Heyman breaks down a trade, fails to understand the relative value of players involved, cashes another paycheck

[Note added after posting: as I am only marginally less fucking stupid than Jon Heyman, Chris W had to point out to me that the Cubs didn't even get $3 MM in salary relief. They've got to pay Volstad (or non-tender him, which wouldn't surprise me given how dumb the trade is in the first place) and he's arbitration eligible for the first time. Last year Jason Hammel and Kevin Slowey, two pitchers who are slightly better than Volstad but probably comparable, got 2 years $7.75 MM and 1/$2.7 MM respectively in their first years of eligibility. Put the bubbly on ice, Cubs fans. IT'S GONNA HAPPEN HOPEFULLY.]

As Theo Epstein frantically rushes to establish that the two BoSox titles of the '00s were not of his making (A damaged but talented Carlos Zambrano for a guy who might maybe be a #5 starter on his best day and $3 MM in salary relief? Hot sizzle!), Heyman provides this incisive analysis:

The agreed-upon trade between the Cubs and Marlins of volatile former star Carlos Zambrano for talented former phenom Chris Volstad

The word "talented" needs to be moved back in the sentence so that it's next to "volatile."

works for everyone.

In the sense that it works well for the Marlins.

The Cubs get rid of the volatile Zambrano, who had lost his friends in the clubhouse after losing is way on the mound last year.

Even if the Cubs never wanted him to start another game for them, he's still worth a hell of a lot more than Chris Volstad. It's essentially a contract year for Zambrano. He has a 2013 option that vests if he's in the top 4 in the 2012 Cy voting, in which case you'd like him on your team in 2013 anyways. Otherwise he's gone in 10 months. You eat $15 MM of his $18MM salary and all you get in return is Chris Volstad? Holy moly, how much were the Marlins going to pay if the Cubs asked for nothing but salary relief in return? What a crap trade.

The Marlins give up Volstad, whose great promise has seemed to dissipate the past few years to the point where he was an unacceptable 5-13 with a 4.89 ERA for the Marlins in 2011.

Yes, it "seemed" to dissipate since his very good rookie year in 2008. Since then he's had one sort of barely acceptable season, and two where he was replacement level or worse. 88 starts since the beginning of 2009, ERA just under 5 (in the NL, in a mild hitters park), WHIP over 1.40, bad strikeout numbers, cumulative WAR of 1. Can you say "future 6th/7th inning guy?"

This trade represents a fresh start for both right-handers.

That's true. Could you have thought up that angle on your own? Heyman hopes CBS doesn't think so.

Pat Forde Passed Tenth-Grade English

As bad as the article chris w posted last week with the overextended introduction via Death Cab For Cutie was, I think this is even worse.

It's right in the middle of a slow offseason for college football fans; the recruits are settled and Terelle Pryor plans to make a decision next week, but the season doesn't start for another month and a half. So, of course, the WWL's football showpiece, Pat Forde, needs to do something to drum up interest and draw out an article. Rather than just predicting, Pat decided to go with a theme as well. I imagine Pat's final list of themes for the article looked something like this:

1. American heroes - as it's almost July 4th and everyone likes fireworks.
2. Aliens and extraterrestrials - celebrating the Will Smith classic Independence Day and a celebration of world multiculturalism and xenophobia.
3. Gas prices and the war in Iraq - for those of you scoring at home, the terrorists are currently winning.
4. Shakespeare - why not?

Because it's June, and because June is slower than an Ivy League defensive back when it comes to college football news, the boss e-mailed me with a quirky story idea.

The throwaway gag aside, I wonder who Pat's boss is, and I wonder if this is really how things work over at the ESPN Offices, which are doubtless the sort of wacky and fun offices that we glimpse in those hilarious SportsCenter commercials.

The curiosity in me wants to see this email...

He pointed out that Midsummer's Eve was upon us, and the day has a long tradition of being a time for telling fortunes. Some guy named William Shakespeare even built a story around Midsummer's Eve -- and the suggestion was that I do the same.

"Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal" - Eliot.

"Fuck it, man, the boss wants me to sound like a pretentious asshole while I'm writing about college football, why the hell not?" - Pat Forde

Who can turn down an offer like that?

Good question, Pat. You can't, I guess, but I'm not sure this really applies to anyone else in the world... most of our bosses don't ask us to do things like this.

After reacquainting myself with "A Midsummer Night's Dream,"

Do you think he read the play? It seems that he deliberately avoided saying that he re-read the play; I think, in this context, "reacquainted" means "read the SparkNotes".

it seems Shakespeare himself might have had football on the brain when he wrote it. You don't believe me? I have the evidence.

This is so funny!

"Lord, what fools these mortals be!" -- Was that Puck? Or Tim Tebow?

Why would Tim Tebow say that? Am I missing something?

So he rambles on about some connections between Shakespeare and football and whatever. But on to his predictions:

1. Notre Dame will be better.

No shit. Notre Dame was awful last year. This is a lousy prediction.

Perhaps improved enough to lose another bowl game.

Good thing you qualified that. You wouldn't want to predict a six-win Notre Dame team. That would be really going out on a limb.

But part of the Fighting Irish fan base won't notice, because it'll be consumed with watching for Scourge of Humanity Ty Willingham to fail at Washington.

Most likely. It'll be better than watching Notre Dame play USC, for sure.

3. Rick Neuheisel won't bet on his own team in the office bowl pool.

No shit. His team sucks, and he'll never coach again if he gets in trouble. What kind of predictions are these?

4. Ohio State at USC is the nonconference game of the year.

No shit! I'm glad you predict this, Pat!

Honestly, I really want to know how long it takes these writers to write these articles. I could write this shit in like an hour. At that rate, Forde should pump out eight of these a day, but his archive suggests he gets one out every four days or so.

5. Georgia at Arizona State won't be bad, either.

What a lousy prediction. They both won 10 games last year. You suck, Pat.

There are some other predictions but they're either boring or poor attempts at humor. In sum: The article was poorly written, it has an inane and questionable theme, and the predictions are mostly nonsense. I realize ESPN has to provide some content to the college football fans who need something to read during the offseason, but this is ridiculous.

Here's what's even more ridiculous: the picure and the caption. Voila:

William Shakespeare isn't the only one who can pen a midsummer night's dream.

*&^$ the heck? I wonder what the caption writers were thinking. How many levels of irony can you spot in that statement? I'm finding at least four....

It's time to close this critique. If you haven't fallen asleep while reading it, or if I've offended you with this commentary, just pretend it was all a dream... because Pat Forde certainly chose a weak and idle theme for this article.