Re: New GM/Cubs Future News Articles

[Scotti]

I just don't buy that any talks re: Hoyer are to bring him here with Theo.

 

We're having enough trouble as it is getting compensation lined up for one guy. We're gonna look for an active GM to make a lateral move or take a demotion to work under Theo?

 

I don't get the "demotion" part of that. He'd be a GM of a BIG BUDGET team. Right now SD is a small budget team without any real prospects of changing that (even if they win).

 

And Chicago IS going to win a WS at some point. If he were the GM when that went down then his career prospects would be that much brighter. He already was a part of Boston's change but he wasn't GM there. Cub GM under like-minded Theo/Ricketts is much better than VP/GM of a low-budget gig.

[Scotti]

Theo would be influencing most signings. As President of Baseball Operations he wouldn't be worried about Wrigley, the City crap, the Triangle Building, etc. He would oversee changes on the field, changes in player development, changes in scouting, changes in medical rehab and injury prevention, etc. That is TOO much to expect from a GM.

 

Through no fault of your own, really, you're wayyyyy behind in the discussion making these types of points. Get with it. We're arguing about much more important crap now.

 

Huh?

 

 

It was a sort of smart ass way of me telling you we went over stuff like that back in August.

 

I guess I saw the smart and missed the ass.

[Scotti]

Clearly the disconnect here lies in the fact that some of us view the level of the job based on the title and the level thereof and some of us weigh the job description/responsibilities more heavily.

 

And it's not irrelevant because of the precedent. For lateral moves, you have stuff like Randy Winn or the two Florida prospects going back in return. For promotions, you have Andy MacPhail going for a random A baller. Plus in this case you have the Cubs taking on a significant financial obligation for Theo that they don't have to.

 

Bingo.

[Guest]

I just don't buy that any talks re: Hoyer are to bring him here with Theo.

 

We're having enough trouble as it is getting compensation lined up for one guy. We're gonna look for an active GM to make a lateral move or take a demotion to work under Theo?

 

I don't get the "demotion" part of that. He'd be a GM of a BIG BUDGET team. Right now SD is a small budget team without any real prospects of changing that (even if they win).

 

And Chicago IS going to win a WS at some point. If he were the GM when that went down then his career prospects would be that much brighter. He already was a part of Boston's change but he wasn't GM there. Cub GM under like-minded Theo/Ricketts is much better than VP/GM of a low-budget gig.

 

I'm saying it's either a lateral move (he's the GM under Theo) or a "demotion" if Theo has a President/GM hybrid title, like we all expected/hoped up until now.

[treebird]

You know all these Theo related screen names are going to be hard to differentiate when it comes time to committing to memory what to make fun of people for.

 

ehhhh, i see all of them as the same so far and i am no worse for it

[javy knows my name]

You know all these Theo related screen names are going to be hard to differentiate when it comes time to committing to memory what to make fun of people for.

 

ehhhh, i see all of them as the same so far and i am no worse for it

 

Yep. They're all Theotards to me.

[Cubfanintheknow]

Clearly the disconnect here lies in the fact that some of us view the level of the job based on the title and the level thereof and some of us weigh the job description/responsibilities more heavily.

 

And it's not irrelevant because of the precedent. For lateral moves, you have stuff like Randy Winn or the two Florida prospects going back in return. For promotions, you have Andy MacPhail going for a random A baller. Plus in this case you have the Cubs taking on a significant financial obligation for Theo that they don't have to.

 

Bingo.

 

Actually, precedents are irrelevant until a mediator steps in. Of course Boston is going to ask for the moon, regardless of any promotion Epstein may be getting. And of course the Cubs are going to compensate for what they deem is fair value, since Epstein is under contract with Boston for another year. Both sides are seeing that "fair value" quite differently.

 

Look at it this way: Seattle didn't take Randy Winn for Lou Piniella because of any precedent--they took him because they felt it was a fair trade. The Twins didn't take a Low A pitcher because of precedent, either. They did what they felt was in their best interests.

 

Right now, the two sides are attempting to reach this fair value on their own. But if they can't, either Boston walks away (highly unlikely), the Cubs walk away (also highly unlikely) or a mediator steps in (which is becoming increasingly likely, though both sides would have to agree to a mediator AND abide by the decision that mediator comes to).

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I have a hard time seeing this ever getting to a mediator. If one side sees an outcome of unacceptable (losing a McNutt, not getting at least a McNutt, whatever), they aren't going to put it in a mediator's hands.

[ctcf]

FWIW - Josh Vitters has now been out of the lineup for the last 3 games in the AFL after going 4-5 on Friday the 14th. Probably nothing, but just throwing that out there.

[SouthSideRyan]

FWIW - Josh Vitters has now been out of the lineup for the last 3 games in the AFL after going 4-5 on Friday the 14th. Probably nothing, but just throwing that out there.

 

Thanks Kap!

[treebird]

if we end up losing control and busting, i really hope mcnutt doesn't stain the carpet

[treebird]

if we end up losing control and busting, i really hope mcnutt doesn't stain the carpet

 

i meant to say "legacy of theo epstein" there instead of carpet. it doesn't make any sense if it says carpet.

[ctcf]

FWIW - Josh Vitters has now been out of the lineup for the last 3 games in the AFL after going 4-5 on Friday the 14th. Probably nothing, but just throwing that out there.

