Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 97 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 1441
  1. #46
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,543
    vCash
    1500
    Why is it not being discussed that Ricketts may not EVER want a bigtime payroll? He may very well have hired this FO with the intention of them being smart enough to not have to carry a large payroll as it is. One World Series win and Ricketts is a hero. And this team can line his pockets forever after that. As a businessman, why not go after it with this approach first, instead of trying to buy one, which has been proven completely unsuccessful by us, and largely unsuccessful by the rest of the league as well. The renovation could be limiting his spending too obviously. Theres lots of factors here that we don't know the answers on. Hell, we don't really even have a good read on the Ricketts financial clout and how much is actually Papa's. At any rate, before anyone questions the FO, this argument should start at the very top. And that ain't Theo.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,752
    vCash
    1500
    It gets pretty hard to do if you keep giving up draft picks and punting prospects from the system for young star players (which cost a whole lot these days).
    It's supposed to be hard. That's why only teams like the Cardinals have been able to pull it off. That's why you try to hire an amazing front office who can do things that are hard.

    And the Cubs have about 25 wins to make up before they even sniff the play-offs.
    4 wins of Pythagorean negative variance
    13 wins of sup-replacement players

    You can improve very quickly if you want to when you've employed that many awful players. The Cubs aren't the Astros. They have a lot of interesting players. We've got 3/4ths of an infield, 2/3rds of an outfield and 3/5ths of a rotation already.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,752
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by davell View Post
    Why is it not being discussed that Ricketts may not EVER want a bigtime payroll?
    Well, it's possible that he lied about putting all the money back into baseball ops. But for the moment, I'm going with that being the truth.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,155
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    And besides, being an 82-win team isn't nearly as bad as people have convinced themselves it is. They've bought into this false efficiency idea that it's better to be the Astros than it is to be the Blue Jays.

    If this team had spent $130 million to win 82 games this year, we'd be in better shape. Sure, we wouldn't have the No. 2 draft pick to fap over, but we'd have a better MLB roster to build off of.

    It's an endless cycle.

    Off-season: "We can't spend any money because we'd only win 82 games, so we might as well lose 100."
    Season: "Lose 100."
    Off-season again: "We can't spend any money. We just lost 100 games. If we had won 82 or something, it'd be different..."
    Maybe
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,752
    vCash
    1500
    Well, as always, nothing in baseball is guaranteed.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,885
    vCash
    1500
    which has been proven completely unsuccessful by us,
    Those 2000's teams started with the idea that Wood/Prior/Zambrano/Patterson would be The Future. It quickly, quickly fell to ****.

    Meanwhile right after they spent some money they put out the best Cubs team in a good 20+ years...

    But lets ignore that and keep this bad boy rolling.

    Also, I have zero worries about Ricketts' long term spending here.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,885
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gaughan333 View Post
    Maybe
    That's where 4 years of losing and losing often (2010-2013) will put us without some real work being done.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,155
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato View Post
    What's the Rangers' issue with Michael Young? Who's he been blocking?
    They're arguably the best franchise in baseball right now, the only team to go to back to back WSs since the Yankees, and STILL they have a wave of young talent coming up (killing on the parallel fronts thing).

    Why can't the guy making 17 million be an above average player? Just because? How would they be blocking the super prospects if said FA is a productive player? Doesn't that just mean more good players on the roster - gifting that the prospects work out? Why should we only consider the possibility that these FAs will be below average AND blocking our super talents? Is it safe to assume it is because they are not currently 18, set to make the minimum salary when that big day comes?
    Texas built a strong foundation on system players before adding free agents. I don't get your point?
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    16,596
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    Ah, the "put in offers" argument.

    1) We have no idea what they did or didn't do. GMs lie. It is very much in their interest to lie. Information about budgets and player offers is valuable to their opponents, and they don't want to leak more than they have to. The only thing we know about any of those players is the actual contracts they signed. Anything else could just as easily be misinformation as truth.

    The Cubs get judged on what they do and do not do. Not on what someone is willing to let a reporter anonymously report.

    Bryan LaHair was promised a shot at the job very early in the offseason, and Ian Stewart was installed as the starting 3b just as early. Those aren't the moves of a front office trying to win.

    Now, I don't think they were trying to be as bad as possible. I just think they weren't trying to win, and in a highly competitive universe like MLB, those are functionally equivalent.

    Yes, we won 61 games. We also:

    Had a bullpen that was 7 wins worse than average according to WPA
    Fielded 7 negative WAR worth of sub-replacement position players
    Fielded 6 negative WAR worth of sub-replacement starting pitchers.


