Bleacher Report - Articles by Ricky Butts

Slapping Scott Boras: What I Would Do in the Strasburg Situation

Ricky Butts — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 20:25:05 -0400

He is a super phenom with a 102 mph fastball.

His ceiling is higher than almost any pitcher in history, so they say.

Some think that he could be the Washington Nationals opening day starter in 2010.

But, Scott Boras is his agent.

With only a short time to sign Strasburg, the Nationals could very well take a first round slap, for the second straight year.

They have offered, what has been reported as a record-breaking deal. One that seems to make Mark Prior's 10.5 milli snarl.

I knew the Nationals were bad, but I didn't know they were crazy.

For one, MLB history says that pitchers taken first overall do not fair too well. There has never been a 200-game winner taken first overall. Does history repeat, or is Strasburg really worth breaking the bank over?

I understand that it is not everyday that a player of this caliber comes along. I also understand that unlike LeBron James in basketball, one pitcher will not turn you from worst team in professional baseball, to a World Series contender.

So a team that selling at the deadline, three short weeks ago, should now invest somewhere around $20 million into a pitcher that has yet to throw a minor league pitch?

I remember when the Royals were criticized for signing Gil Meche to a five year deal worth $55 million, or $11 million a year. He was 55-44 with a 4.65, but he had roughly 750 innings under his belt. He now stands at 83-77, with a 4.38 career ERA.

So, while he hasn't gained the wins, he has actually been more effective. He should thank the Kansas City Royals for the lack of wins.

That same summer, the Cubs were ridiculed for doing about the same thing with Jason Marquis and Ted Lilly. Both of those guys made the All-Star team this year, albeit Jason Marquis is now in Colorado, pitching fantastic for the Rockies.

Both those guys also had established themselves as adequate major league pitchers.

So, first, I think it is crazy that this guy can get a $7 million per year contract. He established himself against college hitters and could be as good as advertised, but what if he isn't.

The Nationals already have major troubles.

Hell, they are the team that spelled their names wrong on their jerseys.

Jordan Zimmerman is likely out for 2010, likely making the Nationals front-runner for worst team in the majors, yet again. Yes, I am assuming that they finish there this year.

If they finish last this year, they will also find themselves with the first overall pick in 2010. To go along with that if they cannot sign Strasburg, they will get the No. 2 pick in next years draft.

So, let's look at this. The Nationals can end up with the No. 1 and 2 picks in next year's draft.

The same draft that Stephen Strasburg will once again be available in.

So what would I do?

I retract the offer that is on the table, now offering about 65 percent of the speculated $20 million he was offered. Coming in somewhere around $13 million sounds good.

Strasburg will almost undoubtedly take his chances and not sign the deal. Making him wait till June to be drafted again.

Ok, so it hurts that the No. 1 pick goes wasted.

What if it's not?

Next year, the same Nationals could pick Strasburg second overall, taking the top pick title away from the negotiation table, though it won't matter much in this situation.

Now, it is Strasburg that is in the hot seat. He either has to sign with the team or wait yet another year to play professional baseball.

I don't think Scott Boras could talk Strasburg into missing two full seasons so that he can sign a contract that is out of this world.

The young man knows he is an all-world talent, but he also knows that two years out of baseball could damage his image (see JD Drew), his strength, progression, and ultimately lower the super high ceiling that he has.

It would be a bold move by a team that has cleaned baseballs basement the past two seasons. On the other hand, what difference does it matter if he is on their roster in April of 2010 in June, or even at all next year?

It is a risky move, but even if the second time didn't work out for them, they essentially only lose one, though a top pick, and no money. If it works, they get the world's best amateur pitcher for a price that everyone could be happy with.

Minus Scott Boras.

Chicago Cubs: Tale of Two Seasons

Ricky Butts — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:05:32 -0400

It has been a frustrating first ninety eight games on the north side of the "Windy City."

They were pre-season favorites to win the National League Central Division and make a run at their first World Series appearance since 1945.

Up until now, it has been a tough go at it. At some points, they found themselves scuffling and making a run at the bottom dweller in the division they were supposed to run away from.

Some blame Jim Hendry for partially dismantling the team from one year ago. The trade of Derosa still has some reeling, but the point is, not even he could have saved the team in the first half.

Many also were stung by the allowing to let Kerry Wood walk and the trade for Kevin Gregg. I think it is fair to say that Gregg has been the most consistent pitcher in the Cubs bullpen this year.

The piece that was missing wasn't traded or allowed to leave in free agency. It was on the DL after a freak injury. Losing Aramis Ramirez for the majority of the first half dismantled this team in many ways.

First, with the way the lineup was structured, there was no protection after the four-hole (Milton Bradley).

Two, a good number of players couldn't pinpoint where they would be playing from day to day.

Mike Fontenot didn't know if he was playing second or third. Fukudome didn't know if he was playing center or the dreaded right-field. Micah Hoffpauir, Bobby Scales, Reed Johnson, Andres Blanco, and Jake Fox didn't know whether they would be starting or coming off the bench.

This made it hard on everyone. Yes, you prepare to play everyday, but when you are a bench player you have to have a different mindset. How do you stay prepared for eight innings before you play. The flux in playing time and the uncertainty put extra stress on the players, impairing their ability to get the job done.

Now, I understand the most people are saying that this is an excuse that players do not deserve. They are paid to play and they should be able to handle it.

True, to a certain extent. These guys aren't programmed like a computer. You can't just turn them on and off or move them from one desk to another and expect them to play the same way every day.

The absence of Ramirez led to a slow start and a great deal of adjustments for Lee and Bradley. It took them both about a third of the season to get acclimated to the new found revolving lineup that was forced upon them.

At that point, the Cubs began to get a little more consistent, but were still in need of that protection.

Now, most people thought it would take Aramis Ramirez a while to get back to form. His success so far in his return just proves how valuable he is to this lineup.

Another big move, was Soriano to the six-hole, adding more protection and power to the middle of the line-up. Since July 5th, about the same time Ramirez returned, Soriano has hit much better, but he isn't the only one.

Stats since July 5:

Alfonso Soriano - .377 with a .434 OBP, 4 HR, 13 RBI and 9 runs.

Kosuke Fukudome - .308 with a .392 OBP, 1 HR, 7 RBI and 9 runs.

Milton Bradley - .235 with a .426 OBP, 1 HR, 5 RBI and 6 runs.

Derrek Lee - .324 with a .410 OBP, 6 HR, 15 RBI and 15 runs.

Plus, you have to add Aramis Ramirez into that line since they were getting nothing from him.

Aramis Ramirez - .309 with a .382 OBP, 4 HR, 12 RBI and 11 runs.

Despite the season long average that Bradley has continued to sport, the average and on-base percentages have gone up.

Bradley has almost been a second lead-off hitter from the sixth hole which has proved successful in front of the hot Alfonso Soriano.

I understand it is still a short sample size, but these are all guys that can hit, and have proved it, even though most think Fukudome is a bust. I believe he is where he belongs, leading off that is.

If this offense can stay healthy and get Geovany Soto back, I believe they can once again be one of the top in the National League.

If the starting pitching can come close to being as good in the second half as the first this team can still run away from the division.

Chicago Cubs: Top 10 Keys to the Second Half

Ricky Butts — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:03:57 -0400

The Cubs have been very disappointing in the first half of the season. They start today 41-41, when in reality, they should be six or seven games above .500. Luckily, they are not too far away from that. Any day now, they could go on a six game winning streak and be right back in the thick of things. There are a numerous things that the Cubs need to do to win consistently over the next 80 games. If the Cubs can achieve at least the majority of them, they should find themselves a top the National League Central for the third straight year.

Begin Slideshow

Chicago Cubs' Milton Bradley: Is It As Bad As It Looks?

Ricky Butts — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 01:52:28 -0400

I have been paying a lot of attention to Milton Bradley in the box scores lately.

His average has creeped up to .245, not a great number by any means, but better than the .208 he was at on June 9.

Since then, he has hit safely in 17 of 23 games. Starting June 10 and through June 21, he had a 10-game hitting streak. His average jumped to .248. He then went four games without a single hit.

The thing is, in those four games, he only had eight official at-bats in 13 plate appearances. His averaged dipped back down, but he still managed to raise his OBP four points.

Since June 23, he has had multiple walks in five of 12 games and has hit in all but two. He has safely hit in 33 of his last 47 games. Nine of the 14 games he didn't attribute a hit, he had two or less at-bats. Also, out of those 14 games, he had six games with at least a walk and four saw him walk multiple times.

While his average didn't jump the way Derrek Lee's did when they both turned the corner at relatively the same time (Lee was hitting .198 on May 16 and Bradley was at .194), he has been successful.

Yes, in this same time frame, he was disciplined by Lou. He also made an embarrassing (though it didn't hurt the team) blunder when he posed after a catch then threw the ball into the stands, after the second out.

Despite all of that, he has been important to this lineup. He now stands in with a .245 BA and a respectable .370 on-base percentage. He has started 54 of the Cubs 79 games and played in 65. Right now it is looking like he will start about 115-120 games and play in around 140, which is more than anyone expected.

So, while many think he has been a bust, and really rightfully so, there are some underlying statistics that show that since mid may he has been fairly productive. Lee has driven in a lot of runs in front of him, so the RBI total is also not a good indicator, especially in a lineup that hasn't hit.

I am predicting now that Bradley's average and on-base percentage both increase as Ramirez settles into the lineup. To go along with that, if Soriano breaks out of his funk and is successful in the second half (staying in the sixth hole I hope), then Bradley will have some monster protection behind him too.

While it has taken some time, I think this move just may workout for the offense.

Chicago Cubs: Who Is To Blame For Their Struggles?

Ricky Butts — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 15:20:36 -0400

I have been reading a lot of articles over the past few weeks that have been throwing Jim Hendry under the bus.

In turn, over the same time period, I have put a lot of thought in to who is really to blame for the Chicago Cubs struggles.

While many didn't like his moves this past offseason, is it really his fault? Or, is it possible that the personnel isn't holding up their end of the bargain?

Yes, they let longtime Cub Kerry Wood walk and traded fan favorite and super versatile Mark DeRosa. They then replaced Wood with Marlin Kevin Gregg and moved Mike Fontenot to number one on the depth list at second base.

Is this what has brought the Cubs from top of the National League to bouncing between third and fourth in the National League Central?

This is a very easy answer. No.

I understand that Mike Fontenot has not performed the way he should, but this is still not the reason the Cubs have struggled. Fontenot has moved between second and third base, the same thing DeRosa would have had to do.

So lets compare their numbers thus far.

Mark DeRosa

235 AB, 41 R, 11 2B, 10 HR, 23 BB, 50 K, .346 OBP, .451 SLG, .277 AVG

Mike Fontenot

176 AB, 17 R, 6 HR, 27 RBI, 22 BB, 38 K, .327 OBP, .409 SLG, .244 AVG

Yes, Mark DeRosa has had the better season thus far, but I believe that there are many reasons for this.

The first reason is that, while DeRosa is always prepared to move positions, Mike Fontenot didn't expect to have to play this much third base. The injury to Ramirez almost immediately put extra pressure on Fontenot.

The second, and what I believe to be the most devastating, is that the middle of the lineup has not hit well at all. I will evaluate this more later.

So, the difference in closers has to be the reason, right?

Wrong again.

Kerry Wood

2-2, 4.84 ERA, 8 Saves, 2 Blown, 22.1 IN, 4HR, 13BB, 27K

Kevin Gregg

0-1, 4.28 ERA, 10 Saves, 2 Blown, 27.1 IN, 5 HR, 13BB, 29K

Both pitchers got off to bad starts this season, but have improved drastically. Looking at their numbers, there isn't a whole lot of difference outside of ERA. Even if you chalk this up to the AL vs. NL difference, they are both very close statistically.

So, it isn't the loss of Derosa or Wood that has the Cubs sitting at .500, what could it be?

How about player performance and injuries?

I myself am a firm believer that if the middle of your order can't hit, it makes it much harder for the rest of your lineup.

Up until recently, Derrek Lee was completely horrid at the plate. His recent 11 game hitting streak has brought his average up to .268, .25 below par for mister Lee. His OBP (.354) and SLG (.441) are also lower than last years (.361 OBP, .462 SLG).

Then there is everyone's favorite scape goat, Milton Bradley. One that could be blamed on Hendry, but he has thus far, got near the numbers of games played expected.

What wasn't expected, by anybody that pays attention, is that Bradley would be hitting .224, with a OBP of .333 and SLG of .381.

So yes, Hendry took a true gamble, and thus far has lost. On the other hand, he hasn't lost because of the reasons that everyone deemed this a loss prior to the season. He was criticized because Bradley wasn't durable enough and that hasn't been the case, though it has been an issue.

The truth is, nobody would be talking and everyone would be happy if Bradley was hitting even near what he is capable of. If his line looked more like, .300 AVG, .395 OBP, and .550 SLG, what would there be to complain about?

