Hypothetical on Rebuild Going Back 3-4 years...Worth it in hindsight?

[Tracer Bullet]

I think it's too early to say.

 

Assuming this season is just a taste of things to come, then yes. I'd say it was worth it. I'll be honest, I barely watched in 2012 and 2013, so the crappy seasons didn't cause me too much anguish.

 

However, if Bryant and Russell, god forbid, become the position player equivalents of Mark Prior and all their promise/excellence is fleeting, it might be a different story.

 

I'm here too. My life sort of blew up in 2011 and has only really started settling in the last year or so. I might just be getting older b/c I care less about other teams losing too.

[Guest]

Side note...

 

If they take all the money saved and give Bryce Harper a record contact when he is a free agent, all will be forgiven.

[Little Slide Rooter]

As of now, Theo has accomplished all that he set out to do, how he set out to do it, and in the time from that he alloted himself to do it. Personally, I've been on board with it since day one, which is why I've inexplicably suggested scooping up every stray former top prospect not nailed down. But that's beside the point.

 

To answer the question:

 

short answer: at this moment, yes.

 

Long answer: ask me again in 3-5 years if/when we've become baseball's answer to the Blackhawks.

[Sammys Boombox]

Something else not mentioned yet: None of the throw away seasons would have been potential low-hanging fruit in terms of reaching the playoffs.

 

Record of last team in:

2014 88-74 (NL Central had 90 and 88-win teams)

2013 90-72 (NL Central had 97, 94 and 90-win teams)

2012 88-74 (NL Central had 97 and 88-win teams)

 

Side note: The Cardinals and Pirates have almost already matched their win totals from last season. The Cubs already have. The Pirates and Brewers are fast approaching their loss total from last season. All 5 teams will end with records nowhere near their 2014 records.

[imb]

its all been good for me, even the last few years. we hired a smart FO and they said "we have a plan," and it was good enough for me. I dunno, I guess there were enough real world parallels where I was like sometimes you have to eat a little [expletive] for a big payoff down the road.

 

if the payoff never comes, [expletive] it, I had fun on the journey and it will be fun to see what the next iteration is.

[Geech]

its all been good for me, even the last few years. we hired a smart FO and they said "we have a plan," and it was good enough for me. I dunno, I guess there were enough real world parallels where I was like sometimes you have to eat a little [expletive] for a big payoff down the road.

 

if the payoff never comes, [expletive] it, I had fun on the journey and it will be fun to see what the next iteration is.

 

I wish the front office had tried harder to field a competitive team, but this is pretty much how I feel. At some point you have to try to enjoy the ride for what it is. I'm certainly not going to resent these losing seasons for years to come.

[Gingerballs Lives]

Tough for me to argue against what has transpired. Super young, talented and flexible is a great place to be.

[CyHawk_Cub]

I'm fine w/ the rebuild/The Plan because I'm not convinced that short-term band aids would have accomplished more than giving the f.o. less draft pool money, and going through with some of the long-term contracts would have been a drain, and a waste on teams w/out resources to fill-out the roster with meaningful talent. We'll see how this turns out, because I also agree that we shouldn't assume so much about the future. I am glad, however, that early returns look promising.

[Boris]

Side note...

 

If they take all the money saved and give Bryce Harper a record contact when he is a free agent, all will be forgiven.

 

*drools*

 

On topic, yes, I've always been a fan of this direction. It was clear there were some monetary issues and this direction was going to take a bit, but seeing this team on the field has made up for it spades. Focused and organized. Deadly combination and we are not running on all cylinders yet. That's the really cool part.

 

It's been bittersweet watching them miss out on high prices FAs but I'll tip my cap to them not blowing their loads just to land one.

[RammyFanny]

It was extremely risky and relied on making perfect draft picks and not [expletive] up any major trades. During the time it was going on, it was absolutely fine to disagree with "The Plan" because the plan itself had a strong chance of blowing up in our faces if we didn't make the correct picks.

 

That being said, it appears they completely nailed it so it was absolutely worth it. I do applaud the fact that they didn't half ass it and continue adding middling pieces so we'd have a prayer of going .500 once in awhile. Although, they could have been financially handicapped so who knows if that was even an option.

 

I was competely all for it, but I won't deny that a small part of me loved it because I was really obsessed with following amatuer baseball prospects and the minors at the time, so I was still having fun even when we were losing. I can see how it would be torture for someone who doesn't give a damn about following that stuff.

