Re: Projecting the 2013 Cubs

[sneakypower]

So Kyle's concern is that Theo took bullpen and middle infield depth and turned it into a very good SP, a very good and controlled 1b, and a couple other long term assets with potential and dared not spend millions on the bullpen and middle infield depth in years in which we aren't going to win a title and had very little realistic chance of making the playoffs?

 

 

But every season is sacred. Of course your team has no chance of making the playoffs when you don't bother to bring in any cost certainty to highly variable spots. I HATE this logic which keeps getting repeated around here. Oh what, you wanted to sign that guy and improve by 4 wins? Whoopdee doo, now you won 65 games last year. You don't build a team by looking at your zIPS projection, and if win total < 75, don't try.

 

ETA: And when arguing the point be sure to reference the worst contract at said position as your supporting evidence.

the "cost certainty" is that you'll pay $5M-$5.5M per win, which when it could easily be argued we needed to add 30 wins to be actual contenders would have been utter lunacy to chase

[Tracer Bullet]

So Kyle's concern is that Theo took bullpen and middle infield depth and turned it into a very good SP, a very good and controlled 1b, and a couple other long term assets with potential and dared not spend millions on the bullpen and middle infield depth in years in which we aren't going to win a title and had very little realistic chance of making the playoffs?

 

 

But every season is sacred. Of course your team has no chance of making the playoffs when you don't bother to bring in any cost certainty to highly variable spots. I HATE this logic which keeps getting repeated around here. Oh what, you wanted to sign that guy and improve by 4 wins? Whoopdee doo, now you won 65 games last year. You don't build a team by looking at your zIPS projection, and if win total < 75, don't try.

 

ETA: And when arguing the point be sure to reference the worst contract at said position as your supporting evidence.

 

I don't care what you hate and I'm glad Theo employs that logic. If the team he can reasonably field would require a miracle to compete, then the focus should be on the next year and thereafter even if that costs us some wins now. If that means you run out some scraps as backup MI when your 2b gets hurt in ST, then that's what you do. You definitely don't spend $4m to have a quality second baseman waiting in case the cheap starter gets hurt (I completely made up that number so you and kyle can attack it however you like-I truly don't care).

 

I'm sorry but are you really arguing that a team severely lacking in homegrown cost-controlled talent shouldn't look at it's roster going into an off-season and determine whether it makes sense to spend heavily to hope to get a playoff spot instead of spend that money elsewhere in the org? You don't want your FO to project win totals based on players under contract? You don't what them making spending decisions based on that info? Then we'll just forever disagree on this.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm sorry but are you really arguing that a team severely lacking in homegrown cost-controlled talent shouldn't look at it's roster going into an off-season and determine whether it makes sense to spend heavily to hope to get a playoff spot instead of spend that money elsewhere in the org? You don't want your FO to project win totals based on players under contract? You don't what them making spending decisions based on that info? Then we'll just forever disagree on this.

 

Are you really arguing that if a team doesn't have a decent chance to make the playoffs they shouldn't bother putting anything respectable out there in key positions? How pissed off were you about the Fujikawa contract? What a [expletive] waste right? And don't get me started on wasting our time with Nate Schierholtz and Scott Hairston. Not to mention Scott Feldman God, we could've made even more money if we didn't bother with these guys. Don't they know our PECOTA had us at 73 wins? What the [expletive] was the point?

[SouthSideRyan]

So Kyle's concern is that Theo took bullpen and middle infield depth and turned it into a very good SP, a very good and controlled 1b, and a couple other long term assets with potential and dared not spend millions on the bullpen and middle infield depth in years in which we aren't going to win a title and had very little realistic chance of making the playoffs?

 

 

But every season is sacred. Of course your team has no chance of making the playoffs when you don't bother to bring in any cost certainty to highly variable spots. I HATE this logic which keeps getting repeated around here. Oh what, you wanted to sign that guy and improve by 4 wins? Whoopdee doo, now you won 65 games last year. You don't build a team by looking at your zIPS projection, and if win total < 75, don't try.

