Mark DeRosa waits to be introduced at a news conference Sunday in St. Louis.
Take a look at this photo of Mark DeRosa, decked out in Cardinals red, and say hello to the ongoing nightmare that has been the 2009 Cubs season.
Bad enough that the Cubs lost two of three games to the White Sox over the weekend. Even worse that the game they won was overshadowed by Lou PIniella's blowup with volatile outfielder Milton Bradley. The ultimate insult came Saturday night with the acquisition of fan favorite DeRosa by archrival St. Louis, which strengthened its bid to unseat the Cubs as NL Central champions by obtaining the popular player who was banished from the North Side to make way for Bradley.
DeRosa went 0-for-3 with a walk Sunday as St. Louis lost 6-2 to Minnesota, but he gives the Cardinals the extra bat their lineup has lacked. In St. Louis, the move is being interpreted as a sign that the Cardinals are committed to winning this season. As columnist Bernie Miklasz wrote in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, ''This will be good for the morale of the team. [Tony] La Russa and his staff and the players were working hard and battling like crazy to keep this team in the hunt for 1st place in the NL Central. To a man, they were waiting for help to arrive. If help didn't arrive, a feeling of abandonment would have set in. Now they'll get a boost, just by knowing that ownership and management are really behind them.''
Cubs fans who voiced their deep affection for DeRosa when the Indians visited Wrigley Field recently will get another chance when St. Louis comes calling the weekend of July 10-12. Look for DeRosa's reception as a member of the Cardinals to be more muted, but many will cheer him just to send another message of disapproval to Cubs GM Jim Hendry.
True, DeRosa's skills seemingly have taken on mythical proportions. His numbers are solid, not great (.270, 13 homers, 50 RBI); he's a handy, versatile utility man and a clutch hitter --something the Cubs sorely lack -- but he's not a game-changer. On paper, he shouldn't have represented such a big loss. But his absence has been made more glaring by the injury to Aramis Ramirez and the subpar hitting of Alfonso Soriano, Geovany Soto and Kosuke Fukudome, among others.
DeRosa's true value involves "intangibles." If you doubt the importance of "good clubhouse guys," check out the quotes from his former Cubs teammates who were asked Sunday about DeRosa going to St. Louis. Most telling is the one from Sean Marshall, who wistfully reflects on how good the Cubs' clubhouse atmosphere was last season -- an obvious indictment of the current atmosphere (Marshall caught himself and tried to add that things also were just peachy this year, but too late).
Where does all this leave the Cubs? Does Hendry need to make a deal to counter the Cardinals' move? What does this team need to do to bounce back from its dreadful weekend? Perhaps the heart-to-heart talk between Bradley and Piniella that resulted from their dust-up will help get the moody right-fielder back on track.
One overlooked tidbit that arose from the Bradley incident: Word of grumbling from teammates that he is such a "me-first" guy obsessed with his on-base percentage that he is more concerned about coaxing walks with runners on base than putting the ball in play and trying to drive in runs. When you're being paid $30 million, you shouldn't always be leaving it up to the guy batting behind you to get the runs home. No wonder he still has only 16 RBI (34 fewer than DeRosa).
Milton Bradley and Mark DeRosa: When October rolls around, which of the two players is a better bet to be in the postseason?
Folks don't understand players like Bradley. No question about it - Milton Bradley is the guy you want around in the playoffs. He is not dealing well with the pressure that the Cubs bring, but when it gets down to it, this is the guy you want. I find it hilarious that anyone on the squad would be talking crazy about the man's game when they have collectively been mediocre. Bradley is having problems dealing with the pressure of that contract, being in the Cubs fishbowl, replacing DeRosa, and being the lightening rod of a slumping team. Lou can't manage its Bradley's fault, Soriano cant hit its Bradley's fault, Punto cant field its Bradley's fault, Z gets banged its Bradley's fault. Now if Dusty Baker was coaching this squad - it would have been HIS FAULT. Dusty WISHES he had this kind of talent to manage.
Bradley and Hendry are taking ALL the lumps. And Mark DeRosa is going to come back down to earth. He's hot, but these are not his career numbers, thats why the Cubs let him go. Wasn't anything wrong with the Cubs last year EXCEPT they choked. Hendry did his best to make sure that didn't happen again this year. He might have to blow it up.
