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

[mul21]

Does it really matter whether this was Theo's Baseball Mogul dream or not? If he didn't come here to carry out THE PLAN!!!, then Rick Hahn would have been here running the team for nickels. What does it matter?

 

That's the truth. If we don't have the ability to carry more than around a 100 mill in payroll, none of this matters.

 

A better front office making better decisions absolutely could have had this team in better shape right now with a $100m payroll.

 

It's counterfactual so there's no way to prove it, so feel free to sputter some vague insults at me over that statement.

 

I don't disagree with you at all that taking a different tact on the last few seasons could have resulted in more wins. But how many more wins would there have been and would it have been at the expense of building anything tangible for the future? #1 I have no idea and #2 the answer is almost certainly that we'd have been in Jim Hendry bandaid territory in perpetuity if that approach had been taken.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I don't disagree with you at all that taking a different tact on the last few seasons could have resulted in more wins. But how many more wins would there have been and would it have been at the expense of building anything tangible for the future? #1 I have no idea and #2 the answer is almost certainly that we'd have been in Jim Hendry bandaid territory in perpetuity if that approach had been taken.

 

Didn't this front office already prove they could draft and develop better than Hendry's organization did with the same back-of-the-order picks? And no, it wasn't all overslotting.

 

These were supposed to be the guys who didn't need top-5 picks to rebuild the farm system.

[davell]

Kyle, if I'm saying they'll spend it, I DO mean they'll spend it on something they want. I know I don't want them just spending it because they can. I guess you differ in that. You'd have been happy with another E-Jax signing, I guess.

 

They [expletive] up. Everyone does. I'm much better waiting for them to find something they truly want, than shooting their wad just to up the payroll.

 

They've made mistakes, but nothing that truly hinders us moving forward, even with a low payroll. By this time next year, considering where our prospects are, if there's not a true air of excitement around the Cubs, I'll start bitching.

 

But all you're doing is being the little kid throwing a tantrum when you flat out know there's not much of a chance ANYONE could take a team with extremely little talent at any level, some bad contracts, and a finite budget and turn it into a world beater in this length of time. You're just arguing to argue, because I know you're too intelligent to be that unrealistic.

[Guest]

That's an out-of-context, bad interpretation of what I said.

 

ahahahahahahahahaha

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Kyle, if I'm saying they'll spend it, I DO mean they'll spend it on something they want. I know I don't want them just spending it because they can. I guess you differ in that. You'd have been happy with another E-Jax signing, I guess.

 

"spend just to spend" is a condescending, lazy catchphrase. You spend to help your baseball team win baseball games.

 

But all you're doing is being the little kid throwing a tantrum when you flat out know there's not much of a chance ANYONE could take a team with extremely little talent at any level, some bad contracts, and a finite budget and turn it into a world beater in this length of time. You're just arguing to argue, because I know you're too intelligent to be that unrealistic.

 

It's been three offseasons. I have no idea how you've managed to convince yourself that it would somehow be a Herculean feat to take this team to respectability in three offseasons.

 

For comparison, take the 2013 A's. A fairly decent majority of players who made major contributions to that team were acquired within the previous three offseasons, and none of them would have been major, impossible FA signings.

 

The only particularly difficult thing Beane did in that time was get a pretty amazing haul for Gio Gonzalez, but he didn't have any more trade value at that time than Garza or Castro did when Epstien got here.

[davell]

One, there's no vague insults. You know I respect MOST of your opinions.

 

Two, your idea of just "draft better" works fine over the long run. It also puts a ton of pressure on the immediate when it's far from a sure thing. No one drafts great in the middle on a truly consistent basis. The higher the pick, the better chance of it panning out.(which you know)

 

Taking advantage of that to get Bryant versus some dude that went after 10 last year? I think it'll prove worth it. Same with picking 4 this year versus the middle of the pack.

 

I honestly think we'll pick in the 8-12 range next year and it'll be harder to come up with elite talent. They inherited the Almora slot and look to have done well there. They didn't miss with KB. PJ is a top 100 guy that they got later.(when you were dying to keep Aramis, if I'm not mistaken) They HAVE drafted well so far, early and later on.

[Guest]

Jesus Christ...I just said a damn page ago not to respond to Kyle and now look at this cluster [expletive]

 

It's the game thread and we don't have another game until Tuesday. Any participants are willing. If you don't like it, don't.

 

I like it. I assume anyone who takes the time to respond enjoys it too, or they wouldn't respond. Not your problem.

 

I'm trying to save davell the aggravation. Not your problem.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

For reference, keeping Ramirez was definitely not my first choice. I wanted to let him walk for the pick. I just preferred keeping him over what we actually ended up doing with the position.

 

In order for getting Bryant over deeper first-round picks, and other similar trade-offs, to be worth it, we're going to have to go on one *hell* of a run. Because starting 0-for-abunch makes averaging it out really hard.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm trying to save davell the aggravation. Not your problem.

 

People find it aggravating to haggle over the long-term plans of their favorite baseball team? I'll admit I'm not always in step with ordinary people, but that seems weird to me. It's a time-honored tradition and never not fun.

[davell]

The A's had a much better group of young pitching to pull from and trade pieces to make a few moves as well, because they had upper level minor leaguers. Gio had quite a bit more value than anything we had, other than Castro, who I can't and won't get upset they didn't move.

