May 20, 2019 - Phillies (Jakester) at Cubs (p-Yu) 7:05 PM Live from Wrigley on NBC Sports - Chicago

[jersey cubs fan]

1. I know people will call this boot licking, but we really have to stop acting like the Cubs are cheap.

 

Counterpoint, no, we really do not have to.

 

They've owned the team for a decade and spent half that decade bargain hunting and not trying to win. They finally started to spend and then suddenly slammed on the brakes. You boot lickers might be happy with one year of a spending out of a decade, but I'm not.

 

They don't get the benefit of the doubt until they've spent the vast majority of their ownership actually putting money back into the team and trying to win. They aren't anywhere close to that yet.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

1. I know people will call this boot licking, but we really have to stop acting like the Cubs are cheap.

 

Counterpoint, no, we really do not have to.

 

They've owned the team for a decade and spent half that decade bargain hunting and not trying to win. They finally started to spend and then suddenly slammed on the brakes. You boot lickers might be happy with one year of a spending out of a decade, but I'm not.

 

They don't get the benefit of the doubt until they've spent the vast majority of their ownership actually putting money back into the team and trying to win. They aren't anywhere close to that yet.

 

I'm very much willing to give Theo the benefit of the doubt that he wanted to tear things down and don't really look much at those years. If the Cubs moving forward aren't in the top 5 payrolls in baseball every single year or damn near close to it, I will revolt with you.

 

ETA: We have had a top 4 payroll three of the last four seasons. It's not totally accurate to say "we might be happy with one year of spending out of a decade."

 

ETA2: Please don't take this as me saying we SHOULDN'T spend more money, as all owners could and should. I'm saying we can't use it as an excuse, because we are spending enough to be better than everyone else.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm very much willing to give Theo the benefit of the doubt that he wanted to tear things down and don't really look much at those years.

 

Theo isn't the owner. The owners were practicing austerity well before Theo arrived.

 

 

ETA: We have had a top 4 payroll three of the last four seasons. It's not totally accurate to say "we might be happy with one year of spending out of a decade."

 

ETA2: Please don't take this as me saying we SHOULDN'T spend more money, as all owners could and should. I'm saying we can't use it as an excuse, because we are spending enough to be better than everyone else.

 

Here' s a major flaw in your bootlicking.

 

If you steadily increase your budget every year it is much better than increasing it and then suddenly slamming on the brakes. Slamming on the brakes on budget growth completely destroys the process of spending that budget. Pulling back is unforgivable and that is what the owners did. They did not pull back to prevent losses or risk to the underlying business. They pulled back to maximize profitability during a time of unprecedented tax cuts they advocated for.

 

But go ahead and keep making excuses for them.

[CP_414]

The Cubs payroll is only 2nd (or 3rd, the Yankees are about even) because other teams came back to them. Other owners being cheap doesn’t make the Cubs owners not cheap.

 

It’s fair to criticize the Cubs spending even though other big market teams stopped spending, too.

[Sammy Sofa]

The Cubs payroll is only 2nd (or 3rd, the Yankees are about even) because other teams came back to them. Other owners being cheap doesn’t make the Cubs owners not cheap.

 

It’s fair to criticize the Cubs spending even though other big market teams stopped spending, too.

 

THIS.

 

Effectively applauding the Cubs for keeping with the pack of cheap bastards blows. They're choosing to be the big spenders of the cheap bastards, not the actual big spenders we longed for.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

The Cubs payroll is only 2nd (or 3rd, the Yankees are about even) because other teams came back to them. Other owners being cheap doesn’t make the Cubs owners not cheap.

 

It’s fair to criticize the Cubs spending even though other big market teams stopped spending, too.

 

THIS.

 

Effectively applauding the Cubs for keeping with the pack of cheap bastards blows. They're choosing to be the big spenders of the cheap bastards, not the actual big spenders we longed for.

 

Well, yes. This is a baseball problem, not exclusive to the Chicago Cubs.

 

We can complain about it and every other fan should, too. What I don't think we can do is use as it as an excuse if our team blows, because we aren't a team like the Pirates who are spending $100 million less than the top spenders.

[squally1313]

The Cubs ownership is cheap just as much as every other ownership in baseball is cheap. Maybe more so. The players are getting less and less of the share of total revenue. We all know that, and I think everyone did their share of complaining during the offseason. The fact that the Ricketts are pretty clearly a garbage family certainly doesn't help.

