The Cubs are looking to avoid a twelve-game losing streak, AND a four-series sweep streak. It has come to that: let the fear and shame be your motivator.

Matt Garza will try to rebound from one of the worst outings of his career, and the worst in his time with the Cubs.

Dale Sveum once again busts out the mostly-righty lineup to face lefty Erik Bedard.

Game Info

Chicago Cubs (15-31) at Pittsburgh Pirates (22-24), 12:35pm CT on WGN.

Game Thread and Series Preview

The Game Thread lives here. You should participate in the madness. And, of course, for those who aren’t into message board-style game threads, please feel free to use the comments on this post for your in-game commentary/outbursts.

The Series Preview for this series lives here.

Starting Pitchers

Matt Garza (2-2, 3.72 ERA, 103 ERA+)


Erik Bedard (2-5, 3.52 ERA, 106 ERA+)

Pittsburgh Pirates Lineup

1. Jose Tabata, LF

2. Josh Harrison, SS

3. Andrew McCutchen, CF

4. Pedro Alvarez, 3B

5. Neil Walker, 2B

6. Garrett Jones, RF

7. Matt Hague, 1B

8. Michael McKenry, C

9. Erik Bedard, P

Chicago Cubs Lineup

1. David DeJesus, RF

2. Starlin Castro, SS

3. Joe Mather, 3B

4. Alfonso Soriano, LF

5. Jeff Baker, 1B

6. Reed Johnson, CF

7. Darwin Barney, 2B

8. Koyie Hill, C

9. Matt Garza, P

  • Doug


  • nkniacc

    I don’t mind Mather playinng 3rd but Hill again!

    • rcleven

      Kind of hard to keep going back to the well when it’s dry.

  • Cib Fan Dan

    When’s Clevenger due back? Tomorrow?

    • djriz

      I read he was scheduled to start Monday and Wednesday in Iowa, then back up if everything goes okay. (Okay as in health, not performance).

  • ry34

    thank god hill is back in the lineup, streak will be broken today!!

  • Cheryl

    Sveum is probably doing his best, but that lineup?

    • Joe

      When I Sveum do this kind of crap I cringe. Your’e right Cheryl. That so-called lineup.

  • Ben

    umm…. I would much rather see Lalli even if he is not much of a prospect

  • Njriv

    Where is Campana?

  • HoustonTransplant

    I’m tired of the rightly line up against a lefty…blah. It’s gross.

    • Joe

      If the “righty”, “lefty” thing worked, wouldn’t every team be doing it? I can see doing it with one batter. Throwing an entire right or left lineup out there is nonsense.(That’s putting it mildly) The pitchers don’t have to adjust.

      • Kyle

        Most teams don’t do it because it only works if all your position players are roughly of equal ability. There’s no need to replace a good player with a bad platoon partner. But the Cubs have so many bad hitters, there’s no reason not to mix-and-match.

        • Campana

          Well how come I’m not in the lineup? I have just as good a chance of getting on base against a lefty or righty with my speed.

  • Cubs1967

    how bad is this team? when the cubs were shutout friday; they became the 3td team in the history of baseball (since 1876) to have 10 hits and 3 SB and still get shutout!

    the other 2………..the 1905 and the 1990………..Cubs.

    when the cubs suck; the suck bad………

    when does it change to where we are good; we are really good????

    • DocPeterWimsey

      The key thing to remember is that those hits were all singles.  10 singles is an average of just better than one per inning: and even with stolen bases, it is really tough to score much with a single per inning.

  • Campana

    I’m here. I’m just waiting for the schmuck, I mean Dale to pull his head out his butt.

  • Jesse

    The only way your gonna get LaHair out of his slump is playing him …

    • Campana

      Thats a big 10-4.

  • Kyle

    I’m trying to figure out who the last World Series winner was that built the team by stocking the farm system during a sustained period of awfulness.

    • nkniacc

      Boston or New York

      • Kyle

        Boston definitely not. The 2004 WS winner was not heavily homegrown, and the 2007 WS winner was built on draft picks and farm products that were acquired while the team was already good.

