Last of '98

The 1998 Cubs were not the first team of my lifetime to make the playoffs. They were, however, the first to make it when I was really old enough to be fully engaged. And what a year that was. The Cubs were certainly not a great team, but there was Sammy Sosa battling McGwire for the right to Maris' record, and a dramatic wild card chase and playoff, and the wunderkind Kid K, Kerry Wood, tying the strikeout record and delivering one of the most dominant pitching performances of all time on May 6, his fifth career start.

Wood never really lived up to his promise. Oft-injured, he had just two full seasons in Chicago, 2002 and 2003, and since the latter - the best of his career - his record is 18-20, with 34 saves (all in 2008). In 2006, he was paid $12 million to make four starts, earning more than $600,000 per inning pitched; all told, Baseball-Reference lists him earning almost $49 million for a career in which he has won 77 games, more than $636,000 per victory.

But with that said, Wood was a good soldier. Perhaps feeling that he owed the Cubs for his well-paid and under-performed 2004-2006, he came back in 2007 on a cheap, one-year deal, reinventing himself as a reliever. He came back with another lower-paid, one-year deal in 2008 and took over as the team's closer, allowing both Ryan Dempster to move into the rotation as he wanted and Carlos Marmol to stay in the more favorable 8th-inning role. In the process, he became the first Cub to play on four playoff teams since Stan Hack.

Sadly, the Cubs have announced that Wood will not be back in 2009, or at least that he will almost certainly not be be back assuming that someone else will be willing to sign him to a multi-year deal. It seems that Wood is looking for a three- or four-year commitment as a closer, surely for at least 6-7 million dollars a year, and the Cubs are not in a position to offer it to him. (Chalk one up for the slumping economy.) After trading prize prospect Jose Ceda for Marlins closer Kevin Gregg, the message is clear - we're moving on.

The rational side of me understands this perfectly, of course. Even in 2008, Wood could be unreliable - he was out with a blister for most of July and could struggle with his command at times. Of course, the latter is true of most pitchers, and at his best Wood was typically unhittable. His best moment of the year came when he froze Prince Fielder with a breaking ball to get a game-ending strikeout on September 16, but even this came after giving up three hits and a run. To ask the Cubs to pay anything like 3/25 or 4/35 or whatever, when reasonably effective closers are a dime a dozen and few of them have anything resembling Wood's injury history, and with the team's ownership status still unresolved and the economy in shambles - yeah, that's probably too much.

But the fan in me is upset. In part because Wood is the last connection to the seminal Cubs team of my childhood, and the only current Cub besides Zambrano to break camp with the team in '03. In part because even in the age of free agency, I think we're still conditioned to believe that players who come up with our team are going to stay with them forever, especially if they're good; surely we wouldn't let them go. Seeing Sammy Sosa leave the Cubs - yes, he didn't come up with them, but he spent the vast, vast majority of his career with the Cubs - was tough, and that was in spite of what the situation with him had turned into and in spite of the fact that he was aging in dog years. Seeing Wood leave, though, is significantly worse; he doesn't leave on bad terms like Sosa, he isn't sneaking out to grab a ring in his twilight years like Grace, and he isn't making a shameless money grab in spite of inspiring no confidence like Prior. He's a very good pitcher who, while only in a relief role, is about as effective as he's ever been. He's just turned himself into a luxury the Cubs clearly don't feel they can afford, at least when you combine the money he can command with his injury history. It's reached the point where the Cubs feel that if they're going to spend that kind of money, they need a guy who is more likely to be on the field day in and day out than not. And having that be the reason, while perfectly understandable, is tough to absorb.

The other reason is that there is a pretty good chance that Wood will sign with an NL team and the Cubs will have to see him. Heck, he could sign in the division - Milwaukee and St. Louis could both use a closer. And the thought of Kerry Wood, the longest-tenured Cub at the close of the '08 season, jogging in from the bullpen in Cardinals red, makes me sick to my stomach. It's not just that I don't want Wood going to the Cardinals - I don't want to have to root against him. You thought seeing Jim Edmonds in blue was weird? Wood on the Cardinals or Brewers would be 100 times worse. For my own sanity, I really hope he goes to the AL.

Anything's possible if you just make shit up

Say you're Phil Rogers and you need some grist for the rumor mill to fill out your "Whispers" column. Hey, how about saying something totally unsourced about the Jake Peavy "deal"?

The Cubs are on the list of teams for which Jake Peavy will waive his no-trade clause. This doesn't look like a fit, but don't be surprised if Jim Hendry tries to put together a package that would include a swap of first basemen, Derrek Lee and Adrian Gonzalez, who is supposedly untouchable.

Uh, what? Let's break down this nonsense.

Okay, the first sentence is true; the Cubs are on that list. Doesn't really mean much.

The second sentence starts with "This doesn't look like a fit." True enough. It seems doubtful that the Cubs have the prospects to beat out teams like Atlanta.

Then: "Don't be surprised if Jim Hendry tries to put together a package." Yup, that's fine. I mean, I want him to try.

Then we head to Crazy Town: "...that includes a swap of first baseman, Derrek Lee and Adrian Gonzalez, who is supposedly untouchable."

Whaaaaaat? Phil, did you forget to take your non-crazy pills this morning? Think about this for a second. The Cubs don't have the prospects to put together a deal... so they're going to juice it up by asking the Padres to trade their untouchable first baseman for the Cubs' first baseman? I can just imagine how this conversation would go:

Kevin Towers: Hello?
Jim Hendry: Hey, Kevin, Jim Hendry here.
Towers: Hi, Jim, how are you?
Hendry: Oh, fine, thanks. Listen, since you guys have Jake Peavy on the market and he's willing to come to us, I wanted to pitch a trade to you.
Towers: Shoot.
Hendry: All right, Felix Pie, Kevin Hart and Jeff Samardzija. And we'll eat some of Samardzija's contract.
Towers: I don't know, Jim. I really need some guys who are major-league ready right now. Pie hasn't exactly done much for your team, and Hart and Samardzija haven't proven they can start in the bigs. I've got the Braves ready to offer me either Jair Jurrjens or Charlie Morton as a centerpiece of a deal.
Hendry: Well, I could send you Jason Marquis...
Towers: Ha ha! You old jokester.
Hendry: Um, yes. I'm a jokester. Anyway, I thought you might find that a little light, so I'm willing to sweeten the pot.
Towers: Go for it.
Hendry: What would you say to the triumphant return of Derrek Lee to San Diego?
Towers: Well, we've already got a first baseman, Jim, and he's younger and more powerful than Lee.
Hendry: Here's how you resolve that problem - you trade him to us in return! So, what do you say?
[faint clicking sound]
Hendry: Kevin?
[dial tone]

Does Phil Rogers honestly believe that the Padres would trade the Cubs arguably their pitcher and best hitter for a grab bag of prospects and Derrek Lee? Just for fun, here's how Adrian Gonzalez stacks up with Derrek Lee:

Lee, 2008: .291/.361/.462, 41 2B, 20 HR, 90 RBI; age for bulk of 2009 season: 33
Gonzalez, 2008: .279/.361/.510, 32 2B, 36 HR, 119 RBI; age for bulk of 2009 season: 27

So Gonzalez is six years younger than Lee, has more power despite playing in Petco (on the road he hit .308/.368/.578), and makes $3 million in 2009 to Lee's $13 million. Who wouldn't do that???

I don't believe for a second that Phil Rogers even had a source on this. I think he just made it up. Either that or it was some tossed-off thing that the source wasn't being serious about.

Randy Bush: So that about wraps up the interview, I guess, Phil. Anything else you wanted to ask me?
Phil Rogers: Yeah, any chance that Jake Peavy deal happens?
Bush: Heh, well, we'd all like it to, Phil. In fact, we'd love to be able to get Adrian Gonzalez from them too!
Rogers: Really? Wow. What about Derrek Lee?
Bush: I suppose we'd have to ship him out there, then.
Rogers: Wow, I can't wait to break this story!
Bush: Phil, I was clearly kidding.
Rogers: Can't hear you! On a deadline!

Pet Peavy

Good news, everyone! Jake Peavy is probably going to be traded by the Padres any day now, and he's listed five teams he'd be willing to accept a trade to. Those five? The Braves, the Dodgers, the Cardinals, the Astros, and your Chicago Cubs.

Now the bad news: there is no way the Cubs can put together a package capable of getting Peavy.

Consider what the Cubs gave up for Rich Harden: essentially, it was the prospect pu-pu platter. Two guys in Murton and Patterson who had proven themselves as great AAA players but average major leaguers; an A-ball catcher (Josh Donaldson) who was highly rated but struggling (though he's improved substantially since joining the A's system); and a young pitcher (Sean Gallagher) whose ceiling is considered by most to be "third starter." And if Harden didn't have a history of injury, it doesn't seem likely that would have been enough to get the job done.

But that deal exposed the barrenness of the Cubs' farm system. What top prospects do we have to swing a deal for a Cy Young winner in his prime? The Padres are said to want a center fielder, and surely they'll want either a very good young starter or maybe two good-to-decent ones. From the Cubs' standpoint, the obvious name for the first part is Felix Pie, but does anyone really think that's getting the job done? He still seems to be considered a decent prospect, but he doesn't seem to have the "future star" tag on him that he used to. Is he really still thought of highly enough to be the centerpiece of such a deal?

And what pitchers do the Cubs have to give up? Once upon a time, that was the strength of the farm system, but many of the callups of the early 2000s flamed out. Now, who's left? Samardzija? Hart? Even if a package of Pie, Samardzija and Hart could get it done for Peavy in a vacuum, what are the odds that that's the best offer?

I hope Peavy goes to Atlanta, because I sure don't want to see him in the division, and fuck the Dodgers. But even though he'd be willing to waive his no-trade to come to the Cubs, I just don't think we've got the pieces necessary to do it.

AC 00 63 100

There's not much more to say about the baseball itself. For the second year in a row, the opposing team got all the breaks, and the Cubs compounded their own misery by looking like a wreck on offense. The team that scored 855 runs in 161 games in the regular season scored six in three in the playoffs; the team that was second in the league in ERA allowed almost seven runs per.

