The 2018-2019 Cubs Offseason Rumors & Discussion Thread AKA The Rickettssss take a dump on EVERYTHING

[Bertz]

If the Ricketts don't want us to complain, one very simple solution is to show us a top line budget.

 

I think the issue isn't that the team isn't spending a lot, it's that we know revenues are rising substantially (because most of that info is public), while payroll, the primary driver of expense, is rising modestly in comparison. Non player costs are surely higher than ever before, but there's not really evidence that they're making up the whole difference. Servers and analysts and such are expensive to be sure, but we're talking a Daniel Descalso sized hole in the budget, not a Bryce Harper sized one. Several years ago Ricketts said that money coming in from baseball sources would go towards baseball ops. That doesn't appear to be happening. There's three possible explanations for what IS happening: 1. The Ricketts Family is pocketing a bunch of cash 2. Baseball revenue is being used on a non baseball ops expense (renovations or debt servicing most likely) 3. There is some legit baseball expense that we're all vastly understating (it would have to be revenue sharing, considering the magnitude). #3 is certainly possible, but #1 or #2 are far more likely.

 

I will say I'm not going to complain about the changes to the neighborhood. The IO and Salt & Pepper are the only things that have gone that I would consider at all to be a loss. And I like Gallaghet Way enough that I'm fine with the trade off.

[Brian]

I don't know what is going on, but I'm starting to become a conspiracy theorist. All the stories last off-season were about the teams that were re-setting their luxury tax, or making sure they don't go into it so they could be prepared to go wild this off-season, and now crickets.

 

Some fun luxury tax facts -

 

- Last year was the first year the Yankees didn't pay in its existence (since 2003)

- Last year was the lowest total for all teams since the first year (2018 14,337,188 - 2003 11,798,357)

- The Yankees have paid about %62 of the total tax collected

- The Yankees and Dodgers combined have paid %89 of it

- The single most paid by a team is $43,567,472 by the 2015 Dodgers

 

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't know what is going on, but I'm starting to become a conspiracy theorist.

 

What's the conspiracy theory?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

for the last time, the % goes AFTER the numbers

[Ding Dong Johnson]

sorry, been yelling at random kids and forgot who I was talking to

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Those long-winded lectures about how it’s a business and they can’t possibly not make a cash profit always ignore the insane appreciation sports team have. We could have been having $400m payrolls all along, Ricketts could still sell the team tomorrow and make a comfortable profit on his investment.

[SouthSideRyan]

The revitalization of the neighborhood?

 

Ah, yes; Chicago's under-policed mini-Bourbon Street with the wonky crime stats to not scare away the suburban bros and bro-ettes and their precious, precious dollars. So deliciously and impressively revitalized now that there's a hotel, too.

 

I'm very satisfied that that is the criticism you chose to offer.

 

Doesn't really take away from my point. May add to it.

 

I'm not an expert on the situation by any means, but its pretty clear to me that business people gonna business.

 

I don’t think you want him to address the that mean old Sam Zell is why the Ricketts couldn’t spent argument

[Sammy Sofa]

I will say I'm not going to complain about the changes to the neighborhood. The IO and Salt & Pepper are the only things that have gone that I would consider at all to be a loss. And I like Gallaghet Way enough that I'm fine with the trade off.

 

Personally, I'm not bemoaning the neighborhood as if some great old part of Chicago was lost; it was horsefeathers then and it's horsefeathers now. It just basically moved sideways to a type of shitty with a glossy coat of paint that makes everything more expensive.

[CubinNY]

It’s another form of collusion. The owners have decided to limit themselves and act as one with regard to total salary. George Steinbrenner is long dead. It’s about maximizing profit. I don’t think they care about individual huge contracts, but they do care about the total amount of payroll for each team. The Ricketts are on board if not the leader of the group.

 

Baseball isn’t a business, it’s exempt from antitrust laws. It’s a club that makes obscene amounts of money for those in the club.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

This has nothing to do with this topic, but I never realized how boring our offseason was after winning the World Series, probably because I wasn't paying attention and figured there was nothing needed any way.