 

In hindsight, could you have probably built a somewhat similar team through free agency a little earlier? Sure. But that would have been even more risky than what we did if it failed, and we wouldn't be taking about still having the ability to add a ton to this already-awesome team through free agency.

 

I've got to say, we're pretty lucky that all of these guys are this good this early. I mean, we really haven't had anyone major completely fall on their face (unless you count 2 months of Baez in a meaningless year. Maybe Soler but it's not like he's helpless out there) and sometimes that just happens. But maybe it's a testament to the profile of player that we target.

[Guest]

I agree with Tim. Maybe the organization needed a total reboot with new ownership. I'm quite happy with the current product, but I don't think it took a genius front office to intentionally lose for 3 three years. On the other hand, through luck, good decisions, or a little bit of both they did pick some winners when they got their draft picks. Thank goodness there was no Tyler Colvin's, Ryan Harvey's, Matthew Clanton's etc. ad infinitum picked in the first round. I am thankful and happy.

[Guest]

I was always fine with letting Epstein blow up the team. Building the team with the personnel that you want rather than using someone else's retreads takes time. Putting a competitive team on the field during the off years was something they probably attempted to do, but not at the cost of the future or their vision of the future.

 

I went into the Hendry era with the same attitude, however. He was known as a developmental organization guy and we had Choi, Helton, Hill, Montanez and a stable of pitching prosects coming up, and I was willing to ride out the change from the previous administration then, too. I think the success of 2003 may have changed Hendry's line of thinking. That or he was always destined for failure, but it seems like from the point he got success from bringing in guys like Ramirez, Lofton, Karros and Grudz that you can trade prospects for "useful" major league regulars, and then that's what kind of GM he became going forward. And actually, I'm not so sure that Hendry deserved the credit for the prospects that made the Cubs farm system one of the best in baseball at the time. I want to say MacPhail drafted/signed most of those guys.

 

The Padres got a new GM this year and he tried to just throw money at a failing system and doing that doesn't just make your team a winner. And if you end up being a meddling team that doesn't make the playoffs or improve your draft position, you end up stuck in a holding pattern season after season. I'm actually winning a case of beer from a buddy of mine when I got so tired of hearing him brag about all the players the Padres brought in, that I bet him that the Cubs would end up with a better record by the end of the season. This was before they got Kimbrell, and I didn't really feel all that comfortable making the bet, but who cares, it's a case of beer. LOL. I knew the Cubs would be better this year, but I never expected that they would actually be good enough to potentially make the playoffs.

 

Epstein needed to "flip this house", IMO. The foundation was shaky, the glue was non existent and the only thing he could do was bulldoze it and start over. I do think Ricketts was cash poor, also, which makes one wonder how Epstein would ever agree to a complete rebuild with no money to spend, but it's what he basically did. Could someone other than Epstein pull this off? I don't know, but I'm glad he was the one they brought in to do it, and I'm thrilled with the results.

 

My golf game is much better because of these last few years. :yahoo:

[Backtobanks]

I was always fine with letting Epstein blow up the team. Building the team with the personnel that you want rather than using someone else's retreads takes time. Putting a competitive team on the field during the off years was something they probably attempted to do, but not at the cost of the future or their vision of the future.

 

I went into the Hendry era with the same attitude, however. He was known as a developmental organization guy and we had Choi, Helton, Hill, Montanez and a stable of pitching prosects coming up, and I was willing to ride out the change from the previous administration then, too. I think the success of 2003 may have changed Hendry's line of thinking. That or he was always destined for failure, but it seems like from the point he got success from bringing in guys like Ramirez, Lofton, Karros and Grudz that you can trade prospects for "useful" major league regulars, and then that's what kind of GM he became going forward. And actually, I'm not so sure that Hendry deserved the credit for the prospects that made the Cubs farm system one of the best in baseball at the time. I want to say MacPhail drafted/signed most of those guys.

 

The Padres got a new GM this year and he tried to just throw money at a failing system and doing that doesn't just make your team a winner. And if you end up being a meddling team that doesn't make the playoffs or improve your draft position, you end up stuck in a holding pattern season after season. I'm actually winning a case of beer from a buddy of mine when I got so tired of hearing him brag about all the players the Padres brought in, that I bet him that the Cubs would end up with a better record by the end of the season. This was before they got Kimbrell, and I didn't really feel all that comfortable making the bet, but who cares, it's a case of beer. LOL. I knew the Cubs would be better this year, but I never expected that they would actually be good enough to potentially make the playoffs.