During Game One, I was angry. During Game Two, which I didn't get to watching until it was already 5-0, I was pretty much just numb. During Game Three, which I attempted to watch from the beginning but gave up on watching consistently once the Cubs went behind, I was angry again. But I already feel numb to the whole thing the day after, although I was in Borders today and saw a raft of Cubs-related merchandise, including caps reading "1908-2008: Team of Destiny" and various magazine covers, and it just felt like a punch to the gut.

What upsets me isn't so much how badly they played, although that's certainly appalling. It's how quickly the whole thing was over, after 161 games that started on March 31, ran throughout the spring and summer and ended with the Cubs running away with a second straight Central Division title and 97 wins, the most since 1945. I threw myself into the team as much as I could this year, going to a road game for the first time in more than a decade, listening to day games on internet radio at work, keeping a printout of the schedule in my cubicle, on which I would write "W" and "L" as appropriate. I'm not going to claim I was the most rabid fan there was - I only went to three games, and just one of those was at Wrigley - but given my other commitments I think I did pretty well, trying to make time to watch the games whenever I could or at least following them online. And I loved this team. Every night someone else was the hero; Soto or DeRosa or Fukudome or Lee or Ramirez or Soriano or Edmonds or Johnson or Theriot or Marmol or Wood or Zambrano or Dempster or Harden or Lilly or even Marquis. Yeah, they had a few bad stretches, but what team doesn't? This was the team that was supposed to have the talent to go all the way.

And then it was just over. We barely even had time to soak up the playoff excitement of DeRosa's home run in Game One when Dempster self-destructed, and the Cubs never led in the series again, rarely even looking competitive. The best post-HR moment was scoring two runs and looking briefly competent against Takashi Saito in the bottom of the ninth in Game Two; of course, the score was already 10-1 when the "rally" started. The Cubs, best team in the National League and arguably the best team in baseball, were the first team to be officially eliminated from the playoffs, falling to the mighty 84-win Dodgers. Even Milwaukee, overmatched by the Phillies and unable to get a win out of CC Sabathia in their Game Two, was able to take a game before falling. The NL Central, which had a claim to having the three best teams in the NL as late as August, winds up with no teams in the NLCS.

Every Opening Day with the Cubs is like a first date with that year's team. And this year's first date, with Fukudome's tying home run in the bottom of the ninth, was pretty special, even if the Cubs didn't end up winning. As the season went on, every Cubs fan was drawn into the relationship as far as they could go. Ask just about any Cubs fan, certainly any Cubs fan under the age of 40, and they'd tell you this was the best team of their lifetime. This team was doing things no team in decades had done. It was the 100-year anniversary. This was the team that was going to go all the way. And then, before we knew it, we'd been dumped, sitting heartbroken in front of the television, wondering how six wonderful months could have evaporated into disaster so quickly. Just as with a particularly devastating breakup, it's enough to make you tell yourself that you're going to swear off baseball forever - all it does is break your heart, and you can't take it anymore.

But just as with that next person we can't stop thinking about, we're all going to be back eventually. It may not be next Opening Day, but every one of us is going to allow ourselves to love the Cubs again as long as they give us a reason to do so. The bulk of this team isn't going anywhere - aside from Jim Edmonds, not one of the key players from this year's team will be older than 34 next year. And consider this - aside from Mark DeRosa (and, you might possibly argue, Theriot), not one of the Cubs' position players had what you would call a career year. Five guys hit 20 home runs, but no one hit 30, even though at least four guys on the team probably have that capability. And while Dempster might have had his career year on the mound, just about everyone else on the pitching staff can be better. And who knows what Hendry might do to reshape the roster a bit in the offseason, maybe trying to bring in another frontline starter or a little relief help, or another outfield bat. This team will be back. It may not win 97 games again, but it's going to contend. And when you consider how long it's been since the Cubs even contended in three straight years, that in itself is a small victory.

It hurts now. I know it does. But you haven't heard the last of the Cubs just yet. And if we've waited decades to get to this point, and survived the agonies and indignities of 1969, and 1984, and 2003, always coming back eventually, always believing that one day things finally would go our way... well, there's a reason they call it "eternal optimism." We're Cubs fans. Giving up hope just isn't an option.

Wait till next year.

Bulletin from a parallel universe in which things are awesome.

Rich Harden throws eight innings of two-hit ball, striking out 13 Dodgers, and the Cubs get to Hiroki Kuroda in the fifth, taking Game Three of the series by a 4-1 score. The next day, a short-rested Derek Lowe struggles with his command, and the Cubs win 6-3; Manny Ramirez hits two solo homers off Ted Lilly, but separates his shoulder diving for a ball in the sixth inning. The series returns to Chicago for Game Five and Chad Billingsley holds the Cubs again, but this time Ryan Dempster is almost equal to the task (it helps that the Dodgers are forced to play Juan Pierre in left), and the Cubs enter the bottom of the ninth trailing 1-0. Takashi Saito walks Derrek Lee to start the inning, and his first pitch to Aramis Ramirez is ripped deep into the night for a walk-off home run, sending the Cubs into the NLCS, where the Phillies await.

Game 2: There are no words

I really don't even have the energy for this one. How do you give up 17 runs in two games to the Dodgers? (Well, seven walks in one game and four errors in the other, but even so.) The offensive part doesn't necessarily surprise me - though it sucks - but to have the pitching and defense be so lousy (though Zambrano was better than you'd think looking at the score)...

Honestly, yesterday I was really angry. Today I'm just numb. It's like it's happening to someone else's team.

Game 1: Dempster Diving

Honestly, is there any way that could have gone worse? I suppose Aramis could have blown out his knee rounding first on his double, but that's about it. Here, in no particular order, are the five worst things about this game, and then I'm not talking about it anymore.

1. There goes the home field advantage.
We heard that the Dodgers were better than they had been when the Cubs last played them, but consoled ourselves with two facts: (1) the Cubs are still better and (2) the Dodgers were lousy on the road all year, so having the home field should be enough of an edge. Well, now what? The Cubs have to win at least one in Los Angeles to have any hope. It's not like that's an impossible task, but so much for not having to do it.

2. Can we trust any of the starting pitchers?
Whether Dempster was anxious or what, it doesn't matter - he blew it big-time, utterly failing to vindicate Piniella's faith in him. Let's say the series does come back to a fifth game at Wrigley - are you feeling that confident seeing Dempster stride out there again?

3. In Carlos we trust.
Yeah, Mr. 7.28 ERA Since August 1 now has to win Game Two to save the Cubs' season. (At the very least, the Cubs have to win, but Zambrano simply can't pitch poorly.)

4. Hi there, 2007 NLDS offense.
Only twice in the game did the Cubs put more than one runner on base in an inning. Once was DeRosa's two-run homer in the second, and the other was when DeRosa and Theriot had consecutive two-out singles in the fourth. Everyone else who got on - and the Cubs had a man on base in every single inning - just died there, most annoyingly Ramirez's leadoff double in the sixth.

5. Derek Lowe.
I hate you, I hate your stupid face, and I hate that the umpires call your stupid pitches at the ankles a foot off the plate for strikes.

My dad wanted to spin this by saying that "you have to overcome some adversity to break a curse," pointing to the '04 Red Sox. Of course, the Red Sox won their first-round series 3-0. Also, the '05 White Sox overcame adversity to the tune of losing one game the entire postseason. Whatever. It comes down to this: the Cubs win tomorrow, or the Cubs lose this series. Here we go.

The 11 Best Games of 2008

I did this last year, and okay, it wasn't exactly a harbinger of good things for the playoffs. But with 11 games left to win, here are the 11 best Cubs games of the 2008 regular season, this time with video! Let's hope that by the time October's over, they're games #12-22 of the 2008 season.

11. "Atta boy, Jimmy!" (June 12)
Hosting the Braves and Tim Hudson, the Cubs struggled to get much offense going all day behind Carlos Zambrano. Trailing 2-1 entering the bottom of the ninth, Jim Edmonds - who was still fairly new as a Cub and trying to win the fans over - smacked a 1-0 offering from Blaine Boyer out to left to tie the game, eliciting this call from Len Kasper, who (on WGN's 60th anniversary) had clearly been saving it all day. Perhaps even more entertaining was the Cubs winning the game in the 11th when they loaded the bases and Reed Johnson took a ball off his shoe to drive in the winning run.

10. Revenge is a dish best served cold (May 11)
Hosting the Diamondbacks for the first time since being eliminated from the playoffs in three straight games the previous October, the Cubs had already won the series with a Sunday game against Randy Johnson looming. But due to the conditions (cold, wet, and with a 24-mph breeze blowing in), both teams scrapped their intended starters, treating the fans to Sean Gallagher against Edgar Gonzalez. Gonzalez got the better of the head-to-head, but the Cubs rallied - down 4-2 in the seventh, they scored two to tie it when Reed Johnson smacked a no-doubt line drive into the teeth of the wind in left center, his first Cubs home run. In the eighth, Daryle Ward blasted a pinch-hit two-run double to right center, and the Cubs swept the D-Backs out of Wrigley with a 6-4 win, an early statement series for the season (at a time when people still thought the D-Backs were good).

9. Ward pinches the Fish (August 15)
Daryle Ward might not have had the kind of 2008 we all hoped for after his stellar 2007, but he could still come through in a big spot. Aside from the above mentioned double to beat Arizona, he also had a dramatic go-ahead three-run homer on the same night that Michael Phelps won his seventh gold in Beijing. (So you can see why Ward got overshadowed.) With the Cubs down 5-3 against Marlins closer Kevin Gregg, Mark DeRosa drew a walk and Reed Johnson singled, leading to Ward's heroics. The Cubs held on to win 6-5 (not without a scare as Wood walked one, hit another and threw a wild pitch), their fifth in a row at the time.

