Dempster

[SouthSideRyan]

Let's not pretend that Hendry couldn't have spent on the pen if he wanted to. He didn't need to trade for Garza, he could have dumpster dove for a 1B. It's certainly what I was expecting him to do.

[Sammy Sofa]

Let's not pretend that Hendry couldn't have spent on the pen if he wanted to. He didn't need to trade for Garza, he could have dumpster dove for a 1B. It's certainly what I was expecting him to do.

 

He did dumpster dive for 1B.

[EhDubya]

Expensive dumpster.

[Sammy Sofa]

Expensive dumpster.

 

Eh, they split it between this year and the next, so it works for me. I have no problem with Hendry taking 1 or 2-year shots on a guy like Pena as a placeholder. I mean, it's not like the Cubs would have an extra $5 million (or however it's specifically split) to spend next year if they didn't spend it on Pena this year. And look, they sign a guy like that for a reason: the hope that he rebounds a little and manages to hit a ton of home runs. There's people here that wouldn't mind if the Cubs had signed someone who was complete garbage for next to nothing to man 1B with the idea of just killing time until Pujols or Fielder takes over in 2012, but there's zero chance that a team trying to sell tickets is going to do such a thing. It was pretty much a given they were going to go for a name even just for 1 year, and that's pretty much a lock to cost between $6-10 million for that season.

Edited May 1, 2011 by Sammy Sofa

[Tarver]

He's likely gone by August anyway.

[EhDubya]

So wait, we will be paying Pena next year even when he isn't on the team?

[Sammy Sofa]

So wait, we will be paying Pena next year even when he isn't on the team?

 

Yes, half of his salary is deferred to 2012. BR says it's to be paid "1/2012."

[davearm2]

The only real problem the offense has is an inability to score runs, due largely to a lack of walks and extra base hits.

Phew. Glad it's nothing to worry about.

[davearm2]

Yes, we should...but we don't. And that's not going to turn around on a dime. Yeah, I agree, I'd like to see a turnover when it comes to Hendry and co. (and it should have happened already), but even when it does there's an excellent chance that things don't get better or even get worse.

 

And the ticket prices are indicative of demand for Wrigley, not the Cubs.

 

That"s what kills me. I've never seen someone wearing a "Busch Stadium" shirt.

 

You brought up the average fan angle before. Are we more dedicated fans just supposed to acquiesce?

 

People are going to do what they want. If you don't want to support the product on the field then don't. Personally, I haven't been to a game since April of '09 despite living 10 minutes away from Wrigley because of my frustration with the team. I also can't think of any Cubs merchandise I've bought in that time, either. I'm not saying this to brag or boast; it's simply been my response to an underwhelming team. I'm not going to fault people who are spending their money on Cubs' gear and tickets and so on. I also can't really fault the Cubs organization for courting/"exploiting" casual fans of the Cubs/Wrigley; yeah, there's the competitive aspect, but it's also a business. If they've found an avenue that enables them to make money without having an elite team I can't really fault them for generally following that path. I don't agree with it and it frustrates me and I'll respond by closing my wallet to them, but that's just me.

They're not generally following that path though. The Cubs' payroll is at or near the top of the NL.

 

Obviously the results (wins) haven't been there, but it's surely not because of a lack of financial commitment from ownership.

 

The fact is, the Ricketts seem intent on capitalizing on the inherent popularity the Cubs and Wrigley have with casual fans, AND putting a winner on the field. There's no reason they're mutually exclusive options.

[Sammy Sofa]

Didn't say they were.

 

Also, you selectively picked one line to respond to and spun it into something I wasn't really talking about in that post. I was talking about how the team has largely catered to casual fans in terms of drawing people to Wrigley and getting them to spend their money, not fans like you'll mostly find here. The point was referring primarily to things like steadily increasing ticket prices and promotions and the like.

Edited May 2, 2011 by Sammy Sofa

[Little Slide Rooter]

Let's not pretend that Hendry couldn't have spent on the pen if he wanted to. He didn't need to trade for Garza, he could have dumpster dove for a 1B. It's certainly what I was expecting him to do.

 

He did dumpster dive for 1B.

 

Nick Johnson would have been dumpster diving. Pena was the team and the player taking a gamble with each other. The Cubs took a gamble that Pena could go back to his pre 2010 ways. Pena took a gamble with the 1 year deal with the hopes that he could get back to his pre-2010 numbers and land a long term contract in 2012. Pena probably could have landed something similar to what LaRoche with Washington if he held out.

