Cub prospects in the news

[sneakypower]

it's not on me to make them better, it's on the supergroup of highly compensated geniuses. Their job isn't to vault to the top of baseball america rankings, their job is to make the big league team win lots of baseball games.

like it or not, their job was to rebuild an entire organization, and this is what they inherited: http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2013/08/12/the-all-homegrown-mlb/

"these Cubs would be in the running for the first pick of the draft. This makes Theo Epstein’s slash-and-burn rebuild seem all the more necessary."

under the budget restraints that were imposed, contending early was never a realistic option, and if you choose to remain willfully ignorant of that i guess that's your prerogative

[Guest]

 

Not even asking for a detailed plan. There's also only so much they could do. They didn't have a lot of valuable assets to work with at the time, so it's not like they could have gone out and pulled a Blue Jays/Marlins type deal. The free agent market has been, to put it mildly, [expletive] the last few seasons. I don't really see how they could have drastically improved the team these last few years through throwing money around.

 

I'll absolutely be upset if they cry poor this off-season and don't go out and sign anyone, but as of right now, through this season, I don't see how they could have produced a winner given the resources and restrictions they inherited.

 

Perfect example is sneak's response to my suggestion that they should sign Ellsbury and Tanaka. Based on what I've read about Tanaka, that's exactly what we should be after if we had the financial wherewithal. There are a few reasons you could cast doubt on Ellsbury, but I still think he'd be worth the risk. Most of the one year outlay would be Tanaka and his posting fee, though.

 

His (probably correct) response was basically that it's too much money. That sucks.

[Guest]

it's not on me to make them better, it's on the supergroup of highly compensated geniuses. Their job isn't to vault to the top of baseball america rankings, their job is to make the big league team win lots of baseball games.

like it or not, their job was to rebuild an entire organization, and this is what they inherited: http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2013/08/12/the-all-homegrown-mlb/

"these Cubs would be in the running for the first pick of the draft. This makes Theo Epstein’s slash-and-burn rebuild seem all the more necessary."

under the budget restraints that were imposed, contending early was never a realistic option, and if you choose to remain willfully ignorant of that i guess that's your prerogative

 

i don't think he really thinks they should be doing better with the budget restraints. i think he thinks the cubs shouldn't be choosing not to spend money on payroll (from an ownership standpoint).

 

what i'm not sure about is whether that's an option or not

[Guest]

Seriously I'd love to hear the list of free agents the last two years that would have radically improved this team.

1) Winning on some of: Darvish, Anibal, Liriano, Cespedes, Puig

2) Having a better plan on relievers

 

You'd have a possible 2013 rotation of Darvish, Sanchez, Garza, Samardzija + Wood

 

The lineup could be: DeJesus, Castro, Rizzo, Puig, Cespedes, Valbuena, Castillo, Barney

 

Add in quality relievers and you've got a pretty good team.

 

It would be more expensive, no doubt. But in this scenario, we don't spend on Jackson & Soler, Maholm, Feldman, Baker, Fujikawa. So it isn't crazy in terms of how much additional money it would require.

[Guest]

No, I mean specifics. It's easy to pound your fist with "they aren't even trying!" rhetoric, that doesn't make it true.

 

Screw that. The specifics have been thrown out thousands of times. Don't come with this nonsensical "there is nothing they can do about their situation" rhetoric. It's their job to make it happen. They are the highly compensated super group already 2 years into their tenure. If they can't figure out a way to make the team competitive 3 seasons in they really did a poor job.

 

I didn't say "there is nothing they can do". You're the one throwing out stuff about "actually trying". My point is that there's a huge chasm between "not trying" and "they can get there but it's not a very wide path". That's why the specifics matter, and probably why you haven't and aren't bothering with them. I can outline an offseason that gets them to be competitive:

 

Sign Ellsbury and Tanaka

Lake/Alcantara/Soler/Almora for Stanton

Schierholtz for Hochevar

 

That's a team that projects between 80-85 wins with Soriano's money coming free to offer to Stanton/Shark and Olt/Baez/Bryant upcoming to help with 3B/2B/LF holes that may be there for 2015. I think it's pretty rock solid, if bold.

