ESPN MLB

• Austin Jackson scored a run in each of the Tigers' first six games this season. That was the longest streak by a Detroit batter to start a season since Darrell Evans crossed the plate in each of the first eight contests in 1986. And it's the longest streak by a Tigers leadoff hitter since 1939, when one of Jackson's center field predecessors, Barney McCosky, also scored in the first eight games of the season. In game seven on Friday, however, Jackson was on base only once (he walked in the eighth) and was stranded at third.
• [+] Enlarge
  Duane Burleson/AP PhotoAustin Jackson is having a solid season for the Tigers early on.
  The Red Sox managed to blow a three-run lead in the ninth and a two-run lead in the 11th in losing a wild one to Detroit on Sunday, 13-12. It was the first time Boston had scored a dozen runs and lost since May 31, 1970, when they were on the wrong end of a 22-13 slugfest with the White Sox at Fenway.
• Alfredo Aceves gave up all three ninth-inning runs in Sunday’s game without retiring a batter, making him just the second Red Sox pitcher in the live-ball era to work zero innings pitched in each of his first two appearances of the year. Guido Grilli faced one batter each in the first two games of the 1966 season, and didn't get either of them out.
• The Tigers used eight pitchers in that 13-12, come-from-behind win over the Red Sox. It marked just the second time in 70 years that Detroit had come back to win a game in which their starter surrendered seven-plus runs without getting through the third inning. Omar Olivares was the starter in 1997 when the Tigers rallied to beat Baltimore 11-8.
• On Sunday, the Yankees managed just three hits -- all doubles. That same day, the Twins had just two hits as Jason Hammel posted the longest no-hit bid of the year so far. Both Minnesota knocks were doubles. It's the first time in almost three years that two teams have done that on the same day. But then … the Royals did it against Oakland (three hits, three doubles) on Monday … and the Athletics did it against Kansas City (one hit) on Tuesday.It's the first time since at least 1917 that there have been three straight days where a team had every hit be a double.
• On Sunday, Jeff Samardzija (making just his sixth career start) was afforded the chance at a complete game. He had to be pulled after giving up a two-out homer that pulled the Nationals to within a run. Four days later, Matt Garza was en route to a shutout against Milwaukee, but was pulled after committing a two-out error that allowed the inning to continue. So the Cubs had two pitchers this week leave the game after 8.2 innings pitched.The Cubs hadn't had two pitchers work exactly 8.2 innings in the same season since 1995 (Jaime Navarro and Frank Castillo).
• In Sunday's Cardinals-Brewers game, you could say the teams spread it around. In the 9-3 Milwaukee victory, the 12 runs were charged to eight different pitchers. In fact, every hurler who appeared in the game ended up with at least one earned run on his record.It's the first game in eight seasons where the teams combined to use eight or more pitchers, and every single one of them got charged with at least one earned run. The last time that happened was on Sept. 9, 2004, when the Royals erupted for a 26-5 victory over the Tigers in the first game of a doubleheader.
• James Shields got called for a balk Wednesday on an illegal pickoff throw to third. That was in the bottom of the fifth -- after Justin Verlander had been called for his own balk in the top of the fifth.It was the first MLB game to feature balks by both teams in the same inning since Aug. 16, 2004, when the Rangers' Mickey Callaway and then-Indian CC Sabathia committed them in the fourth inning of a 5-2 Texas win.
• In that same game, Verlander threw eight shutout innings before getting tagged for four runs and the loss in the top of the ninth. He became the first pitcher to throw eight scoreless innings, then surrender four (or more) runs in the ninth to take a loss since Tim Hudson did it for the Braves on Sept. 22, 2005. Hudson allowed a three-run homer to Shane Victorino of the Phillies for most of that damage before Macay McBride had to come in and get the final out.
• In Monday's Yankees-Orioles game, Derek Jeter went a perfect 4-for-4 for the visitors, while Matt Wieters went a perfect 4-for-4 in the home dugout. It was the first game this year to feature two players with four-hit games.Since the start of 2010, there's been only one other MLB game where a player for each team went a perfect 4-for-4 or better -- and it was between the Orioles and Yankees. On July 30, 2011, Vladimir Guerrero’s 4-for-4 was the bright spot for Baltimore as the Yankees -- led by Robinson Cano's 5-for-5 -- demolished them 17-3.
• In Yu Darvish's much-anticipated major league debut on Monday, he allowed five earned runs, four walks, hit a batter, threw one wild pitch -- and won the game because the Rangers spotted him eight runs.He's the first pitcher in the live-ball era to win his major league debut while giving up all of those stats (or worse). Even take away the wild pitch, and only one other hurler has hit five earned runs, four walks, one HBP and a win in his debut. That was the Blue Jays' Matt Williams on Aug. 2, 1983.
• Jeff Gray of the Twins earned the first one-pitch victory of the season on Wednesday. Gray threw his one and only pitch to Peter Bourjos to end the top of the seventh, after which the Twins took the lead in the bottom of the inning. The Twins, conveniently, recorded the last one-pitch win last season, by Matt Capps on Sept. 23.
• Speaking of pitching oddities, the Royals-Athletics game was finally called in the top of the eighth inning on Tuesday after its second rain delay. Aaron Crow, who had pitched the seventh for the Royals, was credited with his first career save. Technically, he does meet the save criteria set forth in the rule book, notably that of being the "finishing pitcher" in a game his team won.The last player to be credited with a save prior to the ninth inning was Tony Sipp of the Indians, who received one in a rain-shortened affair with Tampa Bay on July 23, 2010. That also remains Sipp's only career save.
• On Tuesday, Freddy Garcia of the Yankees famously threw five wild pitches to tie the single-game American League record for such a thing. He was also the first pitcher to throw five-plus wild pitches in an outing of less than five innings. But two of those wild pitches scored runs for Baltimore. Another run scored on an error. That made the Orioles the first team in two years to score four-plus runs with one or fewer RBI. (The one RBI they did get came on a home run.)For the Orioles, it was just the second time since moving to Baltimore that they scored four runs on one or zero RBI. The other was in their inaugural year: On June 27, 1954, they scored three times on errors by the Athletics before finally walking off on an RBI single in the bottom of the 11th.
• Oakland "walked off" in unusual fashion on Wednesday when Jonathan Broxton plunked Yoenis Cespedes and Jonny Gomes to force in the winning run in the bottom of the 12th. It was the first game to end with back-to-back hit batters since Sept. 2, 1966, when Stu Miller of the Orioles hit Al Weis and Tommie Agee of the White Sox in the bottom of the 11th. (I admit that Elias found this a lot quicker than I would have.) However, Gomes became the first Athletics batter to get hit by a pitch with the bases loaded in extra innings since at least 1947. (It had never happened in the Baseball Reference "play index" era.) It's also noteworthy that Oakland scored its two runs in the 12th without a base hit. The three runners ahead of Cespedes reached on two walks and an error.
• Before Friday, there had been 36 double-digit strikeout games by teams this week (including seven games where both teams did it) but not one by a single pitcher. Max Scherzer's 11-strikeout outing on Friday afternoon broke that string.
• In Wednesday's 17-8 eruption between the Giants and Rockies, there were four pitchers (Tim Lincecum, Jeremy Guthrie, Guillermo Mota, Jeremy Affeldt)who all gave up at least six hits and at least five runs. It's the first time that that has happened since July 17, 1998, when Seattle dropped an 18-5 score on the Royals at the Kingdome.(It is also very intriguing that, in that game, both teams posted a seven-run inning. Except I don't know of a good way to search line scores.)
  
