People in Chicago can count real good

I love Dusty Baker. I'm not afraid to say it. I'm not a fan of the way he manages, though he does seem to be improving. I like hearing the dude talk. Man, he makes me laugh. Now he's wishing Dale Sveum good luck and let me be the 87,965th person to tell you this: all the luck in the world ain't gonna save Dale Sveum's job in Chicago. That's just how it is with the Cubs. If the manager doesn't win, he's hated. That simple. Cubs aren't going to be doing much winning and by mid-summer the Thoyer love affair will have grown old for some who will have already been expecting significant improvement. I'm telling you, patience is not something Cubs fans have. But back to Dusty.

“Patience is a real virtue here,” Dusty Baker said Monday. “They’ve been patient for a hundred years. That’s a hard sell in Chicago – more patience. They might be patient for a little while, but unlike any other place I’ve been, people count. They can add real good in Chicago. Everybody – men, women and children.”

This season is going to be interesting. For one thing, we might get extended looks at top prospects like Brett Jackson and Anthony Rizzo. It's even possible we get to see newly signed Gerardo Concepcion at some point though I think t's unlikely. Maybe Josh Vitters turns a corner and figures out which pitches are out of the zone. Perhaps Trey McNutt puts the blister issues behind him and takes a big step forward.

The season will also be interesting to see in which ways the Cubs make changes to the roster. The draft is coming in June. The trade deadline follows about 7 to 8 weeks later. Who will still be in Chicago? Who do they acquire? The international free agent signing period will begin. Like the draft, they're limited by how much they can spend, but do they come away with a top prospect or two? By season's end are we talking about how Ian Stewart is beginning to show flashes of what made him an MLB top prospect a few years ago? Or are we talking about how the Cubs need to get rid of him and let just about anyone else play the position?

Maybe at that point the Cubs can start fielding a consistently good team and a manager can stick around longer than that.

Finally, what are Cubs fans going to be thinking? We already know they aren't interested in the team right now. They can't even sell tickets to the opening of Theo and Jed, Part 1. it's already clear the box office sales for the first installment will flop. Can they show even the slightest improvement over the year to make fans want to show up for Part 2? If not, what happens to their value when their WGN contract runs out after the next sequel? If fans aren't watching, they're not going to get maximum value in any tv deal. How can they get asses in the seats in 2014 if they suck in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013?

Related to that, just how impatient will the fans be? There's no point in asking how patient they will be. It's not a matter of them being patient or not. At some point soon they will lose it and turn on Thoyer. It's a matter of time. The question is just how much they're going to turn and how many of them? Does the media?

Getting back to Dale Sveum's shelf life, it won't be long. Two years. Maybe three. You have to go back to Jim Riggleman to find a Cubs manager who lasted more than 4 years. That was during a time when the Tribune couldn't have cared less how the Cubs did. Those teams won 73, 76, 68, 90 and 67 games. After Riggleman you have to go back to Leo Durocher's 6+ years as the team's manager from 166 through part of the 1972 season. Since Durocher, few Cubs managers have lasted more than 3 years. Zimmer lasted 3+. Didn't make it to 4. Don Baylor almost reached 3. Baker managed 4 years. Lou managed 3+.

Based on how likely it is the Cubs contend at any point in the next 2 to 3 years, I don't see how Dale Sveum sticks around longer than that. In my opinion, the best he can hope to claim is being a part of the better Cubs teams that come after he's been let go. So go ahead, get to know Dale Sveum. Just don't get too attached. He won't be around more than 3 years.

Discredited Fantasy Baseball II: Attack of the Chones

I've reopened our ESPN fantasy baseball league for another season. The draft is tentatively set for Tuesday, March 20 at 8:00 CST. It is a 12 team, 5×5 Roto league (NOT head to head, you accumulate statistics in 10 categories over an entire season). The categories for hitters are R, RBI, SLG, OBP, and net stolen bases. The categories for pitchers are quality starts, K, HR allowed, WHIP, and saves.

If you were in last year, you should have already auto-enrolled into this year's league. If you want in this year for any spots that open up, post that in the comments of this thread. Spots will be given on a first-come first-served basis as they become available.

Plus if you win, you get this:

Fun with Photoshop

Actually it's fun with GIMP as I didn't buy Photoshop, but I thought I'd share this in an unOV so I don't derail your regular conversations about politics and Game of Thrones. Enjoy!