 

ETA: And when arguing the point be sure to reference the worst contract at said position as your supporting evidence.

the "cost certainty" is that you'll pay $5M-$5.5M per win, which when it could easily be argued we needed to add 30 wins to be actual contenders would have been utter lunacy to chase

 

I was told the front office didn't really do a bad job last year because they were on a ~70 win pace when they decided to trade everyone and shut down Shark, so really the team wasn't that awful. I don't think we needed to win 100 games to be "contenders"

[Tracer Bullet]

I'm sorry but are you really arguing that a team severely lacking in homegrown cost-controlled talent shouldn't look at it's roster going into an off-season and determine whether it makes sense to spend heavily to hope to get a playoff spot instead of spend that money elsewhere in the org? You don't want your FO to project win totals based on players under contract? You don't what them making spending decisions based on that info? Then we'll just forever disagree on this.

 

Are you really arguing that if a team doesn't have a decent chance to make the playoffs they shouldn't bother putting anything respectable out there in key positions? How pissed off were you about the Fujikawa contract? What a [expletive] waste right? And don't get me started on wasting our time with Nate Schierholtz and Scott Hairston. Not to mention Scott Feldman God, we could've made even more money if we didn't bother with these guys. Don't they know our PECOTA had us at 73 wins? What the [expletive] was the point?

 

And you whine about me picking literally the first non-cub RP that came to mind and citing his contract in my post.

 

Off the cuff, none of those were bad deals. I'm supportive of trying to find some value at reasonable cost and haven't at all suggested we should be the Marlins. But using the depth at MI and RP as a strike against Theo in his first two years is ridiculous given all the issues that have been discussed over and over here. Extrapolating that to apply to the guys you listed above makes you look silly.

 

I do not think a team as bad as the cubs were in the 2011 and 2012 off-seasons should spend much money on backup MIs and depth at RP, esp when there are a number of options in AAA that may or may not work as RPs. $4.5m per for 2 years for a guy that could be a closer? Meh. If he's healthy soon and closes some games he could be a valuable trade piece. What's not to like?

 

The point was and is to collect assets that have some value in the future, can be flipped for future value, or, maybe, give us an inside track to re-sign them if it makes sense when we're ready to compete. Obviously there are players that don't fit in those buckets but those buckets capture the majority of the team's moves the last 2 years and I like it.

[SouthSideRyan]

I do not think a team as bad as the cubs were in the 2011 and 2012 off-seasons should spend much money on backup MIs and depth at RP, esp when there are a number of options in AAA that may or may not work as RPs.

 

I take it you don't think we should spend money on the pen in 2014 either

[sneakypower]

I'm sorry but are you really arguing that a team severely lacking in homegrown cost-controlled talent shouldn't look at it's roster going into an off-season and determine whether it makes sense to spend heavily to hope to get a playoff spot instead of spend that money elsewhere in the org? You don't want your FO to project win totals based on players under contract? You don't what them making spending decisions based on that info? Then we'll just forever disagree on this.

 

Are you really arguing that if a team doesn't have a decent chance to make the playoffs they shouldn't bother putting anything respectable out there in key positions?

no

 

we're arguing that if you're at very slim odds to seriously contend, you don't indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere in the improbable hopes of defying the odds

 

here's an exercise that'll make you feel more at peace: Travis Wood's outproduced CJ Wilson per bWAR since the start of last season; pretend to yourself that we're paying him $80M to do so and you'll feel much, much happier about management's level of devotion and effort

 

similarly, when Rizzo produces similarly to Pujols & Fielder the next several years as he's projected to do, convince yourself that we're paying him $200-$250M to do so and you'll assuredly be pleased as punch about it

[jersey cubs fan]

we're arguing that if you're at very slim odds to seriously contend, you don't indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere in the improbable hopes of defying the odds

 

Oh well good to know, because that's important. A lot of people were preferring management to indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm sorry but are you really arguing that a team severely lacking in homegrown cost-controlled talent shouldn't look at it's roster going into an off-season and determine whether it makes sense to spend heavily to hope to get a playoff spot instead of spend that money elsewhere in the org? You don't want your FO to project win totals based on players under contract? You don't what them making spending decisions based on that info? Then we'll just forever disagree on this.

