Yooooooooooooennis Cespedes: To Oakland pg 44

[C.C.]

Fielder has two knocks. So happy we passed on these guys.

 

 

I don't care if Fielder hits 50 this year, that contract was horrible and I'm thrilled the Cubs aren't stuck paying it.

 

Why is it every player we don't sign we are happy because it's a bad contract?

 

Other than Fielder/Pujols, who is that being said about?

 

Those were the only two premiere players on the market. You aren't going to sign a stud to a good contract. That's the reality of baseball.

[XZero771679666304]

Fielder has two knocks. So happy we passed on these guys.

 

 

I don't care if Fielder hits 50 this year, that contract was horrible and I'm thrilled the Cubs aren't stuck paying it.

 

Why is it every player we don't sign we are happy because it's a bad contract?

 

Other than Fielder/Pujols, who is that being said about?

 

Those were the only two premiere players on the market. You aren't going to sign a stud to a good contract. That's the reality of baseball.

 

But you said every player we don't sign.

 

And there's bad, and then there's stupid bad. Pujols was the former, Fielder was the latter. You could make case Pujols might have been worth it, but not Fielder.

 

And neither one was going to make the Cubs good this year and Rizzo seems like a good long term solution. Cespedes is a far more troublesome miss.

[Guest]

I don't care if Fielder hits 50 this year, that contract was horrible and I'm thrilled the Cubs aren't stuck paying it.

 

Why is it every player we don't sign we are happy because it's a bad contract?

 

Other than Fielder/Pujols, who is that being said about?

 

Those were the only two premiere players on the market. You aren't going to sign a stud to a good contract. That's the reality of baseball.

 

But you said every player we don't sign.

 

And there's bad, and then there's stupid bad. Pujols was the former, Fielder was the latter. You could make case Pujols might have been worth it, but not Fielder.

 

And neither one was going to make the Cubs good this year and Rizzo seems like a good long term solution. Cespedes is a far more troublesome miss.

 

Exactly.

[C.C.]

If Rizzo is any good. Pujols or Fielder could of help this club for now and the future. With so many contracts coming off the books you can afford a bad contract or two latter down the line.

 

I do agree on Cespedes and you can add Darvish in there.

[XZero771679666304]

If Rizzo is any good. Pujols or Fielder could of help this club for now and the future. With so many contracts coming off the books you can afford a bad contract or two latter down the line.

 

I do agree on Cespedes and you can add Darvish in there.

 

And if Pujols' decline won't be as sharp as the past couple year's numbers indicate, or if Fielder doesn't break down under his own weight, etc., etc.

 

Just because you have money to burn doesn't mean you should throw it in the fire. Signing Fielder to a nine year deal would be pretty close to doing that, due to his body type and the fact he isn't as elite as his rep indicates.

 

And it's harder to be mad about Darvish since it was a blind bid that was lost, not an open bidding war. It's still disappointing.

[C.C.]

If Rizzo is any good. Pujols or Fielder could of help this club for now and the future. With so many contracts coming off the books you can afford a bad contract or two latter down the line.

 

I do agree on Cespedes and you can add Darvish in there.

 

And if Pujols' decline won't be as sharp as the past couple year's numbers indicate, or if Fielder doesn't break down under his own weight, etc., etc.

 

Just because you have money to burn doesn't mean you should throw it in the fire. Signing Fielder to a nine year deal would be pretty close to doing that, due to his body type and the fact he isn't as elite as his rep indicates.

 

And it's harder to be mad about Darvish since it was a blind bid that was lost, not an open bidding war. It's still disappointing.

 

But the problem is any premiere player is going to be a bad contract latter down the line. So are we going to pass on everyone?

[XZero771679666304]

If Rizzo is any good. Pujols or Fielder could of help this club for now and the future. With so many contracts coming off the books you can afford a bad contract or two latter down the line.

 

I do agree on Cespedes and you can add Darvish in there.

 

And if Pujols' decline won't be as sharp as the past couple year's numbers indicate, or if Fielder doesn't break down under his own weight, etc., etc.

 

Just because you have money to burn doesn't mean you should throw it in the fire. Signing Fielder to a nine year deal would be pretty close to doing that, due to his body type and the fact he isn't as elite as his rep indicates.

 

And it's harder to be mad about Darvish since it was a blind bid that was lost, not an open bidding war. It's still disappointing.

 

But the problem is any premiere player is going to be a bad contract latter down the line. So are we going to pass on everyone?

 

If there is a viable alternative, and if it's as prodigiously bad as Prince Fielder's was. Again, there are degrees of bad, and the Tigers are going to wear that contract.

