash to finalize his purchase of the Cubs.  Tom Ricketts has chosen to compensate for this fact by wisely offering a portion of the team to rich, celebrity Cub fans. 

For only a cool $25 million you can buy your own slice of the Chicago pie!  I can only imagine a Cubs organization in which this is the necessary result of an owner with too little money to actually buy the team.  Forget about the possibility that the Cubs will have to cut salary to a more affordable level.  I'm worried more about an organization crafted by the feedback of such wealthy co-owners as Bill Murray, Jim Belushi, Billy Corgan, and John Cuzack.

Imagine a Cubs team in which the organist plays melancholy tunes between innings, in which the scoreboard is painted a Burtonesque black, and where one of the crazy owners dangles from the foul pole in order to relive the greatest moment of his movie-making career hoping to catch the homerun ball that wins the Cubs the World Series. 

Actually scratch all of that.  None of that is actually scary.  What's scary is the team being purchased by a poor owner.  What's scary is the sudden realization that "Ricketts" is in no way, shape, or form an anagram for "Steinbrenner."  What's scary is that the best possible owner remains caught up in his own world in which he dodges allegations of insider trading while exchanging wordy insults with the player of his basketball team's playoff rival.  That's the scary thing and that is exactly where we are headed.

There has not been anything of late about the sale of the Cub's being completed. Here is what I know. About 3 weeks ago there was a story in Chicago Crains Business that Ricketts looking for 10 investors to put in another 25 million each. Today the reports are that Ricketts has had meetings with "hollywood" types that have Chicago roots looking for money. I don't take any of this as good news that the sale will being going thru any time soon. My take on the situation is that this may hold back the Cub's as much as the bullpen. With the ownership in such a state of flux, Hendry's hands may-be tied as the deals he can make. Does anyone have any more information?