Theo on The Score @ 10:40AM

[WrigleyField 22]

In addition to rollover from Tanaka didn't we save like $6M with deadline deals?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We did the same last year, and they never really made a peep about that money rolling over. That money is almost certainly gone.

Wasn't it assumed that paid some of our IFA penalties? Also it was a smaller amount, as we ate some money that deadline.

 

ETA- also hard to say if part of our Tanaka space. Could have just rolled into that.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited August 28, 2014 by WrigleyField 22

[Guest]

"I think because we have so many young players that are going to be cost-controlled over the next several seasons, we have tremendous flexibility built into our roster as it is," Epstein said on a conference call with reporters on Wednesday. "We'll be able to field a pretty good nucleus with a very low payroll associated with that.

 

"That in of itself -- and some of the savings that we made over the last offseason, for example -- will allow us the flexibility to be very aggressive if the right player or players present themselves to us."

 

 

 

"As we get closer to a new television deal [in 2019], and as we realize some of the revenues associated with a renovated Wrigley field, I believe that will only enhance our flexibility," Epstein said.

 

 

"I never look at any one offseason as a time that we have to do something," Epstein said earlier Wednesday during the "Carmen & Jurko Show" on ESPN Chicago 1000. "I look at offseasons and trade deadlines and future offseasons together. Looking at the next 24 or 18 months, I think you'll see us add impact starting pitching from outside the organization. The major league starting pitching free-agent market is pretty good. The free-agent class is more pitching-rich than position player-rich this offseason. And, frankly, the class after that is even more impressive in the 2015-2016 offseason."

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/26955/theo-epstein-the-money-will-be-there-for-future-transactions

 

Exactly this.

[SouthSideRyan]

"I think because we have so many young players that are going to be cost-controlled over the next several seasons, we have tremendous flexibility built into our roster as it is," Epstein said on a conference call with reporters on Wednesday. "We'll be able to field a pretty good nucleus with a very low payroll associated with that.

 

"That in of itself -- and some of the savings that we made over the last offseason, for example -- will allow us the flexibility to be very aggressive if the right player or players present themselves to us."

 

 

 

"As we get closer to a new television deal [in 2019], and as we realize some of the revenues associated with a renovated Wrigley field, I believe that will only enhance our flexibility," Epstein said.

 

 

"I never look at any one offseason as a time that we have to do something," Epstein said earlier Wednesday during the "Carmen & Jurko Show" on ESPN Chicago 1000. "I look at offseasons and trade deadlines and future offseasons together. Looking at the next 24 or 18 months, I think you'll see us add impact starting pitching from outside the organization. The major league starting pitching free-agent market is pretty good. The free-agent class is more pitching-rich than position player-rich this offseason. And, frankly, the class after that is even more impressive in the 2015-2016 offseason."

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/26955/theo-epstein-the-money-will-be-there-for-future-transactions

 

http://www.vivamovil.cl/gifs/asco14.gif

[SouthSideRyan]

Hendry:obviously::Epstein:flexibility

[Guest]

"I think because we have so many young players that are going to be cost-controlled over the next several seasons, we have tremendous flexibility built into our roster as it is," Epstein said on a conference call with reporters on Wednesday. "We'll be able to field a pretty good nucleus with a very low payroll associated with that.

 

"That in of itself -- and some of the savings that we made over the last offseason, for example -- will allow us the flexibility to be very aggressive if the right player or players present themselves to us."

 

 

 

"As we get closer to a new television deal [in 2019], and as we realize some of the revenues associated with a renovated Wrigley field, I believe that will only enhance our flexibility," Epstein said.

 

 

"I never look at any one offseason as a time that we have to do something," Epstein said earlier Wednesday during the "Carmen & Jurko Show" on ESPN Chicago 1000. "I look at offseasons and trade deadlines and future offseasons together. Looking at the next 24 or 18 months, I think you'll see us add impact starting pitching from outside the organization. The major league starting pitching free-agent market is pretty good. The free-agent class is more pitching-rich than position player-rich this offseason. And, frankly, the class after that is even more impressive in the 2015-2016 offseason."