For me, a lot of the blame for the Cubs' offensive woes goes to these two supposed sluggers.

That blame isn't just derived from their stats. Not only because of their offensive lines, but because of what it does to the rest of the lineup.

Once opposing teams saw that these guys were getting themselves out, they didn't have to throw as many fast balls to other players in the line-up. Making it harder on everyone else.

They can afford to let guys like Theriot, Fontenot, Soto and Fukudome get themselves out. This means they can throw more early count breaking pitches and less first strike fastballs.

There is one more glaring concern with these Cubbies.While I like the majority of what Lou Piniella does, he has one major hiccup.

Alfonso Soriano is NOT a leadoff hitter.

Yes, he is one of the best home run hitters to ever occupy the No. 1 spot in the lineup, but he does not get on base near enough. I don't care if he only leads off one time in a game, when your line-up is not hitting, he is still coming up with the bases empty most of the time.

Soriano should be in a spot where he can drive in runs. This is more evident with the absence of injured Aramis Ramirez.

Soriano doesn't need to move to 2B, but he needs to be hitting in the four or five hole. Doing this not only puts someone with a higher average and on-base percentage in the one hole, it helps protect the heart of the order. I don't think a pitcher in baseball wants to pitch to Soriano with two men on base.

Not only that, but pitchers then have to pitch to Lee, Bradley, or Ramirez (when he returns) when runners are on in front of them and Soriano behind them.

To me, this a no brainer.

So, in conclusion, I don't think it is Hendry's fault.

Yes, he could have signed Abreau or Ibanez instead of Bradley.

Yes, he could have signed a good left-handed reliever instead of staying with Cotts.

Yes, he could have kept DeRosa and Wood.

But, it doesn't matter who you do or don't get, if the guys you expect to perform drop off the way that Soriano, Lee, Bradley and Soto have. Couple that with the injuries, most notably Ramirez, and there will be some trouble.

On the other hand, if the guys that are suppose to perform would perform, this team would not nearly be in the position that it is.

Quite frankly, I didn't see the lack of performance coming, and my bet is that neither did you.

I blame the personnel.

Chicago Cubs Rotation: Each Year Brings a Different Ace

Ricky Butts — Sat, 30 May 2009 16:05:35 -0400

This is what personally annoys me more than anything about the Cubs. Since they started their run as National League Central champs in 2007, there has been no consistency in the starting rotation.

Now, the rotation has been good overall, but not as good as it should be, IMO.

In 2007, the Cubs had three starters that could have been considered the staff ace, if you will. Ted Lilly, Rich Hill, and supposed ace Carlos Zambrano were all really neck and neck for this title.

Ted Lilly

15-8, 3.83 ERA, 207 IP, 174 K, in 34 starts

Rich Hill

11-8, 3.92 ERA, 195 IP, 183 K, in 32 starts

Carlos Zambrano

18-13, 3.95 ERA, 216.1 IP, 177 K, in 34 starts

Most people would give the nod to Zambrano by default, but I completely disagree.

I myself would have to go with Rich Hill. I remember a handful of games that he lost giving up two or less runs. If I remember correctly (I am not sure how to look it up) he had one of the worst average run support stats in the National League.

Either way, by the end of the year, I thought that he was the Cubs best and most consistant starting pitcher.

It is really too bad that he pulled a Rick Ankiel (no he wasn't a better hitter than pitcher) and lost complete control in early 2008. I really thought this kid was going to be a good starter for the Cubs for a long time.

Going into 2008, Carlos Zambrano was once again labled the Cubs ace. Rich Hill was expected to improve on his solid '07 campaign and Ryan Dempster was a complete mystery after moving from closer to starter.

Rich Hill imploded on to the scene. In his five starts, he walked 18 batters in 19.2 innings of work. It was chalked up to back problems and he never made it back to the team after his demotion.

He was then traded to the Baltimore Orioles, where he is trying to put the pieces of his career back together.

Carlos started the season off strong. For awhile, it looked that he was back to the pitcher he was from 2003-2006. Then, after an injury, it was like he lost everything. He had a very inconsistent second half of the season after making the All-Star team, despite a late season no-hitter.

Zambrano would go on to finish the season with a line of; 14-6, 3.91 ERA, 188.2 innings, with 130 strikeouts in 30 starts. Not what was expected from the Cy Young candidate.

The pleasant surprise was from Ryan Dempster.

After a winter of working hard and getting in shape, Dempster proved all the detractors wrong. He started of the season stellar, yet most critics still expected him to stutter at the end of the year.

He just kept going and going, to a tune of 17-6, 2.96 ERA, 206.2 IP, 187 K, in 33 starts. He ended up finishing fifth among starters in Cy Young voting, and sixth overall.

His season was somewhat diminished with his awful performance in game one of the NLDS. In that game against the Los Angeles Dodgers, he walked seven batters in 4.2 innings and gave up four earned runs.

Playoffs aside, Dempster was still the teams ace in 2008, and they paid him like one entering 2009.It is now 2009. The Cubs entered the year with three out of the four mentioned previously still in their rotation. Zambrano is still considered the club ace, with Dempster and mid-2008 acquisition Rich Harden, who wasn't mentioned for 2008 only because he only pitched half the season here.

With a combo of Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly, and Harden, the Cubs were/are supposed to have one of the best rotations in the majors.

So far they haven't lived up. Lilly is the only one that has pitched consistently well so far. He has a line of; 6-4, 3.50 ERA in his 10 starts. Zambrano comes in second with his 4.22 ERA, followed by Harden at 4.74 ERA and then Dempster at 4.99.

While they all have time to improve their seasons, they look like they could be challenged by a rookie, Randy Wells, who has looked phenomenal in his first four starts. Despite his 0-2 record, he has a 1.80 ERA in his 25 innings. He has had absolutely no run support. He could easily be 4-0 to start his career, but because of the Cubs lack of offense, finds himself with two loses.

While it is not likely that he will finish the season with a 1.80 ERA, it does seem that, for the time being, Wells will be in the Cubs rotation. I think it is plausible that he could end the season with an ERA around 3.50, which could put him right in line for "staff ace 2009."

What would be fantastic is if Zambrano could return to his '03-'06 form, Lilly and Wells continue what they are doing, with Dempster and Harden returning to their 2008 form. Even if this was for a 50 game stretch, it could help put the Cubs above the rest of the Central Division.

BREAKING NEWS! Widespread Steroid Use Among Major League Umpires

Ricky Butts — Fri, 29 May 2009 12:34:03 -0400

It is hard to believe, but Jose Canseco didn't tell us the entire story.

On Friday, May 29, 2009, breaking news came that 99.9 percent of Major League umpires have failed tests for numerous types of steroids and HGH. It is also reported that other chemicals have been found that inflame the medulla oblongata resulting in massive anger issues.

It was just a couple short weeks ago that Milton Bradley was badly bashed for his comment about umps.

"Unfortunately, I just think it's a lot of 'Oh, you did this to my colleague,' or 'We're going to get him any time we can,'" he said.

It was then chalked up as the "woe-is-me" attitude that Milton is so infamously famous for.

Maybe he was on to something?

Since then, we have seen numerous "what the &$^% is going on" incidents with umpires.

Todd Tichenor, pictured above was just called up from AAA. It is believed that since the turnover rate is very low among MLB umpires, that Todd used steroids to gain an advantage on his other Minor League counterparts.

It took all of just under seven innings for his 'roid rage to be released. His first game was between the Minnesota Twins and Boston Red Sox. In the seventh inning of that game, he presumptively tossed Mike Redmond before their argument really even started.

That is when Ron Gardenhire came out from the dugout, not to argue the play (Jeff Bailey ruled safe at home), but that Tichenor ejected Redmond too fast. All that did was allow Redmond and Gardenhire to sing sweet nothings to each other in the team shower.

It was made possible for Jason Varitek and Terry Francona to join in on the rubber ducky bash, though not likely, when they were both tossed in the very next half inning.

Two players and two managers tossed in less than an inning without a brawl? I have never seen it.

I am beginning to believe that Milton Bradley is on to something, because that isn't the end of "roid raging" umpires.

Major League baseball is currently looking into accusations made by Chicago Cub pitcher Ted Lilly. Lilly is notorious for throwing with the wrong (left) hand and for having the best flower garden in the bigs.

Ted Lilly pulled a "Craig" (from the movie Friday) moment on May 26, when he was tossed by Bob Davidson. The good part, is that Ted Lilly didn't even pitch that day.

He didn't steal cardboard boxes, but he believed that Davidson wasn't concentrating behind the plate. After watching video of some of the calls in the video room, he hopped the fence in front of the Cubs dugout to let Bob know he needed to concentrate more.

"I thought both ways, he wasn't concentrating and I asked him if he could concentrate a little bit back there, and he told me he could do whatever he wanted," Lilly said. "That got me upset."

I know it is not right for someone on the bench to go on the field and argue, but maybe Lilly had a point. Steroids do crazy things to your body and mind. Since every Major League hitter and nearly all pitchers take steroids, I am sure that Ted Lilly recognized the look in Davidson's eyes.

Needless to say, like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, Bob Davidson is denying everything. Going as far as saying that Ted Lilly didn't say anything about concentrating in their argument.

The fun part is this though, Davidson says he can't quote what Lilly said. Either he isn't very creative in his attempt to frame Lilly for something he didn't say, or the testicular shrinkage has taken its toll on this grown man.

I mean, isn't he old enough to say things like (WARNING: Extremely explicit content ahead); @#%*, $*%#&, *&%hole, and my favorite, mother*&^%$#.

Disclaimer - no symbols were harmed in the production of the previous sentence.

If I can say them, than why can't he?

Milton Bradley is a genius.

There is more on page three.

It was all capped off when Carlos Zambrano pitched on Wednesday.

After a close play at the plate following a wild pitch by Zambrano, Pittsburgh Pirate Nyjer Morgan was called safe, much to "Z's" dismay. The umpire, Mark Carlson, let Carlos argue a bit, but then took matters into his own hands.

As "Z" appeared to be finishing his argument, Carlson, who apparently wasn't ready to stop, purposely (aided by his "roid rage") bumped Zambrano. After a slight nudge, with a look like "WTF" was that, Carlos was tossed.

Still not sure of what happened, and knowing that any contact gets a player thrown out, Zambrano figured that when umpires make the contact, they should get tossed too.

He did just that, tossing Carlson, which he did not like at all.

While this is going on, Milton Bradley is watching. Most likely, he was telling fans in the right field bleachers that, "see, now the umpires are going after anybody I associate with," and that, "Zambrano is just another casualty of the MLBUC."

The tirade continued with Zambrano throwing the ball into left-center field, throwing his glove, and beating the *$&% out of the Gatorade machine.

Major League Baseball announced yesterday that Carlos would be suspended six games and that Carlson won't be suspended because their is not a steroid policy in effect for umpires at this time.

I am sure this is not the end of the steroid saga that is ongoing in the umpire community. The "Snitchell Report" is due out in 2017. Then and only then will we learn the truth about our beloved umpires.

Until then, Milton Bradley is going to be my Jose Canseco. They are both credited men who do not lie. Listen to their words of wisdom and maybe, just maybe, one day cocaine will be the drug that tears down our superstars.

Oh wait, that was the '80s.

Definition - MLBUC stands for "Major League Baseball Umpire Conspiracy"

NL Prediction: When the Ivy Turns Green, the Chicago Cubs Will Get Mean

Ricky Butts — Mon, 04 May 2009 13:16:23 -0400

Here we are, May 4, 2009. The Chicago Cubs are only 24 games into a season in which many picked them to run away with the National League Central. At 13-11, they find themselves three-and-a-half games behind the dreadful Red Birds of St. Louis.

This has caused major stress for numerous Cubs fans. Understandably, they are remembering seasons of recent past, 2004 and 2006, where the Cubs were picked by many to make the playoffs. I bet I do not need to explain what happened in those years.

Now, I have always been a realist. If I thought the Cubs were bad, I would be the first to say it. At times in 2009, they have looked terrible, but they are only 24 games in.

This is still one of the top three teams in the National League.

I think that Cubs fans are blessed. How often can a team start over .500 and be scrutinized for being off to a slow start?

Now, how often can a team do this while missing a major piece of their offense nearly every game since the season began? Just look at the list of players who have missed time due to injury: Milton Bradley, Aramis Ramirez, Geovany Soto, Derrek Lee.

To top that, they might as well reverse their rotation. The fourth and fifth starters, Ted Lilly and Sean Marshall, have easily been the best so far. Lilly has been fantastic, throwing 31.2 innings with a 3.13 ERA and 26 strikeouts, yet he is only 3-2.

The Cubs' top three starters, Carlos Zambrano, Ryan Dempster, and Rich Harden, have combined for 92.2 innings, a 4.98 ERA, 95 strikeouts, and a 6-3 record. Once this trio (figuring Z isn't hurt for too long) turns it up a notch, this starting rotation will be filthy.

