It’s an off-day for the Cubs, who head out West to San Francisco for a series starting tomorrow. My kickball game last night went well enough (like the Cubs, we came back from being down early, scored three in the top of the final inning to take the lead, and then got out of a bases loaded jam in the bottom of the half to seal the win (our closer is Carlos Marmol)), and our team improved to 5-0 on the year. The bummer? My OBP finally slipped under 1.000, as I grounded “out” on a totally blown call at first base.

  • Tony Campana hasn’t started since May 21, and, to me, doesn’t sound too thrilled about it. “I guess it’s all right,” Campana said. “Everybody wants to play but we had to make a change. You can see that we had to do something and Joe brings a little more thump and he’s been having really good at-bats so he gets his chance. I’ll just come off the bench, do what I do off the bench and try to bring some excitement.”
  • Sveum added that Campana didn’t so much lose his job as others claimed playing time. “It’s just one of those things where [Campana] didn’t do anything to lose his job,” Sveum said. “He was kind of more of a victim of doing a good job but the offense not scoring runs so I thought put somebody in there that might juice the team with a home run or a three-run homer or two-run double, something like that. Unfortunately for Camp, like I told him, he’s just a victim.” Since May 21, Mather is hitting .250/.294/.344. Just sayin’.
  • Ryan Dempster was sufficiently pissed about his poor outing yesterday that he put a hole in the wall between his locker and Alfonso Soriano’s. Thankfully, he apparently used something wooden, rather than his hand.
  • Darwin Barney said that yesterday’s walk-off homer was the first of his career at any level. Barney, you’ll recall, added 15 pounds of muscle at Camp Bussy (formerly Camp Colvin) this offseason, and it seems to be working. His IsoP this year is a healthy .155 after being just .077 last year. His .274/.326/.429 line on the year is excellent for a quality defensive second baseman, and, at the moment, he’s looking like an above average starter at second base. I should caution that his numbers can fall rapidly, and this kind of offensive improvement at the big league level is quite rare, but I’m happy to enjoy the ride while it lasts.
  • It sounds like Anthony Rizzo is expected back in the Iowa lineup as early as today, after missing some time with a sore wrist. Speaking of Rizzo, Kevin Goldstein has an ESPN Insider piece on the slugger.
  • Dale Sveum and White Sox manager Robin Ventura are texting buddies.
  • Kerry Wood authored a children’s book.
  • Theo Epstein was the subject of a Bloomberg TV program last night, and you can see some of the notable quotes here.
  • Cubs’ Scouting Chief Jason McLeod was on a media blitz yesterday, and I’ll have much more on that later today.
  • Chop

    When will we get EBS for your kickball games?!

    • Brett

      Ha. They would grow boring, because I’d only enhance myself.

      • JB88

        I get about 15 or so spam emails about “enhanc[ing] myself” everyday. Send me your email address and I’ll make sure to forward them on to you 😉

        • Brett

          Oh, you funny gents…

      • TWC

        That explains all the spam comments last night.

  • ReiCow

    As I said last night, I’d like to see Campana leading off, with DeJesus batting third.


    • King Jeff

      I agree, I’d like to see what DeJesus can do at #3, between LaHair and Castro.

      • Joe

        I think Tony – Starlin – David – Bryan is worth checking out. Campy starting the game with a single and a steal is as good as a DeJesus double in the same spot.

    • DocPeterWimsey

      If you start Campana, then you’ll get more bang for your buck putting him low in the order.  For one thing, he is (probably) never going to get on much (his current OBP is almost certainly a fluke).  For another, stolen bases are much more valuable in front of bad hitters than in front of good ones in that they are much more apt to generate runs that otherwise would not have scored.  (Including yesterday’s run, I count only 2 or 3 of Campana’s SB that have generated a run that would not otherwise have scored: and in yesterday’s case, it was only the steal of 3rd that really did so because he would have advanced to 2nd on DeJesus’ walk.)

      Really, Campana is a one-trick pony, much like that lefty specialist who can get out only lefties and even then only if he faces them infrequently.  Your best use of him is as Sveum used him yesterday: let someone else get on base, then pinch-run with Campana.  That’s a shoo-in SB or 2, and you can get a guy to 3rd in a few pitches.  If he is in the lineup, then he probably will not bat in that inning and if he does, then he probably will not get on base.

