Levine: Hendry secure but firesale could begin

[Sammy Sofa]

Why is it clear to you? I'm honestly asking, because then you're privy to information the rest of us don't have.

 

I'm sure he's talking about the cubs' insistence on not going after one of the best hitters in the game entering the prime of his career. i mean, it's just common sense to see why any team would be averse to that.

 

There's been a focus on the lower levels of the franchise, with time & investment in our facilities for Spring Training and in recruiting. And the contracts Hendry has been given license to sign have been shorter term deals (like Pena, for example).

 

I don't buy that it's all because we have bad contracts on the books. Someone with a ton of money to spend and willingness to go nuts with it would eat the cost and move on. The fact that Ricketts hasn't tells me that he isn't going to stand for being locked in like that -- at least not easily or quickly. And it tells me he really doesn't have unlimited funds to work with anyway. More Soriano-type deals would just put us back in the same hole we've been in, that Ricketts now has to clean up. It doesn't make any sense to me to go through all this only to jump right back in again.

 

He's enduring quite a bit of pain to clear our books of the bad ink. There have been empty seats, a real sense of apathy that hasn't been around this franchise for awhile. My read on this is that he's doing it because he has a plan to go in a different direction. That's what makes the most sense to me.

 

Again, maybe I'm wrong.

 

Probably. Not spending money just means this team is going to be horrible for the foreseeable future, which would just increase the "apathy" and empty seats.

 

The Ricketts have only owned the team for a season and a half, and in that time pretty much only Adam Dunn was someone you could argue was a big name FA that the Cubs could/should have made a splash with. Bemoaning them not spending their way to victory otherwise in that short window of time is believing in a fantasy world of good FA that simply did not exist.

 

You may not "buy" that much of the holding course action isn't due to letting contracts expire, but it's the one that makes the most sense. Pena got a short term contract because you have two huge 1B FA options potentially available after this season, plus Pena is old and coming off of a crappy season. Singing him to a short deal was just smart and what we should want the Cubs to do more of when necessary/prudent, yet you're talking like they should have signed him to a longer deal and couldn't instead of choosing not to. You're also seemingly equating signing Pujols or Fielder to signing Soriano, which is absurd. If you want a big name player you have to overpay. Always. There's a difference, however, between drastically overpaying for a player like Soriano and overpaying for someone like Fielder or Pujols.

 

In short, it seems like you like to fearmonger these sorts of things so you can complain about them when so far the evidence simply isn't there. Yes, for all we know the Ricketts ARE horrible owners and they totally screw the pooch during this offseason...but we don't know yet. And the way things are shaping up they certainly have some huge opportunities to show us what they've got. But until then, your "evidence" for them not being willing to sign someone like Fielder or Pujols is pretty flimsy.

[Exile on Waveland]

If Ricketts isn't willing to spend on (any) major free agents, then we might as well resign ourselves to rooting for the quasi-Pirates/Royals/A's/whoever. Also, Ricketts should be tarred and feathered for buying a major market team and treating it like a small market team.

[Sammy Sofa]

If Ricketts isn't willing to spend on (any) major free agents, then we might as well resign ourselves to rooting for the quasi-Pirates/Royals/A's/whoever. Also, Ricketts should be tarred and feathered for buying a major market team and treating it like a small market team.

 

Pretty much. The Cubs will be garbage for at least most of the next decade if they go that route. Really doesn't jive with how savvy the Ricketts are as businessmen/women.

[Little Slide Rooter]

If Ricketts isn't willing to spend on (any) major free agents, then we might as well resign ourselves to rooting for the quasi-Pirates/Royals/A's/whoever. Also, Ricketts should be tarred and feathered for buying a major market team and treating it like a small market team.

 

Pretty much. The Cubs will be garbage for at least most of the next decade if they go that route. Really doesn't jive with how savvy the Ricketts are as businessmen/women.

 

If Ricketts really wants Joe Cowleys prophecy to come true and have Chicago become the White Sox town, then he should definitely go this route.

