Re: New GM/Cubs Future News Articles

[ScrubMD]

Ricketts needs to put a stop to these childish games. He just needs to walk into the meeting room using a hunting knife to eat his apple and say, "You assholes have been pantsing yourselves and dipping your nutsacks into kerosene for a week. You either take Casey Coleman and be happy about it or I'll provide you with the candle to squat on and sign my second choice."

 

Mic drop and out.

 

Then the Cubs win the world series...this year.

[Magnetic Curses]

if nothing gets done, the league will step in and mediate and dictate what the compensation will be. this will get done.

[BosRedSox5]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

[Guest]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

There is already a deal in place. Cash is exchanging hands.

[Vinestal]

I still believe that the deal will get done and Theo will be here soon.

 

However, a quick question: Has Friedman extended with Tampa yet or would he still be a possibility?

 

Friedman works without a contract. Theoretcally possible but is rumored to want to go to Houston is he leaves TB.

Actually he's publicly stated he doesn't have interest in the Houston job, someone wrote a piece recently that said people close to Friedman think that the only job outside of Tampa that might interest him is the Cubs job. The reason he was rumored to go to Houston was because his father was part of a group that had the possibility of buying the team, that is no longer the case.

 

Do you have a link to that? I'd be curious to read that since I was seeing talk of the Houston theory as recent as yesterday.

 

 

I cant seem to find that article now, so maybe your right and that ownership group that includes his father is still in play. Could have swore I read that that particular group had fallen out of contention.

[Derwood]

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

The Cubs don't have to budge an inch. They can easily walk away and leave Boston in a lurch (PR nightmare, pissed off Epstein, etc.) As has been said before, the Cubs have options, while the Red Sox have nothing but a headache

[Banedon]

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

Cash a lesser prospect isn't nothing. It's just not what Boston wants. And why is getting another GM so unrealistic? Getting Theo was pretty damn unrealistic about a month ago.

[Sammy Sofa]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

There is already a deal in place. Cash is exchanging hands.

 

The Cubs also seem to be willing to give up prospects in addition to the cash; just not their top prospects.

[Guest]

Boston guy:

http://blog.timesunion.com/mdtobe/files/2011/08/fingers-in-ears.jpg

[Sammy Sofa]

I still believe that the deal will get done and Theo will be here soon.

 

However, a quick question: Has Friedman extended with Tampa yet or would he still be a possibility?

 

Friedman works without a contract. Theoretcally possible but is rumored to want to go to Houston is he leaves TB.

Actually he's publicly stated he doesn't have interest in the Houston job, someone wrote a piece recently that said people close to Friedman think that the only job outside of Tampa that might interest him is the Cubs job. The reason he was rumored to go to Houston was because his father was part of a group that had the possibility of buying the team, that is no longer the case.

 

Do you have a link to that? I'd be curious to read that since I was seeing talk of the Houston theory as recent as yesterday.

 

 

I cant seem to find that article now, so maybe your right and that ownership group that includes his father is still in play. Could have swore I read that that particular group had fallen out of contention.

 

That could very well be the case. What I was reading was little more than blog speculation.

[mookie]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

Sure thing on the players in bold. I believe Guyer is a Ray. You can throw McNutt and Simpson in same category as Brett Jackson.

Edited October 15, 2011 by mookie

[ParadigmShift]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

 

The thing is, we could just hire a Theo approved GM, like Byrnes, and wait until next offseason to get Theo for nothing. It's certainly a better option than depleting a farm system we desperately need to keep as strong as possible.

[Guest]

btw - you are more than welcome to a package of Dolis & Simpson if you want them.

[Magnetic Curses]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

as i've said, if negotiations stall, the league will intervene and tell boston who they are getting. and based on virtually no precedent for a GM accepting a promotion with another franchise, it won't be much.