      • ReiCow

        If you are saying he has one trick: speed, I don’t see that as a bad thing. If he could keep near his present OBP (which is on par with his minor league career), then he would continue to be a terror on the basebaths. Not only is his swiping bases valuable, but the THREAT of him stealing likely rattles some pitchers, which would also be valuable. In addition, he can score on more hits than anyone else on the team (like getting to home on a single that others wouldn’t). Seems like it would be most advantageous to have speed on in front of the best bats. It isn’t like we have a mountain of talent keeping him out of the lineup.


        • hansman1982

          hopefully in a few months we will – Jackson, Rizzo, LaHair. At that point he won’t have a home.

          The key for Campana is maintaining a .350 OBP and even then his lack of any power will hinder what he is able to do. Soon teams are going to be playing with noone on the outfield grass and daring him to hit the ball into the outfield.

          • Joe

            Oh man, I can see it now — pull all three outfielders in, ten feet off the infield. Of course, then Tony just needs a short fly ball to get an in-the-park homer…

        • CastrotoBarneytoLaHair

          As I’ve mentioned before, Campana is our Dave Roberts and hopefully, like 2004, he will one day have “THE” stolen base that propels us to the WS title!

      • Leo L

        hey i mostly agree with you Doc. just wondering what you think of these thoughts. if his OBP stays up, would you change your mind about starting him more often. Or do you think he is still more valuable (or too valuable) of the bench to pinch run. another thought i had is that on tough ptichers that do not give up much hits, if it would be beneficial to have a guy like tony where he gets on by speed rather than driving the ball. would you consider spot starting him in those game? (i agree with toward the bottom of the order). I also think that if he does start, that in RBI situations later in the game they should pinch hit for him. any thoughts?

      • Joe

        Obviously I’m a big Tony fan, as long as he’s keeping his OBP up anywho, but I do find this statement curious: “For another, stolen bases are much more valuable in front of bad hitters than in front of good ones in that they are much more apt to generate runs that otherwise would not have scored.”

        I’ve seen a bit of that, where Starlin really seems to get thrown off sometimes by Tony trying to steal and the pitcher paying too much attention to the baserunner. But is there statistical evidence to back up what you’re saying? (I’m not being contrary so much as curious here. I could believe you’re right, or I could see this turn out to be a matter of something our eyes are telling us but data doesn’t support.)

        • Drew7

          Im sure Doc has statistical evidence, but I havent seen any myself. It seems to be one of those things that, since we have had the old-school approach of, “put your speedy guys at the top” burned into our heads for so long, we fail to look at the logic behind it.

          If Campana is batting ahead of someone that hits a very high % of singles, (such as Barney) he is much less likely to score from 1st base, making the SB much more valuable. Conversly, stealing in front of your middle-of-the-order guys (who are much more likely to hit XBH’s) makes the SB less valuable, since Campana would score from 1st on a double anyway.

          • Joe

            I can’t agree with that logic, sorry Drew7. A stolen base is a stolen base. I don’t care who it’s in front of or behind. The bottom line is a stolen base improves your chance’s of scoring and thus your chance of winning. Just because a batter has a better “chance” of hitting a XBH doesn’t mean he’s going to!

            • DocPeterWimsey

              “Just because a batter has a better “chance” of hitting a XBH doesn’t mean he’s going to!”

              No, it means that he is going to get an XBH more often than the other guy, and thus obviate the need for a stolen base more often than the other guy.  The other thing to remember is that there will be hits and walks more often at the top of the order, also obviating the need for the stolen base.

              So, when does a stolen base most increase the probability of a guy scoring?  When the subsequent batters have low probabilities of slugging and/or getting on base.  Ergo, stolen bases are not stolen bases.

              Baseball is probabilistic, not deterministic: so, to maximize the probability of scoring runs, put your speed in front of your least potent hitters.

              • Joe

                Doc, it depends on what your definition of a “potent hitter” is. Are you speaking about a player that can hit 30 homers and have have a .240 BA and .300 OBP or a player that has a 310/.380 line and averages 15 homers a year with 100 RBI? There’s obviously a huge difference on the definition of “potent.” My point is it depends on the circumstances and one should’t stand by some general rule as to where to place a speedster.