  By the way, on their next two games on Thursday and Friday, the Giants promptly had two pitchers (Madison Bumgarner and Matt Cain)carry no-hit bids into the sixth inning. The only team to have bids in consecutive games last season was also the Giants. That happened on May 8 and 10 by Ryan Vogelsong and Lincecum.
• The Orioles and Blue Jays combined to hit seven home runs in Baltimore's 7-5 victory on Friday. All were solo shots. It's the first game with seven-plus home runs that were all solo since a July 20, 2010 game at Camden Yards between the Rays and Orioles.
• There's always one guy left out.In the 10-9 "pitchers’ duel" between the Twins and Angels on Thursday, 17 of the 18 starters recorded at least one base hit. Howard Kendrick was the lone collar, going 0-for-4 plus a walk.
  
  It's the first nine-inning game this season to have 17 different starters record a base hit. There were three games last season where all 18 did.
• Minnesota got a four-hit game from Denard Span and three-hit games from Joe Mauer, Josh Willingham and Danny Valencia. It's the first time the Twins have had four players with three hits, including at least one with four, since they dropped a 20-1 score on the White Sox on May 21, 2009.

Last year, You Can't Predict Baseball came up with bold predictions for the year. We had a lot of fun coming up with them, and then laughing at how hilariously wrong they were at the end of the year. This year, we're bringing these predictions to SweetSpot, along with explanations for some of them. Keep in mind, these predictions are supposed to be bold, but not insane -- even we know the Orioles aren't going to the playoffs in 2012.

Los Angeles Angels: Kendrys Morales stays healthy all year.

Houston Astros: Bud Norris is top five in K/9 in the NL. We figured something good had to happen to the Astros, right? Norris actually has a pretty nice career K/9.

Oakland Athletics: Yoenis Cespedes is their starting center fielder by Memorial Day.

Toronto Blue Jays: Brandon Morrow makes the jump to elite starting pitcher. He's struck out more than 10 batters per 9 innings two years running, though his ERAs have remained ugly. We think this is the year his results finally match the stuff, especially considering his declining walk rate.

Atlanta Braves: Julio Teheran has more wins than Tim Hudson.

Milwaukee Brewers: Rickie Weeks leads the team in home runs. He was fourth on the team last year, with 20. In front of him were Corey Hart with 26, Ryan Braun with 33, and Prince Fielder with 38. Fielder is gone, and for this prediction we'll assume Braun will miss a third of the year due to a suspension. It's not too bold to think Weeks could pass Hart in 2012.

St. Louis Cardinals: Carlos Beltran outproduces Albert Pujols from last year. Albert Pujols was great last year, but not quite best-player-of-his-generation Albert Pujols. If healthy, it's not absurd to think of Beltran outproducing Pujols' 5.1 WAR in 2011.

Chicago Cubs: Matt Garza isn't their best pitcher. It'll be Ryan Dempster, who had great peripherals but bad results last year.

Arizona Diamondbacks: Aaron Hill will be good again. He was great with them in limited time, and Arizona's park is quite hitter-friendly.

Los Angeles Dodgers: James Loney will be a top-three first baseman in the National League. Many thanks to Mike Scioscia's Tragic Illness for somewhat alerting us to this one. We just decided to take it semi-absurdly far.

San Francisco Giants: Madison Bumgarner is their best pitcher. In terms of ERA, he already wasn't very far behind Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum, and his K/BB ratio eclipsed theirs by quite a bit.

Cleveland Indians: They'll have the best pitching in the American League Central. We're banking on Ubaldo Jimenez, making a major comeback to something closer to what he was in 2010, and the rest of the staff displaying the good that they did in 2011. We're also counting on the Tigers' starters not being very impressive behind Justin Verlander, which is bold but not quite insane, and the pitching of the White Sox, Twins and Royals not being able to keep up with Cleveland's.

Seattle Mariners: Jesus Montero catches 100-plus games. The Mariners probably aren't going to compete, so why not try and play him where he'll accrue the most value?

Miami Marlins: Despite all their new acquisitions and the hype, they still finish fourth in the NL East. When you think about it, this one isn't so crazy. If Josh Johnson isn't healthy and maybe even if he is their pitching still trails that of Philadelphia, Washington, and Atlanta; even with Heath Bell, we don't think their bullpen is as good, either. Their offense might be better than some of those teams', but the Marlins were quite a bit below league average offensively last year and we're not sure how much Jose Reyes is going to make up for that.

New York Mets: Mike Pelfrey is the worst starter in the NL. Pelfrey's been pretty terrible two of the past three years, and now they're moving the fences in at Citi Field. He was far better in his huge home stadium, but we're guessing with the moved-in walls he'll be significantly worse at Citi. Here at YCPB, we actually don't think the Mets are going to be quite as dire as many are saying, even if they do come in last place in the NL East - but Pelfrey won't be a bright spot.

Washington Nationals: Stephen Strasburg has a 17-strikeout game.

Baltimore Orioles: Matt Wieters is the best catcher in the AL. A lot of people are so obsessed with Wieters not matching the hype that they didn't notice he became a plus offensive performer last year, to go along with very good defense. His taking the next step isn't that bold as predictions go, especially if Joe Mauer has to move off catcher.

San Diego Padres: Luke Gregerson is a top-three closer in the NL.

Philadelphia Phillies: Cole Hamels is their best starter. And this isn't meant to be a slight to Roy Halladay or Cliff Lee, but considering their ages and the fact that Hamels is pretty darn good himself, plus a possible boost from a contract year...

Pittsburgh Pirates: Charlie Morton is their All-Star.

Texas Rangers: Yu Darvish isn't their best starter -- but he's still good. And we think he'll be pretty good, we just think Derek Holland will become more consistently good, or Matt Harrison will put up numbers like his 2011.

Tampa Bay Rays: James Shields will have no complete games. Predicting someone to have no complete games might not seem bold, but it is when it's a guy who was known as "Complete Game James" last season. Shields did have 11 complete games in 2011, an almost unheard-of number these days, but he had no complete games in 2009 or 2010.

Boston Red Sox: No one hits 30 home runs. This might seem crazy when you consider their great offensive numbers last year, but only one player on their team hit 30 home runs and it was Jacoby Ellsbury with 32.

Cincinnati Reds: Brandon Phillips is the best second baseman in the NL.

Colorado Rockies: Jamie Moyer will have the best HR/9 on the staff.

Kansas City Royals: They reach .500. While their pitching won't be great, their offense will take a big step forward this year. Combined with the rest of their division being the Tigers and some dumpster fires, it's not that difficult to see it happening.

