Re: New GM/Cubs Future News Articles

[Guest]

My guess is that if we're hearing about a market inefficiency in an SI piece, several teams have already gotten the biggest gains there are out of it, and several more teams are trying to catch up.

 

That's what I thought was kind of funny. At the beginning of the article Theo talks about how he couldn't believe Beane was allowing Michael Lewis to write that book... then he's sort of doing the same thing in this piece on a much smaller scale.

[wvcbxl]

your 2012 cubs...matt garza and no one else?

 

I noticed Grabow and Hill were missing on that list. :-&

Hill is listed in the "Free-Swingers" list.

 

My bad - must be the protective "preserving sanity" filter in my mind that refuses to acknowledge his existence on the roster. :wink:

[Guest]

I don't really buy the notion that better athletes equal better durability.

 

If better athletes simply means better conditioned, I do.

 

If it simply means naturally gifted with speed/strength/what have you, I don't.

[SouthSideRyan]

More SoSH eavesdropping fun:

 

 

 

Apologies if this was picked up elsewhere (I don't have the time to go back into the thread), but I'm beginning to lose sympathy for Theo. He's under contract; he wants to walk away from a mess he contributed to, after promising he'd help clean it up in 2012; he wants to take a significant part of the RS infrastructure with him; and either he or the people he wants to work for aren't budging on compensation. Screw him and screw the Cubs. Release a public statement dripping with crocodile tears, announcing with great regret the Cubs have failed to consider appropriate compensation for taking a valued employee away, talks have ended and Theo's friends in the organization await his return to Fenway to fulfill his contract. If he doesn't show, suspend him. Work closely with the lawyers, and plan every step.

 

 

I notice the frustration coming mostly from one side in this, imo, which tells me exactly which fan base is realistically assessing the situation and which one is reading their own team's metaphorical press releases.

 

I imagine the first 2 pages of the BTF thread comes from almost exclusively SOSH posters. If it wasn't so annoying to read, it'd be hilarious.

[KingCubsFan]

Would it break my heart to give up McNutt for Theo? No.

 

Is there any reason we should have to give up McNutt? Also no.

 

Trading McNutt for Theo is like giving Glendon Rusch 2 years and 5 mil. We could get him for a lot less, so why nickel and dime ourselves to death?

If the reports are true, it's not just Epstein we're getting, though. We'd also be taking 3 or 4 key employees. Still not a reason to give up our best pitching prospect, but somewhat understandable. It's not like McNutt is Matt Moore or Shelby Miller.

[Guest]

Would it break my heart to give up McNutt for Theo? No.

 

Is there any reason we should have to give up McNutt? Also no.

 

Trading McNutt for Theo is like giving Glendon Rusch 2 years and 5 mil. We could get him for a lot less, so why nickel and dime ourselves to death?

 

 

If it literally would allow Theo to pilfer whatever 5 or 6 guys he wants, sure. I think that'd be a great help to him. Otherwise, no way in hell.

[Rob]

Would it break my heart to give up McNutt for Theo? No.

 

Is there any reason we should have to give up McNutt? Also no.

 

Trading McNutt for Theo is like giving Glendon Rusch 2 years and 5 mil. We could get him for a lot less, so why nickel and dime ourselves to death?

 

 

If it literally would allow Theo to pilfer whatever 5 or 6 guys he wants, sure. I think that'd be a great help to him. Otherwise, no way in hell.

 

Yeah, bringing along important guys from the front office obviously changes the equation. But if the Red Sox are sticking to their guns with zero guys coming with, we shouldn't send a McNutt back.

[SouthSideRyan]

Would it break my heart to give up McNutt for Theo? No.

 

Is there any reason we should have to give up McNutt? Also no.

 

Trading McNutt for Theo is like giving Glendon Rusch 2 years and 5 mil. We could get him for a lot less, so why nickel and dime ourselves to death?

 

 

If it literally would allow Theo to pilfer whatever 5 or 6 guys he wants, sure. I think that'd be a great help to him. Otherwise, no way in hell.

 

Yeah, bringing along important guys from the front office obviously changes the equation. But if the Red Sox are sticking to their guns with zero guys coming with, we shouldn't send a McNutt back.

 

If we're getting zero guys with Theo, we shouldn't send them any players at all.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Too much is being read into how long this is taking.

 

This thing has a ridiculous number of moving parts. Just trying to piece together what's going on from the reports, Epstein has a list of people he wants to bring with him. So the Cubs have to agree to give up prospects, the Red Sox have to agree to take the prospects, the Red Sox have to agree to let the other personnel go, and the other personnel have to agree to go.

[Guest]

Too much is being read into how long this is taking.

 

This thing has a ridiculous number of moving parts. Just trying to piece together what's going on from the reports, Epstein has a list of people he wants to bring with him. So the Cubs have to agree to give up prospects, the Red Sox have to agree to take the prospects, the Red Sox have to agree to let the other personnel go, and the other personnel have to agree to go.

 

 

And then the league has to deem it all kosher.

 

What a pain in the ass this all is.

[toonsterwu]

If they are getting McNutt, Theo better be bringing some guys with him.

 

I sort of 2nd that. I'm not that against McNutt being moved, although I'm certainly not pleased by it, but if we are giving up a guy with a good ceiling, a guy who might be a top 5-7 prospect in the Sox system, I would hope that Epstein gets to bring at least 1 or 2 of his confidantes.

 

That said, a lot of time to go. I imagine the Cubs will fight that and go with guys a tier or so below that.

[Rob]

I know that with nothing going on today they could announce a deal, but I'd be shocked to hear anything substantial before tomorrow. That was the day that everybody was probably aiming for anyways. It's unrealistic to expect them to move their schedules up a day just because there's no games today.

[Guest]

I know that with nothing going on today they could announce a deal, but I'd be shocked to hear anything substantial before tomorrow. That was the day that everybody was probably aiming for anyways. It's unrealistic to expect them to move their schedules up a day just because there's no games today.

 

 

I just want my damn press conference already. Not because I'm worried about this falling apart, but because I want to hear all the awesome things he says.

[tfarks]

This wait and the subsequent openings of this thread is going to give me carpal tunnel.

[Splendid Splinter]

Would it break my heart to give up McNutt for Theo? No.

 

Is there any reason we should have to give up McNutt? Also no.

 

Trading McNutt for Theo is like giving Glendon Rusch 2 years and 5 mil. We could get him for a lot less, so why nickel and dime ourselves to death?

 

 

If it literally would allow Theo to pilfer whatever 5 or 6 guys he wants, sure. I think that'd be a great help to him. Otherwise, no way in hell.

 

 

Lets say for example... the offer is J Jax/Flaherty plus maybe a "sleeper" prospect (a rumor that was posted on here) for Theo only (or maybe 1 guy can go with him that is down on Theo's list and Red Sox don't care if that guy leaves)....

 

Now lets say if the offer was changed to McNutt/Flaherty plus "sleeper" prospect for Theo and like 3 or 4 (or possibly more) of the guys that ARE on the top of his list... Would you do the trade?

 

IMO, I would do that trade. Theo would have several guys in the Cubs organization right away and wouldn't have to overhaul it in one offseason (heck if he got his guys, he can slowly bring guys in the organization the next 2 years instead of trying to get most of them this offseason). Because of that, Theo can focus on the team and the offseason (FA/trades/etc...) instead of doing everything plus trying to hire guys to be in the organization.

 

McNutt is worth giving up if it means Theo can bring the guys that HE want over to the Cubs.

[Andy]

My guess is that if we're hearing about a market inefficiency in an SI piece, several teams have already gotten the biggest gains there are out of it, and several more teams are trying to catch up.

 

That's what I thought was kind of funny. At the beginning of the article Theo talks about how he couldn't believe Beane was allowing Michael Lewis to write that book... then he's sort of doing the same thing in this piece on a much smaller scale.

I think the difference is that at the time Beane was in the severe minority. By the time Theo did this article, he definitely was not.

[Guest]

My guess is that if we're hearing about a market inefficiency in an SI piece, several teams have already gotten the biggest gains there are out of it, and several more teams are trying to catch up.

 

That's what I thought was kind of funny. At the beginning of the article Theo talks about how he couldn't believe Beane was allowing Michael Lewis to write that book... then he's sort of doing the same thing in this piece on a much smaller scale.

I think the difference is that at the time Beane was in the severe minority. By the time Theo did this article, he definitely was not.

 

 

I'm just referring to revealing a supposed market inefficiency to the world... obviously, Theo wouldn't have said that if he thought any negative consequences would come of it.

[toonsterwu]

The system is a little too pitching-starved, I would hate to see the Cubs lose McNutt. I'm not surprised at all the Sox are trying to buy low on him.

 

It's not as bad as you seem to think on the pitching side. We should have a fairly intriguing trio in the AA rotation next year if McNutt is around (something like McNutt/Rhee/Antigua, with Whitenack possibly coming back late in the year, with maybe Beeler in that A+/AA mix). The AAA rotation could have Struck, Rusin, Coleman, J. Jackson, etceteras, depending on how Rule 5 goes. The real hope pitching wise lies in the lower levels, where we have an excellent crop of young arms with high ceilings with guys like Wells, Maples, Paulino, Peralta, Cruz, Liria, Jensen (if he starts), Kyler Burke, Reed, and a couple others. There's some solid lefty options in the system as well (aforementioned Cruz and Antigua, along with Del Valle, I still like Hicks a bit, and then the average stuff, end of rotation hope guys like Rusin/Raley/Jokisch/Rosscup/Harman).

 

It's not a great pitching system yet, because there aren't many great upper level pieces, but the system as a whole, I wouldn't really call it pitching-starved.

[Guest]

Well, having a book written about you and your processes does a little more to reveal your competitive advantage than "we think we can get an advantage in pitcher health".

[tfarks]

The market efficiency of keeping pitchers healthy is so complex that the general idea of it doesn't mean much. Whatever team has the resources to sink in the research required to gain an advantage here are the type that aren't worried about what other teams are doing.

 

Limiting pitch counts and refining mechanics is outdated, its time for cyberkinetic implants IMO.

[tfarks]

The system is a little too pitching-starved, I would hate to see the Cubs lose McNutt. I'm not surprised at all the Sox are trying to buy low on him.

 

It's not as bad as you seem to think on the pitching side. We should have a fairly intriguing trio in the AA rotation next year if McNutt is around (something like McNutt/Rhee/Antigua, with Whitenack possibly coming back late in the year, with maybe Beeler in that A+/AA mix). The AAA rotation could have Struck, Rusin, Coleman, J. Jackson, etceteras, depending on how Rule 5 goes. The real hope pitching wise lies in the lower levels, where we have an excellent crop of young arms with high ceilings with guys like Wells, Maples, Paulino, Peralta, Cruz, Liria, Jensen (if he starts), Kyler Burke, Reed, and a couple others. There's some solid lefty options in the system as well (aforementioned Cruz and Antigua, along with Del Valle, I still like Hicks a bit, and then the average stuff, end of rotation hope guys like Rusin/Raley/Jokisch/Rosscup/Harman).

 

It's not a great pitching system yet, because there aren't many great upper level pieces, but the system as a whole, I wouldn't really call it pitching-starved.

 

I messed up. I'm intrigued by the lower level guys and like the direction the farm is taking there, but when I typed that I was thinking of upper level guys that can help in a year or two.

 

But I always welcome you dropping that minor league knowledge, much appreciated.

[Exile on Waveland]

Epstein's idea of keeping pitchers healthy is a revelation. It's not like other teams would have realized that was important; WHY WOULD HE REVEAL SUCH A SECRET?

[toonsterwu]

At this point if it takes giving up McNutt to get this process completed, I'm all for it.

 

Jay Jackson or Carpenter are the best pitchers we should be willing to give up. If they want more, Ricketts should send a polaroid of his butthole.

 

At the end of the day, both sides are going to have to give a bit. I'd rather not give up McNutt, but that was always within the realm of possibility (BJax was always that one that seemed quite unlikely to be moved, despite the media reports). I like McNutt, have defended his down season as I have seen the flashes of the breaking ball still being plus, and have heard the change has improved in potential. That said, both sides need to get this deal done, and guys like J. Jackson and Chris Carpenter, well, they aren't integral enough to center-piece this deal around if the Red Sox wanted to play hard-ball and get something of value. I mean, best case scenario for both guys is that they add some middle relief help to the Red Sox next year, and the Red Sox can pay for middle relief help if they need it, and plenty of arms in the system that are as intriguing, if not moreso, than them.

 

Now, I had hoped a numbers approach might get them to do it (give them multiple guys that may fill key roles for them, an upper level catcher in case Lavarnaway can't stick there, a infielder that can play 3rd to give Middlebrooks more time and act as insurance for Youkilis, maybe a pen arm), but certainly, they could view that approach as being pointless considering their budget (even with the bad contracts, they still likely are able to spend some to fill out those small roles). I'm not against giving up one or two high ceiling pieces in the lower levels, but the Red Sox may want a more immediate return. I actually prefer taking on a bad contract to giving up key talent.

 

All that said, there were few upper level high ceiling pieces that would likely intrigue, and McNutt was at the top of the list. I don't think he's a guy that you absolutely say is untouchable in a deal like this, but if you move him, you need a better return, whether that's giving Theo more guys he wants to work with, or something else.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather not move McNutt, but the Cubs realistically can't go to Plan B anymore considering everyone knows how far this went, and the Red Sox can't realistically have Theo around, so both sides have to give some and find a balance. Neither side is going to play hard-ball and win outright here. I hope we don't give up McNutt, but I'm not against it in the right deal.

[Guest]

Well, having a book written about you and your processes does a little more to reveal your competitive advantage than "we think we can get an advantage in pitcher health".

 

 

I know. Hence my admission from the start that it was on a drastically different scale.

[Guest]

FOR [expletive]'S SAKE PEOPLE, I WASN'T CRITICIZING THEO, NOR WAS I ATTEMPTING TO IMPLY THAT HE WAS REVEALING ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL BY SAYING THAT. I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS A SLIGHTLY FUNNY JUXTAPOSITION.