8. "Beating" Sabathia (July 28)
The Brewers had been adrift in the Central, falling as far back as 8.5 games on June 15 - the exact same deficit the Cubs had come back from a year earlier. And the Brewers, like the Cubs, came all the way back by the end of July, tying the division on July 26 and entering a pivotal four-game series in Milwaukee just a game back, having already taken four of six from the Cubs at Wrigley earlier in the year. The Cubs weren't about to yield anything, even against Milwaukee's newly-acquired ace CC Sabathia, who was already 4-0 as a Brewer with three complete games and a shutout. Ted Lilly was pitching well until giving up consecutive homers to J.J. Hardy and Ryan Braun in the sixth, followed by a run-scoring double to Corey Hart that put the Cubs behind 3-2. Sabathia couldn't hold the lead, however, giving up two singles, a double steal and a walk that loaded the bases with one out. Derrek Lee grounded into what looked like an inning-ending double play, but Reed Johnson made a good takeout slide into second and Rickie Weeks fired wide of first, scoring two runs and putting the Cubs back ahead 4-3. Bob Howry blew the lead in the bottom of the inning with a solo home run to Russell Branyan, but the Cubs won it 6-4 in the ninth, Lee atoning for his near-DP with a double to score the go-ahead run. It was the only game the Brewers would lose behind Sabathia (though he ended without a decision) until the Cubs beat him outright on September 16.

7. Really beating Sabathia (September 16)
Speaking of which, here's that game. By this point the Cubs had an eight-game lead in the division, and they entered their final series with Milwaukee at Wrigley with a magic number of six. They lowered it to four after finally handing Sabathia an L to call his own, though it was close. The Cubs led 3-0 after three thanks to a couple of RBI doubles from Lee and Ramirez, but the Brewers closed it to 3-2 in the top of the sixth when Ryan Dempster allowed a mammoth home run to the mammoth Prince Fielder. Sabathia was still around in the seventh when Alfonso Soriano added a much-needed insurance run, taking the big fella deep to left to make it 4-2. Fielder struck again to lead off the eighth, but the Cubs added another run in the bottom of the inning with a Henry Blanco pinch-hit RBI single. This was again needed to survive a set of Kerry Wood adventures in the ninth, which finally ended the game at 5-4 when he struck Fielder out looking on a gutsy breaking pitch.

6. Rallying past the Phillies (August 28)
Opening a big home series against one of the NL contenders, the Cubs trailed 4-1 going into the bottom of the eighth after doing little against Cole Hamels. Although the Phillies' bullpen was strong for much of the year, seeing anyone but Hamels suited the Cubs as they scored five runs in the eighth. Mike Fontenot led off the inning with a pinch-hit homer, and a double, single and walk loaded the bases for Aramis Ramirez, who put the Cubs up 6-4 with a single swing. Wood had to face the big bats in the ninth, but allowed just a single to Jimmy Rollins, ending the game with a Ryan Howard pop-up.

5. Rallying past the Brewers (September 18)
For sheer degree of difficulty, it's tough to top this game (although the Cubs managed it; see #3). The Cubs trailed 6-2 heading into the bottom of the ninth, and proceeded to make two quick outs; at this point, the likelihood of them winning the game was so low that Baseball-Reference actually rounds it down to zero. But Ramirez doubled on the first pitch he saw, Edmonds singled (scoring Ramirez to make it 6-3), and DeRosa singled, bringing up Geovany Soto, who also took a liking to the first pitch he saw and murdered it to left center, enough of a no-doubter that, as you can see on the video, Ryan Braun didn't even move. This sent the game to extras; Marmol and Wood mowed the Brewers down in the 10th and 11th, but in the 12th Wood put himself in a second and third, no out jam before working out of it. In the bottom of the 12th, Derrek Lee came up with two outs and runners at second and third; he'd been 0-for-5, but picked a good time for his first hit, lacing a single up the middle to win the game and drop the Cubs' magic number to two.

4. Mr. Clutch (June 20)
Aramis Ramirez has taken heat over the years for not hustling all the time, but he was pretty good at coming through when it mattered in 2008, and isn't that what's really important? Perhaps the best example was the opening game of interleague against the White Sox; the Cubs trailed 3-1 after doing little off John Danks in six innings, but Octavio Dotel was greeted with consecutive homers from Lee and Ramirez to open the seventh (winning some lucky WGN listener $7,000, no less), tying the game up. There it stayed until the bottom of the ninth, when Ramirez, leading off against Scott Linebrink, hit the second pitch to pretty much dead center. The Cubs had six walk-off wins in 2008, but this was the only one on a home run.

3. Climbing the Rockies Mountain (May 30)
Ted Lilly won 17 games for the Cubs in 2008, but he was also capable of having really bad outings. This was one such; Lilly lasted just three innings, allowing seven runs (though only four were earned). Jon Lieber replaced him and allowed two more; by the time the Cubs came to bat in the fifth, they were already down 9-1 and their chance of winning the game was down to about 1%. It was bad enough that Lou Piniella actually pulled Lee and Soto, putting Blanco and Micah Hoffpauir in their places. This turned out to be a pretty good move. Hoffpauir smacked a double to start the sixth, which was followed by home runs from Kosuke Fukudome and Jim Edmonds, cutting the deficit to 9-4. Still, the Cubs only had a 3% chance of winning entering the seventh inning, which they turned around in a hurry. With one out, Mike Fontenot singled, followed by a Blanco home run to cut the lead to 9-6. After Hoffpauir and Fukudome singled, Edmonds hit a deep double to center, scoring both runners and cutting it to 9-8. The next hitter was Mark DeRosa, who lifted a full-count pitch into the breeze, giving it enough to carry to the seats in left center and sending the remaining fans (of which there were surprisingly many, but then why leave the ballpark early on a late spring afternoon?) into a frenzy. The Cubs still had to hold the slim 10-9 lead, but Marmol struck out the side in the eighth, and Wood got a convenient lineout double play in the ninth before Todd Helton ended it with a flyout to right.

2. The Clinch (September 20)
Only once in the division play era had the Cubs clinched things at home (2003), and the time was right to add a second, especially against the rival Cardinals and on national TV. The Cubs jumped ahead with three runs in the second, as Soriano hit a single that skipped past Brian Barton in left, clearing the bases and allowing Soriano to go all the way to third. The Cubs tacked on two more in the fourth on a Mark DeRosa RBI double and, amusingly, a suicide squeeze from Ted Lilly (he ended up being safe on the play when the Cardinals attempted to get DeRosa at home and failed). Lilly's squeeze, somewhat fittingly, ended up being the difference, as he scuffled in the sixth, giving up a predictable home run to Troy Glaus to cut the lead to 5-4. That was as close as the Cardinals would get, however, as Kerry Wood closed the door once more in the ninth - also fittingly, as he's the only Cub to appear on every playoff team of the wild card era.

1. Zambra-No (September 14)
It was an up-and-down season for Carlos Zambrano, as it often is. But he found time to throw the first Cubs no-hitter since Milt Pappas in 1972, oddly enough against the Astros at Miller Park, the game having been moved due to Hurricane Ike (or, if you believe Astros fans, due to an anti-Houston conspiracy cooked up by secret Cubs fan Bud Selig). Zambrano needed 110 pitches, striking out 10 (including the last batter of the game) and walking just one (he put a second man on with a hit by pitch). Alfonso Soriano led off the game with a home run, and it was all the offense the Cubs needed; the Astros only sent two balls out of the infield, both caught by Mark DeRosa in right. It was a great moment, and yet another historic punctuation to a season we all hope will end with even bigger things. (And yes, Zambrano followed this up with the worst post-no-hitter start since Bob Forsch in 1978. Let's not dwell on that.)

The playoffs start tomorrow. Recaps/commentary will be here, hopefully for a lot longer than they were last year. Go Cubs go.

Dodge this.

There won't be a New York team in the playoffs, and I'm feelin' fine. But now that we know the Cubs' opponent, it's time to focus on the Dodgers and see just how these teams match up.

Season Series: Cubs 5, Dodgers 2

The Cubs took all three games at Wrigley Field in late May before splitting four at Chavez Ravine a week later. Just about every game in the series was pretty close, though; the Cubs won the first two games at Wrigley by identical 3-1 scores, then squeezed out a 2-1 win in the finale only by scraping out a run in the ninth and then another in the tenth. In LA, the Cubs blew a 4-0 lead in the first game but got a run in the ninth to win 5-4; the Dodgers then got a complete-game shutout from Hiroki Kuroda, followed by a 7-3 win when Carlos Zambrano fell apart in the bottom of the seventh. The Cubs salvaged a split, winning the fourth game by that familiar 3-1 score behind, somewhat surprisingly, Jason Marquis, who allowed just three hits in 6.1 innings.

Reason not to take the season series results very seriously: Manny Ramirez

The Cubs played all their games against a Dodgers team that was still sending Juan Pierre into left every day (and, for that matter, that was still going with Chin-Lung Hu and his .181 batting average at short). Going into today, Manny Ramirez was putting up this line as a Dodger: .396/.489/.743, with 17 homers and 53 RBI in 53 games. A little better than Juan Pierre and his .327 OBP and .329 slugging.

Position-by-Position

To be honest, it's not entirely clear to me who the starters are at some positions for LA. For example, Rafael Furcal started the year as the starter at short. Then I think he was injured, and most recently the starter had been Angel Berroa - until Furcal started the last three games. Also, Jeff Kent has been on and off at second base. And frankly, how one evaluates the Dodgers changes a lot depending on whether Kent and Furcal are starting, as opposed to Blake DeWitt and Berroa. So I'll have to play the comps a bit by ear, here, based on what they're likely to throw out. Could I wait until Torre announces his roster? Maybe, but I don't feel like it.

Catcher: Geovany Soto vs. Russell Martin

Martin is a very good hitter for a catcher - .279/.384/.395 this year - and he's pretty strong defensively, winning the Gold Glove last year (I know, I know). He's also caught the staff with the lowest ERA in the NL, for whatever that's worth. But Soto has been a more valuable hitter - .285/.364/.504 - and his staff isn't too shabby itself, plus Soto's caught-stealing percentage is slightly higher.
Edge: Cubs, though not by as much as you might think.

