Re: Darvish

[SweetZombieJesus]

This is moot point for the time being. Is there a rule that team like let's say the pirates offering huge posting fee to guy for the express reason of trading him off for prospects?

 

Let's say the yanks don't want to pay Darvish (or hypothetical japanese player) 60+ mill

 

Let's say the afforementioned pirates win the posting then trade (Darvish/HJP) to the yanks for Montero, Banuelos and Williams. Would that be legal?

[USSoccer]

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.

 

I was never sold on Darvish, but the point I'm making is the larger one of this offseason being a giant crap sandwich. We're going to replace Aramis with something called an Ian Stewart, we have no 1B, and haven't upgraded anything other than replacing actual Fukudome with cheaper, just as good probably Fukudome.

[Backtobanks]

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?

 

Look at the roster as it stands now (without signing a big FA) and tell me management isn't throwing away 2012.

 

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.

 

There's no doubt Theo can turn this into a winning organization, but the question is when will it happen. If he's going to take 3 more years, then let me be the first to say Theo is a failure. Hendry wasn't the best GM, but he did get 3 postseason appearances and might have had more without tons of injuries.

[Guest]

I'm not bothered by them losing out on Darvish. I don't think he's worth 50m + whatever X six years.

 

The conspiracy theorist in me see the strategy of not making competitive offers as a ploy to get the city to cave for the money it costs to redo Wrigley.

[Exile on Waveland]

Ahahaha . . .

 

The Cubs shouldn't sign a twenty-seven year old because he's a little fat. Instead, they should sign a thirty-one year old ex-junkie (and we're not talking pot or pain killers or something either). Oh yeah, and the ex-junkie likely won't even hit the free agency market.

[Sammy Sofa]

There's no doubt Theo can turn this into a winning organization, but the question is when will it happen. If he's going to take 3 more years, then let me be the first to say Theo is a failure.

 

Nonsense. If in 3 years the Cubs have a good team out that looks to be in it for the long haul it's not a failure. My gripe is the potential awfulness we have to witness to get to that point if they're trying to do it on the cheap.

[treebird]

There's no doubt Theo can turn this into a winning organization, but the question is when will it happen. If he's going to take 3 more years, then let me be the first to say Theo is a failure.

 

Nonsense. If in 3 years the Cubs have a good team out that looks to be in it for the long haul it's not a failure. My gripe is the potential awfulness we have to witness to get to that point if they're trying to do it on the cheap.

 

theo wouldn't be a failure under those circumstances, but we'd be giving him an awful low bar to hop over. i mean, how many guys have gotten a chance to do things that way? to have easily top-5 resources in the league, but don't worry about losing 100 games over and over while you rebuild for three straight seasons?

[Sammy Sofa]

There's no doubt Theo can turn this into a winning organization, but the question is when will it happen. If he's going to take 3 more years, then let me be the first to say Theo is a failure.

 

Nonsense. If in 3 years the Cubs have a good team out that looks to be in it for the long haul it's not a failure. My gripe is the potential awfulness we have to witness to get to that point if they're trying to do it on the cheap.

 

theo wouldn't be a failure under those circumstances, but we'd be giving him an awful low bar to hop over. i mean, how many guys have gotten a chance to do things that way? to have easily top-5 resources in the league, but don't worry about losing 100 games over and over while you rebuild for three straight seasons?

 

Hey, I'm totally agreed. Bottoming out intentionally to fulfill this asinine notion of building teams "the right way" seems like a waste of time. It's one thing if the money isn't there; it's another if they're just not using it.

[mul21]

This is moot point for the time being. Is there a rule that team like let's say the pirates offering huge posting fee to guy for the express reason of trading him off for prospects?

 

Let's say the yanks don't want to pay Darvish (or hypothetical japanese player) 60+ mill

 

Let's say the afforementioned pirates win the posting then trade (Darvish/HJP) to the yanks for Montero, Banuelos and Williams. Would that be legal?

 

Well, newly signed FAs can't be traded until June 15 or July 1 or whatever, so that would be a problem. But I have no idea if they could trade his rights before they signed him. I would imagine there has to be something in the agreement on posting players between the NPB and MLB that would keep a team from doing that.