To go along with those three pitchers, the Cubs can expect their Bradley-Lee-Soto combination to hit better than their combined .172.

So, as the ivy starts to turn from its ugly winter brown to its beautiful summer green, I believe the underachieving Cubbies will turn mean.

Cubby Fire: Why I Love Milton Bradley Getting Tossed

Ricky Butts — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 02:55:59 -0400

High risk, high reward, I said that when the Cubs signed Milton Bradley.

I am also not the guy that looks at a small sample size and is so sure that it will continue for a full season.

I also said that I would be fine with the Bradley signing as long as he played 100 regular season games and was healthy for the playoffs. Whether that happens, time will only tell.

One thing I said I would love for sure, is the fire he brings to the club. A team that was so dry and boring last year despite winning 97 games.

This is the same reason I liked the signing of Lou Piniella. The difference is, "Sweet Lou" doesn't seem to have the fire he had in his earlier days.

I have always loved the fire Zambrano has shown. Yet, in 2008, he even lacked that.

IMO, the Cubs needed someone to bring a flame to the clubhouse. Every team needs it, as long as it is not harmful to the clubs chemistry. While many think that Bradley's run in with Jeff Kent means he is a bad teammate, I have never been sold.

Yes, he has played for five cities in as many years. Yet, outside of the incident with Kent, I have not heard/read anything by a manager or teammate that even hints towards him being a bad guy in the clubhouse.

So, while many people will undoubtedly criticize him for being tossed in his first home at bat, I think it was needed to fire up a team that is playing mediocre baseball. Especially for a team that shouldn't be playing mediocre baseball.

I have said it before, the Lou Pinella toss and Zambrano vs. Barret bout of 2007 turned this team around. Since then, we have seen a swing and miss by Derrek Lee (vs. Chris Young) and that is about as much fire as I can remember.

With Fukudome hitting as well as he is now, it is not as important to have Bradley on the field. Reed Johnson is a very capable outfielder and hitter that can sustain production rather than risking the season for Bradley.

Bradley's importance comes in the fall. The team should be able to win the division without him.

Either way, I think he will bring that fire to the dugout whether in the line up or not.

I myself, wouldn't be upset if he got tossed from a game while he is on the disabled list. If that sparks his teammates then I am all for it.

The Cubs needed a fire lit under their ass. They got it when they signed Milton Bradley.

Around the Bases: The 10 Best Baseball Movies of All Time

Ricky Butts — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 05:28:26 -0400

I must admit that my decision to write an article about the ten best baseball movies of all time was sparked from reading Mark T's article of the same premise. I love baseball movies and while I was still playing, I watched one before going to sleep, every night before a game. The best baseball movies embody the things that make us love baseball. I hope you enjoy my list.

Begin Slideshow

Slave for Saves: Moving Carlos Marmol to Closer Would Cost the Chicago Cubs

Ricky Butts — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 00:00:59 -0400

The debate is hot early on when it comes to the Cubs closer.

Kevin Gregg has started the year with a loss, one blown save in two tries, and a 9.00 ERA in four innings.

Carlos Marmol has started the year with a save in his only chance and hasn't given up a run in his four and two thirds innings pitched.

Forget all that. There are reasons beyond the numbers that both players are in the roles they need to be in.

I have already written articles talking about Gregg and Marmol and the reasons why Gregg was brought in. Now, I am not a Gregg fan, but his numbers speak if you look a little deeper.

On the other hand, I am a Marmol fan. His numbers definitely constitute moving him into the ninth inning. His situation doesn't.

I am a firm believer that the save is the most overrated statistic in baseball. Sixty-two saves can land you a huge contract because your teams offense wasn't dynamic and your team was leading by less than four runs the majority of the time.

Two guys that actually pitched better than K-Rod last year, Joakim Soria and Joe Nathan, both has 24 less opportunities to save games than Rodriguez. Rodriguez also pitched the most innings out of the three with 68.1, even though they were both close to him, Nathan pitched 67.2 and Soria 67.1.

Now, these guys were and are their teams best bullpen pitchers, yet, none of them pitched in more than 76 games.

Now, in Chicago, the Cubs best bullpen pitcher met the mound in 82 games and threw nearly 19 more innings (87.1) than K-Rod.

So, if the Cubs would move Marmol into the ninth inning, it is likely that his innings would drop to around 70, so he could get about 40 to 45 save opportunities. That is like taking two full games out of his hand. That is 18 innings of about four run baseball.

Instead, you keep Carlos available in the sixth, seventh, or eighth innings. You get much more value and versatility out of him. Plus, keeping him in those situation, will allow for there to be more save opportunities to begin with.

You don't play six innings of winning baseball, then hope you still have the lead in the ninth. When you have the lead, you try to secure the lead, and moving Carlos to closer hurts your chances at doing that.

With Carlos in the role he is in, you also allow your team to tack on runs and build on a lead so that the game isn't as close in the ninth and the closer may be negated. This is another reason you don't want Marmol there.

Why have him waste on the bench when the Cubs are blowing teams out like they did so much last year?

Another thing to look at is his lack of success, though a small sample size, in big games. He has been downright awful in the post season, giving up five runs in 5.2 innings, for a 7.94 ERA. He also blew a save in the World Baseball Classic and was the only pitcher on the Dominican team that had an ERA.

His value to this team is much stronger in the set-up role. The bullpen will be weakened enormously when lesser pitchers have to make up the 20+ innings you lose by moving Marmol to the closer role.

That is reason alone to leave Marmol where he is at, if you ask me.

Round 1: Chicago Cub Mike Fontenot vs. Cleveland Indian Mark DeRosa

Ricky Butts — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 03:08:57 -0400

A hot debate in Chicago over the winter was the decision to trade Mark DeRosa to the Cleveland Indians for prospects, some of whom have been labeled not worthy of such a swap.

At the time, many thought Aaron Miles would be the everyday second baseman. That assumption ended up being wrong and Mike "Little Babe Ruth" Fontenot was awarded the starting second base job.

Mark DeRosa on the other hand went to Cleveland as the starting third baseman, with no competition of it ending up otherwise. The Indians fans felt good on their end, for Derosa was coming of two solid years in Chicago.

Cubs fans felt betrayed. Derosa may have been the Cubs MVP over the past two seasons. Playing first, second and third base, along with both corner outfield spots, he reminded me of Jose Hernandez, with a slightly better average and less strikeouts.

Not only was DeRosa that valuable, but how could "Mighty"' Mike Fontenot, a guy that has never had a starting job, dethrone Derosa and all the value he brings?

That answer was right under the nose of anyone who paid just a little attention to Fontenot's very solid 2008 campaign. Despite not even having 250 at-bats, he put up very solid numbers. His nine home runs were one shy of the Cubs left-handed leader in home runs, Kosuke Fukudome.

So here we are, both players merely four early games into the season. Both have new jobs and both are off to a much different start.

Mike Fontenot has started the season hitting .412, with one home run, two doubles, and four RBI in his 17 at-bats.

Mark DeRosa on the other hand, has the same amount of at-bats, but lacks the same success. He has batted .059, with one single, that's it.

Now obviously four games is not going to tell the full picture. So from time to time, I will come back to this classic battle of woulda-coulda-shoulda Cubs debate of two second basemen.

Round One goes to 'Mighty' Mike Fontenot!

Fontenot - 1

DeRosa - 0

Letting the Goat Off the Truck: Chicago Cubs Try in 2009

Ricky Butts — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 13:55:16 -0400

There are many goats. One of my favorite is an old goat comes from middle school memories.

This goat was brutally beaten by an old drunken man and constantly tied to a truck, by a three-foot rope. That was until three young men snuck in and untied him from the truck and played football with him.

I am referring to the goat in Adam Sandler's song, "The Talking Goat." The contents are explicit, but you can listen here.

And then there was Earl "The Goat" Manigault. A 6'1" guard who was said to be able to jump high enough to retrieve money off the top of a regulation backboard. His signature dunk was actually two dunks. While in the air, he would dunk the ball, catch it, and then dunk it again.

Many that seen or played against him, said that he was the best player they ever played against.

This includes NBA legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who during the retirement of his number at the Los Angeles Forum was asked, "Who was the best player you ever played against?" only to hear him respond after a pause, "It would have to be Earl "The Goat" Manigault."

It was a surprise to some, since you wil not find any professional statistics on Earl Manigault. His story later was portrayed on HBO in 1996, when they cast Don Cheadle to play him in a movie called Rebound.

Then there is the dreaded Cubs curse. I need not say anymore.

This time, I think the men in blue could take the goat off the truck for good in 2009.

I have been saying it all winter, I believe that the Cubs are better than they were last year. What many of you do not know is that I do not let personal feelings cloud my judgement.

If the Cubs are bad, I have no problem publicly saying so.

I also have no problem, even though it has caused me to look dumb numerous times, to express when I think they are good.

Right now, I think they look like one of the top three teams in all of baseball. IMO, they are the best looking National League ball club going into the season.

On top of that, I think any problems that look like they need addressed come July, will be addressed in a big way. The organization and new owner, know the same that the Cubs fans are getting uber-impatient with the continued "close but no cigar" success over the past five seasons.

It is time to finally win that World Series, before Chicago is burnt to the ground.

While many fans on B/R didn't like the trade for Gregg or the signing of Bradley, the non-sign of Wood or the trade of DeRosa, I supported all the moves.

Gregg, whom I have said since day one would end up the closer, looked great this spring, and did indeed clinch that role. The man that was traded for him, Jose Ceda, was sidelined with shoulder issues this spring.

While he has great potential, he was eating a roster spot on a team that he may not have been ready for for another year. So the Cubs got someone that can come in and help immensely right now.

Bradley, though he had an early injury scare, had a fantastic spring. I think the Cubs can make it to the playoffs even if he only plays 100 games during the regular season. Being healthy during the playoffs is the biggest concern.

Mike Fontenot and Aaron Miles look to form a solid second base combo. In fact, I have predicted that Mike Fontenot's numbers will be very similar if not better than the ones Derosa had one year ago. I think he is capable of hitting 15-20 home runs, 40 doubles, with a while batting .290.

Miles, will play all his positions well and could very well hit for a higher average than Derosa, probably .300 to .310.

Then there are the three guys that I see rebound from years that were hard to watch at times (some more than most) last year. Fukudome, Lee, and Zambrano all look to have solid years.

Out of the three, I think it is most important that Zambrano becomes more consistent than he has been the past two years. He is the only one that doesn't have a viable replacement.

If Derrek Lee struggles, gets hurt, or for whatever reason can't be in the line-up, he has a formitable replacement in Micah Hoffpauir (whom I personally wish was the starting first baseman).

Then, Fukudome has Reed Johnson backing him up. Most of you feel strongly that Johnson should be starting, I like that they are giving the OBP man another shot at starting, I think Fukudome will hit .280+ with 10+hr with a .390 or so OBP.

All in all, I think this team is not only a little better, but a lot better than they were one year ago. With the impatience riding, mid season acquisitions will most definitely be made to even better the club for the August-October stretch.

The club is now more balanced, which I have felt the Cubs needed to be since the LA Dodgers threw exactly zero left-handers in their playoff sweep of the "Lovable Losers."

The power hitting right-handers can now breathe a sigh of relief knowing they have some left-handed protection in the lineup.

A relatively healthy year, a few "Rebound" years, and maybe, finally, the Cubs and their fans could forget about the truck.

I know we are all sick and tired of the old man beating the s*&t out of us. Most of you, like me, have only endured this for a short time in the scheme of things.

100: Can the Chicago Cubs Do It?

Ricky Butts — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:24:51 -0400

I know what you are thinking. This is just another Cubs article about going a full century without winning a World Series ring. You are wrong.

See, there is a different feat that I am interested in, for reasons I don't really know.

Most of you know that the Cubs last went to a World Series in 1945, in which they obviously lost. There is a feat that goes even further back, that I think the Cubs have a chance to accomplish in 2009.

In 1935, the Chicago Cubs went 100-54. Not since, even after adding eight games to the schedule, have the Cubs won 100 games in the regular season.

Many would say that this is a feat that doesn't matter, but I disagree. See, the Cubs have been doing a lot lately that they haven't done since this time of last century. I believe if they continue the trend, we are that much closer to the holy grail.

IMO, that DOES mean something.

So, in 2008, the Cubs went to the playoffs in back to back seasons since 1906-1908. They failed during the playoffs, because they were built for the long haul and not a short series, a la the reason they needed a strong left-handed bat.

After winning 97 games, the Cubs lost a few faces. Kerry Wood and Mark DeRosa, the only two that I feel were valuable enough to miss, both landed in Cleveland. Two club house "leaders" are now gone, but I do not think they will be missed much, statistics wise, in 2009.

The only real "hole" I see with the Cubs, is a backup third baseman. Which, isn't a huge fear of mine, since Ramirez has been pretty dependable his whole career. So when people tell me that DeRosa could play first, second, third, and corner outfield spots, I kind of yawn.

