Cub prospects in the news

[jersey cubs fan]

two seasons are lost so i'm pretty much on board with the "hope our top 6 prospects all pan out" plan because they've kinda painted themselves into that corner. i mean, there's no going back to rescue the last two seasons and now the propsects that could help are getting close.

 

though, man, if baez and bryant and soler are busts...this franchise is in some serious trouble.

 

they have a lot more than 6 prospects in the system that could end up becoming great. the system is a lot deeper than that.

 

how much would you like to bet that less than 6 of the cubs prospects end up being great?

 

But they could man, and really, what is baseball than a game of what could happen?

[Guest]

IMO, it's a pretty wide interpretation of "great" to think that the Cubs easily have more than 6 prospects that could reach that mark. I'd say Baez, Almora, Soler, Bryant, and maybe(but probably not) guys like Alcantara, Johnson, and Edwards.

 

At the same time, the Cubs don't need 6 guys to all hit that mark, they'd be a 120 win super team if that were to happen. Getting 2 stars and 2 complementary players out of the above group would be a success, and also sufficient support to make the big league team competitive.

[SouthSideRyan]

IMO, it's a pretty wide interpretation of "great" to think that the Cubs easily have more than 6 prospects that could reach that mark. I'd say Baez, Almora, Soler, Bryant, and maybe(but probably not) guys like Alcantara, Johnson, and Edwards.

 

At the same time, the Cubs don't need 6 guys to all hit that mark, they'd be a 120 win super team if that were to happen. Getting 2 stars and 2 complementary players out of the above group would be a success, and also sufficient support to make the big league team competitive.

 

Jesus, that still seems like it's asking a lot to make the team "competitive"

[The-Kris-Bryant]

Well someone has to throw the rock.

[Guest]

IMO, it's a pretty wide interpretation of "great" to think that the Cubs easily have more than 6 prospects that could reach that mark. I'd say Baez, Almora, Soler, Bryant, and maybe(but probably not) guys like Alcantara, Johnson, and Edwards.

 

At the same time, the Cubs don't need 6 guys to all hit that mark, they'd be a 120 win super team if that were to happen. Getting 2 stars and 2 complementary players out of the above group would be a success, and also sufficient support to make the big league team competitive.

 

Jesus, that still seems like it's asking a lot to make the team "competitive"

 

 

That's not a bare minimum. Heck, take an optimistic outcome for Baez alone, put him at 2B and don't sell this year and they push 80 wins.

[Guest]

two seasons are lost so i'm pretty much on board with the "hope our top 6 prospects all pan out" plan because they've kinda painted themselves into that corner. i mean, there's no going back to rescue the last two seasons and now the propsects that could help are getting close.

 

though, man, if baez and bryant and soler are busts...this franchise is in some serious trouble.

 

they have a lot more than 6 prospects in the system that could end up becoming great. the system is a lot deeper than that.

 

how much would you like to bet that less than 6 of the cubs prospects end up being great?

 

i would bet nothing, because i never said 6 would

 

but seriously, there are like 3-5 otherwise reasonable posters on here who have inexplicably become whiny meatballs since theo took over. boohoo, the cubs will have to have an average payroll for like 3-5 years. how GHASTLY

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Cubs have been awful for four straight years now. It's not exactly whiny to be unhappy with the team.

[jersey cubs fan]

but seriously, there are like 3-5 otherwise reasonable posters on here who have inexplicably become whiny meatballs since theo took over. boohoo, the cubs will have to have an average payroll for like 3-5 years. how GHASTLY

 

This is so stupid.

 

This is a major market baseball team with outstanding attendance and excitement levels that skyrocket just when it looks like they might be decent. We're 4 years into this team being abysmal, and the current owners have been here that entire time. 5 years with an average payroll, comping up against teams that can't get fans to show up even when they are good, is ridiculous.

 

Fans aren't fans because they want to see front offices do behind the scenes work. Fans are fans of the major league baseball team, and that major league baseball team can't go four years being awful and expect fans to not get pissed off.

[muntjack]

Villanueva (3) Bryant (9) and Baez (10) all made the hot sheet this week.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Point of order: We *used* to have outstanding attendance. Down to 7th in the NL.

[Guest]

Point of order: We *used* to have outstanding attendance. Down to 7th in the NL.

 

7th in the NL is fairly outstanding for this [expletive] show of a team and with our ticket prices.

[jersey cubs fan]

Point of order: We *used* to have outstanding attendance. Down to 7th in the NL.

 

Which is insanely good for one of the worst teams in the league over the past 4 years.

[TruffleShuffle]

Almost everything in that post was wrong, and you choose to quibble with the part about attendance?

[Guest]

Almost everything in that post was wrong, and you choose to quibble with the part about attendance?

What post?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Almost everything in that post was wrong, and you choose to quibble with the part about attendance?

 

The rest of it was right.

[TruffleShuffle]

No.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

No.

 

Half of it was literally factual.

[Guest]

No.

 

Jersey's? What wasn't right?

[Guest]

I would think that people with thousands of posts on a Cubs message board might be able to understand, even if they don't appreciate, the reasoning behind the results. At the very least, you would think that they could at least separate irritation at ownership from irritation at how the front office is working within given parameters. Is it too crazy to be able to talk about what might happen this offseason without multiple sarcastic rejoinders about how much the team is able to spend, or diatribes about the effort that they are putting in to make the team good?

