The Cubs Sale Thread

[mdwilla]

Cuban would be to good to be true.

[jersey cubs fan]

Please Cuban, please Cuban, please Cuban. :beg:

 

Is there anyone against Cuban at this point?

MLB owners?

 

With the market the way it is, do they become more willing to accept him? It's easy to be picky when everybody is throwing money at you.

[Gmoney08]

http://www.laobserved.com/biz/2008/10/post_186.php

 

Article on Zell's appearance on CNBC today. Says team should be sold before end of the year again...

 

Comeon Cuban.........................

[shnsajax]

http://www.laobserved.com/biz/2008/10/post_186.php

 

Article on Zell's appearance on CNBC today. Says team should be sold before end of the year again...

 

Comeon Cuban.........................

 

What I gather is that it better happen sooner rather than later for his sake, and I am betting he will push to make this happen. This is a sale that he can't really afford to wait on.

 

Before the opening of FA please!

[Post Count Padder]

Step up to the plate Mark. Do it.

[JWCUB]

Cuban says economy slows Cubs sale

According to Mark Cuban, the shaky economic situation will change the math in Tribune Co.'s sale of the Cubs, including his offer for the team. He held court with reporters Thursday night before the team he owns, the Mavericks, defeated the Bulls at the United Center. The team he wants to own might be worth less today than it was three weeks ago, before the current financial crisis exploded. "Yeah, it's going to affect the deal structure," Cuban said. "Because of the way the deal was originally meant to be structured, it's going to create a challenge. So it'll certainly have an impact. Anytime the cost of capital goes up, the cost of assets goes down. Which is what you're seeing in the stock market." When Cuban says "deal structure," what he's really saying is price. Before the recent economic trouble, the price of the Cubs, Wrigley Field and broadcast properties was expected to rise above $1 billion. Now? Just as in most other segments of the business world, no one has a clue. -- Chicago

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/rumors/mlb

 

 

 

I hope he dosen't under bid.

[nilodnayr]

Cuban says economy slows Cubs sale

According to Mark Cuban, the shaky economic situation will change the math in Tribune Co.'s sale of the Cubs, including his offer for the team. He held court with reporters Thursday night before the team he owns, the Mavericks, defeated the Bulls at the United Center. The team he wants to own might be worth less today than it was three weeks ago, before the current financial crisis exploded. "Yeah, it's going to affect the deal structure," Cuban said. "Because of the way the deal was originally meant to be structured, it's going to create a challenge. So it'll certainly have an impact. Anytime the cost of capital goes up, the cost of assets goes down. Which is what you're seeing in the stock market." When Cuban says "deal structure," what he's really saying is price. Before the recent economic trouble, the price of the Cubs, Wrigley Field and broadcast properties was expected to rise above $1 billion. Now? Just as in most other segments of the business world, no one has a clue. -- Chicago

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/rumors/mlb

 

 

 

I hope he dosen't under bid.

 

Also by "deal structure" he means DEAL STRUCTURE. That author is freakin idiot. Zell wanted the deal structure to be heavily based on leveraging debt to avoid taxes. With the credit crisis, that obviously has to change.

[DivineBovine]

Cuban says economy slows Cubs sale

According to Mark Cuban, the shaky economic situation will change the math in Tribune Co.'s sale of the Cubs, including his offer for the team. He held court with reporters Thursday night before the team he owns, the Mavericks, defeated the Bulls at the United Center. The team he wants to own might be worth less today than it was three weeks ago, before the current financial crisis exploded. "Yeah, it's going to affect the deal structure," Cuban said. "Because of the way the deal was originally meant to be structured, it's going to create a challenge. So it'll certainly have an impact. Anytime the cost of capital goes up, the cost of assets goes down. Which is what you're seeing in the stock market." When Cuban says "deal structure," what he's really saying is price. Before the recent economic trouble, the price of the Cubs, Wrigley Field and broadcast properties was expected to rise above $1 billion. Now? Just as in most other segments of the business world, no one has a clue. -- Chicago

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/rumors/mlb

 

 

I hope he dosen't under bid.

