I know it is early but...

[wabash_cannonball]

If this season pans out the way I think it is going to who would do you all think will not be returning next year?

 

Do we test out out the offseason trade market with guys like Fonzy? There are no glaring needs for this team on paper but on the field we see a different story.

 

Me personally I would like to see Jake Fox become a fixture in the starting lineup.

 

I know that Fonzy's contract does not make him the easiest guy in the world to move but you never know what GM might want to take a crack at it.

[Prizefight]

We have a 0.000000001 chance of moving Soriano. As you alluded too, his Luol Deng like contract makes him untradable unless the Cubs were willing to eat a LOT of his salary, which won't happen.

 

The amount of expensive and back loaded contracts we have makes me pessimistic for the next 3-5 years of this quad in terms of being able to add any quality pieces.

[Little Slide Rooter]

However the season pans out, the 2 guys I can pretty much guarantee are gone are Reed Johnson and Aaron Heilman. Nothing against them, but they're too replaceable through the farm system to sign. Also, Koyie Hill will likely be gone and replaced with Chris Robinson. When it comes to backups and role players, Im all for bringing them up through the system rather tham waste money on Aaron Miles' and Joey Gathrights. I also cant see Greggre signed, however, Marmol hasnt shown he can be a closer this season. Perhaps BJ Ryan could be considered for the job if he looks good?

 

Harden is doubtful, but you never know. If they do plan to trade for Peavy, consider Harden gone.

 

Soriano, Fukudom, and Bradley are going nowhere. No chance.

 

As for the rest, You never know. D Lee might be traded, but Id asume that its more likely at the 2010 deadline if the Cubs are out of it.

 

Ramirez, Soto, Theriot, and probable Fontenot are back.

 

The X factor is if we make a big trade for someone like Peavy, and even then, I dont see a lot of major big league pieces moved aside from Sean Marshall, and maybe Randy Wells.

 

The bench will likely consist of backup catcher, Fox and/or Hoffpauir,Fuld, and Baker or Miles(hopefully hes gone), perhaps Blanco. However, if we mamage to aquire a 2B or SS, Fontenot could be back on the bench or traded and wed probablt just need 1 of Baker, Blanco, or Miles.

 

Z, Lilly, and Dempster are all back, as are Marmol and Guz. The rest of the pen likely includes Jeff Stevens and maybe Samardzjia, who could be in the rotation.

 

To some it up, next year, expect to see

 

Soriano

Fuku

Bradley

Ramirez

Theriot

Soto

Fontenot

Lee

Fox

Hoff

Fuld

2 of Baker/Miles/Blanco

Z

Lilly

Demp

Guzman

Marmol

Stevens

Samardjzia

Marshall and Wells too if they're not traded.

[dew1679666265]

We have a 0.000000001 chance of moving Soriano. As you alluded too, his Luol Deng like contract makes him untradable unless the Cubs were willing to eat a LOT of his salary, which won't happen.

 

The amount of expensive and back loaded contracts we have makes me pessimistic for the next 3-5 years of this quad in terms of being able to add any quality pieces.

 

The contracts won't really be a hindrance after, probably, 2011. In 2012, we only have $54 million committed and will likely have a payroll of $130+ million (luxury tax won't kick in that season until $170 million, though, so we could be higher than we are now).

[jersey cubs fan]

We have a 0.000000001 chance of moving Soriano. As you alluded too, his Luol Deng like contract makes him untradable unless the Cubs were willing to eat a LOT of his salary, which won't happen.

 

The amount of expensive and back loaded contracts we have makes me pessimistic for the next 3-5 years of this quad in terms of being able to add any quality pieces.

 

The contracts won't really be a hindrance after, probably, 2011. In 2012, we only have $54 million committed and will likely have a payroll of $130+ million (luxury tax won't kick in that season until $170 million, though, so we could be higher than we are now).

