The fire sale (that Jim Hendry insists isn’t a fire sale) at Wrigley Field is officially underway with the news that the Chicago Cubs have traded outfielder Kosuke Fukudome to the Cleveland Indians for a pair of prospects.

This is the second trade Hendry has put together with Indians GM Mark Shapiro. The first was the deal that sent Mark DeRosa to the Tribe in exchange for Chris Archer, James Russell and John Gaub. Turns out the trade was one of the rare deals that benefited both squads. Cleveland flipped DeRosa to the St. Louis Cardinals to acquire closer Chris Perez, while the Cubs turned Archer (and other trade chips) into Matt Garza.

So, what did Hendry get out of Shapiro this time?It doesn’t seem like much, especially considering the Cubs are picking up a chunk of Fukudome’s remaining salary.

Carlton Smith is a 25-year-old right-hander who is 2-3 with a 4.50 earned run average in 34 relief appearances in Triple-A Columbus. He’s got 46 strikeouts in 46 innings of work, but the rest of his numbers aren’t really worth repeating. On paper, it looks as if the Cubs just got another warm body to call up and eat roster space if necessary.

The big fish of the deal just might be Abner Abreu, a 21-year-old outfielder still making his way through the organizational ranks. Unfortunately, his only redeeming quality seems to be the fact that he’s only 21 and at Class-A ball. Meaning, he probably still has a lot he can learn and there is room for growth.

Hopefully, that’s the case because that .244/.294/.429/.723 slash line isn’t pretty.

I’m not at all surprised the Cubs didn’t get anything quality out of Cleveland’s system, which hasn’t produced anything worth a damn in years.

Look at Cleveland’s top hitters and you’ll realize they all came via trade. Travis Hafner, Grady Sizemore, Shin-Soo Choo, Michael Brantley and Carlos Santana were all acquired in deals. Staff ace Justin Masterson and the aforementioned closer (Chris Perez) were also brought along via the trade waters.

To me, that says that their GM has quite the eye for others’ talents and has shown the ability to swindle teams out of their unpolished or undiscovered gems.

As for Fukudome, the Indians get an outfielder with good plate discipline, good range in the outfield and a guy who I thought could be a valuable piece on a contending team because of his high OBP at the plate and defensive skillset in the field.

Meaning, he had no place on this miserable roster of misfits.

So, where does this make sense for the Cubs?

It allows the team to bring up Tyler Colvin to see how much of his 20-homer rookie season was a fluke only to bench him in favor of Tony Campana.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

A 6-foot-4-inch, 210-pound receiver familiar with the Mike Martz system to the Bears makes sense, right?

Sure, but only if you get the Roy Williams who caught 82 balls, racked up 1,310 receiving yards and hauled in seven touchdowns.

But after watching Williams flounder in Dallas, you wonder if that guy even exists any more.

In three years (40 games) with the Cowboys, Williams made 94 catches for 1,324 yards and 13 touchdowns.

I guess that’s why he’s an ex-Cowboy now, huh?

Throwing a big-money deal at Williams would be a mistake.

You just don’t hand over a burlap sack with a big green dollar sign on it just because a player had one good year under a particular regime.

Then again, that’s how Kevin Millwood got paid.

He had two stellar years under Leo Mazzone and the Atlanta Braves. His 2002 18-8 campaign netted Millwood a two-year deal worth around $20 million with the Philadelphia Phillies before the 2003 season.

He won 23 games in two seasons with the Phils.

Sure, Williams wears the “Martz guy” label, and will probably flaunt that if he gets a chance to meet with Bears representatives.

But do you remember the last time the Bears went to the well on a guy who did big things in the Martz system?

Orlando Pace does, and he’s thankful for the guaranteed $6.1 million he received for his one-year stint in Chicago.

So, while Williams looks like a nice addition to the toy chest, the Bears should likely proceed with caution before making him their next big purchase.

That probably sounds like music to the ears of many Bulls fans, especially those who were disappointed with Noah’s play against the Miami Heat during the Eastern Conference Finals.

Noah averaged 11.7 points and 10.4 rebounds in 48 regular season games. But, in 16 postseason contests, the 6-foot-11-inch center averaged 8.7 points and 10.2 boards. That’s a significant drop off compared to last year’s playoff tear when Noah averaged 14.8 points and 13 rebounds in the five game series against the Cleveland Cavaliers.