[Guest]

I probably would have given Pujols the contract he got. I think he'll be worth it. But I certainly understand not taking that risk as your first big move as GM.

 

Fielder's contract is atrocious.

 

I'm really sorry we missed on Cespedes and Darvish. If you add those two guys to this team, there's suddenly a lot more to be excited about in the near and mid-term.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

But the problem is any premiere player is going to be a bad contract latter down the line. So are we going to pass on everyone?

 

I keep having this nightmare scenario play through my head:

 

2012: We were too bad last season to make it worth adding a big-time contract.

2013: Ditto

2014: We almost made it to .500, but there's only a couple of impact players on the market, and the Dodgers and Yankees went to insane numbers on them and we should be thankful we didn't try to match that.

2015: Attendance has been down the last few years because of all the awful teams, and we still don't have the cable megadeal like those big market teams, so we have to be prudent.

[davell]

If the WGN deal runs out in 2014, hopefully we renegotiate with Comcast, to get our big deal then. I don't want to wait til 2019 to get our own network. We're big enough right now to be able to sign large deals as it is. That's obvious. Yeah, I'm pissed we didn't get Cespedes. No doubt. We BETTER get Soler. And we BETTER get him before July 2nd, so we're not penalized for spending. And at this point, I'm legit worried he won't even be eligible by then. It's certainly too early to call Cespedes a supetstar, but the returns are pointing that way. He wanted a 4 year deal, or an 8 year deal. He should have been a Cub, one deal or the other. And we'll never know what we offered on Darvish' posting fee, but there would be a TON of excitement right now, if we had those 2. No doubt. But Cespedes is the bigger miss of the two.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

More pissed about missing Darvis than Cespedes anyway....I think Darvish is going to be an absolute stud. Can't believe the bankrupt-just-two-years-ago Rangers have made so many strides so quickly...Some well connected guys over there I guess.

[dew1679666265]

Other than Fielder/Pujols, who is that being said about?

 

I have seen a number of people on here say the Cespedes and Darvish contracts are pretty bad and their teams will be regretting them (especially Cespedes).

[dew1679666265]

But the problem is any premiere player is going to be a bad contract latter down the line. So are we going to pass on everyone?

 

I do agree with you that in order to bring in star talent, you have accept that there will be bad contracts on the roster (and that's perfectly acceptable). However, I wouldn't include Prince in that conversation. The Tigers signed him to an unbelievably awful contract - one that there's almost no chance he comes close to being worth it. Passing/missing on Pujols, Cespedes, Darvish was bad, passing/missing on Prince was prudent.

[dew1679666265]

More pissed about missing Darvis than Cespedes anyway....I think Darvish is going to be an absolute stud. Can't believe the bankrupt-just-two-years-ago Rangers have made so many strides so quickly...Some well connected guys over there I guess.

 

I feel worse about missing on Cespedes because there was no reason to miss on him. It was a conscious decision by Theo/Jed to not give him the 4-year deal he was seeking. In Darvish's case, it's frustrating, but much less so because of the blind bids. That appeared to be less of an intentional pass (like Cespedes was) and more of just bad luck of the draw.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Look, obviously it's a tiny sample size, but let's not pretend a ton of people here weren't drooling over this guy. Hell, I don't care if someone prefers Soler (I do myself); I still view it as a failure right now that they didn't pick up both.

 

This. Especially considering the state of the organization and the direction Theo and Jed wanted to go, passing on the Fielder and Pujols speepstakes was very understandable. However, both Cespedes and Soler were exactly what we needed and we had the funds to overpay for both. Especially taking into consideration the lack of elite free agents in the near future and the upcoming regulations when it comes to overslot draft picks one could argue that it was virtually crucial to get these guys. At this point, Soler is a must.

[XZero771679666304]

Other than Fielder/Pujols, who is that being said about?

 

I have seen a number of people on here say the Cespedes and Darvish contracts are pretty bad and their teams will be regretting them (especially Cespedes).

 

Well that's silly. The Cespedes contract is only even potentially onerous to a team like the A's, and the only thing exorbitant about Darvish was the posting fee.

[dew1679666265]

Other than Fielder/Pujols, who is that being said about?

 

I have seen a number of people on here say the Cespedes and Darvish contracts are pretty bad and their teams will be regretting them (especially Cespedes).

 

Well that's silly. The Cespedes contract is only even potentially onerous to a team like the A's, and the only thing exorbitant about Darvish was the posting fee.

