Offseason Rumors

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Well, it's better than what I actually expect to happen.

 

I doubt that, too.

 

Nope, I'm pretty serious. I don't think we're going to be .500 in the next two years. Too far away, too little interest and/or resources in closing the gap quickly.

[rawaction]

Well, it's better than what I actually expect to happen.

 

I doubt that, too.

 

Nope, I'm pretty serious. I don't think we're going to be .500 in the next two years. Too far away, too little interest and/or resources in closing the gap quickly.

 

Yeah, not sure why this sounds crazy to people. It's pretty clear they are not going to be .500 in 2014 based on what we're hearing (Shark, Castro traded, no money for Tanaka). And it would take a pretty big offseason and quick development of former prospects at the MLB level to get there in 2015 based on what 2014 looks like at this point.

[jersey cubs fan]

Well, it's better than what I actually expect to happen.

 

I doubt that, too.

 

Nope, I'm pretty serious. I don't think we're going to be .500 in the next two years. Too far away, too little interest and/or resources in closing the gap quickly.

 

Yeah, not sure why this sounds crazy to people. It's pretty clear they are not going to be .500 in 2014 based on what we're hearing (Shark, Castro traded, no money for Tanaka). And it would take a pretty big offseason and quick development of former prospects at the MLB level to get there in 2015 based on what 2014 looks like at this point.

 

What's crazy is pretending we can call it a success if the reach .500 by 2015, or that fans would be happy with that. That's crazy. It is not crazy that people expect them to keep struggling.

[davell]

We're likely a 70 win team right now, heading into 2014. Yes, I can see Shark dealt, but I doubt we trade anyone else of importance. Javy and Bryant could make us slightly better than 70 as well. If we head into next year with the same payroll as we headed into 2013 with, we've got 35 mill or so to spend.

 

I can see us around .500 in 2014(without trading away much from the farm), with 2015 being the year we try to move into 90 win territory. It even makes sense from the business end, with the need for TV ratings, to get the most money out of WGN or CSN.

[pitchcs]

Yeah, they have no interest in closing the gap quickly. That's a legitimate reason.

 

I don't think people are realizing how quick the Cubs could become an above average team with a lineup of Rizzo, Baez & Bryant + some pitching.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I don't think people are realizing how quick the Cubs could become an above average team with a lineup of Rizzo, Baez & Bryant + some pitching.

 

That's placing a ton of faith in two guys who have less than 250 PAs combined above A-ball.

 

And even if that happens, we'd need to get the pitching too.

 

I'm sure the waves and waves will get us there eventually, but I'm not willing to place even money on it for 2015.

[davell]

I don't think people are realizing how quick the Cubs could become an above average team with a lineup of Rizzo, Baez & Bryant + some pitching.

 

That's placing a ton of faith in two guys who have less than 250 PAs combined above A-ball.

 

And even if that happens, we'd need to get the pitching too.

So, you think those two are going to fail? And we have Wood, E-Jax, and Arrieta as a baseline for the rotation, in place. Yeah, we need 2 frontline SP to go with them, but if Shark is dealt, I'd certainly think one comes from that trade. And we definitely have the prospects to go get one more.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So, you think those two are going to fail?

 

I think that if I'm asked for a baseline projection for 2015, those two don't give enough to push the team to or over .500.

 

They might fail, they might succeed. They might succeed but not quickly enough to have a major impact that quickly.

 

Heck, I think there's still a really good chance that one or both are them aren't even making their MLB debuts until 2015.

 

And we have Wood, E-Jax, and Arrieta as a baseline for the rotation, in place. Yeah, we need 2 frontline SP to go with them, but if Shark is dealt, I'd certainly think one comes from that trade. And we definitely have the prospects to go get one more.

 

Those three pitchers combined for 4.8 fWAR last year. The median for an MLB starting staff last year was 11.5. So even all three of them stay healthy and effective, we're basically seven wins short. So, all we need is two pitchers better than anyone we have. I'm not exactly counting on it.

 

I'll place that 2015-ready MLB pitcher we get for Samardzija next to the 2014 MLB-ready pitcher we were definitely going to get for Garza and the Rizzo-like trade acquisitions we were definitely going to make last offseason.

 

I'm not saying your scenario is implausible. t's worth dreaming on. But I don't think it rises all the way up to "likely."