Indy Theo Parody

Are some players rushed to the Major Leagues

The guy I used to run The Hawkeye State with and who now helps run The High Porch Picnic, another Hawkeyes blog, asked me a question on twitter yesterday.

I've always wanted your opinion: Did Corey Patterson not work out because he was awful, or because the Cubs rushed him?

It's not something I've thought all that much about for several years. I recall thinking about this for the first time back in 2005 when Patterson was struggling. We often heard about how his struggles were related to him being rushed to the big leagues several years earlier. Patterson reached the big leagues in his age 20 season. He had just turned 21 and rosters expanded. He played in 11 games in 2000 and I remember being as excited as I'd ever been about a young Cubs player. He would spend much of the next season back in the minors, but managed to play in 59 games in 2001. He took over full time in 2002.

Was he rushed? To be honest, I really don't even know what that means. Consider an 18 year old in Low A who is hitting the ball rather well. He's young for the level, but is also showing that he's superior to much of the competition. What is a team supposed to do? Leave the player on track for one season per year or challenge him? There may be some who think taking it more slowly would be the right way to do it, but what exactly is that 18 year old going to learn in a level he's clearly too good to be in? Can he learn more at the next level? I don't know the answer to this question and I'm not sure anybody else does.

While being superior to the competition may indicate that you should move up a level to be challenged, it also may be a good time to focus on aspects of the game that are likely to trip you up down the road. However, would working on that in a league you're superior be successful? Again, I don't know.

If we move away from baseball for a minute and look at this from a different perspective it might help us. Imagine an 18 year old kid beginning college. He's taking Calc 101, but it's a breeze. He's acing all the tests. He's spending far less time working on it than the other kids are. Would it be beneficial to leave this 18 year old in that class or challenge him?

I think the answer becomes clear in this case. Leaving him in Calc 101 is going to accomplish very little. Parents and educators agree with this. Being challenged in the classroom is considered to be far more important than acing every test. At least it is for some people anyway. Parents want to see their children being challenged. They certainly want to see them perform well, but if it comes to easy for them the student could be complacent. When the math gets harder it may be more difficult for him as he hasn't developed the study habits he'll require later on. He could become disappointed in himself as it becomes more difficult.

Now imagine a 30 year old in middle management. He's able to complete his required tasks easily. He has time to spend on twitter and Facebook. He's sending emails to his family. The amount of work he's been given is less than he is capable of accomplishing. In the business world the bosses will just give the guy more work to do without increasing his pay. But they will give him more work than they gave the previous employee because he can handle more.

In the working world and in the classroom challenging a person is seen as more important than letting someone be unchallenged. I think this is true in sports and I believe the way players are promoted shows that those running the minor league systems (all of them) agree. It's better to send the 18 year old excelling in Low A to High A than it is to have him work on a few things against inferior competition. Teams do this all the time. There are many players who are promoted aggressively through the minor leagues.

When we're talking about who was rushed and who wasn't, I'd also add that what we're really talking about is who didn't live up to expectations and who did. If Corey Patterson turned into half the player we expected I don't think we'd be talking about whether or not he was rushed. Was Evan Longoria rushed? What about Starlin Castro? Ken Griffey, Jr.? Mike Leake?

Think about it for a moment. If rushing players was detrimental to their future, no player would be rushed. Teams invest large sums of money and a significant amount of time in developing these players. It's in their interest to do everything they can to ensure each player has the best chance to succeed. If rushing a player was a negative, couldn't we also sit here and wonder how good Evan Longoria would be if he wasn't rushed to the big leagues?

I understand why people think certain players were rushed. They're young and because of this high expectations are placed on the athlete. Just look at Starlin Castro. He's already the face of the Cubs franchise and he's 22 years old. He's also going to disappoint because he won't be half as good as many people are expecting. Many are expecting him to be a superstar and Castro is not that. There are too many holes in his game to make it likely he reaches that level. When these guys fail to reach expectations, they wonder what could have gone wrong. But really, we already know what went wrong. Take a look at the 1st round of the 2004 Draft.

The best player in the country at the time never even reached the big leagues. Of the 41 1st round picks, only Justin Verlander, Jered Weaver, Stephen Drew, Gio Gonzalez, Billy Butler and Huston Street have been worth more than 5 rWAR. Only Weaver (26.7) and Verlander (26.8) have been worth more than 10.7. 19 of the 41 either didn't reach the big leagues or were worth 0 rWAR or less. All of thse first round picks had considerable talent and half of them provided no value to the big league club. 26 of them provided less than 1 rWAR. All of them were elite talents where they played prior to the draft. A couple remain elite, but the others have reached a point where they're not only no longer better than everyone else, but for most of them they're worse than everybody else. It happens.

