Re: Darvish

[Guest]

Yeah, I know, building for the future is fine and I want them to do that, but I'm not going to lie and act like I give a [expletive] about the minors until any of those players are actually producing for the Cubs. I'm a fan of the major league team, and spending years waiting for the farm system to develop while our offense is for the foreseeable future is a pretty barren wasteland of mediocrity outside of Castro is depressing as hell. If it all starts paying off years down the line, hey, great; it's just going to REALLY suck getting there in the meantime if the Ricketts are going cheap.

 

"Going cheap" implies that they are not spending the money they have; it is entirely possible that they're not spending money because they don't have much to spend.

 

That's not better.

 

Yes it is. Eventually there will be added revenue...lots of it...and if they aren't spending now I'd much rather it be because they can't than because they don't want to.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yeah, I know, building for the future is fine and I want them to do that, but I'm not going to lie and act like I give a [expletive] about the minors until any of those players are actually producing for the Cubs. I'm a fan of the major league team, and spending years waiting for the farm system to develop while our offense is for the foreseeable future is a pretty barren wasteland of mediocrity outside of Castro is depressing as hell. If it all starts paying off years down the line, hey, great; it's just going to REALLY suck getting there in the meantime if the Ricketts are going cheap.

 

"Going cheap" implies that they are not spending the money they have; it is entirely possible that they're not spending money because they don't have much to spend.

 

That's not better.

 

Yes it is. Eventually there will be added revenue...lots of it...and if they aren't spending now I'd much rather it be because they can't than because they don't want to.

 

We just got done wasting a couple of decades where we should have been bludgeoning the division.

 

Every year, Selig squeezes through new rules and revenues improve, meaning the gap becomes smaller and smaller.

 

Yeah, "in a decade we'll be filthy rich" isn't really good.

 

At least "we've decided not to spend" means we might change our minds.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yes it is. Eventually there will be added revenue...lots of it...and if they aren't spending now I'd much rather it be because they can't than because they don't want to.

 

If they aren't spending now because they can't, then this organization's financial advantage over the opposition is a mirage, and that would suck mega balls. I would much, much, much rather they actually just chose to be too smart for their own good and not spend what was available to them.

[Guest]

 

We just got done wasting a couple of decades where we should have been bludgeoning the division.

 

Every year, Selig squeezes through new rules and revenues improve, meaning the gap becomes smaller and smaller.

 

Yeah, "in a decade we'll be filthy rich" isn't really good.

 

At least "we've decided not to spend" means we might change our minds.

 

Yea, this just isn't true.

 

Well, the part about Selig squeezing new rules every year and the gap getting smaller between the haves and have nots, that is.

Edited December 20, 2011 by David

[davell]

You head into 2013 with Jackson/Chen/Alvarez in your rotation and you have Castro, Brett, DeJesus, Beltran, Rizzo, and maybe Barney as starters. With well over 40 mill to spend. You can backload for a year or two, to help offset Soriano still. You'd have Beltran gone after 2013. Soler could be ready by then, or any number of other IFA we may could sign before July. The hope here is that Rizzo and Brett are solid regulars heading into 2013 and I don't think that's all that hard to imagine honestly. Your system is stocked too, so you've got the ability to add more than one piece through trade now. And still sign a bigtime SP or 2, if you want. Finding the big bat won't be easy, at least probably not a longterm fix, but I figure the system could entice a team to trade us one. But, I see us having an excellent shot at contention from this point forward basically. If there's a downside here, I'm counting on Rizzo to be very solid and I see that. But, I think he will be.

[treebird]

if we really don't have a huge advantage over the other teams in our division that play in way smaller and crappier cities, it has to be because of wrigley and we should all be in favor of tearing it down and getting a generic boring new stadium like everyone else has.

 

i really doubt this is the case, though.

[WilcoFan]

Yes it is. Eventually there will be added revenue...lots of it...and if they aren't spending now I'd much rather it be because they can't than because they don't want to.

 

If they aren't spending now because they can't, then this organization's financial advantage over the opposition is a mirage, and that would suck mega balls. I would much, much, much rather they actually just chose to be too smart for their own good and not spend what was available to them.

