POSIT: epstein has the best executive position in sports

[Hairyducked Idiot]

None of what has been said here is able to refute the notion that the man has a ridiculously long leash and he's very clearly going to use all of it.

well then, since Theo has a 5 year deal, I guess we'll suck for the next 4 automatically then, by your thinking. Because he's certainly not getting fired between now and then. It's not going to take this group that length of time to get us from a crawl to a sprint.

 

If they suck for 4 years he'll be gone before then.

 

Don't count on it. Ricketts is one of those fans who is convinced that it all went wrong because of big contracts and that we have to do it "the right way."

 

In four years, the first picks from Theo's first draft will just be hitting the majors. He'll have several more years of leash after that.

 

This is the quote that has me nervous:

 

I can go ahead and write your stories for you now if you want. At some point you’re going to wake up and write about ‘Oh, the honeymoon is over. We’re not seeing enough progress.’ I don’t know when that’s going to be. It might be two years from now, it might be three years from now, it might be two months from now, it might be two weeks from now. But because progress as an organization isn’t linear, that’s coming, and we just don’t let it bother us.

 

Maybe it's just more of his random cliche meaningless press conference stuff, but that sure sounds like Theo plans on being bad for a few more years while he gets to water his plants in Farmsystemville.

[bukie]

Which, of course, ignores Rizzo and Jackson, and the rest of the moves made to revamp the minor league system.

 

It ignores the entire universe of existence outside of the conversation at hand, which was whether or not Theo Epstein decided to tank the 2012 season.

 

I'm very happy with what he's doing with the minor leagues and the overall organization. I just don't think that the tanking of 2012 was necessary to support those actions.

I don't think giving LaHair six weeks of time at 1B to preserve an extra year of eligibility for Rizzo is the same thing as saying the Cubs didn't make any upgrade at 1B. The plan isn't to replace Pena with LaHair, it's replacing Pena with Rizzo, and using LaHair for six weeks to bridge the gap.

[jersey cubs fan]

If they stay below .500 for the next 4 years the guy is toast. The fans will disappear, the ratings will plummet and things will get ugly. He's going to have to do something to come back for a 5th season, and not sucking is going to be the first thing. That almost certainly won't happen, because you would have to try to be that bad. It's one thing to try and be bad in year 1, it's not happening for 4 years.

[jersey cubs fan]

Which, of course, ignores Rizzo and Jackson, and the rest of the moves made to revamp the minor league system.

 

It ignores the entire universe of existence outside of the conversation at hand, which was whether or not Theo Epstein decided to tank the 2012 season.

 

I'm very happy with what he's doing with the minor leagues and the overall organization. I just don't think that the tanking of 2012 was necessary to support those actions.

I don't think giving LaHair six weeks of time at 1B to preserve an extra year of eligibility for Rizzo is the same thing as saying the Cubs didn't make any upgrade at 1B. The plan isn't to replace Pena with LaHair, it's replacing Pena with Rizzo, and using LaHair for six weeks to bridge the gap.

 

There's no point in bringing up Rizzo after six weeks. If that is the plan, he should be there today.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I don't think giving LaHair six weeks of time at 1B to preserve an extra year of eligibility for Rizzo is the same thing as saying the Cubs didn't make any upgrade at 1B. The plan isn't to replace Pena with LaHair, it's replacing Pena with Rizzo, and using LaHair for six weeks to bridge the gap.

 

It'll be a lot more than six weeks. For one thing, Rizzo already has 68 days of major-league service time. He'll need to stay down for at least 10-12 weeks to delay his free agency.

 

For another, he's 22 and still has some worrisome K issues. Given the apparently cautious approach to the minors that the front office is taking, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him get the full season at AAA with a September call-up.

[treebird]

Which, of course, ignores Rizzo and Jackson, and the rest of the moves made to revamp the minor league system.

 

It ignores the entire universe of existence outside of the conversation at hand, which was whether or not Theo Epstein decided to tank the 2012 season.

 

I'm very happy with what he's doing with the minor leagues and the overall organization. I just don't think that the tanking of 2012 was necessary to support those actions.