Alas, Noah won’t be gone for good — much to the chagrin of a certain segment of Bulls fans.

Instead, Noah will be representing Team France in the European Championships in Lithuania.

With the NBA lockout in full swing, here’s hoping Noah can somehow heal form the injuries that slowed him down this season and recapture the form he had during the early part of the year when he was a double-double machine and a force on both ends of the court.

I guess that’s what it takes to be Chicago’s top columnist these days.

On Saturday, Cowley posted a column titled “Pirates on rebound, Cubs should take notes” from PNC Park as he took in the action featuring two teams headed in opposite directions.

Unfortunately, Cowley doesn’t do much to take readers through what the Pirates have done in the three years since Neal Huntington took over for Dave Littlefield. Instead, Cowley’s opening seven grafs (145 words to be preceise) are used to take us back to 1992, when Sid slid and Barry Bonds’ head didn’t require its own zip code.

(For those of you scoring at home, that’s 17 percent of the column wasted on something that happened when Starlin Castro was two years old.)

Eventually, Cowley makes his point. Then, it only takes Cowley 20 grafs Cowley gets to his real point.

Look, moneyball was cute for a few years, and even earned an overrated GM such as the Oakland Athletics’ Billy Beane a best-selling book and a soon-to-be-released movie. Then pitchers Mark Mulder, Tim Hudson and Barry Zito moved on, and Moneyball went to paperback in more ways than one.

Nothing like another half-hearted swipe at Moneyball to get the creative juices flowing, huh?

Joe Cowley vs. Moneyball is a pretty unfair fight in Chicago. Considering that its baseball teams and fans are so stuck in their traditional ways, this battle likely resembles LeBron James vs. Kyle Korver on the hardwood or Ray Lewis vs. Garrett Wolfe on the gridiron.

Cowley, the long-time White Sox beat writer and No. 1 pom-pom waver, has been clear in his distaste for Moneyball, which also tends to fall in line with the way many people think on the Southside, especially when Hawk Harrelson is calling it the biggest fraud in baseball history — conveniently forgetting that whole Steroid Era thing actually existed.

And if that is the case and Moneyball is in fact, the biggest farce since Milli and Vanilli took to the stage, then the Cubs should be first in line to attempt their own little ponzi scheme.

Contrary to popular belief, the Moneyball A’s weren’t built by a team of lonely nerds looking for love only to find it in a Bill James handbook.

Tim Hudson was drafted in the sixth round of the 1997 amateur draft. Mark Mulder was Oakland’s first-round choice in 1998. Barry Zito was the Athletics’ first-round selection in 1999.

Jason Giambi was drafted in the second round of the 1992 amateur draft. Miguel Tejada was signed as an amateur free agent in 1993. Eric Chavez was drafted as the 10th overall selection in the 1996 draft.

The six players who played the biggest role in the Athletics’ success from 2000 to 2003, when Oakland won 392 games and made four straight postseason appearances, were all homegrown talents.

So, what’s the problem with Moneyball again?

I don’t know what Cowley thinks the concept of Moneyball is, but I have a hunch that my conclusion differs from his.

In my world, Moneyball is about collecting young, inexpensive talent through drafts and trades and watching it excel at the big league level while it still is at a bargain price.

• In 2000, the A’s had three All-Stars (Jason Giambi, Tim Hudson and Jason Isrinhausen) making a combined $4.1 million.
• In 2002, Oakland’s two ASG reps (Barry Zito and Miguel Tejada) made a combined $3.9 million.
• In 2003, $11.5 million was the combined salary of All-Stars Keith Foulke, Mark Mulder, Ramon Hernandez and Zito.

Now, that’s getting bang for your buck.

(And sadly, it puts Alfonso Soriano’s $18 million salary in perspective doesn’t it?)

Back to Moneyball’s concept, once said talent hits a price premium (see the escalating price tags on Zito, Mulder, Tejada and Giambi) the franchise could no longer afford, it is shipped off for younger, cheaper talent that can do the same job at a lesser price.

(See: Mulder for Dan Haren trade.)

Considering Tom Ricketts just spent $800 million, the Moneyball method just might be the right plan of attack for the Cubs.

Even if the great Joe Cowley thinks otherwise.

They are 27-39, 10 games out of first place and 12 games under the .500 mark. If not for the always LOL-worthy Houston Astros, the Cubs wouldn’t just have the worst record in the NL Central, but they would own the worst record in the National League.

