Cubs 2015 Tentative Schedule

[SouthSideRyan]

Again, the difference is trivial for next year. You'd have to think that Bryant was going to be sub-replacement for a month or two then flip a switch to 5 win monster immediately after that for it to make a material impact on the team's chances.

 

Or you could think we'll be in the running for a 2nd wild card, and putzing away 3 months might not be the best idea.

 

Again, unless you think there's some sort of eureka moment where he turns the corner from bad to awesome in the blink of an eye, it's not making a difference worth worrying about(especially compared to the benefit). If he's great right away it doesn't make a difference, if he's bad for a long while it doesn't make a difference. If he's bad then progresses to be good, the difference in his call-up time is simply not significant.

 

I know neither Baez nor Alcantara are Bryant, but I'm ecstatic that each were called up this year so they'll hopefully be able to hit the ground running next year. I think we should contend for a playoff spot next year, but I think our margin for error is slim. Throwing away potential wins in 2015 for wins we could likely lock up in 2021 anyway just seems so silly.

[jersey cubs fan]

Bryant will play for the Cubs for as long as the Ricketts want. It has everything to do with money.

 

This is reductive nonsense. Having Bryant through age 29 is better than having him through age 28. If history is any predictor, it's a lot better because Bryant will be a really good baseball player at age 29. In order to *guarantee* they have him at 29, they're sacrificing having him on the MLB team at the tail end of a lost season, and for a couple weeks next year. It's a trivial sacrifice for the expected benefit.

 

I say guarantee because despite pretending otherwise, there are no certainties when it comes to Free Agency. Guys leave big market teams all the time. Just last season Cano left the Yankees for more money/years, while the Yankees were in the process of spending a billion dollars in FA and giving the middle finger to the luxury tax. As a result the Yankees are going to miss the playoffs by about one Robinson Cano because they're playing the husk of Brian Roberts at 2B.

 

Moreover, money is not the only consideration here and why this is such a false choice. I'm pretty certain that I want a team option on Kris Bryant for his age 29 season. I'm far less certain that I'll want to guarantee him significant cash through age 34, 36, or even 40(like Cano). So if I can get the former while not at all jeopardizing the latter for the trivial cost mentioned above, it's a no-brainer.

 

Money is the only consideration. It is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Even if you take into account the other stuff, the only thing that matters in that regard is money. The only reason you would not considering keeping him until he's 40 is money. Money is the only reason and pretending otherwise is foolish.

[KingCubsFan]

Bryant will play for the Cubs for as long as the Ricketts want. It has everything to do with money.

 

This is reductive nonsense. Having Bryant through age 29 is better than having him through age 28. If history is any predictor, it's a lot better because Bryant will be a really good baseball player at age 29. In order to *guarantee* they have him at 29, they're sacrificing having him on the MLB team at the tail end of a lost season, and for a couple weeks next year. It's a trivial sacrifice for the expected benefit.

 

I say guarantee because despite pretending otherwise, there are no certainties when it comes to Free Agency. Guys leave big market teams all the time. Just last season Cano left the Yankees for more money/years, while the Yankees were in the process of spending a billion dollars in FA and giving the middle finger to the luxury tax. As a result the Yankees are going to miss the playoffs by about one Robinson Cano because they're playing the husk of Brian Roberts at 2B.

 

Moreover, money is not the only consideration here and why this is such a false choice. I'm pretty certain that I want a team option on Kris Bryant for his age 29 season. I'm far less certain that I'll want to guarantee him significant cash through age 34, 36, or even 40(like Cano). So if I can get the former while not at all jeopardizing the latter for the trivial cost mentioned above, it's a no-brainer.

 

Money is the only consideration. It is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Even if you take into account the other stuff, the only thing that matters in that regard is money. The only reason you would not considering keeping him until he's 40 is money. Money is the only reason and pretending otherwise is foolish.

Money is not the only consideration. It's certainty. There's about a 95% chance that, with Boras as his agent, Bryant is hitting free agency as soon as his 6 years is up. And once a player hits free agency, all bets are off.

[Guest]

I know neither Baez nor Alcantara are Bryant, but I'm ecstatic that each were called up this year so they'll hopefully be able to hit the ground running next year. I think we should contend for a playoff spot next year, but I think our margin for error is slim. Throwing away potential wins in 2015 for wins we could likely lock up in 2021 anyway just seems so silly.