Is it just me...or is this picture something you'd expect to see on a billboard on Broadway near Wrigley, rather than from an MLB public relations person?
So Bradley is having trouble with the pressure of his contract. We fans are supposed to give him a break on that? You mean if not for that pressure, we would see his real sparkling personality warm up the clubhouse? The guy is a big problem and it was a mistake to sign him to a giant multi year contract. The Cubs 2009 mess is not all Bradley's fault, just a major part of it. He hasn't delivered at the bat. In theory he's the perfect guy for this team, selfish, mean, angry; just the kind of guy who could care less about 1000 years of not winning. So the pressures's got to him?. Does the guy need a reason to be unpleasant? Look at his major league bio, how many teams have dumped him? Next I'll hear that the pressure would've got to Manny here too! Can anybody handle it?
The Cubs win a couple of games by coming from behind and then it is all about how they have saved their sinking ship.
The White Sox take 2 of 3 from the hottest team in baseball (Dodgers) and the story is how the Cubs are sucking.
The White Sox take 2 of 3 from the Cubs and once again the story is all about the Cubs stinking it up and scary the sight of Mark DeRosa in a Cardinals uniform.
Danks pitches great and shuts down the Cubs but it is all about the struggling Cubs hitters instead. “What can we do? Who will save us?”
Pierzynski is hitting .295 but we just have to talk about Soto not doing anything but eating himself into mediocrity. Guess those Doritos taste really good when you are toking up eh Geovany?
Unless it is Ozzie trying to get a rise from the Cubs fans then it is all about Bradley being a jerk, Lou has lost control, Zambrano is a crybaby, Fukudome is in another tailspin....
That is a lot of attention being given to a 4th place, below .500 team with a lot of unlikable players on the roster.
Let me guess. As soon as the Sox hit another skid or Ozzie says something that you don't like we will see a story about them right away.
All this Cubs bashing has me asking one question...
IS ROMAN BACK?
With the Cubs back to their inconsistent ways and the White Sox doing rather well lately with the reborn Scott Podsednik, it's rather strange seeing both teams with basically similar records. This is just way too much negative attention on a Cubs team that is still basically in contention for the Division title. The Cubs are so inconsistent that it's getting tiresome discussing about how well they do one week, then they stink the next week and then trying to predict how this will all spell another inevitable doom of disappointment come September or October. If it isn't Bradley, it's Marmol, then it's DeRosa to the Cards, then it's Zambrano again, never mind the other problems on the team. Right now, nothing is clicking for the team, but they just continue to play .500 ball just like basically half of the entire National League. I'd rather just let the season play out and then discuss what went wrong or right in the end, rather than follow this media microscope soap opera almost daily it seems like now. The White Sox are the better baseball team right now, simple as that, and they don't even have Quentin in the lineup. Podsednik is a revelation.
Oh, and regarding Bradley and his supposed "on base" efficiency over run production, why not slot him in the lineup near the top of the order at #2 then and play him to his strengths? That's pretty much what Lou is lacking when experimenting on the lineups. It goes back to the same old argument about Soriano shouldn't be leading off, but what do I know, I played more basketball and football back then, not baseball. It just seems that this is all more political than it is about coaching to the players' strengths.
KLSS --
If you want Bradley around for the playoffs, you're welcome to him. He is a bonehead of MLB proportions. How many teams has he been on in the past 7 years? How many of them made the playoffs?
I do agree that Bradley will ultimately hit. It's just a question of whether he will start hitting when it will benefit the team or late in the season after the team is out of the pennant race.
He put up big numbers in Texas last year for a team that was eliminated from the playoffs at about mid-season. Pretty easy to put up numbers when you don't have much else to play for.
Bradley ain't the dude. He never was. Lou needed another left-handed bat in his line up like he needed another Zambrano meltdown. What he needs to do is hold his players accountable for their performance. Granted, he seems to do that with Bradley, who is the easiest target among his multiple underperformers, but Lou lets Soriano, Fukudome, Zambrano and Soto slide.
