We were dead before the ship even sank

It's June 1, 2007. The Cubs, who committed nine figures to this year's payroll in the hopes of winning now, are 22-30. During today's game, Carlos Zambrano and Michael Barrett got into a fight in the dugout after Barrett passed a ball and then threw wildly to third; Zambrano pointed to his head on TV replays, evidently telling Barrett either that he should have caught the ball or shouldn't have thrown to third, period, after which Barrett appeared to gesture to the scoreboard, most likely pointing out that Zambrano had allowed 13 hits in just five innings. (The Cubs allowed 20 on the day. Frankly it's amazing they only lost 8-5.) After being separated, Zambrano and Barrett went separately into the clubhouse where, out of Piniella's watchful eye (?), they fought again, ending with Barrett getting his lip split. Barrett doesn't even catch Zambrano, but Henry Blanco is on the DL, leading to Barrett getting replaced by Koyie Hill, who I'd never even heard of until I checked the box score to find out who the hell could have replaced Barrett.

There are, of course, two ways of looking at this:

1. This is a good team that needed a kickstart, and maybe this will provide it.
2. This is a bad team venting its frustration with a season that, on June 1, appears already to be hopelessly lost.

Historically, teams that fight with each other are not very good teams. SportsCenter today showed video of a few other dugout fights, and they included the 2006 Kansas City Royals (62-100) and 2006 Toronto Blue Jays (87-75 but never a threat to make the playoffs). They did also include the 2002 San Francisco Giants (95-66), but that was Bonds and Kent, who both hit more than 35 home runs that year. Also Bonds' OPS+ was 275. That was clearly superstar egos. Zambrano might have a superstar ego but he sure doesn't have a 275 ERA+.

This team is not as untalented as it looks, although you could argue that it's benefited from some of the starters pitching above their historical averages thus far. (Key case in point: Jason Marquis and his 2.93 ERA.) Of course, Zambrano has sucked, though he's been the one getting the run support, which is why he has five wins. Offensively it's been pretty much an average showing, with the team OPS+ slightly below average (98), but that's not what you want from a playoff team. (Even the 2005 Padres, arguably the worst playoff team of all-time, had a team OPS+ of 104.) The Cubs have scored more runs than they've allowed, even after the -14 in two games against the Marlins this week, so their Pythagorean W-L is over .500, which suggests that they've been the victims of some exceptionally bad luck. But some consolation that is.

Now, on June 7, 2006, the Minnesota Twins were 25-33. Eight games under .500, just like the Cubs are now, and through more games. In their final 104 games of the season, the Twins went 71-33 and won an exceedingly competitive division in which three teams won 90 games or more.

The Twins also had the league's batting champion, the league MVP, and the AL Cy Young Award winner, of course. Also, a team OBP of .347 (although their OPS+ was a mere 101). Also, a team ERA+ of 113 (the Cubs', right now, is 104, though at least that's above average).

Am I looking for reasons to be optimistic? You're damn right I am. I intentionally lowered my hopes prior to the season because the Cubs had failed me too many times for me to assume they would win just because they spent money. But right now this team is failing to meet even my modest expectations. My thought was that, worst-case, they'd stumble around .500 all year. Right now, .500 is looking pretty sweet - they're on pace for 93 losses, which for $300 million would represent a three-game improvement over last year.

I hate overreacting and tossing blame around. But it's June fucking first. Among the people who need to queue up for some share of the blame:

Carlos Zambrano. Great, he's tied for the team lead in wins. He's also 5-5, has been bailed out by some of the majors' best run support, and has looked like absolute shit in a goddamn contract year. A lot of people have speculated that he's hiding an injury - for his sake, I hope he is, because I don't understand how anyone trying to justify a nine-figure contract could play this badly.

The bullpen. In particular, the holey trinity of Ohman, Howry, and Eyre, who have a combined WHIP of 1.78 through the end of May. It happens every year: the swallows return to Capistrano and the Cubs have a bunch of shitty middle relievers. In typical Cubs fashion, Neal Cotts pitched badly enough to get demoted to Iowa, while the guy for whom Cotts was traded, David Aardsma, is striking out more than a guy an inning. (Although his ERA isn't so hot either, so I guess whatever.)