        Yankees you could make a borderline case for. The mid-1990s dynasty was mostly homegrown, with a mix of players acquired when the team was bad and when it was good.

    • Cub Style

      San Francisco

      • Kyle

        Not really. Lincecum was a high draft pick, but that’s about it. Cain was a very late first-round pick from the years when they were good, and the Giants were mostly good or at least borderline outside of a very brief flirtation with awful.

    • Joe

      St. Louis

      • Kyle

        Definitely not, unless you mean like the 1982 Cardinals or something. The Cardinals do a great job of building from within, but they’ve never felt like they needed to be awful at the big-league level to do it.

        • Joe

          I think you might be wrong on this one Kyle. I’m thinking ’67 or ’64 Cardinals.

  • Still Love the Cubs

    Marlins (both times)



    D-Backs (they had some FA’s but not until after their homegrown talent was there)

    White Sox

    There are many examples really, depending on how far back you go.

    • Kyle

      Marlins, not even close. I’m going to try to be nice, but the Marlins buying their World Series through free agency, then flipping those players into a farm system to build another WS winner, is a pretty important moment in baseball history.

      The Phillies? Not even close. Yes, they had a lot of homegrown players. But they built that farm system during a stretch of seven consecutive years of at least 80 wins before they won the WS. There was no sustained period of awfulness that helped them draft and build the farm system.

      The Diamondbacks? Who the eff were the key homegrown players on the Diamondbacks’ WS winning team? That team was built *entirely* off of free agents and trades for veterans. Byung-Hyun Kim was the only homegrown player I can think of. The entire lineup + the important part of the rotation was mercenaries. They are Exhibit A in how to win a world series *without* building from within.

      2006 White Sox? When was the White Sox’ sustained period of awfulness to build from the farm system? The team had *one* season of less than 80 wins in the 11 years leading up to the World Series.

      I’m beginning to wonder if people actually read the question. It was “Who was the last World Series winner to be built from a farm system that built during a sustained period of awfulness?” It wasn’t “Who were World Series winners that had some homegrown players that they drafted while the team was still competitive?” and it definitely wasn’t “Let’s all just spam the names of recent World Series winners and hope Kyle’s knowledge of recent baseball history is bad as our own so he won’t call us on it. ” :)

      • Still Love the Cubs

        You got me on the 1st Marlins winner. My bad.

        2nd one was definitely apropos though.

        I guess D-Backs I was thinking that most of their guys didn’t do much on other teams before they came to the team. Luis Gonzales sucked before he was on that team. As did the 3rd baseman although I can’t remember his name. Pitching was the most FA’s that they bought to become good. To my memory, most of the team were Ian Stewart type reclamation projects that they grew into good players.

        Phillies were bad in late 90’s and got a little better before they went beast mode here lately.

        You make good points. I guess I just don’t feel like Cubs are going to be TERRIBLE for anything more than this year. I think starting next year they’ll be .500 and better from there. Not a “sustained period of losing” but then again, I’m somewhat of an optimist.

      • cubs1967

        you are right Kyle……no one can remember; and that’s exaclty the reason this entire BS of building from within is a crock. look at the pirates or royals; they’ve tried and they have a combined 30 plus years under .500. even the rays have not won a WS despite their numerous times to the playoffs recently.

        you have to sign FA to win; and alot of time it’s on deals longer than 5 yrs.

        it doesn’t have to be this bad…………team Theo has chosen it to be.

        next year the payroll is 35M not including garza and castro; that’s alot of money to spend…….’cuz the farm will not supply enough talent to even be .500 and when you see stupid trades like marshall which in essense we gave away………time for the ricketts to enjoy the attendance of the ’70’s which was about 1.5M till they decide to grow some (base)balls and win.

        • Jimmy james

          Who should they have signed? What one, even two players would make this team competitive…and I don’t mean for the wild card….cubs have been halfassing a team for years thinking if they just get in anything could happen, despite being an inferior team. As far as the pirates, royals and even the rays, they don’t have the cash to keep what they produce, or add to it. That’s why this has a legit shot at working…..