 

Here's the thing though, it's a very narrow plan. Tanaka might not even get posted, Stanton might not be available or available for anything reasonable, someone could give Ellsbury 10/300. There are alternatives to be sure, but they are lesser players or those with less certainty that chip away at the value you can add. So even in the event that they "try", they may not succeed at making the team competitive, or good enough to your liking. And that's the nuance that's missing from the "they could do it if they just tried" nonsense.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Seriously I'd love to hear the list of free agents the last two years that would have radically improved this team.

 

I'm not going to do that and I don't care if you don't take it seriously or not.

 

Here's what happens when you post an alternative offseason:

 

Person - Well, what could they have done differently?

 

*spends three hours digging through free agent lists, presents exhaustive alternative offseason that gets the team to 92 wins and under budget using WAR totals from that season*

 

Person - Well, you didn't know at the time those players were going to do that.

 

*spends another hour reconfiguring offseason to use pre-season projections from that time instead of actual results*

 

Person - Well, you didn't know that those players would sign with us for that money.

 

*spends another hour making an 88-win team that overpays all its players*

 

Person - Well, that might not have even made the playoffs and we would have missed out on three prospects!

 

*spends another hour reconfiguring to make sure we get plenty of prospects too*

 

Person - Well, you used the wrong WAR. Do it all over again with a different one.

[Guest]

Seriously I'd love to hear the list of free agents the last two years that would have radically improved this team.

 

I'm not going to do that and I don't care if you don't take it seriously or not.

 

Here's what happens when you post an alternative offseason:

 

Person - Well, what could they have done differently?

 

*spends three hours digging through free agent lists, presents exhaustive alternative offseason that gets the team to 92 wins and under budget using WAR totals from that season*

 

Person - Well, you didn't know at the time those players were going to do that.

 

*spends another hour reconfiguring offseason to use pre-season projections from that time instead of actual results*

 

Person - Well, you didn't know that those players would sign with us for that money.

 

*spends another hour making an 88-win team that overpays all its players*

 

Person - Well, that might not have even made the playoffs and we would have missed out on three prospects!

 

*spends another hour reconfiguring to make sure we get plenty of prospects too*

 

Person - Well, you used the wrong WAR. Do it all over again with a different one.

 

this was one of your better attempts at humor

[davell]

Pound your fists all you want, but Theo doesn't have the ability to spend. If he did, we would be. Theo has taken the ONLY route he's been able to. Go read the payroll thread in Discussions. If Papa Joe won't give the kids extra allowance money, Theo and us get [expletive] in the ass until we have additional revenue.

 

Here's where you and I diverge. I don't expect my team's owner to spend money out of his own pocket on the team or something. That said, the team should be profitable enough and produce more than enough revenue on its own to sustain a really high payroll.

Actually, we don't though. I think professional sports owners ought to make plenty of money. And the Cubs do. However, it seems to me that the Cubs profits currently are going straight to Papa Joe's bank account. And as a businessman without an interest in sports whatsoever, they're going to stay there. Leaving the kids enough to pay their bills the new hobby has given them. With the chance the kids can work hard and earn more(reno and TV deal) to help them do better at their little project. Papa Joe is the devil, basically. The kids are just playing with their new toy daddy gave them and he's making them earn anything above what he already gave them.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

In reality, it's not. Major League Baseball is not the National Football League.

 

The teams with the best record in the AL and the second-best in the NL were projected to finish fourth in their divisions by the consensus of statistical projection models.

 

Of course, now everyone *knew* that the Pirates and Red Sox were going to be awesome and they totally weren't in that ".500 with little chance" category before the season.

[ctcf]

But again, even with the budgetary restraints out of the picture, it wouldn't have been easy to make a sustainable, quality team. Just look at some of the "impact" FA's of the last few years:

 

Albert Pujols: Signed essentially for the rest of our combined lives, put up a .767 OPS this year and is already seemingly heading into injury and decline.

Josh Hamilton: Drug/alcohol addled injury prone OF, signed for 5/133 and has a .690 OPS this year. I'm sure that'll end well.

Prince Fielder: Signed also for the rest of our lives, many here were opposed due to his body (I wasn't and now feel dumb). Probably the best performer out of the bunch and only out-OPSing Anthony Rizzo by .028 this year.