Detroit Tigers: They score fewer runs than they did in 2011. Yes, that’s even with Fielder. It's not improbable that Jhonny Peralta, Alex Avila and Delmon Young regress quite a bit from their numbers with Detroit last year, and that Prince Fielder's production "only" makes up for the offensive loss of Victor Martinez in 2012. They'll still have a very good offense, though.

Minnesota Twins: Joe Mauer hits 15 home runs.

Chicago White Sox: Robin Ventura gets ejected more times than Ozzie Guillen. Look at the state of the White Sox. We'd get ejected too.

New York Yankees: Hiroki Kuroda leads the team in ERA.

You Can't Predict Baseball is an affiliate of the SweetSpot network.

One of the best parts of being a baseball fan, especially one that blogs about his favorite team on a regular basis, is being able to voice opinions on a wide range of topics. If you’re talking to me, and can get past my inherent hatred of Carlos Zambrano, you’ll find someone with strong views on what should be done to make this great game even better. Since my time as the main SweetSpot blogger is limited to today, I’d like to share two changes I’d make right now if I could play commissioner for a day.

No. 1: Drastic changes to the All-Star Game are needed.

As a kid, I used to mark my mental calendar for the All-Star Game. It was exciting to see all the American League players I typically did not get a chance to watch. These days I can’t wait for the three-day All-Star break to pass so we can get back to meaningful baseball. That should not be the case. So I propose a few tweaks to the Midsummer Classic that would make the game and the events surrounding it a great deal more entertaining.

First, MLB should make a better decision about whether or not the game truly counts. If you want the game to decide the league that gets home-field advantage in the World Series, as it does now, that’s fine. But take the fans out of the selection process. Give the managers or a team captain the chance to select the roster. If you want the fans involved, then take the seriousness out of the game and find a new way to determine home-field advantage. You can’t have both. It’s ludicrous.

Second, it’s time to change the events that take place the night before the festivities begin. Baseball's annual showcase of the top minor league players is the Futures Game. The problem? MLB schedules the game the day before the break begins, when the rest of the major league teams are playing. Not only that, but they put it up against the national broadcast on Sunday night. It seems to me that the best way to market the product is to not directly compete with the product. Last year the Futures Game was televised on ESPN2 at 6 p.m. ET. It's not a bad time, except that there was a Cubs-Dodgers game beginning just two hours later on "Sunday Night Baseball." Why the competition among games?

The All-Star break always starts on a Monday, and MLB always has a national broadcast on Sunday night. Why not schedule all MLB games as day games and make the Sunday night game be the Futures Game? You could make it a big deal using the “Sunday Night Baseball” announce crew and really do it up special. This would also give all the teams (not just 28 of them) the chance to get Sunday evening off as they head into the break. It would get the players on a plane home that evening instead of late that night and allow them to spend the full, rested day, with family on Monday. It just makes sense, and it’s an easy fix.

Finally, change the Home Run Derby. You can’t scrap it, but please make it shorter. The easiest solution is to cut down the number of participants to six or even four. No more waiting for the perfect pitch. Each of these guys gets to pick who throws to them anyway, so give them an umpire back there. If they take a pitch that is called a strike, it's an out. If the pitch is good enough, you better be swinging. This would make picking your pitcher a key part of the contest. You want to be like Josh Hamilton and have a 106-year-old man pitch to you? Fine, but you better be up there ready to hit.

No. 2: The playoff system needs to be re-examined.

There is one problem with the current format and two improvements I'd make. Currently, we see a best-of-five series in the first round in which the team with the best record in the regular season plays the wild-card team (unless said team is in the same division). This doesn’t give the team with the best record a significant advantage over the rest of the teams. When you battle and claw your way to the best record in the league, you should be rewarded for that hard work with at least an advantage in the first round of the playoffs. Because a short series in baseball is so unpredictable, we've often seen the wild-card team advance over a much better top team.

The 2003 Florida Marlins and the 2007 Colorado Rockies are examples. Both teams were less than impressive and came into the playoffs as wild-card teams. In fact, the Marlins fired their manager earlier in the season before going on a run to get to the playoffs under Jack McKeon. Neither team had any business being in the World Series. Since its inception in 1995, the wild card has provided MLB with four World Series winners, including three straight champions from 2002-04. Maybe I'm just a fan of chalk, but I don't think this should be the case. I want to see the best teams fighting it out in the end, not the hottest teams. My plan is a simple yet radical way to change the format so more of the cream rises to the top in October.

The proposal can be taken apart and implemented separately or together as a package deal.

• The regular-season league champions choose their first-round opponent.
• The regular-season league champions get four of the five LDS games at home.
• Add a second wild-card team to each league.

Here is how each would work.

The first two are fairly self-explanatory. When the season ends, the league champs will choose whom they best match up against and alert the league accordingly. By doing this, it makes being the first seed meaningful because the No. 1 team can avoid a particularly hot team and in turn select a team that might be struggling, injured, not well-rested, etc. The No. 1 team could also choose to simply play a team that it best matches up against. Regardless of the criteria, the format would award the No. 1 seed for being the best over 162 games. The previous six months should not be irrelevant.

Once the matchups are set, the league champ also receives a sizable advantage in the first round. If we're all in agreement that the playoffs tend to get too long, then it's important that the first round stays a best-of-five series. Because a short series tends to lessen the disparity between a good team and an average team, the top team in the league is rewarded with four of the five games being at home. The format would be 2-1-2, which would guarantee that the opponent would get one home game for their fans in the first round. Once the LCS round comes into play, the home-field format would return to normal with the better team getting four of the seven games.

Adding a second wild-card team is a little more interesting. When Bud Selig proposed the idea of three divisions in a league and the addition of the wild card, many purists scoffed at the idea and didn't want to give it a chance. As time has passed it has become clear that the wild card has been a quality improvement because it keeps more teams in the hunt longer into the season. We end up seeing better quality baseball deeper into the season from more teams. Adding a team to that mix would only help that even more.

Under my plan, the three division champions would be given a spot in the playoffs. From there, the next two top records would then be meet in a special play-in game. Simply put, it would be a one-game game playoff the day after the regular season, similar to the ones we see in the event of a tie for the wild card or division. The winner of the play-in game would then be awarded a trip to the LDS.

By implementing this concept, it keeps more teams in the hunt and lessens the idea that a weak division winner would be taking the spot of a team with a better record during the regular season.

Obviously, I’m not going to be commissioner any time soon, but it’s been fun dreaming with you for a few minutes. I’d love to hear your comments and suggestions as well.

Joe Aiello writes View from the Bleachers, a blog about the Chicago Cubs.

Baseball players with Hall of Fame talent don't generally spend much time in the minor leagues, and Ron Santo, who died Thursday at the age of 70, was no exception.

Signing with the Cubs out of high school in Seattle, Santo began his professional career in 1959 with the San Antonio Missions in the Double-A Texas League. Excelling there, he began the next season with Triple-A Houston, in the American Association. Santo found Triple-A pitching a bit tougher, but he held his own. And with the Cubs going nowhere, he was summoned to the big club in late June and took over at third base from Don Zimmer.