[Sammy Sofa]

If Ricketts isn't willing to spend on (any) major free agents, then we might as well resign ourselves to rooting for the quasi-Pirates/Royals/A's/whoever. Also, Ricketts should be tarred and feathered for buying a major market team and treating it like a small market team.

 

Pretty much. The Cubs will be garbage for at least most of the next decade if they go that route. Really doesn't jive with how savvy the Ricketts are as businessmen/women.

 

If Ricketts really wants Joe Cowleys prophecy to come true and have Chicago become the White Sox town, then he should definitely go this route.

 

Nah, they're pretty screwed, too. Especially if Kenny is left in charge.

[Exile on Waveland]

If Ricketts isn't willing to spend on (any) major free agents, then we might as well resign ourselves to rooting for the quasi-Pirates/Royals/A's/whoever. Also, Ricketts should be tarred and feathered for buying a major market team and treating it like a small market team.

 

Pretty much. The Cubs will be garbage for at least most of the next decade if they go that route. Really doesn't jive with how savvy the Ricketts are as businessmen/women.

 

I'm all in favor of spending money on the farm system and developing from within. However, that's not mutually exclusive to spending money on free agents (especially with a ultra-populer, major-market team like the Cubs). If you ever plan on competing to the level I believe most here think the Cubs should be competing, you're going to have to spend some money in the free agent market. The key is not spending it on the Soriano's (who is a productive player, no doubt) but on the Pujol's/Fielder's and the Kemp's/Ethier's (which I think is the board's preferred position-player shopping list the next two offseasons). I suspect that's more in line with the Ricketts' plans moving forward. We have no idea what the future holds -- and maybe Ricketts will turn out to be baseball's Donald Sterling -- but I don't believe that comports with the indications so far that he's a savvy businessman. I cannot imagine that Ricketts wants to be "garbage" the next few years -- and, in order to avoid such fate, the Cubs need an external (read: free agency) talent infusion.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Exile on Waveland

[Rob]

If Ricketts isn't willing to spend on (any) major free agents, then we might as well resign ourselves to rooting for the quasi-Pirates/Royals/A's/whoever. Also, Ricketts should be tarred and feathered for buying a major market team and treating it like a small market team.

 

Pretty much. The Cubs will be garbage for at least most of the next decade if they go that route. Really doesn't jive with how savvy the Ricketts are as businessmen/women.

 

If Ricketts really wants Joe Cowleys prophecy to come true and have Chicago become the White Sox town, then he should definitely go this route.

 

Nah, they're pretty screwed, too. Especially if Kenny is left in charge.

 

I don't understand why people think Crane Kenney is doing a bad job. He's not here to be the baseball guy. He's basically head of marketing.

[Sammy Sofa]

You were making a joke, right? I was talking about Kenny Williams.

[CubColtPacer]

I can see an argument that the Ricketts may decide to wait on signing big free agents for a while. I don't think that this is what will happen, but I could see a scenario where they try to keep the major league team afloat with stopgaps while they fix the farm system and let the youth core build up before sticking their toes back into the long-term contracts.

 

But I can't see any scenario where the Ricketts go away from long-term contracts altogether. They said they want to build up through the farm system and supplement through free agents, but the fact that they want to emulate the Red Sox who have definitely been active in free agency shows me that they're certainly willing to make the big splash. Whether they'll do that this offseason or even next is more questionable though, but I think they'll be willing to make one if the situation is right.

[Rob]

You were making a joke, right? I was talking about Kenny Williams.

 

Actually, I didn't bother reading the posts you were quoting... or even the first sentence of your post.

[Soul]

I can see an argument that the Ricketts may decide to wait on signing big free agents for a while. I don't think that this is what will happen, but I could see a scenario where they try to keep the major league team afloat with stopgaps while they fix the farm system and let the youth core build up before sticking their toes back into the long-term contracts.