        • hansman1982

          yes, cause I would much rather miss the playoffs by 10 games than 30. so much gained in that.

          Or we could have signed Pujols to a 10 year – $270M contract so that we would be an 80 win team this year instead of a 70 win team and that way in 3 years when he is a $15M player getting paid $27M we can try to supplement his aging body

          • Lou

            Or we could have gotten Fielder and offered him a contract with a opt out clause. Plus our starting pitching has been MUCH better than anyone initially thought, regardless of Garza’s last two starts. The Nationals are currently doing it with SP and not much offense and they have a very large contract in Werth.

      • hansman1982

        Yes, please noone pay attention to the current leaders in the AL – none of these teams have strong farm systems that are paying dividends. Don’t look at the Rangers, Rays, Giants, Nationals, Dodgers, Blue Jays, Indians who have key members of their teams developed through their farm system. Please only look at the White Sox, Angels, Yankees, Brewers, Phillies, Tigers who spent a boatload of money and prospects on players and are currently under .500 or out of first place in their division.

        Cause its either completely building through 10 years of suck and the farm system or spending big money on free agents. God forbid we would want the model that Theo has lived for the past 10 years and that has produced 0 losing seasons since 1998. The, have a strong farm system and use free agency to build around that.

        But what am I saying, Theo and Co. just want to lose for a few years, take no blame for that, retire to cushy broadcasting jobs and then when the Cubs become good (by some random miracle every year out of 4) they will take all the credit. This is a vacation for Theo and Jed. They don’t give a crap about their legacy. They don’t want to build a winner here. They just want to slack and not take any risks.

        You know, you naysayers want ot have it every dang way possible. We have tried to throw some money at it, what do you think the last 30 years have been? We now have an owner that is dedicated (hence the whatever it takes attitude in getting one of the best in the business) and one of the best GM’s in the business (as determined by his peers) and you think you know better 6 months into their plan? You honestly think this team was anything but a Pujols, Fielder, Wilson, Burhle, Marshall and $800M away from contending? No, and before you complain that you want better, what is the difference between 85 wins and 50? Neither will get you in the playoffs and unless you want to signe the 4 guys I mentioned above that is the only difference between the two. How about we trust a GM who’s worst season was 89 wins before this one.

        • Kyle

          You just responded to a whole lot of thing that weren’t said.

          I’m simply tired of hearing “We suck, but it has to be this way to build a great farm system. It’s good that we suck.”

          No, it doesn’t. You can build a good farm system without sucking.

          The fact that we are building a good farm system is great. The fact that we suck, sucks.

          • hansman1982

            Oh no, everything I typed up there has been said over the past month and a half. Maybe not by you but by people. If I remember correctly you are of the crowd that thinks the 2011 team was this year’s rotation away from contention. Sadly, no, not when you are near or below average in nearly every stat that matters. For what its worth, Boston ranked #1 in OBP, SLG, Runs, and third in home runs and 2nd in walks. But we shouldn’t trust Theo’s plan.

            You are right you can build a farm system when you are good, tougher to do that when you give up the #6 pick in the draft by signing a guy to an obscene contract last offseason. For what? An extra 5 games won at this point? I like the strategy they employed last offseason – improve through defense and pitching. Granted, now that we are on our 4th string catcher and LaHair isn’t hitting the team has fallen off a cliff.

            There is a reason Theo is avoiding the “rebuild” word. The thing that the Pirates, Mariners, Royals, Twins have NEVER done is added decent free agents. They add the John Grabows of the world and then wonder why they can’t get over the hump. The Marlins of this year are a prime example of what the Cubs are doing. Get a bunch of homegrown guys together that are good and then blow the budget on 2-3-4 free agents to get you over the hump.

            But I am sure Theo will be too lazy/gunshy/idiotic/dumb/whateverelse to do that final key point because we know, he just doesn’t care.

            This debate is similar to the When to Call Up Rizzo debate. Would you rather enjoy a small gain now to hinder the team in the future? Right now are their 10 wins from last year that you would rather have over the #2 pick this year (or even 20 to get the #1 pick)?

            • Kyle

              Give up the no. 6 pick? Not how it works.

