Thirty-three and thirty-nine is a mighty fine line for the Chicago Cubs. Keeps them just this side of lovable loser while still in haling distance of "Miracle Cubs". And to think they did it all while being menaced by an evil presence the likes of which have been unknown since Rasputin cavorted with the Czar's women.

Michael Barrett-catcher and pugilist, orator and debater of pitchers, has been traded to San Diego. Gone is the malevolent clubhouse presence that cut through Chicago like the winds off Lake Michigan in January or a bad kielbasa through a man's insides.

It wasn't, said the Cubs, because Barrett had fought with Carlos Zambrano or argued with Rich Hill. It was just that the team was "...trying to shore up the position in a little different fashion, a little bit more defensively."

In the interest of full disclosure, I admit to believing that the chief defensive purpose of a catcher is to stop the ball rolling to the backstop. I believe there are two basic types of catcher. Johnny Bench and "all other".

Calling Bruce Bowen, who Barrett was traded for, an upgrade defensively is like trying to decide whether Paris Hilton or Nichole Ritchie is more chaste. Logically speaking one must, to some slight degree exceed the other in that regard, but neither appears poised to run off to the local convent. Likewise the choice between Barrett (who has thrown out 8 of 43 runners attempting to steal) and Bowen (who has nailed 3 of 26) is barren of good alternatives.

Given a choice between a catcher who can hit but doesn't throw runners out and one who doesn't hit and can't throw runners out, most elementary school students would make the logical choice and keep Barrett around. Unfortunately, the Cubs aren't run by grade school kids, just Lou Pinella who occasionally behaves like one around umpires.

Pinella, rumor has it, didn't think Barrett (in common with alot of Cubs fans) was paying attention during games. Like most thoroughly modern managers, he believes catchers must be defensive specialists who are good handlers of pitchers. There is no scientific method of proving that such an animal exists, so most field generals quantify those qualities by looking for a catcher who is allergic to any form of wood used to strike a spherical object.

To their credit, the Cubs front office did not speak ill of Barrett. Cubs GM Jim Hendry said the catcher was on his way to being a great player. Chicago also paid $1 million to San Diego just to make sure San Diego felt good about the wonderful catcher and fine human being who would be joining their team. What a great bunch of guys.

I believe the Cubs had a better chance of getting to the playoffs with Barrett than without. The only time I would trade a catcher who could hit based on clubhouse chemistry, would be if that catcher's meth lab exploded and blew up the clubhouse attendant. Short of that, I'd read one of the many fine books on dealing with difficult people and go happily on my way. If the pitchers didn't like Barrett they could always take him into the club house and beat him up. It worked for Zambrano, although granted a Barrett-Carlos Marmol slugfest could get ugly fast.

And so we bid a fond farewell to Michael Barrett and any chance of seeing the Cubs in the World Series. It was a small chance which will be mourned for an appropriately short period.