First Base: Derrek Lee vs. James Loney

Loney's had an okay year, but hasn't flashed a lot of power for a first baseman - his OPS+ is actually just below average, at 99. His .341 OBP is pretty mediocre as well. Lee, for all the knocks on him, still managed to get to 20 home runs (although most were at home) and had a .363 OBP, which isn't too bad. For all the noise about his double plays, he ended up grounding into 26, but Loney grounded into 25 himself. Add in the fact that Lee is a great defensive first baseman while Loney is average, and the fact that Loney is in his second full season while Lee has a World Series ring, and that should give the Cubs the edge.
Edge: Cubs.

Second Base: Mark DeRosa vs. Jeff Kent/Blake DeWitt

This depends a lot both on DeRosa's health - he's been nursing a strained calf for a few days - and on which player is actually starting for the Dodgers. Kent came off the DL last Saturday, but has only appeared in three games since then and only twice as a second baseman. I'm guessing Kent gets the nod if he's healthy, as DeWitt is just a rookie and hasn't hit all that well (although he's having a strong September), but Kent's OBP for the year is only .327. He murdered the Cubs in his five games against them, though, going 8-for-19 with two home runs. As for DeRosa, assuming he's fully healthy, he's having a career year, setting new career marks in home runs, RBI, runs scored, walks, and OBP and slugging. All this and he's been 11 runs above average on defense, despite being shuttled around between four different positions and appearing in right field more often than at second base in September. For this he's been worth 7.8 WARP1 and is top 30 in the NL in VORP; Kent has been a below average defender and contributed just 2.3 wins to the Dodger cause.
Edge: Cubs if DeRosa is healthy, although even if they're forced to start Mike Fontenot at second, they might still have the edge (Fontenot was worth more wins that either Kent or DeWitt this year).

Shortstop: Ryan Theriot vs. Rafael Furcal/Angel Berroa

It seems like it's Furcal's job now that he's back, and why not - his OBP in 36 games is .439, compared to Berroa's .305 in 83 games. Furcal has also been the superior defender historically in spite of his occasional tendency to air-mail throws to first. As for Theriot, he's never going to be mistaken for Alex Rodriguez at the plate, what with his one home run this year, but he's been pretty good at finding a way on base in big spots, whether by slapping a single or drawing a walk, and he does walk more than he strikes out, which is certainly a nice feature. All told he's been worth about five wins to the Cubs; all the guys who have played short for the Dodgers combined add up to just slightly more, although a full season of Furcal, presumably, would have been worth more than that (I would project, but his slashes are so high in his short period of time that it's going to be inflated past what he likely would actually have contributed). At any rate, a fully healthy Furcal - if that's what he is - is probably a better player than Theriot.
Edge: Dodgers if Furcal is 100%, Cubs if he's not (and especially if he isn't playing at all).

Third Base: Aramis Ramirez vs. Casey Blake

Blake has hit 10 home runs since coming over from Cleveland, but his OBP is .313. Ramirez, meanwhile, might be the best hitter on the Cubs. The two are probably about a wash on defense, so you have to give the edge to Ramirez's offense.
Edge: Cubs.

Left Field: Alfonso Soriano vs. Manny Ramirez

Soriano, somewhat quietly, is really the engine that drives the Cubs. When he's out, you can tell; just look at the Cubs' record without him this year. He added 5.8 wins in just 108 games played; over a full season he might have added nearly 9, a pretty robust number. But Ramirez has added a mind-boggling 5.3 wins to the Dodgers in 53 games since coming over! He gives that lineup an entirely new dimension, and he's also got a ton of playoff experience.
Edge: Dodgers.

Center Field: Jim Edmonds/Reed Johnson vs. Matt Kemp

I was surprised to see Baseball Prospectus credit Kemp with 6.1 WARP1, since his OBP is only .340 and he's listed as an average fielder. I was even more surprised to then find out that combined, Edmonds and Johnson have only added 6.6 wins to the Cubs. Consider, however, that Kemp has played in almost every game for the Dodgers, while Edmonds and Johnson combined have about 25 fewer at-bats than Kemp does alone. Given the Cubs' ability to platoon, and the postseason experience Edmonds brings, I think you have to favor the Cubs here.
Edge: Cubs.

Right Field: Kosuke Fukudome vs. Andre Ethier

There's no guarantee Fukudome will even be starting, of course; if his bat stays silent, Piniella might try to play DeRosa out there (though that would depend on his injury) or even Hoffpauir (although that's a lot of defense to give up in a playoff environment). Either way, you probably have to give the offensive edge to LA; Ethier is hitting .302/.373/.507 this year, but .447/.547/.671 in September, possibly thanks to hitting in front of Ramirez, and seeing better pitches as a result, for most of the month. The Cubs have the advantage on defense, but for the moment you have to give the Dodgers the nod thanks to Ethier's hot bat.
Edge: Dodgers.

Starting Pitching: Ryan Dempster, Carlos Zambrano, Rich Harden and Ted Lilly vs. Derek Lowe, Chad Billingsley, Hiroki Kuroda and Greg Maddux

Dempster finished third in the NL in VORP, the highest among this group; next was Billingsley at seventh. Lowe was tenth, and while you have to go all the way to 23rd to hit the next Cub, Zambrano, Lilly and Harden are bunched up at 23, 24 and 28, just ahead of Kuroda at 30 and well ahead of Maddux at #80 (most of that accomplished with the Padres, of course). But Maddux might not even start; Joe Torre has suggested Lowe could come back on short rest in Game Four if the situation called for it. At any rate, this will probably be a series for people who love pitching. Certainly it was in the regular season, with both teams scoring less than three runs per game.

The opening game will match Dempster and Lowe. Dempster, famously, was 14-3 at Wrigley this year, while Lowe has been touchable on the road, his BAA rising from .206 at Chavez Ravine all the way to .292. He doesn't walk many, though, and he's a sinker-ball pitcher, both factors that will give the Cubs trouble. Lowe started twice against the Cubs this year, both times matching up with Zambrano; he got a no-decision after seven shutout innings in the Dodgers' 2-1 loss on May 28, but won the 7-3 Dodgers win in LA on June 7, though he allowed three runs in seven innings in that one. Dempster was also 1-0 with a no-decision against LA, though the Cubs won both games; his start at Wrigley was seven innings of one-run ball.

Game Two as scheduled will pit Zambrano against Billingsley. Like Lowe, Billingsley has pitched worse on the road - not surprising for pitchers in a pitcher's park - but not by much, and he's only got a couple bad starts all year. Zambrano, of course, is Zambrano; really, who has any idea what to expect out of him at this point? He might go eight innings and give up three hits, or he might get knocked out in the fourth. His biggest problem is always walks; if he can restrict those and keep himself under emotional control, he could be great. Let's not forget that he turned in a strong start on the road last year in the playoffs after sucking out loud for much of the final two months. The good news is, the Dodgers don't take a ton of walks. The bad news is they pounded 13 hits off him in his June 7 start in LA.

Game Three should match up Harden and Kuroda in Los Angeles, where Kuroda blanked the Cubs on June 6. Like Lowe, Kuroda does not issue a lot of walks (in fact, the Dodgers were second in walks allowed, which partially explains their #1 ERA); he's also pitched better at home, though like Billingsley, the split isn't all that wide. Harden is one of the most unhittable pitchers in baseball; in seven of his 12 starts for the Cubs, he's allowed no more than two hits. Two! The only problems, of course, are (1) in three of those starts, he's only gone five innings and (2) he's also got four starts with at least four walks. The piece de resistance was on September 18, when he threw 115 pitches in five innings against the Brewers, walking six and striking out seven. (I believe he also hit the bull mascot twice.) His ERA with the Cubs is 1.77, but that's only so useful if he's forcing you to call the bullpen after five innings. Hopefully he can turn in seven of similar quality in what will likely be yet another pitchers' duel. Harden has been slightly worse on the road this year, but since he's a flyball pitcher when the ball actually gets in play, starting him away from Wrigley Field probably isn't a bad thing.

Ted Lilly may be the hottest pitcher the Cubs have; he's gone 16-5 since a 1-4 start, and lowered his ERA to 4.09 after it was over 5.00 as late as June 10. He's pitched particularly well on the road of late, with his last two road starts both seeing him take no-hitters into the seventh inning (and both times at Miller Park). For the season, he's 10-4, 3.77 on the road next to 7-5, 4.50 at home, so throwing him out there on the road in a pitcher's park can't be a bad thing. Of course, he might not make a start in this series depending on how things go. As for who he would face, it's either Lowe on short rest or Maddux, who has been mediocre as a Dodger.

Edge: It's pretty even, which isn't surprising when you have the top two teams in ERA going at it. But because of the home field advantage and the way the pitching lines up with that, I'd probably give a very slight edge to the Cubs, pretty much no more edge than the home field allows for. Obviously a lot of this depends on which Zambrano shows up. A top-of-his-game Zambrano, following a good outing by Dempster, gives the Cubs a good chance of being up 2-0 when heading out west. If Zambrano drops a bomb, that pretty well changes the complexion of the series.

Middle Relief: Carlos Marmol, Jeff Samardzija and the rest vs. Joe Beimel, Jonathan Broxton, Cory Wade, Chan Ho Park and the rest

The Dodgers have more middle relievers in which I'd be willing to have confidence; the Cubs are pretty much down to two, and frankly I'm not sure I trust Samardzija all that far right now. The Cubs catch a break in that Hong-Chih Kuo, possibly the Dodgers' best reliever, won't be available, but they've got several guys with sub-3.00 ERAs. I don't even know who Piniella wants to take besides the above two since everyone else has been so lousy; I expect Howry will show up on the roster, and at least one of Marshall and Cotts. Kevin Hart has also pitched fairly well since being called back up on September 1. I've gotta think Marmol is the best of this bunch, and in fact he's fifth in baseball in WXRL, a reliever's win expectation over replacement (lineup-adjusted), adding more than five wins to the Cubs, a lot for a guy who pitches under 100 innings. But you go through six Dodgers on the list before you get to another Cub who isn't Wood, and that's Marshall at #125 in baseball. On volume, the Dodgers are better, and more equipped to handle the early departure of a starter.
Edge: Dodgers.