CJ Wilson: Arguably a solid sign at 5/77. Has 2 WAR (or 2.8, going by FG) this year. Also seemed deadset on hanging out in SOCAL.

Michael Bourn: JK, you guys

BJ Upton: I tried to look at his stats but my eyes started crying blood.

Yu Darvish: Probably the biggest missed opportunity, although I will only fault them so much for missing out in a bidding process, especially if Papa Joe is being a douche.

Cespedes: Perhaps another missed opportunity, although there have been conflicting reports to just how close they were. Also, after being absolutely amazeballs last year, he has a lower OPS than Soriano this season.

 

I just don't see how spending tons of money on guys like those (with the exception of Yu and maybe Yoennis) would have helped build a long term successful team.

[The-Kris-Bryant]

In reality, it's not. Major League Baseball is not the National Football League.

 

The teams with the best record in the AL and the second-best in the NL were projected to finish fourth in their divisions by the consensus of statistical projection models.

 

Of course, now everyone *knew* that the Pirates and Red Sox were going to be awesome and they totally weren't in that ".500 with little chance" category before the season.

Just 15 of the 146 teams who finished in the bottom four of their league made the playoffs the following year since the advent of the wild card.

 

No one in their right mind would describe that as a high rate of a quick turnaround nor should it be used to argue, in your words high variance.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Also, when I said "we could be competitive in 2014" I didn't just mean in an "if we open up the pocketbooks" sort of way.

 

Baseball is weird, and we have a ton of interesting talent in the organization. Sometimes talent breaks out. Sometimes (and since we have yet another year of it not happening, it's really hard to convince people of this) you have a lot of good luck in a season.

 

If our entire offseason is picking up a bargain FA outfielder and one starting pitcher, I still think we could compete with the $90m payroll that would result. Emphasis on could.

 

Take that offseason I described above, then fill out the roster with players already in the organization.

 

Now imagine Castro/Rizzo/Samardzija remember that they are supposed to be core and combine for 12 WAR like we hoped instead of the 5 we're going to get from them this year.

 

Then our huge stockpile of interesting, hard-throwing or tricky bullpen arms comes forward and replaces all the schmucks we have now, and we have a slightly above-average bullpen.

 

Then Javier Baez comes up in May and hits 20 HRs the rest of the way.

 

Then we get a fluky-good year in clutchiness. Nothing extreme, just three or four extra wins.

 

That team might win 95 games.

[Guest]

But again, even with the budgetary restraints out of the picture, it wouldn't have been easy to make a sustainable, quality team. Just look at some of the "impact" FA's of the last few years:

 

Albert Pujols: Signed essentially for the rest of our combined lives, put up a .767 OPS this year and is already seemingly heading into injury and decline.

Josh Hamilton: Drug/alcohol addled injury prone OF, signed for 5/133 and has a .690 OPS this year. I'm sure that'll end well.

Prince Fielder: Signed also for the rest of our lives, many here were opposed due to his body (I wasn't and now feel dumb). Probably the best performer out of the bunch and only out-OPSing Anthony Rizzo by .028 this year.

CJ Wilson: Arguably a solid sign at 5/77. Has 2 WAR (or 2.8, going by FG) this year. Also seemed deadset on hanging out in SOCAL.

Michael Bourn: JK, you guys

BJ Upton: I tried to look at his stats but my eyes started crying blood.

Yu Darvish: Probably the biggest missed opportunity, although I will only fault them so much for missing out in a bidding process, especially if Papa Joe is being a douche.

Cespedes: Perhaps another although there have been conflicting reports to just how close they were. Also, after being absolutely amazeballs last year, he has a lower OPS than Soriano.

 

I just don't see how spending tons of money on guys like those would have helped build a long term successful team.

You forgot Anibal Sanchez, Liriano & Puig.

 

Heck, just replace Jackson with Sanchez, Feldman with Liriano and Soler with Puig. Don't sign Baker. There's less than $10M additional cash outlay, no additional impact from a prospect/organization perspective and the team is significantly better. Add a competent bullpen and that team is very, very competitive.