              10 wins don’t just disappear. We would have to lose 10 wins worth of players. Garza and Castro to move up a few slots? Pass.

              • hansman1982

                ok you are right, we would still have the #6 pick but would have lost our 2nd round pick

                My 10 win statement was asking (and I used the wrong there) if you would rather have 10 fewer wins last year and the #2 pick this year or would you rather have those 10 wins?

                • Kyle

                  I get what you’re asking. I’m telling you that you are looking at it the wrong way.

                  In a vacuum, the No. 2 pick is preferable. The problem is that when have that many losses, it’s because you have very little in MLB assets, which makes your long-term outlook bleaker.

                  • hansman1982

                    Yes and no – let’s say you add 10 wins to last year’s team – and you do that by adding Albert Pujols and CJ Wilson. Those 10 wins mean jack diddly for last year. Either way you are not making the playoffs. Now, with the way the minor leauges are there isn’;t a glut of talent coming in the next 2-3 years (Wilson and Pujols’ remaining prime years) as such, you have to add through more free agents which costs you more draft picks and decreased spending for the draft and player development.

                    Suddenly it is 2014 and you have a $15M first baseman getting paid $27M, a SP that is getting paid $20M while providing $15M in value and you are still struggling to hit 85 wins on a consistent basis because you wanted a quick fix through free agency and lost a glut of young, cost-controlled talent by chasing a hope at contention. AKA, what we have been doing for the past 20 years.

                    Does it suck suckiing this bad? Yes, could they have made this team a little better this year, yes. Would that have made it slightly more difficult to do what they are doing, yes. Could we be in the same condition we are today in 5 years – yes, but at least we would have tried something different.

                    Where is my head at, we should be an 80 win team this year because those extra 10 wins mean something…

                    • Kyle

                      You are still missing the point.

                      If you want to argue that “avoiding sucking this year wouldn’t have been worth the cost,” well, that’s a discussion we have had many times and I respect your opinion.

                      But “It wouldn’t have been worth it to avoid sucking” and “it’s good that we suck” are still two entirely different things, and many Cubs fans have snuck over from the former to the latter.

                    • hansman1982

                      Just putting an optimistic spin on our situation.

                      Although, that is certainly not what we started debating.

          • Lou

            Exactly. The thing that hansman fails to realize is that while he and others were criticizing Hendry for bad contracts and not much more in the way of additional wins, Hendry NEVER valued his farm system. Bad contracts are what they are but certainly they look a lot less worse when there are young players coming up through your farm system alongside those veteran contracts. Hendry NEVER got that.

            • DocPeterWimsey

              “… Hendry NEVER valued his farm system.”

              That simply is untrue.  Hendry took pride in player development, as scouting was his background.  What Hendry did not value are the traits that get winning franchises to post-season (or close to it) annually.  He never accepted that batting eye was a fundamental tool, not something gained with experience.  He never accepted that “clutch” was not a real trait rather than an artifact of small sample sizes and luck.  He never accepted that control was something that only some pitchers can develop: and that you should be able to identify where it is possible.

              10 years ago, the Cubs had one of the highest ranked farm systems according to traditional criteria.  Just 4 years later, the Cubs were a 90+ loss team with almost none of those prospects doing anything for any MLB team.  The batters couldn’t avoid making outs consistently and the pitchers who’s arms didn’t fall off couldn’t hit the strike zone consistently.

              • Lou

                I guess you lost me at he took pride in the development of players but never understood how to develop their fundamentals.

    • Jeff L

      Your completely wrong about the Marlins. Also, the D-Backs won because of Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling. They dominated the playoffs and WS. The Marlins bought the championship the first year they won. Check it out they had one of the highest payrolls in baseball. I can’t disagree with the 2nd year they won, but I can say years like that happen once in a 100 years and take at the very least 6 years of being the worst team in baseball to make that happen. If you want to wait 6 years be my guess. I got to admit the fans that say wait for next year are the reasons we ARE WAITING FOR NEXT YEAR. You guys still buy the tickets and pay money at the games. You give the owners a pass at putting a good product on the field. By the way for all you people who think the Tribune spent money they DIDN’T FOR MANY YEARS. They only started spending money when they knew they only had a few years left.