 

That's assuming the Cubs stop giving out big contracts. Soriano's contract is going to be a hindrance regardless of what everybody else's situation is. However, just because Ramirez and Lee may be gone by then, they might by then have resigned Lilly to another deal. It's possible Hendry will have committed to a 30-something Theriot before he reaches full free agency. You also will have Soto in his later arbitration years, plus a need to fill both CF and RF by then. If Ramirez and Lee are both gone they will likely have spent big on at least one of those positions, and then there's the bullpen, where Hendry has showed over and over he's more than happy to hand out 3 year multi million dollar deals.

 

The fact that the Cubs "only" have $54 million commited (really a ridiculous amount of just about any team) doesn't mean payroll issues cease to be an issue in 2011.

[dew1679666265]

We have a 0.000000001 chance of moving Soriano. As you alluded too, his Luol Deng like contract makes him untradable unless the Cubs were willing to eat a LOT of his salary, which won't happen.

 

The amount of expensive and back loaded contracts we have makes me pessimistic for the next 3-5 years of this quad in terms of being able to add any quality pieces.

 

The contracts won't really be a hindrance after, probably, 2011. In 2012, we only have $54 million committed and will likely have a payroll of $130+ million (luxury tax won't kick in that season until $170 million, though, so we could be higher than we are now).

 

That's assuming the Cubs stop giving out big contracts. Soriano's contract is going to be a hindrance regardless of what everybody else's situation is. However, just because Ramirez and Lee may be gone by then, they might by then have resigned Lilly to another deal. It's possible Hendry will have committed to a 30-something Theriot before he reaches full free agency. You also will have Soto in his later arbitration years, plus a need to fill both CF and RF by then. If Ramirez and Lee are both gone they will likely have spent big on at least one of those positions, and then there's the bullpen, where Hendry has showed over and over he's more than happy to hand out 3 year multi million dollar deals.

 

The fact that the Cubs "only" have $54 million commited (really a ridiculous amount of just about any team) doesn't mean payroll issues cease to be an issue in 2011.

 

Of course not, but the comment was concerning contracts that have already been passed out. He said he was concerned about the big contracts already weighing us down keeping us from competing for the next 3-5 years. Those contracts will only really impact the payroll through 2011, though.

 

I have no idea whether Hendry will or will not (or can or cannot) give out huge contracts in the foreseeable future, so I can't comment on that. At this point, there is no real financial strain to keep us from competing any longer than 2011. And I don't think it's out of the question that we could compete in 2010 and 2011. It'll be tougher, but it's possible.

[jersey cubs fan]

We have a 0.000000001 chance of moving Soriano. As you alluded too, his Luol Deng like contract makes him untradable unless the Cubs were willing to eat a LOT of his salary, which won't happen.

 

The amount of expensive and back loaded contracts we have makes me pessimistic for the next 3-5 years of this quad in terms of being able to add any quality pieces.

 

The contracts won't really be a hindrance after, probably, 2011. In 2012, we only have $54 million committed and will likely have a payroll of $130+ million (luxury tax won't kick in that season until $170 million, though, so we could be higher than we are now).

 

That's assuming the Cubs stop giving out big contracts. Soriano's contract is going to be a hindrance regardless of what everybody else's situation is. However, just because Ramirez and Lee may be gone by then, they might by then have resigned Lilly to another deal. It's possible Hendry will have committed to a 30-something Theriot before he reaches full free agency. You also will have Soto in his later arbitration years, plus a need to fill both CF and RF by then. If Ramirez and Lee are both gone they will likely have spent big on at least one of those positions, and then there's the bullpen, where Hendry has showed over and over he's more than happy to hand out 3 year multi million dollar deals.

 

The fact that the Cubs "only" have $54 million commited (really a ridiculous amount of just about any team) doesn't mean payroll issues cease to be an issue in 2011.

 

Of course not, but the comment was concerning contracts that have already been passed out. He said he was concerned about the big contracts already weighing us down keeping us from competing for the next 3-5 years. Those contracts will only really impact the payroll through 2011, though.

 

I have no idea whether Hendry will or will not (or can or cannot) give out huge contracts in the foreseeable future, so I can't comment on that. At this point, there is no real financial strain to keep us from competing any longer than 2011. And I don't think it's out of the question that we could compete in 2010 and 2011. It'll be tougher, but it's possible.