 

 

I really read nothing into that statement. I think that since he's talking about "deal structure" and not talking about doing the deal at all. It tells me he is still interested, and it tells me that he may be trying to lobby for a better deal for him- which any smart person would do anyways.

[David]

Cuban says economy slows Cubs sale

According to Mark Cuban, the shaky economic situation will change the math in Tribune Co.'s sale of the Cubs, including his offer for the team. He held court with reporters Thursday night before the team he owns, the Mavericks, defeated the Bulls at the United Center. The team he wants to own might be worth less today than it was three weeks ago, before the current financial crisis exploded. "Yeah, it's going to affect the deal structure," Cuban said. "Because of the way the deal was originally meant to be structured, it's going to create a challenge. So it'll certainly have an impact. Anytime the cost of capital goes up, the cost of assets goes down. Which is what you're seeing in the stock market." When Cuban says "deal structure," what he's really saying is price. Before the recent economic trouble, the price of the Cubs, Wrigley Field and broadcast properties was expected to rise above $1 billion. Now? Just as in most other segments of the business world, no one has a clue. -- Chicago

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/rumors/mlb

 

 

 

I hope he dosen't under bid.

 

Also by "deal structure" he means DEAL STRUCTURE. That author is freakin idiot. Zell wanted the deal structure to be heavily based on leveraging debt to avoid taxes. With the credit crisis, that obviously has to change.

 

I emailed him about that and he claims that he specifically asked Cuban if he was referring to the price. I'm just thinking that was a polite way of brushing off the question without having to provide a much more complicated answer, but what do I know.

[Brett]

Cuban says economy slows Cubs sale

According to Mark Cuban, the shaky economic situation will change the math in Tribune Co.'s sale of the Cubs, including his offer for the team. He held court with reporters Thursday night before the team he owns, the Mavericks, defeated the Bulls at the United Center. The team he wants to own might be worth less today than it was three weeks ago, before the current financial crisis exploded. "Yeah, it's going to affect the deal structure," Cuban said. "Because of the way the deal was originally meant to be structured, it's going to create a challenge. So it'll certainly have an impact. Anytime the cost of capital goes up, the cost of assets goes down. Which is what you're seeing in the stock market." When Cuban says "deal structure," what he's really saying is price. Before the recent economic trouble, the price of the Cubs, Wrigley Field and broadcast properties was expected to rise above $1 billion. Now? Just as in most other segments of the business world, no one has a clue. -- Chicago

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/rumors/mlb

 

 

 

I hope he dosen't under bid.

 

Also by "deal structure" he means DEAL STRUCTURE. That author is freakin idiot. Zell wanted the deal structure to be heavily based on leveraging debt to avoid taxes. With the credit crisis, that obviously has to change.

 

I emailed him about that and he claims that he specifically asked Cuban if he was referring to the price. I'm just thinking that was a polite way of brushing off the question without having to provide a much more complicated answer, but what do I know.

 

He may have said deal structure - and of course, the structure will have to change - but I think it is obvious at this point that the price is also going to come down. Deflation doesn't just affect the price of oil and cookies.

[shnsajax]

Cuban says economy slows Cubs sale

According to Mark Cuban, the shaky economic situation will change the math in Tribune Co.'s sale of the Cubs, including his offer for the team. He held court with reporters Thursday night before the team he owns, the Mavericks, defeated the Bulls at the United Center. The team he wants to own might be worth less today than it was three weeks ago, before the current financial crisis exploded. "Yeah, it's going to affect the deal structure," Cuban said. "Because of the way the deal was originally meant to be structured, it's going to create a challenge. So it'll certainly have an impact. Anytime the cost of capital goes up, the cost of assets goes down. Which is what you're seeing in the stock market." When Cuban says "deal structure," what he's really saying is price. Before the recent economic trouble, the price of the Cubs, Wrigley Field and broadcast properties was expected to rise above $1 billion. Now? Just as in most other segments of the business world, no one has a clue. -- Chicago

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/rumors/mlb

 

 

 

I hope he dosen't under bid.

 

Also by "deal structure" he means DEAL STRUCTURE. That author is freakin idiot. Zell wanted the deal structure to be heavily based on leveraging debt to avoid taxes. With the credit crisis, that obviously has to change.

