09/11 CUBS (Germano) @ Houston (Lyles) 7:05 CDT, WCIU TV

[bukie]

Personally, I've never been on board with "deliberately tanking" the season, unless this is one of those weird binary "great or awful" type of semantic claims.

 

I'm sorry I thought you were one of those people who was okay with what they did.

See, silly you, it's not a semantic claim, it's a false dichotomy.

[Guest]

So it is a semantics thing.

 

I understood why the front office approached the offseason how they did, and felt that they had made some improvements while also doing a lot to make the future better. I wish they had done more, but by the end of the offseason had the realization that given the state of the team that improving them to playoff contender wasn't feasible without some reckless decisions. If they act in a similar fashion this offseason, I'm going to be disappointed, or at the very least wondering if they have greater financial constraints than we think.

 

If that position gets grouped into complicity with some sort of "they were intentionally awful!" debate, then okay, I'm not going to waste time on that type of semantical hand-wringing.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So it is a semantics thing.

 

It isn't. It's a rhetorical fallacy, but not a semantic one. But arguing about whether it is or not is a semantic argument.

[jersey cubs fan]

So it is a semantics thing.

 

Not at all.

 

They tanked the season. Some people were on board with that and some were not. If you were on board with their plan and thought it was the right thing to do, but now want to squeeze out a few wins to see a little more improvement out of a group of guys who stand zero chance of being together when this team is finally good then you aren't making any sense. As somebody who was against the tanking of the season, I think it's pretty stupid now to hold onto any notion that there is something positive to take from a couple more wins this season.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'll take improved performance and future outlook from the (young) players already on the MLB roster every time over a couple hundred thousand dollars to spend on guys who have the odds stacked against them to even reach the major leagues. Every time.

 

 

See my above post. If it's the difference between, say, the 2nd overall pick and the 5th overall pick, then I start to get cranky.

 

But it's likely not. So enjoy some [expletive] wins.

I am enjoying the wins and the better performances by guys. But there's only a 4 game difference in the L column between us at #2 and the Twins at #5 right now, as Kyle pointed out there's a pretty big difference historically between the overall #2 picks and overall #5 picks. We have 5 games left against the [expletive] Astros, so I'd say there's a decent chance we slide down a few spots if we keep playing like this given the competition and going all the way to #5 isn't all that unlikely.

 

A 4 win difference over the average career of a player that is less than 50% to even become an MLB regular is not very much at all.

 

Besides those extra 4 wins would just cost us draft budget anyway.

[davell]

This upcoming offseason, even moreso than last year's is not set up for us to make major moves. I can't really see us trading away major pieces from our system yet either, unless someone like Upton, Price, Felix, or someone like that becomes available. Even then, I kind of doubt we're in a true position to go after those types without emptying out quite a bit.

 

But the main FA out there all have tremendous red flags that could and should scare us off. Greinke with his social anxiety disorder, hamilton with his drug problem. And that's about it as far as guys that'll get over 100 mill go. Does anyone want Swisher for 5/90ish? I don't. I'm definitely interested in BJ Upton, but at what price? I think I'd go all the way to 5/75 or so myself, but I understand if the FO thought differently on that one. Michael Bourn? We don't really need him. Edwin Jackson or Annibal Sanchez? Yeah, I'm interested, but with the lack of pitching available, I figure both get 4-5 year deals and I'd just as son grab guys like Marcum and McCarthy(possibly, if he gets better) on one year deals, to keep the flexibility moving forward.

[SouthSideRyan]

And don't get me started on how scary the 2014 FA class is

[davell]

And don't get me started on how scary the 2014 FA class is

 

They're all going to be scary, that's the point. The difference though, is we'll have the prospects to trade away by the time 2014 comes around. No, we don't know who will be available, but it'll be some guys who are good. It always is. I'd rather wait and dip heavy into FA when we ARE a contender and not beforehand, to where at least the first couple years of whatever exorbitant deals we eventually hand out, has a much better chance of being the best years of that deal.

[CubColtPacer]

wasn't it reported that we would have taken Almora even at #1 overall?

 

I'd imagine most of the top 10 leaks out reports that they wanted their guy #1 overall.

 

Usually that kind of report doesn't leak out before the draft though. Did the Cubs also say something to that effect as well? The original pre-draft report was that some other clubs believed that the Cubs loved Almora so much that they would take him at #1.

[jersey cubs fan]

wasn't it reported that we would have taken Almora even at #1 overall?

 

I'd imagine most of the top 10 leaks out reports that they wanted their guy #1 overall.

 

Usually that kind of report doesn't leak out before the draft though. Did the Cubs also say something to that effect as well? The original pre-draft report was that some other clubs believed that the Cubs loved Almora so much that they would take him at #1.

 

You think they'd leak out that they were going to take a guy who wasn't going to be available for them?

