Cubs Hire Mark Loretta and Bob Tewksbury to Fill Out Coaching Staff

nlcsteamsworkoutbeforegame1lj1m940-na4l

The Cubs finalized their coaching staff on Wednesday hiring a new bench coach and mental skills coordinator. Brandon Hyde, bench coach in 2018, took the managerial job with the Baltimore Orioles last month. Darnell McDonald was the first person to hold the job of mental skills coordinator when it was created in 2015.

Speculation about the bench coach position in particular ran wild the last few weeks. David Ross was originally the focal point of media interest, but he took his name out of consideration. People with ties to the organization such as Chris Denorfia and Will Venable  were also thought of as possible replacements. In the end, Chicago went outside the team by hiring former major league infielder Mark Loretta.

Loretta, a graduate of Northwestern University, played for five teams mainly the Milwaukee Brewers. He played for the Red Sox in 2006 under then General Manager Theo Epstein. After his retirement, Loretta took a job in the San Diego Padres front office. He also managed team Israel in the 2013 World Baseball Classic.

Bob Tewksbury was hired to replace Darnell McDonald as mental skills coordinator. Tewksbury pitched from 1986-1998 with six teams including the Cubs from 1987-88. He has a masters degree in psychology from Boston University. Tewksbury has worked for numerous teams as mental skills coach.

He was a sports psychology coach for the Red Sox under Epstein starting in 2004. Recently, he held a similar position for the San Francisco Giants.

Barring any future departures the Cubs have a set coaching lineup for 2019. Anthony Iapoce as hitting coach, Tommy Hottovy as pitching coach, and Loretta as bench coach.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • A good position for Loretta, since the last two Cubs bench coaches have gone on to MLB Manager positions. I'm hoping Tewks can use his psychology degree to cure Edwards and Chatwood of their phobias of the strike zone!

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Even through I really can’t comment on Darnell McDonald, from learning a little bit about Tewksbury’s resume, he seems to be much more experienced in his current position that McDonald ever could have been especially since Darnell kinda went straight from failed MLB player to becoming the Cubs mental skills coordinator, while Tewks had a longer and better career and much more education and expertise in the subject matter.

    In that regard I have much more hope that he can help the likes of CJ and Chatwood, although I question whether a small part of CJ’s issues come down to his strength and size as he always seems to wear down later in the year.

  • In reply to Cubber Lang:

    Well, if they force CEJr to eat a whole sandwich every now and then, his stamina should improve. He seems to pitch OK until he gets in any kind of trouble and then the wheels fall off. That's where the psychology could work...

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    I remember an article about CE a couple years ago. It said he eats a crazy amount of food. I guess his DNA says he is going to be thin.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    I don't quite see the same thing, although I agree it's psychological. I've said this before but while I'm not overly critical of Maddon I think he's misjudged CJ's abilities quite a bit. He's a guy that either has command or he doesn't, he's never going to work out of situations because it's not in his make up. Maddon lets him flounder and it carries over to the next game sometimes longer. To me all that means is that he's not a closer because you can't have that in the 9th. Sometimes guys are who they are and as a manager it's your job to figure that out. He's a valuable pitcher, maybe not what you'd like him to be, but I'd let him be his best self and pull him when the command isn't there.

  • In reply to TC154:

    You might be right, but I land on the term "abilities." For a developing player, abilities change and, hopefully, grow. The manager's dilemma is recognizing when abilities have changed - and when they haven't, and managing accordingly. Maddon, IMO, often manages according to what he thinks the player's ability SHOULD be, rather than what it actually is. Maybe that's a confidence builder for some players, but it doesn't do much for MY confidence!

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    I guess my point is that everyone motivates differently. It could very well be that CJ will get ticked off when every time he shows the slightest bit of command issues he's yanked and that makes him better. Humans are funny. I've always been a guy that gets better when I'm told I can't do something and my attitude becomes "I'll show you", some people, including my wife would turn off at that kind of thing. She's motivated by positive reinforcement. I'm just saying it wouldn't hurt to try another tack.

