Do We Really Want This Team to Make the Playoffs?

[nilodnayr]

I can't believe this is even a topic. Only a fool would want the team they are supposedly a fan of, to fail to get into the playoffs.

 

Only a fool would want the current philosophy of the front office to be validated and perpetuated, resulting in indefinite mediocrity.

 

Like I said, Derwood makes some big assumptions, which there has been some good debate about, but I don't understand how people are so blind to what he is saying in general to respond with one liners like that.

 

Scenario A) We make the playoffs this year and continue with making the playoffs about once every 4 years.

 

Scenario B) We miss the playoffs this year, but begin making the playoffs once every other year.

 

That is essentially what Derwood is saying. If you would prefer Scenario A, then you aren't a true cubs fan.

[FergieJ31]

I can't believe this is even a topic. Only a fool would want the team they are supposedly a fan of, to fail to get into the playoffs.

 

Only a fool would want the current philosophy of the front office to be validated and perpetuated, resulting in indefinite mediocrity.

 

Like I said, Derwood makes some big assumptions, which there has been some good debate about, but I don't understand how people are so blind to what he is saying in general to respond with one liners like that.

 

Scenario A) We make the playoffs this year and continue with making the playoffs about once every 4 years.

 

Scenario B) We miss the playoffs this year, but begin making the playoffs once every other year.

 

That is essentially what Derwood is saying. If you would prefer Scenario A, then you aren't a true cubs fan.

 

This is really a false dichotomy though isn't it? How on earth can you even begin to make Scenario B a plausible alternative to trying to win this year?

[jersey cubs fan]

I understand where somebody would be coming from by asking this question, I've felt that way in the past. There's nothing wrong with contemplating the benefits of failure, namely, ushering out the old and bringing in a new management group. However, I think the GM position, and team philosophy in general, is based entirely on the new ownership group, and not on whether or not this team backs into the playoffs.

 

 

In other words, yes, I want the Cubs to make the playoffs. It's fun to see them play in October, even if they really aren't that good.

[nilodnayr]

I can't believe this is even a topic. Only a fool would want the team they are supposedly a fan of, to fail to get into the playoffs.

 

Only a fool would want the current philosophy of the front office to be validated and perpetuated, resulting in indefinite mediocrity.

 

Like I said, Derwood makes some big assumptions, which there has been some good debate about, but I don't understand how people are so blind to what he is saying in general to respond with one liners like that.

 

Scenario A) We make the playoffs this year and continue with making the playoffs about once every 4 years.

 

Scenario B) We miss the playoffs this year, but begin making the playoffs once every other year.

 

That is essentially what Derwood is saying. If you would prefer Scenario A, then you aren't a true cubs fan.

 

This is really a false dichotomy though isn't it? How on earth can you even begin to make Scenario B a plausible alternative to trying to win this year?

 

No one is talking about "trying" to win. The logic follows that if the cubs miss the playoffs then the philosophy of the team will change (for the better) and we will create a better team resulting in make the playoffs more often.

[oldcubsfan]

I can't believe this is even a topic. Only a fool would want the team they are supposedly a fan of, to fail to get into the playoffs.

 

Only a fool would want the current philosophy of the front office to be validated and perpetuated, resulting in indefinite mediocrity.

 

Like I said, Derwood makes some big assumptions, which there has been some good debate about, but I don't understand how people are so blind to what he is saying in general to respond with one liners like that.

 

Scenario A) We make the playoffs this year and continue with making the playoffs about once every 4 years.

 

Scenario B) We miss the playoffs this year, but begin making the playoffs once every other year.

 

That is essentially what Derwood is saying. If you would prefer Scenario A, then you aren't a true cubs fan.

 

This is really a false dichotomy though isn't it? How on earth can you even begin to make Scenario B a plausible alternative to trying to win this year?

 

No one is talking about "trying" to win. The logic follows that if the cubs miss the playoffs then the philosophy of the team will change (for the better) and we will create a better team resulting in make the playoffs more often.

