Yooooooooooooennis Cespedes: To Oakland pg 44

[davearm2]

Willfully fielding a team that's a stretch to crack 75 wins is effectively tanking the season. I'm still optimistic we're going to see some big, smart moves that allay such fears.

You said intentionally tanking the season. As though the braintrust sat around a conference table and brainstormed ways to make the team as awful as possible.

 

What they're doing is building for the present and the future, with the priority on the future when both objectives are mutually exclusive. Enough with the "they can do both" schtick. They are doing both, except in cases where it's one or the other.

[Sammy Sofa]

Does not compute, eh, dave?

[davearm2]

Does not compute, eh, dave?

No worries, I'm happy to help :good:

[Sammy Sofa]

He rebooted.

[dew1679666265]

I could be being unfair to him, but I feel like that move was more of a salary dump than selling high because selling high is smart.

 

 

Wasn't there talk of the purse strings being really tight after 08 and that move was made to help accommodate the signing of gameboard? Or am I remembering wrong?

 

The same justification could be made for Theo here - he's not selling high, he's simply moving a guy who happens to have an expiring contract and got lucky that this guy also had a ton of value.

 

Looking at the moves that offseason, I'm not sure the DeRosa deal was purely for monetary reasons. We signed Dempster that offseason and traded for Kevin Gregg and we later acquired Heilman. Our payroll also increased from 2008 to 2009I seem to recall that Hendry wanted to get left handed and DeRosa was the best value righthander he could trade, so he did it. It wasn't simply to sell high and no other reason, but then it rarely is only that.

[dew1679666265]

You said intentionally tanking the season. As though the braintrust sat around a conference table and brainstormed ways to make the team as awful as possible.

 

What they're doing is building for the present and the future, with the priority on the future when both objectives are mutually exclusive. Enough with the "they can do both" schtick. They are doing both, except in cases where it's one or the other.

 

If you want to play around with the terminology, then the more appropriate way to say it would be that they are making no effort to contend this season. Which, to this point, they have made none. And it would take some really ill-advised contracts (Edwin Jackson at 4 years and/or more than $12 mil, Oswalt at three years, etc) for this team to have any realistic shot this year.

 

If they were trying to build the present, they would be doing something to improve the current team and so far they've only made the current team worse. I'm sure they'll do a good job building for the future, but I'd really like to see them fulfill the "parallel fronts" comments they made earlier in the offseason.

[XZero771679666304]

You said intentionally tanking the season. As though the braintrust sat around a conference table and brainstormed ways to make the team as awful as possible.

 

What they're doing is building for the present and the future, with the priority on the future when both objectives are mutually exclusive. Enough with the "they can do both" schtick. They are doing both, except in cases where it's one or the other.

 

If you want to play around with the terminology, then the more appropriate way to say it would be that they are making no effort to contend this season. Which, to this point, they have made none. And it would take some really ill-advised contracts (Edwin Jackson at 4 years and/or more than $12 mil, Oswalt at three years, etc) for this team to have any realistic shot this year.

 

If they were trying to build the present, they would be doing something to improve the current team and so far they've only made the current team worse. I'm sure they'll do a good job building for the future, but I'd really like to see them fulfill the "parallel fronts" comments they made earlier in the offseason.

 

I don't think it's at all fair to say they've made no effort to improve the 2012 team. They haven't gone to the lengths other teams have to secure players like Pujols (which I am perfectly fine with) and Darvish (which I'm less okay with), but that doesn't constitute no effort.

 

We've been over this before, but most of the signings we've seen have been ones I would not have wanted the Cubs to make (in terms of the financials). And we weren't going to see Theo and Jed throwing packages of prospects out there to improve the 2012 team given the drive to improve the system from the bottom up.

 

The bottom line here is that if pieces can be added that improve the team going forward and don't compromise the future to an unreasonable degree, they'll likely be added. But other than Darvish and Wilson (who I know you wanted but we really weren't going to get, imo) I haven't seen any go off the board for a price I would have been willing to pay. And let's not forget there's still a few out there yet and the offseason is not nearly over (I'm still far from convinced we're not in on Fielder).

 

I'm pretty disappointed that it looks like 2012 is going to be rough, but I'm really not angry because I see the logic in what they are doing and what they haven't done. And I don't really feel like they've done anything that egregiously runs counter to what they said they'd do.

 

And given the resources the Cubs have, I don't think a rebuild would/will take that long. If Theo and Jed can get more returns like we saw in the Marshall trade (or a big one for Garza) and clear the board of big money pieces like Soriano this offseason, that gives them a lot of ammo to use next offseason. I can see the Cubs being contenders in 2013.

[dew1679666265]

I don't think it's at all fair to say they've made no effort to improve the 2012 team. They haven't gone to the lengths other teams have to secure players like Pujols (which I am perfectly fine with) and Darvish (which I'm less okay with), but that doesn't constitute no effort.

 

Every move they've made to this point has signaled a classic burn it down and start all over again rebuild. Some of the moves have been good (DeJesus, Marshall), some have been kinda neutral (Stewart, Corpas), some have been mind-boggling (Reed). But the common thread has been filling holes with cheap vets/high risk youth in the hopes that you can look respectable for a season or two while you rebuild the minors.

 

We've been over this before, but most of the signings we've seen have been ones I would not have wanted the Cubs to make (in terms of the financials). And we weren't going to see Theo and Jed throwing packages of prospects out there to improve the 2012 team given the drive to improve the system from the bottom up.