                • DocPeterWimsey

                  Here is a simple logical proof of what I mean.  Let’s worry solely about stealing second.  (This proof extends to 3rd, but I’m going to keep it simple.)  We have 4 probabilities:

                  PA1: prob. of scoring from 1st given batters A

                  PA2: prob. of scoring from 2nd given batters A

                  PB1: prob. of scoring from 1st given batters B

                  PB2: prob. of scoring from 2nd given batters B.

                  where A represents your 3rd & 4th hitters and B represents your 8th and 9th hitters.


                  The question is not whether PA2>PA1 (it is) or even whether PA2>PB2 (it had better be).  The improvement gained by a stolen base is a fraction (odds):



                  That is, by how much do you improve the probability of scoring by moving from 1st to 2nd while in front of Batters A and in front of Batters B.

                  For any lineup (including this Cub lineup), (PB2/PB1)>(PA2/PA1).  There is simply a much greater chance of a series of events that would score a runner from 1st given the middle of the lineup coming up than given the bottom of the lineup coming up.  Magically put the same runner (no matter who he is) on 2nd base, and and his chance of scoring improves in both cases, but more drastically for Batters B than for Batters A.  After all, now outs and soft hits can score the guy: and although the middle of the order does that, too, the bottom of the order often excels at that.

                  And that means that anything putting a runner on 2nd in front of Batters B does more to create a run that otherwise would not have scored than putting that same runner on 2nd in front of Batters A.

                  • Joe

                    I uderstand your point Doc.. You are strictly going by statistics though! I would contend (I don’t have numbers to back this up) that most playoff contenders and WS champs defied the law of averages(statistics) and won based on gut feelings by a manager, perhaps obsevations by others within an organization, or simply good pitching. My point is statistics(and where you put your speedster) mean very little as long as you don’t get ridiculous.

                    • DocPeterWimsey

                      I would say that the exact opposite is true.  The strong teams of recent years (Yankees, Sox, Braves, A’s, Cardinals, Rays, etc.) were built by putting together players that maximized the probability of consistently outslugging and out-OBPing their opponents.  Over the last 10 years, every playoff team has had a positive net OPS (team OPS – opposition OPS).

                      Put another way, Moneyball really was about how the Yankees actually win, as opposed to what ESPN reported about how the Yankees won.  Or, put a 2nd way: Epstein, Cashman, Friedman & Beane use statistics a lot.  Hendry didn’t!

            • Drew7

              Just because someone smokes 2 packs a day doesnt mean they *will* get cancer, but its hard to argue they arent more likely to.

              Also, you have to look at the other side of the equation as well – if you are gonna attempt to steal bases, you will sometimes be thrown out (yes, even the great Campana!); getting thrown out in with the middle of your order up is much more likely to cost you runs, thus is more of a gamble. I’m not big on the SB, but if forced to utilize it, I’d do it in the most low-risk, high-reward situations, and that is in front of singles hitters.

          • WGNstatic

            I would also disagree with that sentiment.

            First, there is nobody on the Cubs roster who is more likely to hit an extra base hit than a single.

            Second, if Campana gets on, steals 2 and 3rd, he is then at 3B with the potential for a middle of the order hitter to get an RBI with a sac fly.

            • DocPeterWimsey

              Again, this is entirely the wrong way to look at it.  One, the fact that all batters are more apt to get singles than extra base hits is irrelevant: it’s about stealing in front of guys who are least apt to get extra base hits that maximizes the benefit of the steals.

              Two, who cares about a sac fly for the middle of the order guy?  The middle of the order guys should be the one with the greatest potential to get a hit and an extra base hit to drive home a runner from second or even first.  (They also are the ones most apt to K on most teams.)  Indeed, this is why stolen bases in front of bad hitters are so much more valuable: bad hitters make more outs than do good hitters, and having a guy who can steal 2nd and 3rd in front of a guy who gets a ton of groundouts or flyball outs will create runs that would not have scored far more frequently than will stealing 2nd and 3rd in front of a guy who slugs.

              Hmmm, I’m going to get very Benderific soon!

              • King Jeff

                Doc, to put what you’re saying simply, “you can’t take the bat out of your best hitters hands.” I am as big of a proponent of small ball as anybody, but I do think that the Cubs need to let LaHair and Castro go up there and swing the bat when there are guys on base. There is no harm in playing small ball and squeeze out runs with the rest of the lineup and letting Castro and LaHair try to create big innings.