It happened with Corey Patterson. It's happened with many other Cubs draft picks over the last 15+ years.

While I'm not certain I know the answer to this question, I am relatively confident that Patterson failing to reach his potential had little to nothing to do with rushing him. I could be wrong, but I don't know why baseball would be so different than everything else.

Pre-Season NL Power Rankings

Throughout the season we'll be publishing our NL Power Rankings. We won't do this each week and maybe not even every other week, but we figured there's going to be little to talk about with regards to the Cubs so we needed as many alternatives as possible. We also plan to invite someone each time to take part in it. For the pre-season rankings we contacted Brett from Bleacher Nation and he was more than happy to take part. The team comments are from one of the four who run Obstructed View unless otherwise noted.

Rk.	Team	W-L	Comment	Up/Dwn
1		0-0	Pitching, pitching and pitching. They're the Braves of the 1990s. Great pitching, bad offense. Halladay, Lee and Hamels are as good as it gets for the top 3 in a rotation.	–
2		0-0	The Braves are one of three teams in the NL East who could potentially be the best team in the league. Chipper is still well above average, they have a very good catcher in McCann, and Heyward is looking to improve. The Braves rotation doesn't match the Phillies, but Hudson and Hanson make a strong top of the rotation.	–
3		0-0	Every year the Cardinals add a new Cub killer, and this year it's Carlos Beltran (career 1.004 OPS vs. Cub pitching). The return of Adam Wainwright should help, because he's good at baseball, but their best players are pretty old and none are named Pujols. They won't be injury proof.	–
4		0-0	If Aroldis Chapman can stick in the rotation, they'll be harder to outscore on a regular basis.	–
5		0-0	The uniforms still suck. — Brett, Bleacher Nation	–
6		0-0	They'll have Buster Posey (i.e. half their offense) back, which should edge them ahead of the rest of the NL West.	–
7		0-0	Something's brewing in Milwaukee's fridge, and it smells extra strong. Ryan Braun benefited from the arbiter's rash decision, Bud Selig is pissed, and the Brewers could collect the NL Central crown on puns alone. They can just FedEx this one in.	–
8		0-0	Should be docked a few wins for signing berselius's other bete noire, Joe Saunders. Ian Kennedy proving he's not a flash in the pan will be a big part in any success they have.	–
9		0-0	The starting rotation has huge upside and could be very formidable if they can get a full season out of Strasburg at the top.	–
10		0-0	The Rockies big offseason moves brought them ex-Cubs and Michael Cuddyer. It will be fun to see Tyler Colvin hit the occasional 800-ft homer, but Cargo and Tulo will still be what keeps this team likely either to contend or to acquire Mike Quade as their new nickname guy.	–
11		0-0	They have a superstar in Matt Kemp, but he can't do it all	–
12		0-0	The trade for Alonso is still a bit of a head-scratcher. I think they'll still have trouble scoring more than 600 runs this season.	–
13		0-0	Would have had them number one until the Burnett injury. — Brett, Bleacher Nation	–
14		0-0	Um … Citi Field is nice? — Brett, Bleacher Nation	–
15		0-0	They look to have the best bunting in the National League.	–
16		0-0	My mother said if I can't say anything nice, I shouldn't say anything at all.	–

Our individual rankings are below.

Rk.	mb21	And Counting	berselius	Aisle 424	Brett Taylor
1	Phillies	Phillies	Phillies	Phillies	Braves
2	Reds	Marlins	Cardinals	Brewers	Marlins
3	Braves	Cardinals	Reds	Braves	Reds
4	Marlins	Brewers	Nationals	Diamondbacks	Cardinals
5	Giants	Braves	Braves	Cardinals	Phillies
6	Brewers	Giants	Giants	Marlins	Giants
7	Cardinals	Reds	Brewers	Reds	Diamondbacks
8	Diamondbacks	Diamondbacks	Diamondbacks	Giants	Brewers
9	Nationals	Nationals	Rockies	Nationals	Nationals
10	Rockies	Rockies	Marlins	Pirates	Rockies
11	Dodgers	Dodgers	Padres	Rockies	Padres
12	Mets	Cubs	Dodgers	Dodgers	Dodgers
13	Padres	Pirates	Cubs	Padres	Pirates
14	Pirates	Padres	Mets	Mets	Mets
15	Cubs	Mets	Pirates	Cubs	Cubs
16	Astros	Astros	Astros	Astros	Astros

A contest for folks who like scrap and heart

Hey guys, thought I'd share this in an un-OV blog so it doesn't intrude with the normal discussions about fatty acid polymerization or Breaking Bad stuff. We're having a contest to give away swag and all are welcome to enter, just leave a comment in the blog article linked below and you're automatically in. Thanks for playing!