 

Yes, Beane certainly has made some good moves, no doubt about it. But didn't be go thru quite a long rebuild in order to get back there? 5 years in between playoff appearances actually. And Beane was at the helm for all of it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Garza had easily as much value as Gio.

 

Who are these young pitchers the A's had that are better than, say, Samardzija and Cashner?

[dcvalpo]

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/shut-ups.gif

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Is your book ready yet?

[gscool89]

http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/13/136085/2479220-1578648373-gw-cl.gif

[Andy]

Yes, Beane certainly has made some good moves, no doubt about it. But didn't be go thru quite a long rebuild in order to get back there? 5 years in between playoff appearances actually. And Beane was at the helm for all of it.

For whatever it's worth, the A's only once were more than 11 games under .500 in the 2007-2011 span, so unlike the current Cubs, they weren't embarrassing themselves in between playoff appearances or racking up awesome draft picks.

[gscool89]

Yes, Beane certainly has made some good moves, no doubt about it. But didn't be go thru quite a long rebuild in order to get back there? 5 years in between playoff appearances actually. And Beane was at the helm for all of it.

For whatever it's worth, the A's only once were more than 11 games under .500 in the 2007-2011 span, so unlike the current Cubs, they weren't embarrassing themselves in between playoff appearances or racking up awesome draft picks.

The A's were also never in position where they had a previous general manager who didn't give a [expletive] about the minor league system and handed out horrible contracts like candy.

[Fro]

I'd say this is already a respectable team considering how many games we've been in.

- We blew out the Phillies and beat the Cards by 3 runs

- We beat Pittsburgh twice, once by 2 runs and once by 1 run

- We lost to Pittsburgh by 1 run twice in extra innings, and then to Pittsburgh twice again by 1 run

- We lost to the Phillies by 2 runs and the Cardinals by 2 runs

- We got blown out in 2 games by the Phillies and Cards

 

Basically we're past the "lose big" stage of the rebuild and onto the "lose close games" stage. Once Baez/Bryant come up and we make some moves to get a couple pitchers we should be into the "win close games" stage by 2015.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Fro

[Sammy Sofa]

Yes, Beane certainly has made some good moves, no doubt about it. But didn't be go thru quite a long rebuild in order to get back there? 5 years in between playoff appearances actually. And Beane was at the helm for all of it.

For whatever it's worth, the A's only once were more than 11 games under .500 in the 2007-2011 span, so unlike the current Cubs, they weren't embarrassing themselves in between playoff appearances or racking up awesome draft picks.

The A's were also never in position where they had a previous general manager who didn't give a [expletive] about the minor league system and handed out horrible contracts like candy.

 

The Cubs didn't have the bold either. Kyle is an anus, but there's no need to rewrite history.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Sammy Sofa

[Andy]

Basically we're past the "lose big" stage of the rebuild and onto the "lose little" stage. Once Baez/Bryant come up and we make some moves to get a couple pitchers we should be into the "win little" stage by 2015.

We're on pace to lose 108 games, so that's an interesting interpretation.

 

(Yes, I know we're not likely to actually lose 108 games, but we're also not likely to be near .500, so I'd say another 90-loss season, which would not qualify as 'lose little' IMO, is very much in play.)

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yes, Beane certainly has made some good moves, no doubt about it. But didn't be go thru quite a long rebuild in order to get back there? 5 years in between playoff appearances actually. And Beane was at the helm for all of it.

For whatever it's worth, the A's only once were more than 11 games under .500 in the 2007-2011 span, so unlike the current Cubs, they weren't embarrassing themselves in between playoff appearances or racking up awesome draft picks.

The A's were also never in position where they had a previous general manager who didn't give a [expletive] about the minor league system and handed out horrible contracts like candy.

 

Actually look at the 2013 A's. A pretty decent majority of their contributions came from players who were acquired in the previous three offseasons without massive FA contracts. There were savvy trades and smart, cheap pickups. Nothing that Epstein couldn't have done here if he were good enough and motivated enough.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Cubs didn't have the bold either. Kyle is an anus, but there's no need to rewrite history.

 

Their interpretation absolutely needs to rewrite history. Every year that Epstein fails to put together a good MLB team, the organization he inherited has to be assumed to be a bit worse to account for it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'd say this is already a respectable team considering how many games we've been in.

- We blew out the Phillies and beat the Cards by 3 runs

- We beat Pittsburgh twice, once by 2 runs and once by 1 run

- We lost to Pittsburgh by 1 run twice in extra innings, and then to Pittsburgh twice again by 1 run

- We lost to the Phillies by 2 runs and the Cardinals by 2 runs

- We got blown out in 2 games by the Phillies and Cards

 

Basically we're past the "lose big" stage of the rebuild and onto the "lose close games" stage. Once Baez/Bryant come up and we make some moves to get a couple pitchers we should be into the "win close games" stage by 2015.

 

 

We had a -87 run differential last year. We're on pace for -108 this year.

[davell]

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.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

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.

[TruffleShuffle]

i think someone quoted kyle a couple of weeks ago when he was on my foe list, and his post was actually not obnoxious, so i said "oh maybe he's better now" and i unfoed him. boy was that a mistake. i think i'd prefer davearm back at this point.