Cubs sign Scott Feldman

[Guest]

Jed Hoyer believes that Scott Feldman will benefit in a move from a hitter-friendly park in the AL, as well as the knowledge that he's a permanent member of the starting rotation, not a borderline starter having to prove himself. Said Hoyer:

 

“He had a great year in 2009, and then he had knee surgery. Since then it was kind of like he had one foot in (the rotation) and one foot out, looking over his shoulder a little bit. We certainly gave him assurances, you come in here, you’re going to be in the rotation. Having that (role), you’ll see guys settle in a little. It is hard to perform when you’re always worried about the security of your job if you don’t perform.’’

 

Feldman opened last season as a long reliever – the role he had with Texas on its World Series team in 2011 – but did make 21 starts from last April through September. The Rangers went 7-14 in those starts, as opposed to 86-55 behind everyone else. He finished the season with a 5.09 ERA over 123 2/3 innings. Said Hoyer:

 

“The numbers are pretty misleading. Looking at his ratios you see some misleading numbers. He was one of the most unlucky pitchers in the game last year. He might not have had a good year, but it was not as bad as the ERA on the page says it was.’’

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-chicago-cubs-sign-scott-feldman-20121127,0,2928233.story

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The trying to plug 5-7 full time positions, 2-3 rotation slots and most of the bullpen with free agents approach to contention, even if done shrewdly, isn't the recipe for success, and it's why Hendry got fired.

 

Hendry got fired because, as someone on another board very astutely put it, he never found a good replacement for himself in charge of the farm system.

 

Of course Kyle continually refuses to acknowledge that there was practically nothing to build around, and I don't expect him to change his rhetoric now.

 

The Astros had nothing. The Cubs had a lot more than the apologists will ever, ever admit.

Edited November 27, 2012 by Hairyducked Idiot

[Hairyducked Idiot]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-chicago-cubs-sign-scott-feldman-20121127,0,2928233.story

 

What does that have to do with this thread?

 

I like the fact that Feldman has some bullpen potential if he doesn't cut it as a starter or we find five better ones at some point in the season. I think he'd play very well in a setup role.

[Guest]

Is there some sort of precedent for a team doing what seems to be suggested here, that they add ~30 wins of talent across 6-10 positions without either selling the farm in trade or spending hundreds of millions in free agency?

[Guest]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-chicago-cubs-sign-scott-feldman-20121127,0,2928233.story

 

What does that have to do with this thread?

 

I like the fact that Feldman has some bullpen potential if he doesn't cut it as a starter or we find five better ones at some point in the season. I think he'd play very well in a setup role.

 

It says right there that they assured him that he'll be a permanent member of the rotation.

 

Obviously, they can go back on that promise, but it just seems like an odd reply.

[XZero771679666304]

Hendry no doubt left the Cubs in terrible shape. It just seems odd to me that Theo's moves seem above reproach because of the low bar Hendry set. I don't care how bad the organization was when Hendry left it is unfathomable that the Cubs shouldn't be expected to compete in Theo's fourth year running the show.

 

Is there a single person here arguing otherwise?

 

I'm not sure. I asked how long it should take to rebuild a big market team but no one replied.

 

Toon made a statement that he hoped the Cubs could compete in 2015 but things would all have to go right for that to happen. I really didn't see anyone address that point. Instead, it seems that we're having a battle between things are going great vs. we've fallen off the organizational cliff.

 

I think one more year of "young talent acquisition mode" should be enough.

 

If the team isn't at least around competition in 2014 my patience will have run out.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Is there some sort of precedent for a team doing what seems to be suggested here, that they add ~30 wins of talent across 6-10 positions without either selling the farm in trade or spending hundreds of millions in free agency?

 

I'm not going to answer that, mostly because it perpetuates the false assertion that the Cubs needed to add 30 wins.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-chicago-cubs-sign-scott-feldman-20121127,0,2928233.story

 

What does that have to do with this thread?

 

I like the fact that Feldman has some bullpen potential if he doesn't cut it as a starter or we find five better ones at some point in the season. I think he'd play very well in a setup role.