That aside, funniest quote I read today goes to Ozzie -- "Wrigley Field is just a bar."
Truer words were never spoken.
Finally, I am happy that the Cards landed DeRosa.
DeRosa.... and well, the Cardinals are a better bet to be in the postseason....if you're a Cubs fan, you should know this..
Sincerely,
Lou Brock
I think the Cubs should trade Milton Bradley he has not helped us none this year. A man on the DL is doing better than he is, we got to go after a big name like a Holiday or someone else. We need bats.
On the Real, I understand just how the Cubs feel. It was just a few weeks ago Sox fans were reeling over our rejections from Peevy and Oswalt. Sox had to get over it and keep on rolling and that is exactly what Kenny and Ozzie did. Contreras has just gotten shelled and sent down; Quinton had just injured his foot and Alexi was in a huge slump. Josh Fields was at 3rd and Beckham was just hype and hope. It was also cold and rainy and Michael Jackson was still alive. Difference a few weeks make.
Cubs need to hang in there.
Seedy that Ozzie Quote is the BOMB. Some smart alecky reporter asked Ozzie why US Cellular wasn't filled. Ozzie replied "because Soxfans are SMART - we have been playing like *expletive*" Team plays bad - Fans don't show. Makes sense to me. Team beats Cubs and plays better - fans come back. SMART FANS - who are part of the REASON the Sox won a championship in 05, and who will be the reason they win again. In short Ozzie is saying....that's what happens when your team is not performing up to par. And the Cell is a beautiful park, but without good baseball - not worth spending our hard earned dollars on. That's why I love the Sox.
You are right Keith.
Sox fans are not going to take a day off of work to go and see the Texas Rangers. That does not make them bandwagon jumpers or fair weather fans.
They are just a .500 team right now and that does not excite their fan base. They don't close their eyes and hand over their cash for a poor product. It has been that way for as long as I can remember.
They expect the team to field a competitor and not showing up is the only way that you are ever going to get the owners attention.
Showing up in mass to watch 2nd rate baseball is like going to see Paulie Shore movies. You know the film is going to suck, yet you keep going anyway because "they have really good popcorn!" and the theater is right around the corner from a place that makes a decent fajita.
If the ballpark is just a place to meet so you can go to eat and drink afterward then just cut to the chase and go to the damn bar in the first place.
“Hey, meet me at... O'Hare's, O' Reilly’s, O’Doul’s, O'Shea's, Flanagan’s', Finnegan’s, Hooligan's, Hannigan’s, McDougal’s, McMurphy’s”... or any one of those fake Irish Pub type places.
Ozzie’s quote was not only funny but it was honest and right to the point.
Love him or hate him…. at least you know where he stands and he is not out to B.S. you into loving the team, the players or the manager.
There is no cuddly image to promote with the Sox.
We just want winning baseball.
The Cubs have gotten zero production from the 2nd base position all season.
Why did they not make a real effort to pick up Brian Roberts instead of getting fooled by Milton "Badley's" promises?
Hendry fell for it hook, line and sinker ball.
You could have kept DeRosa in right field and avoided the never-ending soap opera that they signed for 3 years.
The Cubs have actually won their division more times since 2003 than the Sox. 3-2. The Sox won the series though. But, I would say neither have been terrible in the last 10 years. So, your argument is a fallacy Phillacy!
Milton Bradley is a one tool player.
Unfortunately he's the tool; and a rather rusty one at that.
Even Sears wouldn't take him back in exchange, or for a refund.
What argument would that be Culzie?
If you are trying to compare the two teams over the last 10 seasons then you can’t just cut off one stat at 2003 to get you little spin to work for you. Since you brought it up then lets stick to the last 10 years and to the facts.
In the last 10 years…
The Sox are 853-767 (.526)
The Cubs are 791-828 (.488)
The Sox have won 3 division titles
The Cubs have won 3 division titles
The Sox have finished in the top 3 in their division 10 times
The Cubs have finished in the top 3 in their division 4 times
The Sox have finished in the bottom 3 in their division 1 time
The Cubs have finished in the bottom 3 in their division 6 times
The Sox have lost 90 or more games 1 time
The Cubs have lost 90 or more games 4 times
The Sox record in the post season is 12-7 (.631) Including a World Series ring
The Cubs record in the post season is 3-10 (.230) With no Word Series since 1945
How far back do you want to go?