Aaron Miles, who the Cubs acquired seemingly at the same time DeRosa was traded, can play second, short, third, or both corner outfield spots. He lacks the power Derosa has, but will likely hit for a similar or better average. The home runs will be made up by DeRosa's second base replacement, Mike Fontenot.

Miles is also not the only back-up infielder that can play corner outfield. Though he lacks the defensive prowless, Micah Hoffpauir makes up for it with the bat.

Alfonso Soriano, Kosuke Fukudome, Reed Johnson, Milton Bradely, Joey Gathright, Micah Hoffpauir and Aaron Miles make one of the deepest and most capable outfields, offensively and defensively in the big leagues.

Now, the Wood loss looks a little stronger on paper, but I have a feeling Kevin Gregg is going to surprise a lot of Cubs fans this year. Outside of August 2008, his numbers over the past two years have been very, very dependable.

I have wrote about this numerous times, so search for past articles if you want them.

Another article I wrote, was about the impact a healthy Alfonso Soriano has on the Cubs win/loss record. When he was in the line-up, the Cubs had a winning percentage of about .645, which translates into 104 wins. Their winning percentage without him was about .520.

If those numbers stayed the same, he would only have to play 135 games for the cubs to win 101 games.

I personally think the Cubs will be a better team this year, when he is not in the lineup than they were last year.

Remember, the Cubs won't stick with Fukudome, whether they are winning or losing, if he doesn't hit. They have Rich Harden and Milton Bradely with Mitch Atkins/Jeff Samardzija and Micah Hoffpauir to pick up the load if/when injuries happen. Geovany Soto and Ryan Theriot are one more year of experience.

All in all, I feel that this team is more than just a little improved. I think this team is 10 wins better than they were last season. Do I really think they will win 107 games? No, it is unlikely due to all the different variables. On the other hand, it wouldn't surprise me.

So let's break one feat that has to do with 100 on our way to conquering the World (Series) for the first time in 100(+) years.

Lee-iterating Why the Chicago Cubs Should Have Traded Derrek Lee

Ricky Butts — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 03:59:00 -0400

Before I get into this article, I want to admit a few things. I didn't necessarily disagree with the Mark DeRosa trade, nor the Milton Bradley signing.

That being said, I think there was a better move for the Chicago Cubs to make this past winter. Something that I was very public with, before Mark Teixeira signed with the Yankees.

The Cubs should have traded Derrek Lee.

Now, I have been a Derrek Lee fan since the day the Cubs acquired him. His 2005 season was the best from a Cubs hitter since Sammy Sosa's three consecutive 60-home run seasons.

Since then, Lee has put up a solid .301 combined batting average. The problem is that he has only driven in 202 runs in those three years combined.

Hitting from the three-hole, that number should be higher.

Now, he did miss most of the 2006 season with his wrist injury, but he should be driving in 100 runs a year. In 2005, he drove in 107 and hasn't topped 90 since.

When you are hitting third in the best lineup in the National League, that just doesn't cut it.

On top of that, his 2008 home run total of 20 was his lowest since 1999, when he only totaled 218 at-bats. In 1998, he hit 17 during his first full season.

I think it is obvious that he is declining. While his defense stays strong, his presence in the lineup is not nearly what it was four years ago, and opponents know that.

Lee does have a full no-trade clause, but these things are always waived. Given the right circumstances, I am convinced he would have allowed a trade to certain teams.

While he is still a very valuable piece for this team, I think the Cubs would have been better off dealing him, and I will tell you why.

When Lee signed his five-year contract with the Cubs, it was for $65 million. That is $13 million per year, the total amount of Mark DeRosa's three-year contract.

That means if the Cubs would have traded Lee instead, they could have saved at least $8 million in 2009.

Lee's replacement would have been Micah Hoffpauir, a left-handed hitter who I believe could hit the 20 home runs Lee has hit the past two seasons and have a very solid average of .285 or better.

The Cubs, then, would not have needed to spend another $10 million on a left-handed hitter.

Though I love Milton Bradley's talent, I believe DeRosa in right field and Micah at first would have been a much more reliable combo than Lee and Bradley.

Plus, the Cubs would have another $18 million that they don't have now.

That money could have been spent on one of two things: a starting pitcher or multiple relievers, preferably a left-handed seventh- and eighth-inning guy.

They may have even been able to complete the Jake Peavy trade and sign a guy like Brian Fuentes.

Now, I know that would have been unlikely, even with a Derrek Lee trade, but I think it makes my point.

The Chicago Cubs could have opened the door for better options had they traded Lee rather than Mark DeRosa. I think the team could have been much more durable and versatile.

Instead, we are going into the season with a right fielder who has already showed signs of injury, a starting first baseman who, until today, had barely hit, and a backup first baseman who has been hitting very well.

I am not one to look too far into spring stats, but I fear that the decline of Derrek Lee will continue in 2009. I am sad to say it since I predicted earlier in the offseason that he would have a comeback year.

I hope I can admit I was wrong come October.

Chicago Cubs: Nothing Short of a World Series Will Satisfy

Ricky Butts — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 04:58:40 -0500

I remember it like it was yesterday. The first time I made a visit to Wrigley Field, at the age of 11 or so, the Cubs were not a winning ballclub. Yet, though a lousy team, the stands were packed. I learned that day, that Cubs fans were loyal.

Being loyal is one thing, but as I got older, I learned that Cubs fans were also forgiving. It didn't matter whether they won 95 games or lost the same, the stadium would be packed, and the fans would love there "Lovable Losers."

I myself was never really satisfied. I have always hated losing. I never would turn my back on the Cubs, but I was also utterly disappointed when they were terrible.

Then in 1998 we got a taste of the playoffs. The feeling of seeing the Cubs in the postseason was fantastic, but short lived to say the least.

We forgave them and braced ourselves for a let down in 1999.

In 2003, falling just a few outs short of the first World Series appearance since 1945, we felt the most disappointment in recent history. We didn't protect ourselves, by tagging them World Series favorites in 2004.

Once again, our hearts were broken, but we forgave them, even though 2005 and 2006 were lousy seasons also.

2007 and 2008 were much of the same, though the first time since 1906-1908 they made the playoffs in back to back years. Our hearts were shattered two years straight come October.

There is a big difference though, which I have learned over the past couple years. We forgave them for 2007, but I don't think we have for 2008.

Over the past two weeks, I have spent a substantial part of my free time at the Horseshoe Casino in Hammond, IN. Only a short drive from Chicago, I have met a lot of Cubs fans, young and old.

One guy was irritated that the Cubs did not sign Adam Dunn. His argument was that his on-base percentage and home run total even out his inability to be an adequate right fielder in Wrigley, his horrendous batting average, and his lack of speed.

He quickly called me a "moron" when I said that Adam Dunn would have been a worse pick-up than Milton Bradley. He had yet to hear my argument. I said that while Dunn will get on base at around .400 (as does Bradley), he would clog the bases.

See, Adam Dunn is normally trotting around the bases or stopping at first. We don't have Jason Marquis to pinch-run for him once a game anymore.

After being dubbed the biggest "moron" at the casino, we proceeded to talk about Milton Bradley.

At this point, I was completely comfortable speaking my mind. I am already the biggest moron, so what do I have to lose at this point. Come to find out, you can do a lot worse than being the biggest moron.

With my major points being that the upside of Bradley, despite his past, is much higher than any outfielder they could have signed (outside of Manny Ramirez possibly). His ability, just like Dunn, to reach base is outstanding. The bigger plus, though fewer home runs, are more doubles.

Bradley, if (while a big if) healthy, could be a guy to hit 25 home runs, 40 doubles and bat .315 with a .400+ on base percentage. Not only that, but he can field much better than Dunn, as well as run the bases better.

At this point, I had apparently dug myself a grave and buried myself alive.

This is when something came apparent to me. While I myself like the signing of Milton Bradley. Fans are just fed up with not being first.

A lot of people were happy with the Cliff Floyd signing at the time. They also liked when we traded for Nomar. We also endured their continued injury plagued seasons.

We went through 10 years of Kerry Wood being in and out of rehab and on and off the disabled list. We saw one of our own, who was projected to be one of the best pitchers of our generation, fall from earth, in Mark Prior.

We hate injuries. We hate losing. We just want a World Series Championship, so we do not have to defend our loyalty to the Cubs anymore.

To me, this is fantastic. While I myself have loved the Cubs the same each year (I got the '60s logo tattoo on my shoulder back in 2005), I am happy that we are more critical now. We no longer settle for less just because we are Cubs fans.

We love being NL Central Champions, but that is no longer enough.

In 2009, nothing less than a World Series trophy will satisfy. I think when I say that, I am speaking for Cubs fans in general.

If you are drinking while reading this, please put your glass in the air and say,

"Cheers, to the day we are no longer known as the "Lovable Losers."

Major League Baseball: Sad Times To Be a Fan

Ricky Butts — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:12:05 -0500

Throughout my life, I have been a baseball fan. Like many others, I dreamt of one day playing at Wrigley and Fenway.

While I have always been a Chicago Cubs fan, I grew up idolizing guys like Frank Thomas, Rickey Henderson, and Cal Ripken Jr.

To me, being a baseball fan is more than about being loyal to your team. A true baseball fan can and will appreciate true greats, no matter who they play for. In today's game, I have always been a fan of arch rival Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez, and John Smoltz.

This isn't easy. Giving kudos to guys like Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell was not fun, but it was deserved.

In 1998, one of the greatest spectacles I have ever seen in sports, captivated a nation. Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa helped bring the game of baseball back to the forefront after Michael Jordan and Co. helped push the NBA ahead after baseball's strike.

Now, to me at least, it seems like a figment of my imagination.

Baseball doesn't have the caliber or person to help it amid its biggest scandal. Anyone that speaks out about steroids is just as likely to be a culprit as the one before him.

We all saw the congressional hearing when Sosa forgot how to speak, McGwire plead the fifth, and Rafael Palmeiro pointed while saying "I have never done steroids. PERIOD!"

We know how all this ended, or better yet, progressed. Not a word that has been said can be believed. The most truth we have heard has come from the mouth of hated antagonist, Jose Canseco.

Now, here we are, spring training 2009 is right around the corner and another great of our our generation has fallen. Alex Rodriguez is a great talent, he always has been. On the other hand, he has never been the best at making decisions.

I myself am tired of the excuses. It is wrong, there is no excuse. If I get pulled over because I was drinking and driving, I can't say, "Sorry officer, I was trying to get home and do the dishes because my girlfriend thinks I am the best boyfriend in the world. I am sorry, I just have to live up to it!"

I very rarely write an article that is completely opinionated. I almost always have facts and statistics to back up my opinions. What I have witnessed today has just made me furious.

With the players of the late 90's and early 2000's falling like flies in the steroid scandal, I am in complete awe. One thing that I remember older baseball fans talking about, was them watching their idols play. Great games, no-hitters, and walk-off home runs.

Those years of idolizing baseball players as a young boy are over for me, they have been since 2003, when my playing days came to an end. I will never have that connection to baseball, where a player is my absolute hero.

Now, I feel that I have lost more than that. The memories I have of Sosa hitting monster home runs and Kerry Wood striking out 20, now come into question.

How can we believe that these type of feats were true and not tainted? Right now, I just don't believe that I can. Worse than that, it feels terrible because I have always been an innocent before proven guilty guy, but I just don't trust these guys at all.

Cubs Contention: Defending Kevin Gregg Against Kerry Wood

Ricky Butts — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:30:04 -0500

There has been a lot of confusion at why the Cubs traded Jose Ceda for Kevin Gregg. To add to that, the Cubs let last year's closer, Kerry Wood, walk to Cleveland even though he wanted to stay.

This situation has really angered some fans.

It makes no sense to them.

Kerry supposedly deserved the money.

Now, I am a huge Kerry Wood fan. I wish him the best of luck in Cleveland. At the same time, I see what the Cubs were doing by letting him go and acquiring Kevin Gregg.

Gregg did lead the league last year in blown saves with nine. Yet, he saved 29 games, only five shy of Kerry Wood. I would also like to note, that Kerry received a save twice when pitching one third of an inning with a four run lead. He had four total saves where the Cubs were ahead by four runs. Gregg had zero saves when his team led by more than three.

Also, one year earlier, Gregg saved 32 games and blew only four. Kerry was coming back from yet another injury, saved zero games, and recorded zero holds.

My question is this.

How do we know that Kerry will continue his success as a closer?

Is that risk worth $10 million?

I myself don't think so, even though I wish Kerry could have stayed. I wish Mark Grace, Greg Maddux, and Sammy Sosa never left either.

It is easy for one to say, "Kerry was improving and Gregg was going backwards." Looking at a stat sheet might say that, but that is not what you see if you dig deeper.

In 2008, Kevin Gregg was hampered by a knee injury in August. In that month, he blew three out of nine save chances. In those three games, he gave up more than three runs in each. That helped his August ERA balloon to 10.13, his only month above 3.00.