 

But I can't see any scenario where the Ricketts go away from long-term contracts altogether. They said they want to build up through the farm system and supplement through free agents, but the fact that they want to emulate the Red Sox who have definitely been active in free agency shows me that they're certainly willing to make the big splash. Whether they'll do that this offseason or even next is more questionable though, but I think they'll be willing to make one if the situation is right.

 

Why couldn't this be the case? Why do we have to become the Pirates for the next ten years just because we won't take on another huge, lengthy deal while our lower levels are brought up to speed?

 

I don't understand why my theory -- wrong as it may be -- would necessarily mean that this team is heading for a disaster. There's no guarantee signing a guy like Fielder would do anything other than fill a few more seats while the team still languishes around the .500 mark anyway.

 

And once you are realizing production from your lower levels on a more regular basis, that puts you in a better position to make saner forays into the free agent market, rather than feeling like you need to throw insane amounts of cash at a guy like Soriano because you have nothing else to go with.

[SouthSideRyan]

Let's keep pretending that spending money on free agents = another Soriano contract. It's very productive.

 

OH, and if we couple that iwth the concept that this team is doomed to 70 wins next year no matter who is signed/traded for that'd be just swell.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Let's keep pretending that spending money on free agents = another Soriano contract. It's very productive.

 

OH, and if we couple that iwth the concept that this team is doomed to 70 wins next year no matter who is signed/traded for that'd be just swell.

 

This. I still stand by my theory that Ramirez+Fielder+decent 2-3 starter=contention if not division favorites.

[Sammy Sofa]

I can see an argument that the Ricketts may decide to wait on signing big free agents for a while. I don't think that this is what will happen, but I could see a scenario where they try to keep the major league team afloat with stopgaps while they fix the farm system and let the youth core build up before sticking their toes back into the long-term contracts.

 

But I can't see any scenario where the Ricketts go away from long-term contracts altogether. They said they want to build up through the farm system and supplement through free agents, but the fact that they want to emulate the Red Sox who have definitely been active in free agency shows me that they're certainly willing to make the big splash. Whether they'll do that this offseason or even next is more questionable though, but I think they'll be willing to make one if the situation is right.

 

Why couldn't this be the case? Why do we have to become the Pirates for the next ten years just because we won't take on another huge, lengthy deal while our lower levels are brought up to speed?

 

I don't understand why my theory -- wrong as it may be -- would necessarily mean that this team is heading for a disaster. There's no guarantee signing a guy like Fielder would do anything other than fill a few more seats while the team still languishes around the .500 mark anyway.

 

And once you are realizing production from your lower levels on a more regular basis, that puts you in a better position to make saner forays into the free agent market, rather than feeling like you need to throw insane amounts of cash at a guy like Soriano because you have nothing else to go with.

 

And yet again you conflate signing Fielder with signing Soriano. Please stop that.

 

And yes, avoiding big name FA's will mean the team languishes in mediocrity or worse for at least the better part of a decade. The Cubs don't have any prospects on the horizon that project to be much more than decent everyday starters at best. Guys like that can obviously be very useful, but they're not enough to put a team over the top. The Cubs are going to have to wisely mix developing talent with smart signings, and yes, some of those signings are going to have to be big contracts. The Cubs not spending simply doesn't equal good business sense.

[Exile on Waveland]

Seriously, can anyone envision a realistic scenario where the Cubs contend over the coming few years without signing a marquee free agent? If/when the answer is "no," it's sheer lunacy not to sign a marquee free agent.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The problem with Soriano is that the Cubs made up their mind to get the best player on the FA market no matter what, and it was an offseason where the best wasn't all that great. This offseason will not have such a problem.

[Sammy Sofa]

The problem with Soriano is that the Cubs made up their mind to get the best player on the FA market no matter what, and it was an offseason where the best wasn't all that great. This offseason will not have such a problem.

 

Exactly. Soul seems to be saying that since the Ricketts didn't do the exact same thing the first offseason they owned the team and had overspent on whoever the best FA was after last season (I assume it was Dunn, right?), then that's evidence of them planning on not dishing out any big contracts anytime soon. FTH?

[Soul]

Well, define big contracts.