[davell]

I have damn near 0 faith in Ricketts, but I am near the opposite when it comes to the FO. Ricketts is all about money, it makes complete sense to put a more exciting team on the field immediately. A 75-80 win team in 2014 is VERY doable, especially without a selloff. CSN or WGN seeing a nice increase in wins, with an extremely young nucleus in place could be forced to pay up, if they project plenty of playoff baseball inside that 2015-2019 window.

 

Enter 2014 with our opening day payroll of 106ish and we've got 35 mill to spend. Attendance loss is canceled out by the MLB revenue gain. No matter what Arguello was saying, I see no reason our payroll should drop. Getting WGN or CSN just to pay what CSN is already paying for their half results in around 10 mill more for Ricketts per year for that 5 year period. 50 mill over 5 years for just keeping payroll static THIS year. Attendance would also move back up, meaning more money for Ricketts.

 

I have total confidence the FO can get 5-10 wins out of 35 mill of payroll, given the construction of our team and the assets we have available to trade(that don't include Javy or KB). I'm banking on Ricketts to be capable of seeing a financial opportunity. He ain't much, but surely he's got THAT in him.

[The-Kris-Bryant]

You can't really group Arrieta with the other two - who combined for a 4.8 fwar

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I have damn near 0 faith in Ricketts, but I am near the opposite when it comes to the FO. Ricketts is all about money, it makes complete sense to put a more exciting team on the field immediately.

 

It made sense in 2012 and 2013 too. I'm way past the point where "it'd seem to make sense for them to be good" is a reason for me to believe they will be.

 

A 75-80 win team in 2014 is VERY doable, especially without a selloff.

 

Doable isn't likely, and the hot rumors right now are that we're selling off before the season even starts.

 

CSN or WGN seeing a nice increase in wins, with an extremely young nucleus in place could be forced to pay up, if they project plenty of playoff baseball inside that 2015-2019 window.

 

Enter 2014 with our opening day payroll of 106ish and we've got 35 mill to spend.

 

I'll believe we enter 2014 with that payroll when I see it. We ended last year at $95m and I'm barely expecting us to reach that again.

 

Attendance loss is canceled out by the MLB revenue gain. No matter what Arguello was saying, I see no reason our payroll should drop. Getting WGN or CSN just to pay what CSN is already paying for their half results in around 10 mill more for Ricketts per year for that 5 year period. 50 mill over 5 years for just keeping payroll static THIS year. Attendance would also move back up, meaning more money for Ricketts.

 

In the current MLB environment, $50m over five years gets you like one average starter.

 

I have total confidence the FO can get 5-10 wins out of 35 mill of payroll, given the construction of our team and the assets we have available to trade(that don't include Javy or KB). I'm banking on Ricketts to be capable of seeing a financial opportunity. He ain't much, but surely he's got THAT in him.

 

Well, like I said, I think the path you've laid out here is plausible. I'm just not willing to call it probable. It's too easy for too many things to go wrong.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't think people are realizing how quick the Cubs could become an above average team with a lineup of Rizzo, Baez & Bryant + some pitching.

 

That's placing a ton of faith in two guys who have less than 250 PAs combined above A-ball.

 

And even if that happens, we'd need to get the pitching too.

So, you think those two are going to fail?

 

They don't have to fail for things to not work out as they seemingly have to. There's a pretty wide gulf between failing and being awesome enough to essentially carry a team/build one around, and they kinda have to be the latter at this point.

[Backtobanks]

I have damn near 0 faith in Ricketts, but I am near the opposite when it comes to the FO. Ricketts is all about money, it makes complete sense to put a more exciting team on the field immediately. A 75-80 win team in 2014 is VERY doable, especially without a selloff. CSN or WGN seeing a nice increase in wins, with an extremely young nucleus in place could be forced to pay up, if they project plenty of playoff baseball inside that 2015-2019 window.

 

Enter 2014 with our opening day payroll of 106ish and we've got 35 mill to spend. Attendance loss is canceled out by the MLB revenue gain. No matter what Arguello was saying, I see no reason our payroll should drop. Getting WGN or CSN just to pay what CSN is already paying for their half results in around 10 mill more for Ricketts per year for that 5 year period. 50 mill over 5 years for just keeping payroll static THIS year. Attendance would also move back up, meaning more money for Ricketts.

 

I have total confidence the FO can get 5-10 wins out of 35 mill of payroll, given the construction of our team and the assets we have available to trade(that don't include Javy or KB). I'm banking on Ricketts to be capable of seeing a financial opportunity. He ain't much, but surely he's got THAT in him.

