Misc. Cubs offseason rumor discussion

[Cubs Fan Dan]

I'm kinda confused now. Has the front office moved away from the rebuild and is now considering going all-in (or something close to it) for 2013?

 

Bourn and Choo, while very good players, don't seem to fit into the rebuild we've appeared to commit to.

 

Adding good players will only increase their potential to compete regularly starting in 2014.

[Guest]

ABTY7:

 

I still haven't had a single person confirm the Cubs are in on Bourn... Two confirmed a check in with Boras, neither said ther was any conversations with him thereafter...

 

Indians, Cubs have had deep conversations on deal(s)... Choo a target...

Just curious, are you DavidH over there?

 

Yeah

[XZero771679666304]

I'm kinda confused now. Has the front office moved away from the rebuild and is now considering going all-in (or something close to it) for 2013?

 

Bourn and Choo, while very good players, don't seem to fit into the rebuild we've appeared to commit to.

 

Like others, I'm not buying the Bourn interest. Choo could be traded for and re-signed.

[dew1679666265]

Just to plays devil's advocate, some will say this is just this offseason's version of being in on Pujols/Darvish in order to keep up the appearance that we aren't throwing away seasons.

 

I don't feel that way, I think they are legitimately interested and to me that's a pretty exciting thing to consider. A Cubs team with at least a chance to compete in the next couple years is exciting because I have set myself up with the lowest possible expectations to prevent disappointment. We will find out soon, hopefully. They really need some impact moves before the end of the offseason.

 

I'm not sure how excited I am by either. Bourn is going to cost a ton ("true leadoff hitter" and whatnot to up his value) and may well decline really fast and while I really like Choo, he's probably going to cost a ton in prospects. If we were close to contention and he put us over the top, I'd be excited. But as an early piece of the puzzle, I'm not crazy about him.

 

These have the feel of overpaying to get good quick.

[XZero771679666304]

Just to plays devil's advocate, some will say this is just this offseason's version of being in on Pujols/Darvish in order to keep up the appearance that we aren't throwing away seasons.

 

I don't feel that way, I think they are legitimately interested and to me that's a pretty exciting thing to consider. A Cubs team with at least a chance to compete in the next couple years is exciting because I have set myself up with the lowest possible expectations to prevent disappointment. We will find out soon, hopefully. They really need some impact moves before the end of the offseason.

 

I'm not sure how excited I am by either. Bourn is going to cost a ton ("true leadoff hitter" and whatnot to up his value) and may well decline really fast and while I really like Choo, he's probably going to cost a ton in prospects. If we were close to contention and he put us over the top, I'd be excited. But as an early piece of the puzzle, I'm not crazy about him.

 

These have the feel of overpaying to get good quick.

 

I don't think Choo will cost "a ton". But Bourn will, plus his value is tied to his legs and he's entering his 30's, so I don't really think the FO is interested, at least not at the price Boras will be seeking.

[dew1679666265]

Adding good players will only increase their potential to compete regularly starting in 2014.

 

I've made that argument myself, but with guys who aren't as likely to immediately fall off a cliff like Bourn. Bourn is a guy you pay a bunch to right now and live with the consequences later, Upton would have been a guy you add with 2-4 years of good to very good baseball in mind.

 

Choo fits that mold much better, but will cost a lot in prospects. I'd rather have signed Upton for just money than give prospects for Choo. If we get Choo, I won't be unhappy, though.

[dew1679666265]

I don't think Choo will cost "a ton".

 

That may have been overstating, I'm honestly not sure how motivated the Indians are to trade Choo. I assumed not very, but I could be wrong.

 

I agree on Bourn that it's probably just Boras posturing.

[davell]

Whether I want the rebuild or not, I get excited to see us connected to the bigger names. Bourn is a monster on the basepaths, great defensively, and a bigtime makeup guy. If the FO truly wants him(I obviously have doubts), I'm all for it, because they must see something in him they didn't in Upton, who they've seen quite a bit obviously.

[rawaction]

Choo's a FA after the year and going to get about 6-7 Mil next year in arbitration, I don't think he'd cost very much. None of the Cubs top 7 or so prospects, depending on where you consider Brett Jackson. I could see Jackson and a middle of the road arm for him.

[dew1679666265]

Choo's a FA after the year and going to get about 6-7 Mil next year in arbitration, I don't think he'd cost very much. None of the Cubs top 7 or so prospects, depending on where you consider Brett Jackson. I could see Jackson and a middle of the road arm for him.

 

That's far less than I expected. I'm not opposed to Choo at all, he just seems to be outside our current, apparent plan.

[USSoccer]

God forbid we deviate from the current "suck for the next 3 or 4 years plan until all our prospects get good at the same time" plan.

 

I could give a crap if they "overpay" to get good. The goal is to get good. It's the collection of geniuses' job to continue to bring good players in via draft and IFA while getting and being good.

