Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 55 of 226 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765105155 ... LastLast
Results 811 to 825 of 3379
  1. #811
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,855
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    I mean, the answer to what I'd want the Cubs to do is simple; realize that the market inefficiency is the market right now and go out and buy wins. This is the time to do it. Sadly, we all know that's not on the table, so we're left we 2 bad options; rolling it back or resetting. For me, the answer is simple; one of those is a bad idea, and one is worse. If the market is the inefficiency right now, the last thing you should try to do is use the market to reset. The market is going to be full of guys teams will be moving.

    I agree, being .500 is usually a bad spot. But it's only good to sell if you get something out of it. I don't think this is the time. We'll sell on these guys, and get junk returns. It's not going to strengthen the long term outlook of the team to take back middling prospects who don't offer impact upside, or to load up on lottery tickets (most of whom will bust simply because that's how lottery tickets work). This year, being .500 is probably good enough to win what should be a horrible division. The Cardinals are cashing out, and not spending. The Pirates suck. The Reds are losing players. The Brewers are mediocre and not getting any better. So roll it back. If Bryant and Baez rebound, you could win 86 games, and you're in the playoffs. And maybe that helps add revenue for next year for Ricketts to spend (wishful thinking but hey, let's pretend for a minute).

    Or maybe they don't win the division. You offer QO's to the guys, they most likely turn them down and you get comp picks. Which probably aren't any better or worse than trading these guys in a saturated market.

    I think if the Cubs hit the reset button this year, people are going to be disappointed in what they get to reset the team with overall. So right now, I don't think there's going to be nearly as much to gain in a "big step back" as people think. In a year where the market was strong to sell in? Where Baez/Bryant had control? Or coming off big years? Maybe. Maybe it'd be time to reset. But I think a reset now is the worst option. Rolling it back is uninspiring, and unexciting. I get it. This is a very flawed roster. But I think it's merely the 2nd worst option right now.

    In the end I don't think any of this matters though. Theo leaving signals very clear; the Cubs are going to be resetting now. It's a putrid market for it. It's going to be incredibly difficult for the Cubs to really make this work quickly, I think. It is what it is. I think this is coming from the top, of course. At this juncture I'm expecting a payroll of under $150m this year.
    So run back the majority of the roster and hope for the best in a bad division? I can be on board with that.

    Having a very large market team, and not being buyers in a fantastic market to do just that, is quite frankly, pathetic and embarrassing. The team(s) that put themselves in a position to be buyers in today's market are going to get some tremendous deals. Both dollars, and length of contract. It's too bad that we are not one of them.

    The question is, why are we not one of the teams that can be buyers? We had good young players. We have a sold out stadium. We have a ton of money. We now have our own network. How did this happen?? We should hardly ever be pinching pennies. We should always be improving on the fly. We're a wealthy, large market team for God's sake! The position we are in right now is the worst case scenario...and it happened.

  2. #812
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,286
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    So run back the majority of the roster and hope for the best in a bad division? I can be on board with that.

    Having a very large market team, and not being buyers in a fantastic market to do just that, is quite frankly, pathetic and embarrassing. The team(s) that put themselves in a position to be buyers in today's market are going to get some tremendous deals. Both dollars, and length of contract. It's too bad that we are not one of them.

    The question is, why are we not one of the teams that can be buyers? We had good young players. We have a sold out stadium. We have a ton of money. We now have our own network. How did this happen?? We should hardly ever be pinching pennies. We should always be improving on the fly. We're a wealthy, large market team for God's sake! The position we are in right now is the worst case scenario...and it happened.
    Yeah, that would have been my prefered strategy. Sadly it's just not likely on the table. I think there's every reason to believe right now major turnover is coming this offseason. In two weeks, it's non-tender time. I fear a major non-tender coming. I hope it doesn't, but I fear it. Especially with uncertainty of when the season will start and how long the offseason might go (they have a schedule but it could change). I think the market will be slow too, as teams wait to see what goes on with the potential of fans (payroll could go up or down).

    And because of that, and if there's a mandate that payroll must go down, I think there's a real chance we're going to see a non-tender in 2 weeks that's going to really, really, hurt.

    It's frustrating we're acting this way. The Cubs shouldn't be. But they are.

  3. #813
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    And because of that, and if there's a mandate that payroll must go down, I think there's a real chance we're going to see a non-tender in 2 weeks that's going to really, really, hurt.
    If they don't plan on trading Happ, probably non-tender Schwarber and give Happ left field.

  4. #814
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,855
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    Yeah, that would have been my prefered strategy. Sadly it's just not likely on the table. I think there's every reason to believe right now major turnover is coming this offseason. In two weeks, it's non-tender time. I fear a major non-tender coming. I hope it doesn't, but I fear it. Especially with uncertainty of when the season will start and how long the offseason might go (they have a schedule but it could change). I think the market will be slow too, as teams wait to see what goes on with the potential of fans (payroll could go up or down).

    And because of that, and if there's a mandate that payroll must go down, I think there's a real chance we're going to see a non-tender in 2 weeks that's going to really, really, hurt.

    It's frustrating we're acting this way. The Cubs shouldn't be. But they are.
    I agree, but it's only delaying the inevitable. But at least we get to see a legitimate run at winning the division.

    Here's a thought. Can we non tender KB, or any other player for that matter, and resign them at a much lower cost? Or are there rules in place to prevent that?

