Two More Practice Games and Two More Decisions for the Cubs

The Cubs extended stay in Arizona came to an end on Thursday following the Cactus League finale against the Mariners. The team broke camp and departed for Houston. The Cubs have only two more exhibition games remaining on their spring schedule … and a couple of decisions to make.

During Thursday’s telecast on Comcast SportsNet, Jason McLeod said the organization was meeting on Thursday afternoon to finalize the minor league rosters for the start of the season. So barring any last minute additions, the Cubs should officially announce the final round of spring roster cuts well before Sunday’s deadline.

With the addition of Guillermo Moscoso and placing Arodys Vizcaino on the 60-day DL, the Cubs spring roster officially stands at 34 players.

According to multiple reports, Alberto Gonzalez, Zach Putnam and Cory Wade have been informed they did not make the team which would reduce the roster to 31 players. J.C. Boscan and Brett Jackson are expected to be on the I-Cubs’ Opening Day roster. That would take the Cubs’ spring roster down to 29 players. Matt Garza, Ian Stewart and Scott Baker will begin the year on the DL … and that leaves 26 players in camp.

Guillermo Moscoso does not appear to be a viable option for the Opening Day roster. Moscoso is not expected to catch up with the team in Houston. The Cubs have to open two spots on the 40-man roster to add both Brent Lillibridge and Hisanori Takahashi. Placing Scott Baker on the 60-day DL will clear a spot for one of the two players. With the conservative June timeframe for Baker to possibly join the Cubs’ rotation, there is no reason to place him on the 15-day DL and have him take up a roster spot.

The Cubs are anticipating Matt Garza and Ian Stewart being ready to play big league games in May. The front office can always transfer either player to the 60-day if they have another setback. For the second roster spot needed to add either Lillibridge or Takahashi to the roster, the Cubs could take the same route they did a year ago with Frankie De La Cruz and place Guillermo Moscoso back on waivers and once he clears outright him to Triple-A Iowa. Moscoso has not been outrighted to the minors, and by rule he must accept the assignment.

Unless the Cubs make a last minute addition, the Opening Day roster appears to be set and should include Steve Clevenger and Hisanori Takahashi.

Gleyber Torres

According to a report from the Tribune, the Cubs are pursuing Venezuelan shortstop Gleyber Torres.

Torres becomes eligible on July 2 and the report from Phil Rogers, using Kiley McDaniel from Scout.com as his source, indicated that it could take $2 million to sign the 16-year old. According to the report from Scout.com, Torres doesn’t offer a ton of projection but has a lot of smoothness and now skills to propel him to the top group of talents in the class.

News Bits

The Cubs followed up a 17-16-2 mark in the Cactus League a year ago with a 16-18-1 record this spring. The Cubs played one less game than scheduled (March 8 in Goodyear against the Reds was rained out) and beat Team Japan in an exhibition game at HoHoKam Park on March 15.

The Cubs see growth potential in Anthony Rizzo, Starlin Castro and the young core … and according to the same report from Patrick Mooney, Alfonso Soriano doesn’t think the old, expensive, brand-name teams are sure things anymore.

Steve Clevenger told the Sun-Times he was glad he finally saw action at third base on Wednesday night. Clevenger was able to field a couple of groundballs which helped him with the confidence he will need to play the position this season.

Follow ChicagoCubsOnline on Twitter: @TheCCO and @TheCCO_Minors

Quote of the Day

"Our lives improve only when we take chances and the first and most difficult risk we can take is to be honest with ourselves." - W Anderson.
Share on Fancred
  • Tony_Hall

    The roster is almost set, Takahashi and Clevenger round it out. I have to say, I am more interested in the minor league assignments than I am discussing a RP named Moscoso who was brought in to go to Iowa. And as always the front office is still working to bring in more young talent into the system, even if we have to wait until July for official signings.

    • Ripsnorter1

      Do you think the Cubs can lose 100 games again?

      • Tony_Hall

        Yes. If they are not going to make the playoffs, they will sell of players again. Last year they wouldn’t have lost a 100 if they didn’t dot the sell off and kept Demspter, Maholm, etc instead of getting prospects for them. So, yes, they are not going to make the playoffs, they will trade off players, get more prospects,and bring up young players. If the young players play well, then they won’t lose 100, but if they are overmatched, like last year, there will be few wins in August and September again. Once again, if you are not going to make the playoffs, the new rules are designed to benefit the teams that lose the most games…I didn’t make the new rules, but you can be sure that Theo has figured out the best way to maximize them.