 

Most of the posters on NSBB thought 75-80 wins was doable in 2012 and 2013 too.

[davell]

Re-quoting all of that will be too long. I'll touch on each though.

 

We can go round and round about 2012-13, if we had kept payroll where it was, based on what happened with other teams, we wouldn't have made the playoffs, may not have finished .500 dependent on which moves were made and could have been looking at dropping payroll NOW, in order to offset the probable loss of attendance, due to the debt crap. Not to mention, we wouldn't have KB, the 4th pick next year, and likely not Edwards or PJ, among many others. No clue IF Ricketts ever plans to spend, but I'm 100% sure I like our current set up and future more than if we had went the other route and been capped at the top end of where our payroll was. The TV rights make it much closer to a necessity to be good, than it was the past few years.

 

I'm not thinking selling off Shark kills us, nor do I see it as an immediate concession for 2014. Getting a return including any of Bradley, Skaggs, Delgado, Taillon, Kingham, Zimmer, Ventura, Duffy, plus more could all out-produce Shark in 2014, much less going forward. If I trade him and I take a half step back in 2014 off the move, but 2 steps forward in 2015, its still a win. Bottom line is selling him off, as long as it brings back ready or near ready players doesn't mean we're punting. Not to mention, we've also been linked to every single FA out there. Rumors go both ways.

 

We obviously didn't lose money, I'm not going to think payroll is lowered again, at least not considerably(within 5 of the 106 one way or the other is where I'm thinking)

 

The 50 mill over 5 years wasn't meant to get us players, I'm using that as money Ricketts can just pocket. The payroll can advance from the increased attendance using the money would bring in, along with the youngsters generating a bit of excitement.

 

In the end, I think our only difference is I have confidence the upcoming TV deal, the relative closeness of our best prospects, and currently being a 70ish win, will propel a couple of major moves this offseason.

[davell]

I have damn near 0 faith in Ricketts, but I am near the opposite when it comes to the FO. Ricketts is all about money, it makes complete sense to put a more exciting team on the field immediately. A 75-80 win team in 2014 is VERY doable, especially without a selloff. CSN or WGN seeing a nice increase in wins, with an extremely young nucleus in place could be forced to pay up, if they project plenty of playoff baseball inside that 2015-2019 window.

 

Enter 2014 with our opening day payroll of 106ish and we've got 35 mill to spend. Attendance loss is canceled out by the MLB revenue gain. No matter what Arguello was saying, I see no reason our payroll should drop. Getting WGN or CSN just to pay what CSN is already paying for their half results in around 10 mill more for Ricketts per year for that 5 year period. 50 mill over 5 years for just keeping payroll static THIS year. Attendance would also move back up, meaning more money for Ricketts.

 

I have total confidence the FO can get 5-10 wins out of 35 mill of payroll, given the construction of our team and the assets we have available to trade(that don't include Javy or KB). I'm banking on Ricketts to be capable of seeing a financial opportunity. He ain't much, but surely he's got THAT in him.

 

Most of the posters on NSBB thought 75-80 wins was doable in 2012 and 2013 too.

Yeah at a much higher payroll and many more longterm commitments. I'll take our current positioning easily over what a 130+ mill 80 win team would have looked like.

[UMFan83]

I have damn near 0 faith in Ricketts, but I am near the opposite when it comes to the FO. Ricketts is all about money, it makes complete sense to put a more exciting team on the field immediately. A 75-80 win team in 2014 is VERY doable, especially without a selloff. CSN or WGN seeing a nice increase in wins, with an extremely young nucleus in place could be forced to pay up, if they project plenty of playoff baseball inside that 2015-2019 window.

 

Enter 2014 with our opening day payroll of 106ish and we've got 35 mill to spend. Attendance loss is canceled out by the MLB revenue gain. No matter what Arguello was saying, I see no reason our payroll should drop. Getting WGN or CSN just to pay what CSN is already paying for their half results in around 10 mill more for Ricketts per year for that 5 year period. 50 mill over 5 years for just keeping payroll static THIS year. Attendance would also move back up, meaning more money for Ricketts.

 

I have total confidence the FO can get 5-10 wins out of 35 mill of payroll, given the construction of our team and the assets we have available to trade(that don't include Javy or KB). I'm banking on Ricketts to be capable of seeing a financial opportunity. He ain't much, but surely he's got THAT in him.

 

Most of the posters on NSBB thought 75-80 wins was doable in 2012 and 2013 too.