As a 20-year-old rookie in 1960, Santo spent most of the second half of the season as the youngest every-day player in the National League, and it showed a little in his stats.

Just that once, though.

Or rather, just that once for a long while.

Beginning in 1961, Santo established himself as the best all-around third baseman in the league and held that (unofficial) title for quite some time. He played well in '61, struggled in '62 while learning to treat his juvenile diabetes, then established himself as a power-hitting, Gold Glove-winning third baseman. Oh, and he was exceptionally durable, averaging 159 games per season from 1961 through '71.

Maybe all those games did take their toll, as third basemen historically have not aged well. Maybe the diabetes took its toll (though Santo didn't blame it for anything except his poor numbers in 1962). Whatever the reasons, Santo's four best seasons all came before he turned 28. There was one last brilliant season in 1972, when he was 32, after which the end came rather quickly.

Santo had always figured on spending his entire career in Wrigley Field.

Just after the World Series, the Cubs traded their ace (and future Hall of Famer) Fergie Jenkins to the Texas Rangers for an impressive young hitter named Bill Madlock.

Madlock played third base, but Santo apparently didn't see the writing on the wall, and was surprised when management approached him about a deal that would send him to the California Angels. Management had to approach him, because he could veto any trade.

Santo balked. He didn't want to leave Chicago, and said he would rather retire than move to California. Eventually, Santo did agree to a trade to Chicago's other team, the White Sox, after being assured that he would spend at least some of his time at third base (and not much as the DH, a "position" for which he held little affection).

Well, it didn't work out that way. The White Sox already a star third baseman, Bill Melton. Santo played a little third base, but he DH'd a bunch and also started 37 games at second base, which he hated. Still only 34, Santo didn't hit at all, didn't appreciate the mercurial talents of superstar teammate Dick Allen, and was generally miserable all season. After which, he quit, walking away from the one season and $130,000 still left on his contract.

For decades now, the question in Chicago has been Why isn't Ron Santo in the Hall of Fame?

It's probably not just one thing.

It didn't help that his career ended relatively early.

It didn't help that some of the things he did -- particularly drawing walks and playing excellent defense at third base -- are generally undervalued by Hall of Fame voters.

And it absolutely didn't help that the Cubs blew their big lead over the Mets down the stretch in 1969. That was the team that was supposed to win. They had three future Hall of Famers, plus Santo, plus a Hall of Fame manager in Leo Durocher. Three weeks into August, they still owned an eight-game lead over the second-place Mets.

And then they blew it. The Cubs didn't play well down the stretch, the Mets played brilliantly, and the Cubs finished the season eight games behind the Mets.

The Mets wound up winning 100 games. The Cubs won 92, their finest showing since World War II. Nevertheless, the story wasn't so much that the Mets won the pennant, but that the Cubs lost it. And nobody's ever taken more blame for the Cubs losing in 1969 than Santo.

By 1969, Santo had been installed as Cubs captain. Not Ernie Banks nor Billy Williams. Ron Santo. He thought the Cubs were the best team in the National League, and wasn't shy about his confidence. Before a July series against the Mets, Santo was asked by a New York writer to compare the Cubs and the Mets. "Man for man," he said, "there's no comparison. You've got the pitchers but don't try to compare the Mets to the Chicago Cubs." In the annals of "famous last words" spoken by front-runners in baseball, those probably rank among the top 10.

Just a few weeks earlier, Santo had celebrated teammate Jim Hickman's walkoff home run at Wrigley Field by running down the left-field line, jumping into the air and ... clicking his heels together. It became a huge story, and Santo began clicking his heels after every Cubs win at home.

After Santo said the Mets couldn't compare to the Cubs, the Mets took two straight games from the Cubs, and it got into the papers that Santo had blamed one of the losses on rookie center fielder Don Young ... who, as it turned out, had been mentored by Santo all season. This story blew up, too, and Santo was booed in Chicago and received death threats for some time afterward.

For better or worse, in the space of about three weeks Santo had become the face of the Chicago Cubs. If they had finished the season well, he would have been haled for both his performance and his leadership, all the negative stories forgotten (Young, who talked about quitting after the game in New York, played decently in August and September).

But they didn't finish well, and a fair number of Hall of Fame voters probably assigned an inordinate amount of the blame to their captain. Apparently forgetting that Santo's brushes with publicity in '69 came many weeks before the Cubs' September swoon.

Incredibly, when Santo first appeared on a Hall of Fame ballot in 1980 -- Ron Santo: nine-time All-Star, five-time Gold Glove winner, No. 2 all-time in home runs for a third baseman -- he received 15 votes. Fewer than Roy Face, Elston Howard, Don Larsen, Harvey Kuenn, and a bunch of other guys who would never come close to being elected. So few votes, in fact, that Santo was dropped from the ballot forever ... until 1985, when a special committee restored him.

Santo's support did steadily improve, and in 1998, his final year on the BBWAA ballot, he was named on 43 percent of the ballots. Since then, he's been considered by various manifestations of the Hall of Fame's Veterans Committee, but fallen just short of election.

Santo will make it, eventually. He was simply too good a player not to make it. But I think we can all agree that it's a shame he didn't make it during the 30-some years when he could have enjoyed it.

Upon hearing the news about Tyler Colvin, I immediately Tweeted this:

Report: MLBPA concerned about Tyler Colvin, but will wait for fatality before seriously addressing issue of shattered bats.

Of course, a few people thought the report was real.

It was, of course, not.

My sentiment regarding the MLBPA's sentiment was absolutely real, though.

A few years ago, Major League Baseball took the lead in the study and (ultimately) the regulation of maple bats, which apparently are more shatter- and shard-prone than the more traditional ash bats.

A few people also lamented the fact that we'll just never get the same sound (and presumably batted-ball characteristics) from metal bats that we get from good ol' fashioned wood.

But it must be stressed, as stridently (if logically) as possible, that this is absolutely a false choice. It is absolutely possible to construct a bat which behaves exactly like a traditional bat, with one exception: It will not come apart in sharp pieces that might kill someone. There's Extratec. There's BatGlove. I'm sure there are other things.

Why hasn't some real fix been mandated yet? Some will blame Major League Baseball. Some will blame Rawlings and other bat manufacturers. But most of the blame, paradoxically enough, goes to the players. If the Players Association pushed for safer bats, what would Major League Baseball and the bat-makers say?

The exact moment players demand action, it's a done deal because none of the other parties would be able to raise any objection that could pass muster with the public or anyone else. Game over.

Why hasn't it happened? Because the players, collectively, care more about their freedom to use any bat they like than about some potentially catastrophic injury. They figure that even if something terrible does happen, it won't happen to them.

Which is true. There are more than 1,000 members of the Major League Baseball Players Association, and the odds are greatly against any particular member getting seriously hurt or killed. As a pure calculation, perhaps it really does make sense for each player to resist any measure, no matter how apparently sensible, that might impinge upon his personal freedom.