 

I emailed him about that and he claims that he specifically asked Cuban if he was referring to the price. I'm just thinking that was a polite way of brushing off the question without having to provide a much more complicated answer, but what do I know.

 

He may have said deal structure - and of course, the structure will have to change - but I think it is obvious at this point that the price is also going to come down. Deflation doesn't just affect the price of oil and cookies.

 

But it hasn't yet dropped the price of Lap Dances.

[freaky]

I'm surprised more people don't talk about this on the board. Oh well, can't get everything you want. I really hope Mark Cuban gets his bid awarded and becomes the new owner of the Cubs. He is the ideal guy for the job at a time like this. One thing is for sure, if Cuban does buy the team (say for $700 to $900 million), you know everyone is gonna be wiped out from a front office perspective. Good bye Jim Hendry, good bye Crane Kenney, good bye Mark McGuire (you suck btw)! Why do you think McDonough left right away as soon as he got his offer from the B'Hawks? Because of a situation like this. Please Mark Cuban! 8-[

 

No necessarily. I still believe Hendry is a very good baseball guy, and I believe he has earn the right to keep his job, to be honest.

He has spent a lot of money and not of the players are true superstars.

And these players he has signed have no trade contracts.

And he signed Lou to more years before he wins a playoff game.

Earned to stay?

[Soul]

I'd welcome a cleaned house. Hendry has been able to assemble a playoff team by virtue of the massive resources he has at his disposal, but that doesn't make him a "good baseball man." It makes him a fortunate one.

[TheDude]

I'd welcome a cleaned house. Hendry has been able to assemble a playoff team by virtue of the massive resources he has at his disposal, but that doesn't make him a "good baseball man." It makes him a fortunate one.

 

I really hate this line. Either the GM utilizes his resources correctly, or he doesn't. There have been plenty of 'expensive' teams that are not playoffs teams over the last 10 years.

 

If you believe he has correctly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then you can't come to the conclusion that he's not a good baseball man and just fortunate.

 

If you believe he has poorly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then it seems reasonable to question his baseball talent evaluation skills, but then you have to do an adequate job explaining how a consensus elite and deep team is merely a fortunate team.

 

It is a tough argument to sell that he is a poor GM coming off a 97 win season in which the team had an elite offense (2nd in MLB Runs, 3rd in MLB OPS), an elite pitching staff (3rd in MLB Runs Allowed, 3rd in MLB OPS Against), and a middle-of-the-pack defense. And it is very much the same team from 2007, and likely the same team in 2009 which will be projected as the 90+ Win division holder once again.

[Sammys Boombox]

I'd welcome a cleaned house. Hendry has been able to assemble a playoff team by virtue of the massive resources he has at his disposal, but that doesn't make him a "good baseball man." It makes him a fortunate one.

 

I really hate this line. Either the GM utilizes his resources correctly, or he doesn't. There have been plenty of 'expensive' teams that are not playoffs teams over the last 10 years.

 

If you believe he has correctly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then you can't come to the conclusion that he's not a good baseball man and just fortunate.

 

If you believe he has poorly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then it seems reasonable to question his baseball talent evaluation skills, but then you have to do an adequate job explaining how a consensus elite and deep team is merely a fortunate team.

 

It is a tough argument to sell that he is a poor GM coming off a 97 win season in which the team had an elite offense (2nd in MLB Runs, 3rd in MLB OPS), an elite pitching staff (3rd in MLB Runs Allowed, 3rd in MLB OPS Against), and a middle-of-the-pack defense. And it is very much the same team from 2007, and likely the same team in 2009 which will be projected as the 90+ Win division holder once again.

 

Every year the Cubs have been contenders Hendry has gone out and gotten something to fill a hole, or even just to bolster a weak spot. What have the Cubs lost for them? Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi, Dontrelle Willis?

 

Ricky Nolasco is about all the Cubs have lost off the top of my head that I would really want back. Then think of '03-'04. Hill, Choi, Willis, Hundley, Alex Gonzalez, Brendan Harris out the door for ARam, Lofton, Simon, Lee, Karros, Grudzielanek, Nomar, Clement, and Murton. Murton, Sean Gallagher and Eric Patterson netted us Harden and Gaudin this year.