 

But we traded Soler for Wade Davis. That was about it. I suppose we also signed Jon Jay.

[BigSlick]

I'm gonna need the Cubs to do something exciting because there are no sports I care about until opening day at this point and the Bears horrible loss can't be all I chew on.

 

So get on it.

[imb]

there are lots of businesses. owning a sports team is not a business.

 

I don't know what to do with this. If you mean "owning a sports team shouldn't be a business," I can go along - but only so far.

 

But that's just not realistic. Maybe I have some sort of strange Stockholm Syndrome from following the Cubs during Tribune ownership, but I don't see how its anything but a business.

 

**I'm not a businessman, so forgive me if I misuse some terms**

 

Have we forgotten the whole saga of tribune ownership, and underspending? Tribune in bankruptcy and selling the team? Sam Zell and the resrictions put on the Rickett's as far as requiring a certain debt load (if I'm remembering correctly)? The revitalization of the neighborhood?

 

As much of a fan as Ricketts might be, you can't be naive enough to think that someone with a background in BANKING AND INVESMENTS would go through countless hours of meetings, fights with the neighborhood, the rooftops, and the city if they didn't think it would gain them a profit. These people live life by ROI. And all the other owners are business owners as well.

 

I don't have to like them. I don't have to like big business, but to fail to recognize that an asset acquired for nearly a billion dollars is anything but big business is somewhere between gullible and dense.

 

Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others. I feel the same way about capitalism. It is the worst economic system, except all the others. It really is the worst. but its what we have, and to expect people who have played that system for generations, and have invested the time and energy they have in it to not turn a HEFTY profit is to fail to understand the world around you. I wouldn't be surprised if they are leading the way on collusion. I'd image the penalties on baseball collusion will be much less than the same behavior in the banking industry and the Ricketts' know it.

 

That said, the Cubs have a top 5 payroll, will continue have one. They have been more competitive this last 5 years than any other time in my lifetime or yours (I haven't checked the numbers, but I'd image even averaging in the "tank" years, they've set an 8 year high in W/L record at this point) due to quality hires and open wallets.

 

I want Bryce and will be dissappointed if they don't get him. But to expect the Ricketts to be anything but what we knew they were walking in is just silly. They're investors and they're doing pretty well with this investment, both in terms of its success and thier profit.

 

tl;dr. Baseball is a business. You don't have to like it, but its true. The Ricketts' are good at business and the Cubs are more successful than ever, while the Ricketts are making tons of money, which is kind of what bankers do.

 

The goal of owning a business is to make money.

 

The goal of owning a sports team is to win titles.

 

If you want to make money, spend your $900 million owning a profitable business.

 

If you want to own a sports team, do everything you can to win a title.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

there are lots of businesses. owning a sports team is not a business.

 

I don't know what to do with this. If you mean "owning a sports team shouldn't be a business," I can go along - but only so far.

 

But that's just not realistic. Maybe I have some sort of strange Stockholm Syndrome from following the Cubs during Tribune ownership, but I don't see how its anything but a business.

 

**I'm not a businessman, so forgive me if I misuse some terms**

 

Have we forgotten the whole saga of tribune ownership, and underspending? Tribune in bankruptcy and selling the team? Sam Zell and the resrictions put on the Rickett's as far as requiring a certain debt load (if I'm remembering correctly)? The revitalization of the neighborhood?

 

As much of a fan as Ricketts might be, you can't be naive enough to think that someone with a background in BANKING AND INVESMENTS would go through countless hours of meetings, fights with the neighborhood, the rooftops, and the city if they didn't think it would gain them a profit. These people live life by ROI. And all the other owners are business owners as well.

 

I don't have to like them. I don't have to like big business, but to fail to recognize that an asset acquired for nearly a billion dollars is anything but big business is somewhere between gullible and dense.

 

Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others. I feel the same way about capitalism. It is the worst economic system, except all the others. It really is the worst. but its what we have, and to expect people who have played that system for generations, and have invested the time and energy they have in it to not turn a HEFTY profit is to fail to understand the world around you. I wouldn't be surprised if they are leading the way on collusion. I'd image the penalties on baseball collusion will be much less than the same behavior in the banking industry and the Ricketts' know it.