The second two blown saves were back-to-back and led to Gregg and his knee being rested. He did not pitch between August 30 and September 8. He proceeded to come back to pitch in nine September games, compiling seven innings, four holds, and no earned runs.

Kerry on the other hand, had three months with an ERA over 6.50. One was March, where he only pitched one inning, but in September, he gave up eight runs in 10.2 innings.

Gregg has had much more experience in the ninth inning. Minus his horrific August of 2008, he had saved 55 out of 65 games (only four blown saves in 36 chances in 2007) over the past two years. To go along with that, he also recorded 10 holds.

Now, maybe Kerry would also have saved 58 out of 65. It also may be true that Kerry was better set up to succeed in Chicago. I believe Gregg will get more save chances with two-plus run leads in Chicago than he did in Florida. Not to mention the four run lead chances.

Also, if Gregg remained healthy last year, his ERA would have very likely been under 3.00.

For some reason, people have made this out to be one of the "bad" trades of Hendry's tenure. On the other hand, I don't feel many have dug deep enough to get a great handle on the situation.

First, he can pitch in the eight or ninth inning, depending on whether he or Marmol win the closer's job.

Second, he has more experience, consistency and is $8 million dollars less per season than Wood. If you ask me, the blown saves (three more than Wood in 2008) and higher ERA (3.41 compared to Wood's 3.26) are worth the bargain, even though Wood is classic Cub legend.

You Never Know: The 2009 Major League Baseball Season

Ricky Butts — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:44:42 -0500

They say it is one of (if not) the hardest things to do in all of professional sports; hit a round ball with a round bat and hit it squarely. That is why outside of a weather man, only a position player in baseball can fail seven out of 10 times, and be one of the most successful at his job.

You see it all the time, players excel one year, and face plant the next. This isn't just an epidemic in baseball, all profession sports are this way.

I see a problem in baseball though, one season heroes being treated like kings, and getting paid like them too. This has hurt many teams, putting them in a financial stranglehold, when they give big contracts.

Most notably, players getting contracts after "career" seasons.

When looking at "career" seasons, you have to separate that from "breakout" seasons. In my opinion, a 24 year old that has been in the majors since he was 19 or 20, can't have a "career" year. Instead, I would call it a "breakout" season.

There were a number of both of these in 2008. Seasons that nobody can predict, nor can we be sure they will be replicated.

Position players had a lot of success breaking out last season. Future stars were born in both leagues. The list includes; Dustin Pedroia, Ian Kinsler, Ryan Theriot, Joey Votto, Geovany Soto, Alexei Ramirez, Carlos Quentin, Evan Longoria, Nate McLouth and even more.

Soto and Longoria were the National League and American League "Rookies of the Year" and were big parts of the Cubs and Rays playoff runs. Others, like Pedroia and Theriot were playing in their second seasons as full time players.

Some would say Pedroia broke out one season earlier, when he won the "Rookie of the Year" award, but his 2009 season was even more of a breakout.

Other players were not expected to perform the way they did; most notably Nate McLouth and Carlos Quentin. Though young and talented, nobody predicted the impact they would have on their teams.

The problem is, you don't know for sure whether it is something you can count on going from season to season. You can have a better idea about what you will get from players like Pedroia, Soto and Longoria, these were all guys that people expected to be good players. The other guys on the list are hit and miss types.

The most confusing is when a player that has been around, typically in his 30s, has a monster year nobody saw coming.

Christian Guzman, a man that would have been considered a "breakout" player in 2001, but declined ever since, was among batting average leaders in the National League all season.

Mark DeRosa, who had a fine 2007 season after moving to the Chicago Cubs from Texas, had an absurd year by his standards. He topped 80 runs (103), 15 home runs (21), and 75 RBI (87) all for the first time in his career. This is a Major League career that started when he was 23, in 1998.

The Cardinals stayed in their playoff hunt longer than anybody expected because of the emergence of two outfielders that had "career" years: Ryan Ludwick and pitcher turned hitter Rick Ankiel.

If I was a MLB GM, I would not be too sure that any of these guys would emulate this past season. I sure wouldn't be ready to give them a big pay increase. Rick Ankiel, though he broke into the majors 10 years prior, is the youngest of the group at age 29.

Hitters weren't the only ones that had "breakout" and "career" years in 2008, pitchers did too.

Tim Lincecum, in his second full season, won the National League "Cy Young" award. Jon Lester, in his third season, first full because of his battle with lymphoma, threw a no-hitter and held Boston's staff together.

Edison Volquez was right there with Tim Linceum for most of the season before fading a bit late. John Danks and Joe Saunders were big parts of the White Sox and Angels playoff runs.

There were many more young pitchers—Scott Baker, Ricky Nolasco, and Jesse Litsch to name a few—that had fantastic seasons.

Guys like Cliff Lee and Ryan Dempster were once prospects with high ceilings, but until 2008 had battled inconsistency and injuries. Lee was in the minors in 2007 and Dempster was the Cubs closer.

In 2009 they were both All-Stars, Lee won the American League Cy Young and Dempster started game one of the Divisional Series for the Cubs.

For the Cardinals, along with their "breakout" by outfielders, had Todd Wellenmeyer. He, in five prior seasons, had never thrown more than 80 innings, or had an ERA under 4.00. At age 29, he threw 191.7 innings with a 3.71 ERA.

These types of players come about every year. Never can the following season be relied upon, but it is always expected. Teams always make these players a big part of their following seasons plans, but rarely ever have back-up plans to protect themselves.

That is why, like any other year, predicting the upcoming baseball season is nearly impossible. We just do not know who will live up to it, die by it, or shop up unannounced.

Will Ryan Dempster lead the Cubs rotation again? Will Ryan Ludwick, Rick Ankiel and Todd Wellemeyer keep the Cardinals in the playoff race? Maybe Cliff Lee will find himself in 2007 form?

Dustin Pedroia could have a junior year slump. Maybe Felix Pie or Lastings Milledge will live up to their billing. If blessed, Mark Prior may find himself among the elite starters in the game once again.

There is no telling, only blind-eye predictions of whom will or will not have big seasons. Outside of the mainstays like Albert Pujols and Alex Rodriguez, there ar only a select group of guys that can be counted on year in and year out.

In 2009, there are so many teams that are borderline playoff contenders, that "unknown" heroes will play a huge factor in who is successful.

I don't know who these players will be and I will not give any bold predictions, but I will close by throwing out a few names of guys that I think are threats to fit these profiles. I am sure there will be numerous not mentioned.

Breakout possibilities: Delmon Young, Mike Fontenot, Lastings Milledge, Felix Pie, Felix Hernandez, Matt Weiters, David Price and Denard Span.

One Through Eight: Predicting the Chicago Cubs Lineup and Statistics

Ricky Butts — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:57:19 -0500

It is mid January, only a month before pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training 2009. The Chicago Cubs have won two straight National League Central Division Titles, but have only played six playoff games combined. In 2008, their offense was a big part of their success. This will be most of the same in 2009. With the trade of Mark Derosa, Mike Fontenot will more than likely be the everyday second baseman. Right-field will also be manned by a new face, Milton Bradley, who brings a lot to the table. The Cubs just need to stay away from freak injuries. We have seen Derrek Lee (making a tag) and Alfonso Soriano (hit by pitch) break their wrists over the past few seasons. Neither of these are because they are injury prone. They were just baseball injuries that you can't really avoid. If the Cubs can stay away from these types of injuries, their offense will be strong throughout 2009. Couple that with a division that no longer has Ben Sheets or CC Sabathia, and this team could score a lot of runs. Even with one of these injuries, the Cubs are strong enough to succeed. In 2008, the Cubs lost Soriano for 50 games and played over .500 (26-24) for that time. The addition of Aaron Miles helps bridge the gap that Derosa left when traded. He can hit .300+ and plays both corner outfield spots, along with middle infield, and occasionally the corner infield spots. His versatility is right along with what we expected with Derosa, Miles just won’t hit for as much power. Another big plus, is that the Cubs are now a lot more balanced than they were in 2008. They needed a left-handed hitter for the middle of the lineup, and got that in Milton Bradley. As long as he stays healthy, this team will likely be a contender for the National League Championship.

Begin Slideshow

Milton Bradley Presents Risk: The Chicago Cubs Edition

Ricky Butts — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:51:56 -0500

Risk is a game of world domination, or in this case baseball domination. Your objective is to conquer the world (series). To win, you must attack and defend, 81 times a piece.

The game includes six continents (divisions) made up of 30 teams.

OK, you get it, Milton Bradley and "Risk" the board game they make. It just works, so deal with it.

The fact is, it seems this is exactly what the Cubs are getting themselves into. A brand new edition of the game is rumored to be unleashed in the spring of 2009; Risk: The Chicago Cubs Edition.

With the trade of Mark Derosa finalized and Jason Marquis standing at the door, it is rumored that the Cubs will be signing right fielder Milton Bradley.

Of late, I have shown support for the Cubs signing Bradley. Not for one second though, have I forgot his injury plagued career.

Not now, will I try to justify 10 million a year, for three years. But, I also wouldn't try to justify giving CC Sabathia roughly $700,000 per start if the Cubs would have signed him. Baseball contracts, in all of baseball, are simply out of hand.

When I look at who else is available, via free agency, Milton Bradley is my pick for a few different reasons.

Some of you will remember, I wrote about wanting Bobby Abreu, but the past is the past. After learning more about Bradley, I feel he is the better candidate, and more suitable right fielder.

One difference is age. Abreu will be 35 prior to next season and Bradley will turn 31 shortly into the season. Abreu would commend at least a two year deal, if not three.

It is no baseball secret, outside of the steroid era, that after you hit 35, you are normaly on a monumental downfall in sports. This alone makes Abreu a liability.

On the other hand Bradley, whom has been injured as much as a 96 year old man with bad hips, is in the middle of his prime. I do say prime loosely, because it could very possibly be for less than 100 games.

So, I ask myself another question. What is the value of Bradley over Abreu in a short series? This is the reason we need a left-handed hitter, right?

So say Bradley only plays in 100 games in right-field during the regular season. He hits .315, with 15 home runs, and 50-60 RBI with a .400+ OBP. The Cubs win the Central Divison and he plays in the post season.

What is his value to the Cubs now? This is exactly where we need him.

If you get into the salary case, didn't Rich Harden get seven million dollars? Harden has made exactly 41 starts over the past three years, with 25 of them in 2008. At 13 starts per year, his seven mill, will net over $500k per start.

Obviously I hope Harden makes 30 starts, which will bring his price per start to $225,000 per start, but it is as unlikely as Bradley starting 130 games.

Yet, we are just glad to have Rich in our rotation for a full season.

Now, I know some may not agree with me, but I think pitchers contracts are even more ridiculous than hitters. I can't see how a pitcher that starts 30 games is more important than a key hitter that starts 130.

Now, I think about the upside of both Milton Bradley and Kosuke Fukudome. Despite the colossal fall off in 2008, Fukodome has a high ceiling. Whatever the problem was in the second half, I believe he is probably working to fix it, as I type.

I know this is no guarantee. I know that Kosuke could very possibly be a .250 hitter. After watching him early in the season, prior to the All-Star ballots opening, he could also be a .300 hitter with an OBP of .400 plus.

So, say Fukudome returns to the United States, and hits even .280 with a .380 OBP. Milton Bradley plays 100 games in the outfield, the rest are then played by Kosuke, with Reed Johnson playing in center field.

While I understand that this is wishful thinking, the return of early 2008 Fukudome is still a possibility.

Just as it is possible, likely or not, that Milton Bradley starts 130 games in right field. If he does this, the Cubs will come very close to winning 110 games, if all other players stay healthy too.

The reason I like this scenario better, is because Bradley is still young at 31 and could still progress average wise. His OBP is likely to be around .410 and he is a serious threat to hit .325.

Abreu on the other hand, could begin a serious downfall, as soon as 2009. Bradley is a better hitter, has more power, and has a higher OBP over the past two years.

Now, the fact that Milton Bradley is about to join his fifth team in five years, could be scarey. There have been a number of reports that have said that outside of his relationship with Jeff Kent, Bradley is well liked by his teammates. Now, Jeff Kent would be a clubhouse cancer, IMO.

Bradley does have a temper. Yet, in 2008, he made huge strides. He was much more tame and some say he matured a lot. It is believed, that being teamed up with Josh Hamilton, whom Milton played big brother to, brought on an unseen maturing process.

Injuries have been the reason, not clubhouse presence, that Bradley has changed uniform so often. Not because he is not liked by his teammates. The media doesn't like him and that is no secret.

In fact, I believe the Cubs need a vocal leader. Someone that shows emotion on a daily basis. Look at the 2008 Cubs and show me who shows a bit of tenacity in their line-up, because I don't see it.

Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez both just go out and do their job. They don't look like they are having any fun. In my opinion, they look way too uptight.

Whenever there is a close call, I pray that Lou will come out and argue. This team reacts to sudden outbursts. If you disagree, take 2007 for example.