No matter what happens, the philosophy won't change enough for your or Derwood's liking. They have gone from last to a contender, they won't bring in a person like DePo to replace Hendry. In fact, they won't replace Hendry. They aren't going to play mostly rookies and they won't be replacing Piniella. So in any business, you go for the win when you have the opportunity and they have that opportunity. They will never rip the team apart and start completely over.

[Laura]

There were mighty long losing streaks in the past that didn't result in drastic philosophical changes.

 

The team is being sold. Who buys it and how they choose to run it will influence the future philosophy more so than whether the team wins the division this season.

[oldcubsfan]

There were mighty long losing streaks in the past that didn't result in drastic philosophical changes.

 

The team is being sold. Who buys it and how they choose to run it will influence the future philosophy more so than whether the team wins the division this season.

Who ever buys it won't be changing the philosophy overnight. More than likely, the new owner won't be in place and approved very much before Opening Day next year.

[Laura]

Overnight is relative in this situation.

 

If the choice is between ownership changing the philosophy of the team or not winning the division changing the philosophy of the team, I'd still bet on ownership changes having a greater impact in the short and the long term.

 

If the Trib holds off on indefinitely on selling the team because of Zell turbulence ... I still don't see what happens in the next couple of weeks as having a huge impact on how the Trib chooses to run the team between now and next season.

[nilodnayr]

I can't believe this is even a topic. Only a fool would want the team they are supposedly a fan of, to fail to get into the playoffs.

 

Only a fool would want the current philosophy of the front office to be validated and perpetuated, resulting in indefinite mediocrity.

 

Like I said, Derwood makes some big assumptions, which there has been some good debate about, but I don't understand how people are so blind to what he is saying in general to respond with one liners like that.

 

Scenario A) We make the playoffs this year and continue with making the playoffs about once every 4 years.

 

Scenario B) We miss the playoffs this year, but begin making the playoffs once every other year.

 

That is essentially what Derwood is saying. If you would prefer Scenario A, then you aren't a true cubs fan.

 

This is really a false dichotomy though isn't it? How on earth can you even begin to make Scenario B a plausible alternative to trying to win this year?

 

No one is talking about "trying" to win. The logic follows that if the cubs miss the playoffs then the philosophy of the team will change (for the better) and we will create a better team resulting in make the playoffs more often.

No matter what happens, the philosophy won't change enough for your or Derwood's liking. They have gone from last to a contender, they won't bring in a person like DePo to replace Hendry. In fact, they won't replace Hendry. They aren't going to play mostly rookies and they won't be replacing Piniella. So in any business, you go for the win when you have the opportunity and they have that opportunity. They will never rip the team apart and start completely over.

 

I think all in all, I have to agree with the fact that the assumptions made are too big. (Note: Some are not my opinions)

 

Assumption #1. If the cubs make it to the playoffs, Hendry will continue to be the GM for the indefinite future.

 

With new ownership looming, there is the possibility that regardless of outcome, the new ownership may clean house. Obviously, the worse the team does, the higher the probablilty this will occur.

 

Assumption #2. If the cubs miss the playoffs, Hendry will be fired.

 

While it will be disappointing if the cubs miss the playoffs, some may see the fact that the team improved so significantly as a positive. He recently guided the team to back to back winning seasons. He may be lauded for signing the likes of Lee, ARam, and Z to significantly undermarket deals (as well as trading for Lee in the first place).

 

Assumption #3. If Hendry is fired, the philosophy will change and we will get a better GM.

 

Hendry is probably a middle of the road GM. As I and others have said, theres no guarantee we get DePo or someone of his ilk. We won't get someone as horrible as Krivsky, but as Hendry's philosophy is fairly prevalent in the game of baseball, we may not get anyone better.

 

Assumption #4. The new GM will have the ability to significantly improve the team.

 

This team has its core locked up through 2010. Post FA guys (Soriano, Z, ARam, Lee, Lilly) accounting for about $75M and pre FA guys (Hill, Marshall, Pie, Patterson). A ton of deadweight is on the roster for 08, and a decent amount for 09. Unless a good deal of additional salary is added, the new GM will be fairly handcuffed. Additionally, minor league systems don't get turned around overnight. To counter, small changes can make significant differences, and even if a new GM/philosophy might be handcuffed, change is needed and its best to start sooner than later.