How about the last 20 years including this one?
Since 1990…
The Sox are 1632-1454 (.528)
The Cubs are 1463-1583 (.480)
The White Sox have been the better team for a long time Culzie.
Phil - that post is just "RAW" as my 8 year old son puts it. You have run off a list of facts that even Spock would be impressed by.
I listened to Mully and Hanley on the Score this morning and a very soberly minded Cubs fan called in and said..."No more. There is only one team in this town that has earned his respect and its the Whitesox". And he tearfully gave up his fight and excuses for remaining a Cubs fan and came on over. And that is what logic dictates.
To the rest of Cubdom - hang on in there with your team, but keep it real - its all about the party.
Keith,
I was surprised that Culzie wanted to compare the two teams.
Yes, the Cubs draw more fans than the White Sox on a regular basis but as far as the actually baseball goes.... the Sox have been better for years.
I thought that they were on their way to the World Series in 1994.
They were coming off a 94-win season and a division title the year before and were 21 games over .500 when the strike shut down the season.
The World Series team was far from a fluke.
Between 1990 and 2005 they finished in 1st or 2nd place in their division 13 out of the 16 seasons.
That is prolonged success. Not a flash in the pan feel good story once every 10 or 15 years.
In adding to what Phil has stated so well, I actually felt, at the time, that the Sox caught lightning in a bottle in the '05 playoffs as some arguably fluky things happened. Still, I then thought about things from a different perspective:
1. That 2005 team was one of just a very small group ever that led their division for the entire 162-game season with an impressive record to boot. That's not a team in which the term fluky should follow.
2. A.J. Pierzynski was a significant part of those fluky occurrences, but if you really put a microscope on his "antics," he simply out-savvied his opponents. As abrasive and annoying as he can be, few could contend that he isn't a highly intelligent ballplayer.
3. The starting pitching exploits in the playoffs were amazing, but certainly not beyond their abilities. Bobby Jenks has also proven later that he was no fluke.
4. Finally, and this is perhaps most important in my book. It has been said a multitude of times that championships are normally won in any sport with significant breaks going the way of the eventual champs. Then, the argument continues that winners create their own breaks. I think Chicago baseball fans on both sides of town just never saw such things in their favor so even many White Sox fans like myself were in a state of shock! Of course, no Chicago baseball fan could have witnessed such breaks because no fan had been alive to have seen such breaks (previous possibility--A.D. 1917)!
Highly Opinionated Addendum:
By the way, while Cleveland fans would guffaw at the notion that the '94 White Sox were on their way being only one game up on the Indians at the time of the abbreviated season's end, I will go to my grave knowing that there was a swagger and dominance to that team that would have taken it all. It was Frank's second MVP season with a wonderful lineup. While NL fans would say that either Montreal, Atlanta, Cincy or Houston would have given the AL a run for its money, I'd say that none of those teams had the lineups or the pitching (Montreal, with the exception of Pedro, was pitching over its head and Atlanta wasn't quite so dominating then except for Maddux), I believe the next best team in baseball were the Indians and I was confident that the Sox were about to break out and leave them in the dust as good as they were. Our pitching was better and we were a better road team and that's always significant. It did take me awhile to get over that season, especially when Jerry Reinsdorf contributed to the World Series cancellation.
why is 9 years any less arbitrary than 6 years?
Are you for real with calling out my spin and then spinning the hell out of your stats? Dude...both teams have been above average and certainly playing above levels that I remember growing up watching in the 70s and 80s and early 90s
So...what is your point? Sox are marginally better in the early 2000's?
How idiotic..
And what stats did I spin Culzie?
You picked 10 years and then changed it to 2003 because the Cubs won their division that year.
Weak.
Are you all chaffed because I not make your Cubbie Wubbies look better than they really are?
Can't deal with reality or anything that does not support your blue and red view of the facts?
Just hand pick your favorite seasons and stats and gloss over everything else like no one can remember all the way back to 2006.
Yeah, I remember the 70s and 80s too. That is when Wrigley was a ghost town.