  • cjdubbya

    They have a kickball league in Columbus? Hmmm…as someone that works from home, methinks I should take a closer look at this.

  • Kyle

    Darwin Barney: 5th among NL 2b in WAR, on pace for a 3.8 WAR season.

    I’m not prepared to say he’s a legitimate .750 OPS player, but I don’t see anything in his peripherals that screams fluke.

    His K% is down, his BB rate is up, his line drive rate is up, his BABIP is completely normal, and his power is way way up.

    • hansman1982

      Barney is going to be a player that will have value through about their 1st arb year. After that the $$$ will be too much for his performance.

      Interesting note, Baseball Reference states that a Secondary Average of less than .200 is poor and >.500 is excellent. Even in Barney’s above-average season this year he is eeking out a .244 and has been below .200 in his previous 2 seasons.

      • Kyle

        Secondary average is a very weird, nearly worthless Bill James creation leftover from the 1980s.

        It’s not meant to be a total offensive value statistic. It’s meant to be a rough guideline to how much value a player creates outside of his batting average, and it’s meant to be used in combination with batting average. And since Darwin Barney’s offensive value, especially before this year’s power explosion, is very much tied into batting average, he’s of course going to look bad in the other half.

        Anyway, Secondary Average stopped being useful once people started using OBP/SLG in combination. OBP/SLG accomplishes the same goals as BA/SA, and does it much more accurately.

        • hansman1982

          ya, after I posted that I perused over to see Cano and Pujols’ SA – Pujols is actually getting beat by Barney at this point this season. That kind of ruined the stat for me.

          Hopefully he can keep up the .750 OPS – will be extremely valuable then for a few years.

  • hardtop

    Rule 3.09 states: “Players in uniform shall not address or mingle with spectators, nor sit in the stands before, during, or after a game. No manager, coach or player shall address any spectator before or during a game. Players of opposing teams shall not fraternize at any time while in uniform.

    He better have been naked when he sent those texts.

    Sorry Sveum, you stopped being buddies when you put on the pinstripes… pal.  There are likley no two teams more “opposing” than the cubs and white sox.  you can pat him on the back,squeeze his hiney, or give him an oil massage  when its all over.  but until then, i command you to hate everything white sox, just like the rest of chicagoans with acumen.

    wait, didnt sveum play for the brewers when ventura played for the sux?  like, shouldnt they already be rivals?  thats when i know a true brewers fan, when they dislike the sux more than the cubs… that means they were real fans in the BF era (before fielder (or fatty, if you prefer))

    *i know the rule doesn’t really apply… just looking for a way to introduce naked dale imagery*

    • @cubsfantroy

      dafuq did I just read?

  • Jp

    Anyone want to elaborate on Kevin Goldstein’s solution to get rizzo to the big club? The only solution I see is if Kevin has invented a time machine because that’s all the cubs are waiting on at the point. It’s funny to listen to them try to justify what he needs to work on down in AAA. I’m pretty sure he’s fine-tuned everything he needs to to move up.

  • MikeW

    kind of a small sample size on mather’s stats there Brett. I think its ok to keep on pressing on with Mather in CF. We’ve got nothing to lose. We know what Campana is, a very fast, and decent defender who has no pop. This is Mather’s first real shot at significant playing time since 2008, a year he played reasonably well.

    • Edwin


      2008 was also a small sample size. Only 147 PA. He’s had only 381 Major League PA in his career. He’s 29 or 30. For his career, he’s hitting .235/.295/.400. In the minors he’s had 3608 PA, and hit .260/.334/.450. That’s not terrible, but it’s not impressive either. Players don’t normally wait until age 29 to figure things out at the Major league level.

      • MikeW

        I get all of that. Normally they don’t take til age 29. But sometimes it happens. And we’ve got nothing to lose. I know in 08 it was a small sample size as well. But it (along with this year) are the only times he’s really got an opportunity. I see nothing wrong with letting that opportunity continue for a few more weeks.

  • Spencer

    It’s an interesting situation with Campana. I almost think he is more valuable coming off the bench, because he can be inserted in situations where he is most needed at that particular time, rather than having to wait for his spot in the order to come up. For those of you that don’t think he’s worth a roster spot coming off the bench as a speed guy (as nearly everyone on this site was during spring training), there are a couple other players I’d like to see bounced before Campana. We won yesterday in large part because of his speed.