It'll be funny, though, how fast the calculation will change if somebody's dead.

No, it's probably not going to happen overnight. Gordon Wittenmyer:

Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts says it's up to general manager Jim Hendry to identify the right guy to replace Lou Piniella as manager.

But no matter how good Hendry's new manager is, if the Cubs plan to contend next season, that's probably going to be up to the Ricketts ownership.

Because without at least two or three significant free-agent additions -- probably on the pitching staff alone -- it will be a long, slow climb back toward the top of the National League Central. And it's unclear how big a hit Hendry's opening $146 million payroll will take for 2011 as he tries to fix all that broke down this season.

--snip--

One thing ownership won't do, Ricketts said, is favor a managerial candidate for marketing and fan-draw value, such as Ryne Sandberg.

"The fact is, it's Jim's job to decide which manager to bring in," said Ricketts, who expects to get involved as part of the interview process once Hendry has a short list of finalists. "But it's about winning, not about marketing.

"I don't think we need a marquee name to sell tickets. What we need is a team that produces on the field. That's really what's most important to us."

If you're a Cubs fan, that's exactly what you want your owner to say.

Reportedly, Ricketts once lived across the street from Wrigley Field and met his wife in the Wrigley Field bleachers. His love for the Cubs seems genuine. Today, much of his great wealth comes from the family business, but even before joining the family business he seems to have done quite well for himself. And he seems to believe in modern objective analysis.

I don't know if Ricketts is good at hiring people or managing them. I don't know how he'll respond to another losing season (if there is one). But less than a year into his ownership, he's said most of the right things and the Cubs seem to be in pretty good hands. They're down now, but I don't expect them to be out for long.

Cubs win! Cubs win! Cubs win!

Today the Cubs captured Game 7 -- in dramatic fashion -- in their Ultimate Rivalry series against the White Sox, which makes them Windy City champions.

For a day, anyhow.

This is far from the first time these clubs have matched up with something on the line, though. Sometimes it's been for pride. Sometimes it's been for important wins and losses during the regular season. And once, it was for the World Championship.

In 1906, the Cubs went 116-36, which to this day is the best record in modern major league history. Meanwhile, the White Sox went 93-58, which was good enough for the American League pennant. For any number of good reasons, the Cubs were massive favorites to beat the "Hitless Wonders" -- the Sox finished last in the league with a .230 batting average -- in the World Series.

This wasn't the first time the Chicago teams had faced off in October. In 1903, when the Pirates and Red Sox challenged each other in the first American League vs. National League World Series, there were other inter-league postseason series in Philadelphia, St. Louis, Ohio (Cleveland vs. Cincinnati) ... and Chicago. These "city series" would become a staple for decades, and nowhere more than in Chicago, where the teams and the fans took the games seriously. In 1912, White Sox pitcher Ed Walsh started four of the Series' seven games (and relieved in two others). The Sox won, but Walsh was never the same. According to one source, "The fans saw the city series as a genuine championship event, and the clubs responded by playing all out."

That first Chicago city series, in 1903, wound up deadlocked at seven games apiece (the 15th game wasn't played because the players' contracts expired a day too early). Two years later the Cubs would win the second city series, and in 1909 they would win the third.

But for the next few decades the White Sox would dominate the Cubs. From 1911 through 1942, they played 22 city series and the White Sox won 18 of them. Their run included a seven-series streak from 1911 through 1921, and an eight-series streak from 1931 through '42. It's possible that 1942 marked the last city series because of World War II. It's also possible that 1942 marked the last city series because the Cubs were tired of losing every year.

Which isn't to suggest the teams stopped playing one another. I don't have the research at hand, but I suspect they played occasional exhibitions in the ensuing years. I also suspect those games weren't particularly competitive. For that, Chicago's baseball fans would have to wait until regular-season interleague play.

But while the results have been closer than in the city series, the White Sox are, once more, leading the way. In 14 seasons of interleague play, the Sox have won 41 of 78 games. Their lead is bigger in terms of the season series, winning 11, tying four and losing only three.

So, it's been a long, dominant run for the White Sox over the Cubs, going on more than a century now. And one series -- even one as important as the Ultimate Rivalry -- can't change all that history.

With the Cubs-White Sox Ultimate Rivalry series about to conclude, I want to 1) get my Cubs "eras" in the books and under the wire, and 2) wish both squads the best of luck!

Now the eras, beginning in the beginning ...

1876-1894: The Cap Anson Era
Few players have personified a team like Adrian C. Anson personified the National League's Chicago franchise (known first as the White Stockings, then the Colts, during Anson's tenure). When the league formed in 1876, Anson was already an established star with Philadelphia's entry in the National Association. In 1879, Anson took the managerial reigns and captained the club for nearly 20 seasons, during which the White Stockings won five National League championships (all before 1887). Throughout, he also served as the club's regular first baseman, and despite the shorter seasons of the era, finished his career with well over 3,000 hits.

1895-1899: The Bill Lange Era
"Little Eva" Lange would probably be in the Hall of Fame today, if not for love; still only 28, Lange retired after the 1899 season because his future father-in-law didn't consider baseball a suitable occupation for his future son-in-law.

1900-1912: The Frank Chance Era
Discovered in California by Lange, Frank Chance began his career as a catcher. It wasn't until 1902 that new manager Frank Selee put Chance where he belonged: first base. Three years later, with Selee stricken with tuberculosis, Chance took over as player-manager. In seven full seasons as manager, he earned the nickname "Pearless Leader" and guided the Cubs to four pennants, two World Series championships, and an average of 107 wins per season.

1913: The Johnny Evers Era
Evers, the Cubs' second baseman during their brilliant run under Chance, has been described as "the spiritual and competitive driving wheel of four pennant winners and two world championships." So it's not surprising that with Chance's departure, Evers took over as the Cubs' player-manager. The Cubs finished 1913 with a solid record, but after a contract dispute with owner Charles Murphy, Evers left for Boston (and was named the league's most valuable player when the "Miracle Braves" won the National League pennant).

1914-1918: The Hippo Vaughn Era
With Evers, Chance, shortstop Joe Tinker and ace Three Finger Brown all gone, the Cubs during the first World War were a different team than the dynastic version of the previous decade. They weren't real good, either. One bright spot was James "Hippo" Vaughn, who averaged 20 wins per season from 1914 through 1920. In 1917, he matched the Reds' Fred Toney with nine hitless innings before finally giving up two hits (and losing) in the 10th. In 1918, he pitched three complete games in the World Series, gave up only three runs ... and still somehow lost twice.

1919-1925: The Charlie Hollocher Era
As a 22-year-old rookie in 1918, Charlie Hollocher led the National League in games and hits. But Hollocher just wasn't built for the rigors of the baseball season. Complaining of "nervousness" and mysterious stomach pains, he was in and out of the lineup in the early '20s before finally quitting for good in 1924. And throughout Hollocher's trials, the Cubs were rarely competitive.