 

I'll admit I'm still frustrated over missing on Pujols. I'd have been ok with 10/275 for a historically great hitter who fills a major need where we have 0 ML talent above rookie ball. I'd have certainly preferred that to doling out huge sums of money to multiple FA pitchers next offseason to have any hope of contending. Adding Pujols would be a big risk, but a calculated one and one that fills a hole that will be incredibly difficult to fill going forward. They're going to have to give up assets at this point to get a first baseman and we have much more money available than assets.

 

My biggest frustration there, though, is that we reportedly didn't even make a competitive offer.

 

On Darvish, that's not Theo/Jed's fault. They put in what they felt was a fair bid and likely were in line with everyone else. If the bid was $20 million or less, I'll be disappointed they didn't go higher, but they likely hit right around market value and it can't be helped that a team went way above market in a blind bid.

 

The bottom line here is that if pieces can be added that improve the team going forward and don't compromise the future to an unreasonable degree, they'll likely be added. But other than Darvish and Wilson (who I know you wanted but we really weren't going to get, imo) I haven't seen any go off the board for a price I would have been willing to pay. And let's not forget there's still a few out there yet and the offseason is not nearly over (I'm still far from convinced we're not in on Fielder).

 

I really wanted Wilson, but I don't fault them there either. It was clear he was going to the Angels and it would have taken a silly contract to pry him away.

 

There are other free agents out there, but I have serious doubts about whether we'll pursue them. If the philosophy going forward is to not overpay for FAs, then that's admirable but it's going to guarantee an extended rebuilding process. Given the lackluster attempt at pursuing Pujols and the carelessness of tossing around needless millions (Reed and Corpas), I'm beginning to think the reports that they're not serious or don't have the funds for Prince are the more likely to be accurate. I could be wrong and I hope I am, but I've not seen anything this season that leads me to believe differently.

 

I'm pretty disappointed that it looks like 2012 is going to be rough, but I'm really not angry because I see the logic in what they are doing and what they haven't done. And I don't really feel like they've done anything that egregiously runs counter to what they said they'd do.

 

If I was seeing some parallel fronts stuff, I'd agree. But the only improvements they've made to the major league roster have been Wood over our 5th starters and DeJesus over our RF. Third base is likely a major downgrade and they didn't make a serious attempt at improving first when Pujols was available. If they go get Prince and, say, Cespedes then I'll be wrong and happy about it. But I think the trend we're seeing is indicating otherwise.

 

And given the resources the Cubs have, I don't think a rebuild would/will take that long. If Theo and Jed can get more returns like we saw in the Marshall trade (or a big one for Garza) and clear the board of big money pieces like Soriano this offseason, that gives them a lot of ammo to use next offseason. I can see the Cubs being contenders in 2013.

 

It's not about resources at this point, it's about opportunities. This becomes less a full rebuild and more a lengthy reload if we go get Prince, but if we miss on him what impact talent is out there? Nothing this offseason (Cespedes might be potential impact, but that's it) and only pitching next offseason. We'll basically go into the offseason absolutely needing 2 of the FA starters to have any shot at contending next year with how mediocre (optimistically) our offense is likely to be. First off how likely are we to sign two of those free agents, and how smart is it to give 6-8 years to one pitcher with a decent amount of mileage on his arm, much less two of them?

 

And even if we sign two of the FA pitchers, we're still losing Dempster and Zambrano. Neither is great anymore, but both are still solid 2-3 win players (adding in Z's offense there). We're really only gaining a few wins over the two of them and may still have questions at the back end of our rotation - what if Shark doesn't cut it as a starter, what if Cashner doesn't develop enough arm strength to start? If we don't get Prince, I simply think there's way too many needs, questions, and unknowns to realistically think we can contend in 2013. But Theo's really good at what he does, so he may make me look silly on this. And I hope he does.

[XZero771679666304]

I wanted Pujols too, but not at 10 years. I think that giving him as much as he got is madness. I had been saying all year I wouldn't mind giving him 5-6 years with a higher AAV, but I couldn't go 9-10 years. IMO, there are a lot of people who are/were too enamored with what Albert has done and not realistic enough about what he will do. That and the idea of sticking it to the Cards. I literally have zero regret/angst about not signing him at the terms he got. Not one iota. Albert has been a player worthy (and more than worthy) of 27.5MM/per in the past, but he's not that player anymore, imo.

 

A lot of people here fell in love with the idea of Pujols as a Cub, which is where a lot of the "where is the parallel fronts" angst is coming from.

 

Theo said on day one he didn't want to pay for past production but future performance, which should have been an obvious indicator Pujols wasn't going to happen. And I think that 6-7 years from now (if not sooner) the decision not to make a stupid offer to Albert will look very wise. I may be wrong, but I don't think I am.

 

Prince is another story. I don't see him getting a huge contract, and if he signs a reasonable one (5-7 years @22-25 with vesting options) that isn't with the Cubs, I'll be a little miffed. Or if the Cubs don't make a serious run at the Cubans.

 

I'm just not seeing any players who have been signed that make me think "hey, that would have been a great investment for the present and future, and he was signed a reasonable (or even semi-reasonable) contract."

[Backtobanks]

I don't think it's at all fair to say they've made no effort to improve the 2012 team. They haven't gone to the lengths other teams have to secure players like Pujols (which I am perfectly fine with) and Darvish (which I'm less okay with), but that doesn't constitute no effort.

