2013

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I like that stuff a lot better. Where'd that guy come from and can we hire him to run the 2012 Cubs retroactively?

[Guest]

I like that stuff a lot better. Where'd that guy come from and can we hire him to run the 2012 Cubs retroactively?

 

Here's how that guy would respond to that...

 

Epstein signaled that the Cubs will continue to be open-minded, that their focus last offseason hadn’t only narrowed to that mid-tier where DeJesus and Maholm were looking for deals.

 

“(We) passed on some other longer bets that we didn’t think would provide good return on investment,” Epstein said. “But had that nice value been there, long-term, for the right player, we would have done that, even maybe if we would have done that with eyes wide open, recognizing that it was probably a year longer than we wanted.

[dew1679666265]

WHY IS NOBODY PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT STUFF UP THERE?

 

That's the Theo I thought and hoped we were getting in 2012. I agree with every word and hope he means it. They got me excited and then dashed me last year with the "every season is sacred" and "parallel fronts" stuff, so I hope it doesn't happen again.

[Guest]

WHY IS NOBODY PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT STUFF UP THERE?

There are other ways to look at success other than financial. Great teams pay people for past performance. I always thought the bottom line was winning, but I guess not.

[XZero771679666304]

WHY IS NOBODY PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT STUFF UP THERE?

There are other ways to look at success other than financial. Great teams pay people for past performance. I always thought the bottom line was winning, but I guess not.

 

Paying for past performance doesn't always equate to positive results. Many "great" teams also throw money away by paying for past performance without getting substantial returns.

 

There's a difference between paying for past performance because you can reasonably expect similar production going forward, and there's paying for past performance because of the reputation of the player, even if there's little to no chance you'll get anything approximating that past performance over most of the contract (ARod's last deal, Pujols' deal, for example). I'm pretty sure Theo was referring to the latter and not the former.

 

Obviously you're not going to pay a player for anything but past performance, but there's a difference between that and spending huge for an older player because of reputation earned in glory days they'll never repeat. Giving long term contracts to guys already in their decline phase isn't being committed to winning, it's being stupid. Because 25-26 year old stars don't come on the market, you're invariably going to take a bit of a hit later in contracts, but there are times where you're likely to take an absolute bath, and those are the ones that you have to pass on.

 

I'm all for paying a little extra to secure players who are going to be key pieces for at least most of their contract, but I'm not a fan of paying a king's ransom for a player to be good for a couple years and then fade away, simply because he was great in his bygone prime.

[Guest]

WHY IS NOBODY PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT STUFF UP THERE?

There are other ways to look at success other than financial. Great teams pay people for past performance. I always thought the bottom line was winning, but I guess not.

 

I have no idea what you are replying to, because it has nothing to do with my post, and is just an odd response to the one it was referring to, which highlighted some quotes from Theo indicating that they are fully aware that being inefficient on the free agent market is necessary and that they'll be willing to do so when necessary.

[sneakypower]

yes, let's do this please

 

http://www.bleachernation.com/2012/10/09/lukewarm-stove-braves-pitchers-free-agent-pitchers-soriano/

The Atlanta Braves are poised to go into 2013 with the following starting pitchers theoretical available to start for them: Kris Medlen, Mike Minor, Tommy Hanson, Tim Hudson, Paul Maholm, Randall Delgado, Julio Teheran, and a few other upper minors types. And that’s without mentioning Jair Jurrjens (who’s likely to be non-tendered, and could be a reclamation type for the Cubs) and Brandon Beachy (who won’t be back until late in the second half after Tommy John surgery). Yes, teams like to have depth, but given the Braves’ increasingly tight pursestrings, you can imagine they’ll consider dealing a young arm or two. What a deal might look like involving the Cubs – who, yes please, want some young pitching – is anyone’s guess, but maybe the Cubs could take Dan Uggla‘s contract off of the Braves’ hands ($13 million per for the next three years) in exchange for picking up someone like Delgado (we know the Cubs like him … ), while sending back a couple good positional prospects and/or Darwin Barney (which, I know: sacrilegious)? Or maybe the Cubs would target Tommy Hanson, who is coming off a down year, and is about to get a healthy raise in his first year of arbitration?

[Backtobanks]

yes, let's do this please

 

http://www.bleachernation.com/2012/10/09/lukewarm-stove-braves-pitchers-free-agent-pitchers-soriano/

The Atlanta Braves are poised to go into 2013 with the following starting pitchers theoretical available to start for them: Kris Medlen, Mike Minor, Tommy Hanson, Tim Hudson, Paul Maholm, Randall Delgado, Julio Teheran, and a few other upper minors types. And that’s without mentioning Jair Jurrjens (who’s likely to be non-tendered, and could be a reclamation type for the Cubs) and Brandon Beachy (who won’t be back until late in the second half after Tommy John surgery). Yes, teams like to have depth, but given the Braves’ increasingly tight pursestrings, you can imagine they’ll consider dealing a young arm or two. What a deal might look like involving the Cubs – who, yes please, want some young pitching – is anyone’s guess, but maybe the Cubs could take Dan Uggla‘s contract off of the Braves’ hands ($13 million per for the next three years) in exchange for picking up someone like Delgado (we know the Cubs like him … ), while sending back a couple good positional prospects and/or Darwin Barney (which, I know: sacrilegious)? Or maybe the Cubs would target Tommy Hanson, who is coming off a down year, and is about to get a healthy raise in his first year of arbitration?