[oldcubsfan]

I agree with much of your analysis, except one major point. Depo is not a good GM and I don't he gets another shot for many years. Houston, Pittsburgh and others will be looking and neither Depo or Stone are ever even mentioned. Just my opinion, but I hope that neither ever has a job with the Cubs in any meaningful role.

[nilodnayr]

I agree with much of your analysis, except one major point. Depo is not a good GM and I don't he gets another shot for many years. Houston, Pittsburgh and others will be looking and neither Depo or Stone are ever even mentioned. Just my opinion, but I hope that neither ever has a job with the Cubs in any meaningful role.

 

Here is a good read.

[oldcubsfan]

I appreciate the link and I read it, but that is that man's opinion and a seemingly bias one. I did notice he left out many of the transactions that didn't fit his opinion. But, each his own.

[nilodnayr]

I appreciate the link and I read it, but that is that man's opinion and a seemingly bias one. I did notice he left out many of the transactions that didn't fit his opinion. But, each his own.

 

Then provide a retort.

[FergieJ31]

This is really a false dichotomy though isn't it? How on earth can you even begin to make Scenario B a plausible alternative to trying to win this year?

 

No one is talking about "trying" to win. The logic follows that if the cubs miss the playoffs then the philosophy of the team will change (for the better) and we will create a better team resulting in make the playoffs more often.

 

I guess I should have chosen better words.

 

I knew what Derwood's provocative original point was, and while I didn't think it was that outraegous (unlike some other posters) I disagreed with the conclusion that by contending the Cubs are somehow doing long-term harm to themselves. I called for the Cubs to be a .500 team at the beginning of the year, like many other NSBBers, but the only real surprise was how bad the rest of the division would be. Personally I'm relishing the possibility of a playoff berth, not denigrating it because of what might or might not happen to Hendry at the end of the year.

 

Of the four assumptions you laid out, a few of them are very dicey. Hendry fired because the Cubs miss the playoffs even though they were in the division race til September? Extremely unlikely. If the Cubs had lost 90+ games again, well that's another story - so in a sense the "damage" of winning is already done (unless the Cubs absolutely tank the rest of the year).

 

Plus, the wildcard in all of this -- on whether Hendry is retained or not -- is clearly the Cubs' ownership situation.

Edited September 6, 2007 by FergieJ31

[nilodnayr]

I appreciate the link and I read it, but that is that man's opinion and a seemingly bias one. I did notice he left out many of the transactions that didn't fit his opinion. But, each his own.

 

Here is a list of his transactions along with a summary of their aggregate win shares.

 

The only trade I can see that was bad was giving up Dave Roberts for Henri Stanley. IMO Roberts is little more than a 4th OF, though.

[nilodnayr]

This is really a false dichotomy though isn't it? How on earth can you even begin to make Scenario B a plausible alternative to trying to win this year?

 

No one is talking about "trying" to win. The logic follows that if the cubs miss the playoffs then the philosophy of the team will change (for the better) and we will create a better team resulting in make the playoffs more often.

 

I guess I should have chosen better words.

 

I knew what Derwood's provocative original point was, and while I didn't think it was that outraegous (unlike some other posters) I disagreed with the conclusion that by contending the Cubs are somehow doing long-term harm to themselves. I called for the Cubs to be a .500 team at the beginning of the year, like many other NSBBers, but the only real surprise was how bad the rest of the division would be. Personally I'm relishing the possibility of a playoff berth, not denigrating it because of what might or might not happen to Hendry at the end of the year.

 

Of the four assumptions you laid out, a few of them are very dicey. Hendry fired because the Cubs miss the playoffs even though they were in the division race til September? Extremely unlikely. If the Cubs had lost 90+ games again, well that's another story - so in a sense the "damage" of winning is already done (unless the Cubs absolutely tank the rest of the year).

 

Plus, the wildcard in all of this -- on whether Hendry is retained or not -- is clearly the new Cubs' ownership.

 

Frankly, I think all the the assumptions are dicey, and why I prefaced them saying that I think they are too big. Thats why I outlined them and provided explanations as to why they may not be true.