 

Every move they've made to this point has signaled a classic burn it down and start all over again rebuild. Some of the moves have been good (DeJesus, Marshall), some have been kinda neutral (Stewart, Corpas), some have been mind-boggling (Reed). But the common thread has been filling holes with cheap vets/high risk youth in the hopes that you can look respectable for a season or two while you rebuild the minors.

 

We've been over this before, but most of the signings we've seen have been ones I would not have wanted the Cubs to make (in terms of the financials). And we weren't going to see Theo and Jed throwing packages of prospects out there to improve the 2012 team given the drive to improve the system from the bottom up.

 

I'll admit I'm still frustrated over missing on Pujols. I'd have been ok with 10/275 for a historically great hitter who fills a major need where we have 0 ML talent above rookie ball. I'd have certainly preferred that to doling out huge sums of money to multiple FA pitchers next offseason to have any hope of contending. Adding Pujols would be a big risk, but a calculated one and one that fills a hole that will be incredibly difficult to fill going forward. They're going to have to give up assets at this point to get a first baseman and we have much more money available than assets.

 

My biggest frustration there, though, is that we reportedly didn't even make a competitive offer.

 

On Darvish, that's not Theo/Jed's fault. They put in what they felt was a fair bid and likely were in line with everyone else. If the bid was $20 million or less, I'll be disappointed they didn't go higher, but they likely hit right around market value and it can't be helped that a team went way above market in a blind bid.

 

The bottom line here is that if pieces can be added that improve the team going forward and don't compromise the future to an unreasonable degree, they'll likely be added. But other than Darvish and Wilson (who I know you wanted but we really weren't going to get, imo) I haven't seen any go off the board for a price I would have been willing to pay. And let's not forget there's still a few out there yet and the offseason is not nearly over (I'm still far from convinced we're not in on Fielder).

 

I really wanted Wilson, but I don't fault them there either. It was clear he was going to the Angels and it would have taken a silly contract to pry him away.

 

There are other free agents out there, but I have serious doubts about whether we'll pursue them. If the philosophy going forward is to not overpay for FAs, then that's admirable but it's going to guarantee an extended rebuilding process. Given the lackluster attempt at pursuing Pujols and the carelessness of tossing around needless millions (Reed and Corpas), I'm beginning to think the reports that they're not serious or don't have the funds for Prince are the more likely to be accurate. I could be wrong and I hope I am, but I've not seen anything this season that leads me to believe differently.

 

I'm pretty disappointed that it looks like 2012 is going to be rough, but I'm really not angry because I see the logic in what they are doing and what they haven't done. And I don't really feel like they've done anything that egregiously runs counter to what they said they'd do.

 

If I was seeing some parallel fronts stuff, I'd agree. But the only improvements they've made to the major league roster have been Wood over our 5th starters and DeJesus over our RF. Third base is likely a major downgrade and they didn't make a serious attempt at improving first when Pujols was available. If they go get Prince and, say, Cespedes then I'll be wrong and happy about it. But I think the trend we're seeing is indicating otherwise.

 

And given the resources the Cubs have, I don't think a rebuild would/will take that long. If Theo and Jed can get more returns like we saw in the Marshall trade (or a big one for Garza) and clear the board of big money pieces like Soriano this offseason, that gives them a lot of ammo to use next offseason. I can see the Cubs being contenders in 2013.

 

It's not about resources at this point, it's about opportunities. This becomes less a full rebuild and more a lengthy reload if we go get Prince, but if we miss on him what impact talent is out there? Nothing this offseason (Cespedes might be potential impact, but that's it) and only pitching next offseason. We'll basically go into the offseason absolutely needing 2 of the FA starters to have any shot at contending next year with how mediocre (optimistically) our offense is likely to be. First off how likely are we to sign two of those free agents, and how smart is it to give 6-8 years to one pitcher with a decent amount of mileage on his arm, much less two of them?

 

And even if we sign two of the FA pitchers, we're still losing Dempster and Zambrano. Neither is great anymore, but both are still solid 2-3 win players (adding in Z's offense there). We're really only gaining a few wins over the two of them and may still have questions at the back end of our rotation - what if Shark doesn't cut it as a starter, what if Cashner doesn't develop enough arm strength to start? If we don't get Prince, I simply think there's way too many needs, questions, and unknowns to realistically think we can contend in 2013. But Theo's really good at what he does, so he may make me look silly on this. And I hope he does.

 

Great post. The only thing I disagree with is your comment about looking respectable for a season or two while you rebuild the minors. Right now the 2012 Cubs are nowhere near respectable and 2013 looks about the same. As you posted, I hope Theo proves me wrong.

[XZero771679666304]

 

It's not about resources at this point, it's about opportunities. This becomes less a full rebuild and more a lengthy reload if we go get Prince, but if we miss on him what impact talent is out there? Nothing this offseason (Cespedes might be potential impact, but that's it) and only pitching next offseason. We'll basically go into the offseason absolutely needing 2 of the FA starters to have any shot at contending next year with how mediocre (optimistically) our offense is likely to be. First off how likely are we to sign two of those free agents, and how smart is it to give 6-8 years to one pitcher with a decent amount of mileage on his arm, much less two of them?

 

And even if we sign two of the FA pitchers, we're still losing Dempster and Zambrano. Neither is great anymore, but both are still solid 2-3 win players (adding in Z's offense there). We're really only gaining a few wins over the two of them and may still have questions at the back end of our rotation - what if Shark doesn't cut it as a starter, what if Cashner doesn't develop enough arm strength to start? If we don't get Prince, I simply think there's way too many needs, questions, and unknowns to realistically think we can contend in 2013. But Theo's really good at what he does, so he may make me look silly on this. And I hope he does.