 

$54m committed for 2012 is a HUGE number. Not sure why you only count it through 2011. But the point remains that Soriano's contract will be a hindrence until the day it gets off the books, and that they are likely to be in a situation where they have to give out big contracts to replace guys soon making your statement about ending in 2011 even more untrue.

[CubColtPacer]

We have a 0.000000001 chance of moving Soriano. As you alluded too, his Luol Deng like contract makes him untradable unless the Cubs were willing to eat a LOT of his salary, which won't happen.

 

The amount of expensive and back loaded contracts we have makes me pessimistic for the next 3-5 years of this quad in terms of being able to add any quality pieces.

 

The contracts won't really be a hindrance after, probably, 2011. In 2012, we only have $54 million committed and will likely have a payroll of $130+ million (luxury tax won't kick in that season until $170 million, though, so we could be higher than we are now).

 

That's assuming the Cubs stop giving out big contracts. Soriano's contract is going to be a hindrance regardless of what everybody else's situation is. However, just because Ramirez and Lee may be gone by then, they might by then have resigned Lilly to another deal. It's possible Hendry will have committed to a 30-something Theriot before he reaches full free agency. You also will have Soto in his later arbitration years, plus a need to fill both CF and RF by then. If Ramirez and Lee are both gone they will likely have spent big on at least one of those positions, and then there's the bullpen, where Hendry has showed over and over he's more than happy to hand out 3 year multi million dollar deals.

 

The fact that the Cubs "only" have $54 million commited (really a ridiculous amount of just about any team) doesn't mean payroll issues cease to be an issue in 2011.

 

What he's saying is that the Cubs will have the flexibility to make moves to rebuild the team. Yes, Soriano's contract will be a hindrance. The only other contract that looks somewhat likely to be a hindrance is Bradley's though, and that is only for two more years.

 

Sure Hendry could make bad moves to replace the players that will be leaving or re-sign people to bad deals. That is always an option. But the current contracts will not be a huge factor in precluding the Cubs from competing in 2012 and beyond. It's the moves that Hendry does over the next 2 1/2 years that will determine that.

 

To say that the current contracts are going to hurt the Cubs significantly in the long-term (3-5 years) is not right because most of the contracts don't run that long, and most of the contracts that do run that long are assigned to players who will earn most of that money (with the big exception of Soriano).

 

And Hendry hasn't given out a big multi-year deal to a reliever in the past 3 offseasons and actually refused the last potential one. The Cubs have 0 relievers right now on multi-year deals. That's not exactly a sign of a GM who loves to give out contracts like that.

[dew1679666265]

$54m committed for 2012 is a HUGE number. Not sure why you only count it through 2011. But the point remains that Soriano's contract will be a hindrence until the day it gets off the books, and that they are likely to be in a situation where they have to give out big contracts to replace guys soon making your statement about ending in 2011 even more untrue.

 

I don't know what you mean by the bolded. In 2012 we'll have, probably, at least $80 million to spend. If Ricketts bumps payroll up to the luxury tax limit ($170 million), then we'll have $120 million to commit to players by 2012.

 

That's more than enough money to put a winning team on the field, especially considering we'll have what should be a productive Zambrano and Soto still on the books and, hopefully, an arbitration Samardzija pitching well. Soriano's contract won't be a good thing at that point, but it also won't keep us from being able to put a good team on the field by then - if not perhaps sooner.

[dew1679666265]

What he's saying is that the Cubs will have the flexibility to make moves to rebuild the team. Yes, Soriano's contract will be a hindrance. The only other contract that looks somewhat likely to be a hindrance is Bradley's though, and that is only for two more years.

 

Sure Hendry could make bad moves to replace the players that will be leaving or re-sign people to bad deals. That is always an option. But the current contracts will not be a huge factor in precluding the Cubs from competing in 2012 and beyond. It's the moves that Hendry does over the next 2 1/2 years that will determine that.

 

To say that the current contracts are going to hurt the Cubs significantly in the long-term (3-5 years) is not right because most of the contracts don't run that long, and most of the contracts that do run that long are assigned to players who will earn most of that money (with the big exception of Soriano).