[jersey cubs fan]

I would think that people with thousands of posts on a Cubs message board might be able to understand, even if they don't appreciate, the reasoning behind the results. At the very least, you would think that they could at least separate irritation at ownership from irritation at how the front office is working within given parameters. Is it too crazy to be able to talk about what might happen this offseason without multiple sarcastic rejoinders about how much the team is able to spend, or diatribes about the effort that they are putting in to make the team good?

 

I would think that people that care about a baseball team enough to actually bother posting about it on message boards, and moderate those message boards, would not pretend that front office maneuvering is more meaningful to fans than the major league team winning baseball games.

[Guest]

I like half of what they are doing and I understand what they are doing on the other half, but I don't like it. Worse, I think it's intentional from ownership and management. I think both want to show how smart they are. On the other hand, I always thought it would take awhile to right the ship, so to speak.

[XZero771679666304]

I would think that people with thousands of posts on a Cubs message board might be able to understand, even if they don't appreciate, the reasoning behind the results. At the very least, you would think that they could at least separate irritation at ownership from irritation at how the front office is working within given parameters. Is it too crazy to be able to talk about what might happen this offseason without multiple sarcastic rejoinders about how much the team is able to spend, or diatribes about the effort that they are putting in to make the team good?

 

This is the part I don't get. Yes, the big league team is bad, and that sucks. No one is enjoying this. But this isn't a situation where you can cast blanket condemnation over the entire organization for "not trying". It's a little more nuanced than that.

[Layoutman]

How awfully unathletic is this Abreu guy? Just wondering if it wouldn't make sense to leave your good defensive 1B there and let him Dunn-up left field rather than weaken two defensive positions.

 

the problem with doing that is if he truly is as horrific as dunn was once he started to lose his athleticism (like mid 2000s), then his bat loses a lot of value. with dunn, you're talking about a guy who was cranking out a wOBA around .390 every season, which was damn near elite, but he was ending up anywhere from a 1 to 3 win player because he gave back so much value on defense. and there's certainly no guarantee that abreu's bat is as good as in-his-prime adam dunn. you can get as much value in LF with a platoon like schierholtz/hairston at a fraction of what abreu is likely to cost.

 

to me, the only realistic option if you sign abreu is to turn around and trade rizzo. i don't like the idea of playing abreu at 1b and rizzo at lf, because they're both going to leak value defensively, and abreu will probably be a joke in lf (and may not even sign to play a new position).

 

Don't fall into the slippery slope argument over positions. Abreu, if signed, is simply a talent grab that opens up more OPTIONS for the organization. You're smart and realize how fickle the baseball gods can be with injuries and regressions. Focus on the talent not the position.

 

No one wants to see an outfield like Rizzo in center, Abreu in left and Vogelbach in right field, though it would bring a beer league softball feeling to wrigley. Seriously though, Rizzo, would be a very nice trade chip to headline a Stanton deal or to grab a power arm rather than having to include Baez to get anything done.

 

The FO has done a great job of restocking the system through scouting, drafting and selling. What remains to be seen is how they use the talent to purchase missing pieces when we are buyers.

 

Can still remember the elation of acquring Garciaparra and Harden at the trade deadlines. Hopefully this ever increasing talent pool yields more 'buys' at the deadline.

[TruffleShuffle]

No.

 

Jersey's? What wasn't right?

 

4 straight years of being abysmal, 5 straight years with an average payroll, etc. too lazy to break it all down. but it sucked.

[jersey cubs fan]

I would think that people with thousands of posts on a Cubs message board might be able to understand, even if they don't appreciate, the reasoning behind the results. At the very least, you would think that they could at least separate irritation at ownership from irritation at how the front office is working within given parameters. Is it too crazy to be able to talk about what might happen this offseason without multiple sarcastic rejoinders about how much the team is able to spend, or diatribes about the effort that they are putting in to make the team good?

 

This is the part I don't get. Yes, the big league team is bad, and that sucks. No one is enjoying this. But this isn't a situation where you can cast blanket condemnation over the entire organization for "not trying". It's a little more nuanced than that.

 

They didn't try last year. That had a carry over effect this season. They tried to improve incrementally this year but they put themselves in a hole by being so bad last year. My biggest problem is with Ricketts, who took way too long to make a change in leadership. You didn't have to wait to amass a supergroup of front office types if all you were going to do was have them build from within. Any competent management group could amass the talent the Cubs have in the system now if there was no mandate to make the major league team competitive. Hell, Hendry's bumbling morons acquired the guy people are drooling over the most. And he had to know they had to replace Hendry when he showed up.

 

I am also not buying the Theo and Jed are only operating under the restrictions placed on them by ownership theory. There is no way this is just on ownership. The CBA as a surprise story does not hold up, since it was all stuff that had been on the table and likely to happen. These guys have talked openly about their collective desires to build a team all from within, and while they did say they didn't think they would ever have a chance to do it, the fact is they do now, and they are taking advantage. It is pretty clear that all the parallel front talk was just talk, and they went into this ready willing and able to focus exclusively on prospects, while treating the major league team as a secondary concern.

 

It is absolutely ridiculous to criticize fans for not being happy with this set-up.