        • Ray Ray

          Who did Theo signed in the offseason that will be trade chips by the all star game. That is my problem with Theo’s offseason.

          • John_CC

            There is no certainty that anyone will be a trade chip, but the list of potentials includes:

            DeJesus
            Schierholtz
            Baker
            Villanueva
            Camp
            Feldman
            Harriston

            Stewart

          • http://theboardridersuite.wordpress.com/ Theboardrider

            Feldman, Navarro, Schierholtz, Hairston, Villanueva, Baker (if he gets healthy), Edwin Jackson if we get blown away by an offer. Any one or all of these guys could be this year’s Paul Maholm. Not to mention Dejesus, who is so consistent that he may be a huge chip at the deadline.

          • Tony_Hall

            First, the new guys need to play to increase their value, can you let them get to Opening Day at least.

            Second, the sell off of players might not be the guys we just signed, but guys that were already here.

        • Dorasaga

          Are you trying to tell me the Cubs is dealing as the Marlins? Aiyaya!@ripsnorter1:disqus @Tony_Hall:disqus

          • Tony_Hall

            Like the Marlins? Not even close. No different than if you are in a keeper fantasy league and trade off players that can help another team this year, all the while getting younger keepers to bring back the next year.

          • Dorasaga

            At fantasy, even if you trade away the bigger “name player,” you as a manager would still stay competitive and seize the chance to win if there is. Trading away all the not-necessarily young, but 29-32 years old veterans (Edwin, say), for prospects that might become big leaguer or might not, doubts and clouds, that’s not staying competitive.

            That’s staying cheap. That’s the Marlins. That’s an insult to pro-baseball.

          • Tony_Hall

            The Marlins sold off every player, even ones who could help them down the road. They stripped the team of any payroll dollars. Comparing the Cubs situation to the Marlins in any way is just wrong.

            The Cubs have no intention of trading Edwin Jackson, just of moving him down in the rotation, hopefully all the way to #5 over the next few years.

          • Dorasaga

            I don’t know, but it only takes one crack to fall a dam. One trade, one dollar saved, the owner might be thinking, well, trade two, trade three, save a million here and there.

            Screw the Marlins and J. Loria. You know what? And how about the Mets owner? Why wasn’t Loria punished? Because Wilpon fears him be next. It’s a funny little world up there, in that Society ballroom hosting Selig and Friends.

      • SuzyS

        Can they?…of course…will they? NO. Because there is something magically negative about the number 100. I look for the Cubs to lose somewhere between 95-99 games…and show “improvement”.
        Theo ‘s worst nightmare is to fall into the middle of the pack…so I do look for the Cubs to garner a top 10 draft pick again…and the FO can, in fact, engineer that.

        • Dorasaga

          It’ll be a betrayal to us fans, I’ll say the least. 100 losses some other year, but not now, not after Epstein said all those big goals of making the postseason and signing long-term assets like Edwin the past few months.

  • Ripsnorter1

    Since Detroit optioned Rondon to the minors….there’s still some hope Marmol might be traded to the Tigers. But in reality….not much hope. If you were a GM, would you want a BB expert as your closer? And after last year’s 1st half failure, would you spend the minor league talent to acquire a shot in the dark? You’d only do it if you were throwing junk at Jed.

    So I doubt that Marmol goes to Detroit.

    • Tony_Hall

      I think it is unlikely more because that is what they are trying to get away from, then anything else. But, Marmol’s 2nd half was pretty good and if that Marmol shows up in the 1st half, teams will want him. Remember, when a team has World Series aspirations in June and July, GM’s don’t think long term, they think short term. Anything can happen.

    • Dorasaga

      You know, we might undervalue BB experts these days. Look at this guy as a SP:

      178 game started, 1128.2 IP, 1299 K, 3.68 era, 71 W
      — 10.4 k9, 4.4 bb9, 1.0 hr9, 1.259 whip, 117 era+

      …then as a RP:
      235 games, 227 IP, 259 K, 3.69 era, 63 Sv
      — 10.3 k9, 4.2 bb9, 0.8 hr9, 1.308 whip, 116 era+

      That was Kerry Wood (1998-2006) compared to (2007-12). Same guy, same pitcher, but less effective as he got older–if you consider his lesser role since many severe injuries that knocked him off the rotation. He got knocked around half the time he turned relief (hence, higher whip). Plus all those walks as a late reliever? Didn’t stop the Yanks from signing. Didn’t stop the Indians from a multi-year contract.