 

Epstein needed to "flip this house", IMO. The foundation was shaky, the glue was non existent and the only thing he could do was bulldoze it and start over. I do think Ricketts was cash poor, also, which makes one wonder how Epstein would ever agree to a complete rebuild with no money to spend, but it's what he basically did. Could someone other than Epstein pull this off? I don't know, but I'm glad he was the one they brought in to do it, and I'm thrilled with the results.

 

My golf game is much better because of these last few years. :yahoo:

 

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, some of you forget that the situation with Hendry was completely different. He believed in young players and deserves some credit for the farm system during his tenure, but the Tribune company gave him the money and pushed him into a "win now" mode. He never was given complete autonomy like Theo. Also, many of our young players now came from trading the veterans that Theo inherited from Hendry. The time came when there had to be a change and Theo stepped in to make the necessary changes. Three years later, everything is coming up roses. We'll never know whether it could have been done a different way or whether anyone else could have done it, so let's just enjoy it.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, some of you forget that the situation with Hendry was completely different.

 

Yes, he was incompetent and Theo and Jed are both competent.

[Guest]

 

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, some of you forget that the situation with Hendry was completely different.

 

Yes, he was incompetent and Theo and Jed are both competent.

 

LOL. Nailed it!

[sneakypower]

Has anyone fired up the Kyle Signal yet?

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Ross-Why-Would-You-Do-That.gif

[Guest]

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, some of you forget that the situation with Hendry was completely different. He believed in young players and deserves some credit for the farm system during his tenure, but the Tribune company gave him the money and pushed him into a "win now" mode. He never was given complete autonomy like Theo. Also, many of our young players now came from trading the veterans that Theo inherited from Hendry. The time came when there had to be a change and Theo stepped in to make the necessary changes. Three years later, everything is coming up roses. We'll never know whether it could have been done a different way or whether anyone else could have done it, so let's just enjoy it.

 

I don't think Hendry had a completely different situation. There was absolutely zilch on the major league team when he inherited it, and they had one of the best farm systems in baseball. Epstein had to take it a step farther, because they had zilch on the major league roster and the farm system was weak, also.

 

I gave Hendry credit for adding talent to the major league roster without giving up the best of the prospects in order to create the success he did in 2003-2004. However, the organizational philosophy on what will make the team succeed going forward took a horrific turn under Hendry and Baker's watch. Abusing pitchers and not understanding the value of a walk and valuing said walks in relation to line up construction was the beginning of the end of his future as a GM. Looking at the line ups Baker was throwing out there day to day was vomit inducing if you look back on them today. Neifi Perez batted 1st or 2nd more than 400 times in 2005. There is just no defending that. He traded Greg Maddux at the trade deadline for Cesar "[expletive]" Izturis. The list of bad decisions became comical at one point to the point we all thought he was purposely trying to sabotage his own career, which he basically did. I certainly don't see ever hiring him to be a GM again after that.

 

My apologies for making anyone remember any of this.

[Little Slide Rooter]

 

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, some of you forget that the situation with Hendry was completely different.

 

Yes, he was incompetent and Theo and Jed are both competent.

 

But the argument at the time was that Theo and Co. should be able to field a competive team then and build toward now. While the delusions of putting together an immediate 90+ game winner thankfully died, the idea of going all in for the likes of Cespedes, Darvish (does he still exist) and Tanaka while still building a top farm system wasn't that far fetched.

 

But also, while nobody can question Hendry's win now methods compromising the then future, was the baron farm system that Theo inherited and quickly spun into gold really the fault of Hendry, so much as Tim Wilken, who was very well respected.

 

I know some of us joke about Hendry's willingness to sacrifice too prospects for junk, but other than Donaldson and Archer, both o whom were apart of trades that virtually everybody applauded at the time, and neither of whom could have been expected to become 2 of the game's elite as quickly as they did. But in terms of post-2003, did Hendry really give up that many top prospects so much as he didn't have many to begin with? And those he broke and/or flopped. And wouldn't that be more the fault of Wilken?

[Sammy Sofa]

baron farm system

 

Worst Star Wars villain EVER.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, some of you forget that the situation with Hendry was completely different.

 

Yes, he was incompetent and Theo and Jed are both competent.

 

But the argument at the time was that Theo and Co. should be able to field a competive team then and build toward now. While the delusions of putting together an immediate 90+ game winner thankfully died, the idea of going all in for the likes of Cespedes, Darvish (does he still exist) and Tanaka while still building a top farm system wasn't that far fetched.