  • In reply to TC154:

    After several debacles last season, I recall that our conclusions were:
    1) CJ cannot close
    2) CJ cannot pitch multiple innings
    3) CJ cannot come into a game with men on base
    4) CJ cannot pitch multiple days in a row
    5) Once trouble starts, CJ goes downhill fast.

    What's left? Maybe pitch the 6th or 7th inning, so long as he comes in clean. And then only if he has not pitched the day before.

  • In reply to DropThePuck:

    Yeah, like I just posted to me it's about how he's motivated. Dude has the skills, we see them, and honestly he is better than we give him credit for now, but what he isn't is reliable. Make him feel that, see if that motivates him. Let him know he's lost their confidence. I managed people for 25 years and you'd be surprised at the differences in how people are motivated.

  • In reply to DropThePuck:

    I think he answered a lot of those questions before getting injured. He was filthy until injury. If he can remain injury-free, he appears to be a back-end high-leverage guy.

    Now, I do admit he was awful and I wrote in here that he could not be part of the post-season bullpen.

  • In reply to DropThePuck:

    Hit that nail right on the head.

  • I like the decision to hire guys from outside the organization, even with their familiarity with team Theo (or Jed). I know Theo doesn’t want “yes men,” and it’s probably a good idea to bring around some fresh perspectives for the dugout and clubhouse. Some players might be surprised to hear some of the same messages, yet with a different delivery, which might hopefully resonate better with some of the younger individuals on the team.

  • fb_avatar

    OT. Theo just said that going over the luxury tax isn't a problem this offseason. They just need to move players in order to make a big splash. I would normally say someone driving up the price, but Theo said it. Which is probably true if they can actually move Heyward.

  • In reply to Wrigley0923:

    I believe they’re currently about $20 million above the first luxury tax of $206M, so I’m sure they are ok with that. The question is are they willing to go above the final threshold of $246M? That would cost them 10 spots in the draft and international signing $, in addition to the tax. By signing Harper, they would have to move Hayward to stay under that. Plus, if they can’t move Hayward, it would be tough to have that much long term $ tied up in two right fielders. Which is why I believe the only way they can sign Harper is by moving Hayward

  • In reply to Cubpack:

    I do not believe a team going over the luxury tax by more than $40M will cost a team international signing money. I believe a club loses international signing money by being over the luxury tax and signs a free agent who received qualifying offer from his former team.

  • In reply to 2016 Cubs:

    I think your right. I just looked it up again and I didn’t see anything about international money. So the cost of going $40M over the limit is a 42.5% tax plus losing 10 spots on your top draft pick

  • In reply to Cubpack:

    And also they would not be able to sign a FA next offseason that received a qualifying offer without losing some international $

  • In reply to Cubpack:

    Yes, that is how I understood it also. I also believe the 40%+ tax is only for what is over the $40M luxury tax limit.

  • In reply to 2016 Cubs:

    Yes. This is accurate.

    The penalties are NOT severe the first year. The Cubs are printing cash. There is absolutely no reason for the Cubs to be concerned with the tax. Their revenues cover the tax and then some. It’s not like they would need to get a loan to make payroll.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    I agree somewhat, but signing Harper to a 10 year, $300+ million dollar contract without losing Heyward’s contract means they would have over $400 million tied up in two right fielders. And a payroll over $275M, including the tax, is excessive no matter how much money you can print. Then throw in losing 10 spots in the draft and restrictions on FA signing next off season, I just don’t believe signing Harper makes sense if they can’t trade Heyward

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    Harper would not be a RF if Heyward were not moved. Or Heyward may become the LH platoon with Almora in CF.

  • Having a penalty of 20 M is mice nuts. No more than signing a aged LH pitcher who may or may not have anything left for the coming year. Or add up the signings of Duensing, Ziegler, Descalzo and another sub and you're there.

  • fb_avatar

    it's reported on ML trade rumors that the Yankees are re-signing Zach Britton for 3 years and about $40M. That's a long contract for a lot of money. Now he's off the market who do the Cubs go after? Maybe Adam Ottavino. I just don't believe we've seen the end of activity for the Cubs, and I feel like Harper will eventually end up with us.

