Re: Theriot should be shopped

[flyseye]

If you want to write an article about why Theriot should be traded, stick to the facts.

 

If you want to write an article venting about how you "used to Like Ryan Theriot ", then write that.

 

Don't attempt to hide the latter under the guise of the former.

 

Simply my opinions.

Is that really all you got out of the article?

 

Really?

 

Pretty much,Tim.When you start with " I used to like Ryan Theriot ", then end a paragraph about his handling of the Bradley situation with "Count me as one person who no longer thinks of Ryan as such a nice guy" it taints any legitimate reasoning you may have presented with the stain of being simply sour grapes.

 

At the very least I would have axed the opening line.

 

Once again, my opinions.

[Guest]

If you want to write an article about why Theriot should be traded, stick to the facts.

 

If you want to write an article venting about how you "used to Like Ryan Theriot ", then write that.

 

Don't attempt to hide the latter under the guise of the former.

 

Simply my opinions.

Is that really all you got out of the article?

 

Really?

 

Pretty much,Tim.When you start with " I used to like Ryan Theriot ", then end a paragraph about his handling of the Bradley situation with "Count me as one person who no longer thinks of Ryan as such a nice guy" it taints any legitimate reasoning you may have presented with the stain of being simply sour grapes.

 

At the very least I would have axed the opening line.

 

Once again, my opinions.

And you're ignoring all the baseball reasoning in the middle. Excellent.

[flyseye]

If you want to write an article about why Theriot should be traded, stick to the facts.

 

If you want to write an article venting about how you "used to Like Ryan Theriot ", then write that.

 

Don't attempt to hide the latter under the guise of the former.

 

Simply my opinions.

Is that really all you got out of the article?

 

Really?

 

Pretty much,Tim.When you start with " I used to like Ryan Theriot ", then end a paragraph about his handling of the Bradley situation with "Count me as one person who no longer thinks of Ryan as such a nice guy" it taints any legitimate reasoning you may have presented with the stain of being simply sour grapes.

 

At the very least I would have axed the opening line.

 

Once again, my opinions.

And you're ignoring all the baseball reasoning in the middle. Excellent.

 

 

I think I have explained myself pretty well.

[jersey cubs fan]

At the very least I would have axed the opening line.

 

Once again, my opinions.

 

But that goes along with the theme that Theriot had value as a younger cheaper version of himself, but is in the process of losing that value. It made sense to like him then and like him less the more money he made without getting better.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think I have explained myself pretty well.

 

You've explained yourself but it doesn't hold up to much reasoning. It's clearly not a "he sold out bradley, trade him" article, but you are ignoring the main point for no good reason.

[flyseye]

One for, one against.

 

Hey, at least I read the damn thing.

[davearm2]

I for one would appreciate it if someone could point me to the Theriot quotes that have got so many folks spitting nails.

 

I expected to see them in the article, especially since Tim was particularly critical of them, but nada.

[TruffleShuffle]

I'd give my left nut to be in the Orioles position right now

LOL [expletive] no.

 

You clearly haven't been paying attention to the potential juggernaut they've been slowly building

I've been paying attention, thanks. A bug chunk of their "potential juggernaut" is in pitching prospects, and we know from history that a good share of those guys are likely to be exposed before reaching the HOF.

 

Seriously, for a franchise that's produced Brian Roberts, Mike Mussina, Erik Bedard, and Nick Markakis in the last two decades, it's hard to get too carried away with the "juggernaut" talk.

 

plus peter angelos is still the owner. that's not giving a left nut, that's getting kicked in the nuts.

[imb]

I for one would appreciate it if someone could point me to the Theriot quotes that have got so many folks spitting nails.

 

I expected to see them in the article, especially since Tim was particularly critical of them, but nada.

 

I hate Theriot, but I'm beginning to doubt the vileness of these quotes. If he was really out of line, they'd be all over this board by now.

[TruffleShuffle]

There's nothing wrong with shopping him at this point although I question whether or not they'd get as much in return as much as they value him.

 

The teams that are tools oriented are going to see no real plus tool. He has good bat control, good hands, and decent baseball speed but none of them really stand out to go along with his below avg. power and arm strength.

 

The teams that are more stats inclined will look at it the same with regards to his lack of power, decent OBP, fair defensively, & how much the Cubs likely value him and likely decide that he is not worth negotiating with the Cubs on.