 

Are you really arguing that if a team doesn't have a decent chance to make the playoffs they shouldn't bother putting anything respectable out there in key positions?

no

 

we're arguing that if you're at very slim odds to seriously contend, you don't indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere in the improbable hopes of defying the odds

 

here's an exercise that'll make you feel more at peace: Travis Wood's outproduced CJ Wilson per bWAR since the start of last season; pretend to yourself that we're paying him $80M to do so and you'll feel much, much happier about management's level of devotion and effort

 

similarly, when Rizzo produces similarly to Pujols & Fielder the next several years as he's projected to do, convince yourself that we're paying him $200-$250M to do so and you'll assuredly be pleased as punch about it

 

I don't have time to be so thrilled about these hypotheticals because I've been enjoying the 2013 Cubs too much.

[Tracer Bullet]

So backup MI is a key position?

[SouthSideRyan]

So backup MI is a key position?

 

No.

[Guest]

we're arguing that if you're at very slim odds to seriously contend, you don't indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere in the improbable hopes of defying the odds

 

Oh well good to know, because that's important. A lot of people were preferring management to indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere.

 

Based on some of the moves people wanted them to make, they sort of did, even if they didn't realize it. And I don't consider myself innocent of that.

[davell]

we're arguing that if you're at very slim odds to seriously contend, you don't indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere in the improbable hopes of defying the odds

 

Oh well good to know, because that's important. A lot of people were preferring management to indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere.

Kyle is wanting a better bench and a better pen. Trying to be frugal is going to wind up as a crapshoot, where you hopefully find a few guys that may stick longterm. Adding truly proven bench or bullpen guys IS spending money just for the sake of spending it. Adding 5 wins or so to last year or this years team doesn't matter. When we have enough of a foundation(hoping next year) then adding a couple of 3 mill a year bench bats and 4-5 mill a year relievers MAY be a necessity. Hopefully not though, because it'd be much better to constantly fill those spots from within, to where the true bulk of your payroll goes towards impact guys.

[SouthSideRyan]

we're arguing that if you're at very slim odds to seriously contend, you don't indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere in the improbable hopes of defying the odds

 

Oh well good to know, because that's important. A lot of people were preferring management to indiscriminately, irresponsibly throw money everywhere.

Kyle is wanting a better bench and a better pen. Trying to be frugal is going to wind up as a crapshoot, where you hopefully find a few guys that may stick longterm. Adding truly proven bench or bullpen guys IS spending money just for the sake of spending it. Adding 5 wins or so to last year or this years team doesn't matter. When we have enough of a foundation(hoping next year) then adding a couple of 3 mill a year bench bats and 4-5 mill a year relievers MAY be a necessity. Hopefully not though, because it'd be much better to constantly fill those spots from within, to where the true bulk of your payroll goes towards impact guys.

 

What do you see happening between now and November that makes it worth spending money on a bullpen?

[Tracer Bullet]

I do not think a team as bad as the cubs were in the 2011 and 2012 off-seasons should spend much money on backup MIs and depth at RP, esp when there are a number of options in AAA that may or may not work as RPs.

 

I take it you don't think we should spend money on the pen in 2014 either

 

If Cots #s are right, the Cubs are spending just shy of $20m on the pen in 2013 and that doesn't include any of the 7 starters (assume not all of Garza, Shark, Jax, Wood, Baker, Feldman, and CV were expected to start). If 2 of those 7 are pushed to the pen, then the total is nearly $30m.

 

Marmol takes half that off the books after this year but how much do you want this team to have committed to the pen in 2013?

 

And if backup MI isn't a key position, why are you bitching about the Cubs not having respectable players to cover for Barney? I'm not sure what the argument is frankly.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The point of complaining how bad the infield bench and the bullpen are isn't to say that Epstein should have spent indiscriminately on those positions.

 

It's to show that this front office has done a poor job in several areas where success doesn't require large monetary investment but rather shrewd judgment. The 2012 and 2013 Cubs didn't need to do nothing but spend money to get better. They needed to spend money and make shrewder decision. So consistently pointing out that spending money alone wouldn't have gotten them to where they need to be is technically true but also a non sequitor.

 

Of course, none of this is relevant if you believe that the state of the team in Oct. 2011 was such that there could be no reasonable expectation of a front office making the right combination of decisions to create a competitive team by 2013 without significantly harming the long-term future of the team.

