I’m as impressed by his performance as anyone, but I’ve probably now heard my lifetime quotient of “Kung Fu Panda” and terrible “Pandamonium” puns. Also, how about Barry Zito?
- Bruce Miles, who consistently “gets it,” once again goes to the trouble of printing Theo Epstein’s full comments on a variety of underreported subjects from his press visit on Tuesday. I gave you the gist yesterday, but it’s good to see his thoughts on Ian Stewart, Chris Volstad, and plate discipline problems in their entirety.
- On the latter, his comments were borderline excoriating of the prior regime. Why would you not want to print this: “If there was one thing that I was surprised by in a negative way it was how pervasive the lack of plate discipline was in the whole organization, at the major-league level, upper minors, lower minors, draft decision making and protocol. It’s just something that has not been a factor for a long time, and we’re paying the price for that. It’s embedded. It’s institutionalized, so we have to be really, really vigilant in turning that around.” Whew. I mean, Theo just blasted the prior regime for essentially ignoring plate discipline (something we, as fans, have seen and griped about for 10 years). I want to make sure everyone sees that.
- Part of the reason it’s surprising to hear Theo state this so plainly is that he and Jim Hendry are considered friends (the MLB front office universe is a small town). I’m sure Theo didn’t mean his comments to be a direct rip on Hendry, but let’s be perfectly plain: they were.
- It sounds like MLB Network’s Dan Plesac is indeed interested in the Cubs’ open color gig. The issue there, though, is that he just signed a new deal with MLBN, and it’s unclear how willing WGN would be to try and buy him out (or how interested Plesac would be in contributing to that buy-out fund). This remains the issue with Rick Sutcliffe, as well, who is under contract with ESPN.
- Doug Padilla’s review of the 2012 Cubs concludes with the front office, and it goes about as you’d expect: good moves, bad results, long process, and we’ll see what the future looks like.
- Paul Sullivan does a Q&A, and, to his credit, accepts and prints a question that is designed to do little more than (unfairly) rip him (for not saying enough positive things about Ian Stewart, which, um … ). And then he answered the question without taking a shot back at the reader.
- If you didn’t have a chance to check out the site’s first podcast (me, together with Sahadev Sharma), here’s your reminder.