 

i agree with this notion. i feel like if the cubs shop him now, teams will say "why is this big market team shopping a cheap player who's been relatively productive for them" and come to the same conclusion that tim arrived at in his article - theriot is a useful player when cheap but loses a lot of value as he heads farther up the arby ladder.

 

i think you'd get the best return on him if you wait until midseason and hope that a contender has either a lack of production or an injury at middle infield. teams can get desperate to fill a black hole.

[SouthSideRyan]

Unless you are good enough to sign no trade contracts, you might want to be careful what you say about someone who could very easily be your teammate again within just a few short years.

 

The guy who says no comment is the classier guy.

 

Why are we acting like Theriot verbally raped Milton, his kids, wife, and mother? I don't see his comments as being that awful.

 

(unless there is more to it that I haven't seen, which is very possible)

 

I'm not sure what comments you are referring to, but Theriot was the centerpiece of the teammates who were quoted all over the place about Milton. Dempster said some things, but also said something about welcoming him back which sounded like BS but served its purpose. I think Ramirez had the classiest response, acknowledging that Milton had issues but more importantly stating it was meaningless and had no effect on the season. Some of these guys sounded more than willing to feed into the nonsense that Milton's attitude somehow contributed to the team struggling.

 

I was just referring to the quotes from the story linked above.

 

I guess the larger point is that I don't think it matters one bit what Theriot thought of, or said about MB, when it comes to evaluating his place on the ballclub.

 

Yet you think what MB thought about his teammates or Cub fans should have driven him out?

[Bruno7481]

Not at all. I don't even think I implied that either. My point was Theriot's feelings, or lack thereof for Bradley, have no bearing on his value to the team.

[Soul]

Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind seeing several of our players "shopped."

 

Why not see what value we could get--even for some of the more productive players on the roster?

[Bote McBoteface]

I completely missed it. What did Theriot say about Bradley?

[SouthSideRyan]

Not at all. I don't even think I implied that either. My point was Theriot's feelings, or lack thereof for Bradley, have no bearing on his value to the team.

 

Agreed. I took it as more of a "fair is fair" type hypothetical.

[dew1679666265]

I for one would appreciate it if someone could point me to the Theriot quotes that have got so many folks spitting nails.

 

I expected to see them in the article, especially since Tim was particularly critical of them, but nada.

 

I hate Theriot, but I'm beginning to doubt the vileness of these quotes. If he was really out of line, they'd be all over this board by now.

 

I did a quick Google search and skimmed a couple of Bradley-related threads from when he was suspended. This is all I came up with as far as Theriot comments:

 

"I never thought so, but this year it's kind of obvious.''

 

-- Shortstop Ryan Theriot, on whether one player can disrupt the clubhouse chemistry for an entire team

 

I know there was more - I remember reading an article where he commented a bit more - but I don't recall him trashing Bradley or anything like that. I could very well be remembering wrong or have never heard the comments before, though.

[DurbanJer]

Come on guys, this is not about what Theriot said or did not say. This is about a player who has perceived value that could be net some long-term benefit for the team (his value relative to his production is probably at its peak).

 

There could be many teams who'd be willing to part with an useful piece in exchange for a productive, major-league caliber shortstop.

 

The Cubs, under Ricketts, have expressed their desire to establish a plan such that they build a system that allows the major league team to fill its needs from within or to use the pieces they have to build long-term success.

 

With the NTC contracts doled out to the likes of Zambrano, DLee, and Ramirez, those pieces are harder to move to execute that plan. I too, as others have mentioned, would love to see any one of those players shopped for talent that would:

 

-build the farm system, or

-start to stock the team with lower price replacements that are younger and likely to be more productive over the long term, or

-free up some of the back-loaded contracts so that they have more financial flexiblity.

 

I do not see JH conforming to this methodology. He, as I've noted before, is the classic short-term fix type manager. He doesn't seem to carry thorugh with a long term talent/payroll strategy that help make other teams successful over the long-haul.

 

With a well run front office combined with the inherent financial benefit of a major-market franchise, there would be absolutely NO reason for this team to be a contender every year.

 

To do that, you have to start recognizing the value of your assets and move them, reduce the impact of overhead on those stupid long-term deals, and be willing to move popular players.

 

JH won't do this.

 

But its a nice thought.