Closer: Kerry Wood vs. Takashi Saito

Saito was out for two months and has only had one save chance since coming back, but I'm assuming he'll be the closer in the playoffs. Edge to Wood mostly on the freshness count; Saito's stats are comparable to Wood's, with a better ERA, but the Cubs have also handed him a blown save and a loss this year in the two times he came on in either a save situation or a tie.
Slight edge: Cubs.

Put it all together: The Cubs are going to be the favorites, and they should be, but this isn't going to be a cakewalk. In the playoffs, you need good starting pitching, timely hitting, and a bit of luck. Last year the Cubs had none of that. If they want to avoid another, even more serious disappointment, things have to begin with the starters and roll from there; that's how the Red Sox and White Sox broke their droughts (the latter in particular). This should be obvious, of course, but that's what I'll be looking forward to seeing starting Wednesday. This team is the best team in the NL and it should be representing the league in the World Series if it plays up to its potential. Whether or not that happens... that's why they play the games.

Change of plans

The Cubs officially announced their playoff rotation today. Fortunately, this year the Cubs have four starters and won't have to do anything like pull Zambrano a little early in Game One to save him for Game Four. Of course, they also won't have to do that this year because Zambrano isn't starting Game One. Your planned rotation:

Game One (Wednesday): Ryan Dempster
Game Two (Thursday): Carlos Zambrano
Game Three (Saturday): Rich Harden
Game Four (Sunday): Ted Lilly
Game Five (Tuesday): Ryan Dempster

I think this works out pretty well. For one thing, it's obvious that Dempster has been the Cubs' best pitcher all season, so why not reward him? He's also got a 14-3 home record, lest we forget, so having him possibly start two games, both at home, seems like it would work out pretty well. Better still, you're starting your two ground-ball pitchers at home and your two fly-ball pitchers on the road, and "the road" is looking more and more like it's going to be pitcher's park Chavez Ravine.

I think it's time to revisit the playoff roster debate:

Starters: Dempster, Zambrano, Harden, Lilly
Relievers: Wood, Marmol, Marquis, Marshall, Howry, Samardzija, Cotts

I'm not totally sure about Marquis. Remember last year during the season-ending series in Cincinnati, when he was put in as a reliever, got shelled, and then afterwards said that he really only feels comfortable when he's starting? He's been good down the stretch this year, in defiance of his usual form, but he's right - his value is as a fifth starter who can usually give you six innings and maybe only allow three or four runs. But he often allows all those runs in one inning. I guess he could be the long-relief backup plan should anything happen with Zambrano or Harden (or, for that matter, the occasionally homer-happy Lilly), but man - if we see Marquis trotting in to save the Cubs' season in Game Three or Four, I don't think I'm going to be feeling very good. As for the rest of them, I don't really like the last three, but where else do you go? You need that second lefty in Cotts, and Howry and Samardzija, while they haven't necessarily been great, have probably been the two most effective relievers outside of the Wood-Marmol team in the last month. The only other possibility is Kevin Hart; Gaudin pitched himself out of consideration last night, and Wells and Lieber are hurt.

Eleven pitchers allows for 14 position players, which is nice. I think the debate here is about the same as the last time I talked about it:

Catchers (2): Soto, Blanco
Infielders (6): Lee, DeRosa, Theriot, Ramirez, Fontenot, Cedeno
Outfielders (4): Soriano, Edmonds, Johnson, Fukudome
Bench (2): Ward, Hoffpauir

I've been on board with taking Pie over Hoffpauir, but I was thinking about this just now and changed my mind for a couple reasons, and Hoffpauir's recent 5-for-5, two-homer night doesn't even have much to do with it.

Reason #1: Carrying three center fielders is crazy.
I mean, if you're not going to carry three catchers, there's no reason to carry three center fielders, and you've already got the Edmonds/Johnson team platooning at that spot. And let's not forget that in an absolute pinch you can switch DeRo into right (since you are carrying three guys who can play second base) and move Fukudome into center. Pie may be a better center field defender than any of them, but is it by so much that you have to have him on the team?

Reason #2: Bringing Pie over Hoffpauir basically says, "We're valuing late-inning defense and pinch-running over pinch-hitting."
If you bring Pie, he's probably your absolute last pinch-hit choice off the bench, unless you're trying to create a lefty-righty matchup. But Hoffpauir also creates that matchup, and he's a much better shot to get a hit, it seems to me. Pie can pinch-run, but so could Cedeno, Fontenot, or Marquis if it came to that. And as for late-inning center-field defense, you can replace Edmonds with Johnson if you're so worried. Johnson himself probably doesn't even need replacing.

So yeah, Ward and Hoffpauir are basically the same guy - slow-footed lefties who can play first and, if you're really desperate, an outfield corner, but who in the playoffs will only really be used for pinch-hitting anyway. And if someone gets injured, you are allowed to replace that player for the series with someone not on the 25-man (this rule only started in 2007, apparently), so it's not like you absolutely have to plan for all contingencies at the start of the series.

So... the Dodgers, probably? Unless we beat the Brewers the next two days, which isn't impossible. (Even then, the Mets would have to win their next two, and I don't know about that.) The Dodgers don't have lefty power, which is nice, but I do worry a little about their pitching, as I've said.

Strike a match

The playoffs are locked up. Home field advantage is locked up. Now, there's only two questions: can the Cubs really get to the World Series, and who are they going to have to beat to do it?

First things first: of course the Cubs can get to the World Series. They've been the best team in the NL all year and have the record to prove it. If they don't have the best top-to-bottom pitching, they're darn close, and they have the highest-scoring offense. Anything can happen in short playoff series, but it's inarguable that the Cubs can win the pennant.

But will they? To answer that, we have to look at the other NL playoff teams (or potential playoff teams) and ask ourselves how they match up with the Cubs, and what the Cubs have to do to win.

Possible Opponent #1: Mets
At the moment, this looks like the most likely option for the Division Series. After beating the Cubs tonight, the Mets have a one-game lead in the wild card over the Brewers with five games to play. Of course, the Mets have two more against the Cubs (and won't get to start Johan Santana in those games) while the Brewers are playing Pittsburgh, their personal bitches for 2008. So check back on Thursday night, because it's entirely possible the Mets won't be the wild card leaders anymore.

Pros for the Cubs: For a team that's scored 781 runs, the Mets seem to have a tendency the last couple seasons to lock up in the clutch. The Cubs shut them down at Wrigley earlier this year, although that was so long ago at this point that it's virtually meaningless. The Mets' pitching is also highly suspect once you get beyond Johan Santana, especially in the bullpen, which lacks a real closer with Billy Wagner injured and is even thinner beyond that.

Cons for the Cubs: Even ahead of the Phillies, the Mets might be the scariest offensive team in the playoffs (if they make it), with David Wright, Jose Reyes, and a suddenly alive Carlos Delgado, among others. There's also the little matter of Johan Santana, who could pitch twice in a five-game series, leaving little margin for error if the Cubs struggle to hit him as they did tonight after the first three innings.

Possible Opponent #2: Phillies
It should probably be noted that the Mets are only 1.5 back of the Phillies in the NL East right now, meaning it's not yet impossible that the Cubs could see Philadelphia in the first round. Still, an NLCS matchup seems more likely if anything.

Pros for the Cubs: Last year the Phillies were the second-hottest team in baseball going into the playoffs, and they got skunked in three straight. Of course, the team doing the skunking was the hottest team in baseball. But the Phillies are still not blessed with a ton of playoff experience - really, the bulk of their major players have just that one series to point to. The Cubs have a good deal more than that. The Phillies' starting pitching is also a bit thin beyond their top two, and while they have a lot of power, they're not really great at getting on base, often more important in the playoffs than the ability to hit home runs.

Cons for the Cubs: The Phillies went 4-3 against the Cubs this year but it could easily have been 7-0, as the Cubs only won their one game in Philly thanks to a phantom home run call and needed late comebacks against the Phillies' bullpen just to split the four-game set at Wrigley in August. Hamels and Myers are good pitchers, but the Cubs have made them look like Koufax and Drysdale, with Hamels allowing one run and six hits in fourteen innings vs. the Cubs this year and Myers is 2-0 with a 3.00 ERA in two starts. That could easily present problems in a short series if the Cubs can't do a better job of solving them. The Phillies' power and speed are also both liable to be problems. This is probably the one team in the NL I absolutely don't want to see, certainly not in the Division Series.

Possible Opponent #3: Dodgers
If the wild card is won by the Brewers, the Cubs won't play the wild card team; instead, they'll play the division winner with the worst record, which is going to be the team out of the West. Right now that's LA - they should lead by three games by the end of the night with just five to play, an awfully difficult lead to blow, especially when they don't play second-place Arizona.

Pros for the Cubs: The Cubs went 5-2 against the Dodgers this year, sweeping them at Wrigley Field. And aside from one bad Carlos Zambrano start, they mostly kept the Dodgers from scoring, allowing less than two runs per game in the other six contests. The Dodgers have also been pretty bad on the road this year, and of course the Cubs would have home-field.

Cons for the Cubs: The Cubs also didn't hit Dodger pitching all that well, scoring a total of 19 runs in the seven games. They were shut out by Hiroki Kuroda at Chavez Ravine, and twice needed to get into the bullpen to win, including the May 28 game at Wrigley where it was 1-0 Dodgers in the bottom of the ninth before the Cubs managed to tie the game on a sac fly and win in ten innings. Also, we can't count on the Dodgers to be a lousy offensive team anymore, given the improvement in their numbers since the addition of Manny Ramirez.

Possible Opponent #4: Diamondbacks
The chances of this look pretty slim right now, thank God.

Pros for the Cubs: The Diamondbacks stink. They're 79-78 right now!

Cons for the Cubs: Anybody who tells you they want to face Webb, Haren and Johnson to start a five-game set is crazy. It could be over before it even begins, just like last year. And just for good measure, give them Cub killer Adam Dunn. You don't know how glad I am this isn't happening.