 

Not all upcoming opportunities are apparent to us right now.

 

Obviously Pujols and Prince were/are top tier assets at a position that needs to be filled. It's also true that there aren't a lot of FA options in coming years. That being said, you can't let those facts put you in a "must get" position. Albert went for too much and if someone gives Prince 9-10 years, you just have to let it go (if you're smart). The Cubs have money, but by no means does that mean they should adopt a "we'll get player X at any cost" mentality towards anyone. That's foolishness; you pay up until the point it stops making sense.

 

You say you're discouraged the Cubs didn't make a "competitive offer" for Pujols. IMO, an offer in the 9-10 year 250/275 range would have been something more than competitive: it would have been stupid.

 

And fortunately, not all potential solutions are ones that we here see. If Theo and Jed decide they want to load up on prospects and young player via trades and turn some of those into trades for ML players later, that's one avenue. Surely they have things in mind that we aren't thinking about. The Cubs can't field a team of buy-low veteran players for more than a year without impacting revenue, they surely know that.

 

IMO, the frustration here is stemming from them not making moves (so far) that we wanted them to, but as much or more so from the lack of transparency regarding what's going on. And really, you can't make any valid judgement about what they're doing without looking at it in a larger context that we can't see yet. I was hoping for the team to be aggressive about 2012, but was prepared for the possibility that the year would be spent clearing the table. I can't believe it will take very long. With the money the Cubs have and if the Theo and Jed keep making moves and adding assets like they did this week they'll be in a position go out and acquire pieces we need later.

 

And again, the offseason isn't over yet.

[Backtobanks]

 

It's not about resources at this point, it's about opportunities. This becomes less a full rebuild and more a lengthy reload if we go get Prince, but if we miss on him what impact talent is out there? Nothing this offseason (Cespedes might be potential impact, but that's it) and only pitching next offseason. We'll basically go into the offseason absolutely needing 2 of the FA starters to have any shot at contending next year with how mediocre (optimistically) our offense is likely to be. First off how likely are we to sign two of those free agents, and how smart is it to give 6-8 years to one pitcher with a decent amount of mileage on his arm, much less two of them?

 

And even if we sign two of the FA pitchers, we're still losing Dempster and Zambrano. Neither is great anymore, but both are still solid 2-3 win players (adding in Z's offense there). We're really only gaining a few wins over the two of them and may still have questions at the back end of our rotation - what if Shark doesn't cut it as a starter, what if Cashner doesn't develop enough arm strength to start? If we don't get Prince, I simply think there's way too many needs, questions, and unknowns to realistically think we can contend in 2013. But Theo's really good at what he does, so he may make me look silly on this. And I hope he does.

 

Not all upcoming opportunities are apparent to us right now.

 

Obviously Pujols and Prince were/are top tier assets at a position that needs to be filled. It's also true that there aren't a lot of FA options in coming years. That being said, you can't let those facts put you in a "must get" position. Albert went for too much and if someone gives Prince 9-10 years, you just have to let it go (if you're smart). The Cubs have money, but by no means does that mean they should adopt a "we'll get player X at any cost" mentality towards anyone. That's foolishness; you pay up until the point it stops making sense.

 

You say you're discouraged the Cubs didn't make a "competitive offer" for Pujols. IMO, an offer in the 9-10 year 250/275 range would have been something more than competitive: it would have been stupid.

 

And fortunately, not all potential solutions are ones that we here see. If Theo and Jed decide they want to load up on prospects and young player via trades and turn some of those into trades for ML players later, that's one avenue. Surely they have things in mind that we aren't thinking about. The Cubs can't field a team of buy-low veteran players for more than a year without impacting revenue, they surely know that.

 

IMO, the frustration here is stemming from them not making moves (so far) that we wanted them to, but as much or more so from the lack of transparency regarding what's going on. And really, you can't make any valid judgement about what they're doing without looking at it in a larger context that we can't see yet. I was hoping for the team to be aggressive about 2012, but was prepared for the possibility that the year would be spent clearing the table. I can't believe it will take very long. With the money the Cubs have and if the Theo and Jed keep making moves and adding assets like they did this week they'll be in a position go out and acquire pieces we need later.

 

And again, the offseason isn't over yet.

 

Again, I try to be as optimistic as many of you, but "acquiring the pieces we need later" makes it sound like everybody else is going to sit on the sideline when it comes to FAs or give in to Theo on trades. The Yankees and Red Sox basically sat out this offseason, but I wouldn't count on that happening in the coming years. Other GMs have learned to overprice their impact players and their top prospects. A lot of Theo's plan is based on hope - hoping Jackson can be a star, hoping Stewart bounces back to his original draft potential, hoping Byrd/Soriano/Marmol/Zambrano/Dempster can have great 1st halves to become trade bait, etc.