 

Yeah, I'd be pretty happy if we got Darvish on the posting fee/contract combo the Rangers did - it's doubtlessly a risk, but one very worth taking. The Cespedes contract has a very real chance to be a major bargain and wouldn't be an albatross even if he completely busts. I can at least understand (even though I disagree with) the complaints about Pujols' contract, I have no idea where the criticisms of the Darvish/Cespedes deals are coming from.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Other than Fielder/Pujols, who is that being said about?

 

I have seen a number of people on here say the Cespedes and Darvish contracts are pretty bad and their teams will be regretting them (especially Cespedes).

 

Well that's silly. The Cespedes contract is only even potentially onerous to a team like the A's, and the only thing exorbitant about Darvish was the posting fee.

 

Yeah, I'd be pretty happy if we got Darvish on the posting fee/contract combo the Rangers did - it's doubtlessly a risk, but one very worth taking. The Cespedes contract has a very real chance to be a major bargain and wouldn't be an albatross even if he completely busts. I can at least understand (even though I disagree with) the complaints about Pujols' contract, I have no idea where the criticisms of the Darvish/Cespedes deals are coming from.

 

People trying to tell themselves that we dodged a bullet and we're better off saving the money and going after someone like Joey Votto, Matt Cain, or Cole Hamels.

[dew1679666265]

People trying to tell themselves that we dodged a bullet and we're better off saving the money and going after someone like Joey Votto, Matt Cain, or Cole Hamels.

 

I do think there's a thought process going on with Cub fans at the moment, as others have noted, that is against giving out big contracts simply because they're big contracts and without regard to how good the player is/can be. I've seen a lot of people blame the struggles under Hendry to giving out big contracts and, thus, to propose giving a "big" contract to Darvish or Cespedes is just wanting to relive the Hendry days. That's based on the faulty assumption that Hendry's failure was because of giving out bad big contracts (the only one that falls under that description is Soriano's).

 

As a side note, I'm not talking about everybody who opposed signing Pujols, Cespedes, or Darvish. It's simply something I've noticed a number of people referencing when opposing a Darvish/Cespedes contract.

[dew1679666265]

I keep having this nightmare scenario play through my head:

 

2012: We were too bad last season to make it worth adding a big-time contract.

2013: Ditto

2014: We almost made it to .500, but there's only a couple of impact players on the market, and the Dodgers and Yankees went to insane numbers on them and we should be thankful we didn't try to match that.

2015: Attendance has been down the last few years because of all the awful teams, and we still don't have the cable megadeal like those big market teams, so we have to be prudent.

 

I think for some Cubs fans, this scenario is already playing out as they've argued against signing Pujols/Darvish/Cespedes because we wouldn't win this year with them. I trust Theo/Jed will not fall into that mentality, though.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I keep having this nightmare scenario play through my head:

 

2012: We were too bad last season to make it worth adding a big-time contract.

2013: Ditto

2014: We almost made it to .500, but there's only a couple of impact players on the market, and the Dodgers and Yankees went to insane numbers on them and we should be thankful we didn't try to match that.

2015: Attendance has been down the last few years because of all the awful teams, and we still don't have the cable megadeal like those big market teams, so we have to be prudent.

 

I think for some Cubs fans, this scenario is already playing out as they've argued against signing Pujols/Darvish/Cespedes because we wouldn't win this year with them. I trust Theo/Jed will not fall into that mentality, though.

 

The problem is that some of these fans equate overbidding on guys like Cespedes, Darvish, or Soler with giving a potential albatross contract to someone like Pujols or Fielder. For example, Cespedes contract is 4/36, so even if he proved a mega bust, it wouldn't handcuff a big market team like the Cubs who have so much money off the books and more to come. These are the kind of guys that are worth investing in.

[dew1679666265]

The problem is that some of these fans equate overbidding on guys like Cespedes, Darvish, or Soler with giving a potential albatross contract to someone like Pujols or Fielder. For example, Cespedes contract is 4/36, so even if he proved a mega bust, it wouldn't handcuff a big market team like the Cubs who have so much money off the books and more to come. These are the kind of guys that are worth investing in.

 

Exactly, we can afford to make these kinds of investments when the need is there. And the need is certainly there.

[Lefty]

Can we cool on the Cespedes worship. It's been 5 games. Where was Fukudome after the first week?

[Sammy Sofa]

Actually, you're still kind of arguing in favor of him. Signing Fukudome was actually one of the smarter FA moves of Hendry's tenure regardless of how it worked out. Guys like him and (even moreso) Cespedes are the kinds of guys I want them to take chances on.

[dew1679666265]

Can we cool on the Cespedes worship. It's been 5 games. Where was Fukudome after the first week?

 

My feelings on Cespedes have nothing to do with his performance to this point this season.