They have a Triple-A manager who seems overmatched, a Triple-A pitching coach who is understaffed and an owner who is resorting to Triple-A promotions to sell tickets.

So, naturally, the logical move is to run to Wrigley Field wielding torches and pitchforks and ask for Wrigley Field to be torn down.

Wait. What?

This shouldn’t be breaking news to anyone, especially with someone that has a high baseball IQ, such as Peter Gammons.

Gammons got the ball rolling by calling Wrigley Field a dump.

Where was Gammons in 2003, when the Cubs were five outs away from winning the NLCS and going to its first World Series since 1945

Or what about when the team won consecutive division titles in 2007 and 2008?

Was there a need to burn Wrigley down and start over?

I’m not sure where Gammons has been the last decade, but much hasn’t changed about Wrigley Field in that time span.

There is protective netting still in place to save the common man from having concrete fall on his head.

(Though, at times, that seems like a better alternative than watching Jeff Spellcheck pitch in a high-leverage situation.)

The bathrooms still have more troughs than stalls. And I still think that’s a good thing because it logically is the best way to accommodate large crowds of people trying to use the restroom at the same time.

The clubhouses are as comfortable as your first dinner with the in-laws. But why should I care about that? It’s not like I’m prepping to play a game. I spend much of my pre-game time in my seat or on the ‘L’ en route to the stadium.

The seats are still too small to accommodate a population that has grown in height and width since the ball park was opened in 1914.

We get it, Pete. No one could evah get it right like the Sawks did with Fenway.

* * *

Then, Rick Morrissey found it to be a good time to pile on and co-sign by delivering an over-the-top salvo against the ol’ ball park on Clark and Addison.

And leave it to a journalist with a degree from Northwestern University’s acclaimed school of journalism to bury the lead in the 19th paragraph.

“No matter how uncomfortable the seats at Wrigley might be, the lack of a winning product is a bigger burr in fans’ saddle.”

You don’t say?

The complaints about Wrigley’s crumbling facade conveniently took a back seat when the Cubs didn’t suck. And rightfully so.

You know, it’s not Wrigley Field’s fault the Cubs own a .409 winning percentage heading into today’s game. Is it the stadium’s fault that Jim Hendry drafted Josh Vitters ahead of Jason Heyward, Madison Bumgarner and Matt Wieters. Hell, it’s not even Wrigley Field’s fault that the Chicago Tribune, the Cubs’ former owner and Morrissey’s former employer, made a minimal effort to keep the ball park up to code and in good shape over its two decades of ownership.

Maybe Morrissey should have written this column back then.

* * *

I likely would have just let it be and chalked it up to another waste of internet space if not for Morrissey’s Sun-Times teammate Joe Cowley deciding to throw gasoline and matches on the fire with a round of tweets that only served as a reminder that without a day-to-day beat to cover, Cowley is nothing more than a version Jay Mariotti that actually attends ball games throughout their entirety.

“Next week is the perfect time for Cubbie fan to come to the Cell, see a real ballpark, throw his little blue “C” hat in the trash and live.”

Honestly, I love that Cowley’s idea of “a real ballpark” just happens to have its insides resemble the presumably “fake ballpark” with all the green seats and shrubbery beyond the center field batter’s eye.

Why do I feel as if U.S. Cellular Field’s renovation plans have Woody Paige’s signature in the lower right hand corner?

Look, Wrigley Field needs modernization like Alfonso Soriano needs plate discipline. But the stadium is old, get over it. The only thing that needs more repairs than the stadium is the team that resides within its four walls.

What the people lining up to work the wrecking ball at Wrigley need to realize is that the only thing that can cure what ails the park is a successful team between the white lines.

Comfort be damned. I’d rather see a good product at a “dump” of a stadium than a bad product at a sparkling new facility.

Fact is, there would be much more money generated from fannies in the seats, concessions sold, marketing revenue and television dollars if the team was 39-27 instead of the other way around.

As it stands, the 27-39 record means the focus has turned to an aging stadium when the spotlight should be on an aging, overpaid nucleus.

Would a state-of-the-art stadium serving as the new home of my favorite baseball team make my day? Of course.

Would tearing down Wrigley Field kill my soul? Of course not.

Just win some games and suddenly, Wrigley Field will have charm again. Even if the bathrooms smell like *gasps* urine.