 

Thanks Kap!

 

I believe I'm now supposed to yell at you on twitter or something.

[Guest]

Mully couldn't stop with the McNutt jokes this morning.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's probably just the no-news dementia setting in, but I'm beginning to entertain the possibility that this doesn't get done.

 

Epstein is going to cost the Cubs $18.5 million over five years. That's, what, $13 million or so over the imaginary replacement executive.

 

That's already a pretty costly outlay. We talked about this earlier in the thread, and I think the value of a guy like McNutt is something like $12 million (well, actually I think it's quite a bit higher, but for the sake of simplicity).

 

So if the Red Sox genuinely believe that McNutt is the absolute lowest they can go, then they are asking the Cubs to value Epstein at $25 million over a no-strings-attached replacement. I don't think they can do that. We're definitely looking at either a wait-a-year or a walk-away scenario, depending on how willing Epstein is to wait a year.

 

So the question is, are the Red Sox serious about McNutt being the sticking point. I would normally say no, but the more we learn about the Red Sox organization, the less faith I have in their rationality or their ability to serve self-interest when the chance to screw over an outgoing employee is involved.

Edited October 18, 2011 by Hairyducked Idiot

[javy knows my name]

if we end up losing control and busting, i really hope mcnutt doesn't stain the carpet

 

i meant to say "legacy of theo epstein" there instead of carpet. it doesn't make any sense if it says carpet.

 

hahahaha

[Little Slide Rooter]

It's probably just the no-news dementia setting in, but I'm beginning to entertain the possibility that this doesn't get done.

 

 

Even the likes of Wittenmyer and Levine won't entertain the possibility that it won't get done.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's probably just the no-news dementia setting in, but I'm beginning to entertain the possibility that this doesn't get done.

 

 

Even the likes of Wittenmyer and Levine won't entertain the possibility that it won't get done.

 

Yeah, I just keep coming back to "The Red Sox can't really be that stupid."

 

The Cubs are already paying millions of extra dollars for Epstein instead of going with a lesser-known candidate. If the Red Sox drive the price of Epstein to the point that the Cubs walk away, not only do they get nothing, but they actually lose quite a bit of cash. They can't be that stupid, can they?

[CyHawk_Cub]

I agree w/ those who opine McNutt isn't what's holding this up. BoSox must be demanding much more. Once I got over my reactionary "don't give those fucks anything", I now agree wholeheartedly that IF McNutt is what the BoSox want, Ricketts can't (& wouldn't) let that be the roadblock.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I agree w/ those who opine McNutt isn't what's holding this up. BoSox must be demanding much more. Once I got over my reactionary "don't give those [expletive] anything", I now agree wholeheartedly that IF McNutt is what the BoSox want, Ricketts can't (& wouldn't) let that be the roadblock.

 

He can and he must. McNutt is better than you (or I, before this thread started) are giving him credit for.

 

Epstein isn't so much better than the next candidate in line that he's worth a massive contract *and* a major prospect.

[Guest]

How in the blue he'll is McNutt worth $12,000,000? he hasn't pitched above high A. I'm wonder how many people even knew who he was before this thread started. He's a good prospect, but let's no go crazy.

[Guest]

How in the blue he'll is McNutt worth $12,000,000? he hasn't pitched above high A. I'm wonder how many people even knew who he was before this thread started. He's a good prospect, but let's no go crazy.

 

I'm guessing it's gotta do something with all of the very cheap cost controlled years at whatever he thinks the likely level of production would be, with both the likelihood of success and the likelihood of failure being factored in.

 

 

I have little idea of how one would calculate that, though.

Edited October 18, 2011 by David

[SouthSideRyan]

How in the blue he'll is McNutt worth $12,000,000? he hasn't pitched above high A. I'm wonder how many people even knew who he was before this thread started. He's a good prospect, but let's no go crazy.

 

There's the part where he pitched above high A all of 2011.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

How in the blue he'll is McNutt worth $12,000,000? he hasn't pitched above high A. I'm wonder how many people even knew who he was before this thread started. He's a good prospect, but let's no go crazy.

 

First, incorrect, he was at AA at the end of last season and this season.

 

Second, imagine he becomes an average MLB pitcher. How much is he worth to the team over his six years of team control, where he would most certainly be massively underpaid?

 

Okay, now multiply that value by the odds of him reaching it.

 

What number do you come up with?

[Little Slide Rooter]

It's probably just the no-news dementia setting in, but I'm beginning to entertain the possibility that this doesn't get done.

 

 

Even the likes of Wittenmyer and Levine won't entertain the possibility that it won't get done.

 

Yeah, I just keep coming back to "The Red Sox can't really be that stupid."

 

The Cubs are already paying millions of extra dollars for Epstein instead of going with a lesser-known candidate. If the Red Sox drive the price of Epstein to the point that the Cubs walk away, not only do they get nothing, but they actually lose quite a bit of cash. They can't be that stupid, can they?

 

I suppose the ultimate irony would be if this did fall through and Theo spends 2012 in limbo, and next year the Yankees promote Brian Cashman and hire Theo as their GM. I'm thinking that would make Henry and Luccino wish that they hadn't jerked him around.