Front Office Thread

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Every poster was also under the impression the payroll wasn't getting slashed by 25 million.

 

How much of that slashing was due to the restrictions, and how much of it was voluntarily diverting resources to the minors?

 

And even if 2012 wasn't in play, that doesn't justify losing all the way through 2014. Plenty of teams in bad shape post-2011 made the playoffs at least once in the next three years.

[Guest]

these threads are a good litmus test for if a poster has any credibility

 

expressing the general sentiment "i think 2012 was in play" renders the poster a total obvious fool / intellectually dishonest troll and should thereby be roundly dismissed in all arguments henceforth

 

Virtually every poster on this site thought 2012 was in play at the time. They only changed their mind after the fact.

 

The only guy who didn't think 2012 was in play was davearm, more or less.

 

and then i saw what happened with those FAs and realized that i had no idea what was going on in baseball anymore because i had barely been watching for 2-3 years and realized i was really really wrong

 

building through FA wasn't what it used to be. good relatively young players weren't hitting FA anymore and more front offices were/are aware of what makes good players. those guys also weren't getting traded away for nothing by small market teams as soon as they got a little expensive.

 

that and i didn't know we couldn't (or weren't willing to) sustain $150M+ payrolls. wasn't there some kaplan "report" about theo being told he'd have gobs and gobs of money to spend when he took the job?

[Guest]

i'm satisfied with any team that either wins 90+ games or makes the playoffs. is that better?

 

OK.

 

Theo Epstein is currently on pace to make it 0-for-4 by that benchmark.

 

Jim Hendry made it 3-for-9 (or 8 or 10, depending on how you want to split partial season).

 

Does the fact that Epstein needs to go on a tear just to be slightly better than Jim Hendry make you suspect that at the very least, the success of his term with the Cubs should be questionable?

 

jim hendry inherited the best farm system in baseball at the beginning of his run (which obviously he deserved some credit for as he was a part of building that but also shows why trying to compare their tenures as though they're apples to apples is ridiculous)

[davell]

Wait. There is one GM I'm forgetting.....Kyle Hindsight, who would have had us with a top 5 system, have averaged 88 wins during these 4 seasons, trending upwards, with a 75 mill payroll and no bad contracts.

 

I don't think *any* other GM would have done what Epstein did, and I think many of them would have had better results.

 

The pointless personal shots are, as usual, noted and given their due relevance.

 

 

It's not a personal shot whatsoever. It calls you out for continually being as vague as humanly possible and never giving anything substantial.

 

I've taken up for you on most cases, even if we do go back and forth a ton.

 

I'm not asking for you to try and go through fictitious 4 seasons worth of moves....I just want more than standard whack off [expletive] you're spewing while naming nobody or at least giving a general idea of what you'd think other GM's COULD have accomplished during that time, inheriting what they did....

 

One playoff berth? More? Future look brighter? Worse?

 

If you're going to continue to bitch about this group, at least give us your god damn Gokd standard of where you think we should be right now instead.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

jim hendry inherited the best farm system in baseball at the beginning of his run (which obviously he deserved some credit for as he was a part of building that but also shows why trying to compare their tenures as though they're apples to apples is ridiculous)

 

OK. So if we lop off 2012, that gave Epstein a year to get one of the best farm systems in baseball going. Can we start counting from then and at least have some sort of measurable criteria against we can judge Epstein? It's like pulling teeth to get people to give any sort of objective criteria against which failure is possible sometimes.

 

I don't even think Epstein's doing an unquestionably bad job. I just think the idea that he's doing unquestionably good one is based in ordinary fan exuberance and nothing more, even in a place that thinks of itself as being smarter than the average fans.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If you're going to continue to bitch about this group, at least give us your [expletive] Gokd standard of where you think we should be right now instead.

 

I think that in order to be thought of as unquestionably good at this point, we should have employed parallel fronts to at least two competitive seasons and an above-average stable of young talent (doesn't have to be mega-super-elite, just 14th out of 30).

[davell]

If you somehow got lucky and made the playoffs once in those 3 seasons, the odds would be that your future wouldn't look as good as it currently does and you'd likely lose that 1 playoff advantage by the end and maybe more.

[davell]

If you're going to continue to bitch about this group, at least give us your [expletive] Gokd standard of where you think we should be right now instead.

 

I think that in order to be thought of as unquestionably good at this point, we should have employed parallel fronts to at least two competitive seasons and an above-average stable of young talent (doesn't have to be mega-super-elite, just 14th out of 30).

 

So like Hahn, if they win 84 this year?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If you're going to continue to bitch about this group, at least give us your [expletive] Gokd standard of where you think we should be right now instead.

 

I think that in order to be thought of as unquestionably good at this point, we should have employed parallel fronts to at least two competitive seasons and an above-average stable of young talent (doesn't have to be mega-super-elite, just 14th out of 30).

 

So like Hahn, if they win 84 this year?