  • kelvin herrera is the only reliever still on the market I would want the cubs to sign, probably can get him at a decent price. I personally want no parts of ottavino

    the cubs need a lefty for the pen who can miss bats and not that inconsistent bum justin wilson. Probably will have to get that lefty via trade

  • Herrera should be reasonably cheap but will he be ready to start the season? If we were sure of that then he could cover early for Morrow. Speaking of trading for a lefty Will Smith of the Giants is intriguing. You would only have him for a year but he would be a great boost to the pen. Of course I’m sure that can be said of everyone’s pen. The Giants are looking for outfield help but I’d hate to give up any of our outfielders for one year of control. Maybe they would be willing to do it for one of our 6-10 prospects like a Little or an Underwood. Probably too cheap of a price I know.

  • I still would love to get Michael Lorenzen from Cincinnati via some kind of trade. You get a reliever and pinch hitter with pop in one guy. He had 4 homers in 30 at bats last year, and his fastball is 96mph in games. He was an All American as a hitter-pitcher at Cal State Fullerton.

  • Going back to the Harper discussion , the Cubs would probably like to move salary in order to sign Harper, but I think cost is a bigger factor. He's good, but still just one player. As the number of years of the contract go up the his average yearly salary must go down in order to create value in what is destined to be a risky deal.

  • In reply to 44slug:

    His AAV salary will be in the 30 to 40 million range. I don't see how the Cubs can possibly get 30 to 40 million lower in payroll by trades. The chance of the Cubs signing harper is slim to none.

  • In reply to John57:

    My point was if the Cubs valued Harper, for example, 8yrs for 30m for 240m, then they might find 10yrs at 275m reasonable even with the additional years. Also, 6yrs at 35m would look more reasonable.

  • In reply to 44slug:

    You’d think a 6 year, high AAV would appeal to Harper since he’d still be 32 next time he’d hit free agency.

  • In reply to John57:

    I disagree I would say at this point that the chance is at least 50/50. Theo didn't say they had to offset salary, he said "you would like to" which is Theo speak. I think Harper wants to be a Cub or a Dodger just like I have since the beginning. The Dodgers appear completely uninterested (for now anyway) so his current market is a team he doesn't want to play for in Philadelphia and his old home of Washington which I think he will go there if he has to but would prefer not to which leaves the Cubs as the only team semi-in that he really wants to play for. I wouldn't bet against Theo but we've all taken sides here and nobody is changing anybody's minds. If Washington signs him they're the NL favorite, ditto with LA or Chicago. I would prefer he signs here.

  • In reply to TC154:

    Yep I agree no one is changing anyone else's mind. I guess we have to agree to disagree. My guess is harper signs with Nationals or Phillies for stupid money. Dodgers and Cubs won't pay stupid money right now.

  • In reply to John57:

    White Sox may pay stupid money too.

  • In reply to John57:

    I think the thing you are missing is “who” Harper wants to play for. You have missed this in your rebuttals. He doesn’t want to play for WAS or PHL. Your only point is money. And there is NO WAY Harper signs with the White Sox.

    TC’s analysis is spot on. He likely ends up with the Dodgers as that is his first choice, but it will not be for the richest contract offered. The off the field opportunities will make up for any loss in AAV from another team.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    Thanks, rbrucato. That's exactly what I'm saying. I think he wants to play for the Dodgers first and the Cubs second. Now if neither of those two teams get in the pool he may have to go back to Washington because he really doesn't want to play in Philly. He does have dollars in m ind of course, but as so many of us said all along he want the bright lights and big city and he wants to be a STAR in every facet of that word. To look at the money without considering that aspect is missing the point.

  • In reply to TC154:

    Of course Harper would like it all. The bright lights and the most money. If he has to choose between the two, I think he chooses money. After all his agent is Scott Boras. I think he goes back to Washington because they are willing to spend the most (stupid) money on Harper. Washington had offered him the most money last season, 300 million for 10 years, and now rumor has it they upped their offer significantly. My question to them is why. The Dodgers want to offer at most a 4 or 5 year contract and the Cubs don't have the money in their budget. It seems Washington is bidding against themselves. Boras does seem to be able to get Washington to do irrational things.