 

75 wins might have been possible last year without trades

[Sammy Sofa]

I have damn near 0 faith in Ricketts, but I am near the opposite when it comes to the FO. Ricketts is all about money, it makes complete sense to put a more exciting team on the field immediately. A 75-80 win team in 2014 is VERY doable, especially without a selloff. CSN or WGN seeing a nice increase in wins, with an extremely young nucleus in place could be forced to pay up, if they project plenty of playoff baseball inside that 2015-2019 window.

 

Enter 2014 with our opening day payroll of 106ish and we've got 35 mill to spend. Attendance loss is canceled out by the MLB revenue gain. No matter what Arguello was saying, I see no reason our payroll should drop. Getting WGN or CSN just to pay what CSN is already paying for their half results in around 10 mill more for Ricketts per year for that 5 year period. 50 mill over 5 years for just keeping payroll static THIS year. Attendance would also move back up, meaning more money for Ricketts.

 

I have total confidence the FO can get 5-10 wins out of 35 mill of payroll, given the construction of our team and the assets we have available to trade(that don't include Javy or KB). I'm banking on Ricketts to be capable of seeing a financial opportunity. He ain't much, but surely he's got THAT in him.

 

Most of the posters on NSBB thought 75-80 wins was doable in 2012 and 2013 too.

 

75 wins might have been possible last year without trades

 

Or Castro, Rizzo, Castillo and Shark actually being good most of the season. Especially Castro. But especially Castro.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

We've never been linked to those FAs in a serious way. Just the local media saying "sure, we'd like players" or the national media just randomly listing big market teams.

 

Nobody seems to seriously expect us to land any of those big players this offseason.

[davell]

We've never been linked to those FAs in a serious way. Just the local media saying "sure, we'd like players" or the national media just randomly listing big market teams.

 

Nobody seems to seriously expect us to land any of those big players this offseason.

No one expected us to be thisclose on Annibal or getting Jackson last year either.

[davell]

I don't think people are realizing how quick the Cubs could become an above average team with a lineup of Rizzo, Baez & Bryant + some pitching.

 

That's placing a ton of faith in two guys who have less than 250 PAs combined above A-ball.

 

And even if that happens, we'd need to get the pitching too.

So, you think those two are going to fail?

 

They don't have to fail for things to not work out as they seemingly have to. There's a pretty wide gulf between failing and being awesome enough to essentially carry a team/build one around, and they kinda have to be the latter at this point.

Yeah, this is the scary point to make and its true. But its not like either Javy or KB would lose all their value if they came up and struggled out of the gate either. We do have a good enough system to trade out of and get whatever the major holes wind up being. I refuse to believe ALL these guys are going to come up and not produce.

[Sammy Sofa]

We've never been linked to those FAs in a serious way. Just the local media saying "sure, we'd like players" or the national media just randomly listing big market teams.

 

Nobody seems to seriously expect us to land any of those big players this offseason.

No one expected us to be thisclose on Annibal or getting Jackson last year either.

 

How were they "thisclose" to getting Sanchez? He didn't want to play on a terrible team.

[SouthSideRyan]

We've never been linked to those FAs in a serious way. Just the local media saying "sure, we'd like players" or the national media just randomly listing big market teams.

 

Nobody seems to seriously expect us to land any of those big players this offseason.

No one expected us to be thisclose on Annibal or getting Jackson last year either.

 

How were they "thisclose" to getting Sanchez? He didn't want to play on a terrible team.

 

I think he signs here if Detroit didn't up their offer when he went back to them.

[Sammy Sofa]

I didn't follow that at all; I just remember some scuttlebutt that some people thought it was just a ploy to get the Tigers to pay more. I'm probably imagining it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

We do have a good enough system to trade out of and get whatever the major holes wind up being. I refuse to believe ALL these guys are going to come up and not produce.

 

I don't think that will happen, either. But I do think that the timeline of when these players start producing and whatever isn't going to necessarily be in time for us to be .500 in 2015.

 

This is the time of year where every prospect's ETA seems to be pushed up to the absolute soonest that could be remotely feasible, but what we have right now is a bunch of really exciting A-ballers with one guy who had an amazing half-season at AA but lots of caveats as to why he is very raw.

 

We're not going to be terrible forever, but we're not going to be good soon unless the front office decides they want to accelerate the process. And I've seen nothing from them to indicate they'll do that.

[davell]

Ervin Santana wants 5/100+, Nolasco 5/80......Shark's value, rising.