[Sammy Sofa]

That wouldn't be preferred at all.

[davearm2]

Didn't say they were.

 

Also, you selectively picked one line to respond to and spun it into something I wasn't really talking about in that post. I was talking about how the team has largely catered to casual fans in terms of drawing people to Wrigley and getting them to spend their money, not fans like you'll mostly find here. The point was referring primarily to things like steadily increasing ticket prices and promotions and the like.

The point I'm making is that the Ricketts haven't done anything to justify your "make money without having an elite team" comment.

 

If the ticket prices and promotions turn you off, that's cool, but it's not indicative of ownership/organization not striving for an elite team. It's the opposite actually.

[Sammy Sofa]

Didn't say they were.

 

Also, you selectively picked one line to respond to and spun it into something I wasn't really talking about in that post. I was talking about how the team has largely catered to casual fans in terms of drawing people to Wrigley and getting them to spend their money, not fans like you'll mostly find here. The point was referring primarily to things like steadily increasing ticket prices and promotions and the like.

The point I'm making is that the Ricketts haven't done anything to justify your "make money without having an elite team" comment.

 

If the ticket prices and promotions turn you off, that's cool, but it's not indicative of ownership/organization not striving for an elite team. It's the opposite actually.

 

I wasn't talking about just the Ricketts. I was talking about the business trends of the Cubs for a while. And yes, the Ricketts are most definitely trying their damndest to make money without an elite team right now. I have absolutely no idea why anyone would think otherwise. I also never said I think the Ricketts are going to stick to such an approach without trying to put together a better team. I made it abundantly clear in my previous posts in this thread that I understand the situation the Ricketts were buying in to and how it was going to take some time to turn things around. As I said I don't doubt they want an elite team, but it's going to take a bit of time and some luck until they have one. In the meantime they're going to have to look to make money without having a team like that.

Edited May 3, 2011 by Sammy Sofa

[SouthSideRyan]

I guess I don't understand your point Mojo. What's the issue?

[Sammy Sofa]

I guess I don't understand your point Mojo. What's the issue?

 

No idea. I thought I was pretty clear until davearm2 decided to respond to a single line out of context.

[BeerHere]

Not sure if this been brought up already, but I wonder if Rothschild leaving has had a negative impact on Dempster. No team can lose 40% of their rotation at the beginning of the season and not expect some direct ramifications so this can't be blamed on Riggins entirely. Having said that, Dempster has been terrible after a good spring. I wonder if Riggins has had a net negative impact on Dempster.

[Sammy Sofa]

How so?

[BeerHere]

How so?

No idea. Maybe Rothschild was better at recognizing small mechanical differences in his throwing motion or the specific reasons why his slider is flat. Colon is pitching very well for the Yanks. Not saying that is entirely on Rothschild but having a very good pitching coach doesn't hurt.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't think anyone is denying that Rothschild is a very good pitching coach; it just seems unlikely that Dempster somehow "lost" or "forgot" something that Rothschild helped him with.

[dew1679666265]

I don't think anyone is denying that Rothschild is a very good pitching coach; it just seems unlikely that Dempster somehow "lost" or "forgot" something that Rothschild helped him with.

 

It's possible that there's some type of bad habit or something in Dempster's delivery that he's picked up again that Rothschild knew about but Riggins isn't aware of or hasn't noticed yet. I don't know how much Larry and Riggins would have discussed the specific deliveries of each pitcher while Larry was here, but that's a possibility, I would think.

 

It's purely theoretical and hypothetical and no way I could make a statement with any certainty about it, but that's a possibility, at least.

[Sammy Sofa]

Wouldn't Rothschild have shared that info with Dempster?

[dew1679666265]

Wouldn't Rothschild have shared that info with Dempster?

 

If it's a small thing or something Demp does naturally he may not realize he's doing it again. It's unlikely, but possible.

[SouthSideRyan]

Wasn't Maddux given a lot of credit for Dempster's success as a starter?

[dew1679666265]

Wasn't Maddux given a lot of credit for Dempster's success as a starter?

 

I believe he was. I hesitate to say this because I'm unsure about it, but I keep thinking Maddux played a part in discovering Demp was tipping his pitches and the subsequent glove waggle.