[ctcf]

But again, even with the budgetary restraints out of the picture, it wouldn't have been easy to make a sustainable, quality team. Just look at some of the "impact" FA's of the last few years:

 

Albert Pujols: Signed essentially for the rest of our combined lives, put up a .767 OPS this year and is already seemingly heading into injury and decline.

Josh Hamilton: Drug/alcohol addled injury prone OF, signed for 5/133 and has a .690 OPS this year. I'm sure that'll end well.

Prince Fielder: Signed also for the rest of our lives, many here were opposed due to his body (I wasn't and now feel dumb). Probably the best performer out of the bunch and only out-OPSing Anthony Rizzo by .028 this year.

CJ Wilson: Arguably a solid sign at 5/77. Has 2 WAR (or 2.8, going by FG) this year. Also seemed deadset on hanging out in SOCAL.

Michael Bourn: JK, you guys

BJ Upton: I tried to look at his stats but my eyes started crying blood.

Yu Darvish: Probably the biggest missed opportunity, although I will only fault them so much for missing out in a bidding process, especially if Papa Joe is being a douche.

Cespedes: Perhaps another although there have been conflicting reports to just how close they were. Also, after being absolutely amazeballs last year, he has a lower OPS than Soriano.

 

I just don't see how spending tons of money on guys like those would have helped build a long term successful team.

You forgot Anibal Sanchez, Liriano & Puig.

 

Heck, just replace Jackson with Sanchez, Baker with Liriano and Soler with Puig. There's less than $10M additional cash outlay, no additional impact from a prospect/organization perspective and the team is significantly better. Add a competent bullpen and that team is very, very competitive.

 

Sanchez is a weird case, though. They seemed like they were pretty damn close and, given the money, Sanchez just wanted to stick with Detroit and have an immediate shot at a WS.

As for Puig, who the hell knows there? It seemed like the Dodgers were the only team that were really that high on the guy. The initial reports on him were definitely mixed at best.

Liriano, I try not to think about because I'd like to avoid crying myself to sleep.

Edited August 15, 2013 by ctcf

[Hairyducked Idiot]

No one in their right mind would describe that as a high rate of a quick turnaround nor should it be used to argue, in your words high variance.

 

10% of the worst teams made the playoffs the next year? Seems pretty high-variance to me.

 

Not that it means much other than we're terrible often, but I think three of those teams were Cubs.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Hairyducked Idiot

[MWV]

But again, even with the budgetary restraints out of the picture, it wouldn't have been easy to make a sustainable, quality team. Just look at some of the "impact" FA's of the last few years:

 

Albert Pujols: Signed essentially for the rest of our combined lives, put up a .767 OPS this year and is already seemingly heading into injury and decline.

Josh Hamilton: Drug/alcohol addled injury prone OF, signed for 5/133 and has a .690 OPS this year. I'm sure that'll end well.

Prince Fielder: Signed also for the rest of our lives, many here were opposed due to his body (I wasn't and now feel dumb). Probably the best performer out of the bunch and only out-OPSing Anthony Rizzo by .028 this year.

CJ Wilson: Arguably a solid sign at 5/77. Has 2 WAR (or 2.8, going by FG) this year. Also seemed deadset on hanging out in SOCAL.

Michael Bourn: JK, you guys

BJ Upton: I tried to look at his stats but my eyes started crying blood.

Yu Darvish: Probably the biggest missed opportunity, although I will only fault them so much for missing out in a bidding process, especially if Papa Joe is being a douche.

Cespedes: Perhaps another although there have been conflicting reports to just how close they were. Also, after being absolutely amazeballs last year, he has a lower OPS than Soriano.

 

I just don't see how spending tons of money on guys like those would have helped build a long term successful team.

You forgot Anibal Sanchez, Liriano & Puig.

 

Heck, just replace Jackson with Sanchez, Feldman with Liriano and Soler with Puig. Don't sign Baker. There's less than $10M additional cash outlay, no additional impact from a prospect/organization perspective and the team is significantly better. Add a competent bullpen and that team is very, very competitive.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I don't mean this facetiously), but weren't they pretty heavily in on all three of those guys? Our FO can't just kidnap FA.

[Guest]

You forgot Anibal Sanchez, Liriano & Puig.