      GMs want “stuff” or “rubber arm” from a reliever. I see Marmol has that reputation. Looking at this interesting case study to compare two very good pitchers who had flaws nevertheless, I wonder how unfortunate the loss of opportunities was for the Cubs when Wood was dominant.

  • Tony_Hall

    Not sure if this was posted, but read it all the way through. The Cubs needs to just let April 1st come and go, and then start negotiations with Rosemont and other areas that know the financial impact it would mean to their community.

    http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/cubs-talk/if-deadline-passes-rosemont-mayor-seeks-ricketts-meeting-tuesday

    • Ripsnorter1

      I want the Cubs to build a new stadium with a retractable roof and lots of parking. I don’t go to Wrigley to watch the ivy grow. I go to a game to watch MLB. And when I take the day off, driving for 2-3 hours, I want a game to be played for my money.

      • Tony_Hall

        My opinion has changed to match yours over this winter. The Cubs can build so many of the same characteristics into a new park, they could build their own rooftops (and own the buildings), the ivy, the brick look (I would think a padded wall that had a brick look would be a welcome sight to many outfielders), etc.

        In one of the letters, the LVCC actually talk about business’s closing due to the Cubs having too many night games, even 3:05 starts on Friday and Saturday. What do they think will happen if the Cubs move to Rosemont to their community business’s. I think they should not have any more conversation with Emanuel, Tunney or the LVCC until they come back to them begging them to stay.

        • 07GreyDigger

          Hear hear. These people are clearly stupid or insane. Even if the Cubs don’t move to Rosemont or Dupage County, I hope they leverage the crap about of the threat to move and watch these people fold like accordians.

        • Brp921

          I totally agree. I used to want them to stay at Wrigley as well, but I am now in favor of a new baseball only park built elsewhere with good parking and facilities and might games. That’s how they can become competitive. Can you imagine anyone not wanting to play for them.

        • DWalker

          I just don’t see the Rosemont option as a good one, but I am good with transplanting the ivy to a faux brick wall at a new, modern stadium. One thing I notice though about the theatre of the absurd letter that was sent by the LVCC, but they did cap their demands at a mere 200K (75K per event, with a cap of 200 to be used on a lis tof cimmunity projects). I don’t think Ricketts will pull out the activly seeking new ground card yet, but you can chalk me in the move catagory. Hey, not only that, no more curses!

          • SuzyS

            DWalker, I’m with you…I don’t see Rosemont as a desirable location at all…and from watching the shenanigans from the casino licensing bills surrounding Rosemont…I’m not sure the Cubs wouldn’t be going from the frying pan into a fire of a different sort regarding the political games they’d have to play.
            While I’m not adverse to a Cubs move out of the City…Rosemont, in my mind, is not desirable.

          • Tony_Hall

            I’m not advocating for Rosemont, but the closer to me the better!

  • Ripsnorter1

    Daniel Bard was busted all the way down to AA. Not AAA, but AA. The BoSox are sending him a message: you can’t pitch 3 good innings and expect to be back in Boston.

    Read it here: http://espn.go.com/boston/mlb/story/_/id/9110706/boston-red-sox-leaning-jackie-bradley-opening-day-cut-ryan-sweeney-send-daniel-bard

    • Tony_Hall

      That is the risk in taking someone who is successful in the bullpen and converting them to a starter. The Red Sox, when someone else was GM, resisted the talk of moving Papelbon into a starter and he was a very successful closer for them. Last year, they converted Bard back to a starter and it didn’t work. Now he has to get back to being a late inning reliever. Conversely, last year, Samardzija was converted into a starter and it was successful. If you would have bet me which one would be successful and which one would have failed, I would have reversed it and chosen Bard, as I would be many other would of chosen. Being a GM is not easy, there are no sure things.

      • mutantbeast

        Spellcheck actually learned to throw a breaking ball for strikes, and tends to maintain velocity. Bards FB drops off 5-8 mph after 2-3 innings, and he cant throw a consistent breakin g ball right now if his life depended on it. Bosox are sending Bard a message, and the message is quit being lazy and thinking you have a spot on the team no matter what.

        • Tony_Hall

          No doubt they are sending Bard a message and he is going to be a reliever moving forward.