[davearm2]

Come on guys, this is not about what Theriot said or did not say. This is about a player who has perceived value that could be net some long-term benefit for the team (his value relative to his production is probably at its peak).

 

There could be many teams who'd be willing to part with an useful piece in exchange for a productive, major-league caliber shortstop.

 

The Cubs, under Ricketts, have expressed their desire to establish a plan such that they build a system that allows the major league team to fill its needs from within or to use the pieces they have to build long-term success.

 

With the NTC contracts doled out to the likes of Zambrano, DLee, and Ramirez, those pieces are harder to move to execute that plan. I too, as others have mentioned, would love to see any one of those players shopped for talent that would:

 

-build the farm system, or

-start to stock the team with lower price replacements that are younger and likely to be more productive over the long term, or

-free up some of the back-loaded contracts so that they have more financial flexiblity.

 

I do not see JH conforming to this methodology. He, as I've noted before, is the classic short-term fix type manager. He doesn't seem to carry thorugh with a long term talent/payroll strategy that help make other teams successful over the long-haul.

 

With a well run front office combined with the inherent financial benefit of a major-market franchise, there would be absolutely NO reason for this team to be a contender every year.

 

To do that, you have to start recognizing the value of your assets and move them, reduce the impact of overhead on those stupid long-term deals, and be willing to move popular players.

 

JH won't do this.

 

But its a nice thought.

The big-market teams that have had the kind of sustained success that you're talking about have the same sort of long-term deals on their books as the Cubs do (more, actually), and those teams are not trading away their expensive impact guys like you're suggesting.

 

IMO the main thing that separates the Cubs from the likes of the NYY and Red Sox is that those teams are producing a regular influx of all-star caliber talent out of their farm system. Hopefully the Cubs have turned the corner on this one, and will be getting significant contributions at the ML level in the near future from their top prospects.

 

Ironically, you think the Cubs should contend every year, yet your blueprint virtually ensures that they won't be for the next few years, at a minimum. A better plan would be to try and contend now with the core they've got, and contend later with the core they're developing -- which is just what they're doing.

[d_money]

From a baseball talent perspective, Theriot reminds me of a lesser David Eckstein.

 

From a baseball PR/fan love perspective, Theriot reminds me of a lesser Mark DeRosa

[dew1679666265]

From a baseball talent perspective, Theriot reminds me of a lesser David Eckstein.

 

From a baseball PR/fan love perspective, Theriot reminds me of a lesser Mark DeRosa

 

This is not scientific at all, but it's still interesting:

 

Theriot career OPS: .725

Eckstein career OPS: .706

[dew1679666265]

Come on guys, this is not about what Theriot said or did not say. This is about a player who has perceived value that could be net some long-term benefit for the team (his value relative to his production is probably at its peak).

 

Tim did bring up Theriot's comments as a part of his argument as to why he no longer likes Theriot. I was just noting that other than the previously shown quote (plus, perhaps, a couple other innocuous ones), I don't remember the quotes he referred to.

 

There could be many teams who'd be willing to part with an useful piece in exchange for a productive, major-league caliber shortstop.

 

There could be, but it's not very likely. Teams will likely see the exact same thing in Theriot that people who want him shopped see – that once his contract increases, his value decreases. The likelihood is that there won't be very many teams willing to give much for him, but one or two might be willing to overpay.

 

I agree with the sentiment that it's probably better to wait until the deadline and see if we're in or out of the race. If we're in it, might as well keep Theriot and take advantage of the slight value he has over guys like Barney and Blanco. If we're out of it, see if we can get a contender to overpay for a guy who can be helpful down the stretch.

[17 Seconds]

From a baseball talent perspective, Theriot reminds me of a lesser David Eckstein.

 

From a baseball PR/fan love perspective, Theriot reminds me of a lesser Mark DeRosa

 

theriot is better than eckstein

[DurbanJer]

Come on guys, this is not about what Theriot said or did not say. This is about a player who has perceived value that could be net some long-term benefit for the team (his value relative to his production is probably at its peak).

 

There could be many teams who'd be willing to part with an useful piece in exchange for a productive, major-league caliber shortstop.

 

The Cubs, under Ricketts, have expressed their desire to establish a plan such that they build a system that allows the major league team to fill its needs from within or to use the pieces they have to build long-term success.