[CubColtPacer]

There's no doubt Theo can turn this into a winning organization, but the question is when will it happen. If he's going to take 3 more years, then let me be the first to say Theo is a failure.

 

Nonsense. If in 3 years the Cubs have a good team out that looks to be in it for the long haul it's not a failure. My gripe is the potential awfulness we have to witness to get to that point if they're trying to do it on the cheap.

 

theo wouldn't be a failure under those circumstances, but we'd be giving him an awful low bar to hop over. i mean, how many guys have gotten a chance to do things that way? to have easily top-5 resources in the league, but don't worry about losing 100 games over and over while you rebuild for three straight seasons?

 

Hey, I'm totally agreed. Bottoming out intentionally to fulfill this asinine notion of building teams "the right way" seems like a waste of time. It's one thing if the money isn't there; it's another if they're just not using it.

 

They're almost certainly using it one way or the other. The question is if they are using it on major league payroll or not. I doubt that Theo is just going to leave 30 million of his budget unspent.

[davell]

Ahahaha . . .

 

The Cubs shouldn't sign a twenty-seven year old because he's a little fat. Instead, they should sign a thirty-one year old ex-junkie (and we're not talking pot or pain killers or something either). Oh yeah, and the ex-junkie likely won't even hit the free agency market.

I was asked who we COULD spend money on in 2013. BASED ON A SCENARIO I had mentioned. As one of the biggest bats avaialable that offseason, I mentioned him, proceeded to say he wouldn't hit the market, followed by saying he had tons of red flags, followed by saying if I'm signing a bat from that class, it'd probably be Upton or maybe Ethier, but we'd probably have to trade for a bat because the class is so weak. What a ringing endorsment for Josh Hamilton I gave!

[Sammy Sofa]

Ahahaha . . .

 

The Cubs shouldn't sign a twenty-seven year old because he's a little fat. Instead, they should sign a thirty-one year old ex-junkie (and we're not talking pot or pain killers or something either). Oh yeah, and the ex-junkie likely won't even hit the free agency market.

I was asked who we COULD spend money on in 2013. BASED ON A SCENARIO I had mentioned. As one of the biggest bats avaialable that offseason, I mentioned him, proceeded to say he wouldn't hit the market, followed by saying he had tons of red flags, followed by saying if I'm signing a bat from that class, it'd probably be Upton or maybe Ethier, but we'd probably have to trade for a bat because the class is so weak. What a ringing endorsment for Josh Hamilton I gave!

 

Ethier? Jesus Christ.

[Sammy Sofa]

There's no doubt Theo can turn this into a winning organization, but the question is when will it happen. If he's going to take 3 more years, then let me be the first to say Theo is a failure.

 

Nonsense. If in 3 years the Cubs have a good team out that looks to be in it for the long haul it's not a failure. My gripe is the potential awfulness we have to witness to get to that point if they're trying to do it on the cheap.

 

theo wouldn't be a failure under those circumstances, but we'd be giving him an awful low bar to hop over. i mean, how many guys have gotten a chance to do things that way? to have easily top-5 resources in the league, but don't worry about losing 100 games over and over while you rebuild for three straight seasons?

 

Hey, I'm totally agreed. Bottoming out intentionally to fulfill this asinine notion of building teams "the right way" seems like a waste of time. It's one thing if the money isn't there; it's another if they're just not using it.

 

They're almost certainly using it one way or the other. The question is if they are using it on major league payroll or not. I doubt that Theo is just going to leave 30 million of his budget unspent.

 

If they're not using it that's coming from Ricketts, not Theo.

[CubColtPacer]

 

Hey, I'm totally agreed. Bottoming out intentionally to fulfill this asinine notion of building teams "the right way" seems like a waste of time. It's one thing if the money isn't there; it's another if they're just not using it.

 

They're almost certainly using it one way or the other. The question is if they are using it on major league payroll or not. I doubt that Theo is just going to leave 30 million of his budget unspent.

 

If they're not using it that's coming from Ricketts, not Theo.

 

Well, that depends on whether you believe Ricketts when he repeatedly has said he's going to spend every dollar in revenue back on the team and that the overall baseball budget he's given to Theo is about the same as last year. It's unlikely IMO that he is just lying about both.