1926-1931: The Hack Wilson Era
In six seasons as a Cub, this short, squat center fielder led the National League in home runs four times, and in 1930 he drove in 191 runs, then and still the all-time record.

1932-1940: The Gabby Hartnett Era
With the decline (and trade) of Wilson and player-manager Rogers Hornsby's inability to stay in the lineup, no single player grabbed the public's attention. Which isn't to suggest the Cubs didn't have plenty of good players. They reached the World Series in 1932, '35 and '38 -- losing all of them, of course -- and the constants included catcher Hartnett, second baseman Billy Herman, and third baseman "Smiling" Stan Hack (Hartnett and Herman are in the Hall of Fame, and Hack should be). But it was Hartnett who hit the franchise's most famous home run, 1938's "Homer in the Gloamin'" against Pittsburgh that all but clinched the Cubs' third pennant in seven years. And it was Hartnett who managed the Cubs in the World Series that fall; he would remain as skipper through the 1940 season.

1941-1949: The Phil Cavaretta Era
A product of Chicago's Lane Tech High School -- less than two miles from Wrigley Field -- Phil Cavaretta debuted for the Cubs in 1934, just two months after his 18th birthday, and a year later served as the club's every-day first baseman. He didn't hit much, though, and over the next few years his playing time steadily decreased. In 1941, Cavaretta began to work his way back into the lineup, mostly as an outfielder. In 1943 he took over at first base, in '44 he led the NL with 197 hits, and in '45 he batted .355 and captured MVP honors.

1950-1954: The Hank Sauer Era
Early in the '49 season, the Cubs traded for Cincinnati slugger Sauer, who'd hit 35 home runs just a year earlier but gotten off to a slow start for the Reds. Sauer, with a swing perfectly suited for the Cubs' home ballpark, soon became known as "The Mayor of Wrigley Field" and in 1952 was named National League MVP after driving in 121 runs. Sauer wasn't much good in the outfield and the Cubs never topped .500 during his time there. But he helped make them watchable.

1955-1965: The Ernie Banks Era
According to at least one source, the Cubs' franchise player was practically an afterthought. Late in the 1953 season, management decided to finally add an African-American player to the roster: shortstop Gene Baker, who'd been starring for the Cubs' Los Angeles farm club since 1950. There was a problem, though: Baker would need a roommate, and the franchise didn't have another black player who was ready for the majors.

So the Cubs started scouting the Negro Leagues in earnest. They set their sights on Kansas City Monarchs shortstop Ernie Banks, and $22,000 later Banks was a Cub. He and Baker arrived in Chicago on the same day. But Baker was injured, and on Sept. 17, 1953, Banks became the first black Cub. Nobody could have guessed, then, that Banks would eventually win two National League MVP Awards on his way to being dubbed Mr. Cub.

1966-1973: The Fergie Jenkins Era
Frankly, the Cubs in this era were ruled by one man, and one man only: manager Leo Durocher, who also functioned as de facto general manager. Upon being hired, Durocher announced to the press, "I'm gonna get the best of any trade. In fact, they'll be one-sided."

Of course all of them weren't. But the next spring, the Cubs traded veteran pitchers Bob Buhl and Larry Jackson to the Phillies for outfielder Adolfo Phillips and rookie pitcher Ferguson Jenkins in a deal that would soon look decidedly one-sided. Jenkins would eventually post six straight 20-win seasons, and today ranks first in franchise history in games started and strikeouts.

1974-1976: The Bill Madlock Era
Lean times for the Cubs, but Madlock was a bright spot. He lasted only three seasons in Chicago, but in those three seasons he was Rookie of the Year and won two batting titles.

1977-1980: The Bruce Sutter Era
As a rookie in 1976, Bruce Sutter -- armed with a unique split-fingered pitch he'd learned from minor-league instructor Fred Martin -- was good. In 1977, he was a revelation, garnering Cy Young and MVP support after notching 31 saves and posting a 1.34 ERA. Sutter would win the Cy Young Award in 1979 and lead the NL with 28 saves in 1980 before getting traded to St. Louis.

1981-1994: The Ryne Sandberg Era
Losing Sutter hurt, but the pain was assuaged a year later by the arrival of Ryne Sandberg in a lopsided deal with the Phillies. Like Sutter, Sandberg drew attention as a rookie; like Sutter, Sandberg won a big award (MVP) in his third full season with the Cubs.

1995-2003: The Sammy Sosa Era
Well into his tenure as President of these United States, George W. Bush would cite "trading Sammy Sosa" as his greatest mistake; Bush's Texas Rangers traded Sosa (and two other players) to the White Sox for Harold Baines and Fred Manrique. But the White Sox fared even worse, trading Sosa three years later to the Cubs for George Bell.

Sosa broke through in 1993 with 33 homers and 93 RBI, but it wasn't until '95 -- with Sandberg temporarily retired -- that Sosa became the face of the franchise, with 36 homers, 113 RBI, and his first All-Star appearance. Later, of course, Sosa would engage Mark McGwire in a duel that captivated the nation, and average 61 home runs per season from 1998 through 2001.

2004-2010: The Carlos Zambrano Era
The beautiful relationship between Sosa and the Wrigley Field fans deteriorated near the end of his tenure, which included (in 2004) a stretch on the DL after Sosa reportedly hurt his back while sneezing. Ex-phenoms Kerry Wood and Mark Prior might have taken Sosa's mantle, but they both struggled with injuries, too. Fortunately, young Carlos Zambrano had a big arm and a big personality. And for better or worse, ever since then the Cubs have usually gone as "El Toro" has gone.

Who's going to play first base next year for the Cubs? Their rookie right fielder, maybe. Paul Sullivan:

Tyler Colvin hasn't played first base since he was a sophomore at Clemson. But with Derrek Lee gone, Colvin could be the heir apparent at first in 2011.

The Cubs said Micah Hoffpauir would be called up Thursday from Triple-A Iowa and will share playing time with Xavier Nady for the time being. However, Hoffpauir was sent down Friday and can't be called up for 10 days. The Cubs maintain Colvin needs a spring training at first under his belt if they decided to move him there go in that direction.

"I'm not sure how long I'd need," Colvin said. "It's been a while since I've done it. Hopefully if they want me to do that, I'll do it. No one has ever said 'Hey, we want you to take ground balls there.' I've got to wait for that first and then we'll see what happens."

Colvin thinks he could handle first, though he didn't sound like he was eager to move there.

"I'm comfortable in the outfield, but if that's what they want me to do, I can't complain," he said. "If it helps out the Chicago Cubs, that's what I'll do."

Obviously (and as The Friendly Blogfines points out), the Nady/Hoffpauir combination figures as the answer in September, but that's about it. Minor league third baseman Josh Vitters might be a first baseman someday, but today he's still struggling as a hitter in Double-A. Essentially, there's not a first baseman in the system with an ETA before late 2012. At best.

Meanwhile, the Cubs have four outfielders: Colvin, Alfonso Soriano, Marlon Byrd, and Kosuke Fukudome.