  • I think that Harper prefers to sign with Cubs. The question is at what cost? Are Ricketts and 'the boys' willing to compete with an org willing to 'make him an offer that he can't refuse'?

  • In reply to 44slug:

    I don't see him resigning with the Nationals because of 'been there, done that', 'bought the tee shirt'.

  • Ken Rosenthal wrote an article saying the cubs would have to dump salary just to sign a middle reliever like Adam warren for 5-6 mil.The cubs payroll is 228 currently with projected arbitration raises. Now you see why Theo changed his tune after the season ending pc to internal growth etc. very disappointing how he mismanaged the payroll

  • In reply to bolla:

    So basically Harper is a pipe dream without a miraculous significant salary dumping trade.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Plus the Cubs still are going to pick up a reliever or two before the season starts. That may cost 5 to 10 million. The Cubs are going to want to have some money in reserve to pick up a player to fill a hole at the July trading deadline, another 5 to 10 million. That will get the payroll to just under 246 million. For the fans out there who think the Cubs are going to add another 35 AAV million for Harper, are going to be disappointed.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Do we really need another anti-Theo rant after every story in the media? You gotta be having a miserable winter. BTW, Theo didn't "change his tune," he was VERY clear about the need for internal improvement at his season-ending press conference. In reality, without that internal improvement, Bryce Harper won't make much of a difference. He's a great ballplayer, not a savior (just ask Washington...)

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    I think for a team that slumped so much offensively in the 2nd half Harper would make a difference, especially since outside rizzo( who can be up n down himself) the lefty hitters on this team are underwhelming . Happ & Contreras are the only players I believe have potential to be better.heyward sucks,Schwarber sucks,almora really sucks, Russell(no off field issues) is great defensively but has always underwhelmed offensively. That’s a lot of hope for growth. Next winter the cubs will have plenty of flexibility and if they don’t win it I expect changes but in 2019 the cardinals,brewers and dodgers(Braves,nationals and Phillies 2nd tier teams that could play well)worry me,sorry no homer over here. I’m very disappointed in theo, he let me down with terrible fore planning

  • In reply to bolla:

    There is no question that Harper would improve the Cubs offense. We disagree on the "potential" of several Cubs players but I understand that if you're correct, it will be difficult for the Cubs to overcome the competition.

  • In reply to bolla:

    The national media are no longer to be trusted. They've predicted exactly nothing that's happened this winter. As to what might happen I have no idea except that I know that Theo has led an extremely successful disinformation campaign. Rosenthal was one of the last of the national guys I trusted and his falling for this has ended that trust. Use your heads, whether you think Harper is coming or not the money constraints are a ploy and an obvious one. Andrew Friedman has them similarly bamboozled.

  • In reply to TC154:

    The local media(Mooney,sharma,rogers)besides Levine have all said the same.

    Rosenthal gave details about what the cubs tried to do.hes one of the best reporters in mlb. Why shouldn’t he be trusted?

  • In reply to TC154:

    I haven’t found Theo to be someone who does “disinformation campaigns.” In fact, he seems to be remarkably transparent. He obviously emphasizes that there are multiple possible routes the team could take. But when he said on 670 The Score that certain outcomes are very unlikely, I took that to mean Harper. Just based on what he’s saying, I imagine the market would really have to come back to the Cubs for it to be a possibility, and I don’t see that happening. I’m hoping now Schwarber takes a big step forward, like Rizzo and Baez.

  • In reply to Cubs09:

    In 2016, on this blog, we debated how the word from the FO was that they couldn’t go over $130 mil and the payroll ended at $180 mil. I think the truth is always in what he says but so us the disinformation. Again, I’m so tired of talking about this. The whole offseason makes no sense and I’m distrustful of that, and so are a lot of folks. At this point I’m done debating it, I could certainly be dead wrong, but all of us including myself seem to hear what we want or expect to hear and that’s getting us nowhere. What will be will be.