The team was underachieving when then catcher Michael Barret and Carlos Zambrano got into a fist fight. Barret was then traded, for someone I don't recall, he didn't stick around long. They soon shipped him to the Athletics for Jason Kendall.

Somewhere in this time frame, "Sweet" Lou was ejected from a game. Shortly after, Aramis Ramirez hit a walk-off home run, and the Cubs have had the most wins in the National League since.

So yes, it is unlikely that Bradley will be in right field for 130 plus games. He may not even make it out for 80. The fact is that the Cubs need a left-handed bat for the playoffs.

If he does average 130 games over his three years in Chicago, the 10 million he gets, will likely be looked back upon as a discount. If he helps bring a World Series to Chicago, I am sure nobody will care what his contract was.

I don't even like saying those words (playoffs, World Series), but after two straight division titles, and the rest of the central being weak as of right now, you have to think about it. This team can win 90+ games as is, but if they face another Arizona or Los Angeles type rotation in the first round, they could be swept again.

Milton Bradley does present "Risk" for the Chicago Cubs, but it could end up paying off big in the end.

A Chicago Story: The 2008 Cubs and Bears Both Let Fans Down in the End

Ricky Butts — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 07:40:43 -0500

We saw it in October, then again at the end of December. You know what I am talking about. Games our two favorite teams should win. We feel in our heart, this could be the time. Then, they made us look like idiots once again.

The Cubs, 97 wins and best record in the National League. The Bears, eight wins with a chance to go to the playoffs. The records don't tell the entire story though.

Alfonso Soriano missed 50 games for the Cubs. In those games, the Cubs went 26-24, two games over .500. In the 112 games that he played in, the Cubs were 71 and 41. Having him in the lineup was a difference of .114 in win percentage.

Going into October, the Cubs' offense looked poised for a strong showing and a deep playoff run.

The Chicago Bears had a very strange year, right up to their matchup with the Houston Texans. Their offense won them games, and their defense lost them games early in the season.

Kyle Orton then got hurt, which sent the offense into turmoil over the next couple weeks. He never looked healthy again in 2008.

Luckily for the Bears, the defense held strong against Jacksonville, New Orleans, and Green Bay to keep them in playoff contention.

To go along with that, every team they needed to have lose in Week 16, lost. The Cowboys were upended by the Ravens, the Buccaneers lost to the Chargers, and the Eagles lost to the Redskins. This kept the Bears' slim chances at a Wild Card berth alive.

Meanwhile, the Vikings had lost to the Atlanta Falcons, keeping the Bears' division championship alive. For once, it looked like the stars were aligning for Chicago.

Then Week 17 came along. The Bears were playing against a good, young Texans team. A game that would be tough, but the Bears should undoubtedly win, considering all that is at stake.

The Vikings were playing the Giants, Cowboys played the Eagles, and Buccaneers played the Raiders. Going in, the Bears shot looked very slim, unless the Vikings lost to the Giants second stringers.

As the game progressed, we saw that the Vikings were in a close one with the Giants. To go along with that, the Raiders were hanging in against the Buccaneers. A Buccaneers loss would open up more possibilities for the Bears.

The Bears couldn't take care of business. Meaning no combination wins and losses would allow them a new season. Instead, they would have to go home and watch the Eagles.

I say watch the Eagles, because they were the only team that had less of a chance of making the playoffs. Yet, they went in, against the Cowboys, and took care of business. Well, actually they looked to take out the NFL's trash, 44-6.

So, here we are. Chicago fans still, but left with a sting. How could this happen yet again.

The Cubs, two years running, get swept in the playoffs.

The Bears, two years running, miss the playoffs after their 2006 Super Bowl run.

I have a question to ask. Chicago fans, why do we do it? Year after year, we go with the ups and downs.

No wonder I have high blood pressure.

Seriously though, what compels us to put ourselves through such torment?

If you are a Cubs fan, there is not another fan in baseball that can't rag on the Cubs. 101 years and no World Series win. Hell, they haven't even played in the World Series since 1945; neither of my parents were even thought of yet.

Still, we sit here and we ponder offseason moves and argue about how this man or this one fits the team better.

Well, when we are talking about the Cubs, maybe we should just be happy. I mean, until 2007 and 2008, though getting swept, the franchise had not made the playoffs in back-to-back years.

Or when it comes to the Bears, maybe we should be happy that we looked better than just one year before. I myself am happy that it looks to be the end of Rex Grossman in Chicago.

I know as a Bears fan you have heard plenty of things about the quarterback. The one I love is when another team's quarterback (New York Jets - Brett Favre's last five games) is playing terrible and someone compares them to Rex Grossman.

Yet we do not break. Hell, as Chicago fans, we rarely ever bend.

Something new that I have noticed is that we are a lot less forgiving now than we have been in the past.

I myself called for Lovie's head after the Bears failed to make the playoffs two years in a row.

Many other people have been very skeptical about the job the Chicago Cubs Jim Hendry has done this offseason.

If you don't like it, go be a Yankees bandwagoner. That's what I say.

See, the Cubs have done more this offseason than any team outside of New York. Ryan Dempster is the only player to sign for a contract over $40mil that didn't sign with either the Yankees or Mets.

Yes, the Cubs have seen the departure of Kerry Wood and Mark DeRosa, but both are replaced with young players that could be even better than they were.

To clarify, the young players I was talking about were Carlos Marmol and Mike Fontenot. The production doesn't look to go down and could even go up in 2009. The Cubs got three prospects out of a guy that will likely regress and fill his spot with what could be a younger upgrade.

Mike Fontenot had 22 doubles, one triple, and nine home runs in 243 at-bats in 2008. Mark DeRosa had 30 doubles, three triples, and 21 home runs, but he had 505 at-bats. If you give Fontenot Derosa's 505 at-bats, his projected stats look something like this: 46 doubles, two triples, and 19 home runs.

This is production the Cubs need from the left side of the plate. Coupled with Milton Bradley, who many think will sign with the Cubs, their left-handed production could easily be doubled.

One thing many people don't realize is that this is a slow offseason for all MLB teams, once again, outside of New York.

When it comes to the Bears, we have a while to see what Jerry Angelo works up. I hope it is at least a new defensive coordinator. I also hope there is a new, never played in Chicago, quarterback signing.

I would also like to add a secondary and a No. 1 receiver to the wish list. Brian Urlacher should be moved to the outside at least, for he is no longer strong enough to be in the middle.

So, as the Cubs and Bears both disappointed me in 2008, I can't hate. The regular seasons were both filled with great times and some sad. For the most part, the ups were greater than the downs, until the very end.

Why am I a Cubs and Bears fan? I don't know better. Like most of you, I became a Chicago fan before I know what 1908 meant. I didn't know who was a good quarterback and Lovie hadn't helped develop the vaunted defenses in Tampa Bay.

Instead, I grew up learning that it will not always be easy being a Chi-Town fan. Hell, it is never easy being a Chi-Town fan.

Chicago fans know how to appreciate their teams. We live and die with these teams. When we get our next Super Bowl or World Series titles, the feeling will be insurmountable. On that day, nobody on this world can touch us.

Every baseball fan will be scared to go outside. They know, that every single Chicago Cubs fan will remind them who the champions are and who said "it will never happen."

Most importantly, I have too much character, which is what it takes to be a Cubs fan.

This is not the case when it comes to being, let's say, a Yankee fan.

We all know, it doesn't take character to be a Yankee fan.

Are You Ready To Play Poker? Evaluation, Discipline, and Money Management

Ricky Butts — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:45:06 -0500

So many people are playing poker these days. The craze started in 2003, and since then, I myself have played with many different types of people. Players from all over the world. I have played with the rich and not so much.

Poker filled the void that was left when I was done playing baseball. It is strange to say, but poker saved my life.

The best thing about it though, is that I have made money at the table, as well as on the computer.

Now, to clarify, I am not a professional. I tried that, it may have been the hardest three months of my life. It sounds fun, but the pressure to win will play head games with you. You must be very discipline, which may sound easy, but as you see profits, you spend profits.

My goal is to write a series of articles, that may help some of you go from the table "FISH" to the table "SHARK", or at least get you somewhere in the middle.

In writing this, I am assuming my readers know the poker basics. I will not go into hand rankings or anything of that sort.

Step One - Evaluating Your Play

If you want to win at poker, evaluating yourself honestly and often, is very important to progress in the poker world. When you make a bad call, you can't find reason why it was a good call, because it won't help you learn from your mistakes.

When doing this, remember that no matter how good you are, you will make mistakes. Even the best do, and these get broadcast over numerous television networks all over the world.

So ask yourself right now, "Can I honestly evaluate my play?"

If you say yes, and you truly mean it, then good. If you can't, then I recommend playing super low limits and please, do not ever "bet your house on it."

Step Two - Discipline is Key

Are you often called one of the following at the poker table: Donkey, Maniac, Fish, Loose-Cannon, Idiot, Stupid, or Stupid-Idiot, etc, etc?

If you answered yes to any of the above, then you most likely lack discipline.

At this point you have to ask yourself another question, "Can I contain myself?"

See, as a poker player you need to be patient. I don't just mean waiting for a top 10 hand, but for spots to make a move in. You can't call every flush or straight draw, you need to pick the right ones and if you do, you will be profitable.

Now, if you find yourself saying, "Well, I was suited!" or "I only needed a nine for a straight!" then you are behind. You don't want to hear it, but just because you are suited doesn't mean you HAVE to see a flop.

You have a gut-shot straight draw. Let's say you hold an eight and nine, the board has a six and 10, so a seven makes a straight. Once again, you DO NOT HAVE to see a turn.

Folding these hands will make you money, because you will not lose money.

Remember that, if you don't lose money in pots you used to, you are essentially making money now!

Step Three - Bankroll Management

I will be writing a full article on bankroll management; it is so very important to understand this.

Right now, I just want you to ask yourself:

How much money can I lose comfortably?
How much money am I willing to lose?
If I lose my bankroll, can I fill my bankroll again?
Am I disciplined enough to stick to a strict bankroll management system?

I want you to answer all of these. There are really no wrong answers, but if you want to be a winning player, number four is important.

If you want to start playing poker, put up "X" amount of dollars, and not have to reload (you answered "No" to No. 3) then sticking a strict bankroll management system is very important.

I hope the first three steps have given you a good understanding of what it takes to make it in the poker world. I also hope that it has given you a good understanding of whether or not you have what it takes. If you don't think so, don't be worried, everything here can be learned, too.

So, until the next article, figure out exactly what you want to accomplish. Some people just want to play for fun. That is fine, but why not make at least a little money while doing it?

Other people want to make poker a second, or even first income. This is great, but practicing everything in this article is very important.

Good luck, but better skill!

Lost Love: Chicago Bears Should Fire Lovie Smith

Ricky Butts — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 04:08:13 -0500

It is a distant memory...the Chicago Bears playing against the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl XLI. The Bears haven't made the playoffs since that 13-3 season. Their neighbors, the Colts, still haven't missed the playoffs.

Everything that went right that season, has gone wrong for Chicago since. The offense finished second in scoring that season, despite a second half meltdown of Rex Grossman. The defense finished as the fifth overall defense.

One short year later, Grossman was splitting starts with Brian Griese, both were benched for the last three games of the season. The offense was sputtering, but Kyle Orton led the Bears to two victories in his three starts.

Coming into this season, the Bears looked to have an even worse offense than in 2007-2008. They were forced to let Cedric Benson go and Bernard Berrian opted for a big raise from the Minnesota Vikings.

They also saw Mushin Muhammed return to Carolina with parting words of advice to wide receivers around the league. Moose labeled Chicago as "The place receivers go to die."

At that time, it was believed that the offense would struggle, and the now healthy defense would be back to its vaunted self after an injury plagued '07-'08 season.

Despite what looked like an offensive game in week one, a 29-13 win over the Colts, the Bears looked to be a defensive team once again. The Bears only scored two offensive touchdowns and one was a 50 yard run by rookie Matt Forte. The other came on a one yard Jason McKie run.

The other 15 points were scored via two field goals, a saftey, and a Lance Briggs fumble recovery.

In week two, the Bears held a 17-3 lead over the Carolina Panthers mid way through the third quarter. A lead that looked insurmountable against the Bears defense, while Carolina was without star receiver Steve Smith.

Twenty minutes later the Panthers were walking away with a 20-17 win.

In week three, against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the Bears held a 24-14 lead with less than seven minutes to go. Ex-Bear Brian Griese then led Tampa Bay to an unlikely ten unanswered points to close out regulation.

The Bears would then lose the game on a Matt Bryant field goal in overtime.

So after three weeks, the Bears were as close to a 3-0 season as a 1-2 team can get. Losing two games they should have won, not because of the offense, but this time the defense.

While late offense would have been nice. The Bears defense collapsed in each second half. At this point in the season, they had only given up 23 first half points, to 34 second half points. Out of those 34, 27 were scored in their two loses.