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/26955/theo-epstein-the-money-will-be-there-for-future-transactions

 

http://www.vivamovil.cl/gifs/asco14.gif

 

ok, you've stumped me

 

i can't figure out how even you find this excerpt disagreeable

[Clem Fandango]

But ~$100M doesn't = big spending.

 

If they don't sign someone expensive, they are going to likely have a REALLY low payroll.

 

They won't be big spenders, as in they won't be spending $150-$190m on payroll for a while. But with so little committed toward the current roster, that pretty much means they have to be big spenders on 1 or 2 players just to get to the point of being even "medium spenders" for next year's roster.

 

Then like I said, I could be wrong (and probably am). I just misinterpreted.

[davell]

By the way, this is the first time they've said they DID leave money on the table. Previously, they had mentioned that IF there was, it'd get spent at a later date. But they had mentioned they had spent their budget prior to this past offseason.

[Clem Fandango]

"I think because we have so many young players that are going to be cost-controlled over the next several seasons, we have tremendous flexibility built into our roster as it is," Epstein said on a conference call with reporters on Wednesday. "We'll be able to field a pretty good nucleus with a very low payroll associated with that.

 

"That in of itself -- and some of the savings that we made over the last offseason, for example -- will allow us the flexibility to be very aggressive if the right player or players present themselves to us."

 

 

 

"As we get closer to a new television deal [in 2019], and as we realize some of the revenues associated with a renovated Wrigley field, I believe that will only enhance our flexibility," Epstein said.

 

 

"I never look at any one offseason as a time that we have to do something," Epstein said earlier Wednesday during the "Carmen & Jurko Show" on ESPN Chicago 1000. "I look at offseasons and trade deadlines and future offseasons together. Looking at the next 24 or 18 months, I think you'll see us add impact starting pitching from outside the organization. The major league starting pitching free-agent market is pretty good. The free-agent class is more pitching-rich than position player-rich this offseason. And, frankly, the class after that is even more impressive in the 2015-2016 offseason."

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/26955/theo-epstein-the-money-will-be-there-for-future-transactions

 

Exactly this.

 

That settles my concern. Carry on.

[Guest]

By the way, this is the first time they've said they DID leave money on the table. Previously, they had mentioned that IF there was, it'd get spent at a later date. But they had mentioned they had spent their budget prior to this past offseason.

 

Huh?

 

They've pretty explicitly said that they left money on the table because of the Tanaka pursuit and not wanting to settle for any of the leftovers after that multiple times.

[Guest]

By the way, this is the first time they've said they DID leave money on the table. Previously, they had mentioned that IF there was, it'd get spent at a later date. But they had mentioned they had spent their budget prior to this past offseason.

 

They explicitly said the same thing prior to the season too.

[SouthSideRyan]

We'll be able to field a pretty good nucleus with a very low payroll associated with that.

 

...to be very aggressive if the right player or players present themselves to us."

 

As we get closer to a new television deal [in 2019], and as we realize some of the revenues associated with a renovated Wrigley field...

 

Looking at the next 24 or 18 months...

 

And, frankly, the class after that is even more impressive in the 2015-2016 offseason

 

 

 

 

 

ok, you've stumped me

 

i can't figure out how even you find this excerpt disagreeable

Edited August 28, 2014 by SouthSideRyan

[davell]

By the way, this is the first time they've said they DID leave money on the table. Previously, they had mentioned that IF there was, it'd get spent at a later date. But they had mentioned they had spent their budget prior to this past offseason.

 

They explicitly said the same thing prior to the season too.

 

Not before they missed on Tanaka, is all I'm saying. This past offseason was the first that they actually brought up having money left over.

[Guest]

We'll be able to field a pretty good nucleus with a very low payroll associated with that.

 

...to be very aggressive if the right player or players present themselves to us."

 

As we get closer to a new television deal [in 2019], and as we realize some of the revenues associated with a renovated Wrigley field...

 

Looking at the next 24 or 18 months...

 

And, frankly, the class after that is even more impressive in the 2015-2016 offseason

 

 

 

ok, you've stumped me

 

i can't figure out how even you find this excerpt disagreeable

 

not even going to bother

[Brian]

I do believe he's saying the "low payroll" will be the part of the payroll attributed to the nucleus, not the team as a whole will have a low payroll. But whatever.