 

 

I think, to a certain extent, the Cubs' financial advantage is a bit overblown, mostly because people see the manner in which the Cubs draw game after game and assume that it equals a massive financial advantage. Consider the following:

 

1. The Cubs have outdated facilities, both in their Spring Training home (granted, this is a small percentage of potential profit), and in their regular season home--not so much in the average tickets, which they sell, but in the potential for luxury boxes, which most sports finance people argue is where the bulk of profit is made. One could argue that the rooftops could act as additional luxury boxes, however the Cubs only take in a percentage of the profits on those.

 

2. Much in the same way the Cubs are not sole owners of their luxury boxes (rooftops), they are also not sole beneficiaries of their television profits on either the cable or standard television sides. They are splitting the profits from ComcastSportsNet with three other organizations, and their WGN deal is still hampered by the contract signed when the Cubs were just a subsidiary of the network.

 

3. Some of the Cubs' greatest advantages (a large geographically diverse fanbase) are mitigated by the fact that, even if these fans buy Cubs' merchandise, merchandise revenue sharing takes a percentage of the profit.

 

 

This is not to cry for the poor Cubs, but it simply points out that the Cubs, as currently constructed (in the business sense), are probably only maximizing about 50% of their potential assets, while all of their opponents in the division are maximizing close to 90% (that's an educated guess). The Cubs are the "sleeping giant" in MLB, but I don't think an ownership change was the only step necessary to see it through. It was a first step, but not an "only step."

Edited December 20, 2011 by WilcoFan

[Guest]

if we really don't have a huge advantage over the other teams in our division that play in way smaller and crappier cities, it has to be because of wrigley and we should all be in favor of tearing it down and getting a generic boring new stadium like everyone else has.

 

i really doubt this is the case, though.

 

We need a real TV contract. And we need that/those building(s) and all the additional money it'll bring the team.

[abuck1220]

With well over 40 mill to spend.

 

ON WHO?

[davell]

With well over 40 mill to spend.

 

ON WHO?

Maybe you spend some of it Josh Hamilton? I kind of doubt he hits the market, but I consider him the biggest bat out there, although he's older and certainly has more red flags than most. Howie Kendrick maybe? BJ Upton or Andre Ethier? That's about it for bats. So we'd have to have confidence in Rizzo and expect the system to allow us to trade for a big bat. The majority of this money though, would go towards landing one or possibly 2 of Hamels, Greinke, Cain, Danks, Liriano, McCarthy, A Sanchez, or Marcum. Not all will hit the market but some, if not most, will, in my opinion. So, my pretend offseason would be to trade for a relatively young bat, sign Upton or Ehtier, sign one of Cain, Hamels, or Greinke, and one of McCarthy, Sanchez, or Liriano.

[abuck1220]

yeah, i'd rather buy prince fielder.

[davell]

yeah, i'd rather buy prince fielder.

I was OK with Prince. But now, since we're not adding the bigtime pitcher, I think I'd take Rizzo over him, unless I could get him for 6 years or less. If I can get him for 6, instead of adding Beltran, in my idea, we've got Prince and different prospects that don't include Rizzo. But, Prince alone isn't making us contend immediately. If we still got Jackson and did NOT trade Garza, then maybe. But personally, I think the longterm bodes better by trading Garza.

[Backtobanks]

I'm amazed at the number of people that are still caught up in the Theo hype. Quit blaming Ricketts, Wrigley field, or whatever. There's money to be spent and Ricketts turned all baseball decisions over to Theo. The buck stops on Theo's desk. It's starting to look like he's already working on getting his new contract because he's going to be close to a decent team when it's ready to be renewed. So far the 2012 Cubs look to be a 70 win team with the Cards and Brewers losing their power bats. So we trade all of our tradable assets this year for prospects and push our next winning back for 2 more years (assuming that all our our prospects become stars which isn't likely). For all of you that don't want to overpay for some overpriced FA, just realize that Theo is going to have to make Soriano-type contract offers to FAs next year. My expectations of Theo were that he would field a decent team in 2012 followed by a consistent contender in 2013 and beyond. There would be 1000 pages ripping Hendry if he did this little by now.

