2013

[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.

 

 

Based on what?

 

Based on trades like Cashner for Rizzo and Paul Maholm and Reed Johnson for Arodys Vizcaino. Based on signings like Jorge Soler.

 

They've done a tremendous job of acquiring young talent. I think we'll see more of that this offseason and it'll start paying big dividends in 2014. Not to mention guys like Rizzo and Nomar Cano, oops I mean Starlin Castro, will be 24 and hopefully turning into the franchise players they can be.

[davell]

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?

No, not at all. But I do think these guys actually want to do what Hendry once said: get good and stay that way. Sure, I think it can be done different, to an extent than what they're doing it. But I think the renovation and the soon to be expiring WGN deal are both playing a major factor in all of this. They won't suck tremendously for both 2013 and 2014, but I totally expect next year to be like this one. And then once the system has a very solid base, to start making trades from it right after that. If I tried pinpointing it, I guess I see 65ish wins next year, maybe 75 in 2014 and hopefully 90+ for 5 of the following 7, with injuries, bad luck, whatever being the dropff for the other 2.

[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?

No, not at all. But I do think these guys actually want to do what Hendry once said: get good and stay that way. Sure, I think it can be done different, to an extent than what they're doing it. But I think the renovation and the soon to be expiring WGN deal are both playing a major factor in all of this. They won't suck tremendously for both 2013 and 2014, but I totally expect next year to be like this one. And then once the system has a very solid base, to start making trades from it right after that. If I tried pinpointing it, I guess I see 65ish wins next year, maybe 75 in 2014 and hopefully 90+ for 5 of the following 7, with injuries, bad luck, whatever being the dropff for the other 2.

 

Well, I'm sorry but that's just a [expletive] ridiculous plan. Let's be bad for 3 years and assume the rest figures itself out.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

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?

No, not at all. But I do think these guys actually want to do what Hendry once said: get good and stay that way. Sure, I think it can be done different, to an extent than what they're doing it. But I think the renovation and the soon to be expiring WGN deal are both playing a major factor in all of this. They won't suck tremendously for both 2013 and 2014, but I totally expect next year to be like this one. And then once the system has a very solid base, to start making trades from it right after that. If I tried pinpointing it, I guess I see 65ish wins next year, maybe 75 in 2014 and hopefully 90+ for 5 of the following 7, with injuries, bad luck, whatever being the dropff for the other 2.

 

Well, I'm sorry but that's just a [expletive] ridiculous plan. Let's be bad for 3 years and assume the rest figures itself out.

What would be your plan for putting a 90-win team on the field in 2013?

[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?

No, not at all. But I do think these guys actually want to do what Hendry once said: get good and stay that way. Sure, I think it can be done different, to an extent than what they're doing it. But I think the renovation and the soon to be expiring WGN deal are both playing a major factor in all of this. They won't suck tremendously for both 2013 and 2014, but I totally expect next year to be like this one. And then once the system has a very solid base, to start making trades from it right after that. If I tried pinpointing it, I guess I see 65ish wins next year, maybe 75 in 2014 and hopefully 90+ for 5 of the following 7, with injuries, bad luck, whatever being the dropff for the other 2.

 

Well, I'm sorry but that's just a [expletive] ridiculous plan. Let's be bad for 3 years and assume the rest figures itself out.

What would be your plan for putting a 90-win team on the field in 2013?

 

I heard a smart guy use the term dual fronts at some point. I'd go with that.

[davell]

SSR: I think that the goal behind this obviously, is to have a very good, very young team(I'm sure you figured that, but feel I guess I should clarify, just in case). Obviously adding a FA or two, that are difference makers. And continually draft tons of pitching, since it's so volatile. So not to wind up as our early 2000's staffs did. I know we're all behind whatever they wind up doing and other than a very select few, I think we all have confidence they'll execute it. Do I think some of this could be done differently? Absolutely. But I fully acknowledge these guys are smart as hell and know whatever it is they've got planned and won't change course midstream. But this IS what I'm taking from what little we get out of them.

[sneakypower]

did backtobanks change his name to southsideryan

[UMFan83]

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?

No, not at all. But I do think these guys actually want to do what Hendry once said: get good and stay that way. Sure, I think it can be done different, to an extent than what they're doing it. But I think the renovation and the soon to be expiring WGN deal are both playing a major factor in all of this. They won't suck tremendously for both 2013 and 2014, but I totally expect next year to be like this one. And then once the system has a very solid base, to start making trades from it right after that. If I tried pinpointing it, I guess I see 65ish wins next year, maybe 75 in 2014 and hopefully 90+ for 5 of the following 7, with injuries, bad luck, whatever being the dropff for the other 2.