 

The thought of young pitching from the Braves is a great idea, but I'm not sure what players we could offer. The suggestion of taking Uggla's contract doesn't seem likely since the Braves will lose offense with the retirement of Chipper and Bourn's free agency.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Uggla is a solid value at $13 million a year. You would have to give up something useful to get him. You certainly aren't getting something awesome just for taking his contract.

[davell]

No, but that's why Brett threw Barneys name out there. Hell, ABTY mentioned they've kicked the tires on Soriano too. After seeing the video game trade between the red Sox and Dodgers, maybe sending Soriano, Barney, and paying all but 10 mill of Sorianos contract could net Uggla and Delgado. They'd be able to move Prado to 3B, use Barney at 2B, and have extra money available to resign Bourn with.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Still think the Braves have to balk at that, or at least get a better offer elsewhere. Soriano for Uggla is basically a wash, value-wise, before salary is factored in. So it's Delgado for Barney + salary relief? They have to be able to do better than that for young MLB pitching.

[sneakypower]

Atlanta's OF had 3 of the 4 highest UZRs in baseball, and all three were 6+ WAR players

 

that's got to be uncharted territory

[davell]

Still think the Braves have to balk at that, or at least get a better offer elsewhere. Soriano for Uggla is basically a wash, value-wise, before salary is factored in. So it's Delgado for Barney + salary relief? They have to be able to do better than that for young MLB pitching.

I do think they've soured on Delgado, but I honestly have no clue how to value Barney right now.

[davell]

Atlanta's OF had 3 of the 4 highest UZRs in baseball, and all three were 6+ WAR players

 

that's got to be uncharted territory

Wow. Until you mentioned that, I had no clue Prado was anywhere near that.

[Guest]

Uggla is an interesting target. From a value standpoint he's been pretty good for a while, and I'm not sure there's an abundance of teams willing to take on 3/39 for a 32 year old 2B, even if you value him as a 3.5 win player.

 

On the other hand, his seemingly aberrant UZR this year appears to mask that his offense has fallen off from his prime years, so from a value standpoint there may be little difference between him and Barney going forward. So is the ~30 million difference between Barney and Uggla worth the additional player you would get in return like a Delgado or Hanson? Would you pay 3/30 to add one of those guys?

[davell]

I would for Delgado, probably not for Hanson. I like Barney, but while he's certainly better than a Theriot, I don't know how he'll be, when we're paying him 3, 5, 8 mill possibly in his arb years. Will the offense improve or is this as good as it gets? The D is great obviously, but I still want a bit more offensively, if he's going to be considered a key piece going forward.

[SouthSideRyan]

Why would you value Randall Delgado more than Tommy Hanson?

[Guest]

Why would you value Randall Delgado more than Tommy Hanson?

 

5 years v. 3 years is my guess.

[sneakypower]

fwiw, Tommy Hanson is basically Matt Garza's identical twin, complete with an awe-inspiring ineptitude as a hitter

[huff]

Can Uggla play 3rd? might be a decent option for us if he can handle the position. If not he has more value at 2b with something to prove after a down year.

[Sammy Sofa]

Can Uggla play 3rd?

 

http://gifsoup.com/view2/1291518/wayne-s-world-oh-jesus-god-no-o.gif

[davell]

Why would you value Randall Delgado more than Tommy Hanson?

 

5 years v. 3 years is my guess.

Yeah, that's the main reason. But Hanson's mechanics were reworked over the offseason and he's been hit harder this year and has had a noticeable dip in velo too. That concerns me on him. If he's a buy low guy? Sure. But I doubt he is and I'd probably take Delgado moving forward.

[SouthSideRyan]

If you think he's damaged goods fine, but Hanson has been better than Delgado in pretty much every way. At some point you should try and get the better player.

[jersey cubs fan]

If you think he's damaged goods fine, but Hanson has been better than Delgado in pretty much every way. At some point you should try and get the better player.

 

We aren't ready to go after better players.

[davell]

If you think he's damaged goods fine, but Hanson has been better than Delgado in pretty much every way. At some point you should try and get the better player.

 

We aren't ready to go after better players.

When Hanson was 22, he was a much better prospect than Delgado ever has been. But, he's 26 now, getting hit harder and has a noticeable loss of velo. Delgado needs a bit of work on his control, but has 2 starter upside. Is Hanson currently a better pitcher? Probably. Will he be at this time next year? My opinion is no.