 

Is their stable of young talent above-average?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If you somehow got lucky and made the playoffs once in those 3 seasons, the odds would be that your future wouldn't look as good as it currently does and you'd likely lose that 1 playoff advantage by the end and maybe more.

 

I think the future is being severely overrated. It's good, but it's not *that* good. For one thing, nobody's future is that good, it's baseball and there's too much variance. For another, there's a lot more flaws in the future than we want to admit sometimes.

 

We've got one elite prime hitter, one elite young hitter and hopefully a second in Schwarber. Jorge Soler is 23 and hasn't shown himself to be anything more than below-average so far. Even with normal improvement (not a given with his K problems), he would still top out at an average starter. That's the strength of our organization, and it is strong: 2-4 young or young-ish hitters.

 

Meanwhile, Baez, Alcantara, and Castro have all pooped the bed spectacularly. Our minor leaguers in general have not had a particularly impressive year. Vogelbach is all BABIP and still doesn't look like a guy who will hold a major-league starting job once you strip that way. Gleyber Torres is a million years away. Almora is hoping to maybe become CF Darwin Barney. Edit: Glossed over McKinney, a useful guy who doesn't project to anything special.

 

And the pitching situation is precarious. We've had success at the MLB level this year, but it's all on the back of old starters and guys like Hammel who have long histories of ups-and-downs. There's basically no help on the way. Pierce Johnson, Armando Rivero, and CJ Edwards are both walking the world in the minors, the first two can't stay healthy, and there's nothing impressive coming up behind them. We've seen the effects of that thin-ness in 2015: Guys like Richard and Beeler getting starts, the back of the bullpen being a perpetual problem. And that's in a year when we've had relatively good luck with pitching injuries. 2016 and 2017 look just as thin going forward and guys like Lester and Arrieta will be older and have had more chances to injure themselves. The waves and waves of pitching that was supposed to come from drafting them en masse after the top pick just isn't showing up.

 

We weren't the best team in the division this year, and it wasn't close. I wouldn't take us in 2016 or 2017 against the field. So again I ask: Is the future *that* amazing?

Edited August 2, 2015 by Hairyducked Idiot

[davell]

If you're going to continue to bitch about this group, at least give us your [expletive] Gokd standard of where you think we should be right now instead.

 

I think that in order to be thought of as unquestionably good at this point, we should have employed parallel fronts to at least two competitive seasons and an above-average stable of young talent (doesn't have to be mega-super-elite, just 14th out of 30).

 

So like Hahn, if they win 84 this year?

 

Is their stable of young talent above-average?

 

Definitely not elite. But likely in that 11-20 range that could be considered interchangeable.

 

So, my question is if they're 11th in this exercise....They conceivably have 2 .500+ seasons with 84 this year(0 playoff berths) and a worse looking future.....You'd prefer that to where we're at? That's what you're saying.....

[KaiserCesar]

My feeling going into 2013 was that the FO made some attempt to compete, but failed in a lot of moves and opted to stockpile talent once the team went off the rails. At lot of things went wrong to put the team into tanking position, and it wasn't necessarily by design. For one, none of the Fujikawa, Jackson and Hairston signings worked out. Also, Garza started the year on the DL and Castro/Rizzo underperformed expectations.

 

The FO did well in trading away the short-term assets for something of value, but treating that as the intention going into the year is giving them too much credit.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So, my question is if they're 11th in this exercise....They conceivably have 2 .500+ seasons with 84 this year(0 playoff berths) and a worse looking future.....You'd prefer that to where we're at? That's what you're saying.....

 

With 0 playoff berths? No. If they had one or two, maybe.

[davell]

I would take us against the field(assuming you mean division) in 2017 and with a halfway successful offseason, in 2016 too.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I would take us against the field(assuming you mean division) in 2017 and with a halfway successful offseason, in 2016 too.

 

And I think that's the fan in you talking. The Cardinals and Pirates probably would take themselves too, and there's probably a stable of Reds and Brewers fans promising that if the rebuild starts right now, they could take it by 2017.

[Guest]

Did Kyle just definitively (IB he says "nothing is definitive because baseball" or some similar crap) place a 2 WAR ceiling on Soler?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Did Kyle just definitively (IB he says "nothing is definitive because baseball" or some similar crap) place a 2 WAR ceiling on Soler?

 

I said with "normal improvement" that'd be where he ends up, maybe a little better.

 

He's got breakout potential to be a lot more than that, but I wouldn't exactly place high odds on him reaching it. His ZIPS last I checked had him topping out at 2.6.

 

I think "average starter" is a more than reasonable median projection for him. Maybe even a little generous.

[davell]

So, my question is if they're 11th in this exercise....They conceivably have 2 .500+ seasons with 84 this year(0 playoff berths) and a worse looking future.....You'd prefer that to where we're at? That's what you're saying.....

 

With 0 playoff berths? No. If they had one or two, maybe.