      • Still Love the Cubs

        I would totally agree with you on this if the direction of the team hadn’t changed. We are only saying wait til next year now because there actually is a plan in place.

        Ricketts is not spending $20 million/yr on baseball FO people so that they can suck. It just isn’t going to happen for very long.

        • Hawkeye

          I’ve asked this before on here but what exactly is the plan. Basically from what I can tell is the plan is to scout better.

          • DocPeterWimsey

            Look at what the Sox did, and assume that they are going to do that here.  That is, try to sign position players with good batting eyes and the potential to develop slugging.  That is instead of trying to sign “toolsy” guys who you hope will develop into hitters.  Similarly, try to sign pitchers with good ability to locate and change speeds.  That is, a guy who can throw a different strike from the one that he just threw.  This is instead of trying to sign power arms that you hope will develop control and secondary pitches later.

          • Still Love the Cubs

            Well to be honest, a big part of the plan got messed up with the new CBA because they were going to allocate a ton of money to the draft and international signing and get a lot younger. Since they can’t do that to the full extent, that part of the plan is scout better.

            Instill in the minor league’s exactly how they want all of the players to develop. So that all teams are teaching and doing things the same way, the “Cubs Way.”

            Spend money on FA’s that still have their best years ahead of them, and not behind them.

            Hopefully, in about 2014, all of those fronts converge at the same time so that they have a winning season.

  • Joe

    What’s the majic number for Rizzo being called up? By my calculations it could be whithin the next 2 weeks.

    • Still Love the Cubs

      I think its like June 23rd or something like that.

      He can’t get more than 100 something games this year.

  • Jeff

    I love how Soriano will look at a first pitch strike that tails into him, then swings at the second pitch that tails away out of the zone. And then he swings away into a ground out. Go figure on why we are so bad!!

  • CBP

    Brett you should get a countdown timer for Rizzo going!!

  • Jeff

    The bad news on Garza’s pitching performance of late: lower trade value!! The good news: lower contract value on long term deal. Hey dude, your a 4.00 era pitcher, forget about that 100M contract

    • Still Love the Cubs

      And your yips are costing you runs man. No no trade clause either until you get that under control :)

  • Jeff

    This whole,”The new CBA” has ruined their plans is a load of crap and we need to get over it.
    You still build a winning organization the same way, draft good players instead of the flash in the pans. I wish you guys would stop using this as a freakin excuse, Life goes on, get over it
    You still have the same draft spots, you can’t spend as much money, but big whoop, it’s the same for everyone else. Geez……

    We still have the same number of draft rounds as last year, same relative number of picks, it goes in order stupid, just pick good ones, unlike Hendry and his lot.

    • Still Love the Cubs

      Partly true. Playing field is even for everyone now.

      The not true part is that it is not harder to get good talent. It is far more likely now that you can’t get as many guys since a good amount of them will go to other sports. Also, signing internationally will be nearly impossible if you don’t suck the prior year. I guess that’s where the scout better part comes in.

      • Jeff

        The point is, your still going to get who your going to get, your only designated so many pics in the draft, you take a player when your time to pick comes.

        Semantics about fewer players and them going to other sports is a krock, baseball players aren’t going to other sports. How has international signing changed, that still not part of the draft. I haven’t read the whole thing, but picking players that make it is an art. We have tended to pick flame outs in the past unlike other organizations.

        • DocPeterWimsey

          Yes, you draft who you draft: the issue then becomes whether you can sign them.  Boras has already announced that his plan is to convince teams that it is worth going overslot on his players and thus effectively “cutting” earlier draft picks, or his players won’t sign.

          As for the international scene, we do not know how it will play out, but there is a very strong concern that players will go to futball instead: yes, less money, but less risk and they don’t have to leave home.

