Offseason Rumors

[pccubfan]

Would the system be that much worse?

 

OK, we win 75 games in 2012 and don't make the trades.

 

We still have 6 of our current top 10, plus the 2013 No. 12 pick or whatever.

 

Uh.... Yes?

Wasn't Kyle the one who said picks in the top 3 or top 5 are valuable, and the rest of the draft is pretty much a crapshoot?

 

I think it was Kyle and he probably isn't too far from being correct. I think the one thing that Theo has proven in his career is that he has been able to do really well picking at the back end of the draft. I don't follow the draft that closely, so I don't know how much of that was the result of being able to sign over-slot under the old rules, but he didn't have the advantage of picking early.

 

edit I do realize that your point was Kyle saying we wouldn't be too much worse off even though the Cubs would have been picking in the middle of the draft if the Cubs had won more.

[davell]

well i will say, if ricketts was gonna go cheap at least he was smart enough to hire an awesome front office that has the capability to win while being constrained by a mid-market payroll. jim hendry with a mediocre payroll would've been a train wreck.

 

Sorry, but I'm going to have to see it before I give them credit for it.

 

well, he took over a roster and a minor league system largely bereft of talent, and the owner yanked payroll down by $30-40m per year when most clubs in the game have been rolling in dough. i'm not too sure what you expected was going to happen.

 

You're the one giving the FO credit for something they haven't accomplished yet. I won't have any problem giving them credit when they actually accomplish that winning part. And if they can do it without the constraint of a mid-market payroll, I'll give them credit anyway.

 

I agree, I'm pretty sure that at one point Hendry had a lower payroll than the current front office and had a top 1-3 ranked farm system and a team that competed in the division.

 

I do like what Epstein and Hoyer have done with the farm system, but it gets old hearing the excuses on why the front office can't spend, when the Cubs are one of the most profitable teams in the league. There is no excuse for them not being able to compete year in and year out.

 

Signing the type of loans that Ricketts did, in order to buy the Cubs isn't an excuse. It's what happened. It benefitted him, but not the team in the short term. Anything Theo and Co accomplish in the short term is going to be done out of being innovative. They inherited a crap roster, a bottom 10 system, and no money to spend. We weren't aware HOW BAD things were, but this was going to take time.

[CUBZ99]

 

I agree, I'm pretty sure that at one point Hendry had a lower payroll than the current front office and had a top 1-3 ranked farm system and a team that competed in the division.

 

I do like what Epstein and Hoyer have done with the farm system, but it gets old hearing the excuses on why the front office can't spend, when the Cubs are one of the most profitable teams in the league. There is no excuse for them not being able to compete year in and year out.

 

Kind of hard to compare payrolls from 10 years ago with the numbers the way they are now. An $80 million payroll in 2003/4 was a really solid number then. It's peanuts now.

 

That is a fair point. But the Cubs were 11th in spending in 2003 when they nearly went to the World Series and had a terrific farm system. Last couple of years the Cubs have been 15th in spending.

[NewUserName]

Would the system be that much worse?

 

OK, we win 75 games in 2012 and don't make the trades.

 

We still have 6 of our current top 10, plus the 2013 No. 12 pick or whatever.

 

Uh.... Yes?

Wasn't Kyle the one who said picks in the top 3 or top 5 are valuable, and the rest of the draft is pretty much a crapshoot?

Also this whole idea leaves out player development. It matters little who, when or how a young player was acquired if the organization sucks at developing players. Would Baez be the current player if the old regime was still in charge?

[jersey cubs fan]

Would the system be that much worse?

 

OK, we win 75 games in 2012 and don't make the trades.

 

We still have 6 of our current top 10, plus the 2013 No. 12 pick or whatever.

 

Uh.... Yes?

Wasn't Kyle the one who said picks in the top 3 or top 5 are valuable, and the rest of the draft is pretty much a crapshoot?

Also this whole idea leaves out player development. It matters little who, when or how a young player was acquired if the organization sucks at developing players. Would Baez be the current player if the old regime was still in charge?

 

Maybe, maybe not. Castro was a beast when the regime changed, not so much now.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Wasn't Kyle the one who said picks in the top 3 or top 5 are valuable, and the rest of the draft is pretty much a crapshoot?

 

Sort of, and that's not incompatible with the opinion that the system would still be pretty decent without the last two years of losing and flipping and going nuts on IFAs.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Also this whole idea leaves out player development. It matters little who, when or how a young player was acquired if the organization sucks at developing players. Would Baez be the current player if the old regime was still in charge?

 

Getting into player development gets us into all sorts of squicky areas like what happened to the two top prospects that *were* in place when the front office took over.

[pccubfan]

Would the system be that much worse?

 

OK, we win 75 games in 2012 and don't make the trades.

