Theo is on W&S right now

[Careless]

If they want to just sit on that money and save it for future seasons, that'd be a pretty novel approach. Has any major sports team ever done that?

Marlins?

[CyHawk_Cub]

If they want to just sit on that money and save it for future seasons, that'd be a pretty novel approach. Has any major sports team ever done that?

Marlins?

 

Pretty sure they were banking $$ for Loria's personality transplant. Gonna need to save for quite awhile.

[Cubswin11]

My main thing, so far at least, is I'm not regretting us actually "missing" on someone yet. Fielder and Pujols? I'm glad we've got Rizzo instead. No, not because I think he's going to be better than either of them, but because he's super cheap and should be extremely productive, leaving us THAT money to spend elsewhere. Cespedes? He's not looked like a gamechanger and we got Soler, who's not already in his prime. Wilson was a total pipedream, we didn't have a real shot. Darvish? If I'm upset at all, it'd be over him, but he's been having issues himself and doesn't appear to be some kind of definite "ace" right now and for the money outlay, he definitely needed to be. We've got a few solid trade chips to pawn off right now, which could give us enough currency to buy a younger guy or two in a trade over the offseason as it is. I guess we'll see how it all plays out, but I'm pretty happy right now. But I'm much more of the personality, to where if we're not going to contend, I'd rather be where we are, for the picks and extra IFA money.

That and by the time we are serious/annual contenders Rizzo should be in his prime while Fielder/Pujols will be exiting theirs or already out of it and I think Rizzo in his prime will be greater than those two out of theirs

[SouthSideRyan]

My main thing, so far at least, is I'm not regretting us actually "missing" on someone yet. Fielder and Pujols? I'm glad we've got Rizzo instead. No, not because I think he's going to be better than either of them, but because he's super cheap and should be extremely productive, leaving us THAT money to spend elsewhere. Cespedes? He's not looked like a gamechanger and we got Soler, who's not already in his prime. Wilson was a total pipedream, we didn't have a real shot. Darvish? If I'm upset at all, it'd be over him, but he's been having issues himself and doesn't appear to be some kind of definite "ace" right now and for the money outlay, he definitely needed to be. We've got a few solid trade chips to pawn off right now, which could give us enough currency to buy a younger guy or two in a trade over the offseason as it is. I guess we'll see how it all plays out, but I'm pretty happy right now. But I'm much more of the personality, to where if we're not going to contend, I'd rather be where we are, for the picks and extra IFA money.

That and by the time we are serious/annual contenders Rizzo should be in his prime while Fielder/Pujols will be exiting theirs or already out of it and I think Rizzo in his prime will be greater than those two out of theirs

 

Not that I disagree with davell, but that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Part of the reason Pujols/Fielder would be out of their primes by time we were serious contenders is because we didn't try to become serious contenders during their primes.

[Cubswin11]

My main thing, so far at least, is I'm not regretting us actually "missing" on someone yet. Fielder and Pujols? I'm glad we've got Rizzo instead. No, not because I think he's going to be better than either of them, but because he's super cheap and should be extremely productive, leaving us THAT money to spend elsewhere. Cespedes? He's not looked like a gamechanger and we got Soler, who's not already in his prime. Wilson was a total pipedream, we didn't have a real shot. Darvish? If I'm upset at all, it'd be over him, but he's been having issues himself and doesn't appear to be some kind of definite "ace" right now and for the money outlay, he definitely needed to be. We've got a few solid trade chips to pawn off right now, which could give us enough currency to buy a younger guy or two in a trade over the offseason as it is. I guess we'll see how it all plays out, but I'm pretty happy right now. But I'm much more of the personality, to where if we're not going to contend, I'd rather be where we are, for the picks and extra IFA money.

That and by the time we are serious/annual contenders Rizzo should be in his prime while Fielder/Pujols will be exiting theirs or already out of it and I think Rizzo in his prime will be greater than those two out of theirs

 

Not that I disagree with davell, but that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Part of the reason Pujols/Fielder would be out of their primes by time we were serious contenders is because we didn't try to become serious contenders during their primes.

