Yooooooooooooennis Cespedes: To Oakland pg 44

[Sammy Sofa]

Good call to pass with the price getting that high... Cespedes is going to have to be an absolute superstar to be worth that contract.

 

http://www.mostphotos.com/preview/176075/frustrated-businessman.jpg

[Exile on Waveland]

Every single major free agent had at least one major flaw this offseason

 

Are all the perfect players free agents next year, then?

[Guest]

Good call to pass with the price getting that high... Cespedes is going to have to be an absolute superstar to be worth that contract.

 

what is this i don't even

[KingCubsFan]

Every single major free agent had at least one major flaw this offseason

 

Are all the perfect players free agents next year, then?

Most free agents have flaws. That's why you shouldn't rely on the free agent market very often. But guys like Napoli, Wright, Upton, Cain, Greinke, Hamels and Marcum have lesser flaws that make the contracts slightly less risky. I'm not really a fan of building through free agency anyways, so passing on the horrific contracts this offseason doesn't bother me, particularly when it seems to be Epstein's weakness.

[imb]

Good call to pass with the price getting that high... Cespedes is going to have to be an absolute superstar to be worth that contract.

 

what is this i don't even

 

pretend it's 1993

[jersey cubs fan]

Every single major free agent had at least one major flaw this offseason

 

Are all the perfect players free agents next year, then?

Most free agents have flaws. That's why you shouldn't rely on the free agent market very often. But guys like Napoli, Wright, Upton, Cain, Greinke, Hamels and Marcum have lesser flaws that make the contracts slightly less risky. I'm not really a fan of building through free agency anyways, so passing on the horrific contracts this offseason doesn't bother me, particularly when it seems to be Epstein's weakness.

 

Nobody is talking about building exclusively through free agency. But not building does not equal not participating. You build your team through a variety of ways, one of which is to add free agents when you can.

[dew1679666265]

Hold on cowboy. I didn't know all of the teams in the central were so bad. So, both the Reds and the Cardinals are going to barely eclipse the .500 barrier? Do explain.

 

St. Louis won 90 games last year and lost the best player in baseball in the offseason. Their pythagorean W-L was 88-74. You don't think it's very realistic they drop 4-6 games off that pythag W-L? I don't know that I'd bank on it, but I think there's a pretty good chance of it.

 

The Cards also signed Beltran and will get Wainwright back which will help to make up for the loss of Pujols. Furcal for a full year instead of Theriot is also a plus.

 

Furcal's getting old, Carpenter is always a major injury risk, Beltran is old, Berkman is old, Wainwright is coming off a full season injury and may be rusty, at least early on. I think Molina is also 30+, but could be remembering wrong. I tend to think the Cardinals are, at best, the same as last year and probably a little to a lot worse.

[dew1679666265]

Good call to pass with the price getting that high... Cespedes is going to have to be an absolute superstar to be worth that contract.

 

He's getting $9 million a year for 4 years. Going by generally accepted market value, to simply be worth the contract, he'd only have to produce 2 WAR per season. He's very likely to be worth the contract and certainly doesn't have to be a superstar to achieve that.

[Bote McBoteface]

Cespedes really wouldn't have to be particularly good to be worth that contract. If Theo and Jed made a conscious effort to not sign him, and there were reports a day or so ago that they had, money wasn't the reason.

[dew1679666265]

Napoli

 

Napoli will be 31 next year and before his 5.6 WAR in 2011, he's never posted a WAR better than 3.0. He's a nice player, but he's getting older and where we would play him? Catcher? He's probably not good enough to keep Rizzo in AAA an extra year, so first isn't really an option.

 

Wright

 

David Wright? There's a really, really good argument to be made that he's a barely above average player at this point and in severe decline. There are all kinds of flaws to him.

 

Upton

 

Upton's a really nice player. Doesn't have the superstar upside Pujols has, but also has fewer red flags.

 

Cain

 

First off, he's a pitcher and nearly 30. Second, he's going to be looking for a mega deal. Third, there's a very realistic chance he doesn't even hit FA.

 

Greinke

 

Besides the whole potential mental breakdown issue, he's also a pitcher, nearly 30, and has thrown a ton of innings. He'll also probably want a mega deal as well. At least he's likely to hit FA, though. Unless he's traded, that is.

 

Hamels

 

Not a lot of red flags here, other than the obligatory he's a pitcher, around 30, and will want a ton of money. I'd also guess there's a pretty small chance the Phillies let him walk. They'll find the money for him somehow, I expect.

 

Marcum

 

Marcum has averaged 2.8 fWAR per season the past 3 years (his best 3). He's a nice pitcher, but I really don't understand why people keep grouping him in with other elite type players like Pujols, Cain, Greinke, etc. Marcum will also be 31 next season and is a pitcher. There's a lot of risk there.

 

I'm not really a fan of building through free agency anyways, so passing on the horrific contracts this offseason doesn't bother me, particularly when it seems to be Epstein's weakness.

 

Building through FA is different from using FA to supplement what your system doesn't have and likely won't have for a while (superstar talent).