 

Sorry, I just disagree completely. We're talking about rounding error stakes here, and we haven't even talked about the fact that they still get to put 9 players on the field for those games Bryant isn't playing next April and mitigate the risk even further.

 

Even if you take into account the other stuff, the only thing that matters in that regard is money. The only reason you would not considering keeping him until he's 40 is money. Money is the only reason and pretending otherwise is foolish.

 

This is just unfathomably bad and overly simplistic logic.

[jersey cubs fan]

Bryant will play for the Cubs for as long as the Ricketts want. It has everything to do with money.

 

This is reductive nonsense. Having Bryant through age 29 is better than having him through age 28. If history is any predictor, it's a lot better because Bryant will be a really good baseball player at age 29. In order to *guarantee* they have him at 29, they're sacrificing having him on the MLB team at the tail end of a lost season, and for a couple weeks next year. It's a trivial sacrifice for the expected benefit.

 

I say guarantee because despite pretending otherwise, there are no certainties when it comes to Free Agency. Guys leave big market teams all the time. Just last season Cano left the Yankees for more money/years, while the Yankees were in the process of spending a billion dollars in FA and giving the middle finger to the luxury tax. As a result the Yankees are going to miss the playoffs by about one Robinson Cano because they're playing the husk of Brian Roberts at 2B.

 

Moreover, money is not the only consideration here and why this is such a false choice. I'm pretty certain that I want a team option on Kris Bryant for his age 29 season. I'm far less certain that I'll want to guarantee him significant cash through age 34, 36, or even 40(like Cano). So if I can get the former while not at all jeopardizing the latter for the trivial cost mentioned above, it's a no-brainer.

 

Money is the only consideration. It is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Even if you take into account the other stuff, the only thing that matters in that regard is money. The only reason you would not considering keeping him until he's 40 is money. Money is the only reason and pretending otherwise is foolish.

Money is not the only consideration. It's certainty. There's about a 95% chance that, with Boras as his agent, Bryant is hitting free agency as soon as his 6 years is up. And once a player hits free agency, all bets are off.

and the only reason that matters is money

 

 

stop trying so hard to pretend this is not just about money. If you are fine with it, embrace it.

 

Despite my belief that the pursuit for ideal value will lead to less than ideal win totals, in this specific case I don't have much of a problem.

[XZero771679666304]

Bryant will play for the Cubs for as long as the Ricketts want. It has everything to do with money.

 

This is reductive nonsense. Having Bryant through age 29 is better than having him through age 28. If history is any predictor, it's a lot better because Bryant will be a really good baseball player at age 29. In order to *guarantee* they have him at 29, they're sacrificing having him on the MLB team at the tail end of a lost season, and for a couple weeks next year. It's a trivial sacrifice for the expected benefit.

 

I say guarantee because despite pretending otherwise, there are no certainties when it comes to Free Agency. Guys leave big market teams all the time. Just last season Cano left the Yankees for more money/years, while the Yankees were in the process of spending a billion dollars in FA and giving the middle finger to the luxury tax. As a result the Yankees are going to miss the playoffs by about one Robinson Cano because they're playing the husk of Brian Roberts at 2B.

 

Moreover, money is not the only consideration here and why this is such a false choice. I'm pretty certain that I want a team option on Kris Bryant for his age 29 season. I'm far less certain that I'll want to guarantee him significant cash through age 34, 36, or even 40(like Cano). So if I can get the former while not at all jeopardizing the latter for the trivial cost mentioned above, it's a no-brainer.

 

Money is the only consideration. It is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Even if you take into account the other stuff, the only thing that matters in that regard is money. The only reason you would not considering keeping him until he's 40 is money. Money is the only reason and pretending otherwise is foolish.

Money is not the only consideration. It's certainty. There's about a 95% chance that, with Boras as his agent, Bryant is hitting free agency as soon as his 6 years is up. And once a player hits free agency, all bets are off.

 

Exactly.

[jersey cubs fan]

I know neither Baez nor Alcantara are Bryant, but I'm ecstatic that each were called up this year so they'll hopefully be able to hit the ground running next year. I think we should contend for a playoff spot next year, but I think our margin for error is slim. Throwing away potential wins in 2015 for wins we could likely lock up in 2021 anyway just seems so silly.

 

Sorry, I just disagree completely. We're talking about rounding error stakes here, and we haven't even talked about the fact that they still get to put 9 players on the field for those games Bryant isn't playing next April and mitigate the risk even further.

 

Even if you take into account the other stuff, the only thing that matters in that regard is money. The only reason you would not considering keeping him until he's 40 is money. Money is the only reason and pretending otherwise is foolish.