Problem is, we’re thinking about the wrong sport.

If you’re comparing LeBron James to Michael Jordan, you’re doing it all wrong.

If you’re looking for a fair comparison, look no farther than Barry Bonds.

Yes, that Barry Bonds.

The self-anointed King and the asterisk-ridden Home Run King have more in common than reaches the eye.

Both are world-class athletes whose talents didn’t necessarily translate into hoards of adoring fans.

Instead, because of what came out of their own mouths, James and Bonds both share the unique distinction of being the heel despite dominating their sport while possessing a once-in-a-lifetime skill set.

Much of it has to do with the words that somehow someway leave the lips of the respective athlete.

James makes constant references to his haters, a group that he said he was keeping tabs on throughout the season. Still, Hater Nation got the last laugh as James walked off the court a loser in the NBA Finals yet again.

And after Game 6 of the NBA Finals, James walked into a press conference and pulled the “I’ll wake up rich and famous and you’ll wake up and still have a crummy life” card when asked about The Haters in the postgame presser.

The problem is, James’ fan base probably exceeds his haters. Dude has 2 million followers on Twitter, a posse based out of a state that largely hates him that exceeds the number of people in my Chicago and Carbondale cliques combined and the No. 1 selling jersey at the NBA shop.

Team LeBron acts as if the world is against him. And that feeds his ego the way Dunkin Donuts feeds Jim Hendry on a Sunday morning.

If you’re a baseball fan, doesn’t this sound familiar?

Bonds didn’t have a team of yes-men at his beckon call. But he had Dusty Baker, who helped Bonds play the race card in regard to The Haters.

Despite heat coming from outsiders, James had an entire city act like a human shield as San Francisco acted as if The Home Run King* could do no wrong.

Bonds made ESPN’s Pedro Gomez his bitch in the latter years of his career in the way James owned CBS columnist Gregg Doyle after Game 3 of the NBA Finals.

Like Bonds, James should be easy to root for because of his skills and pursuit of greatness.

That is, until he opens his mouth.

He used the Boys & Girls club as a human shield from criticism when he starred in an ill-conceived TV special to announce he was leaving Cleveland.

Who gives a shit about Cleveland, you ask?

Apparently, LeBron, a man who is on the record saying “He loves Cleveland” as recently as the Heat’s last trip there, does. He’s also the same man who said, on the record, in front of microphones, that he was going to win a championship in Cleveland and wouldn’t stop until the job was done.

Oh, then there’s his whole spiel about the NBA needing contraction. Never in the history of pro sports unions has a star player of said union openly said that contraction, which would result in a loss of jobs throughout the league (players, coaches, staff,etc.) is a good thing.

LeBron James will find himself in a compromising position in the 2011-12 NBA season — assuming it tips off in a timely manner.

In the mean time, James’ first step toward a new level of greatness should be hiring a PR firm that doesn’t consist of yes-men.

Next step is to drop the King James moniker.

Oh sure, maybe he didn’t give himself the nickname, but whose decision was it to get “Chosen 1” tatted on his back?

Maybe because of his group of enablers, the nickname is fitting. But if he wants to be adored as much as he feels he needs to, maybe he should put himself in the shoes of his noble followers.

In the end, it was poetic justice having the Mavs celebrate a championship in June in the same arena where the Heat celebrated winning one in July.

James is widely regarded as the NBA’s best player, and only someone as gutsy as say, yours truly, would dare question the self-proclaimed King’s greatness.

What you call piling onto James, I call a thorough takedown and analysis of the guy that everyone has been claiming will be the greatest basketball player ever since high school.

So, let’s get one thing straight. LeBron isn’t Michael Jordan, nor will he ever be.

Jordan’s teams were a perfect 6-for-6 in NBA Finals with MJ claiming six Finals MVP trophies. He averaged 33 points per game on 48 percent shooting.

James is already 0-for-2 in the Finals, averaging 19 points on 41 percent shooting.

And if that wasn’t enough, his first 10 NBA Finals games don’t measure up with Kobe Bryant (20.1 points per game, en route to two titles), let alone Michael Jordan (33.8 points per game, en route to two titles).

Remember, when Jordan led the Bulls in all stats across the board, he was a selfish bastard of a ball player who did nothing but pad his stats.

But for Team LeBron, it was the first line of defense after a Game 4 loss in the Finals.

