Re: Darvish

[SouthSideRyan]

I think the Cubs are a big market team and should act as such, but I am also against just spending money because of that reason. The Cubs probably need to be careful in the free agency market in the next few years because they already have a lot of wasted money and not much immediate help coming from the system.

 

NO THE CUBS DO NOT HAVE A LOT OF WASTED MONEY ALREADY. ESPECIALLY IN THE NEXT [expletive] FEW YEARS

[davell]

Not the point, but they're allowed to trade some of the young guys they acquire for bats as well. The real point is that in no way does what he's suggesting indicate punting the next 4-5 seasons to build from within and be terrible while doing it. It doesn't guarantee anything, but it certainly isn't a total rebuild that's going to take 4-5 years.

 

He absolutely is suggesting punting longterm. If you trade off all your actually productive players, and let the rest walk, without acquiring any impact players in return, it will take an extremely long time to get back to being competitive. You would effectively be starting from scratch and that takes time. The Cubs will suck for multiple years if they do that.

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got? Is Z from the past couple of seasons going to be hard to replace? How about Dempster for 15ish mill? You don't think we can reacquire what he's done for that kind of cash? Newsflash, Soto is an average starting catcher, he's not going to be hard to replace either. Byrd? There's multiple versions of him that can be had each FA class. Seriously, this isn't some major rebuild that takes forever. It's a roster overhaul. But we're overhauling guys that aren't even under contract going forward. Trying to find some young cheap GOOD players to pair with Castro and hopefully Brett on the offensive side is exactly what we need to do. My plan for pitching is the same. I've got us signing Jackson in this, he's been very consistent the last 3 years. 11.2 WAR over that time. Have us signing Chen to a 4 year deal. Hopefully, this takes care of the 3 and 4 spots in the rotation. With all the prospects you've gotten, my hope would be you've added a top of the rotation arm as well. Then go get one in FA and add a 5th starter.

[jersey cubs fan]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Did you even attempt to read?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Seeing as how the best we could do for Ramirez is Ian Stewart, I'm going to go with "yes."

[jersey cubs fan]

The Cubs are a below average team with a few good parts. It's going to take a lot to improve this team to the point of contention. If you trade off all of the good parts after letting 2 of your better parts walk without acquiring any other impact players it is going to take even longer.

[davell]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Did you even attempt to read?

I'm sorry, I think you're going to have to explain this "witty" response.

[NewUserName]

I think the Cubs are a big market team and should act as such, but I am also against just spending money because of that reason. The Cubs probably need to be careful in the free agency market in the next few years because they already have a lot of wasted money and not much immediate help coming from the system.

 

NO THE CUBS DO NOT HAVE A LOT OF WASTED MONEY ALREADY. ESPECIALLY IN THE NEXT [expletive] FEW YEARS

 

That may be so, but spending money just because you have it to appease fans this year is not a good idea. THAT IS WHAT THE LAST REGIME WOULD HAVE DONE. I do not know if Darvish would have been a good long term investment, but I still trust the new regime to make good decisions to build a consistent winner and I do not need them to prove it by making a couple of big free agent splashes this year.

[jersey cubs fan]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Did you even attempt to read?

I'm sorry, I think you're going to have to explain this "witty" response.

 

Your nonsensical statement about replacing this average group in no way shape or form addresses the issue being discussed. The point is not to replace what is here, the point is to get better. If the first step you take toward getting better is getting a lot worse, it's going to take longer to get better.

[jersey cubs fan]

That may be so, but spending money just because you have it to appease fans this year is not a good idea.

 

You don't do it to appease fans, you do it to put the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012.

 

 

Also, considering how important fan based revenues are to the business plan, you probably should at least try to keep them happy.

[NewUserName]

That may be so, but spending money just because you have it to appease fans this year is not a good idea.

 

You don't do it to appease fans, you do it to put the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012.

 

 

Also, considering how important fan based revenues are to the business plan, you probably should at least try to keep them happy.

 

The fans loved the Soriano signing

[jersey cubs fan]

That may be so, but spending money just because you have it to appease fans this year is not a good idea.

 

You don't do it to appease fans, you do it to put the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012.

 

 

Also, considering how important fan based revenues are to the business plan, you probably should at least try to keep them happy.

 

The fans loved the Soriano signing

 

There was quite the mixed sentiment around Soriano. But that's a pretty stupid strawman you've thrown out there. Soriano isn't on the market this year.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

THAT IS WHAT THE LAST REGIME WOULD HAVE DONE.