Soriano's not going anywhere because he's still got about $3 billion on his contract. Byrd's not going anywhere because he's one of the Cubs' best players. Fukudome's probably not going anywhere because his salary is $13.5 million next season.

Granted, the Cubs could trade Fukudome, but that would almost surely meaning eating most of his contract. Everyone's disappointed with Kosuke, and he certainly hasn't played well enough to justify his salaries, these last three seasons. But they've got him for one more season, so they might as well focus on what he can do rather than what he can't. And he does have a .370 on-base percentage and middling power against right-handed pitchers. The Cubs don't need to dump Kosuke. If they can't find someone who will pay most of his salary (unlikely), they just need to find a righty-hitting platoon partner for him (easy).

Which would leave Tyler Colvin in the cold.

What's not immediately apparent is whether he belongs anywhere else.

Entering this season, Colvin was ranked by Baseball America as the Cubs' 17th most promising prospect. Thanks to a fantastic March, he broke camp with the big club despite having never played any Triple-A ball. Considering those facts, he's been a huge success. Of course, other facts include his .320 on-base percentage in the minors and his .307 on-base percentage in the majors. It's not clear that he's actually a good enough hitter to play first base in the majors. Or right field, for that matter.

Still, the Cubs know Colvin can handle right field, defensively. He's been doing it for years. Why not find out this winter if he can handle first base? Somebody has to play there next year. Otherwise a lot of throws from the shortstop sail into foul territory.

Capitol Avenue Club's Peter Hjort on the deal sending Derrek Lee to the Braves:

... the Cubs get three legitimate prospects. The best of the trio is Robinson Lopez, a 6’23 right-hander with an extremely live arm and a very projectable frame. His results at class A Rome have been disappointing, but it’s important to remember he’s only 19 years old and this is his first full season. I still hold him in very high regard. The other two are relievers. Lorick, the left hander, was a 20th round pick out of the University of Virginia in last year’s draft. He’s not the typical refined prospect you see from a 4-year college, but he has some late-game potential. Harris was taken one round before Lorick in the same draft. He throws hard and he’s had a successful first full pro season, making it all the way to AA. He’s got a huge frame (6’43, 235 LB), and like Lorick has some late-game potential.

I think the Cubs did very well to get Lopez and two interesting relief prospects, even if they had to pay some to get them. Still, this deal probably makes the Braves better, and the middle of a pennant race isn’t the time to worry about giving up a lottery ticket and some Carolina League relievers.

Still, if the organization had put Troy Glaus on the DL a month ago, they’d probably still have their three prospects and a productive first baseman.

It's a fair point. If Glaus's struggles over the last month have been caused by a real injury, somebody should have known about it before now.

Of course, it's entirely possible that if they'd put him on the DL a month ago, they'd have traded three prospects then rather than now.

Like Peter, I can't really fault the Braves for doing this deal. But unless Lee helps get them into the playoffs, the trade might look really, really silly in a few years.

From ESPN Chicago:

The Chicago Cubs and Atlanta Braves are working on a deal to send first baseman Derrek Lee to Atlanta for prospects, according to a league source.

Lee, who is presently dealing with a bulging disc on his lower left side, received an epidural on Monday to relieve the pain and will not be ready to play again until Thursday.

Braves top scout Jim Fregosi watched Lee hit four home runs during a series in St. Louis over the weekend. Fregosi reported back to general manager Frank Wren that Lee was swinging the bat as well as he has all season, according to a source.

Atlanta lost All-Star third baseman Chipper Jones for the season with a knee injury on Aug. 10. First baseman Troy Glaus, a former third baseman, could be moved back to third if Lee is acquired.

The key passage here: Lee was swinging the bat well.

It's hard to swing the bat well with a bulging disc. Impossible, maybe. Add the fact that before last weekend's homer-fest, Lee was sporting a .246/.332/.383 batting line for the season, and you have to wonder if he's really any sort of upgrade over what the Braves already have.

You can understand the Braves' concern about first base, though. Since June, Troy Glaus is hitting .192/.292/.288 in 36 games. If the Braves do get a first baseman, I would expect Glaus to spend more time on the bench than at third base (where Omar Infante would provide a better glove and roughly as much hitting).

From Bill Madden, who probably isn't just making this up:

Lou Piniella is retiring as manager of the Chicago Cubs effective at the end of the season, the Daily News has learned.

The 67-year old Piniella, who led the Cubs to NL Central division titles in 2007 and 2008, is in the last year of his contract, but has endured a particularly stressful season in which the team is mired in fourth-place, 10 1/2 games out.I think this is probably the end of the line for Piniella's managerial career ... but I also think we should be clear about the terminology here. Is Piniella retiring ... or is he simply leaving the Cubs? There is a difference.

Granted, at 67 Piniella is old for a manager. But Bobby Cox is 69. Joe Torre was 67 when the Dodgers hired him. Jack McKeon managed the Reds until he was 69 ... and managed the Marlins until he was 74. So while 67, historically speaking, is old for a manager, in the 21st century it's not particularly old.

So I'm not sure that "retiring" is the right word, because I'm not sure that Piniella isn't going to manage again and I won't be sure until he's gone a few years without managing.

Once we're sure, Piniella will become a popular Hall of Fame candidate. He'll probably have to wait a while, though, because he'll inevitably be compared to his contemporaries, and those comparisons won't serve him well.

If Piniella doesn't manage after this season, for at least four years he'll rank 14th on the all-time list with something like 1,860 wins. But Tony La Russa, Bobby Cox, and Joe Torre currently rank third, fourth, and fifth on the all-time list. The Hall of Fame has elected a lot of managers, but it usually doesn't happen quickly. Cox will go in first, then Torre, and finally La Russa (assuming that he actually retires someday).

Then, probably, Lou Piniella.

With the exception of Gene Mauch, every manager with more wins than Piniella will be in the Hall of Fame. And Mauch finished his career with a losing record and never won a World Series; Piniella has a winning record and a World Series ring.

On the other hand, the manager in 15th place is Ralph Houk. Like Piniella, Houk played for and managed the Yankees. Like Piniella, Houk managed a number of teams. Piniella's and Houk's career winning percentages are practically identical. Where Piniella won one World Series, Houk won two.

But I think Piniella gets (and will continue to get) more credit for his team's successes than Houk has for his. Houk's first team was the '61 Yankees, coming off 10 American League championships in 12 years. There was definitely a sense then -- or is now, anyway -- that Houk was simply fortunate enough to take the helm of a powerhouse team that essentially couldn't be beat. Houk managed the Yankees to three straight pennants, was kicked upstairs so Yogi Berra could manage, returned to the dugout after two seasons ... and managed for most of the next 20 years without a single first-place finish.

Piniella's been successful in New York, in Cincinnati, in Seattle, and in Chicago. My guess is that it's the broad-based nature of his success, rather than the raw numbers, that will eventually get him in.