 

And Hendry hasn't given out a big multi-year deal to a reliever in the past 3 offseasons and actually refused the last potential one. The Cubs have 0 relievers right now on multi-year deals. That's not exactly a sign of a GM who loves to give out contracts like that.

 

You said it much better than I did.

[jersey cubs fan]

$54m committed for 2012 is a HUGE number. Not sure why you only count it through 2011. But the point remains that Soriano's contract will be a hindrence until the day it gets off the books, and that they are likely to be in a situation where they have to give out big contracts to replace guys soon making your statement about ending in 2011 even more untrue.

 

I don't know what you mean by the bolded. In 2012 we'll have, probably, at least $80 million to spend. If Ricketts bumps payroll up to the luxury tax limit ($170 million), then we'll have $120 million to commit to players by 2012.

 

That's more than enough money to put a winning team on the field, especially considering we'll have what should be a productive Zambrano and Soto still on the books and, hopefully, an arbitration Samardzija pitching well. Soriano's contract won't be a good thing at that point, but it also won't keep us from being able to put a good team on the field by then - if not perhaps sooner.

 

Because you keep pretending 2011 is the last year they have big money committed even though they have an enormous amount of money committed to 2012. Sure, they "could" start running things differently in the next couple years, and efficiently improve the team. But the only way that happens is probably canning Hendry.

[jersey cubs fan]

And Hendry hasn't given out a big multi-year deal to a reliever in the past 3 offseasons and actually refused the last potential one. The Cubs have 0 relievers right now on multi-year deals. That's not exactly a sign of a GM who loves to give out contracts like that.

 

So a couple years of not giving out new deals means' he's done? He still gave a $10m contract to Samardzija who's being used out of the pen, he traded for a "proven closer" just before the end of his arbitration years and could very easily feel the need to extend. He let Kerry Wood walk due to injuries and the fear of future injuries. But there's plenty of examples of him handing out big money deals to free agent relievers to justify including them into the potential future payroll.

[dew1679666265]

$54m committed for 2012 is a HUGE number. Not sure why you only count it through 2011. But the point remains that Soriano's contract will be a hindrence until the day it gets off the books, and that they are likely to be in a situation where they have to give out big contracts to replace guys soon making your statement about ending in 2011 even more untrue.

 

I don't know what you mean by the bolded. In 2012 we'll have, probably, at least $80 million to spend. If Ricketts bumps payroll up to the luxury tax limit ($170 million), then we'll have $120 million to commit to players by 2012.

 

That's more than enough money to put a winning team on the field, especially considering we'll have what should be a productive Zambrano and Soto still on the books and, hopefully, an arbitration Samardzija pitching well. Soriano's contract won't be a good thing at that point, but it also won't keep us from being able to put a good team on the field by then - if not perhaps sooner.

 

Because you keep pretending 2011 is the last year they have big money committed even though they have an enormous amount of money committed to 2012. Sure, they "could" start running things differently in the next couple years, and efficiently improve the team. But the only way that happens is probably canning Hendry.

 

I'm not pretending anything. We have around $100 million committed over the next 2 years (2010 and 2011) to just a few players. That doesn't leave much money to build around those few guys so it's going to be difficult to be highly competitive the next two years.

 

However, by 2012, the vast majority of that money is off the books and the only money we'll have committed to a likely unproductive player will be Soriano. We will have anywhere from $80-$120 million to spend on putting players around what is now a core of Z, Soto, Shark and Soriano by 2012. That is more than enough money to build a good team. There might be more bad contracts to be signed, but that has nothing to do with the situation we are currently in. Good decisions are always the key to being competitive and if we get bogged down by huge contracts, then we won't be competitive.

 

My argument is that - right now - we have enough money available to be highly competitive by 2012 at the latest. If we are not competitive by then, it won't be because we don't have enough money to spend.

[jersey cubs fan]

To say that the current contracts are going to hurt the Cubs significantly in the long-term (3-5 years) is not right because most of the contracts don't run that long, and most of the contracts that do run that long are assigned to players who will earn most of that money (with the big exception of Soriano).