 

The last regime would have made some trades. We should probably never, ever make a trade either. Also, the last regime would have sent scouts out to look at young players. Better stop that, too.

 

The Cubs are bad almost entirely for this:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?query_type=franch_round&team_ID=CHC&draft_round=1&draft_type=junreg&

 

Since 2002, they have gotten a combined -1.1 bWAR from their first-round picks. -0.8 bWAR from their second-round picks. Later rounds aren't much better.

 

If the Cubs had anything resembling a decent amateur scouting and development staff, they'd have been fine despite the "bad" contracts which weren't really that bad.

[davell]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Did you even attempt to read?

I'm sorry, I think you're going to have to explain this "witty" response.

 

Your nonsensical statement about replacing this average group in no way shape or form addresses the issue being discussed. The point is not to replace what is here, the point is to get better. If the first step you take toward getting better is getting a lot worse, it's going to take longer to get better.

Ok, the idea here is to trade Garza and get at least one guy who can conceivably replace him very shortly, giving the same production for cheaper as well. Plus, other parts as well could certainly be useful. Marshall nets you at least one guy who you should be able to count on as well to be on the major league roster soon. The rest of what we have can be dealt, like Soto, Byrd, and Marmol. Marmol is replaceable from within, it's possible Soto is as well and Byrd being replaced by Brett hopefully becomes an upgrade. We will have lots of cash available, in this scenario, so if you want to sign a pair of bigtime FA., you have the ability to do so. Seriously, other than Castro, who I don't move under any circumstance, do you think is going to be hard to replace quickly? And when I say replace, I fully expect upgrades in most cases.

[CubColtPacer]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Did you even attempt to read?

I'm sorry, I think you're going to have to explain this "witty" response.

 

Your nonsensical statement about replacing this average group in no way shape or form addresses the issue being discussed. The point is not to replace what is here, the point is to get better. If the first step you take toward getting better is getting a lot worse, it's going to take longer to get better.

 

Half of those good parts he mentioned are likely to be gone after next year anyway (Dempster, Byrd, Marshall, Zambrano). The only pieces he's taking off the team that would be a decent part of the team in 2-3 years are Garza, Soto, and Marmol. So really he's mostly just punting 2012 and not the years after that.

 

The Cubs best plan was probably to make a huge effort to compete in 2012. If they are not planning on making some major upgrades, punting 2012 and acquiring lots of assets might be the best way to go rather than wasting the last year of several of your assets. Let's say they don't even do a full rebuild and don't trade Garza, Soto, and Marmol. Trading Dempster, Marshall, Byrd, and Z gives you a better chance of competing in 2013 than holding on to them does. And if you find a good deal for one of the other 3 that fills some holes, then you have to consider that as well.

[davearm2]

You don't do it to appease fans, you do it to put the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012.

Thankfully, putting the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012 isn't Theo's #1 priority.

 

Building a perennial contender is Theo's #1 priority. Achieving that objective may involve trading guys like Garza and Marshall, even at the expense of 2012.

 

But I'm sure you knew that.

[NewUserName]

THAT IS WHAT THE LAST REGIME WOULD HAVE DONE.

 

The last regime would have made some trades. We should probably never, ever make a trade either. Also, the last regime would have sent scouts out to look at young players. Better stop that, too.

 

The Cubs are bad almost entirely for this:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?query_type=franch_round&team_ID=CHC&draft_round=1&draft_type=junreg&

 

Since 2002, they have gotten a combined -1.1 bWAR from their first-round picks. -0.8 bWAR from their second-round picks. Later rounds aren't much better.

 

If the Cubs had anything resembling a decent amateur scouting and development staff, they'd have been fine despite the "bad" contracts which weren't really that bad.

 

exactly. But that still does not mean that the new regime should just toss money around this year. If they feel that the money is right than certainly go ahead and sign some players. But they should not overpay for players to just be competitive this year or appease fans. I do not know if Darvish will end up being overpaid, but the Cubs made the bid that they made and it didn't win, so be it.

[mul21]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Seeing as how the best we could do for Ramirez is Ian Stewart, I'm going to go with "yes."

 

Way to cherry pick the single most barren position this off season. Also, Ramirez is not currently with the team, so he's not part of the discussion anyway.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Seeing as how the best we could do for Ramirez is Ian Stewart, I'm going to go with "yes."