          I’m assuming spellcheck is samardzija after having been spellchecked. Got to love auto correct.

  • Ripsnorter1

    Apparently, there is no news on the Chris Young front at this time.

  • Ripsnorter1

    Solve roster problems: release Jed Hoyer.

    • Tony_Hall

      That is ridiculous!

      • Ripsnorter1

        Haven’t you watched his roster management? It is below the skill level of Mr. Jim Hendry.

        • Tony_Hall

          Not even close. JH would bring in aging vets to fill a roster spot and release, trade away or bury young players. You just aren’t seeing the big picture, when you look at the roster moves and the timings,etc. They have made some moves that you and other criticize, yet they did exactly what they wanted to accomplish, by sneaking a player off the 40 man and into the system. They know, as should you, that most of these players will not be around in another year or two, except for the core players and a few role players.

        • John_CC

          How so? I don’t understand this argument…er your point, because it isn’t an argument without backup.

          • http://theboardridersuite.wordpress.com/ Theboardrider

            C’mon Rip you’re so biased against these guys. In a couple of years you are really going to be hearing it when we’re playing in back to back world series.

            You have to accept it. They aren’t trying to win a few more games now. They know they aren’t a postseason team so they aren’t taking any steps to win a few more games if it isn’t going to get them to the world series. They are trying to field a somewhat competitive team that will win a few games in the first half, showcase good players that aren’t in the long term plans and flip them for prospects at the deadline. Then let the youngsters play in the 2nd half and see what we have to work with and determine further who is in the long term plans.

            It’s been the plan from day one and they’ve stuck with it. You call the moves dumb because you’re looking at them from the perspective of a team trying to win as many games as possible this year. That isn’t what they are trying to do. The system was in shambles when they got here and they are building from the ground up. Starting by filling the minors with prospects and then getting better at the parent level as the last step. They will then play for the postseason and have the assets to make deadline trades to bolster the lineup for the postseason and still have young players to fill in the holes the next year.

            Look at what the Braves and the Rays do, that is the model. What makes it even better here is that being in a larger market they will be able to practice the principles of teams like the A’s, Braves and Rays but hold onto the all-stars and fill in the gaps with stud prospects and deadline signings and free agents.

            But we won’t see the fruit of this labor for at least another year or maybe two. You have to be patient. If we start acting like a large market team and signing everyone we may make a postseason run but we’ll be right back where we were in the long run. This front office is all about sustainability.

          • John_CC

            As opposed to the ridiculous majority model which every July has GMs of .500 teams claiming “we’re only one or two moves away…” And then not catching the lightening in bottle move and ending the season with 87 wins and maybe a wild card loss. Meanwhile they have all the same old players from said .500 team but now can’t get anything in return for them and go into the off-season in the exact same situation!!

            Talk about dumb.

            Epstein and Hoyer will stick to the plan. They have to.

          • Ripsnorter1

            Think about this:
            81 wins = .500 team, isn’t that correct?

            90 wins = playoff team (almost always).

            Not a lot of difference….10%.

            So if I have a .500, I’m looking to get 10% better and go to the playoffs. Maybe I can win the WS, like St. Louis Cards manage to do every once in a while.

          • Tony_Hall

            Yes JH, we are only a couple of players away…..again this year.

            That 10% is hard to do with 30 something free agents, that require many year contracts into their later 30′s.

          • SuzyS

            25 men on the active roster… 2.5 players equal 10 %…2-3 moves to get 10% better.
            Actually the Cards last did it just by improving their bullpen to a ” lights out”
            pen…with most of the moves coming in
            August (if I remember correctly).
            Once the Cubs have a core of talent at the mlb level…I can envision the Cubs making moves like that….but not until then.

          • John_CC

            Yes, you’re numbers are correct. But the odds on going from a .500 team on June 30 to a WS team in October by making a couple moves in July are very poor.

            Which is why some of us like the long-term model of building and THEN making the big moves to increase the odds.

            Two different philosophies with the same goal. Which one is more successful? The old Cubs, Marlins, White Sox, etc. etc. etc. model or the Nationals, Braves, Yankees of the late 90s, etc?

          • http://theboardridersuite.wordpress.com/ Theboardrider

            Totally agree with you John. The successful model is building THEN make the big moves to increase the odds. You don’t make the moves until you’ve built the core. The only reason you’d do it the other way is to give into pressure from the fan base, and when teams do that it almost always goes bad. There’s a reason that these guys are the professionals and we are the fans. We can second guess them all we want but it doesn’t make us right, and I believe time will prove that when we do that we are wrong.