I don't think giving LaHair six weeks of time at 1B to preserve an extra year of eligibility for Rizzo is the same thing as saying the Cubs didn't make any upgrade at 1B. The plan isn't to replace Pena with LaHair, it's replacing Pena with Rizzo, and using LaHair for six weeks to bridge the gap.

 

not a huge deal, but rizzo has to stay down for like 3.5 months in order to preserve that year.

[Guest]

They added DeJesus and Stewart to the offense(which is a greater compliment than you'll give credit for, buy low moves are always easy to lampoon), and will add Jackson and Rizzo to the offense for a significant portion of the year. By the all star break they're likely planning to have a lineup like DeJesus/Jackson/Castro/Rizzo/Soto/Stewart/Soriano/Barney. That's 6 guys who could easily be 3 WAR guys. Giving them the season to help sort out which guys will reach that potential(and doing the same thing with a legion of similarly talented SP) to better identify holes is a far cry from this refrain of willfully forfeiting 1-2 seasons, especially when it would have taken an exceptional sequence(with a lot of risks) to make the team a playoff team in 2012.

 

It's easy to lampoon buy low moves because they are so often just catching falling knives. It's easy to just retcon bad players into "buy low opportunities."

 

Volstad was a great buy low opportunity. He's in his prime age, he had solid peripherals and a pedigree. Stewart has terrible peripherals and a nagging injury that's been known to ruin batting seasons. DeJesus is 32.

 

I don't think "3-WAR potential" is all that much of a compliment. Every stiff in AAA should be able to put up a 2-2.5 win season if the breaks go their way, as Darwin Barney proved last year.

 

We had three clear openings in the lineup. We filled them with a career AAAA roster fill coming off a Julio Zuleta season at Iowa, a 32-year-old buy low candidate, and a bad-wristed, high-K 3b who couldn't hack it in Colorado.

 

We can rationalize it to ourselves all we want, but this is not what we were all hoping for when Theo Epstein came to the Cubs.

 

Less than 75 guys were 3 WAR players last year, so I think it's a sufficiently high benchmark. Several of those hitters(Castro, Rizzo, probably Soto, probably Jackson) have potential beyond it.

 

Are you ignoring Rizzo on purpose?

 

Look at Theo's 2004 team. Millar, Bellhorn, Mueller, Arroyo, Lowe, all guys he picked up off the scrap heap(or in Lowe's case, significantly changed his role) that played significant parts in their run. He didn't bat 1.000(Kapler, Reese, Mientkiewicz, Suppan), but let's not pretend this isn't Theo's MO.

[SouthSideRyan]

You're insane if you think Theo left his hometown to come suck on purpose for 4 years.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Look at Theo's 2004 team. Millar, Bellhorn, Mueller, Arroyo, Lowe, all guys he picked up off the scrap heap(or in Lowe's case, significantly changed his role) that played significant parts in their run. He didn't bat 1.000(Kapler, Reese, Mientkiewicz, Suppan), but let's not pretend this isn't Theo's MO.

 

He also traded for Curt Schilling.

 

So far, we're getting the Scrapyard Hero half of his M.O. without the "also get some really awesome players" portion. And this is for a team that needs more awesome players way more than it needs more scrapheap finds.

[shnsajax]

I wouldn't mind the job of being Hugh Hefner's son.

[bukie]

My problem with the whole "Theo punted this year for no reason" argument is that it almost completely ignores the Rizzo trade. Once the Cubs decided that their best long term solution at 1B was Rizzo (arguably the top 1B prospect in baseball right now...him or Alonso), then 2012's focus was shifted almost immediately from "contend" to "evaluate". Rizzo wasn't going to be major league ready on day 1, and Hoyer knew that from his struggles last year. So, they acquired a bunch of buy-low targets to see who works out and who won't.