Gee, $91.5 million does seem like a lot of money for a pitcher who has three wins and has been suspended indefinitely. Ah, but at least someone will defend Carlos Zambrano's contract:

"There was nothing wrong with the investment," GM Jim Hendry said Sunday about the contract. "This guy was an outstanding pitcher in the National League, in the game, for the four, five years before that. There was no question that the deal was a solid one in the industry. He certainly would have been one of the hotter tickets on the street if that thing went to the end of the season.

--snip--

Really, over the body of work, pitched as well as anybody in the National League for a three, four year period. He certainly pitched well enough to earn that contract whether it's here or somewhere else."

Zambrano signed his extension on the August 17, 2007. At that moment, he was 14-9 with a 3.86 ERA (and in the midst of a five-game losing streak). For the sake of simplicity, let's sort of assume he didn't sign the new deal until after the season. Had Zambrano really pitched "as well as anybody" over those previous three or four seasons?

Well, no. But he wasn't far off. Considering only National League starters who averaged at least 200 innings per season, from 2005 through 2007 Zambrano ranked fourth in ERA+; from 2004 through 2007 he was third. Zambrano pretty obviously wasn't pitching as well as Brandon Webb or Roy Oswalt, but otherwise -- considering his youth and his demonstrated durability -- you might reasonably have argued that Zambrano was the third-best starter in the National League over those three or four years. No question, he was immense valuable.

Here's Aaron Gleeman reacting to Hendry's defense:

And you know what? He's right.

At the time of the deal there were certainly some signs that Zambrano wouldn't age particularly well, because his performance had already slipped a bit and he'd racked up a ton of mileage on his arm. However, he was a 26-year-old workhorse with an 82-55 record and 3.41 ERA in nearly 1,200 career innings, including five straight 200-inning seasons and top-five Cy Young finishes in three of the previous four years.

Here's where I part ways with Hendry and Gleeman. It's almost undoubtedly true that Zambrano would have gotten more money if he'd become a free agent and signed with another team. It's also true that the Cubs, having employed Zambrano for a whole decade, should have known him better than anyone else.

Here's what I wrote about the deal at the time (admittedly, it wasn't much):

Does Zambrano deserve $18 million per season? Well, if you think Barry Zito deserves his $18 million per season, then Zambrano is definitely worth that much. OK, bad example. Zambrano's one of the five best pitchers in the National League, so he was going to get this money or more, somewhere. Still, I wonder if the Cubs might have been better off spending their $91.5 million who's been tested in the real major league.

Yeah, that was a cheap shot there at the end. I could have mentioned that Zambrano's underlying statistics generally hadn't been as good as his ERA; his strikeout-to-walk ratios, in particular. I could have mentioned Zambrano's volatile personality, except I don't really believe that I'm qualified to pass judgment on such things, particularly if they don't seem to adversely affect a player's performance.

Hendry is another story. Hendry should have noticed that Zambrano's underlying performance probably wouldn't support those low ERAs, and Hendry should have known that Zambrano's personality might become an issue at some point.

Yeah, that's a cheap shot. I thought (and think) the Cubs overpaid for Zambrano. But if he wasn't worth $91.5 million, he must have been worth $81.5 million, right? Or $71.5 million? I guess all I'm trying to say is this: When we're setting down everything in the big ledger, we ultimately have to decide if the move worked or didn't work. Yes, second-guessing can be terribly unfairbut isn't it fair to assume Hendry had information about Zambrano that we didn't have? And that such information might have been enough to convince some general managers to spend their $91.5 million otherwise?

Hendry's got a tough job. But I'm not inclined to just give him a free pass on this one.

Brilliant:

Cubs pitcher Carlos Zambrano has been suspended indefinitely after a dugout tirade Friday, according to Cubs general manager Jim Hendry.

Zambrano had to be separated from teammate Derrek Lee in the visitor's dugout after surrendering four runs to the Chicago White Sox in the bottom of the first inning at U.S. Cellular Field.

It was unclear what upset Zambrano, but his frustration was directed at Lee. The two were face to face before manager Lou Piniella and others intervened. Zambrano also walked up and down the dugout shouting and knocked over a Gatorade cooler before Piniella told him to go home.

"His conduct wasn't acceptable," Hendry said. "His actions toward his teammates and staff were not acceptable.

"He will not be at the ballpark tomorrow. We'll play with 24. We'll play with 24 before we tolerate that kind of behavior."

--snip--

Piniella said it's the first time he had to send a player home before a game ended since sending Milton Bradley home from a game last season. That game also happened to be against the White Sox at U.S. Cellular Field.

"Boy, every time we come here," Piniella joked.

It's the first time since last season? No kidding?

It's good that Piniella can joke about it. It's good that Piniella can joke about the second time in two years that a high-visibility, well-paid player had to be sent home in the middle of a season. It's good that Piniella can joke about something that almost never happens in other organizations (let alone solid organizations). It's good that Piniella can joke about Zambrano's second dugout fight in three years (granted, the first had better video.)

I don't know. Seems to me that while Zambrano's obviously got some anger issues, the Cubs also have some management issues. Their general manager keeps committing gobs of money to players who can't control their tempers, and their manager just throws up his hands and makes jokes.

None of it matters much this season. But I'll bet next spring we see an "Under New Management" sign.

What's wrong with Scott Feldman (5-6, 5.32 ERA)? In a word: nothing. For more words, we've got David Golebiewski:

Last season, Feldman benefited from a .276 BABIP. In 2010, balls put in play against him are falling for hits at an absurd clip — his BABIP is .352, trailing only Zach Duke and Randy Wells among qualified big league starters. Also, Feldman’s strand rate has slipped. After leaving 72.8% of base runners high and dry in ’09, his LOB rate is down to 64% this year (70-72% MLB average). He’s not pitching worse with men on base:

Feldman with runners on base

2009: 4.48 K/9, 3.7 BB/9, 4.66 xFIP, .252 BABIP
2010: 5.89 K/9, 3.25 BB/9, 4.50 xFIP, .338 BABIP

Truth be told, Feldman is neither the rotation stalwart that his shiny 17-win total from 2009 suggests, nor the bust that his 2010 ERA implies. Both seasons, he has been a passable starter — Feldman’s xFIP was 4.49 last season, and is 4.58 in 2010. Despite the wild fluctuations in his surface stats, Feldman’s the same pitcher he was last year.

Same thing with Randy Wells, by the way. Last season, Wells finished with a 3.05 ERA. That was a mirage. Not because of BABiP; Wells' was .294, just moderately lucky. Rather, his 76-percent strand rate was unsustainable, and this year it's been just 66 percent. Toss in Wells' incredibly unlucky .361 BABiP and you've got the recipe for a decidedly non-tasty 5.21 ERA.

Let's give some (rare) credit to the Cubs' decision-makers, because (to this point, anyway) they haven't panicked. I don't know if they know that Wells isn't fundamentally pitching any worse than last year, but he's still in the rotation and eventually this thing's going to turn around for him.

Feldman, too. If he keeps striking out twice as many hitters as he walks, his ERA is going to drop. I don't know if he'll ever win 17 games in a season again. I do think he'll be an asset as the Rangers continue their drive for a spot in the postseason tournament.