Let me preface this by saying that I met Rob Neyer last year at BlogWorldExpo, have enjoyed all his books, and generally think he's a knowledgeable baseball writer. On his blog today, there's this almost throwaway paragraph:

According to this unsigned article, the Mets are interested in signing Trevor Hoffman or Kerry Wood as their new closer, and perhaps "acquiring a set-up man such as Colorado's just-acquired Huston Street in a trade."

The "unsigned article" he refers to is this one from the Poughkeepsie Journal. The article's primary topic is the Mets' apparent interest in Trevor Hoffman:

And according to one baseball executive, the Mets’ discussions seem to be leading them away from the top candidates and instead toward the possibility of signing San Diego’s Trevor Hoffman and acquiring a set-up man such as Colorado’s just-acquired Huston Street in a trade.

Following me so far? The only mention of Kerry Wood in that article is here, in a single sentence:

The belief is that a Hoffman or Kerry Wood can be had for a less-pricy, shorter-term deal than the price tags expected for [Francisco] Rodriguez or Brian Fuentes.

Now does that in any way say that the Mets have expressed interest in Wood or contacted him? It appears to be nothing more than speculation from the writer (who, as Neyer says, isn't even named), who needed another name to throw out there because just mentioning Hoffman isn't enough.

Now, someone might see Neyer's post -- or this one -- and send it to MLB Trade Rumors, where it would take on a life of its own. Now, we happen to know, thanks to a BCB reader, that Wood was spotted on a plane heading to NYC last week. So perhaps the Mets do have some interest, and given the state of their bullpen, if true it's not surprising.

But the Poughkeepsie Journal article has no facts, just guessing. And that seems to be the case for the source of a great number of baseball signing or trade rumors these days.

Here's another good example: this cubs.com article about the Mark Teahen rumors, being discussed at length in this FanPost. The relevant passage in that article is:

Kansas City "is focused" on Cubs left-hander Sean Marshall and infielder Mike Fontenot while discussing a possible trade for outfielder Mark Teahen, according to the Chicago Tribune.

And what was this Chicago Tribune article? (cubs.com didn't even bother to link it!) It was in the "Whispers" sidebar to Phil Rogers' column yesterday -- not even in Rogers' main column! Here's what Rogers wrote:

Kansas City is focused on Sean Marshall and Mike Fontenot in talks with the Cubs about Mark Teahen.

That's it. Nothing more. No sourcing, no quotes, nothing more than "is focused".

Personally, I think these breathless rumors should be left to simmer for a while. Most of the Cubs' best deals have been the ones that no one hears about before they happen.

With two deals made yesterday -- Matt Holliday to the A's, and Scott Olsen and Josh Willingham to the Nationals, and Jake Peavy... still a Padre a this writing, the trade market appears to be heating up, and on Thursday, declared free agents will be eligible to sign with any team.

One interesting development overnight was the Padres' withdrawal of a $4 million offer to Trevor Hoffman. Granted, Hoffman is 41 and didn't have such a good year in 2008, but he is a franchise icon and that offer was about half what he made in '08. Whether this is another part of San Diego's cost-cutting in the wake of owner John Moores' costly divorce, or whether it's a harbinger of things to come -- will teams start to rein in spending because of the current economic crisis? -- remains to be seen.

What seems clear is that the Cubs aren't going to be major players in the free agent market. Much as we might like to see CC Sabathia in blue pinstripes, it's not going to happen. The only free agents the Cubs are likely to sign are their own -- Ryan Dempster, Kerry Wood and Henry Blanco, I believe, will all eventually re-up. Daryle Ward may not be back, and Chad Fox and Jon Lieber -- well, yes, they filed, but you didn't really expect to see them as Cubs again, did you?

So instead, Jim Hendry is going to have to get creative. With the Marlins dealing Willingham, does that mean Jeremy Hermida is off the market? I would argue that the Cubs might be able to get him with a package that could include Felix Pie and Sean Marshall. This is pure speculation on my part, and likely they'd have to put another prospect in such a deal, but Pie would be an immediate starter in Florida and Marshall would replace the traded Scott Olsen in the Marlins' rotation.

With Hermida on board and Kosuke Fukudome likely then moving to CF as a platoon partner for Reed Johnson, that would complete the Cubs' starting outfield for 2009. I would still like to see the Cubs sign Kevin Millar to back up LF, RF and 1B... and to be that clubhouse presence that was missing, somehow, during the disastrous 2008 postseason. Yes, I am well aware that Millar is getting on in years and didn't have a very good offensive season in 2008 (despite hitting 20 HR in 531 AB and drawing 71 walks, which would have ranked among the Cubs' team leaders). The Cubs wouldn't be asking Millar to start -- just back up, and provide the looseness that any winning clubhouse needs. Since Hermida would be the starting LH bat in RF, having Millar replace Daryle Ward as the #1 pinch-hitter would be acceptable. At one time I advocated trading Derrek Lee, but after seeing some of the discussions here which mentioned that his neck and back problems may have been the cause of his power dropoff, I would think that an offseason's rest would get him back into shape. He'll probably never have a year like he had in 2005, but even if he could get back to his 2004 level (.860 OPS), that'd be just fine.