WSD contest for April 2012

It's a bit early, but figured we'd get a head start. If you guess "zero" and Tony Campana gets injured in spring training, then you're pretty much automatically in the random drawing to win (dying laughing)

Daily Facepalm – 2.18.12, Evening Edition

Neverending Story

Remember when we were on the 5-yard line in the Theo compensation talks? Remember when Bud Selig said he'd get involved if a decision hadn't been agreed to by sometime in November? Remember when he said the same thing about December? January? Remember two weeks ago when were told Bud would have a decision by week's end? Rememer this week when we were told the same thing? To the surprise of exactly zero people this has been delayed yet again.

At this stage, the source says, the Sox are hopeful of acquiring one quality minor-league prospect from the Cubs. They’re resigned to not getting a major leaguer from the Cubs, and acknowledge it probably won’t be one of the Cubs’ premium prospects, like a Brett Jackson or Josh Vitters. But the source says the Sox are insisting on acquiring a prospect with a legitimate chance of making it to the big leagues as a contributor.

The Red Sox expect a decision in the coming week, the source said. — Gordon Edes

I think GW said it best recently when he said he was confident that the decision would be a player to be named later.

By the way, what prospect doesn't have a legitimate chance of making it to the big leagues as a contributor? If Ryan Theriot and Darwin Barney can do it then so can anyone else. If all they want is that give them the lowest ranked prospect in the organization. Someone like Hayden Simpson who was accidentally chosen in the first round of the draft by the Cubs.

The Cubs' Way

The Cubs' Way is now a manual. This is my favorite quote:

You can't figure this thing out. — Theo Epstein

Recently DFA'd

Blake DeWitt still has a chance to compete for the 2nd base job if he decides to return to the organization. He'd just add one more mediocre 2nd basemen to the mix.

Things That Will Be A Distraction

Theo doesn't think the Starlin Castro rape allegations will be a distraction.

MESA, Ariz. — Starlin Castro should be at camp when position players are scheduled to report on Thursday, and the offseason allegations surrounding him are not expected to be a distraction, said president of baseball operations Theo Epstein.

Let's remember that the Cubs sportwriters didn't overreact to someone chatting with his friends and family on a computer. They didn't overreact to a pitcher taking batting practice and they didn't overreact to a pitcher hanging out in a park. The media will make whatever the hell they want a distraction. Thankfully for Castro he isn't alleged to have done any of the above. So Theo may be right.

A Recent Performance I Enjoyed

My Top 2012 Cubs Prospects, Part 1

Following the Cubs minor leagues in 2012 is probably going to be more fun than following the big league team. Hopefully it will be more rewarding than what we're likely to see from the 2012 Cubs. Each year several sources release their top prospect lists. We talk a lot about them here and I thought I'd take a stab at it. I needed a methodology and came up with something that works for me. Any prospect list is going to be subjective and mine is no different.

We may disagree on some of the prospects that belong in the top 10, but it's most likely anyone in the top 20 will also be in any top 10 list. So what I've done is take John Sickels top Cubs prospects for 2012 as a starting point. This part is about the methodology I'll be using to rank the prospects.

ETA: The closer a player is to the big league the less uncertainty in our expectations. If a player has an ETA of 2012 he's already played ball in the upper minors and probably even in AAA. The player has not been weeded out along the way like so many other prospects are. This is important and I feel that too many ranking systems ignore this. We know a hell of a lot more about Brett Jackson and his chances of success at the MLB level than we do Javier Baez. Just think about it. We know more about Javier Baez's future in baseball than we do the top Little League player in the world. This is just common sense. I see no reason this information should not be included.
Position: It's quite important when determining the future value of a prospect to know what position he currently plays. A starting pitcher has more value than a reliever even though relievers have more impressive numbers. A left fielder has less value than a catcher. This information is taken into consideration with pitchers, but far too often it's ignored or not properly weighted when ranking position players.
Potential: You can call this the ceiling of the player if you want. The potential and ceiling are really the same thing. This is about how good the player could be based on scouting reports available. This already weights heavily in others rankings and it should here too.
Performance: How well the player has done is the single best indication of how well he'll do in the future. Other take this into consideration when raking players. How could you not? You don't find too many 23 year old shortstops among the top 100 who are average defensively and have a .650 OPS. Performance matters, but it's another thing I believe is not given enough attention.