 

But also, while nobody can question Hendry's win now methods compromising the then future, was the baron farm system that Theo inherited and quickly spun into gold really the fault of Hendry, so much as Tim Wilken, who was very well respected.

 

I know some of us joke about Hendry's willingness to sacrifice too prospects for junk, but other than Donaldson and Archer, both o whom were apart of trades that virtually everybody applauded at the time, and neither of whom could have been expected to become 2 of the game's elite as quickly as they did. But in terms of post-2003, did Hendry really give up that many top prospects so much as he didn't have many to begin with? And those he broke and/or flopped. And wouldn't that be more the fault of Wilken?

Hendry didn't have win now methods or willingness to sacrifice top prospects for junk. Nor was his big problem that he spent too much money.

 

Hendry sucked because he refused to believe that there was a different way to evaluate players and measure productivity than the way he knew from coaching high schoolers in the 80s.

[Guest]

that and they seemed to operate on a year to year basis with no real defined long term vision (at least that was made clear) after they built up that first farm system

 

the way things played out, i can see why that happened...a big part of it was crappy drafting and the prior and, to a lesser extent, wood blowing up.

[Backtobanks]

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, some of you forget that the situation with Hendry was completely different. He believed in young players and deserves some credit for the farm system during his tenure, but the Tribune company gave him the money and pushed him into a "win now" mode. He never was given complete autonomy like Theo. Also, many of our young players now came from trading the veterans that Theo inherited from Hendry. The time came when there had to be a change and Theo stepped in to make the necessary changes. Three years later, everything is coming up roses. We'll never know whether it could have been done a different way or whether anyone else could have done it, so let's just enjoy it.

 

I don't think Hendry had a completely different situation. There was absolutely zilch on the major league team when he inherited it, and they had one of the best farm systems in baseball. Epstein had to take it a step farther, because they had zilch on the major league roster and the farm system was weak, also.

 

I gave Hendry credit for adding talent to the major league roster without giving up the best of the prospects in order to create the success he did in 2003-2004. However, the organizational philosophy on what will make the team succeed going forward took a horrific turn under Hendry and Baker's watch. Abusing pitchers and not understanding the value of a walk and valuing said walks in relation to line up construction was the beginning of the end of his future as a GM. Looking at the line ups Baker was throwing out there day to day was vomit inducing if you look back on them today. Neifi Perez batted 1st or 2nd more than 400 times in 2005. There is just no defending that. He traded Greg Maddux at the trade deadline for Cesar "[expletive]" Izturis. The list of bad decisions became comical at one point to the point we all thought he was purposely trying to sabotage his own career, which he basically did. I certainly don't see ever hiring him to be a GM again after that.

 

My apologies for making anyone remember any of this.

 

The zilch that Epstein inherited netted the Cubs (and their farm system) Rizzo, Grimm, Ramierez, Hendricks, Villaneuva, Russell, Castro, and Baez.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Backtobanks

[Guest]

turning cashner into rizzo is much more of a point in theo/jed's favor than hendry's.

 

also hard to say how much of an impact bosio had in samardzija becoming the guy who netted addison russell but it's fair to say it was at least a significant amount.

 

but i agree that saying they started with "zilch" in terms of assets is hyperbole. and castro was an asset (who was turned into garbage - maybe not anymore?) that you missed.

[Backtobanks]

turning cashner into rizzo is much more of a point in theo/jed's favor than hendry's.

 

also hard to say how much of an impact bosio had in samardzija becoming the guy who netted addison russell but it's fair to say it was at least a significant amount.

 

but i agree that saying they started with "zilch" in terms of assets is hyperbole. and castro was an asset (who was turned into garbage - maybe not anymore?) that you missed.

 

Yeah, I just added Castro to my post. My point in all of this is that that this team has been built/acquired over a period of time following a plan by Theo that involved draft choices and trades. Theo deserves credit for making the draft choices and trades, but Hendry deserves credit for leaving the assets necessary to make the trades and for drafting Baez and Castro.

[jersey cubs fan]

but Hendry deserves credit for leaving the assets necessary to make the trades and for drafting Baez and Castro.

 

Absolutely freaking not. Hendry sucked balls as a GM. He doesn't deserve credit for leaving some assets. Every team has some assets. Hendry screwed the pooch as GM. He inherited a big budget team with a farm system stacked with pitchers but no hitters (that he was responsible for building), his budget increased every year but he screwed the pooch because of his horrible philosophy and general meatheadedness.