[davell]

I think we're about to see a video game rebuild job, for the first time in baseball history. I don't see us signing anyone to more than a two year deal, unless they're 25 or under. Everyone we're signing to these 1 or 2 year deals are stopgaps and if they play decently, they'll get dealt. Garza, Byrd, Marmol, and Soto will all be dealt by June, at the latest. Zambrano and Dempster could be gone by the deadline. Soriano will be dumped for nothing. We'll give guys like LaHair, Sappelt, Wood, and Castillo shots. If they show something, they'll be traded as well. Guys like Carpenter, Cashner, Dolis, and Shark will all be given plenty of time to develop at the major league level. And find their longterm role on our team. Guys like Brett won't be rushed, but once he does get here, he'll be given a really long leash. And while this is going on, we'll be developing our prospects and with all the trading off of assets, we'll have a top 5 system by this time next year, maybe even better than that. Because I think we're about to go on a crazy spending spree on IFA between now and July. And I also think we'll find a way to spend more on the draft as well. And it's not to go develop and wait for all these guys to hit the majors. It's so we can make the trades for a Gio or a Cahill or whoever else and it not hurt the system. And spend bigtime on the very few holes we'll see on the horizon. Yeah, we'll suck in 2012 and maybe 2013 as well, but Theo's going to sign value guys and it won't be ridiculously awful. And once we're up and going, I think it's going to be a machine. I wanted us to stay competitive and all, but I'll take the tear it down completely approach, because I think we've got the best FO in baseball to do it.

[Backtobanks]

I think we're about to see a video game rebuild job, for the first time in baseball history. I don't see us signing anyone to more than a two year deal, unless they're 25 or under. Everyone we're signing to these 1 or 2 year deals are stopgaps and if they play decently, they'll get dealt. Garza, Byrd, Marmol, and Soto will all be dealt by June, at the latest. Zambrano and Dempster could be gone by the deadline. Soriano will be dumped for nothing. We'll give guys like LaHair, Sappelt, Wood, and Castillo shots. If they show something, they'll be traded as well. Guys like Carpenter, Cashner, Dolis, and Shark will all be given plenty of time to develop at the major league level. And find their longterm role on our team. Guys like Brett won't be rushed, but once he does get here, he'll be given a really long leash. And while this is going on, we'll be developing our prospects and with all the trading off of assets, we'll have a top 5 system by this time next year, maybe even better than that. Because I think we're about to go on a crazy spending spree on IFA between now and July. And I also think we'll find a way to spend more on the draft as well. And it's not to go develop and wait for all these guys to hit the majors. It's so we can make the trades for a Gio or a Cahill or whoever else and it not hurt the system. And spend bigtime on the very few holes we'll see on the horizon. Yeah, we'll suck in 2012 and maybe 2013 as well, but Theo's going to sign value guys and it won't be ridiculously awful. And once we're up and going, I think it's going to be a machine. I wanted us to stay competitive and all, but I'll take the tear it down completely approach, because I think we've got the best FO in baseball to do it.

 

Everything you posted is fine except you're now talking 5 years down the road instead of 2013 or 2014. I had high expectations when Theo was hired, but I expected results in 2-3 years and not after he signs an extension to his 5 year contract. It's almost like a President who doesn't get much done in his first term because he's running for re-election and finally can get stuff accomplished in his second term.

[davell]

I don't think it's going to take that long honestly. I really think we'll see a spending spree on IFA over the next few months that's never been seen before. Not Cespedes either. But Soler, Concepcion, and as many Latin American guys that fell through from last year. Probably some Pac Rim guys as well. And if by next year, some young cheap guys hit the trade market, I could see us adding them, even if we're not contending. Suck in 2012? Yeah. Suck in 2013? Probably. Suck in 2014? Nah, solid with true excitement again. 2015? Dynasty begins...........

[SouthSideRyan]

That sounds like a 55 win team. While we may understand the reasoning behind it, you're going to have tremendous fan backlash, and the Cubs will start losing money.

[pccubfan]

I think we're about to see a video game rebuild job, for the first time in baseball history. I don't see us signing anyone to more than a two year deal, unless they're 25 or under. Everyone we're signing to these 1 or 2 year deals are stopgaps and if they play decently, they'll get dealt. Garza, Byrd, Marmol, and Soto will all be dealt by June, at the latest. Zambrano and Dempster could be gone by the deadline. Soriano will be dumped for nothing. We'll give guys like LaHair, Sappelt, Wood, and Castillo shots. If they show something, they'll be traded as well. Guys like Carpenter, Cashner, Dolis, and Shark will all be given plenty of time to develop at the major league level. And find their longterm role on our team. Guys like Brett won't be rushed, but once he does get here, he'll be given a really long leash. And while this is going on, we'll be developing our prospects and with all the trading off of assets, we'll have a top 5 system by this time next year, maybe even better than that. Because I think we're about to go on a crazy spending spree on IFA between now and July. And I also think we'll find a way to spend more on the draft as well. And it's not to go develop and wait for all these guys to hit the majors. It's so we can make the trades for a Gio or a Cahill or whoever else and it not hurt the system. And spend bigtime on the very few holes we'll see on the horizon. Yeah, we'll suck in 2012 and maybe 2013 as well, but Theo's going to sign value guys and it won't be ridiculously awful. And once we're up and going, I think it's going to be a machine. I wanted us to stay competitive and all, but I'll take the tear it down completely approach, because I think we've got the best FO in baseball to do it.

 

I think you are being too optimistic. Garza will net some good assets and if you're going to trade him you do it now at his highest value. Trading Soto or Marmol now is probably selling low and if they don't start off strong in 2012 you aren't going to get much for either. Byrd and Zambrano are not going to get you anything more than a high ceiling low A baller or two that haven't performed to date. No IFA signing short of Cespedes or Soler is going to bump the system's rating for at least a couple of years and probably more. So this team is a long way from becoming a top five system as soon as next year.

 

The players traded for Gio and Cahill were not high ceiling guys in the low minors. They were either major league ready or nearly major league ready. It is going to take a minimum of three years for the high-end guys that the Cubs drafted last year, or signed via IFA, to get to that point. This, using your scenario, all while the major league team flounders, with new players every season plus a few farmhands, and wastes Castro's cheap seasons.

