Fecal League Tracking 2013

[CubsWin]

You don't have to be mediocre before you are good, that is correct. Everything else is not right.

I guess I feel like losing the rest of the way does more for our long term success than winning. That's probably the most simple way to put it.

 

That is also not right. The difference in a couple spots in the draft order pales compared to the importance of the success of the players who are currently on the MLB roster.

You're wrong too.

 

The difference isn't between a couple of spots in the draft order. There are so many teams so close together that the difference is between 10 spots in the draft order. And the Cubs can lose enough games (and the other teams win enough games) without compromising the individual success of any one player on the roster. I thought that was obvious...

 

Replace "couple" with 5, 10, 20 spots in the draft order, the point is the same. There are lots of current Cubs who are important to next year's roster(and the years beyond), the difference in their draft position pales in importance to how they collectively perform.

Why?

[Guest]

I just want the Cubs to be good and even more be in a position to go after good players. I'm more concerned with the Ricketts financial wherewithal to do the latter. From draft day to contributing to MLB is so long and fraught with danger it's hard for me to get worked up about picking 5 or 12 or whatever.

[davell]

I just want the Cubs to be good and even more be in a position to go after good players. I'm more concerned with the Ricketts financial wherewithal to do the latter. From draft day to contributing to MLB is so long and fraught with danger it's hard for me to get worked up about picking 5 or 12 or whatever.

From a player talent standpoint there MAY not be that much of a difference. However, the real difference is in still HAVING your 1st round pick, if Ricketts is able to spend finally.

[Guest]

Why?

 

Because the MLB draft is not the NBA Draft.

 

Let's look at the two extremes of your range, the #4 pick and the #14 pick, over the last 20 years.

 

#4 pick

17 of 20 played in MLB

4.7 average career bWAR

3 of 20 have careers of significance(greater than 10 WAR)

Best player: Ryan Zimmerman, 32.1 bWAR

 

#14 pick

14 of 20 played in MLB

5.3 average career bWAR

5 of 20 have careers of significance

Best player: Derrek Lee, 34.1 bWAR (honorable mention to Jason Heyward)

 

The difference in these roles is not remotely worth hoping and cheering for the current major league Cubs to collectively fail. The impact of their performance the rest of the season will have on expectations for next season and beyond is many, many times over more important than the piddling difference in the most extreme example of rooting for fecal league glory.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It'd be different if we were in the top of the draft. The difference between 1st and 4th is pretty huge. But we're not.

[Vinestal]

It'd be different if we were in the top of the draft. The difference between 1st and 4th is pretty huge. But we're not.

Could still happen.

[davell]

I understand and agree with all that. However, if you're not making the playoffs, you want to keep your pick. Granted, there aren't many FA available worth giving up the pick for, but IF the Cubs decide to go get one, wouldn't you rather have finished 73-89 with the 10th, than 76-86 with the 14th?

[Guest]

I understand and agree with all that. However, if you're not making the playoffs, you want to keep your pick. Granted, there aren't many FA available worth giving up the pick for, but IF the Cubs decide to go get one, wouldn't you rather have finished 73-89 with the 10th, than 76-86 with the 14th?

 

That would be a nice side benefit, but not one I'm particularly willing to start a thread to track and breathlessly hope for.

[Cubswin11]

Why?

 

Because the MLB draft is not the NBA Draft.

 

Let's look at the two extremes of your range, the #4 pick and the #14 pick, over the last 20 years.

 

#4 pick

17 of 20 played in MLB

4.7 average career bWAR

3 of 20 have careers of significance(greater than 10 WAR)

Best player: Ryan Zimmerman, 32.1 bWAR

 

#14 pick

14 of 20 played in MLB

5.3 average career bWAR

5 of 20 have careers of significance

Best player: Derrek Lee, 34.1 bWAR (honorable mention to Jason Heyward)

 

The difference in these roles is not remotely worth hoping and cheering for the current major league Cubs to collectively fail. The impact of their performance the rest of the season will have on expectations for next season and beyond is many, many times over more important than the piddling difference in the most extreme example of rooting for fecal league glory.

