After this latest Cubs loss, my brother and I dissected their myriad problems and summed them up with an explanation that is both simple and complex: all the moves made in the off-season have turned into disasters of varying magnitude.
Now, there’s still time for things to improve. I’m absolutely leaving open the possibility that we could be singing a totally different tune come August. But so far, I submit that not a single one of the changes made to this club has resulted in any improvement. Quite the opposite. And anything that’s gone smoothly to this point has resulted from the Cubs deciding to leave well enough alone.
Furthermore, if things don’t turn around, I’m inching dangerously close to the conclusion that this entire season can be blamed on the failure to acquire Jake Peavy. I never thought I would say that because, as much as I’d love to see Peavy don Cubbie blue, I’ve never considered him a franchise savior or anything. And given that the past two playoff failures have been more the fault of the offense than the pitching, this seemed even more the case. But think about it. How many of the off-season moves can be directly or indirectly traced back to the failed pursuit of Peavy? Let’s inspect some of them, shall we?
FAIL: Trading DeRosa/Signing Miles/Promoting Fontenot to Everyday Player
OK, DeRo hasn’t exactly set the world on fire with his middling batting average over in Cleveland. But his 30 RBIs would be good for the team lead with the Cubs, and his seven homers would have him second. Plus, his veteran leadership would sure look nice in the middle of this losing streak. And his glove sure would look nice at third base in Ramirez’s absence.
The decision to trade DeRosa—and then fill his utility man role with the much cheaper Aaron Miles, and his second base role with the much cheaper Mike Fontenot—was based on the need to clear some space on the books for Peavy’s salary. If the Peavy trade was made, then perhaps his addition offsets the sacrifices made here. But with no Peavy, this is all loss and no gain. And trading for Ryan Freel in an attempt to upgrade the infield has also yielded no positive results.
FAIL: Lack of Quality Lefty Relief Options
The Cubs only lefty option out of the pen is Neal “Walk-o-Matic” Cotts. Cotts has walked an impressive nine batters, and given up an impressive nine earned runs, all in just 11 innings of work.
But imagine for a minute that Jake Peavy is one of the Cubs’ five starters. That means Sean Marshall, provided he wasn’t included in the trade—and perhaps a major assumption, I’ll grant—is in the bullpen and Cotts maybe isn’t even on the roster.
FAIL: Lack of Quality Relief Options, Period
Not that Kerry Wood (two blown saves, ballooning ERA) has been so wonderful in Cleveland, but his departure did set off a chain reaction in the bullpen. Suddenly, almost everyone was moved into a new role. And so far, those are roles many of them have proven ill-suited for. Without an established closer, the Cubs were left to choose between someone with all the stuff but no experience, and someone with less impressive stuff but some experience. The decision to let Wood leave, like the decision to trade DeRosa, was a move meant to free up money for Peavy’s salary. Plus, the Cubs shipped off some of the leftover parts intended for the Peavy deal, and got in return Aaron Heilman, who has a Cottsian 15 walks in just under 20 innings of work.
Let’s not forget David Patton. Look, if you’re not going to use him, then don’t keep him on the roster, even if he is a Rule 5 pick.
FAIL: Trading Jason Marquis
With Peavy allegedly on his way, there was no longer a place on the roster for Marquis or his expensive contract. I still hate Jason Marquis, but so far he’s eaten up more innings than every Cubs starter but Ryan Dempster. And his record, ERA and WHIP, while not anything to write home about, still compare favorably to just about every Cubs starter except Ted Lilly. And he’s done all this while making half his starts in a notoriously hitter-friendly ballpark.
Unloading Marquis makes all the sense in the world, assuming that you can replace him with someone better. Peavy would have been someone better. Oh, and the unwanted contract that the Cubs took on in this trade? That dude isn’t even on the roster anymore.
***
And then, there are the moves that failed all on their own, moves for which there is not the luxury of blaming Jake Peavy…
FAIL: Signing Milton Bradley
The success of the Milton Bradley signing was predicated on him remaining healthy, consistent, and well behaved—or at least two of those three. But he’s already been injured, he’s struggled to reach .200, and he’s been suspended once. All this in just two months of work. That’s impressive even by Bradley’s own lofty standards. Particularly galling was his insistence on appealing that suspension, “on principle” mind you, instead of taking it while he was hurt and not playing anyway. Someone should have reminded Bradley that he’s not in charge, and nipped that in the bud. I’m not sure why that didn’t happen. Piniella doesn’t seem like an inmates-running-the-asylum type of manager. That’s more Dusty Baker territory. Maybe, after enough years in Chicago, all managers turn into Dusty Baker.
FAIL: Signing Joey Gathright
‘Nuff said.
***
And finally, a few possible FAILs in the making…
FAIL?: Throwing Lots of Money at Ryan Dempster/Picking Up Harden’s Option
I still maintain that, at today’s prices, even a passable season from Harden will wind up being a bargain. But, like Milton Bradley, Rich Harden has managed to make all our worst fears come true in just two months. Intermittent control issues: check. DL stint: check. And so far, it’s looking like it would have been cheaper and more effective to keep Marquis around and let Dempster go. Of all the Cubs currently playing below their potential, Ryan Dempster is high on my list of those who I believe can turn it around. But he better get on that.
The Peavy factor is fairly minimal with both of these moves, since they were made before the Peavy talks really heated up. Still, one could argue that Harden seemed like a risk worth taking when the presumed acquisition of Peavy would make him no more than a fifth starter. And one could argue that retaining Ryan Dempster became a more urgent matter when two of his fellow clubhouse leaders, Wood and DeRosa, both left for Peavy-related reasons.
FAIL?: Not Even Entertaining the Possibility of Trading D-Lee
For reasons I’ve already covered in past posts and have no desire to revisit, D-Lee may have outlived his usefulness as a Cub. And I say that as someone who would be tremendously sorry to see him go. Yet—and this is a recurring theme—so far Lee has been a living, breathing example of why assuming the worst is sometimes a smart idea. With the injuries, and with the whole league seeing all his flaws on full display, and with his hefty salary, Lee might be untradeable at this point. At the very least, you won’t get the value for him that you could have gotten not too long ago.
The Peavy factor is again minimal, unless you want to argue that trading Lee for pitching didn’t seem like a necessary move with Peavy about to join the team.
***
Now, throw in a bunch of injuries, and it’s not surprising that the Cubs season has so far been bad. In fact, maybe one game below .500 is actually the best outcome we could have hoped for. The division is still there for the taking. Sooner or later, some of the breaks might start falling our way. In fact, that is why I was supremely confident that we’d win on Sunday. My confidence was not based on anything I’d seen on the field, just on my belief that sooner or later the law of averages has to take over and we have to win at least one game. (My confidence that we’d win yesterday was based on playing the Pirates.)
Then again, and I hate to dust off this whole bit but it’s too obvious not to, if the law of averages hasn’t taken over in the last 101 years, then 8 games ain’t nothing.