[jersey cubs fan]

There would be 1000 pages ripping Hendry if he did this little by now.

 

True, but that's largely because Hendry was a failed GM for a decade before this season. Theo is not. I do not like what they have done (or failed to do) so far, but I do believe he can still turn this into a winning organization.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

I'm amazed at the number of people that are still caught up in the Theo hype. Quit blaming Ricketts, Wrigley field, or whatever. There's money to be spent and Ricketts turned all baseball decisions over to Theo. The buck stops on Theo's desk. It's starting to look like he's already working on getting his new contract because he's going to be close to a decent team when it's ready to be renewed. So far the 2012 Cubs look to be a 70 win team with the Cards and Brewers losing their power bats. So we trade all of our tradable assets this year for prospects and push our next winning back for 2 more years (assuming that all our our prospects become stars which isn't likely). For all of you that don't want to overpay for some overpriced FA, just realize that Theo is going to have to make Soriano-type contract offers to FAs next year. My expectations of Theo were that he would field a decent team in 2012 followed by a consistent contender in 2013 and beyond. There would be 1000 pages ripping Hendry if he did this little by now.

 

I still find this way of thinking very entertaining. We didn't need to bring Theo and company in to sign the most expensive of free agents. Anybody can do that.

 

They brought him in to start building an entire organization that had been torn down through years of bad choices. That work sometimes doesn't look real exciting or create the headlines some need to feel satisfied. But they are doing their thing, and I trust them 100 percent.

[Sammy Sofa]

The organization doesn't need to be "torn down," and they can easily both build/rebuild internally AND spend big.

[Sammy Sofa]

And anyone who argued against signing Prince because he's fat who also suggests signing the older, junkie-brittled Josh Hamilton instead (in the off chance he even hits the market) needs a smack on the tush.

[jersey cubs fan]

I still find this way of thinking very entertaining. We didn't need to bring Theo and company in to sign the most expensive of free agents. Anybody can do that.

 

They brought him in to start building an entire organization that had been torn down through years of bad choices. That work sometimes doesn't look real exciting or create the headlines some need to feel satisfied. But they are doing their thing, and I trust them 100 percent.

 

I find this kind of thinking insane. Expensive free agents are expensive because they are really good and help teams win games. As a big market team, the Cubs can afford them and should employ them. There is no reason for this rebuiliding to be some multi-year task where we are forced to live with the garbage that is currently on the roster just because some people get off on the supposed purity of building solely from within. Signing good expensive free agents does nothing to prevent you from building up a farm system. Throwing away seasons is inexcusable.

[mookie]

Parallel paths and all that is wonderful, and can still be achieved without signing these guys that have already signed. I can't be upset because we haven't landed Pujols, Wilson, or Darvish. They simply didn't look right for one reason or another, and I hold no ill will. If we don't sign Prince, I will understand that. I think the silence is getting to people. If we don't get Prince, we most definitely will pull of at least one trade. Things are about to change.

[jersey cubs fan]

Parallel paths and all that is wonderful, and can still be achieved without signing these guys that have already signed. I can't be upset because we haven't landed Pujols, Wilson, or Darvish. They simply didn't look right for one reason or another, and I hold no ill will. If we don't sign Prince, I will understand that.

 

I won't. Literally passing on every big time free agent available when all you had to do was spend money to acquire them in an offseason when all four of them would have helped would really freaking suck. The Cubs don't have enough assets to trade their way to short-term improvements.

[mookie]

I still find this way of thinking very entertaining. We didn't need to bring Theo and company in to sign the most expensive of free agents. Anybody can do that.

 

They brought him in to start building an entire organization that had been torn down through years of bad choices. That work sometimes doesn't look real exciting or create the headlines some need to feel satisfied. But they are doing their thing, and I trust them 100 percent.

 

I find this kind of thinking insane. Expensive free agents are expensive because they are really good and help teams win games. As a big market team, the Cubs can afford them and should employ them. There is no reason for this rebuiliding to be some multi-year task where we are forced to live with the garbage that is currently on the roster just because some people get off on the supposed purity of building solely from within. Signing good expensive free agents does nothing to prevent you from building up a farm system. Throwing away seasons is inexcusable.