 

I'm talking about insane contracts. $18million for 8 years contracts.

[Sammy Sofa]

Depends on who is getting the contract. Soriano? No, of course not. Pujols? [expletive] yeah. Prince? Damn right (I'd prefer to land him for 6 years, but I don't think that's going to happen). No dollar amount/years (within reason) should be verboten, and both of those factors are well within reason for the right players, especially for a big market team like the Cubs. The key is having a FO smart enough to overpay for the right guys (and build a team around them) instead of the Sorianos of the world.

[Soul]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

[bcl412]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

 

This is said every time there is a free agent on the market. My opinion is, that as a large market team it's a risk that you have to take. You can build your minor leagues but no one knows what any of those players will be like 6 years from now (obviously I want the Cubs to build this as well but when you have the resources a team should be built with multiple strategies in mind obviously), either.

[Soul]

I mean - don't misunderstand me. I want Pujols. I want Fielder.

 

 

But I would like us to move toward having those players in the way that the Cardinals & Brewers had them. And away from massively overpaying for past performance.

[Sammy Sofa]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

 

Holy crap, please stop. WE'RE NOT GOING DOWN ANY ROAD "AGAIN." Pujols and Fielder are not Soriano, no many times you attempt to compare signing them to signing him.

 

And you never know what any FA will be 6 years after you sign them. You're going to be signing big name FA who are pushing 30 (or past it) unless you develop them internally. Well, the Cubs have absolutely nobody even close to that on the horizon, thus they need to go out and spend. When you sign big names you've got to pay. The key, again, is overpaying for the right guys, and yes, you WILL be overpaying for players like that. Always. And the Cubs are a big market with lots of money to spend, so I don't know why you want them to just automatically not spend money on big contracts unless it's on a player they developed themselves. They have the money to make these kind of signings and SHOULD make them.

 

Yes, I wish the Cubs would develop players like Fielder and Pujols...but they haven't and they won't any time soon. In the meantime they need to sign good FA to go along with more and more players they hopefully develop from within who can be useful everyday players.

[Soul]

I can't believe you want to go down that road again. Nobody knows what Fielder will be like 6 years from now. Certainly not Pujols.

 

Holy crap, please stop. WE'RE NOT GOING DOWN ANY ROAD "AGAIN." Pujols and Fielder are not Soriano, no many times you attempt to compare signing them to signing him.

 

And you never know what any FA will be 6 years after you sign them. You're going to be signing big name FA who are pushing 30 (or past it) unless you develop them internally. Well, the Cubs have absolutely nobody even close to that on the horizon, thus they need to go out and spend. When you sign big names you've got to pay. The key, again, is overpaying for the right guys, and yes, you WILL be overpaying for players like that. Always. And the Cubs are a big market with lots of money to spend, so I don't know why you want them to just automatically not spend money on big contracts unless it's on a player they developed themselves. They have the money to make these kind of signings and SHOULD make them.

 

Yes, I wish the Cubs would develop players like Fielder and Pujols...but they haven't and they won't any time soon. In the meantime they need to sign good FA to go along with more and more players they hopefully develop from within who can be useful everyday players.

 

I actually don't think we're that far apart. I just think we should take our pain for a little while, develop our system, and then re-engage in the free agent market because I think it would result in shorter, relatively lower-cost deals.

[Sammy Sofa]

How? Superstar players cost are always going to cost money. Again, the Cubs have absolutely zero prospects right now that project to that level and thereabouts for the foreseeable future. They do have, however, a number of intriguing prospects who should produce a few everyday players. They're a big market team with money to spend. Wouldn't you rather see a happy medium where the Cubs develop useful players internally, continue to work towards developing similar and better players down the line, but also take advantage of the resources at their disposal and make smart FA signings to make the team better? It's not an either/or proposition. I don't understand why you would want the team to be bad when they don't have to be. The Cubs can easily spend big for outside players and develop and re-sign their own players. The key is a good FO that can balance the team's options, not going miserly or going nuts with the spending.