    In theory, without spending *any* money, a competent front office should have been able to improve us by 13 wins by fielding replacement level players for those positions. Spend $10 million to make the bullpen average instead of awful, and you've got yourself another 7 wins. We're almost up to .500 without even really trying to add good players.
    With the start we got off to, whether that part was intentional by the FO or not, the plan was clearly to lose after the first few months. Leaving Joe Mather on the roster, not trading for a bullpen piece, leaving Rizzo in Iowa, letting Germano and Volstad get tons of opportunites, etc. weren't because Theo was burnt out or because they all of a sudden forgot how to evaluate talent, they realized it was in the best interest of the org to lose after that horrible stretch in May/June. There are different rules now, so not everything can be compared to Boston.

    You might not have been doing it, but there would've been plenty of people ****ing over pointless wins, much like 2010.

    All of that is honestly why I don't think the Cubs be horrible next season. I'll give them a year to maximize their draft pool, but I do think we'll see improvements and a very interesting team come 2014.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,885
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gaughan333 View Post
    Texas built a strong foundation on system players before adding free agents. I don't get your point?
    Smart pickups and outside gambles like Beltre, Hamilton, Cruz, and much of their bullpen didn't hurt...In fact, those three were the meat of their lineup.

    Before it's said - yes, only Beltre amongst the hitters was a proven talent. That's balanced by Texas only really having money to work with only in the past year and a half or so...
    Last edited by SenorGato; 11-16-2012 at 11:41 PM.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,752
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by RedHeadsRule View Post
    With the start we got off to, whether that part was intentional by the FO or not, the plan was clearly to lose after the first few months. Leaving Joe Mather on the roster, not trading for a bullpen piece, leaving Rizzo in Iowa, letting Germano and Volstad get tons of opportunites, etc. weren't because Theo was burnt out or because they all of a sudden forgot how to evaluate talent, they realized it was in the best interest of the org to lose after that horrible stretch in May/June. There are different rules now, so not everything can be compared to Boston.

    You might not have been doing it, but there would've been plenty of people ****ing over pointless wins, much like 2010.

    All of that is honestly why I don't think the Cubs be horrible next season. I'll give them a year to maximize their draft pool, but I do think we'll see improvements and a very interesting team come 2014.
    Agree. The point is that despite losing 100 games last year, we *could* have been decent. We weren't the Astros. We weren't all bad players. We were a mix of good players and terrible players.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,752
    vCash
    1500
    Texas hasn't drafted in the top 10 since 2003, and that was 9th.

    They are another wonderful poster child for "You don't need top draft picks in order to build a great pipeline if your organization is good."

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,155
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato View Post
    Smart pickups and outside gambles like Beltre, Hamilton, Cruz, and much of their bullpen didn't hurt...In fact, those three were the meat of their lineup.

    Before it's said - yes, only Beltre amongst the hitters was a proven talent. That's balanced by Texas only really having money to work with only in the past year and a half or so...
    Hamilton is a pick up much like I'd see this front office going after...former 1st round talent who's had a hard go. They traded for cruz after having 7 mlb plate appearances and Beltre is their big Free agent signing, which they did not make until those other players were contributing
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,155
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    Texas hasn't drafted in the top 10 since 2003, and that was 9th.

    They are another wonderful poster child for "You don't need top draft picks in order to build a great pipeline if your organization is good."
    They also had a payroll under 100 million. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/co...ts/?page_id=92
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    North Suburbs Of Chicago
    Posts
    9,030
    vCash
    1500
    Maybe just maybe the CUBS are being smart and trying to spend the money to rebuild this ****** *** stadium and won't spend a dime over what is needed until that ****** *** WGN contract runs out and we are able to buy our own network. Maybe since we have not had success doing things the way Kyle and 72 are advocating that a new direction was needed. Maybe since we were the only MLB franchise with 9 baseball employees in the front office there was a **** load of things that needed to be addressed before the roster could be correctly assembled. Maybe we should spend more in free agency but to pay one or two players 15-20 million to win 5 more games is not smart business. It is also not smart to be just good enough to maybe make the playoffs and flame out. Stop throwing money at the problem and fix it once and for all. Now I am a little older than some here and I doubt very seriously that none of the people on this site would have greater enjoyment than me if we were to win the World series. I love our team I love the direction we are heading in...while I may disagree with Kyle and seben duece I respect them because it seems that their main objective is bringing a Champion to Wrigley or CUBS Stadium Or Rahm Emanuel Field. Even though what they are saying might be a little far removed from main stream though at least they stick to thier guns and I think that is admirable.When it finally happens (World Series) be it next year or tewnty years from now I will still celebrate like I was a 20 year old College kid and not leave wrigleyville until the parade was over.


    I think I have about 499 more post before my next 32 bar assault on PSD.
    BUTTERFLIES AND RAINBOWS!!!!! JP611 Just called me an ecstasy user!!!! WTF!!!

    Welcome Tyler Kolek or Brady Aiken or Carlos Rodon if not one of them say hello To Alex Jackson.

Page 4 of 97 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... 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
  •