 

However, I think the point the 'bootlickers' are trying to make is that the Cubs opening day payroll was $80m more than the Brewers. For us to complain that the Ricketts being cheap is the main thing holding us back from being better than the Brewers rings a little false. Yes, it would be great to have Harper and Kimbrel on the roster, especially because we all know the Cubs can pretty easily afford both. But it's certainly not a necessity to compete in this division.

 

That being said, as Cubswin and soccer have pointed out, the Cubs have outplayed the Brewers, and I expect them to continue to do so, either with this roster as is or with whatever additions they can find.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

However, I think the point the 'bootlickers' are trying to make is that the Cubs opening day payroll was $80m more than the Brewers. For us to complain that the Ricketts being cheap is the main thing holding us back from being better than the Brewers rings a little false. Yes, it would be great to have Harper and Kimbrel on the roster, especially because we all know the Cubs can pretty easily afford both. But it's certainly not a necessity to compete in this division.

 

This is right squally, at least for me. I'm not just doing a good enough job articulating it.

 

I live in Brewers Country, and it sucks. And if I'm having a discussion among a bunch of their fans today, I can't come at them with "You guys blow. If my team spent more money we'd be way ahead of you right now."

 

I need a better argument.

[soccer10k]

However, I think the point the 'bootlickers' are trying to make is that the Cubs opening day payroll was $80m more than the Brewers. For us to complain that the Ricketts being cheap is the main thing holding us back from being better than the Brewers rings a little false. Yes, it would be great to have Harper and Kimbrel on the roster, especially because we all know the Cubs can pretty easily afford both. But it's certainly not a necessity to compete in this division.

 

This is right squally, at least for me. I'm not just doing a good enough job articulating it.

 

I live in Brewers Country, and it sucks. And if I'm having a discussion among a bunch of their fans today, I can't come at them with "You guys blow. If my team spent more money we'd be way ahead of you right now."

 

I need a better argument.

 

What’s your favorite Brewers championship team?

 

That should end the discussion.

 

Or tell them the Cubs have made the playoffs more in the last 4 years than the Brewers have in the last 35.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

However, I think the point the 'bootlickers' are trying to make is that the Cubs opening day payroll was $80m more than the Brewers. For us to complain that the Ricketts being cheap is the main thing holding us back from being better than the Brewers rings a little false. Yes, it would be great to have Harper and Kimbrel on the roster, especially because we all know the Cubs can pretty easily afford both. But it's certainly not a necessity to compete in this division.

 

This is right squally, at least for me. I'm not just doing a good enough job articulating it.

 

I live in Brewers Country, and it sucks. And if I'm having a discussion among a bunch of their fans today, I can't come at them with "You guys blow. If my team spent more money we'd be way ahead of you right now."

 

I need a better argument.

 

What’s your favorite Brewers championship team?

 

That should end the discussion.

 

Or tell them the Cubs have made the playoffs more in the last 4 years than the Brewers have in the last 35.

 

Haha. Yeah.

 

What's funny, based on this larger discussion we are having, is that they always counter that we bought that title or that "It must be easy when you spend all that money."

 

I'm always prepared to say that we won the WS based on trades and draft picks, which is mostly accurate even though we had the fourth-highest payroll that season.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't care what the Cubs' payroll is compared to any other team; I want my team to use the assets they have to get better. If that means spending more on top of want they're already spending (especially when you're in an offseason where you have minimal trade assets of value, or ones you're willing to part with), then I want them to use their considerable resources to spend more. I don't care if they already have the highest payroll, or how much more they spent than another team in the division; use the money to try and get better. It means diddly squat how their payroll compares to anyone else.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Yeah, I now realize we are having two different conversations.

 

I love your idea Sofa. Never going to happen, but love it.

[CyHawk_Cub]

The "among the tallest midgets" argument continues to be the most ridiculous residual defense of a group of billionaires. Those who want to keep using it: get over it. You won't be joining their club.

[The_Achiever]

I need the taste from this game out of my mouth asap. We better roll dey asses tonight.