  • In reply to TC154:

    It definitely is a Rorschach test. In my viewing, and as i’ve seen others report, I think Theo is definitely interested in Harper, but would need to be “creative,” in others dump salary. So it seems unlikely. I also don’t see a 10-year, $300m contract, but that is pure speculation. It’s possible if salary is move Theo would spend.

  • In reply to TC154:

    Well, I have not gotten tired of reading your take on the off season. It's been a cold hot stove so fans end up hashing it repetitively, and speculating more. I think it's all good. In the end, we all want the same thing, which is a journey to another run at a world championship.

  • Rosenthal said the cubs explored trades for several of their young players but saw nothing they liked. and he said they came close to trading Russell to a team but that team backed off after his ex dropped details of his abuse and his baby mama chimed in.

    Russell will address the media before spring training and has to improve his value on and off the field in order to be traded. The cubs are really banking on internal growth next season, don’t expect any major changes

  • In reply to bolla:

    Epstein and Hoyer have said repeatedly that the Cubs are counting on internal growth for 2019 and not to count on major FA signings. That is what I expect to happen. Now if some very unusual things happen, they may change their strategy but the chance of that happening is slim to none. I base my opinion on what Epstein/Hoyer say and not Rosenthal.

  • In reply to John57:

    Yes but every time they say that they contradict themselves in the same breath. In Saturdays interview Theo also said when talking about acquisitions "don't bet against us". I think it's typical Theo, saying everything and nothing. Whatever they do they can back it up to what they've said but you can't figure out what they're going to do from it either. It's one of the things I love about these guys.

  • In reply to TC154:

    I'm not saying the cubs can't or won't do anything but options are dwindling for bullpen help and they are currently sitting at 228 in payroll.Harper will be at least 25-30 aav so unless ricketts signs off on blowing past the 246 threshold It's unlikely.Now they could be playing possum but we're 2 months and counting into the offseason and besides signing a bench player and exercising hamels option they have done nothing to give confidence they can make a splash.

  • In reply to John57:

    I haven’t read 1 article or heard 1 interview where Theo said “don’t count on a major free agent signing” as you wrote above. If so, please link.

    You seem to believe this is fact. And I think you are trying way too hard to read between the lines. If I am wrong and missed it, then I apologize. He never made the statement on FA’s that’s I recall. And EVERY single GM speaks about “internal improvements” each and every year as a key to success. That is not a mea culpa that the Cubs are not in play for a big ticket FA. He may have a number in mind and when Boras and him talk if it is agreeable then he pulls the trigger. The number may never be to Theo’s liking and we move on. And the garbage about payroll is awful speculation. The Cubs are cash rich and only getting richer in the coming years.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    I've yet to see a GM step up and say, "We've got a boatload of money that we can't wait to spend, and we won't be outbid on the top (or top 2) FAs. You can take it to the bank, because we HAVE it in the bank!"

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    Yellen at bleeding cubbie blue has put out an article about the Cubs payroll.

    https://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2019/1/8/18172772/cubs-2019-payroll-luxury-tax-update

    Do you still think "the garbage about payroll is awful speculation"? I still say Harper is going back to Washington. They are willing to pay the most money which is Harper's and Boras' primary concern.

  • In reply to John57:

    Yes I do. The Cubs could re-up or sell new advertising to cover the cost of the tax in 2019. Coke would love to oust Pepsi and Miller/Coors would love to oust Bud. And those are only beverages. There is money to be had. So yes, it is garbage. Plus MLB singed a new FOX TV deal and EVERY team was handed a $50 million check. What about the nearly $25 million in summer concerts the Cubs cleared. Where is that money? Again, the Cubs are printing CASH. And I haven't even brought up their own TV deal in the coming years. So, I don't want to hear about payroll or tax. Time to Act Our Size. We are not a second rate team in a small market. We put up with awful teams and asked to stay the course. Well, time to repay the fans for funding those lousy teams.