            Furthermore these guys have a track record of building good farm systems, both in Boston and San Diego. These builds take time but the groundwork was laid. If San Diego had money they could build a winner immediately by trading prospects but they are a team that has to be patient and take advantage of short windows.

          • Ray Ray

            There are more than 1 way to skin a cat. This way will work with the fans suffering for at least 3 years. Big market teams can be competive almost every year and with a few shrewd trades at the deadline win a WS with the addition of the wild cards.

          • http://theboardridersuite.wordpress.com/ Theboardrider

            True, but I’m glad they’ve chosen to go with a more sustainable plan. I think it’s smarter and more likely to succeed. I’m tired of taking the approach of taking leaps and closing our eyes, crossing our fingers and hoping they work out. This plan, if continued to be executed as it has been promises consistent success. The wild card teams almost always are teams that had built from the ground up and made a deadline deal to supplement what they had that was already working.

          • Tony_Hall

            Tell that to the Mets fans, the Dodgers fans the last few years, the Astro fans, etc.

          • Tony_Hall

            At least you are admitting there is more than one way.

          • triple

            Well I’m glad you brought up the STL Cardinals. Let’s examine that 2011 World Series Championship team. Here are the players drafted (round-year drafted)) by STL that saw at least 200AB’s throughout that season: Yadier Molina (4-’00), Albert Pujols (13-’99), Skip Schumaker (5-’01), Colby Rasmus (1-’05), Jon Jay (2-’06), Daniel Descalso (3-’07), and Allen Craig (8-’06).

            Now what other offensive players did they bring in through trades and free agency? They traded Blake Hawksworth for Ryan Theriot in the offseason before the 2011 season. Cards pay him $3.3M. Matt Holiday was signed in 2010 to an 8 year multi-million $ contract (now making $17M/yr). Lance Berkman was signed in 2011 for $20M/2yrs. They traded away Alex Castellanos (a hot prospect from AA) for Rafael Furcal. Might as well mention Nick Punto was signed in 2011 to a 1 year $775k contract – Backup utility IF with experience, but he produced a WAR of 1.5, which is about as good as you can expect from a bench player.

            Notice I left out David Freese (drafted by SDP in the 9th round, ’06). They didn’t draft him, but they traded Jim Edmonds for him in ’07 and developed Freese into .290/20HR/80RBI type player who got hot at the right time and was the World Series MVP. That accounts for 13 position players that contributed to a championship; 7 of which were drafted by them, while they were responsible for the development of 8 of the 13, that’s over 60% homegrown.

            Of all these players, the lowest BA was Rasmus (.246) who they traded away in a big deadline deal that brought Edwin Jackson over, and the lowest OBP was Furcal (.316). That is a drastic improvement compared to where the Cubs are at! Are the Cubs ready to go out and take a chance on an older guy like Lance Berkman to fill a need. Notice they didn’t extend more than 2 years to him. Rurcal (another old guy-baseball years) had 2.5 years left on his contract. TheRiot only had one year left on his contract. I think it’s very obvious that when they signed Matt Holliday,

            management new they had a 2 year window to win a championship because it would likely price Pujols out of the organization (due to the $$$ spent on Holliday). So they went out and filled in short term veterans who were proven, and they got exactly what they needed out of them, because they didn’t have rely on any of them to carry the team.

            Well I’ve already spent too much time on this, but just look at their starting rotation. Jaime Garcia and Kyle McKlellan were homegrown and contributed well to the back end of the rotation. The other homegrown pitcher on the staff is Adam Wainright (drafted by the Braves, but traded to STL in ’03), but he got injured and was out for the season. Did they let that stop them? No, because they still had Kyle Lohse (drafted by the Cubs), Jake Westbrook, and a guy name Chris Carpenter who they signed to a big deal (high risk) for a pitcher with SHOULDER PROBLEMS who they got 6 out of 9 solid season from that shoulder, make it 6 out of 10 since he’s having problems again.

            So just even looking at their starting staff for that year, they had 3 guys they developed themselves, and then 3 FA signings, 2 who are just middle rotation type guys, and then a #1 caliber pitcher who that decided was worth the injury risk, as even though he didn’t contribute to the 2011 championship, he did contribute mightily to their 2006 championship.