 

It doesn't matter that most don't last that long. Most teams don't have multiple big deals that run that long. The Cubs have money committed to Dempster which is not at all a good bet to be "justifiable" money. They have huge money committed to Zambrano who is no lock to be worthy by then. And the Soriano contract can't just be shoved aside with "aside from Soriano". It's a huge deal for a guy that is unlikely to come anywhere close to justifying the money. They have zero minor leagues ready to step in and take over jobs in the short-term, meaning they will more likely than not be forced into spending big on at the very least one corner position player and one corner OF. And they will still be short in starting pitchers, position players, and the aforementioned bullpen.

 

 

Their flexibility depends entirely on the owner hopefully increasing the payroll. They are much less flexible than most decent sized payroll teams.

[dew1679666265]

And Hendry hasn't given out a big multi-year deal to a reliever in the past 3 offseasons and actually refused the last potential one. The Cubs have 0 relievers right now on multi-year deals. That's not exactly a sign of a GM who loves to give out contracts like that.

 

So a couple years of not giving out new deals means' he's done? He still gave a $10m contract to Samardzija who's being used out of the pen, he traded for a "proven closer" just before the end of his arbitration years and could very easily feel the need to extend. He let Kerry Wood walk due to injuries and the fear of future injuries. But there's plenty of examples of him handing out big money deals to free agent relievers to justify including them into the potential future payroll.

 

Your issue appears to be more that you dislike Hendry than anything. My original point was that contracts currently committed will not bog us down by 2012 because we'll have plenty of money to spend for that season and most of the huge contracts (save for Soriano) will have expired.

 

Contracts that may be signed in the next 2 years are a completely different conversation.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm not pretending anything. We have around $100 million committed over the next 2 years (2010 and 2011) to just a few players. That doesn't leave much money to build around those few guys so it's going to be difficult to be highly competitive the next two years.

 

 

You are pretending that $54 million in 2012 is an inconsequential number (not to mention that Zambrano and Dempster are locks to earn their money).

 

And you are also pretending that future deals have nothing to do with the situation they are now in. With no prospects on the horizon to provide substantial production between now and then, and really only Vitters as a good chance to do much of anything starting around then, the Cubs are going to HAVE TO sign new guys to new deals before then.

Edited July 21, 2009 by jersey cubs fan

[CubColtPacer]

And Hendry hasn't given out a big multi-year deal to a reliever in the past 3 offseasons and actually refused the last potential one. The Cubs have 0 relievers right now on multi-year deals. That's not exactly a sign of a GM who loves to give out contracts like that.

 

So a couple years of not giving out new deals means' he's done? He still gave a $10m contract to Samardzija who's being used out of the pen, he traded for a "proven closer" just before the end of his arbitration years and could very easily feel the need to extend. He let Kerry Wood walk due to injuries and the fear of future injuries. But there's plenty of examples of him handing out big money deals to free agent relievers to justify including them into the potential future payroll.

 

The Samardzija comment is irrelevant to the discussion. They didn't give him 10 million dollars to be a reliever just like they didn't give Ryan Harvey over a million to never make it past AA. They so far have somewhat whiffed on his starting development so they are trying to get value from him where they can.

 

Gregg is the one reliever that I'm worried that he'll extend due to Marmol's struggles this year so that the Cubs will have a good closing candidate. I do think it's reasonable to consider that a possibility, especially if Gregg has a good second half and is willing to sign for something like 7 or 8 per.

 

But I'm not worried about him signing relievers from other teams to multi-year deals. It doesn't fit into how the Cubs have treated relievers the last couple years (which has continued to get more and more home grown as time goes on) and it doesn't fit that he's stockpiled the minors with good relief candidates. I don't think Hendry will see the bullpen as a problem when he has so many options in Iowa and Tennessee and already has a young mostly home grown bullpen in the major leagues.