 

Finally, I think a very small minority of fans are willing to wait three or four years for this plan to take place. If the average Cub fan looks at what they are paying to watch a game and then looks at the players they are watching and are being told how payroll has taken a hit selling off all of these veterans there will be some ticked off fans. The local media will have a field day passing out torches and pitchforks.

[Backtobanks]

That sounds like a 55 win team. While we may understand the reasoning behind it, you're going to have tremendous fan backlash, and the Cubs will start losing money.

 

It will be great to walk up to the gate to buy tickets on game day though. I remember the pitiful teams in the late 50s when attendance was 6,000 on many dates. Ticket revenue, concessions, advertising, and souvenirs all go downhill with a losing team. Back then they had a disinterested rich owner using the team as a tax write off as opposed to a rich fan owner.

[davell]

I think it's at least possible to sell this to the general meatball fan, but I admit you'd probably have to reduce ticket prices some. That can be offset though, by having a lower payroll than we've carried recently. Plus, this coincides well with when the current TV deal runs out. Granted, I guess all of baseball would figure out this is what the plan is, but it'd suck to have to say it, in order for the general masses to understand. I guess the key would be watching the development of Castro, Brett, and whoever else is on the big league club. This is where the marketing genius of Crane Kenney would have to truly take effect. He'd have to find ways to keep fans coming out.

[dew1679666265]

I think it's at least possible to sell this to the general meatball fan, but I admit you'd probably have to reduce ticket prices some. That can be offset though, by having a lower payroll than we've carried recently. Plus, this coincides well with when the current TV deal runs out. Granted, I guess all of baseball would figure out this is what the plan is, but it'd suck to have to say it, in order for the general masses to understand. I guess the key would be watching the development of Castro, Brett, and whoever else is on the big league club. This is where the marketing genius of Crane Kenney would have to truly take effect. He'd have to find ways to keep fans coming out.

 

Two things:

 

1) Why is this necessary? Why is it necessary for Theo and Jed to completely dismantle a decent roster to a team that will be lucky to not lose 110 games for 2-3 years? If they can't rebuild the farm system to being a top 5-10 system while also fielding at least respectable teams, if not competitive teams, then I'm not sure they're quite as good as they were billed to be. Part of the benefit of being a major market team is that you have the resources to do more than one thing at a time. Small and mid market teams have to either build for the future or win now, large markets don't. Your plan completely ignores, in every way possible, the parallel fronts Theo and Jed are supposedly pursuing.

 

2) Prospects are more valued than ever in today's game. Look at the packages teams have had to give up to get flawed players like Gio Gonzalez and Trevor Cahill. Video game rebuilds like you proposed aren't realistic because in reality you'll either have to clean house of all your prospects just to add a couple premiere talents or you have to sit around and wait for the perfect mix of available FAs and your young talent maturing - and that isn't something that happens much. If you want premiere talent in the game today, you're going to overpay severely either in prospects or money and if you wait for your young talent to develop everybody into stars, then you're going to have the potential to be waiting far beyond 2015.

[Little Slide Rooter]

That sounds like a 55 win team. While we may understand the reasoning behind it, you're going to have tremendous fan backlash, and the Cubs will start losing money.

 

Precisely why I am very skeptical over the video game rebuild. Nobody is going to pay the expensive ticket prices in the game to see Reed Johnson, Manny Corpas, and Travis Wood. The ceremonial return of Kerry Wood isn't going to cut it either. Yeah, the meatball fans will be the first to go, but there's a lot of them and meatball money is no less valuable the saber metric obsessed money. Fans are getting antsy. Maybe it's the 100+ years of futility, maybe it's not wanting to go back to a losing team after tasting the closest thing to a long term winner in anyone's lifetime. The fact is, we've known of the rebuilding plan all along. How many guys on the current roster did anyone ever expect to see or even want to see in 3 years? Not many. Castro is the only must keep. Anyone else may as well have a price tag instead of a jersey number. Just because The Kapman, who nobodies ever taken serious throws out boogie man words like rebuild and overhaul doesnt even suggest that we won't compete anytime soon. The reason so many people seem to associate the term rebuild with years of futility is because in the past the teams that have done complete rebuilds and overhauls have been small market teams like the Pirates, Marlins, and A's. Well, we're not them and we have over 70 million dollars to play with in the next 2 years. Other big market teams that have recently talked rebuild have been the Dodgers, whose rebuild starte with a monster extension to Kemp and probably Kerahaw to follow ad the Mets who are still a financial mess.

[Conky]

 

I think you are being too optimistic. Garza will net some good assets and if you're going to trade him you do it now at his highest value. Trading Soto or Marmol now is probably selling low and if they don't start off strong in 2012 you aren't going to get much for either. Byrd and Zambrano are not going to get you anything more than a high ceiling low A baller or two that haven't performed to date. No IFA signing short of Cespedes or Soler is going to bump the system's rating for at least a couple of years and probably more. So this team is a long way from becoming a top five system as soon as next year.

 

The players traded for Gio and Cahill were not high ceiling guys in the low minors. They were either major league ready or nearly major league ready. It is going to take a minimum of three years for the high-end guys that the Cubs drafted last year, or signed via IFA, to get to that point. This, using your scenario, all while the major league team flounders, with new players every season plus a few farmhands, and wastes Castro's cheap seasons.