  5. #815
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    37,688
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    I agree, but it's only delaying the inevitable. But at least we get to see a legitimate run at winning the division.

    Here's a thought. Can we non tender KB, or any other player for that matter, and resign them at a much lower cost? Or are there rules in place to prevent that?
    There is no rule against it, which is why you are going to see a lot of non tenders. I think that is what will happen to Schwarber. They will non tender him and bring him back for much cheaper. I don't know if they would do that with KB in fear he would sign somewhere else.

  6. #816
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,286
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    I agree, but it's only delaying the inevitable. But at least we get to see a legitimate run at winning the division.

    Here's a thought. Can we non tender KB, or any other player for that matter, and resign them at a much lower cost? Or are there rules in place to prevent that?
    No rules against it, but I don't think you're going to have Bryant do that. He has zero reason to do so. If the Cubs non-tender Bryant, he's gone. He should be. If the Cubs want Bryant, you don't say "we're not paying you $18m, take $12m or take a hike". Especially from someone who was already willing to challenge the CBA.

    Bryant's either here on a 1/$20m or so, non-tendered, traded, or extended. But there isn't a world I can see where you non-tender him and he'd come back on a 1 year deal less than $20m.

  7. #817
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,855
    Thanks, guys. I think we see a lot of non tenders coming up. And obviously some very good players will be on that list.

  8. #818
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,286
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    Thanks, guys. I think we see a lot of non tenders coming up. And obviously some very good players will be on that list.
    Yeah, I think we will see a few non-tenders. Here's the Cubs current list of arbitration eligible players right now:

    Almora, Baez, Bryant, Contreras, Caratini, Happ, Rea, Ryan, Tepera, Schwarber, Winkler, Martinez. Brothers was eligible, but he already bounced.

    Out of that list, I'd expect Almora, and Rea to get non-tendered. I think Winkler will be safe; he's going to be around $1m. I think Ryan could be a potential non-tender after his last year. I think Martinez could be non-tendered; the Cubs barely used him, and he's going to be over $2m.

    The only safe players I think are: Baez, Contreras, Caratini, Happ, Tepera. I can't see the Cubs just letting Baez walk considering how the fans feel about him. I think Bryant and Schwarber should be safe, but anything is on the table. Especially if the directive from the FO is that they have to move these guys no matter what, and the fear of an extended offseason as teams wait out their final budgets could make it so they will become nearly unmovable down the road.

  9. #819
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Addison, IL
    Posts
    24,544

    2020 Chicago Cubs Offseason Thread

    Wow. Mets gonna be looking for a 2B now:

    Last edited by CubsRule08; 11-18-2020 at 04:35 PM.

    2016 World Series Champions!!!


  10. #820
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,286
    Quote Originally Posted by CubsRule08 View Post
    Wow. Mets gonna be looking for a 2B now:

    That's probably real good for the Cubs. That instantly makes Javier Baez and Kris Bryant on one year contracts interesting for them. Bryant could slide into LF with Jeff McNeil retaking 2b, or Baez could be on the radar for 2b.

  11. #821
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,855
    If a team has a president of baseball operations, why do they need a general manager also? Don't they have essentially the same job duties?

    I could be wrong, but didn't Theo pretty much make every baseball decision? Why was Jed needed?

    That being said, why is it necessary to hire a general manager if Jed is the one that's going to be making baseball decisions? Conversely, if the general manager is going to be making all the decisions, what's the purpose of Jed's job? It seems like a waste of money.

    Am I missing something here?

  12. #822
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    12,533

    2020 Chicago Cubs Offseason Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    That's probably real good for the Cubs. That instantly makes Javier Baez and Kris Bryant on one year contracts interesting for them. Bryant could slide into LF with Jeff McNeil retaking 2b, or Baez could be on the radar for 2b.
    Frees up a ton of cash too. Cano is still a great hitter but I doubt the Mets are heartbroken about this.

    Ricketts is going to start sneaking PEDs into team meals to save salary.
    Last edited by CP_414; 11-18-2020 at 06:31 PM.

  13. #823
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    12,533
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    If a team has a president of baseball operations, why do they need a general manager also? Don't they have essentially the same job duties?

    I could be wrong, but didn't Theo pretty much make every baseball decision? Why was Jed needed?

    That being said, why is it necessary to hire a general manager if Jed is the one that's going to be making baseball decisions? Conversely, if the general manager is going to be making all the decisions, what's the purpose of Jed's job? It seems like a waste of money.

    Am I missing something here?
    Typical the President makes the big decisions and the GM does the day to day work.

    Itís an opportunity to get another bright person into the org.

    If you give $750k to some GM from outside the org and he comes in and acquires the next Hendricks or makes a change in pitching development that leads to the Cubs developing pitching better, did he cost $750k or did he save you millions?

  14. #824
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,442
    Quote Originally Posted by CubsRule08 View Post
    Wow. Mets gonna be looking for a 2B now:

    They should have a 2-strike you're out rule. Guy is a dirtbag cheater.

  15. #825
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,286
    Quote Originally Posted by CP_414 View Post
    Frees up a ton of cash too. Camp is still a great hitter but I doubt the Mets are heartbroken about this.

    Ricketts is going to start sneaking PEDs into team meals to save salary.
    Especially on one year deals. Cano's $24m comes off this year. So a 1 year contract on Baez/Bryant become very attractive. You can slot them in, and then you can decide what to do later.

Posting Permissions

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