Weeks four and five had the Bears beating the Philadelphia Eagles and Detroit Lions to move to 3-2 on the season.

The following week had a rejuvenated Atlanta Falcons team on the schedule.

This time, it was the Bears that would need a late score to snatch a game from the opponents grasp, which their offense did. With only 11 seconds left, Kyle Orton hit Rashied Davis to put the Bears ahead 20-19.

After a pooch kick that gave the ball to the Falcons at the 44 yard line. After Matt Ryan completed a 26 yard pass to Michael Jenkins, Atlanta had moved the ball far enough for Jason Elam. After a 48 yard field goal, the Bears were stunned for the third time in six games.

The Bears would then follow up with two wins against the Minnesota Vikings (Week 7) and Detroit Lions (Week 9) to move to 5-3. I think most Bears fans feel that Chicago should have been at least 7-1 at this point, if not 8-0.

The next two weeks consisted of legitimate loses to the Tennessee Titans and Green Bay Packers.

They then won four (St. Louis Rams, Jacksonville Jaguars, New Orleans Saints and Green Bay Packers) and lost one (Minnesota Vikings) to put themselves in a situation to make the playoffs.

At 9-6 the Bears were tied for the division lead with the Vikings, but would lose a tie-breaker due to their conference record. They also found themselves tied with the Cowboys and Buccaneers for the final wild card spot, which was left after the Atlanta Falcons won theirs the week prior.

So, with a win over the Houston Texans and Minnesota loss against the New York Giants, the Bears would become division champions. The wild card, which to me seemed impossible, would be much more difficult to obtain. They needed the Buccaneers to lose to the Oakland Raiders and the Cowboys to lose to the Eagles.

The Bears started fast, gaining a 10-0 lead through one quarter, but then fell apart completely. They ultimately lost 31-21 sealing their fate.

While the Vikings would end up beating the Giants on a last second field goal, the improbable happened in Tampa Bay as the Raiders beat the Bucs 31-24. The Cowboys would later lose big to the Eagles 44-6.

So, while Chicago went into this game with a 9-6 record, they very well should have been 11-4 and possibly 12-3. Playoff implications would not have existed. If they were 12-3, they would have had the NFC's No. 1 seed, since the Giants lost and they would have won the tie breaker with Carolina. At 11-4, a win would have also sealed them the No. 1 seed.

So, the Bears were literally one quarter (combined) away from being the NFC's top team, but instead, they aren't even in the playoffs.

How can this even happen?

I have one answer: Lovie Smith.

When the Bears lost the three stunners in the first six weeks, the Bears played with a scared to lose mentality. Instead of being more aggressive with second half leads, they played very passive.

The defense had more soft spots than a rotten banana, and the offense would run, run, run for three and outs. Despite being early in the year, and Hester not as reliable as late in the year, they had legitimate seven-to-ten yard receivers in Olsen, Clark, Lloyd, Forte and Hester they could have went to for clock killing first downs.

I still do not understand how you can be so scared of a return man with 11 seconds left, that you pooch kick it knowing you are giving it to them one play away from Jason Elams range.

Did Lovie not learn his lesson when he once again pooch kicked with less than a minute to go against Green Bay in week 16?

How many times did we see the cornerbacks getting beat deep because of bad positioning?

Were you wondering why Adrian Peterson got most of the second half action over Matt Forte, who was second in the NFL in total yards from scrimmage, in the must win Texans game?

Looking at this season, the only positive thing I saw Smith do, was replace Hester on kick returns with Daniel Manning.

I don't give him credit for the Grossman to Orton move, because everyone and their unborn babies knew that needed to be done.

Looking ahead to next year, I feel we need a new coach. Hopefully he brings a revamped secondary with him.

Ryan Theriot Getting No Love in Chicago

Ricky Butts — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 05:21:48 -0500

Why "The Riot" Is Best Cubs Can Get

I have been reading a lot about the Cubs this off-season. To my surprise, there are a lot of people who want a different shortstop in Chicago. I myself am a fan of "The Riot" for many reasons.

The first reason is his hustle. He will get dirty and in many ways reminds me of another shortstop I like, David Eckstein. What Theriot lacks, he makes up for in other areas.

Now, when it comes to defense, Ryan isn't Omar Vizquel or Ozzie Smith, but he isn't terrible either. While he won't make the great play, he won't normally make the bad one either.

When it comes to making errors, Theriot is right around average, with 14 in 2008. There are 12 shortstops in the league that made more than 14. Only eight shortstops with less than 14 miscues played in at least 100 games.

Then, there are double plays. Theriot isn't going to turn them at the rate of say, Michael Young in Texas, but he does normally get the lead runner. It would be nice to turn more, especially to make up for Derrek Lee's propensity to hit into them, but this is a problem the Cubs have at third and second also.

So all in all, Theriot isn't a great defender, but he is not a bad one at all. As he matures his fielding percentage may get better, though his range will probably never be great.

When it comes to offense, to many people's disbelief, "The Riot" makes up for what he lacks as a defender. I have heard it all off-season. Theriot isn't "that" good of a hitter. Well, quite frankly, when it comes to shortstops, he is.

He ranks among the top five in five different offensive categories among MLB shortstops. He comes in third in batting average for shortstops with more than 400 at-bats, checking in with a .307 mark behind the Royals' Mike Avilies (.325) and the Nationals' Christian Guzman (.316).

When it comes to on-base percentage, only the Marlins' Hanley Ramirez ranks higher with a .400 to Theriot's .387. This is a very important statistic on a Cubs team that has, since the beginning of 2008, found itself as an OBP type of team. Ramirez is also the only player that ranks ahead of Theriot's 73 walks, earning 92 free passes in 2008.

Theriot is a bit far back in the pack when it comes to steals, with his 22 swipes ranking fifth behind the Mets' Jose Reyes (56), Philadelphia's Jimmy Rollins (47), Ramirez (35) and St. Louis' Cesar Izturis (24). The biggest negative here is that Theriot is only successful about two-thirds of the time, tallying those 22 steals in 35 attempts. This is one thing that I think he will improve on (percentage-wise) as he matures at the big league level.

A big positive is that Theriot does not strike out very much. Exactly one in every 10 at-bats (58 K's in 580 AB). Only five players struck out less; Guzman (57 in 579 AB), Rollins (55 in 556), Yuniesky Betancourt (42 in 559), Izturis (26 in 414) and Jeff Keppinger (24 in 459).

Out of all these players, only one has a better batting average (Christian Guzman) and the next closest (Betancourt at .279) comes in .028 behind him. The disparity shows even more when you compare on-base percentages, where Theriot is the run-away leader: Theriot is .038 ahead of Rollins, who comes in with a .349 OBP.

The biggest problem with Theriot's offense is the lack of extra-base hits. While he has speed, he just hasn't developed gap power, but could with expierence. In 2008, he only had 24 extra-base hits. He had 19 doubles, four triples and one home run. In this aspect he ranks behind most all other shortstops.

So while Ryan "The Riot" Theriot is an average defender and below average when it comes to slugging percentage, he is a very valuable shortstop, especially for the Cubs.

Looking at the shortstops that ranked ahead of him in "important" categories, not one is available or more valuable than Theriot. Mike Avilies will most likely be a mainstay in Kansas City for a long time. Christian Guzman and Cesar Izturiz are less valuable. There is no way the Cubs could bring in Hanley Ramirez, Jose Reyes or Jimmy Rollins.

Theriot could also show much improvement in 2009. Back in 2007 he hit for more power, with 30 doubles and three home runs. He made a conscious effort in 2008 to raise his batting average and on base percentage, meeting with great success. In 2007 he hit .266 with a .326 on base percentage. He raised his batting average to .307 and OBP to .387 in one season.

Looking at players that are better statistically, along with being available, I can not find any that would be a better fit for these Cubs.

The Great Chicago Hope: Forte And The Bears Still Have Life

Ricky Butts — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 07:02:41 -0500

It is not unusual to be disappointed in Chicago at the end of an NFL season. For that matter, you are most likely disappointed if it is an MLB (Cubs or White Sox) or NBA (Bulls post Jordan) season, too.

For each disappointing finish, people blame many things, some are legit, some are not. The Cubs are cursed. The Bulls are too young and inexperienced. The Bears' offense is terrible. For the most part these are true, though I myself never blame a curse for the Cubs' downfalls.

Instead, when I look at these teams, one word comes to mind.

CHOKE!

I know you are nodding your head in agreement. Whether it was the Cubs in 2003 against the Florida Marlins. The Bulls underachieving in the 2007-2008 season. Or there is the Super Bowl between the Bears and Colts.

You remember, Hester ran back the opening kick and the Bears held a 14-6 lead after a single quarter. They then were outscored 21-3 in the final three quarters.

This is what happens in Chicago. I have witnessed many things in sports and in my lifetime, only the Bulls teams in the mid '90s are worth mentioning.

I feel the tides may be turning though.

See, the Bears playoff hopes were almost nil going into this weeks games. They needed the Cowboys, Eagles, Buccaneers, and Vikings to all lose. With their opponents being the Ravens, Redskins, Chargers, and Falcons, this didn't seem likely at all.

The Cowboys, Eagles, and Vikings had all been looking dynamic of late.

While the match-up for the Cowboys seemed to be a good one, many felt that the Cowboys were near locks to win the game. Willis McGahee and Le'Ron McClain thought different.

The Eagles had looked dominant during their three game win streak since McNabb was benched, sort of. The Redskins had lost five of six since starting 6-2. The Eagles were suppose to win this game, yet didn't because of a McNabb fumble.

Then the Buccaneers were favored at home, because the Chargers were 2-5 on the road, while the Bucs were 6-0 at home. Not only 6-0, but they beat Atlanta, Green Bay, Carolina, and New Orleans in those six games. They now find themselves 6-1 at home.

Last but not least, the Vikings were also at home where they were 5-1. Their only loss came at the hands of the Indianapolis Colts. The Falcons were a little more formidable than the the Chargers, because they came in 3-4 on the road. With a playoff berth at stake, the Falcons moved their road record to .500.

So, going into the weekend, a win by the Vikings seemed to be able to seal Chicago's fate, let alone one of the three wild card teams getting a win. Yet, somehow the odds in Chicago got better.

Now, "ALL" Chicago needs help with is a Tampa Bay loss to the Oakland Raiders and a Cowboys loss to the Eagles. If this happens, then the Bears hold their playoff lives in their own hands.

This all starts tonight when they face off with the Green Bay Packers. If the Bears win, they move into a tie at the top of the division and the wild card. The thing making it most difficult is the Bears win none of the tie breakers.

So, it is sad, but if the Bears win out, beating the Packers and the Houston Texans, they could finish tied with the Vikings for first in the division, yet lose. They could also be tied with three teams at the top of the wild card, the Falcons, Cowboys, and Buccaneers. Somehow, the Bears would lose all three of those tie-breakers too.

But, after a crazy weekend which reminded me of an Umbrella Corp conspiracy , I myself am not giving up. Even though the Bears are like the walking dead, zombies if you will, it would be nice to be on the side that isn't disappointed after a collapse for once.

We deserve it. Maybe this time the football Gods will smile upon our helpless souls.

Plan B: Will Joey Gathright See The Field As a Chicago Cub?

Ricky Butts — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 11:18:19 -0500

The acquisition of Joey Gathright makes very little sense to me. The Cubs are obviously trying to sign a big left-handed bat this off-season, so where does Gathright fit in?

I know a lot of people think that because the Cubs signed him, that he will be on the team next year. I myself, am not to sure about that.

So I thought about this a little more. Rumors have been swirling that the Orioles are interested in Pie. They would trade some young pitching for him. The only problem, is that the young pitching in question, was more coveted by the Padres than the Cubs.

The club has also been offered young pitching for Mark Derosa. Numerous teams have inquired about him, but the Cubs won't even think about this unless it helps their team this year.

So, this takes me back to my belief that the Cubs are not closed to the idea of acquiring Jake Peavy. As the off season continues, the Padres asking price may come down. The Cubs may then need to move Pie and Derosa to make the deal happen.

Now, just like most of you, I will not hold my breath when it comes to the Peavy trade being made. On the other hand, many baseball "insiders" think that the Padres will be forced to trade Peavy prior to the 2009 season.

On another note, it is no guarantee that the Cubs can sign that left-handed bat they covet and need so badly. These same teams, that have been interested in Pie and Derosa, could come knocking with packages that could land them their bat via trade.

This immediately puts the Cubs in a hole for a fifth outfielder and basically a fourth considering that Fukudome and Johnson will seemingly platoon in CF. This is where Gathright comes into the picture. He is a cheap "Plan B" and might be a useful commodity if the Cubs should trade Pie and/or Derosa.

At best, he will be the Cubs fifth outfielder. If Soriano, Johnson, Fukudome, Pie, and a new acquistion are all in play, I believe Gathright and his 800k salary will merely be dumped.