Possible Opponent #5: Brewers
This could only happen in the NLCS, and they need to catch the Mets for the wild card to do it. But they're only a game out, hardly insurmountable with five to play.

Pros for the Cubs: The Cubs know the Brewers very well. They also seem to own them at Miller Park, making the possible 3-4-5 middle section of the NLCS not as daunting as it might be in another city. In addition, the Brewers have pretty much stunk on ice in the last month, and Sabathia seems to be wearing down, something that won't be helped by all the pitching he'll be doing on three days' rest in the next week.

Cons for the Cubs: For some reason, the Brewers seem to play almost as well at Wrigley as the Cubs do at Miller. Also, the Brewers might be able to get on a roll if they win a first-round series; not that the Cubs wouldn't be on a roll also, but with Fielder and Braun, that could certainly be dangerous. You wouldn't want to end up in a slugfest with that team. Still, I'd rather face the Brewers than the Phillies here, given the option.

So, who would you rather face? I'll take whatever I can get, of course, but I'm inclined to prefer Mets/Brewers, although that combo is really unlikely to happen since at this point it looks like an either/or as to which one gets in. So let's say Dodgers/Brewers. The Dodgers are better than they were, but they aren't great.

Magic number: zero

Today I got a new cable box for my HDTV, which unfortunately I didn't get working until the fourth inning of the game, but I still got to see the winning runs (gotta love that the eventual winning run was a well-executed suicide squeeze by Lilly) and, of course, Marmol and Wood closing the door in the eighth and ninth. (The Glaus home run was depressing and utterly predictable - like with most of the home runs Lilly gives up, you could see it coming a mile away - but fortunately it ended up not mattering.)

With the division wrapped up, there are now a few things to concentrate on. In order:

1) Wrapping up the best record in the league (I believe the magic number for this is 3)
2) Being able to set the rotation for the playoffs
3) Determining the playoff roster

#1, while not set in stone, seems like all but a foregone conclusion. The Cubs have eight games left, meaning a simple 3-5 record in that span would be enough to clinch the league's best record, and that's if the Phillies don't lose another game, which they almost certainly will.

#2 has some bearing on #1, of course, but I'm not sure that the rotation is going to need much setting. Looking at the current lineup of probables, here's how the next eight games would be started: Dempster, Marquis, Harden, Zambrano, Lilly, Dempster, Marquis, Harden. The last game happens on Sunday, September 28, and the first game of the NLDS is three days, on Wednesday, October 1. If you assume Zambrano starts that one, that means he'll have had fully six days of rest before it, and I'm going to guess he won't be throwing a ton of pitches against the Mets this Wednesday. Assuming Dempster starts Game Two, he'll have had five days of rest, and if Lilly is your Game Three guy, he gets the nod on a full eight days off. Then, if needed, Harden goes on six days' rest (and probably after a kid-gloves outing on the final day of the regular season, if he even goes then; given how well he's pitched on long rest I might give Marshall a start in that spot to save Harden up) and Zambrano comes back for Game Five. And if they do make the NLCS, I'm frankly fine with pretty much any order. Obviously it'd be nice if you could get there in four games or less, enabling Zambrano and Dempster to pitch four of a possible seven games in the NLCS. But there's no reason to get greedy.

#3: I'm assuming the postseason roster is going to consist of 11 pitchers and 14 position players, at least for the first round (if you're not carrying five starters, there's no reason to carry 12 pitchers). Here's my vote:

Starters: Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly, Harden

Marquis has been surprisingly competent in the second half this year, effectively reversing his usual trend. He's got a 3.38 ERA in September (albeit in just 18.2 innings), and in his last eight starts, dating to August 1, he hasn't given up more than 4 runs (and then just twice) and has four quality starts in the group. But with all that said, there's really no need to have five starters for the Division Series. Maybe you could bring him back for the NLCS, if the Cubs get that far.

Relievers: Wood, Marmol, Cotts, Howry, Samardzija, Marshall, (Gaudin, Lieber or Wells)

The first six are pretty obvious. Wood and Marmol are the best the Cubs have, and Samardzija has tailed off a bit, but he's still a better option than the other available ones. Cotts and Marshall are your lefties (and of course Marshall can throw long innings in an absolute pinch), and Howry... well, he's a veteran. And actually, aside from a real stinkbomb four-run, no-out appearance on September 2 at Houston, he hasn't given up a run since August 22 and has allowed just six hits in eight other innings in that time. Okay, only eight innings, but he hasn't looked this good since May. As for the last slot, I'm not sure at the moment about the injury status of Gaudin and Lieber right now. I'd take Gaudin if all were healthy. If Gaudin and Lieber are both question marks, Randy Wells has looked pretty good in a couple outings so maybe you go that direction. Wuertz is about the only other option but I think it's fair to say Piniella isn't exactly crazy about him (and he gave up three of the runs in that ridiculous 14-9 win over the Reds).

Catchers: Soto, Blanco

Duh.

Infield: Lee, DeRosa, Theriot, Ramirez, Fontenot, Cedeno, Ward

No hard choices here.

Outfield: Soriano, Edmonds, Johnson, Fukudome, (Hoffpauir or Pie)

The only real question here is whether you value Hoffpauir's bat or Pie's value as a pinch-runner and defensive replacement. The latter might be more important in the playoffs (and Pie has shown the ability to get a hit on occasion anyway, and he's also left-handed), so I might go with Pie here, especially since Hoffpauir's defensive value is pretty much nil.

Looking at that lineup, it's almost funny how there's no real difficult decision to be made. You'll probably live with any of the back-end relief pitchers, and Hoffpauir vs. Pie is probably a tossup as far as how much value either will give you, albeit maybe in different ways. If Marquis isn't on the roster, you may prefer Pie to pinch-run for Ward in close spots, of which there will assuredly be some.

There's still some baseball to be played, of course, but we can't avoid it now: the Cubs are in the playoffs.

Carlosing it

Where have I been lately? Well, things were steaming along, I didn't have much to add and little complain about, so I just let it go. But as much as I hate to complain after a win, tonight's game seems to deserve some addressing.

What in the hell is wrong with Carlos Zambrano? Is it just arm angle? Mental? Fatigue? A combination?

After coming off the DL, Zambrano appeared to have found his form. Here were his first six starts after returning, not including his solid two innings in the All-Star Game:

July 4 @ STL: 6 IP, 4 H, 0 R, 2 BB, 5 K
July 9 vs. CIN: 8 IP, 1 H, 1 R, 0 BB, 5 K
July 19 @ HOU: 6.1 IP, 6 H, 4 R, 6 BB, 3 K
July 24 vs. FLA: 7 IP, 6 H, 2 R, 0 BB, 6 K
July 29 @ MIL: 8 IP, 5 H, 0 R, 2 BB, 9 K
August 3 vs. PIT: 5 IP, 3 H, 2 R, 1 BB, 2 K

Pretty strong there, except for the game in Houston right after the break. But that's five out of six strong starts; the July 4, 9 and 29 games, in particular, are probably the three best games he threw all year.

Then came his last few starts:

August 9 vs. STL: 4.1 IP, 10 H, 9 R, 1 BB, 3 K
August 15 @ FLA: 6 IP, 4 H, 5 R, 5 BB, 6 K
August 21 vs. CIN: 7 IP, 6 H, 1 R, 4 BB, 4 K
August 26 @ PIT: 4.1 IP, 8 H, 6 R, 4 BB, 3 K

After all this, his ERA is only 3.53, but this is still a disturbing trend. That's awful control the last three starts, and he just doesn't seem to be missing many bats. Okay, it's only four starts, and actually he's only 1-1 through them, but... recently on ESPN.com, Jayson Stark did a chat that debated which team had the best potential playoff rotation (i.e. top four starters), and he picked the Cubs. But if Zambrano - the theoretical ace of the staff - can't be relied upon not to walk four guys and give up 5-6 runs or worse, that puts a pretty big hole in the rotation.

It may be that I'm overreacting. Z was up and down last year too, putting together five straight starts in August/September where he allowed 31 runs in 28.2 innings (and bookended those five starts with two starts in which he gave up a combined 12 walks in 11 innings, although he allowed just two runs combined in those two games, somehow). He also proceeded to go 4-1 in his last five starts, giving up no runs in the last two, and then had a nice start in the playoffs. So really, who the hell knows? But with that said, he's making what, 18 million a year? You need to be better than the third-best guy on a staff for that kind of cash.

Well, anyway. That's nine straight series wins, the first time the Cubs have done that since 1907, which is ridiculous. It's also their first time at 32 games over .500 since September 15, 1984 and, before that, September 2, 1969; if they win tomorrow, it'll be their first time at 33 games over .500 since they finished the 1945 season at 42 over. I refuse to assume a championship or even a pennant, but with stats like that... if this isn't the year, what the hell is it going to take?

Brew Ha Ha

Hey, remember how confident the Brewers were a week ago?

The Brewers have downplayed the much-hyped July series after initially calling it a dress rehearsal and a test for September and the playoffs.

"This is not a death sentence by any means," Yost said. "If this was September, it would be different. We have plenty of time to recover from this and get back on track."

I mean, obviously he's not wrong. It's not even August yet; at this time last year the Cubs still trailed by a game (tying for first for the first time all season on August 1). But given how people were starting to talk about the Brewers being the hottest team in the NL (which I guess they technically have been, record-wise) and how the Cubs were so bad on the road and were in real danger of losing the division lead...

Well, who's laughing now??? Not only did the Cubs win four straight on the road, they dropped the Brewers from one back to five back at a stroke, returning to a position the Cubs hadn't occupied since July 12. The starting pitching continued to be awesome and the hitting finally came around, with the Cubs scoring 31 runs in the four games - nearly 8 per - and allowing just 11. The Cubs now have a +130 run differential, and the Brewers' is down to just +10.