While the scoring is subjective, I tried to be as unbiased as possible. If the player's ETA was 2012 (or he'd already reached the big leagues like Anthony Rizzo has), he receives 10 points. If the ETA is 2013 he gets 9. I then decreased by 2 for each additional year. So a player whose ETA is 2014 would get 7 points. A player whose ETA is 2016 would get 3. The further the ETA is, the less we know about the player. I dropped the point by only one for an ETA of 2013 because that player has likely already played in at least High A.

The scoring for position is below:

Catcher: 10
SS: 9
Starting Pitcher: 8
2B/3B/CF: 7
LF/RF: 6
1B: 5
Relief pitcher: 4

Arguments can easily be made that a SP prospect is worth more than double a relief prospect, but considering the rate of injuries for pitchers I'm sticking with what's above.

For potential I'm using various scouting reports and keeping things relatively simple regarding points. You get 10 for star player, 8 for above average, 6 for average, 4 for OK and 2 for worse than that. Since we're dealing with top prospects let's hope the Cubs don't have any that are a 2.

To assign points for performance, it's going to hurt most the recent draft picks. I can't assign 10 points for someone who hit well in 17 rookie league at-bats. Those guys are almost entirey potential at this point. The only information we have on these players are their scouting reports. I've long felt that top 10 lists are too populated with last year's draft picks. Many of whom didn't play, or if they did only played for a couple weeks. We've already established that all prospect rankers are including performance, but for recent draft picks they don't. I'm going to evaluate them on the same criteria.

You may be wondering where age factors into this. it's more impressive if a 21 year old is even league average in AA than it is a 24 year old being slightly above average. The fact the 21 year old is already at AA tells us that among his minor league peers he is damn good. You see where age becomes a factor though. It's the performance of the player and his age at the level he's playing in. I haven't explained the points for peformance yet, but they are explained below.

8 points for well above average performance
7 points for above average
5 points for average
4 points for below average

A player who has been well above average, say Anthony Rizzo, and is also quite young, earns an additional 2 points. Rizzo's performance would qualify as 10 points. You get 2 points or 0 points for age. I'm using 25 for AAA and a year younger for each level lower. If a prospect is 2 years younger than that, he gets 2 points. Brett Jackson was 23 last year in AAA so he earns 2 points. But that's not enough. That would make Rizzo and Jackson worth 10 points based on performance and that's not fair. Rizzo was younger and better. So in this category there's an additional 2 points available. One of those points will be given out for MVP caliber performance and the other for reaching the big leagues at 22 or younger. Rizzo deserves more points for performance than Jackson. This would give him 12 and Jackson would get 10.

The maximum points would be 42. That would be a catcher, 22 or younger, who has already reached the big leagues, performed at an MVP caliber season in AAA the year before, and have the potential to be a star. Buster Posey probably would have been 41 points on this scale. He was 23 in AAA in 2010.

Here's the list I'll be using with one exception: Gerardo Concepcion will be included. Jorge Soler will be too if the Cubs sign him quickly enough.

If there's something here I shouldn't consider or something I should, make your case in the comments.

Who do the Cubs trade for Theo Epstein?

The Cubs hired Theo Epstein 4 months ago and it was about that time that we were told the two sides were on the 5-yard line regarding compensation. I can only assume that Ken O'Keefe is running the offense. Every week we're told that Bud Selig will resolve the compensation issue soon. Each week goes by without a resolution. Recently the Boston media has wondered if Reed Johnson and Jeff Baker might be the start of compensation.

I'll admit that I have no freaking clue who they end getting, but there are certain rules regarding transactions. That's what this is. You can call it compensation, but it's a trade. For Andrew Cashner, the Padres sent the Cubs Anthony Rizzo as compensation. Same thing. For example:

Florida Marlins traded RHP Jhan Marinez and SS Osvaldo Martinez to Chicago White Sox and Bristol White Sox traded RHP Ricardo Andres to Greensboro Grasshoppers.

That's the official transaction listed on the Miami Marlins website on September 29th when they traded those two players for Ozzie Guillen. It's quite clearly a trade.