Heck, I’d go out on a limb and say James isn’t even on Derrick Rose’s level.

For all the criticism Rose endured after the Eastern Conference Finals, including those who dared to suggest James should snatch Rose’s MVP before leaving the United Center after Game 5, you can’t say Rose hasn’t improved in every year.

Three years after missing a key free throw, costing Memphis a National Championship (that would have been wiped away anyway), Rose’s shooting percentage from the charity stripe has increased by 14.6 percentage points.

In fact, his shooting percentage from the line has bumped up in each year he’s been in the league.

After facing criticism for not taking enough drives to the hoop, Rose saw his free throw attempts increase as well from 250 to 338 as a second-year player to 555 in Year 3.

And at the risk of becoming a non-factor on the perimeter, Rose made more 3s this year than in his previous two years combined.

But this isn’t about Rose. Though maybe, one day it will be if he can’t get the Bulls over the hump, grows a beard, dyes it black and comes out to Vodoo Chile with Kevin Nash and Scott Hall manning the post.

What this is about is that eight years into what is already a Hall of Fame caliber career, basketball fans still find themselves asking when James will do the things we’re accustomed to seeing the great ones do.

Like, you know, get better from year-to-year.

When will he develop a post-up game?

Because if you didn’t notice by his epic fail of an attempt to post up J.J. Barea, it’s still not there.

At 6-foot-9, 270 pounds, James has the frame and the skill set to generate a low-post game like Jordan and Bryant.

(Damn it, there go those comparisons again. They truly are unavoidable, aren’t they?)

How goes that mid-range game?

Oh, do we even need to go there? Of course we do.

James reminds me of Dave Kingman in a way.

(What is it with all the baseball analogies? Nerd.)

LeBron is an all or nothing player eight years into his career. He’s either taking it to the rack for a monster finish (or at least some free throw attempts) or he’s loafing on the perimeter eyeing a 3-point bomb.

There is no 15-to-20 foot jumper in his arsenal. There is no dribble-drive and pull-up ‘J’ to keep defenders honest.

Where is the consistent perimeter game?

Analysts once joked that Jason Kidd should drop the ‘J’ from his name because of his non-existent outside shot.

Seventeen years into his career, Kidd being a factor on the perimeter helped seal the fate of James’ Heat.

For as hot as he was against Chicago and Boston, he was as cold against Dallas.

And because of his flaws, he simply shouldn’t be put on M.J.’s level until further notice.

If Jordan revolutionized the game by globalizing it, it would likely take LeBron to discover life on another planet and universalize the game.

And unless Swackhammer and the MonSTARS are posted up on Moron Mountain, it’s not happening.

So, at this point, James is left with nothing to do but pave his own lane in NBA history.

Here’s hoping it doesn’t involve steamrolling over fans, teammates or coaches. Though, if history is any indicator, that train won’t be late.

In Game 5 of the 2011 NBA Finals, a game which James himself coined as the biggest game of his career, the Miami Heat star put all of his talents on display.

In the words of Ice Cube — you know, when he was a rapper and not a shell of his former self — last night LeBron messed around and got a triple double.

You want to think that 17 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists would be impressive in a way. Especially considering it came from a 6-foot-8-inch, 250-pound specimen of an athlete.

But really, it wasn’t.

Mostly because it came in a loss.

Still, many scrambled to James’ defense after the loss. They took note of the triple double as just another piece of evidence of LeBron’s greatness that in such a big game, he filled the stat sheet admirably.

Stat boys be damned!

(This, coming from a self-proclaimed stat kid.)

James’ triple double immediately took me to a different place — 2006.

That’s when Juan Pierre, then of the Chicago Cubs, put up the most statistically hollow season baseball fans on the northside have probably ever seen.

In his lone year with the Cubs, Pierre posted what seem to be solid, big-league caliber numbers. He hit .292 out of the lead-off spot, stole 58 bases and racked up 204 hits.

Respectable numbers, for sure.

Until you actually look at them.

In the first two months of the season, Pierre posted a .240/.276/.309 slashline. Considering that Pierre was supposed to be the sparkplug lead-off guy that was supposed to make Cubs fans forget Kenny Lofton.

The Cubs went 20-32 over that 52-game stretch.

Some sparkplug, huh?