A lack of fundamentals. Welcome to another Cub staple. Michael Barrett has seven passed balls this year. Cesar Izturis, the guy who was obtained straight up for Greg Maddux and was touted as a defensive whiz, has a .964 fielding percentage. Remember, he won a Gold Glove in 2004! (For good measure, he's hitting .258 with an OBP of .319 and an SLG that is, in rare fashion, even lower. But when you get a guy with a career OPS+ of 68, you're getting a guy with an OPS+ of 68.) Wednesday's game, the 9-4 loss to the Marlins, featured multiple abysmal baserunning blunders. And this team still can't take walks - they're twelfth in the league and no Cub is on pace to draw even 75 free passes. Dusty Baker may be gone, but his stink remains.

A lack of power. Part of the reason the Cubs have been struggling is that their decent team BA isn't translating to runs, and part of that reason is that there has been a surprising power outage at Wrigley so far. Most years the Cubs hit home runs like crazy - this year they haven't even done that. With 47, they're in the bottom half of the league, and 13 of those have come off the bat of Aramis Ramirez. Alfonso Soriano, who hit 46 last year to get himself a fat contract, has four, putting him on pace for about 13. In Wrigley Field.

Lou Piniella. Sure, it's not Lou's fault that the players on this team do things like hold team meetings before games and then get beaten 9-0, but doesn't it seem like he's just going through the motions? Here's some Lou chatter from today's postgame press conference, much of which has seemed typical of every post-loss press conference in the last month:

"I only have so many players that I can play. You know? And it's about time some of them start playing like major leaguers! Or, get somebody else in here that can catch the damn ball or run the bases properly! All right? That's all I can say!"

Also, Lou said "What am I supposed to do?" about 15 times. Hey, Lou? You're the fucking manager. Have you given any thought to managing? We all know this team is better than it's playing right now, but dumping all the blame on your players is not the world's classiest move, even if they're not playing well. Also, way to throw Barrett under the bus, since "catch the damn ball" and "run the bases properly" are both things that Barrett has not done in the last three games.

So what's the solution, assuming there is one? Some possible alternatives:

1. Trade Barrett.
Between this and last year's Pierzynski fiasco - although who doesn't want to punch A.J. Pierzynski - is he more of a distraction than he's worth? You can't hide Barrett on defense - last year's NL Gold Glove winner, Brad Ausmus had one passed ball, while Barrett had 10, and he's on pace for twice that this year - and his offense, while pretty good for a catcher, isn't irreplaceable. He and Zambrano are both pretty combustible - can you really keep them in the same clubhouse anymore? And remember, this team won the division in 2003 with Damian Miller (bad) and Paul Bako (worse). Ship Barrett out for a good defensive catcher, get some other bat to plug into the lineup... yes?

2. Trade Zambrano.
If the guy's this bad in a contract year, and he's as much of a head case as he is, do you really want to build around him? The problem here - well, one of them - is that Zambrano's stock right now has very likely never been lower, and any trade partner will be well aware of the Cubs' inability to sign Zambrano and may just take their chances in free agency, or at the very least trade as little as possible to get him. And of course if you trade Zambrano, you no longer have an obvious #1 guy (even if Z hasn't pitched like a #1 in more than a couple of games this year). Plus who do you replace him with? Any team trading for Zambrano in midseason probably doesn't have pitching to give away and I'm not exactly relishing another dip into the farm system right now.

3. Do nothing for now and hope this gets the team fired up.
Of course, if it doesn't, either or both guys might get traded in late July anyway.

4. Make a different move altogether.
Ideally, neither Barrett nor Zambrano will be traded, they'll make their peace, and things will be fine. Still, the idea of a trade is appetizing, and if one's going to be made it should be soon. But what trade do you make? Ship the perennially unhappy Jacque Jones out for pitching, which also helps clear up some of that outfield logjam? ...actually, yeah. Go with that one. Jones is hitting .245 with an OPS+ of 68, which makes him the outfield equivalent of Cesar Izturis. Carlos Zambrano is a more valuable hitter right now than Jones is. Of course this raises the question of what you'd get back for Jones... but does it even matter? How about a reliever with a sub-1.6 WHIP? That'd be fine.

Argh. I really hoped this season would be different, you know? And even though there were warning signs, I let myself get talked into it when the pitching started hot... and now it's not as good as it was and no one's hitting. Wonderful.

On the bright side, I discovered possibly the best misery-loves-company Cubs fan site of all time: Hire Jim Essian. Their amusing take on the fight is here.