 

It says right there that they assured him that he'll be a permanent member of the rotation.

 

Obviously, they can go back on that promise, but it just seems like an odd reply.

 

It is. I'm mostly just sort of hoping we go back on it or Cabrera pulls a Samardzija and aces him out or something.

[Guest]

Is there some sort of precedent for a team doing what seems to be suggested here, that they add ~30 wins of talent across 6-10 positions without either selling the farm in trade or spending hundreds of millions in free agency?

 

I'm not going to answer that, mostly because it perpetuates the false assertion that the Cubs needed to add 30 wins.

 

Okay, make it whatever number you think it should be then. At least then the disagreement would be over something more tangible.

 

 

EDIT: And implicitly, you kinda make the point here. If that is the number, or even close to it, there isn't really a precedent because it's a gap too big to overcome with one offseason.

[XZero771679666304]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-chicago-cubs-sign-scott-feldman-20121127,0,2928233.story

 

What does that have to do with this thread?

 

I like the fact that Feldman has some bullpen potential if he doesn't cut it as a starter or we find five better ones at some point in the season. I think he'd play very well in a setup role.

 

It says right there that they assured him that he'll be a permanent member of the rotation.

 

Obviously, they can go back on that promise, but it just seems like an odd reply.

 

I really think pushing Wood to the bullpen must or should be the plan. I assumed Feldman must have been assure a rotation slot, since I can't fathom why a guy taking a one year deal would compromise his future value by accepting the possibility of a bullpen role. And I feel like the FO is looking add one more SP, this time from the more talented pool.

[SouthSideRyan]

Hendry no doubt left the Cubs in terrible shape. It just seems odd to me that Theo's moves seem above reproach because of the low bar Hendry set. I don't care how bad the organization was when Hendry left it is unfathomable that the Cubs shouldn't be expected to compete in Theo's fourth year running the show.

 

Is there a single person here arguing otherwise?

 

toonster said we'll make our first push if everything works out in 2015.

[XZero771679666304]

The trying to plug 5-7 full time positions, 2-3 rotation slots and most of the bullpen with free agents approach to contention, even if done shrewdly, isn't the recipe for success, and it's why Hendry got fired.

 

Hendry got fired because, as someone on another board very astutely put it, he never found a good replacement for himself in charge of the farm system.

 

Of course Kyle continually refuses to acknowledge that there was practically nothing to build around, and I don't expect him to change his rhetoric now.

 

The Astros had nothing. The Cubs had a lot more than the apologists will ever, ever admit.

 

We had next to nothing, less than you are willing to admit. Somewhere between where an abject apologist says the team was and where you do lies the truth. As far as young talent went, it was Starlin Castro and a cloud of question marks.

 

And Hendry didn't get fired simply because he didn't find a replacement, he got fired because he ignored the farm. He didn't prioritize the draft, he didn't sell to stock the system even when the team was abysmal and he often dealt away talent in desperate attempts to salvage lost causes.

[pccubfan]

Hendry no doubt left the Cubs in terrible shape. It just seems odd to me that Theo's moves seem above reproach because of the low bar Hendry set. I don't care how bad the organization was when Hendry left it is unfathomable that the Cubs shouldn't be expected to compete in Theo's fourth year running the show.

 

Is there a single person here arguing otherwise?

 

I'm not sure. I asked how long it should take to rebuild a big market team but no one replied.

 

Toon made a statement that he hoped the Cubs could compete in 2015 but things would all have to go right for that to happen. I really didn't see anyone address that point. Instead, it seems that we're having a battle between things are going great vs. we've fallen off the organizational cliff.

 

I think one more year of "young talent acquisition mode" should be enough.

 

If the team isn't at least around competition in 2014 my patience will have run out.

 

Thanks, I'm feeling the same way. I'm okay with no playoffs in 2014, but think that we need to see signs in 2014 of the next few years being very good years for the Cubs.

[Rob]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-chicago-cubs-sign-scott-feldman-20121127,0,2928233.story

 

What does that have to do with this thread?