[Clem Fandango]

Cain

 

First off, he's a pitcher and nearly 30.

 

Not to be nitpicky, but Cain is only 27, and doesn't turn 28 until after the 2012 season is over. He's still really young, he's just been in the league since 2005 when he was 20 years old so it seems like he's an older pitcher. I agree with all your points though in that entire post

[KingCubsFan]

Building through FA is different from using FA to supplement what your system doesn't have and likely won't have for a while (superstar talent).

I won't quote your whole post, but the risks/flaws you identified (except maybe Greinke's mental issues) are common in pretty much all free agents. They tend to be on the wrong side of the age curve, they may have been overused in the past, etc. To me, these risks are different than the ones we were presented with for guys like Fielder, Darvish or Cespedes. In Fielder's case, his body type has been documented as one that declines extremely early. For Darvish and Cespedes, there's real questions (particularly Cespedes) as to whether they can be successful in major league baseball because they played in foreign leagues. I think Pujols had more red flags than usual due to the huge contract he was going to command, but I think that argument has been made by both sides numerous times and it's not really worth bringing up again.

There's one thing to use free agency to "supplement" what you already have, I totally agree. But what people were advocating, and why they are upset now, is more than simply supplementing the roster. It's devoting a large percentage of your payroll for the next several years for one or two players. If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

[UMFan83]

Every single major free agent had at least one major flaw this offseason

 

Are all the perfect players free agents next year, then?

 

This. I know we all want to give Theo and Co. our full support and give him the benefit of the doubt, but several times this offseason we've discussed our desire for a FA and then point out their flaws when they don't sign with the Cubs. Eventually there's no one left.

 

While I'm disappointed that we haven't really improved our major league ready talent this offseason (besides Rizzo), I still fully believe in the plan even if it isn't run exactly the way I want it to.

[Guest]

Every single major free agent had at least one major flaw this offseason

 

Are all the perfect players free agents next year, then?

 

This. I know we all want to give Theo and Co. our full support and give him the benefit of the doubt, but several times this offseason we've discussed our desire for a FA and then point out their flaws when they don't sign with the Cubs. Eventually there's no one left.

 

While I'm disappointed that we haven't really improved our major league ready talent this offseason (besides Rizzo), I still fully believe in the plan even if it isn't run exactly the way I want it to.

I really don't think Cespedes is indicative of a philosophy so much as not really all that good for the price. I think Beane is going all in on the chance that he will be better than his contract and Beane can then spin him for more talent (i.e., arbitrage).

 

I'm a little miffed at the offseason, but I have trust in the Cubs. If in a few years we see a replay of this past season and offseason there will be some splainin to do Lucy.

[Sammy Sofa]

If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

 

Ugh.

 

I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least.

[KingCubsFan]

If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

 

Ugh.

 

I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least.

All I was alluding to is that it's hard to compete when players like Soriano and Zambrano make up roughly 25% of your payroll, and it's been that way for several years. It puts you in an unnecessary hole that's difficult to get out of.

[dew1679666265]

Not to be nitpicky, but Cain is only 27, and doesn't turn 28 until after the 2012 season is over. He's still really young, he's just been in the league since 2005 when he was 20 years old so it seems like he's an older pitcher. I agree with all your points though in that entire post

 

Oops, was thinking he will turn 29 during the 2013 season. I'd still much rather give an elite superstar positional player a mega deal than a great pitcher a mega deal, even when there's a 3-year age gap the wrong way between the two.

[TruffleShuffle]

If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

 

Ugh.

 

I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least.

All I was alluding to is that it's hard to compete when players like Soriano and Zambrano make up roughly 25% of your payroll, and it's been that way for several years. It puts you in an unnecessary hole that's difficult to get out of.

 

cespedes is getting $9m a year. that's like 6% of the cubs' payroll. it sucks if he ends up being a complete bust, but it's nowhere close to crippling.

[KingCubsFan]

If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

 

Ugh.

 

I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least.

All I was alluding to is that it's hard to compete when players like Soriano and Zambrano make up roughly 25% of your payroll, and it's been that way for several years. It puts you in an unnecessary hole that's difficult to get out of.

 

cespedes is getting $9m a year. that's like 6% of the cubs' payroll. it sucks if he ends up being a complete bust, but it's nowhere close to crippling.

Yeah, I don't have a problem with the money given to Cespedes. I can see why the Cubs wouldn't want him for only 4 years though.

[UMFan83]

I think Beane is going all in on the chance that he will be better than his contract and Beane can then spin him for more talent (i.e., arbitrage).

 

Exactly. This is the main problem I've had with this offseason. This is free talent. They don't have to trade players for him, or waste a draft pick, or use up international signing allotment. If the Cubs are serious about upgrading the talent/assets in the organization, moves like this should be a no brainer if you have money to spend. That's what causes me to wonder if the Cubs have all that much money to spend. Obviously they have some since they offered him 6/40, but overall I don't get the feeling that the Cubs are giving Theo all that much to spend this offseason, and that sucks.

[Sammy Sofa]

If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

 

Ugh.

