Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 87 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 1441

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,148
    vCash
    1500

    Organizational Philosophy Discussion Thread

    Welcome to the battlegrounds.

    Play fair, just and honorable, and do not spread the war into neutral territory. Fail to do so and Ron!n will come down upon you with his hammer of ban. The thunder of his vengeance will echo through these forums like the gust of a thousand winds.

    Soldiers, begin.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,191
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    $130-140 would have been sufficient. The $60 million was referring to what we had available going into the offseason, not in addition to last year's Opening Day payroll.
    Who would they have gotten from 130-140 that would have fixed this?
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gaughan333 View Post
    Who would they have gotten from 130-140 that would have fixed this?
    There are any number of combinations of players that were available last season.

    But keep in mind, that's also assuming we don't get 19 wins combined worth of negative variance and sub-replacement players. It involves a total effort top-to-bottom of the roster, not just throwing on some top-end players.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,191
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    There are any number of combinations of players that were available last season.

    But keep in mind, that's also assuming we don't get 19 wins combined worth of negative variance and sub-replacement players. It involves a total effort top-to-bottom of the roster, not just throwing on some top-end players.
    What players are doing this and what does fix mean?
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gaughan333 View Post
    What players are doing this and what does fix mean?
    As always, offseasons are too complicated to simply list players. Too many contingencies. If I sign a 1b early, that means I don't get Rizzo, but I can use Cashner for something else, maybe a trade. If I trade for Chase Headley, do I get to use his 7-win season or do I have to use his pre-season projections? If I keep Samardzija in the bullpen, do I take his fWAR or his bWAR out of the rotation and plug in a replacement?

    As far as "fix," I would say "has at least a 25% chance to make the playoffs going into the season."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,191
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    As always, offseasons are too complicated to simply list players. Too many contingencies. If I sign a 1b early, that means I don't get Rizzo, but I can use Cashner for something else, maybe a trade. If I trade for Chase Headley, do I get to use his 7-win season or do I have to use his pre-season projections? If I keep Samardzija in the bullpen, do I take his fWAR or his bWAR out of the rotation and plug in a replacement?

    As far as "fix," I would say "has at least a 25% chance to make the playoffs going into the season."
    How exactly do you determine that a team has a 25% chance to make the playoffs. That is completely arbitrary and subjective.

    I have an issue with the constant answer that an offseason is too complicated with too many moving parts, but the front office should have been able to figure it out.
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,715
    vCash
    1500
    Put yourselves in the shoes of the Ricketts. Your team has just lost 91 games with a $134 MM payroll entering the season. Why the **** would you give your front office another $130-140 MM the next season? Why would any business owner do that?
    Last edited by terencem; 11-16-2012 at 11:27 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by terencem View Post
    Put yourselves in the shoes of the Ricketts. Your team has just lost 91 games with a $134 MM payroll entering the season. Why the **** would you give your front office another $130-140 MM the next season? Why would any business owner do that?
    Because this is a different front office than the one that lost 91 games (and don't forget that team had heavy SP injury problems).

    If you are scared to invest in trying to win, don't buy a big-market pro sports team.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    206
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by terencem View Post
    Put yourselves in the shoes of the Ricketts. Your team has just lost 91 games with a $134 MM payroll entering the season. Why the **** would you give your front office another $130-140 MM the next season? Why would any business owner do that?
    Almost any business has a philosophy or a goal of "Maximizing Profits". The philosophy part comes in on how to do that. Fans are not known for worrying about profits or 5 years from now. Should we worry about how much money the Ricketts family makes? What drives me is the Cubs winning. That does not always match with maxing profits. I am not concerned about 5 years from now or the Ricketts making money. I am concerned about winning next year. I think the Cubs could have been much better next year by going with around a $130-$140 million in payroll. I think they now have about $60 million committed to payroll. They could have purchased some a good pair of starting pitchers and a strong outfielder and some middle relief for that kind of payroll. From a fans viewpoint that would be great but the Ricketts know they can still bring in the fans with a team that loses 100 games. This way they can maximize profits by keeping the payroll down. Maybe $90 million at max. They also will likely dump $!9 mil when they get rid of Soriano and maybe dump Garza's salary of $10 mil +. They can put $40-$50 more million in their bank account rather than spend money on payroll. They tell the fans their Alice in Wonderland story about the future of being a constant contender sometime in the future. Apparently most are buying into it. The Ricketts also talk of remodeling Wrigley. That is a good idea. Do remember that is a Capital Expenditure and will be depreciated over the years for tax purposes so it is a good investment as it lowers their tax bill a lot.

    Owners in the past have opted to dork the fans for profits. The Marlins of old and the present by selling off their good players even after winning the World Series. The Ricketts are still a mystery to me but I will have a much better idea by the start of spring training. If one of the major markets in baseball goes into 2013 with a $70-$80 million payroll then prepare to be had. When you have drawn over 3 million fans for 6 consecutive years it does not make much sense to drop the payroll and claim that it is for the future success of the team. Sounds very much like a snake oil salesman. I think they could keep this payroll low for some years to max profits and then sell the team after the WGN contract kicks in and make an enormous profit on the sale of the franchise. Meantime the fans may or may not keep buying the tickets win or lose.

    "By late August, the Red Sox had lost their way and didn’t hesitate to trade away some of Theo Epstein’s big-money guys – Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett – to a Los Angeles Dodgers team pumped up by a new ownership group and a huge upcoming television deal." Well done Theo and well done Money Ball. Theo left under a lot of pressure and we had to give the Sox a player in return. He is a salesman first class and now has the Ricketts under his spell or they jointly have Cub fans under their spell. We deserve better but as usual money will win out in the end.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    5,186
    vCash
    1500
    Spending a crap load of money isn't the solution.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad IBCB View Post
    Spending a crap load of money isn't the solution.
    Nor is gutting the MLB roster and throwing seasons.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,191
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    Nor is gutting the MLB roster and throwing seasons.
    While I see the point, how do you know until it's had more than 1 year?
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gaughan333 View Post
    While I see the point, how do you know until it's had more than 1 year?
    How do you know that these prospects won't bust more than stick? Same answer: We don't know, we simply assess and give our opinions.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,409
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    Nor is gutting the MLB roster and throwing seasons.
    spending 120+mill to be average is not smart.
    thats why last year after we got rid of all we could from the JH years, for what ever anyone wanted to give us, casue when ur giving up a zambrano ur only gonna get a volstad return...
    you play the kids, trade what little proven vets we had for young prospects. thats the way it works in baseball and the way it will continue to work.

    and that "strong" farm system you said we had when Theo came produced 101 losses... so theres that.

    when theo came, bottom to top, cubs had LOW TALENT levels. which is the base of ur arguement...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,758
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ZamboniCub View Post
    spending 120+mill to be average is not smart.
    Agreed. If your front office can't do better than average with $120 million, fire them and hire a new one.

    thats why last year after we got rid of all we could from the JH years, for what ever anyone wanted to give us, casue when ur giving up a zambrano ur only gonna get a volstad return...
    We didn't get rid of all we could. There were a lot of Hendry legacies still on the roster last season. Most of our useful players, in fact.

    you play the kids, trade what little proven vets we had for young prospects. thats the way it works in baseball and the way it will continue to work.
    No, it isn't, and no it doesn't.

    and that "strong" farm system you said we had when Theo came produced 101 losses... so theres that.
    The farm system produced the losses? That's nonsensical.

    when theo came, bottom to top, cubs had LOW TALENT levels. which is the base of ur arguement...
    Disagree.

Page 1 of 87 1231151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •