Re: New GM/Cubs Future News Articles

[ConstableRabbit]

http://www.chicagonow.com/goat-riders-of-the-apocalypse/2011/12/blind-unconditional-trust-in-theo-epstein-must-continue/

 

Love the title.

 

I couldn't get much further, the nicknamification became too exhausting.

? There wasn't a nickname in the title...

 

No, but the article was full of them. I like to think that I follow the Cubs closely enough that if I have to stop and think "who is he talking about?" three times in the span of two paragraphs, then the writer is probably trying too hard.

Yeah, I don't really care about the article and agree on the nicknames -- I just thought the title was funny.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, I don't really care about the article and agree on the nicknames -- I just thought the title was funny.

 

I didn't think it was funny, just completely accurate.

[Little Slide Rooter]

http://www.chicagonow.com/goat-riders-of-the-apocalypse/2011/12/blind-unconditional-trust-in-theo-epstein-must-continue/

 

Love the title.

 

I couldn't get much further, the nicknamification became too exhausting.

 

I would have thought that even the meatyest of balls would have waited until at least spring training before turning on Theo and Co, but I guess he thought his jokes were just too damn funny to risk the possibility that we might make some more moves before then.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Still curious about that compensation. The Rule 5 was almost 2 weeks ago and if we were just going to send them some combination of Rhee, Antigua, J Jax, etc. it would be done by now. Am i the only one thinking that there could be a fairly big trade going down?

[Guest]

It's going to be next to nothing. Neither team would want to go through the offseason with anything substantial over their heads, and it behooves Boston to wait it out as long as possible from a PR standpoint.

[UMFan83]

Still curious about that compensation. The Rule 5 was almost 2 weeks ago and if we were just going to send them some combination of Rhee, Antigua, J Jax, etc. it would be done by now. Am i the only one thinking that there could be a fairly big trade going down?

 

Why would you think that?

[Clem Fandango]

Still curious about that compensation. The Rule 5 was almost 2 weeks ago and if we were just going to send them some combination of Rhee, Antigua, J Jax, etc. it would be done by now. Am i the only one thinking that there could be a fairly big trade going down?

 

Why would you think that?

 

The conspiracy theorist in me suspects a 3-team trade with the Padres and Boston that involves giving Boston and SD their compensation while also trading for improvements. Involving Garza, too. But that's idle speculation and fantasy

[UMFan83]

Still curious about that compensation. The Rule 5 was almost 2 weeks ago and if we were just going to send them some combination of Rhee, Antigua, J Jax, etc. it would be done by now. Am i the only one thinking that there could be a fairly big trade going down?

 

Why would you think that?

 

The conspiracy theorist in me suspects a 3-team trade with the Padres and Boston that involves giving Boston and SD their compensation while also trading for improvements. Involving Garza, too. But that's idle speculation and fantasy

 

I doubt it unless its been agreed in principle for weeks. Otherwise, the offseason is halfway over (in terms of player moves). You can't go that long without knowing if your ace is going to be on the team.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Still curious about that compensation. The Rule 5 was almost 2 weeks ago and if we were just going to send them some combination of Rhee, Antigua, J Jax, etc. it would be done by now. Am i the only one thinking that there could be a fairly big trade going down?

 

Why would you think that?

 

The conspiracy theorist in me suspects a 3-team trade with the Padres and Boston that involves giving Boston and SD their compensation while also trading for improvements. Involving Garza, too. But that's idle speculation and fantasy

 

I doubt it unless its been agreed in principle for weeks. Otherwise, the offseason is halfway over (in terms of player moves). You can't go that long without knowing if your ace is going to be on the team.

 

If it were a 3 team trade involving both teams getting their compensation wouldn't we end up getting a big time shaft out of the deal?

[UMFan83]

Still curious about that compensation. The Rule 5 was almost 2 weeks ago and if we were just going to send them some combination of Rhee, Antigua, J Jax, etc. it would be done by now. Am i the only one thinking that there could be a fairly big trade going down?

 

Why would you think that?

 

The conspiracy theorist in me suspects a 3-team trade with the Padres and Boston that involves giving Boston and SD their compensation while also trading for improvements. Involving Garza, too. But that's idle speculation and fantasy

 

I doubt it unless its been agreed in principle for weeks. Otherwise, the offseason is halfway over (in terms of player moves). You can't go that long without knowing if your ace is going to be on the team.

 

If it were a 3 team trade involving both teams getting their compensation wouldn't we end up getting a big time shaft out of the deal?

 

If you consider getting Theo and Hoyer the shaft, I guess so

[Little Slide Rooter]

If it were a 3 team trade involving both teams getting their compensation wouldn't we end up getting a big time shaft out of the deal?

 

If you consider getting Theo and Hoyer the shaft, I guess so

 

If it's a 3 way deal involving the Red Sox or Padres getting Garza and we get a rock, then yes I consider it the shaft. Big time. If the deal is intended to be compensation for both teams, I really can't see it involving us getting much. Garzas our top trade chip by a mile and there's no way he should be involved in anything in which we don't end up with at least 3 good young players.

 

Give the Red Sox Jay Jackson and Jeff Baker and give the Padres Antigua and Maine and call it a day.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Gordon Edes @GordonEdes 5m Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

Sox and Cubs have agreed, according to one MLB source, that Theo will not be allowed to hire anyone else from Red Sox for 3 years

 

Is that new? My twitter says that's new.

[UMFan83]

Gordon Edes @GordonEdes 5m Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

Sox and Cubs have agreed, according to one MLB source, that Theo will not be allowed to hire anyone else from Red Sox for 3 years

 

Is that new? My twitter says that's new.