 

Well, I'm sorry but that's just a [expletive] ridiculous plan. Let's be bad for 3 years and assume the rest figures itself out.

What would be your plan for putting a 90-win team on the field in 2013?

 

I heard a smart guy use the term dual fronts at some point. I'd go with that.

 

So what do you think happened between the time when the smart baseball dude everyone was ecstatic about made the dual fronts statement and the revised 'hunker down for a few bad years while we rebuild the team from the ground up' plan? I am asking because I really want to know.

 

A) Theo was lying about dual fronts and hoped no one would call him out on it when he stripped the team down to a 60 win squad

B) Ricketts was lying to Theo about the resources he would have to rebuild the team and the Cubs couldnt afford a dual fronts approach until the team was paid off/wrigley was renovated/he found more revenue streams

C) Theo went into this job thinking the dual fronts of winning was possible and the more he evaluated the organization he determined the only way to do this is strip everything down and start all over

D) Theo and Co. are not as smart as we all thought and this was really their attempt to win now while building for the future

E) ?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

A) Theo was lying about dual fronts and hoped no one would call him out on it when he stripped the team down to a 60 win squad

B) Ricketts was lying to Theo about the resources he would have to rebuild the team and the Cubs couldnt afford a dual fronts approach until the team was paid off/wrigley was renovated/he found more revenue streams

C) Theo went into this job thinking the dual fronts of winning was possible and the more he evaluated the organization he determined the only way to do this is strip everything down and start all over

D) Theo and Co. are not as smart as we all thought and this was really their attempt to win now while building for the future

E) ?

 

A combination of A and C, maybe a tiny bit of D.

[Gilby]

I don't think Theo was totally lying on the duel fronts thing. They clearly, and rightly so, made strengthening the minor leagues their first priority, but I believe the 2012 team was built as an "If everything goes right, we have a chance" type of team.

 

Garza (coming off of an ace season), Dempster, Samardzija (high upside), Wood, and Volstad (he's never been this bad before) isn't a bad rotation on paper. They brought Stewart over who did have upside but he was bad/unlucky/injured, Byrd was terrible and they probably weren't expecting Jackson to struggle as much as he did at AAA, Soto didn't bounce back like he did in 2010. That's not a 100 loss team on paper, but they played poorly to start out, so the best pitcher and the hottest pitcher were both traded. Combine that with the most talented pitcher being injured, and we are even worse the second half. It seems right now that Theo wasn't telling the truth, but I'm not sure that's totally the case.

[CubColtPacer]

I'd guess mostly A, but I'd guess Theo wouldn't think it was lying. The dual fronts thing was always couched in one key component. They were going to try to win now, as long as it didn't interfere with the future. Theo stressed this repeatedly. The future always came first in every decision. If they could make a move to improve the team now without hurting the future, they'd do it because every season is precious. But they weren't willing to sacrifice the future for anything.

 

So basically what Theo was saying with dual fronts is that the team wasn't going to actively tank. They were going to try to win, but they were going to do it with one hand tied behind their back because they were prioritizing the future in decisions much, much more than a normal team would. You could still say the statement was misleading though because Theo knew that people would jump on the dual fronts idea and downplay the thought of future based thinking, and he probably used that for PR purposes.

[SouthSideRyan]

did backtobanks change his name to southsideryan

 

Geez, you link one unreputable article and you're an enemy for life.

 

ETA: I wasn't being sarcastic in calling Theo smart.

[Guest]

SSR: I think that the goal behind this obviously, is to have a very good, very young team(I'm sure you figured that, but feel I guess I should clarify, just in case). Obviously adding a FA or two, that are difference makers. And continually draft tons of pitching, since it's so volatile. So not to wind up as our early 2000's staffs did. I know we're all behind whatever they wind up doing and other than a very select few, I think we all have confidence they'll execute it. Do I think some of this could be done differently? Absolutely. But I fully acknowledge these guys are smart as hell and know whatever it is they've got planned and won't change course midstream. But this IS what I'm taking from what little we get out of them.

 

 

"I think the best answer is soon after we develop a core of young impact players that we can build around we can supplement that through free agency and trades.

 

Another way to answer that question is when we get to the playoffs eight out of 10 years. That's the best way to do it."