[Guest]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

Guyer is part of the Tampa Bay organization, he went in the Garza trade. You can have Simpson (you don't want him). Dolis is the type of prospects I'd expect to eventually lose - a top 20 prospect with a nice ceiling.

[Guest]

This we can agree on. As far as precedent is concerned, it is about to get established. I will put my personal team feelings aside when saying the precedent is most likely going to fall shorter than what Red Sox fans want and a tad higher than Cub fans are willing to part with. Brett Jackson won't be in a Red Sox uniform.

 

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

Sure thing on the players in bold. I believe Guyer is a Ray. You can throw McNutt and Simpson in same category as Brett Jackson.

 

Why would you prefer keeping Simpson over Szczur?

[Guest]

 

as i've said, if negotiations stall, the league will intervene and tell boston who they are getting. and based on virtually no precedent for a GM accepting a promotion with another franchise, it won't be much.

 

 

wat?

[DonnieD]

Brett Jackson might be an overreach because he's major league ready and seems to be fairly low risk. He does seem ideally suited to Fenway's spacious RF. As you said the precedent is going to be established, but I believe it will, and should be higher than compensation packages we've seen for field managers. I just don't understand the perspective of Cubs fans that Theo shouldn't be worth some serious on field talent. Friedman is no sure thing to leave Tampa Bay (he works on a handshake agreement with the Rays), Cashman is staying with the Yankees and the only other candidates seem to be unproven.

 

Fact is, the Cubs have Theo in hand if only they can work out a deal. None of the other candidates are a sure thing, if the Cubs play ball with a fair deal Theo is a sure thing. He's reportedly already agreed to a contract.

 

It could be argued that Epstein is the perfect choice for what the Cubs want. Someone with experience in big markets, someone who has shown the ability to work the draft and someone who has experience building a winner. For all his greatness Andrew Friedman does not have Epstein's experience with a big budget. There's a certain knack to running a "100 million dollar player development machine." As Epstein once referred to his goals for Boston's farm system.

 

If Jackson was an untouchable then what about Vitters, Szczur, McNutt, Simpson, Dolis or Guyer? Shouldn't they be part of the conversation in regards to compensation? I can see where the Cubs would be reluctant to give up MLB ready talent but the guys in the lower minors might be easier to replace and their youth makes them unknown quantities.

 

The feeling I've been getting (from news reports and this forum) are that the Cubs should give up nothing for a top executive and they could simply wait and snag someone else. Both cases seem incredibly unrealistic IMO.

 

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't get some on field talent, and some of the names you mentioned would be acceptable. Mostly I've seen people not want to give up Castro, Garza, Cashner, Jackson, & maybe Szczur & McNutt.

 

What I'd like to add as far as compensation precendents, is that (outside of intelligent fans) I think the consensus is that field managers are worth more than general managers not the other way around. Just look at their salaries. Also, the Rays could afford to give up Winn because he was going to be too expensive for them that year anyway. And as has been mentioned Oakland was not going to get Youkilis, and the Marlins sent more talent than necessary to make the tampering case go away.

 

Part of the compensation package for Theo is already done and that is the $3.5 M lump sum payment that the Cubs are going to be responsible for, so what additional compensation should be necessary? I think one prospect in the #8 - 12 range should be suffucient.

[Magnetic Curses]

huh

[El Duderino]

is Bobby Brownlie still around? have at him, sox.

[Derwood]

is Bobby Brownlie still around? have at him, sox.

 

Brownlie, Pawelek and Blasko

[El Duderino]

is Bobby Brownlie still around? have at him, sox.

 

Brownlie, Pawelek and Blasko

 

maybe sisco or dope

[Banedon]

nickcafardo Nick Cafardo

Talks on Theo compensation have not progressed according to source.

5 minutes ago

[El Duderino]

no way anything happens until monday

[mookie]

 

Why would you prefer keeping Simpson over Szczur?

 

I am simply not ready to write him off yet. I know I am in the minority on this one.