2013

[tspain]

Most want to see the Cubs compete in 2013. They can if three things happen. They will need Josh Vitters to man 3rd and Brett Jackson to man cf and Wellington Castillo and Steve Clevenger to handle catcher, and all contribute offensively. They you have a decent player at every position on the field. How many feel each of these are now taken care of. I know Vitters and Jackson have few ab's and have struggled so far, but maybe some believe in them already for next year. Who does? If the lineup and offense is solid, then look at the pitching staff and spend some on it and go for wins next season. But if there are still many holes to fill in the lineup and pitching both, then likely next year will look similiar to this year. I am not sold on Vitters and Jackson myself, but wonder how many are. Fire away.

[davell]

I'm probably as big a fan of Brett as there is on here and I like Vitters a relatively decent amount as well. That said, I'm not sold on either right now, nor do I have any clue how ANYONE even could be.

[questionmarkgrace]

Im not down on either. I expected them to come up and struggle. Its rare for guys to just come up and dominate like Mike Trout. As is apparent both guys have some glaring holes in their game. That said i wouldnt be surprised for either guy to eventually become a legitimate major league regular, maybe by 2014. But they need time to fix their weaknesses.

 

But seriously, even if they find themselves next year this team will still be far from .500 without some free agency moves.

[El Duderino]

Not happening.

[C.C.]

We may be worse then we are this year.

 

3 more K's for Jackson today. Depressing.

[Guest]

We may be worse then we are this year.

 

3 more K's for Jackson today. Depressing.

 

That seems probable.

[davell]

Offseason-wise, I don't think for a second we'll be looking like a contender heading into next year. I expect one trade for a young pitcher that plugs into the rotation, Soriano dealt, a few vets signed......Maybe 2 starting pitchers, like a Marcum and Liriano, a stopgap 3B, maybe Rolen, and a stopgap plugin at LF, maybe Hairston. A vet bullpen arm, like Durbin. If any Cubans defect, I figure they'll again be our main focus. Doubtful we're looking at more than a 70ish win season.

[rocket]

so all we need to be good in 2013 is have 3 guys who project to be below-average next season be amazing?

[Soul]

Most want to see the Cubs compete in 2013.

 

Most want to see the Cubs compete every year.

 

Fire away.

 

Nah. I'd love to see it happen, but I'm pretty sure there will be overall development happening next year, and with it will come a significant lack of wins. But there's no need to harp on it. What will happen, will happen. I'm on board for the long haul.....2015, 2016, etc.

[Clem Fandango]

Three things that need to happen for 2013 to go our way:

 

1) The improbable

2) See #1

3) See #2

[Guest]

if we get lucky in the bullpen, i think we'll end up being better than most people think.

[biittner77]

so all we need to be good in 2013 is have 3 guys who project to be below-average next season be amazing?

 

He said "contribute", they don't have to be amazing, just better than what was thrown out there this year.

 

I'm pretty much a Vitters apologist so I'll point out that he's struggled with every promotion but been better the following year at that same level. 3rd base has been pretty much a train wreck all season so it's not really that much of a stretch to see the Cubs get better there whether it be Vitters, Valbuena or some combo of the two.

 

Can Jackson do enough to contribute more than Lahair? Maybe not but at least he's a young guy that can get better.

 

Castillo/ Clevenger ought to be able to contribute more than Soto did while he was here this season. Again, they're both young guys that could get better.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I still have faith in Ian Stewart coming back from wrist surgery and being an above average 3B, and Vitters at a corner OF spot. The 2013 season will rest very much upon the very young shoulders of Castro, Rizzo, Vitters, Jackson, and Castillo. And of course, there's the rotation. We have a strong 3 in Shark and a solid 4-5 in Wood. Beyond that, who knows.

 

I still understand and respect what Theo and Jed are trying to do for us long term here, but if they change their minds and decide to change courses and go the big market route, I doubt that too many people will think any lesser of them. As been infinitely stated throughout the season, when you're a big market, high revenue franchise, there's no reason for a strong farm system and a competitive big league club to be an either/or proposition.

