Quote Originally Posted by CP_414 View Post
Hard disagree with most of this.

This season was trash. Making the playoffs is always better than winning 71 games. They didnít choose this route for baseball reasons, they chose it for financial reasons. They absolutely should not have done this 2 years ago.

The Cubs donít have to choose between tanking and not having a solid future.
I agree the Cubs should never have to tank. But if guys aren't going to sign extensions they usually should be traded in the offseason. Circumstances beyond the control of the FO, like bad performances last year compounded by a COVID-shortened season, Bryant grievance etc., made that difficult. 5 or 6 seasons of a good young player who costs little is more valuable than 1 or 2 seasons of a good established MLB player that costs a good chunk of money in arb, and it's not even close. It's very hard to consistently contend and consistently have a good farm system (unless you're lucky), and it's very hard to consistently contend without a consistently good farm. You have to trade some MLB assets at some point to reload on young surplus value.

I know you don't like the Rays trading Snell but it's not a bad trade. They have a winning formula, the proof is in the pudding. They seem to use the money they have and put it into their scouting and development. They got 5 seasons out of Snell, they got to recycle him and recoup value. Longterm it makes sense for them.

Everyone agrees Ricketts was cheap last offseason. Worst case scenario since opening day was Cubs contending, getting knocked out early in the playoffs, and their FA's leaving and getting nothing for them minus a couple of compensation picks. They'd be left with hardly any MLB talent and a mediocre farm. Had the Cubs kept Darvish the farm would have been even worse. The Cubs weren't going to buy their way out of that.