    • Joe

      I would have to disagree Spencer. As a starter he has more chances to make an impact. As McLeod said, impact players are what the Cubs are looking for. I truly can’t understand why he has not started in so long. Mather, in my opinion, should be benched.

      • Leo L

        mather should be benched. long term i hope the cubs have a better starter than campana or campana turns out to be a better starter than i expected him to be

        • Joe

          Right! I don’t see Campana as a long term starter at all. Once the “shake up” starts(and one is coming) he will have a bench role. However, as this team stands RIGHT NOW he definitly should be starting.

          • Joe

            I’m inclined to agree with you, Joe. :)

            That said, my buns aren’t burning over giving our fellow Joe a shot. A few more games, maybe a series, to let him try to sort himself out and get into a rhythm; if he doesn’t, though, I’ll join the chorus to get Tony back on the field regularly.

            • Joe

              Mathers career line: .235/.295/.400/.695
              Campy’s career line: .274/.321/.317/.639

              Can’t see for the life of me why Sveum is starting Mather. Neither one is an RBI machine. But, again, Campy is the most likely to have an impact on a game.

      • DocPeterWimsey

        Campana is not an impact player: he’s a 1-tool player who just happens to have about the maximum on that tool.  Being a bad team, the Cubs best hope for wins will be those games where they can hold the opposition close.  They’ll have a better chance of keeping games close with Campana and his single tool on the bench.  Campana might have a chance of affecting (positively) some of those close games if guys get on base and he can be used as a pinch runner.

        However, in the end, a Dave Roberts or Herb Washington is a luxury that only good teams really can afford: the Cubs need impact position players, and that means high OBP, high slugging guys.

        • The Show

          No offense Doc, but when I first read the first line of your statement I chuckled a little. What you basically said was Campana is not an impact player, he is a one-tool player in which that one tool happens to make an impact. I see what you are saying but I thought it was a little funny.

        • ottoCub

          I agree with the comments stating that Campana is more valuable to the Cubs coming off the bench. Leaving aside his questionable defense, and non-existent slugging percentage, his strongest tool (speed) is best used off the bench.

          If Campana starts, he will likely get about 4 plate appearances per game. With his current career .321 OBP, he would get on base 1.28 times per game. In many of these on-base opportunities, a steal would not be advantageous to the Cubs because of the game situation (eg: there is a slower runner ahead of him, or the number of outs dictate that a steal would be risky). And because Campana cannot control when he gets on-base, the steal opportunity might not present itself at an impact moment. So, as a starter (IF he can keep his OBP at current levels) he would have fewer than 1.28 chances to impact the game with a steal. It’s very possible that the chances of an impact steal will be lower than 1 per game. However, if he is used off the bench — EVERY time he is brought in as a pinch-runner will be a steal opportunity, so he would have at least 1 opportunity each game to create an impact (more if he stays in the game and gets on base during a later at bat). And every time he is used, his primary tool will be utilized at the moment Sveum wants speed to impact the game, because he can choose when to put him on first base.

    • CubsFanBob

      He was valuable on the bench last Friday night when Joe Mather led off the eighth with a single to right off Juan Cruz only to get picked off with a deer in the head lights look on his face.

      No disrespect to Mather because I appreciate what he brings every day. I also took a notice on how he tried to comfort Castro when he struck out to end the game over the weekend.

      Bottom line the team is better with Campana in the current lineup in my opinion.

  • cubmig

    Sveum has his work cut for him with Campana. Yesterday Campana made that work more difficult. I have to agree that Campana in a game rattles pitchers and the defense. He’s a threat—–and it’s because of his speed. If Sveum’s decision on when to start him or insert him into a game contributes the way it did yesterday, then I can’t fault Sveum for using Campana as he does. It’s all in the outcome that counts.

  • mark

    I don’t wanna knock either Tony or Superjoe. Part of what it comes down to–and I agree with Sveum’s experimentation–is that the lineup chemistry seems a bit better, due to Castro seeming to feel better at #2, batting behind DeJesus. If DeJesus got traded, I could see Campana at #2 and Castro leading off. The thing with Mather is simply that Stewart isn’t working out offensively so far, Soto is injured, and they need power. Mather is obviously not the answer at #3, but who is? Castro is better at 1-2, Mather does have plenty of power. But pitchers have obviously studied ways to induce ground balls from Mather. Valuable bench guy, starting for lack of the right guy for #3. Tony, as Sveum said, is a bit of a victim. In the right situation…

    • DocPeterWimsey

      #1, what evidence is there that Castro is “feeling better?”  His numbers have not varied more than expected by random fluxes and opponent pitching ever in his career, never mind this season.