With Sean Marshall gone, the Cubs would need another pitcher to perform the role that Marshall did quite well last year -- start occasionally and be a long reliever... that is, if Lou even knows how to use a long reliever, something he failed to do in many situations that called for it. There are some mid-range starting pitcher free agents that could fill this role without costing a fortune: Randy Wolf, Mark Hendrickson, or even Freddy Garcia, who started for Lou for several years in Seattle and who appeared recovered from his arm troubles in pitching five strong innings in that September 29 Tigers/White Sox makeup game at the Cell.

Filling the slot being vacated by the (presumably) departed Bob Howry should be fairly simple to do, either via someone on this list of free-agent relievers (would you take a chance on bringing back some former Cubs like Juan Cruz or Kyle Farnsworth?) or perhaps, by someone who will come out of spring training and surprise. There seems to be someone like that virtually every year. Or maybe Michael Wuertz will finally fulfill the promise that has had him as part of the Cubs' bullpen for the last five seasons.

The rest of the team seems fairly well set; regardless of whether you agree with him or not, Lou likes Ryan Theriot and he will be the starting SS, unless there's someone who could come in cheaply to replace him. One possibility could be Juan Uribe -- and if Uribe didn't start, he could capably back up all three infield positions. Ronny Cedeno did a decent job as a backup in 2008, and if he came into 2009 in the same role, I think we could live with it. Another possibility is Nate Spears, who the Cubs acquired almost as an afterthought from the Orioles in the Corey Patterson deal three years ago. Spears will be 24 in May, had an .832 OPS in Double-A last year and as of today is replicating that (.827) in the Arizona Fall League. He hits lefthanded and has a good glove. Spears isn't on the 40-man roster, which now stands at 39, but that can be easily remedied.

The bottom line is that I don't think the Cubs are getting Jake Peavy, and that's fine with me. Peavy's numbers outside of Petco don't scream "ace" to me, and his contract, four years' worth, would hamstring the team in an era when some here are screaming for Hendry to dump some of the backloaded deals he's handed out like Halloween candy over the last couple of years. The Cubs ought to also look hard at whoever is available in the Rule 5 draft and also at the non-tender list when it comes out in the middle of December.

As I said last time I posted on this topic, this team won 97 games a year ago. There's no need to blow it up and start over. Tweaking, upgrading the bench and bullpen, and making sure the starting rotation has backups in case of injury, are the most important things.

For those of you screaming and yelling about the alleged possibility that Bud Selig is going to "install" John Canning as Cubs owner, I refer you to this November 7 article from the Sun-Times:

Bidders for the team include Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks and the cable channel HDNet, and Thomas Ricketts, president of corporate bond dealer Incapital LLC. An insider said Ricketts, whose family wealth derives from the TD Ameritrade brokerage, currently has the inside track.

Cuban has a colorful reputation and drinks beer in the stands with the fans, but the source said the credit drought has hurt his chances. "Whatever the price for the Cubs, he was only going to put in $100 million of his own money," the source said.

And that last part is why Cuban might be out, not any supposed enmity from Bud Selig and/or Jerry Reinsdorf. I agree with the article: if the sale is consummated soon, it'll be the Ricketts group. But given the state of the economy, who knows?

Feels weird to lose, doesn't it?

And isn't that a good thing? After nine wins in a row -- coming from behind in eight of them -- it still felt OK even when the Cubs went down 1-0 in the first inning.

But for the first time in 26 games the Cubs never led, though they tied it at 1 when Alfonso Soriano singled, stole second, went to third on a Ryan Theriot single, and scored on a sacrifice fly. (The last time the Cubs never led in a game before last night was when they were shut out in Cincinnati 9-0 on May 7. The next day they came home and started a four-game winning streak.

There isn't much more to say about last night's 2-1 loss to the Padres. Ironies abounded: the Cubs finally got a good pitching performance out of their starting pitcher, Ted Lilly, but the bats turned silent -- four singles was all they got, and no walks; that's the first time since April 11 at Philadelphia and only the third time all season (April 4 at home vs. Houston the other) that the Cubs have gone walkless, very impressive patience being shown by Cub hitters all year.

Other numbers: Greg Maddux threw only 69 pitches in dispatching the Cubs through the six innings he threw. (You still don't want Maddux? It wasn't Petco that was making his pitches move the way they did last night. Go get him, Jim Hendry!) The Cubs did get a hit off Trevor Hoffman in the 9th inning, but with two out, Hoffman struck out Derrek Lee to end it. The game finished in a snappy two hours and fifteen minutes, probably sped along by the lack of walks (Lilly walked two, but no other pitcher who appeared in the game walked anyone).

Updating my "Best Starts" box, a numbers curiosity: all the teams that started the day of their 60th game of the season with a better record than the 2008 Cubs, lost that game, as did this year's version.

That's it, really; I did fall asleep after the fourth inning, only to wake up during the bottom of the 7th to see that it was still 1-1, and fell asleep again. The next time I woke up some infomercial was on WGN, and I figured I'd find out the result in the morning.

Yes, it feels weird, as it does when every winning streak that gets this long ends. But the Cubs still won the series, and still lead the division by three games, and their starting pitcher looked good, and they saved the entire bullpen except for Carlos Marmol, who retired both of the hitters he faced (even though one of those outs produced the winning run on a sac fly), and Marmol threw only eight pitches.

Onward to Los Angeles and more winning.