4/13 Cubs (Jackson) at Cards (Wacha) 1:15 WGN

[UK1679666180]

The A's had Parker already.(I know he's just had TJS). They had depth with Griffin, Straily, Anderson, etc. Something we did not. They had Donaldson come out of nowhere(from us). They gave up two top 100 guys for Lowrie. They had an elite closer that netted them Reddick.

 

They had built up quite a bit of excess value that we certainly didn't have at the time the FO took over. We had Starlin, Garza(dealt for an extremely good return) Marshall(extremely good return) Vitters and Jackson, Cashner(extremely good return) and we created value in Shark, which has yet to be figured out what to do with. That's it.

 

We also had McNutt, who was top-100 at the time, iirc.

 

I don't see how the first paragraph contains so much more value than the second.

 

No one should be happy with the state of franchise, they should've started adding pieces from outside the organization that are major contributors in the short and long terms. It doesn't matter why at this point, they'll need to spend more and Theo/Hoyer will have to do better in their FA signings. The state of the farm gives me optimism though.

[davell]

They had more in their system, more money to spend inside their budget and more already on their roster. Flexibility. And McNutt was no longer a top 100 type when Theo took over.

 

They had more room for error. Now though, we ARE in position to make moves by trading obviously. Especially since we've got upper level depth.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

They had more in their system, more money to spend inside their budget and more already on their roster. Flexibility. And McNutt was no longer a top 100 type when Theo took over.

 

They had more room for error. Now though, we ARE in position to make moves by trading obviously. Especially since we've got upper level depth.

 

I really don't think most of those things are true. I think you're kneejerking that *obviously* the A's must have had it better off without really looking at what they had or how they got what they have now.

 

For the record, the 2011 BA organizational rankings (analogous to 2012 for the three-offseasons comparison), the A's were 28th.

[davell]

They had 5 top 100s in 2012, post Gio trade. They had plenty of cheap pitching options. They had more room for error. It's one thing to deal all you have when you're close. It's something entirely different to do it slowly, as they did. And it's something very far away from reality to expect a team to trade all they had, for a few pieces when it wouldn't have taken the team very far to begin with, yet hurt its ability to acquire true impact in the future. As you're seemingly thinking the Cubs should have done.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

We could have had 5 top 100s too if we'd traded Castro or Garza.

 

How many top 100s did we have after one year?

 

If we're losing track here, the comparison was how the A's turned around their organization in three offseasons from 2011, when they finished 74-88 and had the 28th rated farm system. Vs. how the Cubs have progressed from a similar situation beginning in 2012 through three offseasons.

 

Doing it "quickly" would have been being good immediately. 3 offseasons *is* slow. And the 2011 A's weren't close if the 2012 Cubs weren't.

[UK1679666180]

They're not going to add anything, I just want to see what they have in Valbuena (2B), Olt, and Lake. I want them to cont. to display guys likely on the block (anyone not named Castro, Rizzo, and Castillo) or anyone who might be of value to another team.

 

Comparing them to the A's is pointless, they need to have a successful trade deadline.

[davell]

Kyle, the actual number is fairly irrelevant. They had arms. Cheap ones already in place. They added a marquee(for them) guy in Cespedes, had a reclamation pitcher turn into an ace(Colon), had a breakout guy with Donaldson, then added more by getting Reddick and Lowrie. By trading from their UPPER levels. Which we're just now having the ability to do. Same with them having more financial flexibility. We've got it now.

 

If after this upcoming offseason, I'm not impressed, I'll let it be known loudly. I think we've built things to where we can and will contend with a 100 mill or less payroll. And I still think this was the best way to go about things, with the obvious financial crap. If we were allowed 130,150 mill or whatever, I'd think differently.

[Sosa21MVP]

So when will we be good?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So when will we be good?

 

My best guess? 2016 or 2017, depending on how lucky we get with pitching injuries.

[davell]

So when will we be good?

 

My best guess? 2016 or 2017, depending on how lucky we get with pitching injuries.

 

Yeah, I won't argue that. Although I could see playoffs next year with a few things going right. But I think we'll have a long run of success, but so will the Cards and Pirates. My prediction is 8 playoff appearances out of 10, starting in 2016.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So when will we be good?