 

Rather than spend extra on a stop-gap 1B, they're using one they already had that's torn the cover off the ball the past 15 months. In all likelihood, he won't work out, but it's worth a shot for a few months. They've retooled the minor league system, built depth into the rotation, and retooled the entire organizational philosophy. In all likelihood, going forward they'll still need to address 3B and the OF, and pick up another starter or two. But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

[CubColtPacer]

The big question in evaluating 2012 was where the missing money went. The Cubs only spent a fraction of the money they had available to them. Why was that? I can think of 5 main possibilities:

 

1) The Ricketts have been lying all along and are really cash poor. This is an incredibly unlikely one because of all the other moves they've been doing. Dominican complex, buying the McDonalds, even bringing in the highest paid GM in the game. It just doesn't add up.

 

2) Theo had the money available to him and chose to put it back in the Ricketts pockets where he won't see it again. Another very unlikely scenario. Theo could have done lots of things with the money that doesn't involve hurting the future. Acquiring assets on 1 year deals, hiring more staff, building better databases. He wouldn't just give that much money back.

 

3) Theo had the money available to him, and chose to instead spend that money in future seasons. This one is a little more likely but still unlikely IMO. Once you raise the payroll again with that extra money you've saved, it becomes harder to lower it back again when that extra money runs out.

 

4) Theo tried to lure free agents, and they turned him down/haven't signed. Obviously, in some ways we know this is true. Cespedes for example turned down the Cubs who were pursing him. They are very likely pursuing Soler and have some money set aside for that. Who knows what other free agents the Cubs were close with. It still seems to be way too much of a money difference to just be striking out in free agency though, especially because the Cubs chose to fill most of their spots fairly early.

 

5) Theo had the money and chose to spend it on other areas of the organization. This one makes the most sense from what they've said. There's been lots of work being done behind the scenes this offseason. Minor league staff turnover. Front office additions. Dominican complex. Building the new computer database. Paying a second manager/general manager. There's been a lot of things that weren't present in the Hendry era that have more to do with the baseball side than the business side. So either Ricketts is paying out of his own pocket to make the improvements, or it's likely coming out of Theo's overall budget.

 

I tend to think it's a mixture of 4 and 5. But whichever one you think it is dictates how hard Theo was trying. If he really only had 20 million or so to play with on the major league payroll, then his buy low moves look a lot better as an effort to make this team competitive. If he pocketed 30-35 million just because he could, then he's clearly trying to use his leash. If he didn't have the money available at all, then that's a potential major problem.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Less than 75 guys were 3 WAR players last year, so I think it's a sufficiently high benchmark. Several of those hitters(Castro, Rizzo, probably Soto, probably Jackson) have potential beyond it.

 

Okay, three WAR is more than I was thinking it was from a position player.

 

In which case, you are talking about a benchmark that DeJesus has hit once in the last five seasons, Stewart has never passed the halfway mark to, Soto has only done twice. Throw in Soriano's age and Jackson's uncertainty, and I'd say you are as likely to only get 1 3-WAR season out of those six as you are six.

 

My problem with the whole "Theo punted this year for no reason" argument is that it almost completely ignores the Rizzo trade. Once the Cubs decided that their best long term solution at 1B was Rizzo (arguably the top 1B prospect in baseball right now...him or Alonso), then 2012's focus was shifted almost immediately from "contend" to "evaluate". Rizzo wasn't going to be major league ready on day 1, and Hoyer knew that from his struggles last year. So, they acquired a bunch of buy-low targets to see who works out and who won't.

 

Rather than spend extra on a stop-gap 1B, they're using one they already had that's torn the cover off the ball the past 15 months. In all likelihood, he won't work out, but it's worth a shot for a few months. They've retooled the minor league system, built depth into the rotation, and retooled the entire organizational philosophy. In all likelihood, going forward they'll still need to address 3B and the OF, and pick up another starter or two. But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

 

Okay, what was the reason? I'm not entirely clear on what you are arguing the reason was. To "evaluate"? Evaluate who? Some prospects who still need AAA time? We could have done that anyway.

[jersey cubs fan]

But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

 

Jiminy Christmas.