    I don't believe he goes to WAS. I don't believe salary is the #1 factor. It is a winning team, a young team, and a huge market to be more of a mainstream athlete/personality. As I said, I think Theo has a number in his head. If Boras and Harper come to that number in AAV or years, Theo jumps. If not, Harper plays elsewhere. Elsewhere, IMHO, is LA. I could be wrong and none of us will ever know where this negotiation went because it is not disclosed in public.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    Thanks for your opinion. You are guessing LA. I am guessing Wash. We will just have to wait and see if either of us is right.

  • In reply to John57:

    I hope we are both wrong and it is Chicago Cubs. LOL!!! :-)

  • In reply to John57:

    I'll take the Cubs. Y'all are going to owe me a beer, EACH, when they hold the presser to announce it....

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Done!!!! That would be my favorite money ever spent on beer.

  • White sox just signed kelvin herrera smdh.Not many relievers left on the fa market that can make a difference. kimbrel is definitely out the cubs price range along with ottavino .Maybe take a flyer on cody allen

  • In reply to bolla:

    Consolation prize for sox fans. I'd like to see the Cubs add relievers, but IF they're working on an offer to Harper, it makes no sense to increase payroll on relief pitchers.

  • I don’t love the Bumgarner to the Brewers rumors that are circulating. Not only would a division rival get much stronger but one of our potential takers on Heyward could fill their OF needs elsewhere. Lose-lose.

  • In reply to good4you:

    The cubs won 95 games last season and will be banking on internal growth so they should be good.Not worried at all. /sarcasm

  • In reply to bolla:

    Wondering bolla who you think had good years last year amongst our starters to get to the 95 wins? Bryant? Willy? Russell? Schwarbs? Happ?

    Even if you just look at it objectively, there definitely is room for improvement from within. Yes, Javy could slide back, and really the only other regular that had what I would call a good year was Zo.

  • In reply to KJRyno:

    You certainly have a good point but the division improved also and the cubs still have holes that haven't been addressed.Also 3-4 starters are in their 30's(3 early/mid 30's with tons of innings) the rotation is pretty old, the bullpen still has holes and now we're banking on hope/growth for the offense to improve we've seen these same cubs struggle with situational hitting and risp for 3 seasons now how long can they can keep hoping it changes? The brewers imo overachieved last season they may not win the central again but still will be a playoff contender,cardinals improved drastically after firing matheny and added goldschmiddt,ozuna will be healthy and in a contract year + get reyes back,reds improved,pirates should be solid. I personally think standing pat will end in disappointment

  • In reply to bolla:

    Sometimes it is better to stand pat than do a number of bad moves. I am sure if a good move is possible and available, the FO will do it.

  • In reply to John57:

    The giants want one of peralta,burnes or woodruff for bumgarner OMG.If they get bumgarner and add nelson standing pat is not acceptable sorry.

  • In reply to bolla:

    If a good move is possible, the FO will do it. Just doing a move to do a move won't help. The Cubs can't worry what the other teams are doing. They have to do what is best for them.

  • The Brewers had too many guys having career years to repeat. Everything went the Brewers way, especially in September, when they won 9 of their last 10 many of them 1 run games. They did it with really no starting pitching except for Chacin who will need to repeat one of his best seasons for them to have any chance at a repeat. I hope they try and rely primarily on the bullpen like last year where almost every reliever had his best year. The Cubs, on the other hand, with just their “average” years, especially from Bryant and to a lesser degree Darvish, should be able to repeat mid 90s wins. I see the Brewers regressing into the upper 80s in wins. The team that concerns me the most is the Cardinals whose starting pitching is pretty equal to the Cubs and they got a great middle of the order hitter and added Miller. I think though that the Cubs line up, top to bottom, is stronger than the Cardinals though we still have to shore up the back up catcher situation as well as adding to the pen. To me it looks like a dogfight between the Cubs and Cardinals with the Brewers finishing 5-7 games behind.

  • fb_avatar

    It looks like the Red Sox aren't going into the season without a named closer. It looks like they're pulling a Cub and are going to try to find or pick one up before the deadline. It's looking like a new trend because teams don't want to give out big contracts to RP. Unless they have to or if they're in contention. The players probably hate it, but it makes sense.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Wrigley0923:

    are, not aren't

  • got this from bleacher report, cubs current 2019 bullpen options yikes!!!!!