 

You get the picture, he get's a lot back on his returns. Sure he's made some stupid moves (Pierre), but at the same time everybody was begging for a leadoff hitter and the Cubs still don't have one.

 

I'll take my chances with Jim any day.

[Andy]

Yeah, people say (correctly) that Hendry has been the beneficiary of dealing with small-market teams, but even then, the Cubs haven't gone on to watch anyone the caliber of, say, Jason Bay or Hanley Ramirez then tear it up for said small-market team, either.

[Backtobanks]

I'd welcome a cleaned house. Hendry has been able to assemble a playoff team by virtue of the massive resources he has at his disposal, but that doesn't make him a "good baseball man." It makes him a fortunate one.

 

I really hate this line. Either the GM utilizes his resources correctly, or he doesn't. There have been plenty of 'expensive' teams that are not playoffs teams over the last 10 years.

 

If you believe he has correctly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then you can't come to the conclusion that he's not a good baseball man and just fortunate.

 

If you believe he has poorly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then it seems reasonable to question his baseball talent evaluation skills, but then you have to do an adequate job explaining how a consensus elite and deep team is merely a fortunate team.

 

It is a tough argument to sell that he is a poor GM coming off a 97 win season in which the team had an elite offense (2nd in MLB Runs, 3rd in MLB OPS), an elite pitching staff (3rd in MLB Runs Allowed, 3rd in MLB OPS Against), and a middle-of-the-pack defense. And it is very much the same team from 2007, and likely the same team in 2009 which will be projected as the 90+ Win division holder once again.

 

Every year the Cubs have been contenders Hendry has gone out and gotten something to fill a hole, or even just to bolster a weak spot. What have the Cubs lost for them? Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi, Dontrelle Willis?

 

Ricky Nolasco is about all the Cubs have lost off the top of my head that I would really want back. Then think of '03-'04. Hill, Choi, Willis, Hundley, Alex Gonzalez, Brendan Harris out the door for ARam, Lofton, Simon, Lee, Karros, Grudzielanek, Nomar, Clement, and Murton. Murton, Sean Gallagher and Eric Patterson netted us Harden and Gaudin this year.

 

You get the picture, he get's a lot back on his returns. Sure he's made some stupid moves (Pierre), but at the same time everybody was begging for a leadoff hitter and the Cubs still don't have one.

 

I'll take my chances with Jim any day.

 

I totally agree. All that a GM can do is put together the best team possible and then try to fill in any holes that pop up during the season. I think he's done a great job and he's not to blame for a team that hasn't gone deep into the playoffs. Of course all of us would have made dozens of deals (trades and signings) which would have guaranteed a World Series by now. His job really looks easy sitting in front of our computers and making fantasy deals.

[David]

Heard a snippet on the MJH show (ESPN1000) that Cuban was supposedly house hunting in the north shore.

[David]

Rumor has it he was with Kobe and they were looking for a package discount.

[MrApril]

I'd welcome a cleaned house. Hendry has been able to assemble a playoff team by virtue of the massive resources he has at his disposal, but that doesn't make him a "good baseball man." It makes him a fortunate one.

 

I really hate this line. Either the GM utilizes his resources correctly, or he doesn't. There have been plenty of 'expensive' teams that are not playoffs teams over the last 10 years.

 

If you believe he has correctly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then you can't come to the conclusion that he's not a good baseball man and just fortunate.

 

If you believe he has poorly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then it seems reasonable to question his baseball talent evaluation skills, but then you have to do an adequate job explaining how a consensus elite and deep team is merely a fortunate team.

 

It is a tough argument to sell that he is a poor GM coming off a 97 win season in which the team had an elite offense (2nd in MLB Runs, 3rd in MLB OPS), an elite pitching staff (3rd in MLB Runs Allowed, 3rd in MLB OPS Against), and a middle-of-the-pack defense. And it is very much the same team from 2007, and likely the same team in 2009 which will be projected as the 90+ Win division holder once again.

 

Every year the Cubs have been contenders Hendry has gone out and gotten something to fill a hole, or even just to bolster a weak spot. What have the Cubs lost for them? Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi, Dontrelle Willis?