 

This is just unfathomably bad and overly simplistic logic.

 

No. It is simple because this situation is very simple. You can try and pretend there is some nuanced concept at play here, but it is not. It's about money and pretending otherwise is stupid.

[Guest]

Yes, in the cosmic sense there is currently no salary cap so if you really want to you can boil down any roster decision to money, you can. In doing so you'll blow past a bunch of structural reasons why that's not the case, but if black and white is your sweet spot, you gotta do you.

[Guest]

Scott Boras is 61 years of age, we can all do the math. Aside from the stupidity of making a boogie man out him, not all of his clients bolt for free agency at the first chance they get.

 

There is no certainty to any outcome before the fact, but willfully not trying to win helps that outcome along well, as we've seen the last several years.

 

Who gives a good god damn about whether or not having him up at the end of this year and the beginning of next represents a rounding error on win totals or some other such nonsensical verbal masturbation? They should play the game to win or get the [expletive] out and let somebody else own the team. "Every season is sacred" is about the the emptiest statement I ever heard uttered about the Chicago Cubs. This is about delaying when they will have to pay him large sums of cash.

 

The psycophantic ball sucking that passes for unemotional analysis of what is happening is beyond old.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

waiting for scott boras to die new market inefficiency.

[SouthSideRyan]

Carlos Gomez, Elvis Andrus, Carlos Gonzalez, Tulo, and Jered Weaver have all signed pre-FA extensions with Boras as their agent. It's not impossible

[Guest]

Again, the difference between bryant vs. valbuena or coghlan for a few weeks of next season isn't all that likely to be substantial and might even end up being good for us.

 

He's 100% not coming up this year so if you want to argue over that, go ahead and go nuts with that. My point was a really obvious one. Him making the opening day roster and sacrificing an entire year of team control (in his prime, no less) for 2 - 3 weeks of next season would be really really stupid. Like it would immediately be the dumbest thing this FO has done.

[SouthSideRyan]

Again, the difference between bryant vs. valbuena or coghlan for a few weeks of next season isn't all that likely to be substantial and might even end up being good for us.

 

He's 100% not coming up this year so if you want to argue over that, go ahead and go nuts with that. My point was a really obvious one. Him making the opening day roster and sacrificing an entire year of team control (in his prime, no less) for 2 - 3 weeks of next season would be really really stupid. Like it would immediately be the dumbest thing this FO has done.

 

I can agree with that, though my reasoning may be different than yours. It would show an astonishing lack of foresight on their part.

[KingCubsFan]

 

Who gives a good [expletive] about whether or not having him up at the end of this year and the beginning of next represents a rounding error on win totals or some other such nonsensical verbal masturbation? They should play the game to win or get the [expletive] out and let somebody else own the team.

Every time I read this, I imagine Dusty just sitting in the dugout and repeating this statement in his head over and over as Prior hits 120 pitches for the third consecutive start.

[Guest]

 

Who gives a good [expletive] about whether or not having him up at the end of this year and the beginning of next represents a rounding error on win totals or some other such nonsensical verbal masturbation? They should play the game to win or get the [expletive] out and let somebody else own the team.

Every time I read this, I imagine Dusty just sitting in the dugout and repeating this statement in his head over and over as Prior hits 120 pitches for the third consecutive start.

Yes, because Dusty burning Prior is that same thing as Bryant burning the minor leagues.

[DonnieD]

Bryant will play for the Cubs for as long as the Ricketts want. It has everything to do with money.

 

This is reductive nonsense. Having Bryant through age 29 is better than having him through age 28. If history is any predictor, it's a lot better because Bryant will be a really good baseball player at age 29. In order to *guarantee* they have him at 29, they're sacrificing having him on the MLB team at the tail end of a lost season, and for a couple weeks next year. It's a trivial sacrifice for the expected benefit.

 

I say guarantee because despite pretending otherwise, there are no certainties when it comes to Free Agency. Guys leave big market teams all the time. Just last season Cano left the Yankees for more money/years, while the Yankees were in the process of spending a billion dollars in FA and giving the middle finger to the luxury tax. As a result the Yankees are going to miss the playoffs by about one Robinson Cano because they're playing the husk of Brian Roberts at 2B.

 

Moreover, money is not the only consideration here and why this is such a false choice. I'm pretty certain that I want a team option on Kris Bryant for his age 29 season. I'm far less certain that I'll want to guarantee him significant cash through age 34, 36, or even 40(like Cano). So if I can get the former while not at all jeopardizing the latter for the trivial cost mentioned above, it's a no-brainer.