[Guest]

I do believe he's saying the "low payroll" will be the part of the payroll attributed to the nucleus, not the team as a whole will have a low payroll. But whatever.

 

He wants them to spend $100M on 3-4 starting pitchers

 

only half kidding

[Brian]

Wouldn't signing Lester and trading for Stanton still be under 100 million total payroll?

[Guest]

Probably, unless they spent non-trivial money on another starting pitcher or managed to dump a significant portion of Jaxon's deal.

[SouthSideRyan]

I do believe he's saying the "low payroll" will be the part of the payroll attributed to the nucleus, not the team as a whole will have a low payroll. But whatever.

 

He wants them to spend $100M on 3-4 starting pitchers

 

only half kidding

 

I want them to spend something on something this offseason

 

ETA: The fact that it's even posed as a possibility that we have 24 months to add starting pitching of worth, or that we are still operating under limited payroll for another 4 years is absolutely vomit inducing. Opening it all up with, hey it won't be so bad having a low payroll, we can be really good with it is alarming.

[jersey cubs fan]

I do believe he's saying the "low payroll" will be the part of the payroll attributed to the nucleus, not the team as a whole will have a low payroll. But whatever.

 

He wants them to spend $100M on 3-4 starting pitchers

 

only half kidding

 

I want them to spend something on something this offseason

 

I don't look at this offseason as a specific set of dates on the calendar. I prefer a more flexible method of marking the passage of time where every date is some arbitrary point in the future.

[Brian]

Also the quote about having money in 2019, I believe (by the way the article was structured), was in response to a question about being able to lock up all the guys that are coming up now.

[Guest]

I do believe he's saying the "low payroll" will be the part of the payroll attributed to the nucleus, not the team as a whole will have a low payroll. But whatever.

 

He wants them to spend $100M on 3-4 starting pitchers

 

only half kidding

 

I want them to spend something on something this offseason

 

ETA: The fact that it's even posed as a possibility that we have 24 months to add starting pitching of worth, or that we are still operating under limited payroll for another 4 years is absolutely vomit inducing. Opening it all up with, hey it won't be so bad having a low payroll, we can be really good with it is alarming.

 

he pretty much explicitly said that there are some really good starters going on the market this offseason and that they have more than enough payroll flexibility to pursue them. what the hell else do you want?

 

the idea that finances are going to be limited relative to what we expect out of a big market franchise for a while isn't news. bitching about it gets really [expletive] tired. especially when they are positioned to be great and have a lot of money to spend regardless of it.

[Brian]

Yeah I really don't get some people's viewpoints sometimes. I could see if fans of, say, the Yankees were going through this, but this has been a piece of [expletive] organization consistently for decades. They are turning this from a subsidiary of a newspaper company into a real baseball organization and people are getting pissy it's not happening overnight.

[Guest]

Yeah I really don't get some people's viewpoints sometimes. I could see if fans of, say, the Yankees were going through this, but this has been a piece of [expletive] organization consistently for decades. They are turning this from a subsidiary of a newspaper company into a real baseball organization and people are getting pissy it's not happening overnight.

 

i understand the initial and continued unrest about not spending money on the major league team and being terrible. whether the course of action they took was the best way to go is definitely up for debate. it's definitely the most painful on the fan base.

 

in hindsight, had we had real money to spend, the only things i really regret not having happened are being more aggressive on darvish, tanaka, and puig (assuming the rumor that we were the high bidder isn't true, which is pretty dubious).

 

there's some other names, but there are also some others that would have been completely disastrous, too.

[Gmoney08]

Weird, I'm surprised about the negativity because I think thats the most optimistic quote on near future spending I've seen from Theo yet.

[Guest]

I do believe he's saying the "low payroll" will be the part of the payroll attributed to the nucleus, not the team as a whole will have a low payroll. But whatever.

 

He wants them to spend $100M on 3-4 starting pitchers

 

only half kidding

 

I want them to spend something on something this offseason

 

I don't look at this offseason as a specific set of dates on the calendar. I prefer a more flexible method of marking the passage of time where every date is some arbitrary point in the future.

With all this cheap labor the Ricketts will be in heaven. Think of the cost per win here. The Cubs will be winners of the most bang for the buck trophy given out by the Walton family.

 

The Cubs almost have to spend on a big name FA pitcher, right?