 

We still have 6 of our current top 10, plus the 2013 No. 12 pick or whatever.

 

Uh.... Yes?

Wasn't Kyle the one who said picks in the top 3 or top 5 are valuable, and the rest of the draft is pretty much a crapshoot?

Also this whole idea leaves out player development. It matters little who, when or how a young player was acquired if the organization sucks at developing players. Would Baez be the current player if the old regime was still in charge?

 

Good point. The prior regime was abysmal at developing talent. Theo and Co have a very good track record in this area, but with different players down on the farm. I'm probably more negative than most on this site, I still want to see some success at the major league level with guys developed under this regime with the Cubs. I believe that what is happening in the minors is great but the proof is how they perform once they reach the big leagues. It's not the FO's fault that we haven't seen these success stories yet because of where the team started. I'm just in the I'll believe it when I see it mode. Being a Cubs fan for as long as I have been has made me that way.

[jersey cubs fan]

Also this whole idea leaves out player development. It matters little who, when or how a young player was acquired if the organization sucks at developing players. Would Baez be the current player if the old regime was still in charge?

 

Getting into player development gets us into all sorts of squicky areas like what happened to the two top prospects that *were* in place when the front office took over.

 

This also isn't about which regime was better. The point is these guys should be able to field a much better team than Hendry could. But they have not. They have a highly ranked farm system, but Hendry had one of those way back when.

 

I still think these guys are good. They are highly compensated for what they do. And they should be able to work on parallel fronts, making the major league team better while improving the farm. That is not an irrationally high bar to set.

[SouthSideRyan]

Can we have an offseason thread where Kyle isn't allowed? It'd be nice to stop by for updates without having to weed through page after page of his tedious whining.

 

EDIT: I should mention that a mere blocking would not do the trick, as he manages to pull everyone else into his tediousness.

 

THIS! There's precious little Offseason Rumors in this thread. Seems like every topic degenerates into the same tiresome discussion. Maybe start a Ricketts Sucks/Whining/We're Doomed thread for this stuff?

Maybe it's the cubs that have become tiresome. Their offseasons haven't exactly been intriguing.

Before Ricketts it was Hendry and before that Tribune Company. There will always be something. The point is it doesn't have to dominate every [expletive] thread on the forum. This thread would be about 3 pages if it stayed on topic.

 

There are plenty of people who care about the offseason buzz. The only people who care about the endless Poor Tom Ricketts bs are those perpetuating it.

 

But they go hand in hand, the offseason has been limited the past 3 years because Ricketts is a cheap ass. How can you separate the 2?

[Guest]

Also this whole idea leaves out player development. It matters little who, when or how a young player was acquired if the organization sucks at developing players. Would Baez be the current player if the old regime was still in charge?

 

Getting into player development gets us into all sorts of squicky areas like what happened to the two top prospects that *were* in place when the front office took over.

 

You mean Jackson and Vitters?

 

Most/many considered them flawed from the beginning and I remember reading plenty about concerns that Brett Jackson wouldn't be able to make contact at the major league level prior to 2012 happening...and that Vitters would never find a position that his bat was worthy of.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You mean Jackson and Vitters?

 

Most/many considered them flawed from the beginning and I remember reading plenty about concerns that Brett Jackson wouldn't be able to make contact at the major league level prior to 2012 happening...and that Vitters would never find a position that his bat was worthy of.

 

Jackson and McNutt were the top-100 guys, iirc.

 

It's the exact sort of frustrating "heads I win/tails you lose" argument that the Arguello-style fans like to engage in. If Baez excels, that doesn't show that the front office inherited some talent, it shows that they are excellent at player development. But if Jackson falls apart, that doesn't prove that they failed at his player development, it shows that they didn't inherit any real talent.

 

I don't have a super-strong opinion either way on what Baez and Jackson would look like without the new front office. It's completely counterfactual and I don't think anybody has a good way of separating the talent of the player from the development skills of the organization. But the default assumption for some seems to be whichever way makes the front office look the best in each situation.

[Guest]

Maybe, maybe not. Castro was a beast when the regime changed, not so much now.

Define "beast".

 

We thought he was in position to develop into a beast, which has not yet occurred.

[davell]

Javy was there, just had had a few games under his belt though. McNutt was still a top 10 guy in the system, but the luster was well on its way to being gone. Brett was still a top 50 guy at that point and we were still thinking Vitters was or close to it.

[Guest]

You mean Jackson and Vitters?

 

Most/many considered them flawed from the beginning and I remember reading plenty about concerns that Brett Jackson wouldn't be able to make contact at the major league level prior to 2012 happening...and that Vitters would never find a position that his bat was worthy of.

 

Jackson and McNutt were the top-100 guys, iirc.