That's true, but in order for us to "try" and be contenders while those two were in their primes it probably would have required us to sign one of Wilson/Darvish/Greinke/Hamels (if not 2 of them or 1 and a lesser/cheaper pitcher E. Jackson/A. Sanchez), re-sign Aramis, re-sign Garza long term, sign one of Upton/Hamilton/Cespedes to fill an OF spot/middle of order bat, overspend on some bullpen arms, need at least one (probably two) of Vitters, Castillo, Jackson, Baez, Szczur, Almora, Soler, or some other pick to turn into a 4-5 WAR player in the next 2-3 years. Then hope some of the complementary pieces work out really well (like DeRosa did 07-08). Not saying it's not possible to put a contender together when those two are in their primes but the team would have to of been built largely through FA and the payroll increased to around $200m. I'd take the route we are going anyday of the week, not that I think you are arguing otherwise.

[SouthSideRyan]

That team would win 110 games.

[davell]

This deadline and offseason will be interesting as all hell. I think quite a bit hinges on Garza personally. How he pitches between now and the deadline and whether he's reasonable with an extension or not. And HIS fate is probably halfway dependent on how Shark pitches between now and then too. If he looks yhe part of a 3 or better, then Garza's chances of sticking around increase. If not, it doesn't feel like we're going to go out and fill multiple holes through FA. Not on a major level. But I can see our next spending binge hinging on Shark's next 8 starts. Because if we trade Garza, our window gets that much further away.

[Cubswin11]

That team would win 110 games.

Well we were talking about building a serious/annual contender. That's roughly what it would take to do it. If we were just trying to keep the team around .500 and treading water like the old FO last offseason we probably would have re-signed Aramis, signed E. Jackson, signed on of Dejesus/Cespedes/Willingham, add a overpriced bullpen arm or two and probably brought Pena back. I guess that team would be a "contender" in a broad sense but certainly not a serious one or one that people would think would be around for years.

[davell]

I think Hendry's offseason would have been signing one of Fielder or Pujols, keeping Aramis, trading Z in probably the exact same deal since there didn't appear to be any others, sign Edwin Jackson to a 4 year deal, add a couple of 2-4 mill bullpen arms, and probably unloaded the farm to get Cahill or Gio. Shark would be in the pen, LaHair would be in Japan, we'd have no flexibility going forward, and we'd be a .500ish team right now and in decline going forward.

[Elrhino]

We're not getting 2002-2003 Theo, we're getting the post 2011 Red Sox Theo. He doesn't want to be painted into a corner with a maxed out budget, high expectations and an 85 win roster. He's going to keep his powder dry until he's as confident as possible that such a scenario won't play out. Unfortunately, we'll probably have to suffer with some miserable baseball until he gets to that point, but I'm sure that was always part of the appeal of this job for him ... a big market, high visibility job but a customer base with low expectations and a lot of patience.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

That team would win 110 games.

Well we were talking about building a serious/annual contender. That's roughly what it would take to do it. If we were just trying to keep the team around .500 and treading water like the old FO last offseason we probably would have re-signed Aramis, signed E. Jackson, signed on of Dejesus/Cespedes/Willingham, add a overpriced bullpen arm or two and probably brought Pena back. I guess that team would be a "contender" in a broad sense but certainly not a serious one or one that people would think would be around for years.

 

 

Would that have been so bad? Theo's legacy was as a drafting and development expert who built from the later rounds and the end of the first round. Why couldn't he build all that here while still giving them a chance to fluke into a 2006 Cardinals situation?

[davell]

I think Theo actually does have a "video game rebuild" streak in him. With the damn CBA, next year, the big draft allotment and the huge IFA budget will go a very long way. Theo probably valued that over winning 75-80 games. If we suck next year as well, having 2 seasons of those advantages would conceivably give us one of the absolute top systems around, both to play and use as currency. Flexibility and that likely means more than putting an average team out there and having middling allotments to get the same thing done.

[Cubswin11]

That team would win 110 games.

Well we were talking about building a serious/annual contender. That's roughly what it would take to do it. If we were just trying to keep the team around .500 and treading water like the old FO last offseason we probably would have re-signed Aramis, signed E. Jackson, signed on of Dejesus/Cespedes/Willingham, add a overpriced bullpen arm or two and probably brought Pena back. I guess that team would be a "contender" in a broad sense but certainly not a serious one or one that people would think would be around for years.

 

 

Would that have been so bad? Theo's legacy was as a drafting and development expert who built from the later rounds and the end of the first round. Why couldn't he build all that here while still giving them a chance to fluke into a 2006 Cardinals situation?