They won't dump Pie, because him and Gathright are nearly the same offensive player. Pie is much better and the field and has a lot more upside though. I just don't see the Cubs dumping a younger less polished player for a handful of stolen bases. Gathright just won't see the field enough to make that a big factor over Pie.

Z-Files: Mysterious Case of The Decline of Carlos Zambrano

Ricky Butts — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 06:56:07 -0500

CHICAGO CUBS
FAN REPORT
NARRATIVE

Z-FILE	OFFENSE: Decline in performance	DATE: 2005-2008	FILE NUMBER: #38
LOCATION: Wrigley Field	CITY: Chicago	STATE: Illinois	ZIP: 60613-4397
VICTIM: Carlos Zambrano	SUSPECT: Dusty Baker	HEIGHT/WEIGHT: 6-5/255	DATE OF BIRTH: 06/01/1981(27)
REPORTING FAN: Ricky Butts	DIVISION: Bleacher Report	DATE FILED: 12/14/2008	FILE STATUS: OPEN

SYNOPSIS: Since the end of the 2004 season, the Chicago Cubs have noticed a decline in the performance of their "Ace" Carlos Zambrano. In 2007 they signed him to a five year, $91.5 million contract.

BACKGROUND: Hailing from Puerto Cabello, Venezuela, Zabrano was signed by the Cubs in 1997 as a raw 16-year-old. He would move through the Cubs system in four years, making his debut on August 20, 2001.

2001 Review: Big-Z made one start and five relief appearances. Six appearances that made it look like he did not belong on a major league roster. He pitched only 7.2 innings and gave up 13 earned runs, equalling a 15.26 ERA.

2002 Review: Z made big strides in his second opportunity. In 2002 he pitched 108.1 (16 starts and 16 relief appearances) innings. He showed a big improvement in control and it showed in his 3.66 ERA.

2003 Review: Carlos' first full season found him in the rotation full-time. He quickly became the third starter behind superstars Mark Prior and Kerry Wood. he helped the Cubs make it to the NLCS where they... everyone knows that story. Zambrano compiled a 13-11 record while throwing 214 innings with a 3.11 ERA.

2004 Review: Injuries to the top two in the Cubs rotation, Mark Prior and Kerry Wood, quickly moved Zambrano to the rank of "Ace." He didn't disappoint as he put together a season that would anchor him as a number one pitcher. He had a 16-8 record, with a 2.75 ERA.

2005 - 2008 Review: Over the next four seasons, Zambrano's stats have steadily fell off. Is ERA saw a slight increase to 3.26 in 2005. It then jumped to 3.41 in '06, 3.95 in '07, and fell slightly to 3.91 in 2008.

The most alarming stat comes with innings. In 2005 Zambrano was over-worked, throwing 223.1 innings and many times throwing over 120 pitches in a single start. His innings then went to 214 in '06, 216.1 in '07, and then a huge drop off to 188.2 in 2008.

EVIDENCE: Many believe that Dusty Baker was the downfall of the Chicago Cubs rotation from 2003-2006. In his four seasons with Chicago he was widely scrutinized for over working his starting pitchers.

After his initial year, Baker's rotation was rarely ever healthy. Injuries to Mark Prior and Kerry Wood only put more on Big-Z's workload. Looking at innings won't show the true story behind Baker's misuse of the pitching staff. Instead, pitch counts must be studied.

In 33 games in 2005 Carlos averaged 108 pitches per start (33 starts), it went up to 110 per start (33 starts) in '06 under Baker. Piniela's first year, 2007, wasn't much different as Big-Z averaged 109 pitches in 34 starts. But, 2008 was a different story. Zambrano's average dropped to 100 pitches per start and he made only 30 starts.

INVESTIGATION: Over the past four years, the decline of Carlos Zambrano has went widely unnoticed. He is still considered one of the elite pitchers in the National League, but would not be considered by some to be a number one pitcher.

I personally view him as the Cubs number three pitcher going into 2009. Behind Ryan Dempster and Rich Harden. Though a much more rested Zambrano could find himself right back at the top of the rotation in early 2009. His talent can not be argued, but the strain put on him between 2005-2007 could hinder the rest of his career.

I believe after two years pushing the 4.00 ERA mark, Zambrano will be determined to push his way back to the top of the National League pitching ranks. He undoubtedly wants to prove he is worth the $91.5 million the Cubs signed him for in 2007.

It must be noted that in 2008, after skipping two starts, Zambrano came back looking sharp. On Sept. 14, he allowed only two base runners in route to his first career no-hitter.

CLOSING: Carlos Zambrano is a young man with a lot of experience and talent. He could very easily turn his career around and find himself right back at the top of the National League's best pitchers.

Dusty Baker is guilty of over working Zambrano during his tenure as manager, but it is now up to Big-Z to perform like he can.

Z-FILE REMAINS OPEN

Dumb and Dumber: NFL Players and Their Dumb(er) Antics

Ricky Butts — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 07:19:35 -0500

DISCLAIMER! VIDEOS HAVE VULGAR LANGUAGE!

We have all heard the phrase, "Watching too much TV will make you dumb." For the few that may not have heard it, read this "How TV makes you dumb."

Now, I have never been one to believe in this. Anybody with half a brain can tell the difference between TV and reality. This was especially true before shows like The Real World and Survivor made reality TV the giant it is today. Still, the people on these shows are no "dumber" than they were before being cast.

On the contrary, at least for myself, TV makes me feel really smart. I have noticed this a lot over the past year or so, just by watching ESPN.

I see guys like Michael Vick, Matt Jones, Pacman Jones, and Plaxico Burress and wonder how they can make the mistakes they make. For some, they make the same mistakes twice or thrice.

I am starting to believe that for some, maybe TV does make them dumb.

For example, I think Mr. Burress watched the movie 8 Mile one too many times. Their is a rather unusually dumb character named "Cheddar Bob" who shoots himself in the leg. Here is the video.

Now, when I look at the Giants, I see this scene recreated with Eli Manning playing Eminem's part and Antonio Pierce playing Mekhi Phifer's.

Manning says, "Plaxico! What the freak are you doing!? Where did you get the shit?"

Burress responds, "It's my moms."

Manning says, "Put that shit away dawg! Before you freakin' kill somebody"

Burress, "Tank Johnson had more than one!"

Manning, "Put it away!"

Pierce, "Man, put that thing away."

Burress, "Ok, alright." *Shot goes off*

At the end of the movie, Eminem mentions the incident during one of his rap battles. Now my guess is that in early 2009, a rapper will mention Plaxico Burress in a song, and most likely call him out for not being a real "G."

Michael Vick, he has been called out many times, but when I started thinking about this article, I couldn't help but mention him. See, when I was little, there was this movie called Man's Best Friend. The dog in the movie was genetically altered into a super dog named Max.

Max could do just about whatever any other animal could do. Change colors like a chameleon, climb like a cat, and eat animals whole like a snake. He could even piss acid, but I don't know what animal does that.

How does this have anything to do with Vick? Check out this clip and I think you will understand. "Max eats cat"

Now, either Vick grew up very scared of dogs because of this movie, or all he wanted was to see a dog eat something whole. Instead of trying it on cats, he used other dogs. I have come to believe that he wasn't really holding dog fights, he was betting that a dog could really swallow another one without chewing.

Needless to say, he lost.

I find this one really disturbing.

I understand wishing you were like a celebrity. I would trade places with Justin Timberlake or Ashton Kutcher any day. Matt Jones would happily trade with Johnny Depp's character, Ted Demme instead. Not even Johnny Depp himself.

Ted Demme is the true character that Depp portrayed in the movie "Blow." Jones started with the hair and went as far as getting busted with cocaine.

Here is the thing. If you want to be a Johnny Depp character, why not find one that won't land you in trouble? Jones would have been much smarter following in the steps of the more love-able Gilbert Grape.

Now, this one should have definitely been learned from. To bad Larry Johnson didn't pay enough attention.

I don't know of anyone over the age of 20, that hasn't heard the stories of Ike and Tina Turner. Not as many have seen the movie What's Love Got To Do with It though. I figure Larry Johnson has it on DVD.

Not has he only been accused of domestic abuse once or twice, but how bout an astonishing four times. Two of them here in 2008, once in 2005, and another back in 2003. I think he likes to get rid of his girlfriends the way Laurence Fishbourne tried in this video.

See, Larry doesn't remember that Ike turned out to be the butt of many a joke. Tina on the other hand, ended up being a hero to battered woman all over the world.

There are many more players that have lost track and acted out their favorite movies in real life situations.

"Pacman" Jones as the main brawler from Road House. Even Jerry Jones shows up, most notably at 1:47.

"Tank" Johnson must believe he is Neo.

Jevon Kearse, Cedric Benson, Cato June, Brandon Marshall, Dominic Rhodes, and Jared Allen (among many others) just want some "f$%kin' french toast."

They all make me feel really smart. A lot of these guys have been caught more than once. This list was put together by the San Diego Tribune, as you can see, some guys don't learn their lesson.

I, in no way, mean to pick on the NFL solely. MLB and NBA both have their own issues, but this season has been frustrating. How can these players knowingly put themselves in incident after incident that could end their careers?

I know most of the people here at B/R wanted to play a professional sport at one time. I am sure all of us would take the opportunity on the drop of a dime (or a multi-million dollar contract).

These guys do the opposite. I don't know about you, but if I am going to recreate a scene from a movie, it will probably be that of Jim Morris in The Rookie or Vince Papale in Invincible. I really don't want to be called "Cheddar Bob," not to mention, I love my legs.

Easy As Pie: Are the Chicago Cubs Giving Up Too Soon On Young Outfielder?

Ricky Butts — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 06:07:51 -0500

Felix Pie (pronounced, PEE-yay) had not quite lived up to the hype he garnered as a young minor leaguer. In his short time in the majors, he has shown terrible knowledge of the strike zone. He hasn't hit for much power and his on-base-percentage keeps the Cubs from inserting him at the top of the line-up.

So, we declare him a bust right?

I have expressed my concern with this. See, Felix is only 23 (24 in February), and has yet to get extended time on the big league club. A shot that he deserves, without worrying about his job day in and day out.

It is not very often that guys with his sort of talent come around. He has speed, a good arm, raw power, and is a great defensive outfielder. He has been praised by minor league players and managers for being all about winning rather than personal accolades.

With the good, does come some bad. While Pie is a .299 career hitter in the minors with an OBP of .355, he tends to strike out a lot. His patience doesn't help the matter when it comes to the big league club. I believe this comes to erratic playing time.

In the past two years, Pie has 260 AB, with a combined .223 BA and .284 OBP. He did however make improvements from 2007 to 2008. His batting average rose .026 points, and his on-base-percentage rose .041 points.

The improvement (.215 to .241 average and .271 to .312 OBP), though still low in totals, isn't enough for Cubs fans to embrace their once coveted prospect. I, on the other, fear that trading him now and not getting a superstar in return, could turn Lou Brock-ish (I am in no way comparing Felix Pie to Lou Brock, except for the fact the Cubs regret the trade) on us, and fulfill his promise in an opponents jersey.

The Cubs' lineup is good enough to weather his bat in a platoon in center field. Having him hit in the eight hole will not hurt the Cubs as bad as it may look, especially if he follows trends set by other outfielders I know a lot of Cubs fans would like.

Carlos Beltran - 2000

372 AB, .247 BA, .309 OBP, 7 HR, 44 RBI, 69 K, 35 BB

Mike Cameron - Career Averages

487 AB, .250 BA, .340 OBP, 20 HR, 71 RBI, 135 K, 62 BB, 24 SB

Torri Hunter - 1999

384 AB, .255 AVG, .309 OBP, 9 HR, 35 RBI, 72 K, 26 BB, 10 SB

Sammy Sosa - 1989 - 1992 (highs)

532 AB (1990), .273 BA (1989, 99 AB), .351 OBP (1989), 15 HR (1990), 70 RBI (1990), 150 K (1990), 33 BB (1990)

Bernie Williams - 1991

320 AB, .238 BA, .336 OBP, 3 HR, 34 RBI, 57 K, 48 BB, 10 SB

Ken Griffey Junior - 1989

455 AB, .264 AVG, .329 OBP, 16 HR, 61 RBI, 83 K, 16 SB

Not all of these stats were from the players first year, specifically Carlos Beltran, who had a wonderful campaign in 1999. The point of this article, is that these players, who have been star outfielders, didn't start their careers off great either. All of them however, got more than 177 AB when they got their chance.

After getting a season, or in Sammy Sosa's case, four professional seasons in, they made significant improvement. Over the years, I have heard Mike Cameron rumors tied to the Cubs, but his career stats are low for a player coveted the way he has been.

The last thing I want to see is Felix Pie playing for another team and succeeding. He is capable of hitting .290, with 10 home runs, 60 RBI, and 100 runs, with 30 stolen bases. If the Cubs do not give him a shot, someone will, and I fear it will be regretted.

Is this scary because of Corey Patterson or have you really seen enough of the outfielder to justify giving him away?

I know I can't justify it.