Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 8 of 97 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 1441
  1. #106
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,147
    vCash
    1500
    You talk about having more to build from, but what players would you have really wanted that aren't available in some form or another rather consistently?
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,746
    vCash
    1500
    As always, the issues isn't the players, it's the time.

    We lose the 2012 season. We may lose the 2013 season. You don't get those back, and there's no guarantee that the prospects we got will make up for that.

  3. #108
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,635
    vCash
    1500
    I think he means beyond what's already happened. Can't change that they'll be picking 2nd, so why bother with that? They don't need a bunch of #2 picks and the leeway to spend on amateurs to build a good farm system, which is perfectly true even under the new CBA.

    If you can't spend your way to a championship, why do you need to spend your way to a good farm system? I thought spending doesn't actually lock anything up? It only works in one direction, conveniently favorable to one side?

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,147
    vCash
    1500
    No guarantee that anything comes from 2012 season either.
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,746
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gaughan333 View Post
    No guarantee that anything comes from 2012 season either.
    Same as always: Nothing is guaranteed.

    We had some percentage chance of winning it all in 2012. That was damaged by our actions, as were the immediately subsequent seasons, but those actions also increased the odds of winning in other seasons.

    The question is whether the balance of the changes in the odds comes out in our favor with this plan. I don't believe they do.

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,147
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato View Post
    I think he means beyond what's already happened. Can't change that they'll be picking 2nd, so why bother with that? They don't need a bunch of #2 picks and the leeway to spend on amateurs to build a good farm system, which is perfectly true even under the new CBA.

    If you can't spend your way to a championship, why do you need to spend your way to a good farm system? I thought spending doesn't actually lock anything up? It only works in one direction, conveniently favorable to one side?
    Who said it locks anything up? It gives you more money to sign either a more expensive/better prospect or allows you to give extra money to get players you wouldn't otherwise get. Nothing locks anything up, it just gives you more $ to play around with. Your spending in the draft is more or less limited and based on your record. Your spending in free agency is not.
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,147
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    Same as always: Nothing is guaranteed.

    We had some percentage chance of winning it all in 2012. That was damaged by our actions, as were the immediately subsequent seasons, but those actions also increased the odds of winning in other seasons.

    The question is whether the balance of the changes in the odds comes out in our favor with this plan. I don't believe they do.
    In your opinion.
    Save the kittens, ignore sbs' posts
    Red Sox hater since 10/2011

    It is anyway, not anyways.

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,746
    vCash
    1500
    Well, yes. In case it wasn't implicit, everything posted after my name and not cited to a source is my opinion.

  9. #114
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,635
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gaughan333 View Post
    Who said it locks anything up? It gives you more money to sign either a more expensive/better prospect or allows you to give extra money to get players you wouldn't otherwise get. Nothing locks anything up, it just gives you more $ to play around with. Your spending in the draft is more or less limited and based on your record. Your spending in free agency is not.
    All the more reason why the Cubs should be taking advantage of that. Signing a good FA now does not stop you from signing a good FA later or developing talent internally, and it does a hell of a lot more to make the end game - winning at the ML level - a reality.

    The Cubs' best player was an IFA who was signed for less than 100K...Just like you don't need to spend exorbitant amounts to win, you don't need to spend ridiculous amounts of money to produce internal talent.

  10. #115
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    16,335
    vCash
    1500
    Hot thread with new posts. Nicely done, Tyrion.


    I heard you were looking for me.

  11. #116
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,543
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    This argument always confuses me.

    We can all agree on the following, right:

    1) The Cubs have a big financial advantage over their division, which is mostly composed of small-market teams.
    2) The new CBA has made it harder to use that advantage on amateur talent.
    3) The new CBA has left the MLB roster as the only place you can effectively apply a financial advantage.

    So why do people look at the new CBA and decide that it encourages the Cubs to abandon the only place they can actually use their financial advantage?
    Because its more dangerous to spend money on FA now more than ever. Teams are developing and extending their own guys much more often and finding elite players entering FA is getting much more scarcer than previously. So, a team goes out, shoots their wad on players(much like the Cubs after 2006) and either misses completely or misses mostly(as we did). Its fools gold. Its one thing to add one major FA. Its completely different to go buy half your team with longterm deals on guys that aren't stars.

  12. #117
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,543
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    Same as always: Nothing is guaranteed.

    We had some percentage chance of winning it all in 2012. That was damaged by our actions, as were the immediately subsequent seasons, but those actions also increased the odds of winning in other seasons.

    The question is whether the balance of the changes in the odds comes out in our favor with this plan. I don't believe they do.
    Do you really think they haven't ran numbers on all of this before deciding which way to go? Do you really think these guys don't have programs that give every combination of FA out there, extrapolate fake seasons out and go from there? Come on. They do. And they took this route because their odds were better this way.

  13. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    5,746
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by davell View Post
    Do you really think they haven't ran numbers on all of this before deciding which way to go? Do you really think these guys don't have programs that give every combination of FA out there, extrapolate fake seasons out and go from there? Come on. They do. And they took this route because their odds were better this way.
    I think, like all people, convincing themselves that what they want to do is what's also best is very, very easy.

  14. #119
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,635
    vCash
    1500
    It's not even locked in what route they're taking...This whole thing is based on what they did in year one.

  15. #120
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,543
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by KyleJRM View Post
    I think, like all people, convincing themselves that what they want to do is what's also best is very, very easy.
    That doesn't answer my question at all. You know they're numbers guys. Do you actually believe they'd take lesser odds to try and prove a point, because thats what you're implying here.

Page 8 of 97 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... 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
  •