 

Two is just a maybe for you? You evidently like our future quite a bit, if that's the case.

 

I honestly think the criteria you have set is something that maybe could have been accomplished 1 time out of 25 run thrus. And with those odds, it wasn't worth it to chase it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I honestly think the criteria you have set is something that maybe could have been accomplished 1 time out of 25 run thrus. And with those odds, it wasn't worth it to chase it.

 

I'll have to dig it up again, but I believe last year I came up with three teams who were below us in either a 2011 or 2012 farm ranking report, were under .500 in 2011, spent less than $100m in payroll each year, and made the playoffs in either 2012, 2013 or 2014.

[davell]

I honestly think the criteria you have set is something that maybe could have been accomplished 1 time out of 25 run thrus. And with those odds, it wasn't worth it to chase it.

 

I'll have to dig it up again, but I believe last year I came up with three teams who were below us in either a 2011 or 2012 farm ranking report, were under .500 in 2011, spent less than $100m in payroll each year, and made the playoffs in either 2012, 2013 or 2014.

 

Once shouldn't be under consideration since you just said twice was a MAYBE for you.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I honestly think the criteria you have set is something that maybe could have been accomplished 1 time out of 25 run thrus. And with those odds, it wasn't worth it to chase it.

 

I'll have to dig it up again, but I believe last year I came up with three teams who were below us in either a 2011 or 2012 farm ranking report, were under .500 in 2011, spent less than $100m in payroll each year, and made the playoffs in either 2012, 2013 or 2014.

 

Once shouldn't be under consideration since you just said twice was a MAYBE for you.

 

It was a maybe because I don't know the White Sox's current situation all that well. I know they've got like Sale and Rodon and Abreu, but I have little idea beyond that.

[davell]

I honestly think the criteria you have set is something that maybe could have been accomplished 1 time out of 25 run thrus. And with those odds, it wasn't worth it to chase it.

 

I'll have to dig it up again, but I believe last year I came up with three teams who were below us in either a 2011 or 2012 farm ranking report, were under .500 in 2011, spent less than $100m in payroll each year, and made the playoffs in either 2012, 2013 or 2014.

 

Once shouldn't be under consideration since you just said twice was a MAYBE for you.

 

It was a maybe because I don't know the White Sox's current situation all that well. I know they've got like Sale and Rodon and Abreu, but I have little idea beyond that.

 

I'm not THAT up on them either. Quintana, they're annoyingly high on Avi Garcia.....Adam Eaton. I'm not in love with any of their minor league guys.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Unless it's *really* bad outside of the guys I know, I'd take 2 playoff years in the bank and them over what we have.

 

I think if you were a fan of any other team, and you looked at the Cubs, and a Cubs fan said he'd take the Cubs' 2016 and 2017 chances over every other team in the division combined, you'd roll your eyes pretty hard. It's like going over to Mets Refugees and seeing them talk about their future.

 

Our young hitting isn't producing right now, and our plan for pitching in the future is basically "hit on multiple guys from outside the organization every year and nobody important gets hurt."

[Guest]

Unless it's *really* bad outside of the guys I know, I'd take 2 playoff years in the bank and them over what we have.

 

I think if you were a fan of any other team, and you looked at the Cubs, and a Cubs fan said he'd take the Cubs' 2016 and 2017 chances over every other team in the division combined, you'd roll your eyes pretty hard. It's like going over to Mets Refugees and seeing them talk about their future.

 

Our young hitting isn't producing right now, and our plan for pitching in the future is basically "hit on multiple guys from outside the organization every year and nobody important gets hurt."

 

totally anecdotal but most non-cubs fans i know are much more in love with our situation than the cubs fans i know (in real life, not online) who seem super skeptical still and don't even think this year's team is good or going anywhere at all. lots of them like watching the cubs when not watching their team and stuff.

[UMFan83]

I love that Kyle uses 3 years where Theo was purposely not trying to compete to compare him to Hendry who had a team that was closer to success than the mess he left his successor with. And I know he will have a field day with this comment..I'll try to explain

 

Theo had a plan and he executed it and now it's time to see the results. The 3 years he punted will always factor into his evaluation but if those 3 years are followed by 5 straight playoff seasons obviously the plan worked and everyone is happy (except Kyle of course) and the 3 years of losing were obviously (again except to Kyle) worth it. If they make the playoffs 2 of the next 5 seasons then you reevaluate the years he punted and openly question the need to lose from 2012-2014. If we don't make any playoffs then..well it's an unquestioned disaster and Theo probably doesn't make it 4 more seasons after this one.

 

But the bottom line is, Theo had a long term strategy, he's executed it thus far and now it's time to see the results. He has a hole to dig out of because the 3 lost years obviously matter in evaluating him (although Id argue less than a GM like Hendry who seemed to play year to year and occasionally had disasterous seasons in years he expected to compete) but if it results in plenty of winning then it's all good. For now put the pitchforks away, selected Cubs fans, and enjoy the ride.