 

With the NTC contracts doled out to the likes of Zambrano, DLee, and Ramirez, those pieces are harder to move to execute that plan. I too, as others have mentioned, would love to see any one of those players shopped for talent that would:

 

-build the farm system, or

-start to stock the team with lower price replacements that are younger and likely to be more productive over the long term, or

-free up some of the back-loaded contracts so that they have more financial flexiblity.

 

I do not see JH conforming to this methodology. He, as I've noted before, is the classic short-term fix type manager. He doesn't seem to carry thorugh with a long term talent/payroll strategy that help make other teams successful over the long-haul.

 

With a well run front office combined with the inherent financial benefit of a major-market franchise, there would be absolutely NO reason for this team to be a contender every year.

 

To do that, you have to start recognizing the value of your assets and move them, reduce the impact of overhead on those stupid long-term deals, and be willing to move popular players.

 

JH won't do this.

 

But its a nice thought.

The big-market teams that have had the kind of sustained success that you're talking about have the same sort of long-term deals on their books as the Cubs do (more, actually), and those teams are not trading away their expensive impact guys like you're suggesting.

 

IMO the main thing that separates the Cubs from the likes of the NYY and Red Sox is that those teams are producing a regular influx of all-star caliber talent out of their farm system. Hopefully the Cubs have turned the corner on this one, and will be getting significant contributions at the ML level in the near future from their top prospects.

 

Ironically, you think the Cubs should contend every year, yet your blueprint virtually ensures that they won't be for the next few years, at a minimum. A better plan would be to try and contend now with the core they've got, and contend later with the core they're developing -- which is just what they're doing.

 

Sure, there are certainly examples of big market teams with unwieldy contracts, but I don't see them doing so year in and year out. And there's no doubt that one of the great benefits of being a big market team is the financial flexibility to miss on a signing.

 

My dream would be to have a well run front office that was founded on an organizational philosophy that affected all levels.

 

In terms of my plan ensuring that we won't be competitive the next few years, perhaps. If the talent return was appropriate and we had the payroll flexiblity we could do a lot more. I'm not entirely advocating blowing the whole thing up, but changing course for long term success. And we if we had that kind of philosophy, I'd love to see the Cubs swoop in on Adrian Gonzalez. Won't happen because of Lee's NTC, but he's much cheaper and would most certainly NOT be killing our chances next year and get a long term asset that will most probably be more productive over the next few years than Lee.

 

There's a reason teams like Boston and NY are good every year beyond their resources - they're constantly looking to upgrade position by position.

[Tracer Bullet]

If you want to write an article about why Theriot should be traded, stick to the facts.

 

If you want to write an article venting about how you "used to Like Ryan Theriot ", then write that.

 

Don't attempt to hide the latter under the guise of the former.

 

Simply my opinions.

Is that really all you got out of the article?

 

Really?

 

Pretty much,Tim.When you start with " I used to like Ryan Theriot ", then end a paragraph about his handling of the Bradley situation with "Count me as one person who no longer thinks of Ryan as such a nice guy" it taints any legitimate reasoning you may have presented with the stain of being simply sour grapes.

 

At the very least I would have axed the opening line.

 

Once again, my opinions.

And you're ignoring all the baseball reasoning in the middle. Excellent.

 

Sorry, Tim, but I read it the same way. you have 3 single-sentence paragraphs, distributed pretty equally in the piece. The first sentence: "I used to like Theriot." A third of the way down: "so why am I dead set on trading him?" And 2/3 of the way down: "I no longer think of him as a nice guy."

 

People are going to skim articles. The way it's set up lends the article to skimming and reading those 3 sentences while browsing over the rest. Supporting the trade with the arbitration stuff makes sense, but the structure of the article minimizes that in favor of the "Theriot isn't nice b/c he said bad things about Bradley." In fact, one other line jumped out at me. You said, you'd never seen any player throw another player under the bus like that, or something close.

 

You set off 3 single-sentence paragraphs and then add hyperbole to drive that point home. I'm a little surprised to see you now argue that you aren't in favor of trading Theriot almost solely b/c of the Bradley situation. While the baseball stuff makes sense, I really thought the tone of your article meant you were upset with Theriot and wanted him dealt if a fair deal could be had. Sorry if i misinterpreted your point.

[Guest]

So I think the lesson learned is to actually read and not skim what I write. :)

 

I see your point on the article structure, though I don't think the second one line sentence is completely neutral and just serves as a transition point in the article.