 

That said, the Cubs have a top 5 payroll, will continue have one. They have been more competitive this last 5 years than any other time in my lifetime or yours (I haven't checked the numbers, but I'd image even averaging in the "tank" years, they've set an 8 year high in W/L record at this point) due to quality hires and open wallets.

 

I want Bryce and will be dissappointed if they don't get him. But to expect the Ricketts to be anything but what we knew they were walking in is just silly. They're investors and they're doing pretty well with this investment, both in terms of its success and thier profit.

 

tl;dr. Baseball is a business. You don't have to like it, but its true. The Ricketts' are good at business and the Cubs are more successful than ever, while the Ricketts are making tons of money, which is kind of what bankers do.

 

The goal of owning a business is to make money.

 

The goal of owning a sports team is to win titles.

 

If you want to make money, spend your $900 million owning a profitable business.

 

If you want to own a sports team, do everything you can to win a title.

 

The Packers are the only franchise in pro sports who get to just care about making money then. Screw them.

[chopsx9]

there are lots of businesses. owning a sports team is not a business.

 

 

 

That said, the Cubs have a top 5 payroll, will continue have one. They have been more competitive this last 5 years than any other time in my lifetime or yours (I haven't checked the numbers, but I'd image even averaging in the "tank" years, they've set an 8 year high in W/L record at this point) due to quality hires and open wallets.

 

I want Bryce and will be dissappointed if they don't get him. But to expect the Ricketts to be anything but what we knew they were walking in is just silly. They're investors and they're doing pretty well with this investment, both in terms of its success and thier profit.

 

tl;dr. Baseball is a business. You don't have to like it, but its true. The Ricketts' are good at business and the Cubs are more successful than ever, while the Ricketts are making tons of money, which is kind of what bankers do.

 

The goal of owning a business is to make money.

 

[highlight=yellow]The goal of owning a sports team is to win titles.[/highlight]

 

If you want to make money, spend your $900 million owning a profitable business.

 

If you want to own a sports team, do everything you can to win a title.

 

You're making assumptions.

[Cubswin11]

The Ricketts bought the Cubs, Wrigley, and 25% of Comcast for $900m in 2009. For simplicity, let's say they just bought the Cubs for $900m. In 2018, Forbes estimated the Cubs were worth $2.8b. With a B. So, no, I don't give a horsefeathers how much money they are or aren't making on a year to year basis.

I certainly agree that they obviously have the money/net worth to go do whatever they want (even if they had to tap in to personal money vs just Cubs "business" money). But this is all a paper gain, they don't have $2B in cash all the sudden. We know MLB has lending limits/ratios teams can't exceed so there are restrictions for them to just go lend against their paper gain (which is a whole other discussion and we can argue if that's stupid or good). It's possible they've maxed out what they can borrow going by MLB rules and spent that money on things like the renovations, neighborhood projects, ST facility, Dominican facility, etc. so maybe they are tight from a cash flow perspective because maybe those projects cost more money, aren't coming on line as fast as they thought or not returning what they projected (or maybe they are just being plain greedy and pocketing money). Which is pretty dumb and poor planning knowing this offseason was coming and they certainly can dump personal money in, you'd assume, if they really wanted to make something happen. I'm not defending them by any means, just trying to figure out what the hell could be going on.

[squally1313]

The Ricketts bought the Cubs, Wrigley, and 25% of Comcast for $900m in 2009. For simplicity, let's say they just bought the Cubs for $900m. In 2018, Forbes estimated the Cubs were worth $2.8b. With a B. So, no, I don't give a horsefeathers how much money they are or aren't making on a year to year basis.