So you basically want Theo to impliment Hendry's way of building teams and hope he can continue his success of building teams from late round picks, in a drafting environment that has drastically changed from when he was in Boston and when draft picks are such a crap shoot?

[SouthSideRyan]

That team would win 110 games.

Well we were talking about building a serious/annual contender. That's roughly what it would take to do it. If we were just trying to keep the team around .500 and treading water like the old FO last offseason we probably would have re-signed Aramis, signed E. Jackson, signed on of Dejesus/Cespedes/Willingham, add a overpriced bullpen arm or two and probably brought Pena back. I guess that team would be a "contender" in a broad sense but certainly not a serious one or one that people would think would be around for years.

 

 

Would that have been so bad? Theo's legacy was as a drafting and development expert who built from the later rounds and the end of the first round. Why couldn't he build all that here while still giving them a chance to fluke into a 2006 Cardinals situation?

So you basically want Theo to impliment Hendry's way of building teams and hope he can continue his success of building teams from late round picks, in a drafting environment that has drastically changed from when he was in Boston and when draft picks are such a crap shoot?

 

You want us to purposely tank for 8 years so we can build a team solely through top 10 picks?

 

#DICHOTOMY

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So you basically want Theo to impliment Hendry's way of building teams and hope he can continue his success of building teams from late round picks, in a drafting environment that has drastically changed from when he was in Boston and when draft picks are such a crap shoot?

 

Yes. Changed CBA or not, Boston's drafting success had as much to do with their scouting and development as it did with their willingness to overslot.

 

Hendry produced average results with above-average resources. The reason wasn't because of his approach to the major-league team. It was because the drafting and development completely failed under his watch.

[Cubswin11]

That team would win 110 games.

Well we were talking about building a serious/annual contender. That's roughly what it would take to do it. If we were just trying to keep the team around .500 and treading water like the old FO last offseason we probably would have re-signed Aramis, signed E. Jackson, signed on of Dejesus/Cespedes/Willingham, add a overpriced bullpen arm or two and probably brought Pena back. I guess that team would be a "contender" in a broad sense but certainly not a serious one or one that people would think would be around for years.

 

 

Would that have been so bad? Theo's legacy was as a drafting and development expert who built from the later rounds and the end of the first round. Why couldn't he build all that here while still giving them a chance to fluke into a 2006 Cardinals situation?

So you basically want Theo to impliment Hendry's way of building teams and hope he can continue his success of building teams from late round picks, in a drafting environment that has drastically changed from when he was in Boston and when draft picks are such a crap shoot?

 

You want us to purposely tank for 8 years so we can build a team solely through top 10 picks?

 

#DICHOTOMY

No, just that I don't believe now is the right time to invest heavily in FA when we need to build the system and see exactly who some of our prospects are in the majors in the next few seasons (Rizzo, Jackson, Vitters, Baez, Almora, Soler, etc) before figuring out who to compliment those guys with through FA. Building/adding through FA certianly is important and needed, but ideally I'd like for us to attack FA when we know exactly who our prospects are in the majors and they have filled a need and then us FA to fill the other voids our system hasn't been able to fill.

[SouthSideRyan]

No, just that I don't believe now is the right time to invest heavily in FA when we need to build the system and see exactly who some of our prospects are in the majors in the next few seasons (Rizzo, Jackson, Vitters, Baez, Almora, Soler, etc) before figuring out who to compliment those guys with through FA. Building/adding through FA certianly is important and needed, but ideally I'd like for us to attack FA when we know exactly who our prospects are in the majors and they have filled a need and then us FA to fill the other voids our system hasn't been able to fill.

 

If you signed a FA and he blocks a prospect, you trade one of them for something you need. You will never know exactly who your prospects are in the majors.

[Cubswin11]

No, just that I don't believe now is the right time to invest heavily in FA when we need to build the system and see exactly who some of our prospects are in the majors in the next few seasons (Rizzo, Jackson, Vitters, Baez, Almora, Soler, etc) before figuring out who to compliment those guys with through FA. Building/adding through FA certianly is important and needed, but ideally I'd like for us to attack FA when we know exactly who our prospects are in the majors and they have filled a need and then us FA to fill the other voids our system hasn't been able to fill.

 

If you signed a FA and he blocks a prospect, you trade one of them for something you need. You will never know exactly who your prospects are in the majors.