[davell]

Wrong. The new CBA DOES make it an either/or proposition, unless you're much luckier than the next guy. The route they're taking is hoping they stock it up SO MUCH, that the pipeline stays solid for their entire tenure. Which I'm figuring is that 10 year threshold Theo's mentioned before. If it takes until 2015, in order to be competitive(which unfortunately may wind up being the case), they'll have had 4 high draft slots and 3 large IFA budgets, plus trades where we acquired prospects. At that point, if this system isn't the best in baseball, something's gone wrong. But having that type of system then allows a better team to take more risks as well and if you hit on a couple of them, it stays at the top. It's basically looking to me like these guys are going to have one cycle. 3 years of being bad, with the last being slightly better, followed by 7 years of being good to excellent. The FA that are signed to big money likely will be coming off the books around that 10 year period and it's probably around the time the system will be on it's way down as well. So, if they want to jet at that point, they'll be leaving the team with more than they came into it with.

[Little Slide Rooter]

And they also have to take into consideration the fact that no matter how good your scouting department is, the draft is a complete and utter crapshoot, and unless it's a ridiulously stacked draft, your probably not much more likely to grab a superstar with the 6th pick than you are with the 11th pick.

[SouthSideRyan]

So davell, you think until this Reinsdorfian lunacy of a CBA expires, the only way to improve a team is to be terrible for awhile or spend 250M on payroll?

[C.C.]

Wrong. The new CBA DOES make it an either/or proposition, unless you're much luckier than the next guy. The route they're taking is hoping they stock it up SO MUCH, that the pipeline stays solid for their entire tenure. Which I'm figuring is that 10 year threshold Theo's mentioned before. If it takes until 2015, in order to be competitive(which unfortunately may wind up being the case), they'll have had 4 high draft slots and 3 large IFA budgets, plus trades where we acquired prospects. At that point, if this system isn't the best in baseball, something's gone wrong. But having that type of system then allows a better team to take more risks as well and if you hit on a couple of them, it stays at the top. It's basically looking to me like these guys are going to have one cycle. 3 years of being bad, with the last being slightly better, followed by 7 years of being good to excellent. The FA that are signed to big money likely will be coming off the books around that 10 year period and it's probably around the time the system will be on it's way down as well. So, if they want to jet at that point, they'll be leaving the team with more than they came into it with.

 

If it takes this administration 3 years to make us competitive than that's fail. That's crazy for a major market team to suck for three years just to gain draft picks, and never knowing if any of those picks will even pan out. We aren't the freaking Marlins.

[UMFan83]

Wrong. The new CBA DOES make it an either/or proposition, unless you're much luckier than the next guy. The route they're taking is hoping they stock it up SO MUCH, that the pipeline stays solid for their entire tenure. Which I'm figuring is that 10 year threshold Theo's mentioned before. If it takes until 2015, in order to be competitive(which unfortunately may wind up being the case), they'll have had 4 high draft slots and 3 large IFA budgets, plus trades where we acquired prospects. At that point, if this system isn't the best in baseball, something's gone wrong. But having that type of system then allows a better team to take more risks as well and if you hit on a couple of them, it stays at the top. It's basically looking to me like these guys are going to have one cycle. 3 years of being bad, with the last being slightly better, followed by 7 years of being good to excellent. The FA that are signed to big money likely will be coming off the books around that 10 year period and it's probably around the time the system will be on it's way down as well. So, if they want to jet at that point, they'll be leaving the team with more than they came into it with.

 

If it takes this administration 3 years to make us competitive than that's fail. That's crazy for a major market team to suck for three years just to gain draft picks, and never knowing if any of those picks will even pan out. We aren't the freaking Marlins.

 

It's not about being the Marlins or acting like a small market team. Do small market teams trade players but pay their entire salary so that they can get a better prospect? Do small market teams that don't expect to contend pay $5m to a middle of the rotation veteran pitcher so that when the trade deadline comes around they have something worthwhile to sell? Sure the payroll is down but the plan, as stated hundreds of time by the management team is to build up the farm system and invest in free agency when it makes sense to. This year it looks a bit funky because the team is getting rid of so many of the larger contracts and payroll dropped quite a bit, but as time goes on you'll see the Cubs paying to keep the players that fit in our long term plans and when its time to contend you'll see the payroll go back up. I guess I can't guarantee that it will happen like that but all we have to go off of is what the management has told us...and I think they're allowed to have the benefit of the doubt until something happens to tell us otherwise.

[C.C.]