            That seems kind of like what the Cubs are trying to get themselves to be. Homegrown talent, fill in the blanks with proven veterans, pick up some injury risk players and catch lighting in a bottle. And when/if the time is right, make a couple deadline deals that will help make the push. But notice, it wasn’t a put all your eggs in one basket (HAPPY EASTER) approach in the offseason before 2011 or at the deadline. It was just bring in the right players that will complement the organizational talent and not bog down payroll for years to come.

        • Tony_Hall

          You said this about Moscoso

          “And don’t forget: Mr. Coleman was crying to the reporter after being cut that he would have made the staff on several organizations after the ST he had. So here comes Moscoso and wham! he’s on the 40 man when Coleman isn’t. I think a savvy reporter should ask for Mr. Coleman’s opinion.”

          Maybe you didn’t understand that he wasn’t brought in to make the 25 man roster and that they were going to give it a few days to run him through again and outright him to Iowa and off of the 40 man roster. There is a bigger picture on these moves, and all we hear are the complaints at the beginning, but never any kudos for when it works to put another arm in the system. Moscoso may never make it to the majors, but stockpiling live arms is the goal, to get some to make it to the majors as productive arms.

    • 07GreyDigger

      Release Jed Hoyer huh? When he took over the Padres, they had the worst farm system in the majors, in one season they were top 15. But he’s worse that Hendry.

      Question, all you do is dump on the Cubs on this site, why do you even root for them then?

      • Ripsnorter1

        Padres record 2011…71-91. Last place.

        Padres record 2012….76-86 next to last place.

        • Tony_Hall

          Short term results….in what has become a very tough division.

          • Tony_Hall

            To take that a step further, imagine if the Cubs couldn’t afford to keep their best players. Castro is entering his 4th year in the majors. Imagine if he didn’t sign his contract. There would already be talk about the Cubs trading him to get more prospects in the coming years. The window to win with Castro would be short. That is what is so hard for the small market teams, by the time their young players are really good, they don’t have enough around them to win, they sell them off and do it again.

          • John_CC

            Exactly. And there are many factors that make it so difficult to make it work without being able to retain the “core” talent: first, your young talent has to come up together; then they have to actually adjust and succeed together at the MLB level; finally they have to not only succeed but they have to be the best, because like you said the window is so short. It’s not about making the playoffs, it’s about winning the whole think before the players become un-affordable. See KC Royals, they’ve had top prospect for years: Alex Gordon, Hosmer, Moustakas, all of whom can still be great players, but the odds are against a whole crop of rookie players figuring it out at the same time.

        • John_CC

          The Royals will compete for the AL Central this year. They have an incredible “home-grown” lineup and finally decided it was time to go spend a little cash on Sheilds. I hope he is enough to tip the scales for them. I’d love to see a winner in KC again.

          The Pirates don’t have any money to supplement their core, it’s sad – for them. They are stuck.

          The Padre’s have some serious talent on the way up as well.

          And why not bring the Astros into the discussion. They’ve built a pretty solid system as well.

          Of course a highly ranked farm system isn’t the end goal. And it doesn’t promise a highly ranked MLB team, but it is a necessary step in creating a perennially competitive MLB team. Ask the Yankees how buying talent works out in the long run (that is if you still want to ignore what Hendry did to the team we are talking about).

        • Shawon O’Meter

          Seriously Rip if you are going to hate at least use real facts. The Royals were named the top farm system in 2011. Before that they had a three year span where they moved from bad to upper middle of the pack. Before that they were horrible on the field and in the minors as well. So they basically went year to year for 15 – 20 years, they were horrible. They started to build from within and have the most optimistic outlook they’ve had in over 20 years. Please stick with facts.

  • calicub

    LVCC wants to be paid $75k per each additional night game for the inconviencence to the community

    What the What!?!!!!!!!!!!

    Will they be going door to door handing out fists full of cash to each resident?

    • John_CC

      Can someone explain the logic of how starting games at 3:05 (and spilling 40,000 people onto the streets at 5:30) on Friday has a negative impact on the local restaurants, bars and businesses of the neighborhood as opposed to games that start at 1:05 (and dump people onto the streets at 3:30)?

      Seems to me that the area is over-run around the 3-4 O’clock hour no matter what.

      I really do not understand.