My point is to let these guys come up and actually play and see who they are, then you add FA around them. Then you know exactly who they are and exactly what you need.

[Sammy Sofa]

The FA market doesn't just sit around like that.

[Backtobanks]

No, just that I don't believe now is the right time to invest heavily in FA when we need to build the system and see exactly who some of our prospects are in the majors in the next few seasons (Rizzo, Jackson, Vitters, Baez, Almora, Soler, etc) before figuring out who to compliment those guys with through FA. Building/adding through FA certianly is important and needed, but ideally I'd like for us to attack FA when we know exactly who our prospects are in the majors and they have filled a need and then us FA to fill the other voids our system hasn't been able to fill.

 

If you signed a FA and he blocks a prospect, you trade one of them for something you need. You will never know exactly who your prospects are in the majors.

My point is to let these guys come up and actually play and see who they are, then you add FA around them. Then you know exactly who they are and exactly what you need.

 

And what if there is a weak FA crop when Theo decides to spend? Or if the time is right, then Theo can pass out Sorianoesque contracts and overpay middle relievers. FAs who are reasonably young and talented (Hamels, Upton, etc.) need to be signed when they're available, not when we wait for another 5-6 years to figure out whether our prospects are able to play at the ML level.

[davell]

No, just that I don't believe now is the right time to invest heavily in FA when we need to build the system and see exactly who some of our prospects are in the majors in the next few seasons (Rizzo, Jackson, Vitters, Baez, Almora, Soler, etc) before figuring out who to compliment those guys with through FA. Building/adding through FA certianly is important and needed, but ideally I'd like for us to attack FA when we know exactly who our prospects are in the majors and they have filled a need and then us FA to fill the other voids our system hasn't been able to fill.

 

If you signed a FA and he blocks a prospect, you trade one of them for something you need. You will never know exactly who your prospects are in the majors.

My point is to let these guys come up and actually play and see who they are, then you add FA around them. Then you know exactly who they are and exactly what you need.

 

And what if there is a weak FA crop when Theo decides to spend? Or if the time is right, then Theo can pass out Sorianoesque contracts and overpay middle relievers. FAs who are reasonably young and talented (Hamels, Upton, etc.) need to be signed when they're available, not when we wait for another 5-6 years to figure out whether our prospects are able to play at the ML level.

 

Or you look more than a SINGLE year ahead. That may have been Hendry's MO, but I think Theo may, just may, be a tad different.

[Guest]

I don't see Theo ever spending much on middle relievers.

[Backtobanks]

No, just that I don't believe now is the right time to invest heavily in FA when we need to build the system and see exactly who some of our prospects are in the majors in the next few seasons (Rizzo, Jackson, Vitters, Baez, Almora, Soler, etc) before figuring out who to compliment those guys with through FA. Building/adding through FA certianly is important and needed, but ideally I'd like for us to attack FA when we know exactly who our prospects are in the majors and they have filled a need and then us FA to fill the other voids our system hasn't been able to fill.

 

If you signed a FA and he blocks a prospect, you trade one of them for something you need. You will never know exactly who your prospects are in the majors.

My point is to let these guys come up and actually play and see who they are, then you add FA around them. Then you know exactly who they are and exactly what you need.

 

And what if there is a weak FA crop when Theo decides to spend? Or if the time is right, then Theo can pass out Sorianoesque contracts and overpay middle relievers. FAs who are reasonably young and talented (Hamels, Upton, etc.) need to be signed when they're available, not when we wait for another 5-6 years to figure out whether our prospects are able to play at the ML level.

 

Or you look more than a SINGLE year ahead. That may have been Hendry's MO, but I think Theo may, just may, be a tad different.

 

That's exactly my point. Players like Hamels, Upton, etc. are young enough (and are going to demand multiple year contracts) to help with a winning team in the future or at least help determine which positions still need to be filled.

[davell]

I'd love to have either of those guys, but I honestly doubt we make bigtime FA pickups until we KNOW we have lots more currently in place than what we do. I'm not saying it's even how I'd go about it, but with the extremely few "sure things" we have right now, I doubt our FO has a totally clear timetable on exactly when we will be close to contending. I guess we'll know more if Garza is dealt.

[manbearcub]

I don't see Theo ever spending much on middle relievers.

Bobby Jenks thankfully disagrees.