It may not make or break the season, but it certainly was a statement series. First of all, it proved the Cubs can win on the road (although of course the Cubs do have a lot of historical success at Miller Park), it proved they can score runs again, it more or less proved their starting pitching is better than the Brewers' top to bottom, and more importantly it didn't just keep the Cubs in first, but it pushed their advantage well out. It's certainly a lot better than splitting the series and still being up just a game, or losing three of four and leaving Milwaukee in second place.

More importantly, this should shut up Brewers fans for a while. And more importantly, this is hopefully the start of a new trend towards more offense again. As long as the starting pitching keeps up, 5-6 runs a game should be more than enough in most games. And coming up, it's nine games at home, with the first six against cellar dwellers Pittsburgh and Houston. (Of course, watch them somehow lose one of those series now that I'm getting all excited again.)

August is really the time to extend the lead in the division. Here are the August series:

August 1-3: vs. Pirates
August 4-6: vs. Astros
August 8-10: vs. Cardinals
August 12-14: at Braves
August 15-17: at Marlins
August 19-21: vs. Reds
August 22-24: vs. Nationals
August 25-27: at Pirates
August 28-31: vs. Phillies

There's really no excuse for losing any of those series, is there? The divisional series should all be wins, there's no excuse for the Nationals series not to be a sweep, the Braves have given up and are banged up, the Marlins still aren't that good and if we had had any offense last week we'd have swept them, and while the Phillies worry me a little, in a home series we ought to at least be able to split. So that's 28 games in August. I say nothing less than 18-10 is acceptable, and ideally even better. This is the month to push that lead in the division out closer to double digits. Let's see them do it.

Fire Bob Howry

Remember how, in 2007, Scott Eyre was struggling like crazy early in the year, and Piniella's response was to stop using him except in absolute mop-up situations? Well, what's his excuse for continuing to run Bob Howry out there in key game situations? He's got a 5.22 ERA for the year, and here's what his last eight appearances look like:

July 8 vs. Reds: Howry enters with a 7-1 lead in the ninth. He gives up a single, a deep out to left, another single, an RBI double and an RBI groundout before striking out Jay Bruce to end the game.
July 11 vs. Giants: Howry enters a scoreless tie in the eighth. He retires the 8-9-1 hitters in order and ends up getting the win when Aramis Ramirez hits a homer in the bottom of the inning.
July 12 vs. Giants: After Kevin Hart struggles to start the eighth, giving up two runs, Neal Cotts gets one out. Howry then enters the 7-2 game with a man on first. He retires Rich Aurilia on a sac bunt, then gets Randy Winn to fly out to end the inning. (Carlos Marmol subsequently pours gasoline on himself in the ninth.)
July 18 at Astros: Howry comes into the game with the score tied 1-1 and two outs in the bottom of the eighth. He retires Carlos Lee on a groundout. After the Cubs fail to score, Howry is brought back out for the ninth. He gives up a ground-rule double to Miguel Tejada, then allows another double to Hunter Pence on the very first pitch. Tejada scores and the Cubs lose 2-1.
July 21 at Diamondbacks: Howry enters in the 8th with the Cubs down 1-0. He walks light-hitting catcher Chris Snyder to start the inning, then gives up two deep fly balls to center which fortunately both go for outs. Then Stephen Drew hits a 1-1 pitch for a triple to put Arizona up 2-0, which is how it finished.
July 23 at Diamondbacks: Howry enters in the 8th with a cushy 10-3 lead. He gives up a single to Conor Jackson, then strikes out Mark Reynolds (who hasn't). Chris Young doubles. Tony Clark lines out. Howry then gives up a home run to Snyder on a 3-2 pitch to cut the lead to 10-6. Alex Romero strikes out to end the threat.
July 24 vs. Marlins: Despite throwing 33 pitches the previous night in Arizona, Howry enters in the 8th with the bases loaded, no one out, and the Cubs clinging to a 6-2 lead. He gets Cody Ross to fly out on the first pitch, then throws eight pitches to Luis Gonzalez before Gonzo hits the last one like a rocket to right center. Mark DeRosa bails Howry out with a diving catch, although the runner at third tags and scores. Howry is pulled for Carlos Marmol, who ends the inning with a strikeout of Josh Willingham.
July 25 vs. Marlins: Howry pitches for the third day in a row, entering in the top of the ninth with the game tied at 2. He immediately allows what turns out to be the game-losing solo home run to pinch-hitter Jeremy Hermida. The next four guys all hit the ball fairly hard off of him, but only Hanley Ramirez's double doesn't find a glove, so he escapes allowing just one run.

Basically, he's been awful recently. Not a single one of those outings is impressive. Either he's giving up runs, or allowing bullets that are fortunately caught. In the rare cases where he's cruised, it's only because he faced the bottom of the order or was gifted an out via the sac bunt.

But here's what kills me. Lou brought him into the game on Wednesday when the Cubs had a 10-3 lead. Seven runs! When a guy comes into a game with that kind of cushion, that makes me think that he isn't exactly trusted by the manager. Why use your top-level guys in blowout situations? It's not like Howry desperately needed to get some work in - he'd pitched two days earlier. The fact that he was being brought into the game in that spot suggests that Lou considered Howry's results in his last two outings - both of which saw him give up a run, once losing the game - and thought he should get some mop-up work just to see what was going on.

With that in mind, did the three-run homer he gave up to Snyder not make it clear that he's not cut out for high-leverage situations right now? Why was he right back out there with the bases loaded and nobody out the next night? (I know the answer here is: probably not a better option available. But that's pretty sad, isn't it?) More importantly, why was he out there today in a 2-2 game with everyone else in the bullpen available? The only possible answer is that Piniella still trusts Howry more than he trusts Cotts or Eyre or Gaudin or Marshall. And if that's the case, that's a really big problem.

The Cubs' starting pitching has probably been the best in baseball over the last 2-3 weeks. Since July 1, only three times in 20 games has the Cubs' starter gone fewer than six innings, and in no game has the starter allowed more than four runs; of the 20 games, the Cubs' starters have delivered fifteen quality starts (6 innings or more, three runs or less), and while that's kind of a bullshit stat, it at least gives you some idea of the kind of starting pitching that's been delivered. But the bullpen has been appalling. In the same 20 games, the bullpen has given up at least two runs eight times. They blew the win for the starter three times in that span (although only one of those turned into a loss for the Cubs, mercifully). Offense has probably been a bigger problem - the Cubs are averaging 4.3 runs a game in that span, with a 2-8 record in the games where they've scored three runs or fewer and an 8-2 record in the games where they've scored four or more. In other words, if they could score 4+ runs a little more consistently, the whole issue might evaporate. But while the team is going through a little bit of an offensive drag, it can't afford to have one entire sector of its pitching staff crushing the team the way it's doing right now.

But how do you fix this? Jeff Samardzija, who pitched two innings today, is one possible answer, although it's hard to believe he won't go right back to Iowa when Wood comes off the DL, if only because there's no other obvious candidate for demotion since Howry is too old for that. (Cotts, I guess maybe, but that leaves the Cubs with only one lefty out of the pen.) The trade deadline is still six days away, but reliable bullpen pitching is such a rare commodity that the guys out there for trade are either much more expensive than they should be or just not that good in the first place. (Remember, most guys are in the bullpen because they're not good enough to be starters. Sometimes that works out - Marmol - but a lot of times you're just left with a guy who's only good enough to get three outs one out of every three appearances. Right now Howry is that guy.)

Now, no one really has great bullpen pitching, it seems. Milwaukee's has been notoriously lousy for most of this year and St. Louis's hasn't been any good recently either. So it's not like that's going to make the difference, so long as the offense comes back around a bit. But until that happens consistently, having a bullpen that can't hold a one-run lead 40% of the time it's called upon risks being really devastating to this team, especially with the Brewers now just a half-game back (and potentially tying for the division lead by the end of the night). My dad's been freaking out about the offense the last ten days or so, but I think this team has too much talent there not to return to form pretty soon; it's the bullpen, which has been somewhat shaky all year and even worse than that lately, where I'm directing a nervous look.

The kind of game that will drive you crazy

There's nothing worse than losing a game you clearly should have won out of nothing other than sheer bad luck. The Cubs started their series at Arizona with one such. Randy Johnson, 12-0 with a sub-2.00 career ERA against the Cubs entering the game, was hardly the Randy Johnson of old. He was hit hard and often, facing 24 batters and striking out just four - he allowed fifteen fly balls, tied for a career high he had only given up twice before in his career (once earlier this year against the Twins, and once in 1992 against the Yankees). But all fifteen found gloves, with at least half of them doing so within ten feet or so of the fence.

Truly it was a night for horrible luck. The Cubs' two hits were both singles - a Jim Edmonds shot up the middle, and a Reed Johnson swinging bunt to third base. The Diamondbacks also only managed two hits - and Harden struck out ten Diamondbacks, giving them fewer chances to even put the ball in play. But their two hits were a solo home run (of course by the #8 hitter, who had zero previous major league homers) and a triple in the eighth (which of course followed a walk and so allowed Arizona to tack on an insurance run, not that they needed it).

Harden is now 0-1 as a Cub when he should be 2-0. He's the first Cub ever, or at least since 1900, to strike out ten men in each of his first two games as a Cub. He's pitched great. And he's 0-1.

If there's anything that will convince you that the universe doesn't really want the Cubs to win this year, it's games like this one. Absolutely unreal. Of course, maybe you could argue that it's one last test, but honestly, haven't we suffered enough?

Achilles tendency

By this point, everyone knows about the Cubs' road issues. And while they obviously could hit better in road games, to some degree they've just been really, really unlucky.

Consider the following. The Cubs have now played 16 series each at home and on the road. In the 16 home series, they're 13-3. In the 16 road series, they're 4-9-3. All is not totally lost, however; the Cubs started by going 1-6-1 in road series; they're 3-3-2 since, even after the series loss to Houston. What's more, the Cubs have still outscored their opponents on the road, 210 runs to 206.