 

Ricky Nolasco is about all the Cubs have lost off the top of my head that I would really want back. Then think of '03-'04. Hill, Choi, Willis, Hundley, Alex Gonzalez, Brendan Harris out the door for ARam, Lofton, Simon, Lee, Karros, Grudzielanek, Nomar, Clement, and Murton. Murton, Sean Gallagher and Eric Patterson netted us Harden and Gaudin this year.

 

You get the picture, he get's a lot back on his returns. Sure he's made some stupid moves (Pierre), but at the same time everybody was begging for a leadoff hitter and the Cubs still don't have one.

 

I'll take my chances with Jim any day.

 

I personally have to agree with Soul. He isn't a good baseball man but a fortunate one. Fortunate to have/had basically the unlimited resources and money from the Tribune Company. Being able to read ESPN's or Baseball America's top winter free agent list and then throw the most money at the "top player" doesn't make you a good baseball man. Being able to know when and where you need or not need to spend money, who to promote, who to trade, who to keep makes you a good GM. This is where guys like Billy Beane and John Schuerholz excel, which makes them "good baseball men".

 

I know hindsight is 20/20...but I knew it was a mistake 2 years ago and again last year with the signing of Soriano and Koske...we did not need those guys. Murton was a good left fielder that was young and developing. The kid hit over .300 his rookie year, then led the team in hitting his second year, the year before they brought in Soriano. The money that went to Fonzie could have gone to a stud #1 pitcher. He could have put a package together or Pie, Marshall, etc. to land Santana and then signed him to a long term deal with that money.

 

The recipe for building a dynasty is simple and pretty well documented by the Braves of the 90's, Yankees of the 90's, and A's in the year part of this decade...You build from within, then add a couple key free agents to fill holes that you haven't developed with your own guys. Sure the first couple years will be tough, all those Yankees, Braves, A's teams were bad, but then they turned it around, and sustained a championship level for many years.

 

If you say the Cubs haven't been able to develop any players like Jeter, or Smoltz, Glavin, Chipper Jones, Andrew Jones, or Giambi, Tejada, who were the cornerstone type players or those organizations, then who's fault is that?? It's got to be the GM's and the guys he picks to be in charge or developing those minor league guys. Which gets back to being a true "baseball man".

 

Sorry for the rant...I blame it on the election coverage.

[davearm2]

I'd welcome a cleaned house. Hendry has been able to assemble a playoff team by virtue of the massive resources he has at his disposal, but that doesn't make him a "good baseball man." It makes him a fortunate one.

 

I really hate this line. Either the GM utilizes his resources correctly, or he doesn't. There have been plenty of 'expensive' teams that are not playoffs teams over the last 10 years.

 

If you believe he has correctly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then you can't come to the conclusion that he's not a good baseball man and just fortunate.

 

If you believe he has poorly utilized his budget when acquiring talent, then it seems reasonable to question his baseball talent evaluation skills, but then you have to do an adequate job explaining how a consensus elite and deep team is merely a fortunate team.

 

It is a tough argument to sell that he is a poor GM coming off a 97 win season in which the team had an elite offense (2nd in MLB Runs, 3rd in MLB OPS), an elite pitching staff (3rd in MLB Runs Allowed, 3rd in MLB OPS Against), and a middle-of-the-pack defense. And it is very much the same team from 2007, and likely the same team in 2009 which will be projected as the 90+ Win division holder once again.

 

Every year the Cubs have been contenders Hendry has gone out and gotten something to fill a hole, or even just to bolster a weak spot. What have the Cubs lost for them? Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi, Dontrelle Willis?

 

Ricky Nolasco is about all the Cubs have lost off the top of my head that I would really want back. Then think of '03-'04. Hill, Choi, Willis, Hundley, Alex Gonzalez, Brendan Harris out the door for ARam, Lofton, Simon, Lee, Karros, Grudzielanek, Nomar, Clement, and Murton. Murton, Sean Gallagher and Eric Patterson netted us Harden and Gaudin this year.

 

You get the picture, he get's a lot back on his returns. Sure he's made some stupid moves (Pierre), but at the same time everybody was begging for a leadoff hitter and the Cubs still don't have one.

 

I'll take my chances with Jim any day.