 

Heck, just replace Jackson with Sanchez, Baker with Liriano and Soler with Puig. There's less than $10M additional cash outlay, no additional impact from a prospect/organization perspective and the team is significantly better. Add a competent bullpen and that team is very, very competitive.

 

Sanchez is a weird case, though. They seemed like they were pretty damn close and, given the money, Sanchez just wanted to stick with Detroit and have an immediate shot at a WS.

I'm sure it wasn't impossible to sign him, though. I don't think it was a "I really want to go home to SoCal" kind of situation. If we had sold harder and offered a bit more, the chances may have been good.

 

You asked for how we could have been significantly better. Those signings weren't impossible by any means. Payroll wouldn't have gone up much. It would have had a net effect of one player in the system (no Soler). You can't just pick on things and say there's no chance we could have gotten Sanchez.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

We could have upped our Sanchez offer with Concepcion's money.

[Guest]

You forgot Anibal Sanchez, Liriano & Puig.

 

Heck, just replace Jackson with Sanchez, Feldman with Liriano and Soler with Puig. Don't sign Baker. There's less than $10M additional cash outlay, no additional impact from a prospect/organization perspective and the team is significantly better. Add a competent bullpen and that team is very, very competitive.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I don't mean this facetiously), but weren't they pretty heavily in on all three of those guys? Our FO can't just kidnap FA.

We were in on them and lost. That's still on the front office for not selling hard enough or making the right offer to those guys.

 

besides, I was answering CT's challenge that there was no way we could have improved this team in the past two offseasons through FA.

[XZero771679666304]

But again, even with the budgetary restraints out of the picture, it wouldn't have been easy to make a sustainable, quality team. Just look at some of the "impact" FA's of the last few years:

 

Albert Pujols: Signed essentially for the rest of our combined lives, put up a .767 OPS this year and is already seemingly heading into injury and decline.

Josh Hamilton: Drug/alcohol addled injury prone OF, signed for 5/133 and has a .690 OPS this year. I'm sure that'll end well.

Prince Fielder: Signed also for the rest of our lives, many here were opposed due to his body (I wasn't and now feel dumb). Probably the best performer out of the bunch and only out-OPSing Anthony Rizzo by .028 this year.

CJ Wilson: Arguably a solid sign at 5/77. Has 2 WAR (or 2.8, going by FG) this year. Also seemed deadset on hanging out in SOCAL.

Michael Bourn: JK, you guys

BJ Upton: I tried to look at his stats but my eyes started crying blood.

Yu Darvish: Probably the biggest missed opportunity, although I will only fault them so much for missing out in a bidding process, especially if Papa Joe is being a douche.

Cespedes: Perhaps another although there have been conflicting reports to just how close they were. Also, after being absolutely amazeballs last year, he has a lower OPS than Soriano.

 

I just don't see how spending tons of money on guys like those would have helped build a long term successful team.

You forgot Anibal Sanchez, Liriano & Puig.

 

Heck, just replace Jackson with Sanchez, Baker with Liriano and Soler with Puig. There's less than $10M additional cash outlay, no additional impact from a prospect/organization perspective and the team is significantly better. Add a competent bullpen and that team is very, very competitive.

 

To be fair, who the hell saw Liriano's 2013 coming? Or even anything close? And I'd be surprised if even the Dodgers anticipated what Puig has done. Certainly nobody here would have preferred Puig to Soler a year ago. And who would have predicted Jackson would be as much worse than Sanchez as he has been? This is a very "hindsight is 20/20" post, predicated on improbable things that happened.

[sneakypower]

saying "sign Puig instead of Soler" is about as constructive as saying something like "draft Mike Trout"

 

i really, really wanted Liriano though on a 3+ year term

[Hairyducked Idiot]

^ called it

[XZero771679666304]

We could have upped our Sanchez offer with Concepcion's money.

 

This is true. Whether that would have swung things is unclear.

[Guest]

^ called it

In retrospect, I'm not sure why I bothered.

[The-Kris-Bryant]

No one in their right mind would describe that as a high rate of a quick turnaround nor should it be used to argue, in your words high variance.

 

10% of the worst teams made the playoffs the next year? Seems pretty high-variance to me.

 

Not that it means much other than we're terrible often, but I think three of those teams were Cubs.

Well you just labeled a team in the top three quarters "one of the worst"