      #2, what “chemistry”?  (What does that even mean?)  Is it not more probable and more likely that the Cubs getting to play the worst team in the NL was the biggest factor?  Not to rain on the sweep (to badly mix metaphors), but the Cubs just won three fairly close games against a team that the rest of the NL has been blowing out routinely.  Indeed, the Pads are the only NL team getting blown out more badly and more frequently than our beloved Cubbies!  (True, that was without Quentin: but anybody who thinks that Quentin was going to single handedly add 25 runs to the Pads totals this year needs several 12 step programs!)

      • Joe

        Good stuff Doc!

      • Norm

        Cubs are on a winning streak, therefore there is chemistry.

      • mark

        Evidence that Castro is more comfortable since the switch? His play since the switch.

      • mark

        It’s also important to remember that, while everyone’s talking about Campana/Mather, the move was just as much about Castro. Sveum says they need more pop at #3–so who’s been batting at #3 all year? Answer: Castro. To my eye, Castro had been slumping, pressing in a role that doesn’t yet suit him. Sveum was right to make that adjustment in a meaningless season (except for draft position and player development).

  • http://bleachernation loyal100more

    if baseball had special teams like they do in football… tony c would be the cubs devin hester. hes an awesome asset to have on your bench, ready to run like the wind and be the difference in a game. yesterday he came off the bench and helped his club win. had he been in the line up, we would not of had that luxury.I think hes worth a roster spot for sure, and maybe worthy of a starter till bjax arrives. but tony c, im glad your a cub, and anyone who thinks hes not a GREAT weapon to have on your roster, just doesnt understand that game changing speed can be the difference in a tight game, if its available… meaning on the bench waiting for that situation to present itself.

  • mark

    Re Castro, like many I think the day may come when he’ll be a real #3 hitter, but that day hasn’t come yet. Given his age, I think it makes sense not to try to force the issue by pushing him before he’s ready. It’s not like the Cubs are going to make the playoffs this year.

    Re Mather, he’s being asked to do things the Cubs didn’t envision for him in Spring Training. His flexibility on defense–Sveum has consistently said that he is better than average everywhere he plays (OF, 3B)–combined with his power potential makes him an asset for the team. Right now there’s no one in the system who can send him to the bench except Campana and/or Stewart. Sveum’s strategy, whether it works out long term or not, makes sense. I say, let it work its way out.

  • cubmig

    I don’t think I have to mention this to the baseball minds here, but Castro is still a “rough” gem in the upgrade stage. His errors at ss have come down and his at bats are still works in progress. His power imo, will come when his selectivity at the plate happens and becomes habit. Where he bats best and where he’ll settle in the lineup, I think, will remain an open question until he matures more. For now I say exploit his aggressiveness at the plate by insuring he gets the most at bats from his batting slot. That means batting him lead off wouldn’t be a bad idea at all. He has the most hits as well as the most at bats. He also has a high SO rate (one more than Stewart according to But, if maturity is to be helped, more at bats might just be the thing to do the trick.

  • doug

    I don’t think I agree with Sveum’s logic. He says he is taking out Campana, who epitomizes “small ball,” in favor of hitters who are more likely to get big hits and homers. Honestly, that’s exactly the kind of Cubs logic that has led to years of losing. I just don’t get it. If you have a guy with a high OBP who is easily able to steal 2nd and even 3rd after he gets on base, that guy is a keeper. The problem is NOT the player who consistently gets on base. The problem is on the NEXT player who can’t bring him home. As a matter of logic, it would only make sense to replace Campana with a big hitter if the big hitter can get homers or doubles/triples more than 1/3 of the time since Campana can consistently get himeself to 2nd or 3rd with his .350 OBP. Even then it would be better to put that big hitter, whoever it might be, AFTER Campana and get a two-fer. Finally, to the person who said that Sveum should take out Campana now because his OBP is likely to go down in the future, isn’t thinking straight. Again, why take out the guy who is performing because he might not perform in the future? Just doesn’t make sense to me.