[SouthSideRyan]

In what world are Shaun Marcum and a healthy Brandon McCarthy getting 1 year deals?

[SouthSideRyan]

And don't get me started on how scary the 2014 FA class is

 

They're all going to be scary, that's the point. The difference though, is we'll have the prospects to trade away by the time 2014 comes around. No, we don't know who will be available, but it'll be some guys who are good. It always is. I'd rather wait and dip heavy into FA when we ARE a contender and not beforehand, to where at least the first couple years of whatever exorbitant deals we eventually hand out, has a much better chance of being the best years of that deal.

 

By signing FAs, the first couple years of prospects who we'd have traded away will be spent on our team rather than others.

[davell]

Marcum and McCarthy have injury history. I can see short term deals for either, regardless of how their season ends. Maybe it's 2 years, or one and an option, but I can't see either getting a longterm deal right now.

 

I'm not sure I follow what you just said about our prospects being on our team, if we sign FA. Yeah, they would be, but who's out there to sign and put us in the playoffs? I'd rather win 65 than 83, due to the draft positioning, IFA money, and flexibility moving on. Cespedes is the only guy I wish we had already gotten, but even now, Upton's going to be out there and while he's likely to cost a bit more, we can still go get him, if we want to. I'd rather build up the prospect inventory so when the time comes we can trade for true impact guys, and still have leftovers that can help us. An extra year of high picks and IFA money makes it much easier to do, than if we go out and lose flexibility and win 80ish games next year, in the process.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

A 4 win difference over the average career of a player that is less than 50% to even become an MLB regular is not very much at all.

 

I just realized my chart might not have been clear. The average wins was per *pick* not per player that made it. So if you have a 40% chance of making it and a 4 win difference per pick for one slot over another, then the players who did make it were on average worth 10 more career wins at the higher spot.

[SouthSideRyan]

Marcum and McCarthy have injury history. I can see short term deals for either, regardless of how their season ends. Maybe it's 2 years, or one and an option, but I can't see either getting a longterm deal right now.

 

I'm not sure I follow what you just said about our prospects being on our team, if we sign FA. Yeah, they would be, but who's out there to sign and put us in the playoffs? I'd rather win 65 than 83, due to the draft positioning, IFA money, and flexibility moving on. Cespedes is the only guy I wish we had already gotten, but even now, Upton's going to be out there and while he's likely to cost a bit more, we can still go get him, if we want to. I'd rather build up the prospect inventory so when the time comes we can trade for true impact guys, and still have leftovers that can help us. An extra year of high picks and IFA money makes it much easier to do, than if we go out and lose flexibility and win 80ish games next year, in the process.

 

And then we're a 65 win team heading into 2014. A 65 win team with a better farm system, but we're still primed to suck for a 3rd consecutive year. I guess I still don't understand why 3 years of sucking is the magic number. And THEN you can start trying. So even if you trade half of the farm system you sucked so hard for before the 2014 season in order to make improvements then you're looking at what a 78 win team? So now you have a 78 win team heading into the 2015 season and a depleted farm system because we foolishly didn't suck to get a higher budget.

[davell]

To me, 2 years is all that counts, because this group wasn't here for last year. We sucked this year obviously and appear to be headed towards a 100 loss season, or at least awfully close to it. Next year, if we sign the same type gys we did this past offseason(although I think we'll be slightly more active and get slightly better results) we'll likely lose 90ish games again, but have more holes filled longterm. That offseason, I'd expect much more positive movement. No, I don't expect us to win 90 games in 2014 at this point, maybe more like you said, 75-80ish. But you've got a young, improving team, with a solid system and flexibility as well, because I don't think we'll ever deplete the system. But I would expect a solid trade or two at that point. Hell, I expect another Rizzo type trade THIS offseason, to bring us in some pitching help.

 

But I envision a team with lots of younger cost controlled players not making a ton of money and us having lots of funds to use on FA heading into 2014. Whether they spend big or just add thru trade at that point, who knows? But I have no doubt that they'll ante up for a bigtime FA at some point soon thereafter. And it won't kill us if he doesn't pan out either.

[CincyCubsFan]

Oh [expletive].

[El Duderino]

I will burn Minute Maid Park to the [expletive] ground.

[Schwarber Fan]

I think he's alright

[Guest]

What happened to Rizzo?

[Yeti]

any word on Rizzo? i've only got the astros broadcast and they havent said anything

[MWV]

Wow, Clevenger.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Shut him down the rest of the worthless season for all I care, as long as he's OK by Spring.

[Sammys Boombox]

I will burn Minute Maid Park to the [expletive] ground.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I just watched the replay. As rough as the flip looked, he seems to have fallen on his back, and his head didn't seem to hit the ground. Looks like he could have hyperextended the knee though.