[bukie]

A question for those who are upset about the offseason moves to this point: what would you have done differently? Go 10/275 for Pujols? Anticipated a posting bid higher than $52M for Darvish? Spent the money on a 3 year deal for Ramirez?

[Little Slide Rooter]

Now if "building the team te right way" leads to 2-3 unwatchable seasons which leads to an exponentially increasing amount of empty seats and lost revenue how long before the Ricketts say [expletive] it we need star power and overpay for a handfull of free agents and next thing you know we're right back where we are now?

 

Building the team the right way should start now, meaning those young players who can help us win now and in the future need to start showing up.

[Little Slide Rooter]

A question for those who are upset about the offseason moves to this point: what would you have done differently? Go 10/275 for Pujols? Anticipated a posting bid higher than $52M for Darvish? Spent the money on a 3 year deal for Ramirez?

 

No to Pujols, no to Ramirez, maybe to Darvish.

[davell]

Ahahaha . . .

 

The Cubs shouldn't sign a twenty-seven year old because he's a little fat. Instead, they should sign a thirty-one year old ex-junkie (and we're not talking pot or pain killers or something either). Oh yeah, and the ex-junkie likely won't even hit the free agency market.

I was asked who we COULD spend money on in 2013. BASED ON A SCENARIO I had mentioned. As one of the biggest bats avaialable that offseason, I mentioned him, proceeded to say he wouldn't hit the market, followed by saying he had tons of red flags, followed by saying if I'm signing a bat from that class, it'd probably be Upton or maybe Ethier, but we'd probably have to trade for a bat because the class is so weak. What a ringing endorsment for Josh Hamilton I gave!

 

Ethier? Jesus Christ.

What's wrong with Ethier, other than he's evidently a prick towards some of his current teammates? He played hurt most of this past season and his 3 previous ones he had OPS'S of .885, .869, and .857. He'd be 31 at that point and could probably be had on a 3 or 4 year deal. I don't see a problem with him. He's not great defensively? That's not enough to bother me about him.

[shnsajax]

If we sign Fielder and one of the Cubans this offseason would be a major success to me. Long ways to go but possible.

[USSoccer]

What's wrong with Ethier, other than he's evidently a prick towards some of his current teammates? He played hurt most of this past season and his 3 previous ones he had OPS'S of .885, .869, and .857. He'd be 31 at that point and could probably be had on a 3 or 4 year deal. I don't see a problem with him. He's not great defensively? That's not enough to bother me about him.

 

So you'd be okay giving a 31 year old Ethier a 4 year deal?

[questionmarkgrace]

A question for those who are upset about the offseason moves to this point: what would you have done differently? Go 10/275 for Pujols? Anticipated a posting bid higher than $52M for Darvish? Spent the money on a 3 year deal for Ramirez?

 

I dont think anyone had any illusions that Darvish would go for a higher bid than Matsuzaka. To bid 20 million dollars to me seems like a cheap pr move. So they can say 'well we bid on darvish.'

 

My gripe is the potential awfulness we have to witness to get to that point if they're trying to do it on the cheap.

 

My feelings exactly. As is, this is a team where I will probably just look at the box scores and watch on tv very occasionally. I certainly will not attend any games. Not that I thought this would be the year we would win anyways but aside from castro there wont be much to watch. And if we have to watch something like this for a couple of years I will be really disappointed.

 

While my optimism is diminishing with this free agent class I'm still holding out hope that we can make some shrewd moves such as pry away kendry morales from the angels lure his fellow cuban national Cespedes and sign a pitcher maybe edwin jackson. That is a team I would certainly go watch and when all is said and done we wouldnt have given out any 100 million dollar contracts and could still compete for the playoffs.

[bukie]

A question for those who are upset about the offseason moves to this point: what would you have done differently? Go 10/275 for Pujols? Anticipated a posting bid higher than $52M for Darvish? Spent the money on a 3 year deal for Ramirez?

 

I dont think anyone had any illusions that Darvish would go for a higher bid than Matsuzaka. To bid 20 million dollars to me seems like a cheap pr move. So they can say 'well we bid on darvish.'