 

Seems like that's about right.

 

http://www.news-journalonline.com/sports/baseball/daytona-cubs/2012/08/11/team-president-epstein-visits-daytona-cubs-at-jack.html

[davell]

I think it's possible that we all overthought the parallel fronts comment. Maybe all that meant was we'd at least put actual major league caliber players out there, like the DeJesuses and Maholms of the world.....If things go right, maybe somehow you find yourself in contention at the break. Granted, we're a major market team, so we should be doing that, but he could have just been referencing teams like Houston right now, Miami and Tampa, in the past, that literally firesold everything and didn't care what they had at all for a few years. We'll at least go spend 20-30 mill this offseason on stopgaps.

[Sammys Boombox]

SSR: I think that the goal behind this obviously, is to have a very good, very young team(I'm sure you figured that, but feel I guess I should clarify, just in case). Obviously adding a FA or two, that are difference makers. And continually draft tons of pitching, since it's so volatile. So not to wind up as our early 2000's staffs did. I know we're all behind whatever they wind up doing and other than a very select few, I think we all have confidence they'll execute it. Do I think some of this could be done differently? Absolutely. But I fully acknowledge these guys are smart as hell and know whatever it is they've got planned and won't change course midstream. But this IS what I'm taking from what little we get out of them.

 

 

"I think the best answer is soon after we develop a core of young impact players that we can build around we can supplement that through free agency and trades.

 

Another way to answer that question is when we get to the playoffs eight out of 10 years. That's the best way to do it."

 

Seems like that's about right.

 

http://www.news-journalonline.com/sports/baseball/daytona-cubs/2012/08/11/team-president-epstein-visits-daytona-cubs-at-jack.html

What's been the most fun for you this first year with the Cubs?

 

"I think it's been the interacting with Cubs fans and seeing how generally and inherently optimistic they are.

 

It's been a change from the East Coast mentality. I love the Red Sox fans, too. But it's almost as if they're -- even if things are going good, that they're looking for something to go wrong.

 

Whereas here, even when times are bad right now, they're looking for something good to happen, which doesn't necessarily come naturally to me, being born in New York and raised in Boston. But that doesn't mean I don't appreciate it."

 

We'll see what he thinks about that when we're in a tight playoff race or lose a playoff game.

[dew1679666265]

If I tried pinpointing it, I guess I see 65ish wins next year, maybe 75 in 2014 and hopefully 90+ for 5 of the following 7, with injuries, bad luck, whatever being the dropff for the other 2.

 

Honestly, I'm going to be extremely disappointed if we sacrifice 3 seasons so that we could contend for 5. With our resources and the men leading us, there's no reason we shouldn't be able to pull off a Braves-esque run of 10+ years. Especially since we're tanking multiple seasons to build up that core that the Braves used.

[dew1679666265]

A) Theo was lying about dual fronts and hoped no one would call him out on it when he stripped the team down to a 60 win squad

B) Ricketts was lying to Theo about the resources he would have to rebuild the team and the Cubs couldnt afford a dual fronts approach until the team was paid off/wrigley was renovated/he found more revenue streams

C) Theo went into this job thinking the dual fronts of winning was possible and the more he evaluated the organization he determined the only way to do this is strip everything down and start all over

D) Theo and Co. are not as smart as we all thought and this was really their attempt to win now while building for the future

E) ?

 

A combination of A and C, maybe a tiny bit of D.

 

I'd go 75/25 between A and C. I think the "dual fronts" talk was mainly just PR to keep as many people possible interested and coming to the park. But I think the Theo regime is intrigued by the chance to build from the farm almost entirely and they see their opportunity to do that in Chicago with the media/fan frenzy for "young players who really want it and care" instead of "old, overpaid guys who just want to count their millions."

 

Likely finding out the minors were a bit more barren than they originally thought just encouraged that line of thought.

[davell]

If I tried pinpointing it, I guess I see 65ish wins next year, maybe 75 in 2014 and hopefully 90+ for 5 of the following 7, with injuries, bad luck, whatever being the dropff for the other 2.

 

Honestly, I'm going to be extremely disappointed if we sacrifice 3 seasons so that we could contend for 5. With our resources and the men leading us, there's no reason we shouldn't be able to pull off a Braves-esque run of 10+ years. Especially since we're tanking multiple seasons to build up that core that the Braves used.