 

Is that the compensation? if so, LOL

 

Edit: Appears like it was just posted for me. 2 minutes later, he posted this:

 

Gordon Edes @GordonEdes 15m Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

According to @alexspeier, Cubs hired area scout Matt Dorey from Sox, promoted him to cross-checker

[davell]

Damnit, so this is where the Darvish money went. Anyway, glad we keep hiring successful guys and I fully expected we'd come to an agreement where we can't raid the Red Sox.

[Irrelevant Dude]

Gordon Edes @GordonEdes 5m Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

Sox and Cubs have agreed, according to one MLB source, that Theo will not be allowed to hire anyone else from Red Sox for 3 years

 

Is that new? My twitter says that's new.

The Chicago Tribune article made it sound like someone had stepped in and banned the Cubs from any further Red Sox hires. It makes a whole lot more sense that the Cubs and Sox agreed on that arrangement and that must be considered part of the compensation.

 

As for compensation owed the Red Sox for the Cubs' hiring of Theo Epstein, the issue is being treated as an afterthought and Boston isn't expected to receive more than one or two run-of-the-mill prospects.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-report-cubs-facing-ban-on-more-red-sox-hires-20111220,0,7066821.story

[Guest]

I saw the scroll the other day about the 3 year ban on pillaging the Red Sox FO. It probably didn't get the attention it deserves, since Red Sox fans were pretty convinced they were getting Starlin Castro out of the deal.

[Backtobanks]

Gordon Edes @GordonEdes 5m Reply Retweet Favorite · Open

Sox and Cubs have agreed, according to one MLB source, that Theo will not be allowed to hire anyone else from Red Sox for 3 years

 

Is that new? My twitter says that's new.

The Chicago Tribune article made it sound like someone had stepped in and banned the Cubs from any further Red Sox hires. It makes a whole lot more sense that the Cubs and Sox agreed on that arrangement and that must be considered part of the compensation.

 

As for compensation owed the Red Sox for the Cubs' hiring of Theo Epstein, the issue is being treated as an afterthought and Boston isn't expected to receive more than one or two run-of-the-mill prospects.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-report-cubs-facing-ban-on-more-red-sox-hires-20111220,0,7066821.story

 

After I saw this notice, I saw that Theo hired 3 scouts from the Red Sox. :lol:

[Guest]

I think this may have slipped through the cracks back when the interview happened, but it looks like Cherington is much more to blame for Crawford than Theo.

 

I now like Theo even more. That inexplicable deal was my major strike against him.

 

"We felt Crawford was a little underappreciated because he was helping teams win games in a slightly different way than highly paid players," Cherington said. "He wasn't hitting 40 home runs, but he was playing incredible defense, stealing bases and hitting 20 homers with a lot of doubles. We felt he was a top-five player in the league even though he didn't have Miguel Cabrera numbers.

 

"We thought he'd have a big impact on the game. He was a hard worker, well-liked in the clubhouse, and relatively young for a free agent.

 

"From a scouting perspective, he was an incredible athlete who got to the big leagues and was still learning how to play. We felt he was on an upward arc in terms of skill development -- or so we thought."

 

With Gonzalez already acquired and the winter meetings approaching, Cherington said Boston considered Carlos Beltran but Crawford approached the Red Sox, declaring, "This is where I want to be."

 

And that is when Cherington made his case.

 

"I told them, 'If we're going to do this, this is the winter to do it, and I believe this the guy we should do it with,'" Cherington revealed. "Theo bought into it, but I'm the one that pushed it.

 

"Then we had a conversation with ownership, and I had to push them too.

 

"I've learned a lot. One part of the puzzle is doing all the scouting, the background, the info gathering, the negotiating. But it can't stop there.

 

"You've got to keep going. It's a huge adjustment for these guys. We need to do a better job of getting to know Carl well enough to make him feel comfortable, because we've seen how good he is when he's comfortable.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/15287/macmullan-details-cheringtons-journey

[Sammy Sofa]

The deal was hardly "inexplicable," so I really don't give a [expletive] if it was Theo's idea or not.

[Guest]

The deal was hardly "inexplicable," so I really don't give a [expletive] if it was Theo's idea or not.

 

You're right. 7/142 was spot on.

 

Or not.

[Guest]

I hated it when it was handed out. My opinion has nothing to do with how badly he tanked in 11, though that certainly makes it look even worse now.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, saying I don't think it was inexplicable means I thought it was a good deal. Way to davearm the [expletive] out of that one, David.

[Guest]

I think it's too soon to write off the Crawford deal as being a disaster. Yeah, $20 million a year is certainly more than I would have wanted if I was a Red Sox fan (especially for 7 years), but he's still 29 and when signed was coming two very, very good years where he was seemingly coming into his prime. Fangraphs has him as a 5.9 and 7.6 WAR player in 2009 and 2010 respectively, and worth $26.5 million and $30.4 in those seasons. Yeah, this year is absolutely brutal and a bust, but it's not like this is necessarily Epstein's Soriano-signing.

 

It looks like you agree with me that it's a strike against. I just considered and consider it significantly worse than you did.

[Guest]

Yeah, saying I don't think it was inexplicable means I thought it was a good deal. Way to davearm the [expletive] out of that one, David.

 

Is whether it's inexplicable or just bad really worth arguing about or busting out the expletives? And if you think it's bad shouldn't you care somewhat if it were Theo's idea?

 

All I'm saying is that he went from basically having one strike in my book to having none. Theo is awesome.

[Sammy Sofa]

Nope. I think he's overpaid, but, like I said, I really don't care if Theo dove into that one guns blazing. The Red Sox don't live in the same awful, awful world that the Cubs are apparently mired in.