 

Nobody knows what the Cubs bid on Darvish. It wasn't the highest bid, so even Darvish's Japanese team doesn't know. If anyone did know, it wouldn't be a New York columnist that mentions something on Twitter off the cuff.

[Sammy Sofa]

Ahahaha . . .

 

The Cubs shouldn't sign a twenty-seven year old because he's a little fat. Instead, they should sign a thirty-one year old ex-junkie (and we're not talking pot or pain killers or something either). Oh yeah, and the ex-junkie likely won't even hit the free agency market.

I was asked who we COULD spend money on in 2013. BASED ON A SCENARIO I had mentioned. As one of the biggest bats avaialable that offseason, I mentioned him, proceeded to say he wouldn't hit the market, followed by saying he had tons of red flags, followed by saying if I'm signing a bat from that class, it'd probably be Upton or maybe Ethier, but we'd probably have to trade for a bat because the class is so weak. What a ringing endorsment for Josh Hamilton I gave!

 

Ethier? Jesus Christ.

What's wrong with Ethier, other than he's evidently a prick towards some of his current teammates? He played hurt most of this past season and his 3 previous ones he had OPS'S of .885, .869, and .857. He'd be 31 at that point and could probably be had on a 3 or 4 year deal. I don't see a problem with him. He's not great defensively? That's not enough to bother me about him.

 

Too old, too overrated, too expensive.

[Sammy Sofa]

What's wrong with Ethier, other than he's evidently a prick towards some of his current teammates? He played hurt most of this past season and his 3 previous ones he had OPS'S of .885, .869, and .857. He'd be 31 at that point and could probably be had on a 3 or 4 year deal. I don't see a problem with him. He's not great defensively? That's not enough to bother me about him.

 

So you'd be okay giving a 31 year old Ethier a 4 year deal?

 

Dude, you don't understand; HE'S NOT FAT.

[Rob]

Ahahaha . . .

 

The Cubs shouldn't sign a twenty-seven year old because he's a little fat. Instead, they should sign a thirty-one year old ex-junkie (and we're not talking pot or pain killers or something either). Oh yeah, and the ex-junkie likely won't even hit the free agency market.

I was asked who we COULD spend money on in 2013. BASED ON A SCENARIO I had mentioned. As one of the biggest bats avaialable that offseason, I mentioned him, proceeded to say he wouldn't hit the market, followed by saying he had tons of red flags, followed by saying if I'm signing a bat from that class, it'd probably be Upton or maybe Ethier, but we'd probably have to trade for a bat because the class is so weak. What a ringing endorsment for Josh Hamilton I gave!

 

Ethier? Jesus Christ.

What's wrong with Ethier, other than he's evidently a prick towards some of his current teammates? He played hurt most of this past season and his 3 previous ones he had OPS'S of .885, .869, and .857. He'd be 31 at that point and could probably be had on a 3 or 4 year deal. I don't see a problem with him. He's not great defensively? That's not enough to bother me about him.

 

"Not that great defensively" is an understatement. He's abysmal in the field.

 

Last year he had a huge dropoff in power and the only reason his overall numbers didn't look terribly out of the ordinary was a BABIP of .348. I'd suspect that's the start of his decline. For a player that was never much more than a 3.0 WAR guy anyways, I don't want him for anywhere near what he's gonna get paid.

 

That fun old game again. Figure out the mystery early 30's outfielders based off their WAR every year since 2006 (when Ethier broke into the league).

 

A: 2.4, 2.0, 3.5, 2.8, 2.2, 2.9 Total - 15.8

B: 4.4, 1.9, 2.5, 3.7, 2.6, 2.2 Total - 17.3

C: 1.0, 4.4, 1.6, 1.5, 3.3, 2.2 Total - 14.0

 

 

A: Andre Ethier, B: David DeJesus, C: Coco Crisp. And just FYI, this list leaves off 4+ WAR seasons by DeJesus and Crisp in 2005

 

 

There are free agent outfielders every year with comparable or better value than Ethier who will only come at a fraction of the cost. You want to be able to afford to take risks on guys like Fielder and Darvish? We do that by not wasting money elsewhere.