    Brandon Morrow (34, elbow surgery in November, likely to miss at least April)
    Pedro Strop (33, season ended with a hamstring injury)
    Carl Edwards Jr. (27, erratic season in performance, had a shoulder injury and a forearm injury)
    Steve Cishek (32, wore down late in the year after heavy usage)
    Mike Montgomery (29, might be needed in the rotation, was quietly fairly poor as a reliever last year)
    Brandon Kintzler (34, was terrible with the Cubs, is an aging high-contact pitcher)
    Tyler Chatwood (29, lost all semblance of control last year)
    Brian Duensing (35, was terrible and injured last year)
    Randy Rosario (24, scary peripherals all year)
    Kyle Ryan (27, was good at AAA last year but did not earn call-up)
    Dillon Maples (26, so much talent but hasn’t shown big league command)
    James Norwood (25, good stuff but not established)
    Rowan Wick (26, decent minor league production but not established)

  • In reply to bolla:

    Oh, no! www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4ZpiJIBxZs

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not but you probably think that's a championship caliber bullpen, because you're an epstein kool aid guzzling HOMER.

    and the cubs aren't getting harper thanks to heywards albatross contract that nobody in mlb will want unless the cubs eat 80-100 mil.Vegas has the cubs at 89 wins and the cards at 88.5 wins not good

  • In reply to bolla:

    Sarcastic? Me? No, no - I really enjoy your daily OMG-the-Cubs-are-gonna-suck-and-it's-all-Theo's-fault rants. Every time I read an article about the Cubs, I'm thinking, "Wow, this oughta set bolla off again!" In my 50+ years of being a fan, the Cubs have never been in the place they are now, entering their fifth consecutive year as one of the top teams in baseball. They have their problems, but they also have a legitimate shot at making the World Series. I've used this analogy before - I tend to be a glass half-full kind of guy. Maybe that makes me a HOMER, but when my team has won more games than anyone over the past four years, I'm pretty hopeful they can keep it up. You, on the other hand, seem to be a glass half-empty with a crack in the lip, a hole in the bottom and a small piece of rat excrement floating in it kind of guy. I don't know how you handle the daily despair.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Lol, I'm a realist.Yes the cubs will be good and an nl favorite but other teams are improving too!! That's all I'm saying.If harper goes back to the nationals they will again be very formidable,cardinals,brewers and the 2x nl pennant champ dodgers along with up n coming teams like the braves and phillies who have flexibility to improve via free agency this year in just the nl. Then the al you have the yankees, astros,red sox and indians.

    The cubs winning the most games in mlb over the last 4 years is cute but they've been swept out the nlcs,lost in 5(dominated in the process) in the nlcs and lost the wc game too.Standing pat is not gonna get it done and quite frankly I'm scared

  • In reply to bolla:

    Maybe to take your mind off the MLB hot stove take a creative writing class? Just a thought bubbles.

  • Yasmani Grandal to the brewers OMG!!!!

  • In reply to bolla:

    Is it true he was offered $60m, 4 years by the Mets, and get one year, $7.3m and only one year from Brewers? If so: Genius.

  • In reply to Cubs09:

    I think it is more like $18.25M for one year. Nice move by the Brewers.

  • In reply to 2016 Cubs:

    Yeah, it definitely is a good move by them but it also signals that they aren't going to go for a high profile pitcher like Keuchel or even trade for Bumgarner who's going to make $12 mil this year. They simply didn't have $30 mil to add. The fact that Grandal is a great regular season player a terrific framer indicates that they are, once again, trying to maximize their pitching. Right now, today, I give them the edge in the Division. The only issue with Grandal are his playoff numbers.

  • In reply to TC154:

    Grandall's framing might have been good before, but at the end of last year he couldn't even catch the ball let alone frame it. Dodger's couldn't afford to put him behind the plate in the playoffs

    http://dodgersdigest.com/2018/10/16/the-yasmani-grandal-situation-has-come-to-a-head/

  • In reply to TC154:

    Since Bum and Grandal are one-year deals, maybe the Brewers could swing it?