Finally, I think a very small minority of fans are willing to wait three or four years for this plan to take place. If the average Cub fan looks at what they are paying to watch a game and then looks at the players they are watching and are being told how payroll has taken a hit selling off all of these veterans there will be some ticked off fans. The local media will have a field day passing out torches and pitchforks.

 

I think you are being far too pessimistic and are drawing conclusions based purely on conjecture. Were you making these statements 2 years into the new front office, it would be understandable. Simply stated, we do not have any idea of the big picture just yet.

 

To address the bold above:

 

Trading Soto or Marmol now is probably selling low and if they don't start off strong in 2012 you aren't going to get much for either.

 

Soto and Marmol are known commodities. They are not prospects and do not have large upside or downside. They are what they are. They are established major league players and their value will not change accordingly. They are both valuable trading chips.

 

No IFA signing short of Cespedes or Soler is going to bump the system's rating for at least a couple of years and probably more.

 

Signing Cespedes or Soler et al will have an impact on the farm system rating should those moves happen. In the case of Cespedes, he will not be in the minor leagues for long, if at all, so the point is moot. That said, the plan Theo and the front office is working as a whole will boost the farm system rating much quicker than signing a couple of high impact players. The farm is rated as a whole, from top to bottom, not by impact or major league ready prospects.

 

This, using your scenario, all while the major league team flounders, with new players every season plus a few farmhands, and wastes Castro's cheap seasons.

 

What major league roster is this based on?

 

Finally, I think a very small minority of fans are willing to wait three or four years for this plan to take place.

 

Was there a poll taken? Yes, fans that have waited for better than a century will not wait another 2-3 years for a perennial contender. /hyperbole.

 

The local media will have a field day passing out torches and pitchforks.

 

Looks like someone is trying to beat the rush.

[dew1679666265]

Not all upcoming opportunities are apparent to us right now.

 

Obviously Pujols and Prince were/are top tier assets at a position that needs to be filled. It's also true that there aren't a lot of FA options in coming years. That being said, you can't let those facts put you in a "must get" position. Albert went for too much and if someone gives Prince 9-10 years, you just have to let it go (if you're smart). The Cubs have money, but by no means does that mean they should adopt a "we'll get player X at any cost" mentality towards anyone. That's foolishness; you pay up until the point it stops making sense.

 

You say you're discouraged the Cubs didn't make a "competitive offer" for Pujols. IMO, an offer in the 9-10 year 250/275 range would have been something more than competitive: it would have been stupid.

 

And fortunately, not all potential solutions are ones that we here see. If Theo and Jed decide they want to load up on prospects and young player via trades and turn some of those into trades for ML players later, that's one avenue. Surely they have things in mind that we aren't thinking about. The Cubs can't field a team of buy-low veteran players for more than a year without impacting revenue, they surely know that.

 

IMO, the frustration here is stemming from them not making moves (so far) that we wanted them to, but as much or more so from the lack of transparency regarding what's going on. And really, you can't make any valid judgement about what they're doing without looking at it in a larger context that we can't see yet. I was hoping for the team to be aggressive about 2012, but was prepared for the possibility that the year would be spent clearing the table. I can't believe it will take very long. With the money the Cubs have and if the Theo and Jed keep making moves and adding assets like they did this week they'll be in a position go out and acquire pieces we need later.

 

And again, the offseason isn't over yet.

 

I don't want to get into the Pujols debate again any further as we've hashed it out many times. However, I will say that my interest in Pujols had nothing whatsoever to do with sticking it to the Cardinals.

 

That said, whether you believe passing on the players we have to this point was justified or not, we're still left in a situation where a sub-.500 talent team (better than our record, but still probably not quite a .500 team) has gotten worse to this point and there is very little impact talent left on the market. I see us in a situation where we're either in "must get" mode for Prince and a couple FA pitchers next offseason or punting 2013 because of our need for impact talent and the lack of it in either this market (trade or FA) or next year's likely FA/trade market. Since I don't see us going into "must get" mode for any of them (nor do I think it would be smart), I don't see any likelihood that we are competitive in 2013.

[Backtobanks]

 

I think you are being too optimistic. Garza will net some good assets and if you're going to trade him you do it now at his highest value. Trading Soto or Marmol now is probably selling low and if they don't start off strong in 2012 you aren't going to get much for either. Byrd and Zambrano are not going to get you anything more than a high ceiling low A baller or two that haven't performed to date. No IFA signing short of Cespedes or Soler is going to bump the system's rating for at least a couple of years and probably more. So this team is a long way from becoming a top five system as soon as next year.

 

The players traded for Gio and Cahill were not high ceiling guys in the low minors. They were either major league ready or nearly major league ready. It is going to take a minimum of three years for the high-end guys that the Cubs drafted last year, or signed via IFA, to get to that point. This, using your scenario, all while the major league team flounders, with new players every season plus a few farmhands, and wastes Castro's cheap seasons.

Finally, I think a very small minority of fans are willing to wait three or four years for this plan to take place. If the average Cub fan looks at what they are paying to watch a game and then looks at the players they are watching and are being told how payroll has taken a hit selling off all of these veterans there will be some ticked off fans. The local media will have a field day passing out torches and pitchforks.

 

I think you are being far too pessimistic and are drawing conclusions based purely on conjecture. Were you making these statements 2 years into the new front office, it would be understandable. Simply stated, we do not have any idea of the big picture just yet.

 

So maybe the FO ought to tell the paying public exactly what the "big picture" is instead of expecting everyone to "keep the faith" when they sign Reed Johnson because it's part of a mysterious big plan.