 

I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least.

All I was alluding to is that it's hard to compete when players like Soriano and Zambrano make up roughly 25% of your payroll, and it's been that way for several years. It puts you in an unnecessary hole that's difficult to get out of.

 

It does, but it's hardly insurmountable, especially when you're talking about 25% of a nearly $130 million dollar payroll.

 

Look, signing Soriano for the years and money he got was a bad move from day 1, everyone knows that. It was not, however, an "albatross" contract for a team with the resources of the Cubs. Looking at the Soriano contract as being indicative of the main problem is looking backwards at how poorly the team was constructed overall. Soriano's deal didn't make or break the Cubs. Hell, Soriano's deal coupled with Zambrano's (and it's ridiculous revisionist and alarmist history to lump that in with Soriano's deal as if they're readily comparable) didn't make or break the Cubs. What broke the Cubs was crappy, crappy drafting and player development.

[CubColtPacer]

I think Beane is going all in on the chance that he will be better than his contract and Beane can then spin him for more talent (i.e., arbitrage).

 

Exactly. This is the main problem I've had with this offseason. This is free talent. They don't have to trade players for him, or waste a draft pick, or use up international signing allotment. If the Cubs are serious about upgrading the talent/assets in the organization, moves like this should be a no brainer if you have money to spend. That's what causes me to wonder if the Cubs have all that much money to spend. Obviously they have some since they offered him 6/40, but overall I don't get the feeling that the Cubs are giving Theo all that much to spend this offseason, and that sucks.

 

As Davell pointed out, Theo probably has a pretty good budget. It's just that the Cubs have a lot of line items that most clubs don't. From deferred money (Pena and Dempster) to fired executives/managers (Hendry/Quade), to one-time facility upgrades (the 8 million dollar Dominican facility), to greatly increasing front office/minor league staff, the Cubs have a lot of expenses they didn't have just last year. Theo seems to just be choosing to allocate his budget a little differently than Henry did who stuck most all of it in the major league payroll.

 

The 40 man payroll is starting to tick up though especially if the signing of Soler is confirmed. And the good news is that most of that list will go away. The budget money that is being spent on upgrading facilities will be able to be spent elsewhere once that is done. The deferred money is out of the way after the year, and so are the fired salaries.

[dew1679666265]

I won't quote your whole post, but the risks/flaws you identified (except maybe Greinke's mental issues) are common in pretty much all free agents. They tend to be on the wrong side of the age curve, they may have been overused in the past, etc. To me, these risks are different than the ones we were presented with for guys like Fielder, Darvish or Cespedes. In Fielder's case, his body type has been documented as one that declines extremely early. For Darvish and Cespedes, there's real questions (particularly Cespedes) as to whether they can be successful in major league baseball because they played in foreign leagues. I think Pujols had more red flags than usual due to the huge contract he was going to command, but I think that argument has been made by both sides numerous times and it's not really worth bringing up again.

 

I agree that we shouldn't rehash the Pujols argument again, however what I was trying to do there was show that you can talk yourself out of any potential FA pickup. I wouldn't oppose pursuing most of the guys you listed (Marcum and Napoli are probably the exceptions), despite the rather ample question marks surrounding them. Just like I was very much in favor of pursuing one of the greatest players to ever play the game who still most likely has a few great to elite years left in him.

 

Anytime you build a successful organization, you have to take risks. It's not a matter of avoiding risks entirely or not taking big risks (aka contracts), it's about having enough cheap, young talent filling out the rest of the roster to soften the blow when/if the risk doesn't pay off or falters. This management group has shown a terrific ability to put together great, young talent. That, coupled with what should be a large market payroll, enables us to take on greater risks than most teams can handle.

 

There's one thing to use free agency to "supplement" what you already have, I totally agree. But what people were advocating, and why they are upset now, is more than simply supplementing the roster. It's devoting a large percentage of your payroll for the next several years for one or two players. If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

 

If those one or two players are proven elite (Pujols) or great (Wilson) players and your system is completely devoid of either of those types of players, then supplementing is exactly what you're doing.

 

The Cubs' problems of late haven't come from big contracts. They've come from not having any form of young, cheap talent to fill around those big contracts. Zambrano and Soriano haven't kept the Cubs from winning, a lack of young, cheap talent around those big contracts has (among other things).

[SouthSideRyan]

Every single major free agent had at least one major flaw this offseason

 

Are all the perfect players free agents next year, then?

Most free agents have flaws. That's why you shouldn't rely on the free agent market very often. But guys like Napoli, Wright, Upton, Cain, Greinke, Hamels and Marcum have lesser flaws that make the contracts slightly less risky. I'm not really a fan of building through free agency anyways, so passing on the horrific contracts this offseason doesn't bother me, particularly when it seems to be Epstein's weakness.

 

How many of those guys actually reach free agency?

[SouthSideRyan]

If you're going to do that, you better be damn sure they're worth it. Otherwise, you'll end up with the 2010 Cubs.

 

Ugh.

 

I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least.

 

Besides the '10 Cubs went 75-87. That's pretty decent.