Hell, yours truly would rather have had Corey Patterson or Felix Pie out there. At least then, Ricky Nolasco would have still been on the team. Not that the Cubs need any quality starting pitching or anything.

Pierre picked up 52 hits in April and May. That’s right, kids. Fifty-two games. Fifty-two hits.

Meaning that I’m supposed to be impressed with the 152 hits he accumulated in the 110 games from June 1 through October 1.

Well, I’m not. And anyone who is probably deserves to be punched in the face repeatedly. Or face a worse punishment, like watching Juan Pierre take 750 plate appearances.

It will be argued that Pierre was a great base stealer and that his appreciation for the lost art of the swiped bag is overlooked in today’s game.

And if you make that argument, you, too, deserve a swift kick in the crotch.

Pierre was caught 20 times in 2006. That number represents 26 percent of his base stealing attempts.

I don’t care where you got your education. Harvard. Southern Illinois. Kennedy-King Community College. It doesn’t take Bill James and his gang of statisticians to tell you getting caught stealing 26 percent of the time isn’t good for your numbers or good for your team’s success.

By the time the “good” JP showed up to play, the Cubs were already 12 games under .500. And even when Pierre turned his season around, posting a .315 average and .354 on-base percentage, the Cubs went 46-64 en route to a 96-loss season that would mercifully bring the Dusty Baker Era to an end.

To put it in perspective, James’ triple double was so hollow last night, it had me thinking about Juan Frickin’ Pierre.

And that’s how you know you had a bad night.

The silly Michael Jordan-LeBron James comparisons were out in full force after the Miami Heat’s big Game 3 win in Dallas.

Last I checked, you have to win four games in the NBA Finals to go home with the Larry O’Brien trophy.

Furthermore, some of the game’s greatest analysts cautioned those who thought Kobe Bryant was Heir Jordan to Air Jordan that Jordan was a six-time NBA Champion and six-time NBA Finals MVP.

Apparently, those don’t apply to the game’s self-anointed Chosen One.

James scored eight points and had four turnovers as the Dallas Mavericks tied up the 2011 NBA Finals at two games apiece.

After the jump, a fun-fact about Jordan’s scoring numbers in NBA Finals games.Michael Jordan averaged 33.5 points per game in six NBA Finals appearances — and did so without throwing a single-digit clunker in there.

Just for fun, we’ll highlight Jordan’s first NBA Finals against the Los Angeles Lakers in 1991. A series which Jordan averaged (I repeat: averaged.) 31.2 points, 11.4 assists, 6.6 rebounds and shot 55.2 percent from the field.

Again, this isn’t to bring down the almighty King. There will be plenty of others who will do that in the coming hours and days leading up to a critical Game 5 in Dallas.

Though, I’d like to use this as a reminder that maybe we shouldn’t be jumping the gun to anoint a new greatest of all time until he achieves some things that the greatest of all time has already accomplished.

Move over, Jay Cutler. Carlos Zambrano has re-taken his spot at the top of the list of most polarizing Chicago athletes.

The excitable and unpredictable Big Z did so Sunday with his post-game rant after the Cubs 3-2 extra-inning loss to the St. Louis Cardinals. The loss completed a sweep of the Northsiders at Busch Stadium and sent the team to its sixth straight defeat.

Via Cubs.com beat writer, Carrie Muskat:

“The problem wasn’t Pujols,” Zambrano said. ” The problem was the previous at-bat. We should know better than this. We played like a Triple-A team. This is embarrassing, embarrassing for the team, for the owners, for the fans. Embarrassing. That’s the word for this team. We should know better than this, we should know better than we did on the field. We should know that Ryan Theriot is not a good fastball hitter. We should know that as a team. We should play better here. We stink. That’s all I’ve got to say.”

Wait, so what was so bad about that?

Nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

In fact, I woke up this morning wanting to write about how this Zambrano’s post-game statement was a non-story.

Though, really, the non-story here is Zambrano throwing his teammate Carlos Marmol under the bus.

Much was made about the comment directed at Marmol’s pitch selection to Ryan Theriot. However, there’s a gigantic hole inside this argument considering the fact that Zambrano fails to directly mention Marmol by name.

In fact, Z takes a very wide-angled approach to his statement.

“We should know better than this, we should know better than we did on the field.”

“We should know that Ryan Theriot is not a good fastball hitter. We should know that as a team.”

“We should play better here. We stink.”