 

To address the bold above:

 

Trading Soto or Marmol now is probably selling low and if they don't start off strong in 2012 you aren't going to get much for either.

 

Soto and Marmol are known commodities. They are not prospects and do not have large upside or downside. They are what they are. They are established major league players and their value will not change accordingly. They are both valuable trading chips.

If Marmol's arm explodes or if either has another bad season, they become much less valuable.

 

No IFA signing short of Cespedes or Soler is going to bump the system's rating for at least a couple of years and probably more.

 

Signing Cespedes or Soler et al will have an impact on the farm system rating should those moves happen. In the case of Cespedes, he will not be in the minor leagues for long, if at all, so the point is moot. That said, the plan Theo and the front office is working as a whole will boost the farm system rating much quicker than signing a couple of high impact players. The farm is rated as a whole, from top to bottom, not by impact or major league ready prospects.

 

This, using your scenario, all while the major league team flounders, with new players every season plus a few farmhands, and wastes Castro's cheap seasons.

 

What major league roster is this based on?

 

The expected rosters of the 2012 & 2013 Chicago Cubs.

 

Finally, I think a very small minority of fans are willing to wait three or four years for this plan to take place.

 

Was there a poll taken? Yes, fans that have waited for better than a century will not wait another 2-3 years for a perennial contender. /hyperbole.

The poll will be taken at the box office when the team loses revenue for 2-3 years.

 

The local media will have a field day passing out torches and pitchforks.

 

Looks like someone is trying to beat the rush.

[pccubfan]

 

I think you are being too optimistic. Garza will net some good assets and if you're going to trade him you do it now at his highest value. Trading Soto or Marmol now is probably selling low and if they don't start off strong in 2012 you aren't going to get much for either. Byrd and Zambrano are not going to get you anything more than a high ceiling low A baller or two that haven't performed to date. No IFA signing short of Cespedes or Soler is going to bump the system's rating for at least a couple of years and probably more. So this team is a long way from becoming a top five system as soon as next year.

 

The players traded for Gio and Cahill were not high ceiling guys in the low minors. They were either major league ready or nearly major league ready. It is going to take a minimum of three years for the high-end guys that the Cubs drafted last year, or signed via IFA, to get to that point. This, using your scenario, all while the major league team flounders, with new players every season plus a few farmhands, and wastes Castro's cheap seasons.

Finally, I think a very small minority of fans are willing to wait three or four years for this plan to take place. If the average Cub fan looks at what they are paying to watch a game and then looks at the players they are watching and are being told how payroll has taken a hit selling off all of these veterans there will be some ticked off fans. The local media will have a field day passing out torches and pitchforks.

 

I think you are being far too pessimistic and are drawing conclusions based purely on conjecture. Were you making these statements 2 years into the new front office, it would be understandable. Simply stated, we do not have any idea of the big picture just yet.

 

To address the bold above:

 

Trading Soto or Marmol now is probably selling low and if they don't start off strong in 2012 you aren't going to get much for either.

 

Soto and Marmol are known commodities. They are not prospects and do not have large upside or downside. They are what they are. They are established major league players and their value will not change accordingly. They are both valuable trading chips.

 

No IFA signing short of Cespedes or Soler is going to bump the system's rating for at least a couple of years and probably more.

 

Signing Cespedes or Soler et al will have an impact on the farm system rating should those moves happen. In the case of Cespedes, he will not be in the minor leagues for long, if at all, so the point is moot. That said, the plan Theo and the front office is working as a whole will boost the farm system rating much quicker than signing a couple of high impact players. The farm is rated as a whole, from top to bottom, not by impact or major league ready prospects.

 

This, using your scenario, all while the major league team flounders, with new players every season plus a few farmhands, and wastes Castro's cheap seasons.

 

What major league roster is this based on?

 

Finally, I think a very small minority of fans are willing to wait three or four years for this plan to take place.

 

Was there a poll taken? Yes, fans that have waited for better than a century will not wait another 2-3 years for a perennial contender. /hyperbole.

 

The local media will have a field day passing out torches and pitchforks.

 

Looks like someone is trying to beat the rush.

 

So it is your belief that where veterans are concerned recent performance has no bearing on value? That recent performance can in no way signal decline or injury or be predictive of future performance.

 

The OP stated that the Cubs could have a top five system next year. My belief is that outside of Cespedes or Soler, no IFA signing is going to seriously affect this rating as soon as next year and probably not for three or more years. I also contend that if there are two similar systems, the system with the most major league ready talent is going to be rated higher so it does affect the ratings.

 

The orginal poster suggested that the near-term transactions would be one and two year deals to veterans and these guys would be sold off at the deadline if it made sense. The remainder of the roster would be made of players from within the system. That sounds like a lot of roster turnover on the big league team and doesn't sound overly talented if it is made up of guys who couldn't get better than a one or two year offer.

 

Yes, I do believe there was a poll taken. Look at what happened to attendance last fall. Losing breeds apathy and/or anger. Booing is much more prevalent at Wrigley than it used to be. The fans got a taste of success, liked it, and are wanting/expecting more. People know that Cubs tickets are expensive. They also know that the Cubs are a big market team, like the Yankees (I know they're not like the Yankees), Red Sox, Phillies and Angels, Dodgers. Expectations are that Cubs should be able to be competitive.

 

You flatter me with your final comment. I'm just one fan with an opinion. I think it could get pretty ugly if the Cubs have back to back to back to back 90+ loss seasons. I certainly could be wrong about that, but just like everyone else, I don't think I am.