 

Yes, we all know this. The point is they are throwing away 2012. The fact that there is a purpose is besides the point. It didn't need to be done, but it has been done.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I tend to think it's a mixture of 4 and 5. But whichever one you think it is dictates how hard Theo was trying. If he really only had 20 million or so to play with on the major league payroll, then his buy low moves look a lot better as an effort to make this team competitive. If he pocketed 30-35 million just because he could, then he's clearly trying to use his leash. If he didn't have the money available at all, then that's a potential major problem.

 

 

Very good summary. It's hard to figure out just what happened because none of them make sense, like you said. The problem with No. 5 is that the scale just doesn't add up.

 

When you include the fact that the new CBA won't let us spend another $12 million in the draft, then we're talking about a shortfall of dozens of millions of dollars from last year to this year. You could have built six Dominican Academies and gotten every scout a gold-plated iPad, and still not accounted for where all the money went.

 

Unless they counted the McDonald's purchase, then my guess is they are holding it back for Soler.

[Guest]

Partial credit for the possibility that the front office knew they'd be able to get Rizzo, I guess. But that still leaves about half-a-lineup's worth of players that we made no visible attempt to upgrade.

 

They made moves to address 3B and RF, kept a cornerstone at SS, kept moderately productive pre-FAs at C and 2B, and have prospects ready to take over midseason at 1B and CF. I guess they could have sold Soriano and tried to fill LF a different way, but outside that, they either kept productive guys or made moves at every other spot.

 

Wait, "keeping Castro" was a thing they did?

 

The verb isn't really important, the point was that they didn't ignore a bunch of black holes. They still need impact players and it's not a finished product, but the obvious sentiment was that they ignored/didn't try to fix a bad offense, which isn't the case.

It's not? I was among the first to say that the organization needed flushing, it still does. I think Theo et al. are in the process of doing that, however, it does not necessarily preclude spending on difference makers.

 

What they got were guys who were bad and/or needed a change of scene (Stewart, Volstead, Maholm) or middling (DeJesus, you could throw Volstead in there if you wish) or stood pat with what they have (Byrd, Soriano, Barney, Soto, LaHair).

 

Right now they are hoping some of the mediocre talent in the minors breaks through. I am too.

 

They may be marginally better than last year, but that's no great feat.

Edited April 4, 2012 by CubinNY

[bukie]

My problem with the whole "Theo punted this year for no reason" argument is that it almost completely ignores the Rizzo trade. Once the Cubs decided that their best long term solution at 1B was Rizzo (arguably the top 1B prospect in baseball right now...him or Alonso), then 2012's focus was shifted almost immediately from "contend" to "evaluate". Rizzo wasn't going to be major league ready on day 1, and Hoyer knew that from his struggles last year. So, they acquired a bunch of buy-low targets to see who works out and who won't.

 

Rather than spend extra on a stop-gap 1B, they're using one they already had that's torn the cover off the ball the past 15 months. In all likelihood, he won't work out, but it's worth a shot for a few months. They've retooled the minor league system, built depth into the rotation, and retooled the entire organizational philosophy. In all likelihood, going forward they'll still need to address 3B and the OF, and pick up another starter or two. But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

 

Okay, what was the reason? I'm not entirely clear on what you are arguing the reason was. To "evaluate"? Evaluate who? Some prospects who still need AAA time? We could have done that anyway.

 

Volstad, Travis Wood, Wells, Garza (whether it was a 1-year fluke or he's genuinely stepped up), Marmol (whether it was a 1-year fluke or he can be counted on going forward), Stewart, LaHair, and Castro (defensively at SS), Barney, and to a lesser extent DeJesus, Soriano, Sappelt, Rizzo and Jackson. Maybe half of them will work out long-term. Rather than go all-in on spending to contend this year, they decided to give a chance to a number of projects and see what sticks.

[bukie]

But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

 

Jiminy Christmas.

 

Yes, we all know this. The point is they are throwing away 2012. The fact that there is a purpose is besides the point. It didn't need to be done, but it has been done.

Kyle is the one who is arguing that the organization is throwing away the year for no reason.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

 

Jiminy Christmas.