 

It's the exact sort of frustrating "heads I win/tails you lose" argument that the Arguello-style fans like to engage in. If Baez excels, that doesn't show that the front office inherited some talent, it shows that they are excellent at player development. But if Jackson falls apart, that doesn't prove that they failed at his player development, it shows that they didn't inherit any real talent.

 

I don't have a super-strong opinion either way on what Baez and Jackson would look like without the new front office. It's completely counterfactual and I don't think anybody has a good way of separating the talent of the player from the development skills of the organization. But the default assumption for some seems to be whichever way makes the front office look the best in each situation.

I agree with what you're saying here, but it doesn't change what I said about Jackson, top 100 status or not.

 

I remember being excited about Jackson and thinking he should be handed a job in 2012 after looking at his 2011 AAA numbers...this is when I knew a lot less about prospect evaluation and Tim basically said he strikes out way too much (and then I read more and he definitely wasn't the only one saying this).

 

It was a concern with Jackson on this board from the day he was drafted.

 

I don't think "Jackson and Vitters took a turn for the worse so maybe the player development isn't that good" is a good counterargument to a success story. There are going to be more failures, and these guys had already done a lot of their developing under a terrible player development situation (and had major red flags).

 

And speaking totally off the cuff, I really feel like Baez would not be what he is today under the old regime. I can't prove it, but I feel pretty strongly about it.

Edited November 15, 2013 by David

[Felix Leiter]

We're fundamentally bad and when we bring players up they seem to have been taught nothing in the minors. I thought the FO was working on a training plan(book) for all young players, so everyone was operating from the same skill set-not swinging at first pitches, bunting, throwing to the proper base, etc... We seem to care less about 'beating ourselves'.

 

When Tim Wilkins came here, I thought he'd finally turn the minors around but that didn't happen. Why?

 

I wonder of anyone knows the Ricketts family personally. Was Tom or his father the brains behind the fortune? Tom just seems so uncomfortable with the media at times and not a confident owner.

 

I still believe we have at least 2 years minimum before we're competitive in the division and any acquistion of players should use 2016 as a focal point.

[davell]

If the old regime was here, my guess is Javy would have begun last year in AA and after a 2-3 week hot streak, he'd have been in the majors.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

In case this morning had too much broader topic stuff for some people's delicate constitutions to digest, here's something about the offseason:

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/20569/expect-more-inexpensive-additions-to-cubs

[Guest]

Give me a Poor Tom Ricketts forum before one more Jesse Rogers article that tries to impart industry knowledge.

[jersey cubs fan]

Give me a Poor Tom Ricketts forum before one more Jesse Rogers article that tries to impart industry knowledge.

 

You don't think this is helpful?

 

McLouth is at least the type of player the Cubs could use. He's a veteran who can provide some leadership while taking some attention and pressure away from their young players.

 

Yeah, this team just needs veterans who provide leadership and deflect attention and pressure. That's all they need really.

[CubInOK]

McLouth is at least the type of player the Cubs could use. He's a veteran who can provide some leadership while taking some attention and pressure away from their young players.

 

Yeah, this team just needs veterans who provide leadership and deflect attention and pressure. That's all they need really.

Dusty Baker is looking for a job.

[davell]

We're fundamentally bad and when we bring players up they seem to have been taught nothing in the minors. I thought the FO was working on a training plan(book) for all young players, so everyone was operating from the same skill set-not swinging at first pitches, bunting, throwing to the proper base, etc... We seem to care less about 'beating ourselves'.

 

When Tim Wilkins came here, I thought he'd finally turn the minors around but that didn't happen. Why?

 

I wonder of anyone knows the Ricketts family personally. Was Tom or his father the brains behind the fortune? Tom just seems so uncomfortable with the media at times and not a confident owner.

 

I still believe we have at least 2 years minimum before we're competitive in the division and any acquistion of players should use 2016 as a focal point.

 

 

The brains behind the fortune? Young Tom spent a whole summer answering phones for daddy before being named a Director, around the time he was 30 or so. Silver spooned his way into the Cubs.

[Guest]

The brains behind the fortune? Young Tom spent a whole summer answering phones for daddy before being named a Director, around the time he was 30 or so. Silver spooned his way into the Cubs.

 

He also served as a VP of two other companies and co-founded a 3rd in between those two roles.

[Guest]

Give me a Poor Tom Ricketts forum before one more Jesse Rogers article that tries to impart industry knowledge.

I do like the idea of bring Josh Johnson on board. I have faith that Bosio can turn him around as long as he is not physically damaged.

[davell]

The brains behind the fortune? Young Tom spent a whole summer answering phones for daddy before being named a Director, around the time he was 30 or so. Silver spooned his way into the Cubs.

 

He also served as a VP of two other companies and co-founded a 3rd in between those two roles.

That was certainly easier to do based on who daddy was.....He had connections far in advance of what the normal guy would have had.