 

I find that view to be horse manure, personally, and it can only be defended by rather bizarre and byzantine set of self-contradictory assumptions that each take the most front-office-friendly position imaginable. But to each their own.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Hairyducked Idiot

[davell]

Shark, Castro, and Rizzo continue to show progress. E-Jax looks like a good 3. Wood or Villanueva show to be a 3 WAR type. Castillo solidifies himself behind the plate, Schierhoktz/Hairston give top 10 RF production platooning. Head into next year needing a CFer, a 3B(if ones not acquired for Garza) a TOR arm, and bench/bullpen help.

[Backtobanks]

Actually what I'm saying is that both Ricketts and Theo have convinced many of you that things were worse than anyone could imagine when they took over and now we should wait patiently while they rake in huge profits while fielding a terrible team. Ricketts knew about the state of the economy (in Chicago and in Illinois), the politics of Chicago, the rooftop agreement, the landmark status of Wrigley, the horrible physical condition of Wrigley, etc. when he bought the team. Theo knew about the terrible farm system, the payroll, the CBA, the lack of statistics used by the Cubs, the bad ML roster, etc. when he took the job. Hopefully Theo can build the perennial contender that he promised us, but I need to start seeing some results at the ML level next year.

 

So they somehow have convinced many of us that it's worse...than the plethora of terrible things you yourself just listed. Gotcha.

 

I keep reading posts about Theo saying that "things were worse than he thought", "it might take longer than we hoped", etc. Ricketts and Theo are extremely smart and both of them walked into this situation knowing exactly what they were getting into, so I'm saying I'm tired of reading posts saying we might be terrible again next year and Theo should be considered successful if 3 years from now we're still under .500 and some of his prospects are producing at the ML level.

[Martin]

On a slightly different note and im admittedly not that knowledgeable on Baseball but would a trade for Price mean the end of the slow build process seeing as it would take most of our higher rated prospects to get a deal done?

[SouthSideRyan]

And if backup MI isn't a key position, why are you bitching about the Cubs not having respectable players to cover for Barney? I'm not sure what the argument is frankly.

 

Yeah, I didn't. The argument is the same argument that's been going since last December when people decided it was a good idea to continue to not spend money because we don't have a great chance at making the playoffs.

Edited April 22, 2013 by SouthSideRyan

[SouthSideRyan]

Shark, Castro, and Rizzo continue to show progress. E-Jax looks like a good 3. Wood or Villanueva show to be a 3 WAR type. Castillo solidifies himself behind the plate, Schierhoktz/Hairston give top 10 RF production platooning. Head into next year needing a CFer, a 3B(if ones not acquired for Garza) a TOR arm, and bench/bullpen help.

 

So best case scenario (some admittedly not very far-fetched) for 7 guys?

[SouthSideRyan]

And if backup MI isn't a key position, why are you bitching about the Cubs not having respectable players to cover for Barney? I'm not sure what the argument is frankly.

 

Yeah, I didn't. The argument is the same argument that's been going since last December when people decided it was a good idea to continue to not spend money because we don't have a great chance at making the playoffs.

 

PECOTA projected the Cubs at 6 games out of a playoff spot and you're all, we had no chance anyway so why bother?

[Tracer Bullet]

And if backup MI isn't a key position, why are you bitching about the Cubs not having respectable players to cover for Barney? I'm not sure what the argument is frankly.

 

Yeah, I didn't. The argument is the same argument that's been going since last December when people decided it was a good idea to continue to not spend money because we don't have a great chance at making the playoffs.

 

So you decided that piggybacking on Kyle's complaining about RP and backup MI was a good springboard for that? Ok.

[davell]

Shark, Castro, and Rizzo continue to show progress. E-Jax looks like a good 3. Wood or Villanueva show to be a 3 WAR type. Castillo solidifies himself behind the plate, Schierhoktz/Hairston give top 10 RF production platooning. Head into next year needing a CFer, a 3B(if ones not acquired for Garza) a TOR arm, and bench/bullpen help.

 

So best case scenario (some admittedly not very far-fetched) for 7 guys?

Not sure I'd technically say"best case", but improvement or stabilization, for sure. Castro doesn't have to put up a .850 OPS or anything. Curiously, other than the Schierholtz/Hairston platoon, do you see anything else I listed as actually being far-fetched?

[bukie]

When is it ever a good idea to expend more than minimal assets for backup MI and bullpen spots?

 

I can understand the sentiment that the Cubs should've invested more into the OF and 3B holes in the lineup, but I have no issue with them unloading middle IF depth and pen arms to shore up SP, 1B and organizational depth.