 

Where did he mention throwing away seasons? Why are you so hell bent that management is throwing away 2012 because we haven't signed a big name?

[USSoccer]

I'm amazed at the number of people that are still caught up in the Theo hype. Quit blaming Ricketts, Wrigley field, or whatever. There's money to be spent and Ricketts turned all baseball decisions over to Theo. The buck stops on Theo's desk. It's starting to look like he's already working on getting his new contract because he's going to be close to a decent team when it's ready to be renewed. So far the 2012 Cubs look to be a 70 win team with the Cards and Brewers losing their power bats. So we trade all of our tradable assets this year for prospects and push our next winning back for 2 more years (assuming that all our our prospects become stars which isn't likely). For all of you that don't want to overpay for some overpriced FA, just realize that Theo is going to have to make Soriano-type contract offers to FAs next year. My expectations of Theo were that he would field a decent team in 2012 followed by a consistent contender in 2013 and beyond. There would be 1000 pages ripping Hendry if he did this little by now.

 

I still find this way of thinking very entertaining. We didn't need to bring Theo and company in to sign the most expensive of free agents. Anybody can do that.

 

They brought him in to start building an entire organization that had been torn down through years of bad choices. That work sometimes doesn't look real exciting or create the headlines some need to feel satisfied. But they are doing their thing, and I trust them 100 percent.

 

You can rebuild an organization without punting on an entire year by putting out a roster that looks like crap.

[jersey cubs fan]

I still find this way of thinking very entertaining. We didn't need to bring Theo and company in to sign the most expensive of free agents. Anybody can do that.

 

They brought him in to start building an entire organization that had been torn down through years of bad choices. That work sometimes doesn't look real exciting or create the headlines some need to feel satisfied. But they are doing their thing, and I trust them 100 percent.

 

I find this kind of thinking insane. Expensive free agents are expensive because they are really good and help teams win games. As a big market team, the Cubs can afford them and should employ them. There is no reason for this rebuiliding to be some multi-year task where we are forced to live with the garbage that is currently on the roster just because some people get off on the supposed purity of building solely from within. Signing good expensive free agents does nothing to prevent you from building up a farm system. Throwing away seasons is inexcusable.

 

Where did he mention throwing away seasons? Why are you so hell bent that management is throwing away 2012 because we haven't signed a big name?

 

Because signing those free agents was the only way to make meaningful improvements to the team for 2012. The marginal upgrades available via trade aren't enough to fundamentally change the overall weakness of the roster, unless you go out and give up everybody in the system. But that would be what actually damages your long-term plan and be against the whole concept of the parrelel front.

[SweetZombieJesus]

I'm amazed at the number of people that are still caught up in the Theo hype. Quit blaming Ricketts, Wrigley field, or whatever. There's money to be spent and Ricketts turned all baseball decisions over to Theo. The buck stops on Theo's desk. It's starting to look like he's already working on getting his new contract because he's going to be close to a decent team when it's ready to be renewed. So far the 2012 Cubs look to be a 70 win team with the Cards and Brewers losing their power bats. So we trade all of our tradable assets this year for prospects and push our next winning back for 2 more years (assuming that all our our prospects become stars which isn't likely). For all of you that don't want to overpay for some overpriced FA, just realize that Theo is going to have to make Soriano-type contract offers to FAs next year. My expectations of Theo were that he would field a decent team in 2012 followed by a consistent contender in 2013 and beyond. There would be 1000 pages ripping Hendry if he did this little by now.

 

I still find this way of thinking very entertaining. We didn't need to bring Theo and company in to sign the most expensive of free agents. Anybody can do that.

 

They brought him in to start building an entire organization that had been torn down through years of bad choices. That work sometimes doesn't look real exciting or create the headlines some need to feel satisfied. But they are doing their thing, and I trust them 100 percent.

 

You can rebuild an organization without punting on an entire year by putting out a roster that looks like crap.

 

 

You can also rebuild a organization by not spending willy nilly on a uproven player or giving albeit market value but way too long in contract length.

[Sammy Sofa]

Oh, you silly billies.