 

My best guess? 2016 or 2017, depending on how lucky we get with pitching injuries.

 

Yeah, I won't argue that. Although I could see playoffs next year with a few things going right. But I think we'll have a long run of success, but so will the Cards and Pirates. My prediction is 8 playoff appearances out of 10, starting in 2016.

 

I don't think anything this front office has done in their time here has given me even a sliver of hope that they are capable of putting on that kind of run.

 

Nobody makes that kind of run in the modern MLB, and all they've done so far is put together a top-5 farm system, something half the teams in the league have every five years or so.

[Andy]

So when will we be good?

 

My best guess? 2016 or 2017, depending on how lucky we get with pitching injuries.

 

Yeah, I won't argue that. Although I could see playoffs next year with a few things going right. But I think we'll have a long run of success, but so will the Cards and Pirates. My prediction is 8 playoff appearances out of 10, starting in 2016.

 

I don't think anything this front office has done in their time here has given me even a sliver of hope that they are capable of putting on that kind of run.

 

Nobody makes that kind of run in the modern MLB, and all they've done so far is put together a top-5 farm system, something half the teams in the league have every five years or so.

And that's setting aside the fact that STL and Pittsburgh are both loaded with young talent as well as having a head start on being good at the MLB level.

[treebird]

So when will we be good?

 

My best guess? 2016 or 2017, depending on how lucky we get with pitching injuries.

 

Yeah, I won't argue that. Although I could see playoffs next year with a few things going right. But I think we'll have a long run of success, but so will the Cards and Pirates. My prediction is 8 playoff appearances out of 10, starting in 2016.

 

even if you think everything is setting up perfectly for a run starting in 2016, predicting success in 2025 is just straight nonsense. i understand the desire to do so, given how many years we are punting, but it's not even close to reasonable.

[davell]

I'm saying that, banking on the idea that we'll no longer be PTR'd in 2019. I'm not expecting Dodger level spending, but I expect the financial advantage to keep us in contention over the long haul.

 

Wouldn't dare argue this, if not for truly expecting a legit financial advantage to help keep us competitive. And I'm likely the biggest Ricketts hater here(with SSR anyway)

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I believe the only team currently on an 8/10 stretch is the Yankees, and they are a really good bet to lose it this year.

 

8/10 just doesn't happen in current MLB. Too much parity.

[SouthSideRyan]

I expect us to keep our payroll a touch above the Cardinals whenever it is that we start spending. I think people expecting us to throw around our financial weight at even a Phillies level are setting themselves up for disappointment.

[Guest]

I believe the only team currently on an 8/10 stretch is the Yankees, and they are a really good bet to lose it this year.

 

8/10 just doesn't happen in current MLB. Too much parity.

 

I could swear the playoff system changed to allow more teams since most of those years or something

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I believe the only team currently on an 8/10 stretch is the Yankees, and they are a really good bet to lose it this year.

 

8/10 just doesn't happen in current MLB. Too much parity.

 

I could swear the playoff system changed to allow more teams since most of those years or something

 

If we add the 5th playoff team in each league retroactively, I still don't believe that would put any team on an 8/10 run besides the Yankees.

 

The Cardinals are the closest and they still miss in 2010.

[treebird]

FUN FACT

 

the cubs have lost at least 87 games every year since 2010 (and very likely will again this year)

 

here are the last four times the cardinals lost at least 87 games:

 

1997

1990

1980

1978

[Sammy Sofa]

I expect us to keep our payroll a touch above the Cardinals whenever it is that we start spending. I think people expecting us to throw around our financial weight at even a Phillies level are setting themselves up for disappointment.

 

Even if/when the Cubs are good, I think most of their seasons will still likely be able to be summed up like this:

 

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5yafr3OkK1r8yzazo4_r1_400.gif

[sneakypower]

We have a [...] historically awful outfield.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NG29z-xKojU/UsfjVRkZ9GI/AAAAAAAAPu4/2Hfj0wVzkrc/s1600/joe-biden.gif