  • In reply to Cubs09:

    Maybe, it could be a stretch though. Sinking that kind of money (for them anyway) into a one year solution with two players in both money and then prospects for Bumgarner seems unwise though and I don't find their GM to be that shortsighted.

  • In reply to TC154:

    The prospects for Bumgarner would be tough. And he’s risky, because his fastball velocity is down. But if he does bounce back, he’d be the last piece in the puzzle for them.

  • In reply to Cubs09:

    As of right now, if Nelson is as healthy as he seems to be, I would call them the Division favorite over the Cubs. Maybe not by much but by a nose. I see them of having more regression chances, especially Cain and Yelich who likely can't put up quite those numbers again, and the Cubs with more bounceback and progression chances, but even steven I think the Brewers are the favorite right now.

  • In reply to Cubs09:

    I'm having doubts about the 4 / 60 being legit offer.

  • F**k

  • Jeff passan said the brewers aren’t done adding either, it’s sad to watch David stearns Lap Theo 2 consecutive offseasons. Very disheartening

  • In reply to bolla:

    Except Theo lapped them for the last 6 years.

    There is nothing disheartening when you are a 95 win team and have won more games than anyone the last 4 years.

    A nice rebound from Darvish and Theo looks like a genius. When Darvish is your #4, you are better than every other team's #4 which is a huge advantage for us.

    Have a beer and relax. The goal is to win when stats count in April. Not hot stove action in January.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    Ehhh the goal is to win in october and the brewers had more wins than the cubs in september and october.Theo hasn't lapped him for 6 years either, stearns has been brewers gm for 3 years and has already put together a team that pushed the cubs in 2017, took the division in 2018 and are poised to compete for several years with good pitching prospects & 2 more position players prospects in corey ray & heston kiura, unlike the cubs they don't have a barren farm & can develop pitching(same with the cards).It's ok to give them credit

    we can always reminisce about 2016 like bear fans do about 1985.Problem is '85 was 34 years ago and I'm worried the same fate awaits the cubs.The brewers also gave the dodgers a much better fight in the nlcs than the cubs did in 2017

  • In reply to bolla:

    You need to chill a bit. It ain't over. Doesn't anything about this offseason so far remind you of what Theo does either here or in Boston? Do think there is any possible way he's done? If he was going to make marginal moves and be done with it he would have done that a month ago. I would agree that Milwaukee has done a good job, and right now today I'd call them the favorite. You have to figure that 2018 was a career year for Yelich. I think he's a 4.5-5.5 WAR player on a regular basis not the 7.6 WAR he put up in 2018. Also at 32 Cain got better defensively. That's unlikely to happen again, plus it's not like Grandal doesn't come with risks. I think they're an excellent team, I think they're the current favorite on 1/10, but I'd wait until the season to decide how disappointed you are. Life is short man.

  • In reply to TC154:

    Ok I’ll stop and be more patient, but the “internal growth” non sense is frustrating to hear when the teams in the division are improving.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Said “them” meaning the Brewers over the last 6 years. And yes Stearns is part of that.

    I am really surprised at “the sky is falling” and “Theo sucks” posts. It’s ridiculous. This is like saying the game is over in a 4-4 game on the top of the 5th inning.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    Ken Rosenthal said the cubs fo would love a shot at Harper but ownership is unlikely to sign off.so it’s Ricketts tightening the purse strings and I never said Theo sucks Just that stearns lapped him and the cardinals are one move away from dunking on his head

  • In reply to bolla:

    I didn’t realize Rosenthal is in Ricketts office when he and Theo speak. You implied Theo sucks in multiple posts. The words might not be verbatim, but the message has been clear. You can be honest about that.

    It’s pure speculation. I would not give it much credence. If Theo makes no moves then he will answer to the media at the start of ST. Let’s see what he says and then debate it.

    Yes, teams have improved on paper within our division. No question. Let’s see what happens to the Cubs on paper before blowing them up. We won big on paper last off season and we saw hownthat turned out.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Is the offseason over? Do you think the Cubs are done adding?

Leave a comment