 

Like I said, I hit that as a mark for figuring in injuries, bad luck, etc keeping us from winning 90 the other 2 seasons as well. But I would expect we'd have been the favorites to win the division both times in this hypothetical. Today's game is probably a bit harder to get there and stay on top like the Braves did back then too, unless you've got the Yankees(maybe the Dodgers upcoming) payroll. Which by the time we're ready to contend in this hypothetical, we wouldn't have the NEED for anyway, with a core group of youngsters not costing much. We'd just have to pay them when the time comes and fill in, as I said with a big name or two.

[SouthSideRyan]

But I think the Theo regime is intrigued by the chance to build from the farm almost entirely and they see their opportunity to do that in Chicago with the media/fan frenzy for "young players who really want it and care" instead of "old, overpaid guys who just want to count their millions."

 

And that scares the hell out of me.

[dew1679666265]

Like I said, I hit that as a mark for figuring in injuries, bad luck, etc keeping us from winning 90 the other 2 seasons as well. But I would expect we'd have been the favorites to win the division both times in this hypothetical. Today's game is probably a bit harder to get there and stay on top like the Braves did back then too, unless you've got the Yankees(maybe the Dodgers upcoming) payroll. Which by the time we're ready to contend in this hypothetical, we wouldn't have the NEED for anyway, with a core group of youngsters not costing much. We'd just have to pay them when the time comes and fill in, as I said with a big name or two.

 

The bolded is exactly what the Braves did, though. They rebuilt their farm system and produced guys like Smoltz/Glavine/A Jones/Chipper/Neagle/Scmidt/Wohlers/etc and built around them.

 

If you're arguing that the CBA keeps teams from being good for extended periods of time without the excessively high payroll, then it sounds like you're arguing exactly what SSR asked and you denied earlier.

[dew1679666265]

But I think the Theo regime is intrigued by the chance to build from the farm almost entirely and they see their opportunity to do that in Chicago with the media/fan frenzy for "young players who really want it and care" instead of "old, overpaid guys who just want to count their millions."

 

And that scares the hell out of me.

 

Yeah, if any front office group can pull this off, it's our current one. But I'm really concerned that it's going to lead to either an extended period of being bad (i.e. too many prospects bust and we suck through 2015-2016) or the Theo regime is going to feel the need to reach on a signing or two and we'll have a couple Soriano/Crawford-esque contracts.

[davell]

Like I said, I hit that as a mark for figuring in injuries, bad luck, etc keeping us from winning 90 the other 2 seasons as well. But I would expect we'd have been the favorites to win the division both times in this hypothetical. Today's game is probably a bit harder to get there and stay on top like the Braves did back then too, unless you've got the Yankees(maybe the Dodgers upcoming) payroll. Which by the time we're ready to contend in this hypothetical, we wouldn't have the NEED for anyway, with a core group of youngsters not costing much. We'd just have to pay them when the time comes and fill in, as I said with a big name or two.

 

The bolded is exactly what the Braves did, though. They rebuilt their farm system and produced guys like Smoltz/Glavine/A Jones/Chipper/Neagle/Scmidt/Wohlers/etc and built around them.

 

If you're arguing that the CBA keeps teams from being good for extended periods of time without the excessively high payroll, then it sounds like you're arguing exactly what SSR asked and you denied earlier.

 

Where have I said that? I said it's a bit harder to do and I don't think that's very outlandish to say. Teams are just smarter now. Not many teams are willing to go about the way that it appears(key word) that we are either. And very few will have the resources to fulfill it when the time comes as we most certainly do. So while a team like the Yankees and Dodgers can bandaid themselves into staying in contention during the latter parts of their best players deals, I definitely think that IF we carry out this type of plan, it'd be much easier for us to stay in contention because of a constant mix of youngsters being ready and we'd conceivably be able to both trade away guys when we have someone behind him to help replenish the system, if need be, and also the ammo to go get more valuable longterm pieces thru trade as well.

 

Our lower levels, meaning Boise and Arizona both have tons of talent. Not all of which will ever be used obviously. But those teams have guys that are currently 3-5 years away from making the majors, if they ever do. But the talent and upside IS there. Higher ceilings than what we're used to seeing too. Add in next year's draft and HUGE IFA budget and it replenishes it that much more and most of those guys would be a year behind this group. And if we're bad next year, same thing for the following class obviously. Right there, you're already looking at the groundwork for having a damn good farm system for the next 6-7 seasons. Assuming these guys do their jobs, which is scouting and also what they're probably best known for. So this is how they'll earn their money for us.