 

Way to cherry pick the single most barren position this off season. Also, Ramirez is not currently with the team, so he's not part of the discussion anyway.

 

Have you looked around at the league lately? Teams are getting super-hoardy about their young talent. More of it is getting locked up on long-term deals than ever before.

 

Talent is becoming pretty scarce and the price is inflating quickly on the rare occasions that you can find it.

[jersey cubs fan]

The Cubs best plan was probably to make a huge effort to compete in 2012. If they are not planning on making some major upgrades, punting 2012 and acquiring lots of assets might be the best way to go

 

I tend to agree with this, but you have to be realistic and admit they are going to suck for a long time if they do this. 2012 and 2013 will be lost.

[SouthSideRyan]

You don't do it to appease fans, you do it to put the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012.

Thankfully, putting the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012 isn't Theo's #1 priority.

 

Building a perennial contender is Theo's #1 priority. Achieving that objective may involve trading guys like Garza and Marshall, even at the expense of 2012.

 

But I'm sure you knew that.

 

Because the only way to put a competitive team on the field in 2012 is by ruining the long-term future of the franchise.

[davell]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Seeing as how the best we could do for Ramirez is Ian Stewart, I'm going to go with "yes."

You're better than that. You know Stewart is a stopgap. If he hits, great, but Theo, you, me and probably everyone else too, is fully expecting to go back to the drawing board here next year and hope you've acquired a prospect that's better than Stewart. No, there's not going to be a 3B in FA next year that's going to give us Aramis' production either. But, with that 16 mill he was getting, I bet we can get just as much and probably more WAR out of that somewhere else. To where if you put Aramis and Dempster together, we've upgraded the pair of spots as a whole and probably for less money, so you can then do the same thing for the next grouping.

[CubColtPacer]

The Cubs best plan was probably to make a huge effort to compete in 2012. If they are not planning on making some major upgrades, punting 2012 and acquiring lots of assets might be the best way to go

 

I tend to agree with this, but you have to be realistic and admit they are going to suck for a long time if they do this. 2012 and 2013 will be lost.

 

2012 is definitely lost. 2013 would depend on how well some of the young players play. If they find another piece or two of the core during 2012 and then spend a lot in free agency before 2013, they could very well compete. If all the young acquired players flop and they still have this many holes to fill next offseason, they're sunk.

 

But if they don't make a major upgrade this offseason, they're in that position in 2013 whether they trade those players or not. At least with completely punting 2012 they'd have a chance to find some players to fill those 2013 holes.

[jersey cubs fan]

The Cubs best plan was probably to make a huge effort to compete in 2012. If they are not planning on making some major upgrades, punting 2012 and acquiring lots of assets might be the best way to go

 

I tend to agree with this, but you have to be realistic and admit they are going to suck for a long time if they do this. 2012 and 2013 will be lost.

 

2012 is definitely lost. 2013 would depend on how well some of the young players play. If they find another piece or two of the core during 2012 and then spend a lot in free agency before 2013, they could very well compete. If all the young acquired players flop and they still have this many holes to fill next offseason, they're sunk.

 

But if they don't make a major upgrade this offseason, they're in that position in 2013 whether they trade those players or not. At least with completely punting 2012 they'd have a chance to find some players to fill those 2013 holes.

 

If they don't punt they still have a chance to fill 2013 holes.

[treebird]

i think the main upshot is that we need to get theo to promise that all that "ten years and out" thing was just bogus crap to justify leaving boston. ain't no way that's gonna cut it.

[jersey cubs fan]

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you actually think it's hard to replace the very average group we've currently got?

 

Seeing as how the best we could do for Ramirez is Ian Stewart, I'm going to go with "yes."

You're better than that. You know Stewart is a stopgap. If he hits, great, but Theo, you, me and probably everyone else too, is fully expecting to go back to the drawing board here next year and hope you've acquired a prospect that's better than Stewart. No, there's not going to be a 3B in FA next year that's going to give us Aramis' production either. But, with that 16 mill he was getting, I bet we can get just as much and probably more WAR out of that somewhere else. To where if you put Aramis and Dempster together, we've upgraded the pair of spots as a whole and probably for less money, so you can then do the same thing for the next grouping.

 

And the next grouping, and the next grouping, and the next grouping. Hell, I don't see why they'd even bother spending $100m on payroll with this foolproof scheme. You could rebuilding Wrigley in 2 years with that kind of profit margin.