 

I agree that new ownership is the biggest factor, but I think you underestimate the outcome of this season. Hendry made a gigantic splash this offseason with committing over 300M and another 100M with Z in season. While you, I, and most of this community had reserved expectations, I think we are in the minority. Expectations were high, and have not been met.

[TruffleShuffle]

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, and I want those in charge to understand that this team is very average and that Jim Hendry has done a lousy job as general manager. If the Cubs sneak in at 85-77 or so, they should realize that, regardless of the Cubs' showing in the playoffs. If they're too inept to see all the flaws in this team, then we're probably boned no matter what happens.

[Guest]

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, and I want those in charge to understand that this team is very average and that Jim Hendry has done a lousy job as general manager. If the Cubs sneak in at 85-77 or so, they should realize that, regardless of the Cubs' showing in the playoffs. If they're too inept to see all the flaws in this team, then we're probably boned no matter what happens.

 

 

that's a very good point.

[CUBZ99]

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, and I want those in charge to understand that this team is very average and that Jim Hendry has done a lousy job as general manager. If the Cubs sneak in at 85-77 or so, they should realize that, regardless of the Cubs' showing in the playoffs. If they're too inept to see all the flaws in this team, then we're probably boned no matter what happens.

 

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, win the World Series and Jim Hendry to laugh at all of us for doubting his philosophy. I would even be okay with the Cubs keeping him another year if they win it all in 2007. :lol:

[Guest]

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, and I want those in charge to understand that this team is very average and that Jim Hendry has done a lousy job as general manager. If the Cubs sneak in at 85-77 or so, they should realize that, regardless of the Cubs' showing in the playoffs. If they're too inept to see all the flaws in this team, then we're probably boned no matter what happens.

 

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, win the World Series and Jim Hendry to laugh at all of us for doubting his philosophy. I would even be okay with the Cubs keeping him another year if they win it all in 2007. :lol:

 

If they win the world series, I'll be high straight through 2008

[VVMattVV]

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, and I want those in charge to understand that this team is very average and that Jim Hendry has done a lousy job as general manager. If the Cubs sneak in at 85-77 or so, they should realize that, regardless of the Cubs' showing in the playoffs. If they're too inept to see all the flaws in this team, then we're probably boned no matter what happens.

 

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, win the World Series and Jim Hendry to laugh at all of us for doubting his philosophy. I would even be okay with the Cubs keeping him another year if they win it all in 2007. :lol:

 

Why would that scenario allow Hendry to laugh at us for doubting his philosophy? Its not like his team would have won a lot of games, we would have made the playoffs due to a terrible division and getting hot at the right time.

[Peoriaman]

Of course they are average, they lost 96 games last year. Personally, I am thrilled they are "average" after last year.

[Derwood]

now if the team plays like they did last night....well i'd watch THAT team in the playoffs

[CUBZ99]

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, and I want those in charge to understand that this team is very average and that Jim Hendry has done a lousy job as general manager. If the Cubs sneak in at 85-77 or so, they should realize that, regardless of the Cubs' showing in the playoffs. If they're too inept to see all the flaws in this team, then we're probably boned no matter what happens.

 

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, win the World Series and Jim Hendry to laugh at all of us for doubting his philosophy. I would even be okay with the Cubs keeping him another year if they win it all in 2007. :lol:

 

Why would that scenario allow Hendry to laugh at us for doubting his philosophy? Its not like his team would have won a lot of games, we would have made the playoffs due to a terrible division and getting hot at the right time.

 

He would have accomplished something no GM for the Cubs has accomplished in 98 years.

[CuseCubFan69]

I want the Cubs to make the playoffs, and I want those in charge to understand that this team is very average and that Jim Hendry has done a lousy job as general manager. If the Cubs sneak in at 85-77 or so, they should realize that, regardless of the Cubs' showing in the playoffs. If they're too inept to see all the flaws in this team, then we're probably boned no matter what happens.

 

 

that's a very good point.

 

I agree. I really do have a lot of faith in Lou and hopefully he'll help Hendry see the light.