      • SomeGuy27

        This is pure Chicago style shake-down politics. I used to own a business (hot dog stand) in Chicago proper and eventually moved out simply because of harassment by the Alderman and cops coming by for freebies and donations for various causes. Of course this would all be after reminding me how horrible it would be if “Something happened” and they weren’t there to protect us. Ten years ago this would be heresy for me, but I say move out to Rosemont. The mayor will bend over backwards because he understands the economic boon the Cubs would be to the city. Also, Wrigley itself could be duplicated–only nicer and habitable. In reality the only value the neighborhood brings is nice panoramas for the TV cameras. When you’re in the ballpark you may notice the Hi-rise apartments beyond the scoreboard but what you do notice is sub-standard seating, patched up concrete, and in the Spring or Fall the sub-zero effect the lake plays. Move on, gain more revenue, control your destiny and build a winner.

      • calicub

        Because wrigleyville has been transported to the year 802,701 A.D. and the Morlocks surface when the sun goes down.

      • Tony_Hall

        Mostly the night games, because they say that the neighborhood is so full of people going to the Cubs game, that they going to be slow that day….I would think the smart operators would take advantage of ALL THOSE PEOPLE and would be marketing towards Cubs fans going to the game, by offering deals and specials before or after the game…show me your tickets and get a free appetizer added to your meal. And of course you only get this free whatever, if you give me your e-mail so I can try to get you back the next time you come to a game OR EVEN BETTER, the next time you want to go out to dinner and choose to come back to our neighborhood. Imagine having a database of Cubs fans and sending marketing materials for the winter months. A good operator would take advantage of ALL THESE PEOPLE.

        • calicub

          unfortunately, this all doesn’t seem to be good operation but more along the lines of “gimme gimme gimme”

  • Pingback: Two More Practice Games and Two More Decisions for the Cubs ... | Chicago Ticket Hub

  • Tony_Hall

    I guess that ends all the uproar over Moscoso as he is outrighted to Iowa clearing a roster spot for Takahashi.

    • John_CC

      What TERRIBLE roster management! Moscoso stinks and now he is going to pitch somewhere…in some cornfield…and take up one of the seats on a bus criss-crossing the Mid-west!!

      • Tony_Hall

        Absolutely terrible….they brought him in for the whole purpose of sending him to Iowa and clearing the roster space on the 40 man. If someone else claimed him, they were out nothing.

        No risk, just the reward of another arm in Iowa.

        • John_CC

          You’re just making excuses Tony! (Remember when you and I used to be labeled Theo Lovers? I don’t miss that poster.)

          • Tony_Hall

            I don’t even remember who it was who said that.

  • John_CC

    I haven’t heard Stoney speak so positively about the Cubs in quite a while. When a cynic and critic like Stone changes his tune, something is happening.

    http://www.csnchicago.com/cubs/stone-what-expect-cubs-2013

    • paulcatanese

      John, I wasn’t surprised at his comments at all. He has always spoken the truth and was sorry to see him leave the North Side. I think that it was his honesty that got him fired in the first place. That being said, thank you for the link, and it was refreshing to hear his opinion on the Cubs.

      • John_CC

        Paul, I agree with you that Stone always has spoken the truth about the Cubs. And indeed it was his demise on the N Side…remember all that BS at the end his last season? Alou getting in his face on the airplane?

        Anyway, I didn’t say I was surprised to hear his positive view of the Cubs, just that it’s great to hear him say him. Because as you said, he says it like he sees it.

  • Pingback: From the Wire ... Cubs Outright RHP Guillermo Moscoso to Triple-A Iowa - Chicago Cubs Online

  • SomeGuy27

    This isn’t directed at anyone in particular but I can’t understand why so many folks go bat guano crazy over waiver wire claims or DFA pick-ups. From an organizational standpoint it’s not as if you do it to build the starting MLB line-up. You do it for a couple of reasons; 1.) to see if the guy might be better than what you’ve got. 2) fill a need of depth. 3) fill a need of necessity. 4) cover for an injury. 5) serve as a placeholder for a future move.

    If the pick-up takes up a roster spot causing you to release somebody and then the guy doesn’t pan out–well, you rolled the dice and lost. But let’s face it, the guy you released probably wasn’t going to be a better fit anyway so you;re just back to square one.

    • Tony_Hall

      Correct. In the most recent case they did it without releasing someone.

      DFA’s or short term guys that you hope you hit on one every so often, and the 40th guy you are dropping is usually nothing special, especially the last year or so.