The Cubs are 15-15 in one-run games this year. 16 of those games were on the road; the Cubs are 6-10 in those games, while going 9-5 in one-run home games. Some of that is just bad luck and minor park advantage when the Cubs are on the road. More importantly, that's fully a third of the Cubs' 49 road games that were decided by a single run. That 6-10 record could even out in the second half - if the Cubs are playing a lot of close ones on the road, it's likely that they'll win some of them at some point. (What's more, in 12 more road games, the game was decided by just two runs - the Cubs are 3-9 in those games. This, too, is likely to move closer to even as long as the Cubs are really a good team.)

The Cubs also have a nasty tendency for outscoring a team yet losing the series. This has happened at home and on the road, but of course it's happened much more on the road, since the Cubs only have three home series losses. At Washington from April 25-27, the Cubs outscored the Nationals 10-7 but lost two of three. In their very next series, at home against Milwaukee, the Cubs outscored the Brewers 29-19 - thanks to a 19-5 thumping in the middle game - but lost two of three. In their next series after that, they outscored the Cardinals 15-13 in St. Louis, but lost two of three. For the season, the Cubs have six series in which they outscored the opposition but still lost two of the three games, including this past series at Houston; five of those series have come on the road. This is the sort of thing that probably can't hold up over a full season, although you never know.

So what's the problem? The obvious answer is consistency. It's not that the Cubs can't score runs on the road or that their pitchers are suddenly much worse, since the Cubs have outscored the opposition for the year - by a slim margin, to be sure, but it's a positive margin and thus not indicative of a road record that's seven games under .500. Saying that the Cubs need to be more consistent on the road is more than a bit trite, to be sure, but it really seems like the answer. The Cubs have allowed just five more runs on the road in the same number of games; they're not exactly getting pounded. Really, it seems like a few more runs ought to do it. The only question now is can the Cubs, with probably the toughest part of the schedule coming up and with some players possibly in danger of wearing down a bit over the long season, actually find more runs on the road?

I guess we'll see.

All-Star Lame

I don't have a terrible amount to say about the All-Star Game at this point, aside from the fact that staying up until almost one in the morning just to watch your team is at least less disappointing when the outfield of "your team" is made up of three players you hate. Anyway, a few lingering thoughts:

1. The Cubs acquitted themselves well.
With eight Cubs named to the roster in one form or another and six seeing time, two as starters, they had a lot to live up to. Fortunately, they mostly did. Soto and Fukudome didn't do much at the plate, but Soto caught a good few innings (the two steals off him were much more the pitcher's fault). Zambrano was awesome (can he please get through two innings in 20 pitches more often in real games?), Dempster was awesome (striking out the side!), and Marmol was awesome. Dempster and Marmol both pitched in the bottom of innings that could have ended the game, so I was immensely relieved that both pitched well, although I'd have taken just about anything that didn't end with a Cubs pitcher giving up the game-winning run. (The 2001 All-Star Game, when Jon Lieber gave up back-to-back home runs in the sixth to put the game pretty much away, still makes me cringe.)

2. "This time it counts" is still stupid.
As has been pointed out in various places by now, there is no good excuse for claiming that the game needs to count, especially when it's clearly not being managed that way. The lineup that the National League had on the field at the end of the game was kind of pathetic - there's no reason that any All-Star Game that "counts" should be giving three at-bats to Cristian Guzman. What would be wrong with going back to just alternating home-field, which is how it used to be done?

I mean, this is how All-Star Games are played. The best players (mostly) start the game, and then the lesser All-Stars off the bench come in to get a little playing time and finish it out. This is fine when the game doesn't count, or if it's a blowout, but in a tight game where the outcome has any kind of resonance, that kind of thing just doesn't fly. Bringing in Cristian Guzman to pinch-run for Aramis Ramirez was a calculated "let's play for one run" risk on Clint Hurdle's part, but then why did he make no effort to get Guzman into scoring position, choosing to let Corey Hart swing away? Having a man on first and no outs leads to a run more often than having a man on second with one out, but having a man on second with one out leads to a run more often than having a man on first with one out, and Corey Hart's not a bad player but his OBP is only .327 this year. At the very least, it would have been nice if Hurdle had considered that the game might go to extra innings, at which point Ramirez would be a more valuable asset at the plate than Guzman, who may have a lot of hits but only gets on base 34% of the time. Ramirez's OPS+ is 133; Guzman's is 102.

Basically, when you've got Lance Berkman and Albert Pujols on your team, it's pretty weak to finish the game with Adrian Gonzalez at first base. When you've got Chipper Jones, Aramis Ramirez and David Wright on your team, letting Cristian Guzman get three at-bats at third base is unacceptable (to be fair, Wright was DHing, but still). In VORP terms, the NL starting lineup was almost 90 runs better than the AL starting lineup, in spite of the fact that it had the least-valuable player on the field in it (Fukudome, just 11.9, sad to say). By the time the 15th rolled around, the AL now had the more valuable lineup on the field, aided in part by the fact that the most valuable guy in the AL, Ian Kinsler, was coming off their bench. In fact, Kinsler and Grady Sizemore, two of the three most valuable players in the American League, both got five at-bats for the AL. The most valuable guy by VORP left for the NL in extras was Dan Uggla; look how that turned out.

I know it would be kind of ridiculous to make, say, Pujols play a full game while other guys are being rotated out just because he's the best player in the NL. And there's something to be said for trying to strike early, I guess, or for not holding chips on your bench for an inning you might not play. But it just seems like the current format is likely to lead to games like this - close affairs that end up being decided by guys who are barely legitimate All-Stars. Just look at some of the last few out-making batters for the NL in recent games:

2008: Nate McLouth, Russell Martin, Miguel Tejada, Uggla, Gonzalez, Guzman
McLouth has been valuable this season, but he could easily turn out to be a first-half wonder. Martin is a good catcher but Brian McCann, with the highest VORP of any catcher in baseball, probably should have made it into the game first. Tejada and Guzman were both sympathy All-Stars (i.e. the only selections from their crappy teams and not deserving on merit, although Tejada played well so fair play to him). Uggla was more deserving of being there than his performance indicated. Gonzalez has had a good year, but he was also a sympathy All-Star as the only Padre. Should the All-Star Game be decided by guys whose teams aren't coming anywhere near the World Series without buying a ticket?

2007: Orlando Hudson, Freddy Sanchez, Brian McCann, Matt Holliday, Aaron Rowand
Rowand was actually the third-most valuable OF in the NL in 2007, but that says more about how generally weak center field was - Juan Pierre was in the top ten in center, for crying out loud. And of course Rowand managed to make outs in both the 8th and 9th of the 2007 game with the NL attempting to rally, the latter time, famously, with Albert Pujols languishing on the bench. Hudson and Sanchez are both okay middle infield bats but probably shouldn't be deciding a game of this magnitude. Holliday actually deserved his spot. McCann, fittingly, was in the midst of what has been the worst offensive season of his career so far.

2006: David Eckstein, Holliday, Sanchez, Ryan Howard, Carlos Lee
This one actually wasn't so bad, but the mere presence of David Eckstein - the twelfth-most valuable NL shortstop in 2006 - negates everyone else's contributions to baseball.

2005: Luis Castillo, Paul Lo Duca, Carlos Lee, Morgan Ensberg
Ensberg is basically a one-season wonder; this was that one season. Still, he was brought in at first base to replace Derrek Lee, not at his position of third base, which was occupied by token Red, the extremely mediocre Felipe Lopez (though Lopez actually got on base).

2004: Johnny Estrada, Moises Alou, Mark Loretta, Todd Helton, Jack Wilson, Jim Thome
Not as bad as it looks by the names, perhaps; Loretta was actually the top NL second baseman in VORP in 2004 and Wilson was second at SS, and someone has to play those positions. Still, not exactly Murderer's Row.

2003: Preston Wilson, Richie Sexson, Aaron Boone, Rafael Furcal, Castillo, Lo Duca
It's kind of interesting to see which guys manage to be scrubby bench All-Stars year after year, isn't it? Anyway, this is the one that really killed me - you've got a team with Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols on it, with Gary Sheffield, Todd Helton and Jim Edmonds, and Mike Lowell has doubled in his last plate appearance. And the guy you're summoning off the bench to pinch-hit for Lowell - the second-most valuable third baseman and 14th most valuable hitter in the NL in 2003 - is Aaron Boone. (This game remains epically ridiculous for the fact that Eric Gagne - who allowed 11 earned runs in all of 2003's real games and had an ERA+ of 335 [!!!!] - allowed three earned runs in the bottom of the eighth. I was ready to get all het up about the fact that Gagne was pitching the 8th and not the 9th until I looked it up and saw that John Smoltz - who allowed only eight earned runs in 2003 for an ERA+ of 383 [?!?!] - would presumably have been the go-to guy in the ninth. You're off the hook this time, Dusty.)

Some of this is just due to the NL talent deficit in recent years. But this year I really think the NL had a better team and yet they lost, in large part because that better team was fairly frontloaded and so didn't get a chance to play in the most meaningful part of the game. And again, okay, you can't really ask Pujols to play 15 innings in an exhibition game. But that's exactly the point. It's an exhibition game. You wouldn't see the Red Sox pulling Manny Ramirez in the sixth inning of a game to make sure they could get Brandon Moss into the game; they'd leave Ramirez out there because they wanted to win. And while the talent dropoff between Ramirez and Moss is obviously much larger than between Pujols and Gonzalez, for example, the point remains. You can't make the game count and still expect managers to get everyone in like it's Little League.

Am I a little bitter because the Cubs can't possibly have home field advantage in the World Series now? Maybe a little. But then they have to get there first, something of which I'm hardly completely confident, and anyway this means that when the Cubs sweep - which if the 2004 and 2005 schneid-breaking titles are anything to go by, they're destined to do - they'll win it at Wrigley. Anyway.

3. I'm looking forward to the second half.
Now that the exhibition that isn't is out of the way and we're ready for more real baseball, I'm hoping the Cubs can keep doing what they've been doing - which is to say, best record in baseball, best average, OBP and SLG in the league (and best OBP in baseball), pretty good pitching and timely hitting. With Soriano coming back soon and Harden hopefully staying healthy, this could be a really great second half, even with the schedule getting a bit tougher. Here's hoping for a few more road wins.