Monetary difference in draft pool given to #4 and #14 is pretty significant though, isn't it?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

About $2m, so that's like two "second-round talents!" that you can get in later rounds that will be really exciting on draft day and then stall out in Daytona in four years.

[sneakypower]

http://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=Standings

 

top-6 to top-14 seems like the range

[wekim81]

About $2m, so that's like two "second-round talents!" that you can get in later rounds that will be really exciting on draft day and then stall out in Daytona in four years.

Yep. I love prospects as much as the next guy, but i'd rather just win games and have something to build off of heading into 2014.

[imb]

[expletive] it, give me some draft picks

[davell]

I feel like trolling out a discussion, so what the hell.....With where the team currently stands, both in the majors AND minors(Almora, Soler, and Bryant as OF prospects), if we have the 11th pick, do you give Ellsbury a 6/100 deal, if thats what it takes. And its the only move of any consequence payroll allows for this offseason. Or do you fill the OF spot currently open(assuming DeJesus and Schierholtz are here) with a David Murphy type to platoon with Lake?

[Guest]

I feel like trolling out a discussion, so what the hell.....With where the team currently stands, both in the majors AND minors(Almora, Soler, and Bryant as OF prospects), if we have the 11th pick, do you give Ellsbury a 6/100 deal, if thats what it takes. And its the only move of any consequence payroll allows for this offseason. Or do you fill the OF spot currently open(assuming DeJesus and Schierholtz are here) with a David Murphy type to platoon with Lake?

I don't like Ellsbury enough to give him that deal without considering the OF prospects.

[CubsWin]

The difference in these roles is not remotely worth hoping and cheering for the current major league Cubs to collectively fail. The impact of their performance the rest of the season will have on expectations for next season and beyond is many, many times over more important than the piddling difference in the most extreme example of rooting for fecal league glory.

Okay, so don't root for it. No one's asking you to, that's for sure.

 

For me, I'll take the advantages of the higher draft pick and fun of tracking the rest of the season with something to look forward to. You think the Cubs finishing with a few losses more than the next team will somehow stunt the growth of key players or dampen the spirits of the team going into next season, be my guest.

 

I choose to think that having a higher pick will help the scouts this front office employs get a better player. Maybe the draft over the last 20 years has been more of a crapshoot than it is today. Maybe, with the new CBA, the draft has become more important than ever. Maybe teams have been forced to get smarter because of it. Maybe not. I guess the next 5 years will tell...

Edited August 5, 2013 by CubsWin

[CubsWin]

I understand and agree with all that. However, if you're not making the playoffs, you want to keep your pick. Granted, there aren't many FA available worth giving up the pick for, but IF the Cubs decide to go get one, wouldn't you rather have finished 73-89 with the 10th, than 76-86 with the 14th?

 

That would be a nice side benefit, but not one I'm particularly willing to start a thread to track and breathlessly hope for.

I guess that's why you didn't start the thread.

 

I think this is fun and folly. This is about hoping the other teams in the bottom half of the league win games even more than it is hoping that the Cubs lose. And if the Cubs do lose, I'm always hoping that their key players develop. They certainly are not mutually exclusive. If you can make a case for that, I'd sure like to see it.

 

That said, on with the show...

[CubsWin]

Fecal League Standings - 08/04/13

 

1. HOU...36-74 .327 --

2. CWS...40-69 .367 4.5

3. MIA....43-67 .391 7.0

4. MIL....47-64 .423 10.5

5. CHC...49-62 .441 12.5

6. MIN...48-60 .444 13.0

7. SFG...49-61 .445 13.0

8. PHI...50-61 .450 13.5

9. NYM...49-60 .450 13.5

10. TOR..51-60 .459 14.5

11. COL...52-61 .460 14.5

12. LAA...51-59 .464 15.0

13. SDP...52-60 .464 15.0

14. SEA...52-59 .468 15.5

[SouthSideRyan]

"I think it's fun to root for my favorite team to lose"

[UMFan83]

Big fecal league week for the Cubs, first with a separation matchup against the Phillies who are 1 GB us then a weekend series in St. Louis who is fighting for the non fecal league division.