          • Luke

            A couple guys may take that route, but I doubt it will ever be more than a couple.  Very few players were paid so richly on the IFA front that the restrictions would eliminate a team’s ability to sign them.  If anything, I think the terms of the CBA will serve as an incentive for teams that tend to ignore that market to shore up their operations to maximize their returns.  I strongly suspect that the total amount of money heading into the international scene will increase as a result of the new CBA, not decrease.  I suspect we’ll see just as many two-sport types opting for the soccer pitch, but I think we’ll still see plenty of those guys taking up baseball.

            It’ll take a few years before we know for sure, I suppose, but we should start getting an early indication (especially on overall spending) in about a month.

  • CBP

    Starting to look like 12 in a row and Dolis is wild again

  • Kevin

    The Cubs are playing based on the rules of the new CBA! The only way to be sure to get good talent is to draft and the Cubs are positioning themselves to pick first in 2013. BTW, I dont recall the RedSox getting better by subtraction. Just saying……….

  • die hard

    Are we past the point of who gives a hoot?…This team is on the way to set all time record for losses….Mayor Rahm should refuse to return any more phone calls….Team needs to play .500 ball for 60 games in a row before he should entertain any ideas about new park….

  • Kevin

    The Cubs don’t need Rahm or Wrigley field. The Cubs need to find a new location so they can truley start over. If the Yankees can move with all their history, the Cubs can defiantly move. PNC Park built 12 years ago for just over $200M is so much nicer than Wrigley Field. The Cubs want to put $300M into Wrigley Field. I ask why would you spend so much on such an old ballpark when the Cubs have never won there.

  • calicubsfan007

    Oy vey, what a horrible game for us. 10 to 4? REALLY???? I really hate Koyie Hill, he somehow manages to suck even more in clutch situations. When will Clevenger come back? Hopefully soon, which will definetly help with this slide.

  • Patrick

    I say play more night games. Everyone else plays majority of their games at night and the cubs never have, hence no world series in 100+ years. It’s worth a shot right?

  • Big Joe

    I love Wrigley. Alway have. Always will. But…I’m starting to buy into the idea of a new park. When they sign a new tv deal, I think that the team could throw the city the middle finger, and seriously consider a new park. I know some view a new park as blasphemy, but I no longer rule it out. If Wrigley is fixed up, then fine. But, of they choose to build a new place to play, my former attitude of “hell no” will not be heard.

  • http://It'searly Mike F

    No, i know it’s sacrilege, but it’s an antiquated dump. It’s land locked by greedy people looking to make a lot and have an inordinate say. It’s not even safe. It plays crazy depending on the moods of weather and wind patterns. But, you have to balance that against myth. I think you make a great point Kevin. If they want to build a tradition of winning and excellence blow it up. That said, with a legacy of futility, I think there is this erratic notion that Wrigley is something of a national shrine. The site lines and close nature to the field is incredible. And to save the dump and honor it historically, it’s going to take a ridiculous amount of money, incredible political fineness and a lot of cooperation by all involved-City, County and State as well as neighbors. No I definitely think it would be easier to blow it up or move, actually move.

    And that dovetails into the whole issue of what we deserve. I’m at peace with losing in 2012, and have no issue with a 110 loss season and that appears with where we are headed. My big concern is whether 300 losses are acceptable through 2014. This then is the critical question how much losing is acceptable. In his first two years as Owner, Ricketts will accrue over 200 losses likely, so the question is how will Cub fans respond in 2013. I agree with Brett people are too hard on Sveum. But I think Ricketts response to the 2012 and 2011 seasons in this offseason will determine whether he should own the Cubs, not a crazy used car dealer like Selig. I hope we do deserve more than a cynical marketing strategy and 3 or 4 years of losing, It is very possible to build for the long term with emphasis on drafting and developing and at the same time not put a disgrace on the field as they have this year.

    I’m a Theo guy, but that everyday line-up and bullpen is a discredit to the fans, the organization and everyone involved. It’s a collection of scabs and nothing more, and excusing it off to the sins of the past while charging premium championship prices is inexcusable. Ricketts, not anyone else, owes the fans an explanation beyond the nonsense anything can happen for what is occurring and how long it should be tolerated. I’m fine with a mulligan in 2011, and even this year, but I really think it may be more like 2014, 2015 or 2016 in Ricketts mind and he needs to account for what his intentions are. Just my two cents.