 

I like the fact that Feldman has some bullpen potential if he doesn't cut it as a starter or we find five better ones at some point in the season. I think he'd play very well in a setup role.

 

It says right there that they assured him that he'll be a permanent member of the rotation.

 

Obviously, they can go back on that promise, but it just seems like an odd reply.

 

I really think pushing Wood to the bullpen must or should be the plan. I assumed Feldman must have been assure a rotation slot, since I can't fathom why a guy taking a one year deal would compromise his future value by accepting the possibility of a bullpen role. And I feel like the FO is looking add one more SP, this time from the more talented pool.

 

I'd rather see Wood at AAA getting in reps than garbage time as the long man in the pen.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Is there some sort of precedent for a team doing what seems to be suggested here, that they add ~30 wins of talent across 6-10 positions without either selling the farm in trade or spending hundreds of millions in free agency?

 

I'm not going to answer that, mostly because it perpetuates the false assertion that the Cubs needed to add 30 wins.

 

Okay, make it whatever number you think it should be then. At least then the disagreement would be over something more tangible.

 

 

EDIT: And implicitly, you kinda make the point here. If that is the number, or even close to it, there isn't really a precedent because it's a gap too big to overcome with one offseason.

 

OK. Actual inherited players contributed 18 wins last year, excluding a couple of guys who were only called up after the trade deadline to fill space. Players they inherited but traded elsewhere before the season started produced another 5 fWAR around the league.

 

So they inherited 23 WAR last year.

 

According to Fangraphs, the league accumulated 1,130 WAR last season, or 38 per team.

 

So the Cubs front office needed to find 15 WAR last season to be a .500 team and within variance range of a playoff spot. They needed 24 to project to 90 wins.

[Guest]

I'd rather see Wood at AAA getting in reps than garbage time as the long man in the pen.

 

You think he survives waivers?

[Rob]

I'd rather see Wood at AAA getting in reps than garbage time as the long man in the pen.

 

You think he survives waivers?

 

Not now that I realize he has to pass through them.

 

For some reason I kept thinking "oh yeah, he's still got options."

[Little Slide Rooter]

Any word on the corresponding move? With Feldman officially on the roster, it's at 41, and that needs to change very soon. If the were simply to waive someone like Coleman or Clevenger, I'd assume it would have been done by now. Could they be working on something?

[Backtobanks]

8 pages and counting on Scott Feldman. Can you imagine what we could do if the FO signed someone who has real value. :lol:

[SABR Gamer]

8 pages and counting on Scott Feldman. Can you imagine what we could do if the FO signed someone who has real value. :lol:

 

Can you imagine the reaction we could get if you ever made a post worth reading?

[javy knows my name]

So, did we stop banning trolls here or what

[Guest]

So, did we stop banning trolls here or what

I'm not sure who you think is trolling the thread.

 

Kyle has an opinion that differs from the others that are arguing with him. The key statement he's made that nobody has really addressed is that while he agreed that adding 30 (or 24 or whatever) WAR in a single offseason last year would have been difficult, he would have liked the front office to have added some so that we didn't go into this offseason still needing to add 30 WAR (or 24 or whatever).

[Guest]

8 pages and counting on Scott Feldman. Can you imagine what we could do if the FO signed someone who has real value. :lol:

 

Can you imagine the reaction we could get if you ever made a post worth reading?

Please be nice. It's possible to respond to this without a direct attack. Or, you know, ignore it.

[javy knows my name]

8 pages and counting on Scott Feldman. Can you imagine what we could do if the FO signed someone who has real value. :lol:

 

Can you imagine the reaction we could get if you ever made a post worth reading?

Please be nice. It's possible to respond to this without a direct attack. Or, you know, ignore it.

 

I was talking about the guy who came in, obviously having not read the last 6 or so pages, in order to deliver a thinly-veiled potshot at the FO for no earthly reason.

 

I'm sure this time was just an aberration, though.

[huff]

i think this signing is a precursor to McCarthy on a multi year deal..they are apparently friends who have trained together...hoping for McCarthy as a future rotation piece. Definiely wont hurt our chances i believe