 

This is very close to what I wanted to post, and I can only assume it has been missed by a handful of posters or there is a significant failure to comprehend. Control is extremely valuable and some of you want to piss it away for some negligible gain in a theoretical adjustment period. Well congratulations, a few of you can now claim membership in the elite club of NSBB posters that would clearly be worse GMs than Ruben Amaro.

[SouthSideRyan]

Ben Cherington is in that club too. That buffoon isn't going to have Mookie Betts locked up for 2021 now.

[SouthSideRyan]

Ben Cherington is in that club too. That buffoon isn't going to have Mookie Betts locked up for 2021 now.

 

And Anthopolous bringing up Norris just to pitch out of the pen? For what 0.4 wins?

[SouthSideRyan]

Ben Cherington is in that club too. That buffoon isn't going to have Mookie Betts locked up for 2021 now.

 

And Anthopolous bringing up Norris just to pitch out of the pen? For what 0.4 wins?

 

Worst of all are these 2 dopes in Chicago who brought up Alcantara, Baez, and Soler all in a lost season

Edited September 11, 2014 by SouthSideRyan

[Guest]

 

Who gives a good [expletive] about whether or not having him up at the end of this year and the beginning of next represents a rounding error on win totals or some other such nonsensical verbal masturbation? They should play the game to win or get the [expletive] out and let somebody else own the team.

Every time I read this, I imagine Dusty just sitting in the dugout and repeating this statement in his head over and over as Prior hits 120 pitches for the third consecutive start.

Yes, because Dusty burning Prior is that same thing as Bryant burning the minor leagues.

 

I'm sure that sounded really clever in your head.

[wvcbxl]

Ben Cherington is in that club too. That buffoon isn't going to have Mookie Betts locked up for 2021 now.

 

And Anthopolous bringing up Norris just to pitch out of the pen? For what 0.4 wins?

 

Worst of all are these 2 dopes in Chicago who brought up Alcantara, Baez, and Soler all in a lost season

 

I know you know the Soler situation is different, as has been explained a couple of times already.

[Guest]

 

Who gives a good [expletive] about whether or not having him up at the end of this year and the beginning of next represents a rounding error on win totals or some other such nonsensical verbal masturbation? They should play the game to win or get the [expletive] out and let somebody else own the team.

Every time I read this, I imagine Dusty just sitting in the dugout and repeating this statement in his head over and over as Prior hits 120 pitches for the third consecutive start.

Yes, because Dusty burning Prior is that same thing as Bryant burning the minor leagues.

 

I'm sure that sounded really clever in your head.

When you have an original thought, it will be your first.

[Guest]

 

Who gives a good [expletive] about whether or not having him up at the end of this year and the beginning of next represents a rounding error on win totals or some other such nonsensical verbal masturbation? They should play the game to win or get the [expletive] out and let somebody else own the team.

Every time I read this, I imagine Dusty just sitting in the dugout and repeating this statement in his head over and over as Prior hits 120 pitches for the third consecutive start.

Yes, because Dusty burning Prior is that same thing as Bryant burning the minor leagues.

 

I'm sure that sounded really clever in your head.

When you have an original thought, it will be your first.

 

Sick burn, bro. Very original.

[Guest]

 

Who gives a good [expletive] about whether or not having him up at the end of this year and the beginning of next represents a rounding error on win totals or some other such nonsensical verbal masturbation? They should play the game to win or get the [expletive] out and let somebody else own the team.

Every time I read this, I imagine Dusty just sitting in the dugout and repeating this statement in his head over and over as Prior hits 120 pitches for the third consecutive start.

Yes, because Dusty burning Prior is that same thing as Bryant burning the minor leagues.

 

I'm sure that sounded really clever in your head.

When you have an original thought, it will be your first.

That sounded good in my head too.

[SouthSideRyan]

Ben Cherington is in that club too. That buffoon isn't going to have Mookie Betts locked up for 2021 now.

 

And Anthopolous bringing up Norris just to pitch out of the pen? For what 0.4 wins?

 

Worst of all are these 2 dopes in Chicago who brought up Alcantara, Baez, and Soler all in a lost season

 

I know you know the Soler situation is different, as has been explained a couple of times already.

 

Well no, it's been asserted several times that Soler randomly gets FA after the 2020 season with nothing to back it up.