[CubsWin]

"I think it's fun to root for my favorite team to lose"

You do? Weird.

 

See, I think it's fun, when the Cubs are out of the playoff race, to track the other teams around them in the overall standings so as to provide a context for the Cubs wins and losses. Of course, that's a little bit more nuanced than what you boiled it down to. I'll put the straw man back up now...

[CubsWin]

Big fecal league week for the Cubs, first with a separation matchup against the Phillies who are 1 GB us then a weekend series in St. Louis who is fighting for the non fecal league division.

It'll be interesting to see what happens.

 

Man, I never thought I would say that when the Cubs are this far out of it...

[WrigleyField 22]

I just want the Cubs to have good peripherals, but be unlucky the rest if the way. Like if our starters deal every game and our set up men get hold and the Gregg wants to blow some saves and pick up the L I won't be mad.

 

No, I won't track it daily, not this far out at least, but with 1 to 2 weeks left I'll look a little closer if its gonna be close on the over/under 10th spot. Not that keeping verse losing the pick would necessarily change my mind anyways in regards to a FA, but it'd be nice for it not to be a factor at all.

[Guest]

I understand and agree with all that. However, if you're not making the playoffs, you want to keep your pick. Granted, there aren't many FA available worth giving up the pick for, but IF the Cubs decide to go get one, wouldn't you rather have finished 73-89 with the 10th, than 76-86 with the 14th?

 

That would be a nice side benefit, but not one I'm particularly willing to start a thread to track and breathlessly hope for.

I guess that's why you didn't start the thread.

 

I think this is fun and folly. This is about hoping the other teams in the bottom half of the league win games even more than it is hoping that the Cubs lose. And if the Cubs do lose, I'm always hoping that their key players develop. They certainly are not mutually exclusive. If you can make a case for that, I'd sure like to see it.

 

That said, on with the show...

 

Here are the players on the current roster who are mostly assured of having zero impact on the 2014 team:

 

Navarro

Gregg

Ransom

Injury call-ups(Murphy, Gillespie, etc)

 

That's it. Next year is not going to be a clean slate with just a few key holdovers. They won't keep 20 roster spots stable, but even then guys who could potentially be sent out(DeJesus, Schierholtz, Barney, Villanueva, etc) we'd want to perform as well as possible to maximize their return in trade.

 

I don't really have a problem with tracking where the Cubs are going to pick, I know I'll be checking to see if they are in or out of the Top 10. It's the perverse "Cubs lost, other crappy teams won, today was a good day" rhetoric that's distasteful to me. I'm as much of a prospect junkie as anyone, but there are far more important things to get excited over down the stretch if you want something to cling to with the Cubs out of the race.

[apete6]

I just want the Cubs to have good peripherals, but be unlucky the rest if the way. Like if our starters deal every game and our set up men get hold and the Gregg wants to blow some saves and pick up the L I won't be mad.

 

No, I won't track it daily, not this far out at least, but with 1 to 2 weeks left I'll look a little closer if its gonna be close on the over/under 10th spot. Not that keeping verse losing the pick would necessarily change my mind anyways in regards to a FA, but it'd be nice for it not to be a factor at all.

 

Agreed on all counts. Great post. Same with hitters. If Rizzo, Castro, and Lake want to do awesome, but the revolving door at 3B and Barney want to suck badly, that's fine with me as they won't be here when the Cubs are good anyway.

 

We're not cracking the top 3 unless something goes horribly wrong, but having the 4th or 5th pick is fine with me. I really would rather not have an NL team or the White Sox in the top 2, though, as it seems that the 2 pitchers are likely to go there.