 

I'm hoping he'll take that same look at the starting rotation. IMO, the Cubs should not sign anybody for the starting rotation in the next 3 1/2 years. That includes not re-signing either Harden or Lilly. If they do that, the Cubs will have plenty of money for both the offense and 1 bullpen arm. But I have no idea how Hendry is going to treat his pitching depth down in the minors. It's something he hasn't had in several years if ever.

[jersey cubs fan]

And Hendry hasn't given out a big multi-year deal to a reliever in the past 3 offseasons and actually refused the last potential one. The Cubs have 0 relievers right now on multi-year deals. That's not exactly a sign of a GM who loves to give out contracts like that.

 

So a couple years of not giving out new deals means' he's done? He still gave a $10m contract to Samardzija who's being used out of the pen, he traded for a "proven closer" just before the end of his arbitration years and could very easily feel the need to extend. He let Kerry Wood walk due to injuries and the fear of future injuries. But there's plenty of examples of him handing out big money deals to free agent relievers to justify including them into the potential future payroll.

 

Your issue appears to be more that you dislike Hendry than anything. My original point was that contracts currently committed will not bog us down by 2012 because we'll have plenty of money to spend for that season and most of the huge contracts (save for Soriano) will have expired.

 

Contracts that may be signed in the next 2 years are a completely different conversation.

 

My issue is how ridiculous it is for you to pretend $54 million in 2012 is next to nothing. It's a HUGE number. You ignore it and pretend it's small, but it's HUGE. Baseball teams don't generally operate with that much money committed that far out in the future. This team is in trouble for the next 3-5 years, unless the owner significantly increases payroll.

 

A) Because $54m committed is huge.

B) And their GM has not shown any ability to maneuver around financial constraints to build a good baseball team.

[dew1679666265]

You are pretending that $54 million in 2012 is an inconsequential number (not to mention that Zambrano and Dempster are locks to earn their money).

 

And you are also pretending that future deals have nothing to do with the situation they are now in. With no prospects on the horizon to provide substantial production between now and then, and really only Vitters as a good chance to do much of anything starting around then, the Cubs are going to HAVE TO sign new guys to new deals before then.

 

New deals will be signed. Cripplingly large deals don't have to be signed, though. Z and Dempster are part of that $54 million committed to 2012 right now. That will give us $80-$120 million to fill holes on the team (of which there will be quite a few). Obviously a large number will come through free agency and trades, but there will be money available to fill those holes. I don't know if the management will make good decisions between now and 2012. I'm only commenting that the opportunity to compete will most certainly be there by 2012 and that money currently committed will not hold us back.

 

And there's a decent chance that we could get more help from the minors outside of just Vitters. Guys like Jay Jackson, Chris Carpenter, Tony Thomas, Darwin Barney, John Gaub, Chris Archer, Wellington Castillo, Tyler Colvin, Andrew Cashner, etc., could be ready for the majors in the next three years and could be at least moderately productive by then. I don't think for a second that all of them will be up, or even a majority, but if even 2-3 of those guys can give us decent, cheap production by then (perhaps optimistic, but still realistic, I think) that will help us fill holes as well.

Edited July 21, 2009 by dew

[dew1679666265]

And Hendry hasn't given out a big multi-year deal to a reliever in the past 3 offseasons and actually refused the last potential one. The Cubs have 0 relievers right now on multi-year deals. That's not exactly a sign of a GM who loves to give out contracts like that.

 

So a couple years of not giving out new deals means' he's done? He still gave a $10m contract to Samardzija who's being used out of the pen, he traded for a "proven closer" just before the end of his arbitration years and could very easily feel the need to extend. He let Kerry Wood walk due to injuries and the fear of future injuries. But there's plenty of examples of him handing out big money deals to free agent relievers to justify including them into the potential future payroll.

 

Your issue appears to be more that you dislike Hendry than anything. My original point was that contracts currently committed will not bog us down by 2012 because we'll have plenty of money to spend for that season and most of the huge contracts (save for Soriano) will have expired.

 

Contracts that may be signed in the next 2 years are a completely different conversation.