The Cubs and Sox record for those decades are almost identical and neither team was anything to write home about and that is why you brought it up.
You can’t find a single decade where the Cubs did much of anything so you look for the time when the White Sox were bad and that is a lot harder for you to find.
Ignore everything from 1990 to 2006. Never happened.
Ignore the 50s and 60s all together because the Cubs did nothing at all except for the one year that they gagged on the division and have for some reason become heroes for finishing 8 games behind the sorry Mets.
Impressive.
From 1951 to 1967 the White Sox never finished below .500.
That is 17 years in a row but of course that does not count in your world.
Your calendar reads 1984, 2003, 2007, and 2008. There are no other years in Culzieland.
Since the Cubs last World Series they have finished above .500 17 times.
The Sox have done it 36 times.
You are a perfect example of how Cub fans have become so close to resembling Packer fans these days.
Idiotic indeed.
Sorry Culzie..
I did forget to tell you my whole point and then I will stop ranting.
The point is that Chicago has had a baseball team in this town that has been better than the Cubs for many years.
A team that tries to put winning games in front of selling an image.
A team that is deserving of more press because they have put a better product on the field for decades and have not gone the Yankee/Red Sox method of trying to buy a 200 million dollar team.
They have kept their ticket prices at a reasonable rate and have never run a ticket scalping office to fleece their own fans.
Their tradition is richer than the Cubs and it is built on baseball.... not side show attractions.
They do not act like 14 year-old idiots because they have a Japanese player.
They do not throw objects at their own players while shouting racial slurs. They actually embrace players from different cultures.
They have been the team that represents the city in a much better light than the over hyped Cubs and they deserve that respect.
Instead it is a lot of Disneyfied gooey mush about curses and goats and failures and lovable losers.
They sell losing and are actually proud of it.
It is all about selling beanie babies and worthless junk with the Cubs logo stamped on it.
Some fool wants to go on a diet until his Cubbies win and it gets a story.
It is nauseating.
This blog was about what?
Mark DeRosa.
Mark DeRosa?
He is now two teams removed from being a Cub.
The majority of the Cub stories in the media have nothing to do with the game. It is all about a jerk breaking a Gatoraid machine.
Some baby smashing a water cooler.
Racist t-shirts insulting one of their own players being the hottest seller outside of Wrigley.
A gang of losers breaking the water pipes at Dodger Stadium.
An idiot throwing the ball into the stands with two outs because even the players are not watching the Cub games anymore.
Silly little girl drama.
Why not bring in the Octomom to sing during the 7th inning?
There will always be a place for fluff as long you can market it to the right crowd.
The Jonus Brothers are selling millions of records.
Dancing with the Stars is one of the top rated shows.
People go to see Freddie Prinze Jr. movies.
Happy Meals sell in the billions.
And it is all fluff.
All hype.
All marketing.
All image with very little substance.
It is baseball lite for the people who don’t know the difference or don’t care and the media loves a story like that.
Dumb it down and you will reach a bigger audience.
I have to visit this blog to "Phil" better!
That is the sobering truth Phil.
Cubs are better off without Derossa. Good riddance he was an average player with a big mouth. Maybe he should have played for that other team in chicago, they have a manager just like that.
Also, that other team is known mainly for the black sox scandal and fireworks from the score board. Not to mention disco demoliton and pet nights. Yeah theres a real classy organization, right up there with a lot of minor league teams in the area. Of course, for this teams fans this passes for tradition and sophistication. Well, no surprise there either. And as bad as the baseball and the personality of this other team is, their fans have nothing better to do than cast envious aspersions on the most prominent popular team in town the cubs. Its a cubs town always has been always will be.
That other team would be irrelevant if anyone paid them any attention at all.
Remember when Tiger Beat and 16 magazine sold millions of copies featuring David Cassidy and Bobby Sherman on the cover?
Those girls really knew talent when they saw it!
I mean.... those guys were sooooo popular with their target audience.
They MUST have been the best ever!
Why can't the world have more rainbows and unicorns and Kiwi flavored lip gloss and..... and...... Cute Cuddly Cubbie Wubbies?
Like… OMG!
*pops gum*