[Guest]

God forbid we deviate from the current "suck for the next 3 or 4 years plan until all our prospects get good at the same time" plan.

 

I could give a crap if they "overpay" to get good. The goal is to get good. It's the collection of geniuses' job to continue to bring good players in via draft and IFA while getting and being good.

 

The goal is to get good for a long time. Overpaying to get good can sabotage that very easily.

 

Trying to brush that aside as though it doesn't matter is misguided, to say the least. How can you possibly say you don't give a crap if they overpay for talent? There are finite resources being used to acquire talent.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If it makes you good, how can it be an overpay?

[Guest]

If it makes you good, how can it be an overpay?

 

Really?

 

I know you're not this simple minded, so why are you doing this?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If it makes you good, how can it be an overpay?

 

Really?

 

I know you're not this simple minded, so why are you doing this?

 

It's part of the discussion. There's an attempt by people of an opinion that I disagree with to frame the conversation in certain terms. I'm questioning the use of those terms.

[davell]

If it makes you good, how can it be an overpay?

2009, 10, and 11 say hi.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If it makes you good, how can it be an overpay?

2009, 10, and 11 say hi.

 

What does drafting really poorly in the mid-2000s and not having enough young, impact players graduate have to do with free agent prices?

[Guest]

If it makes you good, how can it be an overpay?

2009, 10, and 11 say hi.

 

What does drafting really poorly in the mid-2000s and not having enough young, impact players graduate have to do with free agent prices?

 

Are we talking about free agent prices only or are we talking about giving no regard to the amount paid for assets when the resources available to acquire said assets are very much finite?

[davell]

No organization is going to consistently draft well from the middle to back of the 1st. Especially without the ability to overslot. You know that.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

No organization is going to consistently draft well from the middle to back of the 1st. Especially without the ability to overslot. You know that.

 

OK, now I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not.

[XZero771679666304]

If it makes you good, how can it be an overpay?

2009, 10, and 11 say hi.

 

What does drafting really poorly in the mid-2000s and not having enough young, impact players graduate have to do with free agent prices?

 

 

It had little to do with the market prices, but it had everything to do with how much the team spent on overpriced free agents.

[USSoccer]

God forbid we deviate from the current "suck for the next 3 or 4 years plan until all our prospects get good at the same time" plan.

 

I could give a crap if they "overpay" to get good. The goal is to get good. It's the collection of geniuses' job to continue to bring good players in via draft and IFA while getting and being good.

 

The goal is to get good for a long time. Overpaying to get good can sabotage that very easily.

 

Trying to brush that aside as though it doesn't matter is misguided, to say the least. How can you possibly say you don't give a crap if they overpay for talent? There are finite resources being used to acquire talent.

 

We have the resources of a major market team and a front office that should be able to properly scout draft picks, as opposed to the clown car of failure we had prior to last offseason. If they can't manage to do both, then they're all massively overrated as front office types.

 

I honestly don't believe how people are still buying this whole "we'll blow for a couple more years, but then most of the guys we draft won't flame out and will all hit the majors at the same time, while simultaneously we'll have a second pool of non flameout prospects to deal for hypothetical trade targets" thing.

[Guest]

I honestly don't believe how people are still buying this whole "we'll blow for a couple more years, but then most of the guys we draft won't flame out and will all hit the majors at the same time, while simultaneously we'll have a second pool of non flameout prospects to deal for hypothetical trade targets" thing.

 

and i honestly don't believe how people still think that this is their plan.

[davell]

No organization is going to consistently draft well from the middle to back of the 1st. Especially without the ability to overslot. You know that.

 

OK, now I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not.

No, its not sarcasm. Who has? The only 3 I can come up with are the Giants, Cards, and Braves, and in each case, they still had some very high picks they hit on, and/or used overslotting or bigtime money in IFA to help out. I don't think there's a way to get good and stay really good forever without a gigantic payroll and I truly don't see that coming from the Ricketts. I DO think the tone may change from 2015 to 2014, with the FO believing they can ride their system for a 10 year run.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

No, its not sarcasm. Who has? The only 3 I can come up with are the Giants, Cards, and Braves, and in each case, they still had some very high picks they hit on, and/or used overslotting or bigtime money in IFA to help out. I don't think there's a way to get good and stay really good forever without a gigantic payroll and I truly don't see that coming from the Ricketts. I DO think the tone may change from 2015 to 2014, with the FO believing they can ride their system for a 10 year run.

 

I don't recall the Cardinals being big overslot/IFA spenders.

 

I think that really overstates the usefulness of overslotting for a team like the Red Sox. Yes, they overslotted Rizzo, but they still found Anthony Rizzo in the fifth round.

 

Just like at PSD, this stuff should probably get its own thread, because we're way off of offseason rumor discussion now.