 

I personally have to agree with Soul. He isn't a good baseball man but a fortunate one. Fortunate to have/had basically the unlimited resources and money from the Tribune Company. Being able to read ESPN's or Baseball America's top winter free agent list and then throw the most money at the "top player" doesn't make you a good baseball man. Being able to know when and where you need or not need to spend money, who to promote, who to trade, who to keep makes you a good GM. This is where guys like Billy Beane and John Schuerholz excel, which makes them "good baseball men".

 

I know hindsight is 20/20...but I knew it was a mistake 2 years ago and again last year with the signing of Soriano and Koske...we did not need those guys. Murton was a good left fielder that was young and developing. The kid hit over .300 his rookie year, then led the team in hitting his second year, the year before they brought in Soriano. The money that went to Fonzie could have gone to a stud #1 pitcher. He could have put a package together or Pie, Marshall, etc. to land Santana and then signed him to a long term deal with that money.

 

The recipe for building a dynasty is simple and pretty well documented by the Braves of the 90's, Yankees of the 90's, and A's in the year part of this decade...You build from within, then add a couple key free agents to fill holes that you haven't developed with your own guys. Sure the first couple years will be tough, all those Yankees, Braves, A's teams were bad, but then they turned it around, and sustained a championship level for many years.

 

If you say the Cubs haven't been able to develop any players like Jeter, or Smoltz, Glavin, Chipper Jones, Andrew Jones, or Giambi, Tejada, who were the cornerstone type players or those organizations, then who's fault is that?? It's got to be the GM's and the guys he picks to be in charge or developing those minor league guys. Which gets back to being a true "baseball man".

 

Sorry for the rant...I blame it on the election coverage.

The bolded sentence above precisely describes what the Cubs have done.

 

Current players the Cubs have developed:

Wood

Zambrano

Marmol

Samardzija

Wuertz

Marshall

Hill

Guzman

 

Soto

Theriot

Fontenot (partial)

Pie

Cedeno

 

Current players the Cubs have obtained by trading players they developed:

Lee

Ramirez

Harden

Gaudin

 

Sorry, but that's a list that most (not all) other clubs would be envious of.

 

Significant free agent adds:

Soriano

Fukudome

DeRosa

Lilly

Marquis

 

Not sure what definition of "build from within, then fill holes with FAs" you're using, if that ain't it.

[Soul]

Yeah, if you put Jim Hendry into a situation such as that which Beane finds himself, you would not likely see him have much success. If you disagree with that, then fine -- but that's definitely my opinion of the man. That said, I agree he hasn't done all bad things in *THIS* situation. And you can't expect him to make a great decision every time.

[Elrhino]

On a sidenote, if anyone wants to get inside his head, his blog is pretty interesting. He's typically all about basketball at this time of the year, but recently almost all of his blog posts have been about the economy and personal finance ... so it's definitely on his mind. At any rate, very little insight into the Cubs, but it's an interesting and opinionated read ... almost like you're getting to casually shoot the Howry with a billionaire entrepreneur about the topics of the day.

 

http://blogmaverick.com/2008/11/05/proud-to-be-an-american/

[KingCubsFan]

Yeah, if you put Jim Hendry into a situation such as that which Beane finds himself, you would not likely see him have much success. If you disagree with that, then fine -- but that's definitely my opinion of the man. That said, I agree he hasn't done all bad things in *THIS* situation. And you can't expect him to make a great decision every time.

It's hard to say how he'd do with less payroll. Before he became GM, he was a terrific minor league director, so he certainly understands the importance of developing from within and can identify young players.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, if you put Jim Hendry into a situation such as that which Beane finds himself, you would not likely see him have much success. If you disagree with that, then fine -- but that's definitely my opinion of the man. That said, I agree he hasn't done all bad things in *THIS* situation. And you can't expect him to make a great decision every time.

It's hard to say how he'd do with less payroll. Before he became GM, he was a terrific minor league director, so he certainly understands the importance of developing from within and can identify young players.

 

At the time it appeared he was, but the results were much worse than expectations. I don't think it's hard to say what he'd do with less payroll. Before they really went from high to really high he had a below .500 record with the Cubs.