Because of this, there are a few things to consider. First, players who are drafted cannot be traded until one year after they signed their contract. This eliminates all of the 2011 Cubs draft picks. Second, teams cannot trade a recently signed free agent until June 15th. This is why there are no sign and trades in baseball. Draft picks aren't signed and then traded and free agents aren't either. It's not allowed. A player could theoretically approve a trade as far as I know. At least with regards to free agents. It's entirely possible Reed Johnson could approve a trade to the Red Sox, but why would he?

He chose to sign with the Cubs because he likes Chicago. He could have chosen to sign with the Red Sox this offseason, but didn't. I see no reason to think he'd be willing to accept a trade.

In the article by Nick Cafardo linked earlier in the post he wonders if Anthony Rizzo might be in play. You've got to be kidding me. He's a top 100 prospect. The Marlins didn't get close to a top 100 prospect in return for Guillen and there was a possibility of tampering charges being filed. I actually find it hard to believe that a player on the 40-man roster would be traded to the Red Sox for this. I can't imagine Bud Selig deciding it's fair to send a rostered player to Boston when the Cubs could have used that roster spot to protect someone else earlier on. Someone like Ryan Flaherty. He absolutely would have been protected if Josh Vitters wasn't on the 40-man roster.

But who knows? Bud Selig is an idiot so I don't have any idea. He could give the Red Sox Matt Garza and Starlin Castro and it wouldn't even surprise me. I'd shrug my shoulders and say to myself, Bud being Bud.

When the media told us 4 months ago the Cubs were on the 5-yard line it would have been helpful to know that they were on their own 5-yard line, both teams had infinite timeouts and the Cubs had the ball for eternity.

Daily Facepalm 2.13.12

Cuban outfielder update

The Cubs are apparently no longer in on Cespedes, according to Joe Frisaro. He and KG have heard from sources that the Cubs are making a "big, big push" for 19-year old Cuban outfielder Jorge Soler. According to Frisaro the Cubs are willing to spend $27.5m, though it is unknown over how many years.

Here's BA's report of Soler from a month or so ago, helpfully linked by Pezcore:

He's a 19-year-old athlete with five-tool potential. Six-foot-3 and 205 pounds, Soler has explosive bat speed and power potential. He also has plus speed and arm strength and profiles as a classic right fielder, though he runs well enough to play center. Because of his youth, he'll need some time to develop, but he should be worth the wait.

As for the 2012 Top 100 Prospects list, Soler is somewhat similar to Royals outfielder Bubba Starling, the fifth overall pick in the 2011 draft. Starling has the advantages of being more athletic and a better bet to stay in center field. I'd see both of them sitting in the 11-20 range on our next Top 100.

Soler is four years younger and more talented than Leonys Martin, another Cuban outfielder who signed a $15.6 million major league contract with the Rangers in April. Once Soler is cleared to sign with a major league team, he's expected to top Martin's deal.

News in Z

Per Buster Olney, apparently Z has been clocked at 94-95 mph this winter. No word on whether he is in the best shape of his life, or whether that 95 mph reading came while Z was driving his car.

Is there a Cubs game today?

No.

Player I wish was around to give quotes to spice up this eventless season.

Brandon McCarthy:

Gronkowski is a grown man who’s allowed to do whatever he feels like doing. Just because you’re grieving as a New England fan, doesn’t mean all the players should be sitting in a hotel conference room alternating between crying and devising a plan to get Tim Tebow and his super magic in a trade.

also:

The hats: Really scraping the bottom of the barrel here, but I think this is the most common complaint. MLB issues these spring training hats that are pretty universally hated. They usually have a silly line(s) on them so they’re different from the regular season hats, and the material feels like a wet dish rag if you sweat in them (which you will). Every day that you put them on, you get the same sad feeling Ralphie got in A Christmas Story when he’s wearing the footed pajamas.

(h/t to Mish and Tango)

Xanatos Gambit of the weekend

Courtesy of fang:

I seriously am half-wondering if Thoyer signed him [Concepcion] on behalf of some Japanese team or something who has a trade chip they’re after, thus rendering the MLB options and everything meaningless. That rule 5 thing they did flipping some random to the Monterrey Sultanas was so weird that I keep thinking that some equal and opposite weird thing is going to have to happen later that will make sense of it.

Has the Theo compensation been decided yet?

Speaking of The Simpsons

Apparently the Grammy awards were last night. I've never been a big fan of awards events but The Simpsons long ago cemented my opinion as to the relative worth of the Grammys.