I certainly agree that they obviously have the money/net worth to go do whatever they want (even if they had to tap in to personal money vs just Cubs "business" money). But this is all a paper gain, they don't have $2B in cash all the sudden. We know MLB has lending limits/ratios teams can't exceed so there are restrictions for them to just go lend against their paper gain (which is a whole other discussion and we can argue if that's stupid or good). It's possible they've maxed out what they can borrow going by MLB rules and spent that money on things like the renovations, neighborhood projects, ST facility, Dominican facility, etc. so maybe they are tight from a cash flow perspective because maybe those projects cost more money, aren't coming on line as fast as they thought or not returning what they projected (or maybe they are just being plain greedy and pocketing money). Which is pretty dumb and poor planning knowing this offseason was coming and they certainly can dump personal money in, you'd assume, if they really wanted to make something happen. I'm not defending them by any means, just trying to figure out what the hell could be going on.

 

But it can't be this dire. Their ownership has gone about as well as they could have possibly expected, save another title or two. And it's gone on during a period of constant economic growth across the board. There's no way that this kind of success can have them backed into a corner like this, because that means pretty much any other alternative would have made them declare bankruptcy or something along those lines.

[Forgotmyoldlogin]

It's just bizarre to me that the Convention is NEXT WEEK and the Cubs haven't done anything.

[squally1313]

It's just bizarre to me that the Convention is NEXT WEEK and the Cubs haven't done anything.

 

They retweeted Randy horsefeathering Rosario tweeting about being excited for the convention. That's where they're at right now. Obviously, everyone in the front office knows it will sell out regardless, and it's not like there's no one left to get. But yeah, this is boring and concerning. Do something please.

[Cubswin11]

The Ricketts bought the Cubs, Wrigley, and 25% of Comcast for $900m in 2009. For simplicity, let's say they just bought the Cubs for $900m. In 2018, Forbes estimated the Cubs were worth $2.8b. With a B. So, no, I don't give a horsefeathers how much money they are or aren't making on a year to year basis.

I certainly agree that they obviously have the money/net worth to go do whatever they want (even if they had to tap in to personal money vs just Cubs "business" money). But this is all a paper gain, they don't have $2B in cash all the sudden. We know MLB has lending limits/ratios teams can't exceed so there are restrictions for them to just go lend against their paper gain (which is a whole other discussion and we can argue if that's stupid or good). It's possible they've maxed out what they can borrow going by MLB rules and spent that money on things like the renovations, neighborhood projects, ST facility, Dominican facility, etc. so maybe they are tight from a cash flow perspective because maybe those projects cost more money, aren't coming on line as fast as they thought or not returning what they projected (or maybe they are just being plain greedy and pocketing money). Which is pretty dumb and poor planning knowing this offseason was coming and they certainly can dump personal money in, you'd assume, if they really wanted to make something happen. I'm not defending them by any means, just trying to figure out what the hell could be going on.

 

But it can't be this dire. Their ownership has gone about as well as they could have possibly expected, save another title or two. And it's gone on during a period of constant economic growth across the board. There's no way that this kind of success can have them backed into a corner like this, because that means pretty much any other alternative would have made them declare bankruptcy or something along those lines.

Definitely and the answer is probably somewhere in the middle, they obviously aren’t poor or in a dire spot but maybe (in the vacuum of just the cubs as a business and not their personal worth/money) they don’t have all this money that we think either because something(s) didn’t go as planned on the business side. I’d just like to know the real reason(s) instead of guessing and maybe (likely) it’s as simple as their greed.

[Sammy Sofa]

I keep thinking it's gotta be the TV projections somehow not being what they were wanting.

[Bull]

I keep thinking it's gotta be the TV projections somehow not being what they were wanting.

Or Bryce is happening and they're waiting for the convention to announce it... please?

[SouthSideRyan]

We know the lending limit ratios are [expletive]

[Cubswin11]

We know the lending limit ratios are [expletive]

Right, but we know they are part of the stupid rules they have to play by

[17 Seconds]

if the nats get harper, does that mean they're moving eaton?

[Cubswin11]

if the nats get harper, does that mean they're moving eaton?

He doesn’t make much money, so they shouldn’t have to move him for that reason. Given his injury history and splits I’d assume he’d just move to a platoon OF’er with Taylor/Robles (could even keep Robles in AAA for a while to work on things/use as trade bait down the road).