He didn’t say “Carlos Marmol should know better than this.” Nor did the words “Carlos Marmol stinks.”

This is far from throwing a teammate under the bus. This is the exact opposite. This is a player who many have labeled a me-first guy clearly pointing out that — as a team — the Cubs simply aren’t getting the job done.

In any case, if anyone knows that Theriot can’t get around on a quality fastball it’s the Cubs, who saw it time and again when he was on the roster flailing away and failing at the most inopportune times.

The most frustrating point, as a Cubs fan, is some of the social media abuse Zambrano took on various Twitter and Facebook accounts. Look, if I go through your timeline and see that you’ve said worse things about the Cubs than Zambrano has, then you’re not allowed to criticize him for saying what you’ve been tweeting, but in a different forum and in a different tone.

Sorry, your hypocritical stance won’t fly with yours truly.

Full disclosure: Carlos Zambrano is probably one of my three favorite Cubs.

The funny thing about how some media and fans have reacted to the Zambrano stuff is that Big Z does everything meatball fans, writers and talk-radio hosts want.

He plays hard in all facets of the game. He runs the bases harder than Aramis Ramirez or Alfonso Soriano, who Cubs fans and analysts openly bash as lazy whenever the opportunity arises.

Zambrano openly loves Chicago and has a sense of loyalty to the Cubs organization. He’s been on the record saying his love for the city and the organization is part of why he has refused to waive his no trade clause.

He speaks his mind and hasn’t been afraid to show emotion.

And now we’re supposed to hate him?

Ridiculous.

The fact is that Carlos Zambrano has been arguably the city’s most productive starting pitcher in the three-plus years since signing his contract extension. Has he lived up to the $96 million billing? Not quite. But it’s not as if he’s gone Carlos Boozer on us.

Zambrano has the highest winning percentage of any active Chicago starting pitcher since 2008.

He has made more starts than Jake Peavy and has a lower earned run average in that time span than Ryan Dempster, Mark Buehrle, Gavin Floyd, Edwin Jackson and John Danks.

Yet, David Haugh thinks the Cubs should suspend Zambrano until the Cubs find a trade partner for him rather than watch the team’s most movable commodity’s stock rise as he continues to pitch his best ball in recent memory. Thankfully, Doc Blume has a rather solid takedown of Haugh at his website this morning.

So, please, wake me up when Zambrano says something that isn’t true about this team or pitches them out of contention.

If you watched the last few minutes of the Dallas Mavericks victory against the Miami Heat in Game 2 of the NBA Finals, you witnessed history.

It’s not every day a 15-point lead gets blown in a Finals contest. In fact, it has been 19 years since such an event took place.

The sentiment of many, especially in and around Chicago, was that Michael Jordan would never allow that to happen to him or his championship Bulls.

Well, they have a valid point.

The last time a team blew a 15-point lead in the NBA Finals was June 14, 1992, when the Portland Trail Blazers gagged it up to — you guessed it — the Chicago Bulls.

In fact, the Blazers had two (TWO!) 15-point advantages in the contest. Portland led 43-28 in the second quarter and 79-64 after the third.

With that said, can we please cool it with the James-Jordan comparisons?

As of now, the difference between the two is simple.

Jordan has six championship rings that came on two three-peats. Each three-peat featured its own unique cast of supporting characters with the only constants being Jordan, Scottie Pippen and Phil Jackson.

(And to take it a step further, Jerry Krause and Jerry Reinsdorf.)

Jordan also played in an era where cackling and blunt smoking would have commenced if one were to call for a hand-check foul.

The biggest difference (as of now) between two of the game’s revolutionary players is the killer instinct factor.

Did Jordan talk smack? Of course. Was he a jerk? You betcha.

But Jordan had the killer instinct from the opening tip to the last whistle.

There wasn’t time for a pre-game dance routine. Nor was there time to pose and let out primal yells after fast break dunks.

Sure, Jordan had his show-stopper moments. The Shrug comes to mind. As does the finger wave in Dikembe Mutumbo’s eye.

But in a world where everything is put on a pedestal and folks demand to know whether or not it’s the best of all time, James plays directly into the hands of those who demand instant satisfaction when it really isn’t necessary with every post-slam shimmy.

Now, Miami could very well come back and win Game 3, and this series.

But it won’t be without a fight.

And a reminder that he still has much to accomplish before he gets on Jordan’s level.