    • Ogyu

      Amen, brother.

    • HoustonTransplant

      I don’t disagree with you with the discredit to the fans in regards to prices…I’m coming up to Chicago in a few weeks, and I plan to take in a Cubs game while I’m there. I’m going to go to one of the Tigers games, most likely on Tuesday. My original plan was to sit in the bleachers on Thursday, until I realized BLEACHER tickets were over $80 a piece. That’s downright criminal. You’re right, the team is a bunch of scrubs, and while I’ll visit Wrigley and watch a baseball game, I refuse to pay that much for the product they’re trying to sell. It’s bad enough watching this awful, awful season…it’s quite another to have my wallet take an inexcusable hit while doing it!

      I fully support the direction the organization is going, but I just don’t want to pay those prices to watch this team…maybe I’m hurting the organization in the long run, but I just can’t do it.

    • hansman1982

      No, 300 losses in 3 years would not be acceptable. I don’t think Theo had 100 losses in mind when he constructed this team. This team was constructed to purge out the expiring assets while replacing them with guys who haven’t gotten shots, needed a change of scenery, former top prospects who just haven’t gotten there yet and right now, each and every gamble didn’t work. (I am starting to notice a trend with the Cubs as Hendry had the same problem).

      If Theo amasses 300 losses come November 2014, then I will be standing in front of Wrigley with my pitchfork ready to run his monkey suit wearing ass out of town.

      • The Dude Abides

        Unfortunately what you are describing as the Theo recipe for putting this team together is exactly the same recipe for an expansion team and that is exactly what we have. Theo has no record of pulling this off, Boston was in much better shape and he spent money to maintain as he grew the system. I don’t have the time but would love to see this list of great BOSOX prospects that were signed under his watch I have been a Cubs and BOSOX fan for years so while I like Theo I don’t think we are remotely comparing apples to apples when you compare these two teams and how he built them.

        • Eric

          No but Jed and Jason do have some experience with this. If we can draft like the Padres and have the salary of the Cubs. This team will be in pretty good shape in a few years.

          • Lou

            I disagree with a few years. I don’t think will offer but one (maybe two) competitive seasons under Theo and it will be his last year under his current contract. He’ll need to go deep in the playoffs during that year or years–otherwise why keep him around. I get really annoyed when people say the Cubs will be good in 2014 or 2015. Just don’t see it happening. Everything would have to come together under the perfect storm and I don’t think it’s possible.

        • hansman1982

          Correct, Boston was a maintain and Chicago is a build. But you cannot discount the fact that his worst season as a GM came 2 years ago at 89 wins and even last year his team was a league leader in offensive categories.

          For prospects how about: Ellsbury, Pedroia, Saltalamacchia, Middlebrooks, Bard, Buchholz, Doubront. Oh and our current top prospect, Rizzo. I don’t think there is a player on that list I wouldn’t take over our current talent (although Saltalamacchia might be a short-term push with Soto).

        • Cubs1967

          You are 100% correct and that is the problem; Theo has never built a team; he was handed a 93 win team and a 170M payroll so anyone assuming this team sucking is for the better good is sadly mistaken; in 5 years we could still suck-see the pirates and royals as examples of building and failing. and he already has strike one-see the marshall trade and the ZERo talent back for an “asset”.

          top 5 tix prices-3M plus fans each year; 3rd largest market; is NOT an expansion market so they should not be asking like it!

          • hansman1982

            Really, so Wood, Torreyes, Sappelt all are immediate busts. Just release them because clearly they are garbage. Pay no attention to Marshall’s 4.24 ERA in 17 innings so far this season – WE WOULD BE UNDEFEATED WITH HIM BUT LOOK WE ARE TERRIBLE WITH TRAVIS WOOD AND HIS 3.86 ERA OVER 11 2/3rds. OH WHAILING AND GNASHING OF TEETH! Theo is the worst GM in the history of baseball because it takes ZERo ability or talent to construct a team that wins 90 games a season in the AL East.