 

My issue is how ridiculous it is for you to pretend $54 million in 2012 is next to nothing. It's a HUGE number. You ignore it and pretend it's small, but it's HUGE. Baseball teams don't generally operate with that much money committed that far out in the future. This team is in trouble for the next 3-5 years, unless the owner significantly increases payroll.

 

A) Because $54m committed is huge.

B) And their GM has not shown any ability to maneuver around financial constraints to build a good baseball team.

 

$54 million is not next to nothing and I'm not trying to say it is. I'm saying that because we are a high payroll team, we will have the opportunity to work around that commitment and be competitive by then. Whether our GM makes good decisions is another issue entirely - I'm just arguing that the opportunity is there because of the $80-$120 million we'll have to spend by then.

[Guest]

I'm pretty confident that three years from now we'll have some good candidates for internal production as long as we don't make any stupid trades between now and then.

 

At 3B - Vitters will get a shot - hopefully he'll run with it.

 

At SS - I'm very confident we'll let Theriot go when the time comes and replace him with one of Barney, Castro, Lee, LeMahieu or Lake.

 

At 2B - We'll have all the above candidates plus Thomas. I still feel reasonably confident that Fontenot will get things turned around well enough to be an asset at second for a few years, as well.

 

At SP - While there's no candidates for ace here, there's pretty decent depth of quality (2-4) SP candidates for the future.

 

At RP - We should be able to fill all the upcoming gaps from this depth, with the probable usage of some mid-tier prospects in trades as we saw with Gregg

 

And with the players coming up, I feel very good about being able to restock the bench as time goes on, eliminating the need for wasting money on Aaron Miles-type players.

 

The big gaps we have on the farm are in the OF (though there's some possibilities further down on the farm that could be very interesting in 2-3 years - especially if Castro or Lee converts to CF) and a big bopper at 1B. But if we can plug a large number of the holes that get created by players coming off the books over the next few years with some homegrown prospects, that means we could spend huge on a Pujols-type player to fill 1B for us and not exhaust our spending capacity after 2011.

 

In short, the $54M committed to the players beyond 2011 will certainly be a hindrance. But if management is smart about things, there shouldn't be any issues with fielding a championship quality team if payroll stays at high levels or continues to grow. What I see as the biggest risk is if Ricketts is so leveraged in simply acquiring the team that he lowers payroll to $100M or less. If that happens (and there's no reason to believe that to be the case at the moment), then the $54M will be a huge impediment to success.

[SouthSideRyan]

At SS - I'm very confident we'll let Theriot go when the time comes and replace him with one of Barney, Castro, Lee, LeMahieu or Lake.

 

I really wish I could say the same. I'm fearful of some asinine extension in Theriot's last arb year.

[dew1679666265]

At SS - I'm very confident we'll let Theriot go when the time comes and replace him with one of Barney, Castro, Lee, LeMahieu or Lake.

 

I really wish I could say the same. I'm fearful of some asinine extension in Theriot's last arb year.

 

If none of the SS prospects are ready by then, that may happen. Hendry may pass on re-signing Theriot if Barney or someone else is ready to produce by then.

[Clem Fandango]

Aramis is my favorite player, but next year, depending on certain circumstances (i.e. we're not in it, we didn't trade away Vitters, etc), I'd like to see the Cubs shop Ramirez around. He can opt out after 2010 and maybe if they can get a verbal agreement that he won't opt out his trade value could skyrocket. It'd open up space for Vitters in the future (or who knows, maybe at that time depending on how he develops by then) and he'd bring in some serious prospects and/or players in return. Depending on whether or not he's willing to waive his no-trade clause, which he might because he gets an extra $1 mil if traded, Ramirez could be our biggest bargaining chip next season at the trade deadline.

 

However if we're still in it obviously we'd need to keep him as he'd likely be a big attribute to that.

 

That's just my opinion though. If we're out of it I don't see the harm in shopping Rammy next trade deadline

[JeffH]

However the season pans out, the 2 guys I can pretty much guarantee are gone are Reed Johnson and Aaron Heilman. Nothing against them, but they're too replaceable through the farm system to sign.

 

Who from the farm system is going to replace Reed Johnson?