Wrong. The new CBA DOES make it an either/or proposition, unless you're much luckier than the next guy. The route they're taking is hoping they stock it up SO MUCH, that the pipeline stays solid for their entire tenure. Which I'm figuring is that 10 year threshold Theo's mentioned before. If it takes until 2015, in order to be competitive(which unfortunately may wind up being the case), they'll have had 4 high draft slots and 3 large IFA budgets, plus trades where we acquired prospects. At that point, if this system isn't the best in baseball, something's gone wrong. But having that type of system then allows a better team to take more risks as well and if you hit on a couple of them, it stays at the top. It's basically looking to me like these guys are going to have one cycle. 3 years of being bad, with the last being slightly better, followed by 7 years of being good to excellent. The FA that are signed to big money likely will be coming off the books around that 10 year period and it's probably around the time the system will be on it's way down as well. So, if they want to jet at that point, they'll be leaving the team with more than they came into it with.

 

If it takes this administration 3 years to make us competitive than that's fail. That's crazy for a major market team to suck for three years just to gain draft picks, and never knowing if any of those picks will even pan out. We aren't the freaking Marlins.

 

It's not about being the Marlins or acting like a small market team. Do small market teams trade players but pay their entire salary so that they can get a better prospect? Do small market teams that don't expect to contend pay $5m to a middle of the rotation veteran pitcher so that when the trade deadline comes around they have something worthwhile to sell? Sure the payroll is down but the plan, as stated hundreds of time by the management team is to build up the farm system and invest in free agency when it makes sense to. This year it looks a bit funky because the team is getting rid of so many of the larger contracts and payroll dropped quite a bit, but as time goes on you'll see the Cubs paying to keep the players that fit in our long term plans and when its time to contend you'll see the payroll go back up. I guess I can't guarantee that it will happen like that but all we have to go off of is what the management has told us...and I think they're allowed to have the benefit of the doubt until something happens to tell us otherwise.

 

 

Fair.

[SouthSideRyan]

Benefit of the doubt is fine, the rest of it is steaming.

[C.C.]

That's my problem. Next year will be more of the same, but they better show big time improvement by 2014 or the fan base will be zilch.

[Guest]

Benefit of the doubt is fine, the rest of it is steaming.

I agree.

[Gilby]

That's my problem. Next year will be more of the same, but they better show big time improvement by 2014 or the fan base will be zilch.

 

Even if the fans go away for a bit, once we start winning again, Wrigley will be the toughest ticket in baseball. But I think we're still a ways from seeing the fan base disappear. I mean there were 30,000 people to see the Astros on a weeknight the last homestand.

 

Either way, I don't think we'll be good next year, but I have very little doubt that we'll be excited for the 2014 team.

[C.C.]

That's my problem. Next year will be more of the same, but they better show big time improvement by 2014 or the fan base will be zilch.

 

Even if the fans go away for a bit, once we start winning again, Wrigley will be the toughest ticket in baseball. But I think we're still a ways from seeing the fan base disappear. I mean there were 30,000 people to see the Astros on a weeknight the last homestand.

 

Either way, I don't think we'll be good next year, but I have very little doubt that we'll be excited for the 2014 team.

 

 

Based on what?

[Backtobanks]

Wrong. The new CBA DOES make it an either/or proposition, unless you're much luckier than the next guy. The route they're taking is hoping they stock it up SO MUCH, that the pipeline stays solid for their entire tenure. Which I'm figuring is that 10 year threshold Theo's mentioned before. If it takes until 2015, in order to be competitive(which unfortunately may wind up being the case), they'll have had 4 high draft slots and 3 large IFA budgets, plus trades where we acquired prospects. At that point, if this system isn't the best in baseball, something's gone wrong. But having that type of system then allows a better team to take more risks as well and if you hit on a couple of them, it stays at the top. It's basically looking to me like these guys are going to have one cycle. 3 years of being bad, with the last being slightly better, followed by 7 years of being good to excellent. The FA that are signed to big money likely will be coming off the books around that 10 year period and it's probably around the time the system will be on it's way down as well. So, if they want to jet at that point, they'll be leaving the team with more than they came into it with.

 

If it takes this administration 3 years to make us competitive than that's fail. That's crazy for a major market team to suck for three years just to gain draft picks, and never knowing if any of those picks will even pan out. We aren't the freaking Marlins.

 

It's been my point all along that my big disagreement with this administration has been the timeline. It looks like 2012 & 2013 are going to be historically bad and with the CBA it's going to be hard to make a 20-25 game turn around in 2014 to become competitive. As others have pointed out that Shark and Wood are good for the middle and back of the rotation, there's nothing on the horizon to be optimistic about for the rest of the pitching staff. We can keep our fingers crossed about Jackson and Vitters, but they're certainly questionable at best. The bright hopes all seem to be 3-4 years away, but they are still just promising prospects that could be great ML players or busts.