 

Yes, we all know this. The point is they are throwing away 2012. The fact that there is a purpose is besides the point. It didn't need to be done, but it has been done.

Kyle is the one who is arguing that the organization is throwing away the year for no reason.

 

Oh, I certainly believe there is a reason.

 

But "Let's hope maybe some bad players turn into good players" isn't a reason, it's a rationalization. If a player is good, you can evaluate him while trying to win. If he's not, that's what AAA is for.

[jersey cubs fan]

But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

 

Jiminy Christmas.

 

Yes, we all know this. The point is they are throwing away 2012. The fact that there is a purpose is besides the point. It didn't need to be done, but it has been done.

Kyle is the one who is arguing that the organization is throwing away the year for no reason.

 

Because they didn't need to.

 

Things like the need to evaluate and maintaining financial flexibility are just cop-outs for them not trying this year. They could have built a tremendous organization over the next 3-5 years while still trying in 2012, but they chose not to, because they have a leash and a fan/media base that was begging them not to try.

[bukie]

But the plan isn't unfocused, and it's not like they're throwing away 2012 with no purpose or reason.

 

Jiminy Christmas.

 

Yes, we all know this. The point is they are throwing away 2012. The fact that there is a purpose is besides the point. It didn't need to be done, but it has been done.

Kyle is the one who is arguing that the organization is throwing away the year for no reason.

 

Oh, I certainly believe there is a reason.

 

But "Let's hope maybe some bad players turn into good players" isn't a reason, it's a rationalization. If a player is good, you can evaluate him while trying to win. If he's not, that's what AAA is for.

And "Let's hope maybe some bad players turn into good players" is a gross oversimplification of the position so you can more easily brush it away.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

And "Let's hope maybe some bad players turn into good players" is a gross oversimplification of the position so you can more easily brush it away.

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o4VGwxK1Jt4/TzvUuzHJWlI/AAAAAAAACjU/6GR70HJfC-s/s400phineas%2525255B1%2525255D.jpg

Yes. Yes it is.

 

But "evaluation" is just after-the-fact rationalization to make a bad choice seem better after it's too late to hope it might be changed.

[KingCubsFan]

And "Let's hope maybe some bad players turn into good players" is a gross oversimplification of the position so you can more easily brush it away.

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o4VGwxK1Jt4/TzvUuzHJWlI/AAAAAAAACjU/6GR70HJfC-s/s400phineas%2525255B1%2525255D.jpg

Yes. Yes it is.

 

But "evaluation" is just after-the-fact rationalization to make a bad choice seem better after it's too late to hope it might be changed.

So basically your argument is that Theo made a terrible mistake by not blowing $300-400 million on the free agent market in an attempt to recreate the 2006 Cardinals glory with an 83-win World Series winner, because devoting that much money and locking down several positions long-term would have had absolutely zero effect on the franchise's success in the coming years?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So basically your argument is that Theo made a terrible mistake by not blowing $300-400 million on the free agent market in an attempt to recreate the 2006 Cardinals glory with an 83-win World Series winner, because devoting that much money and locking down several positions long-term would have had absolutely zero effect on the franchise's success in the coming years?

 

 

Handing jobs to bad player | an entire universe | Spending hundreds of millions on free agents.

 

They could have attempted to put a credible team on the field without going the Pujols route.

 

Do everything you did this offseason, but keep Ramirez and Pena, sign Cespedes instead of DeJesus and spend some money on one more decent relief pitcher to replace Marshall. Go ahead and trade Byrd. That's probably a .500 team with some decent chances in the 5-playoff-team era, and you've committed less than $100 million long-term.

[Backtobanks]

I think Theo has a leash that's seems to be way too long for me. I think he could have very easily put a decent team on the field for 2012 while rebuilding. Contention should be the target for 2013 and NL Central winners in 2014. If he doesn't get us to the WS by 2015, then he has been a disappointment to me. He has been brought here to win a World Series and has been given every resource he wanted and complete autonomy by an owner who supports him 100%.