 

And as I said earlier, the better the system is, the more risks and high upside guys you can take, while now, you're most likely trying to balance it somewhat. If this is their plan, and I think it is, while it's going to take patience, I think we'll all love the finalized product.

[XZero771679666304]

A) Theo was lying about dual fronts and hoped no one would call him out on it when he stripped the team down to a 60 win squad

B) Ricketts was lying to Theo about the resources he would have to rebuild the team and the Cubs couldnt afford a dual fronts approach until the team was paid off/wrigley was renovated/he found more revenue streams

C) Theo went into this job thinking the dual fronts of winning was possible and the more he evaluated the organization he determined the only way to do this is strip everything down and start all over

D) Theo and Co. are not as smart as we all thought and this was really their attempt to win now while building for the future

E) ?

 

A combination of A and C, maybe a tiny bit of D.

 

I'd go 75/25 between A and C. I think the "dual fronts" talk was mainly just PR to keep as many people possible interested and coming to the park. But I think the Theo regime is intrigued by the chance to build from the farm almost entirely and they see their opportunity to do that in Chicago with the media/fan frenzy for "young players who really want it and care" instead of "old, overpaid guys who just want to count their millions."

 

Likely finding out the minors were a bit more barren than they originally thought just encouraged that line of thought.

 

Eh, I think the "dual fronts" issue has become a case of different people interpreting the statement in the way most palatable to them. Some people think that the statement meant they would come out checkbooks blazing and somehow stocking the farm system. I think any realistic chance of that went by the wayside with the new CBA. I think what many others do, that they will spend when it makes sense to. Spending this past offseason would not have turned this team into a solid contender, and they knew that.

 

I definitely don't think it was a blatant lie for PR purposes, nor do I think they had to start spending on the FA market immediately to fulfill that statement.

 

I don't think they have some notion that they can build an entire roster from within, or even close. That's not realistic. I think they want to build a core (a few very good/star position players, a couple starters and a few pen guys) from within. Assembling 80%+ of a championship team from within isn't remotely likely to happen, and while that may be a fond, "best case" hope, I don't for a second think that's the plan. I think they're looking at teams like the Yankees of the late 90's/early 00's and the Red Sox of the mid-2000s as models; teams with a core of great, home-grown players, supplemented by a few shrewd acquisitions and a handful of prime FAs.

 

I think they thought they'd be able to expedite the process by spending big in the amateur draft and that they probably underestimated just how barren our system was (especially in the pitching department), and those things may have stretched out their anticipated timetable, but I don't for a second think there's egregious deception going on.

[Backtobanks]

did backtobanks change his name to southsideryan

 

No he didn't, but I'm starting to see more posters finally wondering if this is going to turn around using a reasonable timeline. I've said all along that Theo is very smart and will end up making the organization much better, but I was hoping for a decent team in 2012, .500 team in 2013, contender in 2014, and WS appearance in 2015 and beyond. Many posters seem to think that a 95-win juggernaut yearly is a guarantee in a few years and I'm not convinced of that. All of this speculation is based on the vast majority of our home grown prospects becoming productive ML players and the odds of that happening aren't great.

[davell]

did backtobanks change his name to southsideryan

 

No he didn't, but I'm starting to see more posters finally wondering if this is going to turn around using a reasonable timeline. I've said all along that Theo is very smart and will end up making the organization much better, but I was hoping for a decent team in 2012, .500 team in 2013, contender in 2014, and WS appearance in 2015 and beyond. Many posters seem to think that a 95-win juggernaut yearly is a guarantee in a few years and I'm not convinced of that. All of this speculation is based on the vast majority of our home grown prospects becoming productive ML players and the odds of that happening aren't great.

 

 

Good lord, for someone who LIVES for the fictitional trade scenario, you really have no clue how to grasp what a farm system does. I can unequivocally say that NO, we will NOT win 90ish games with basically a homegrown team within the next 2-3 years. Guess what? The FO doesn't think that either. But they know if you've got an excess of bigtime prospects, you can go out and add around a FEW of the younger guys that stick via trade(for younger cost controlled guys, not 33 year olds, for the most part) and still have more prospects either coming or that can be traded later on as well. Add in a few FA to fill in as well and not only do you have a very good, very young team, you still have plenty of financial flexibility as well moving forward. Go ask the Angels or the Marlins if they would have done things differently this past offseason right about now......