[squally1313]

No one is using that argument to defend the owners. I could spend an hour listing things to blame the Ricketts for. Using their dishonestly imposed budget as an excuse for why aren't beating the Brewers by more than what we are is glossing over some real issues with how this team was put together, and how some of the players (and management) have been performing. Yes, we all hate the Ricketts. Yes, they should be spending more money. But why is a team with a $200m payroll potentially struggling to fend off a team with a $120m payroll? Would it help if our payroll was $250m? Most likely. But the issues go beyond the ownership group, and I think it's more constructive to discuss how to fix those.

[Sammy Sofa]

No one is using that argument to defend the owners. I could spend an hour listing things to blame the Ricketts for. Using their dishonestly imposed budget as an excuse for why aren't beating the Brewers by more than what we are is glossing over some real issues with how this team was put together, and how some of the players (and management) have been performing. Yes, we all hate the Ricketts. Yes, they should be spending more money. But why is a team with a $200m payroll potentially struggling to fend off a team with a $120m payroll? Would it help if our payroll was $250m? Most likely. But the issues go beyond the ownership group, and I think it's more constructive to discuss how to fix those.

 

True, though this seems like the epitome of the "why not both?" meme.

[squally1313]

No one is using that argument to defend the owners. I could spend an hour listing things to blame the Ricketts for. Using their dishonestly imposed budget as an excuse for why aren't beating the Brewers by more than what we are is glossing over some real issues with how this team was put together, and how some of the players (and management) have been performing. Yes, we all hate the Ricketts. Yes, they should be spending more money. But why is a team with a $200m payroll potentially struggling to fend off a team with a $120m payroll? Would it help if our payroll was $250m? Most likely. But the issues go beyond the ownership group, and I think it's more constructive to discuss how to fix those.

 

True, though this seems like the epitome of the "why not both?" meme.

 

Absolutely. But spending all your energy being mad at Ricketts and their budget, when it's pretty abundantly clear that the owners got together and decided to do this all together, is getting pretty close to tilting at windmills (or maybe I just like using that phrase). They are garbage people that are falsely crying poor. Them and pretty much every other ownership group in baseball.

 

We only 'needed' Harper because Heyward has been a bust, Schwarber hasn't developed, Almora is your classic try-hard player who isn't actually good, etc. We 'need' Kimbrel because we slotted Morrow in as a key piece of this bullpen (which is very dumb), and we've spent the last 5 years drafting pitchers in bulk precisely to take care of this problem (and the ever present lack of rotation depth), which hasn't helped us at all, and because our other big FA signing Darvish has thrown all of 98 innings in 18 starts for us.

 

I put 'need' in quotes because it's May 21, and we have the second best record/run differential in the NL. I'd rather debate the magnitude of the problems, and the potential solutions to those problems beyond "take money from Tom Ricketts". Would that be the most satisfying option? Probably. But it's pretty clear it's not going to happen.

[Sammy Sofa]

Ah, but I don't subscribe to the human battery theory.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Ah, but I don't subscribe to the human battery theory.

 

I think your cause is noble. The one thing I can't figure out is why you help put money in the evil empire's pockets then. Why are you paying money to actually go to games and give Ricketts what he wants? I know you've remarked you have been to games this season or are going to be going. If I'm mistaken, I apologize.

[squally1313]

There is a gif response that is just out of my grasp right now, but trust me...no one has ever doubted your persistence around these parts.

[Sammy Sofa]

Ah, but I don't subscribe to the human battery theory.

 

I think your cause is noble. The one thing I can't figure out is why you help put money in the evil empire's pockets then. Why are you paying money to actually go to games and give Ricketts what he wants? I know you've remarked you have been to games this season or are going to be going. If I'm mistaken, I apologize.

 

Nope, I've been to a game this season, but I didn't buy the tickets, and they weren't bought for me; they were part of someone else's season ticket package that would have been bought regardless of whether I went to any games or not.

 

I don't buy any official MLB merch, I don't spend any money in the parks, and I don't subscribe to their streaming service. I maintain it is very, VERY easy to follow the team, watch/listen to the games, and even go to the games, and not give one damn dime to them.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Ah, but I don't subscribe to the human battery theory.

 

I think your cause is noble. The one thing I can't figure out is why you help put money in the evil empire's pockets then. Why are you paying money to actually go to games and give Ricketts what he wants? I know you've remarked you have been to games this season or are going to be going. If I'm mistaken, I apologize.

 

Nope, I've been to a game this season, but I didn't buy the tickets, and they weren't bought for me; they were part of someone else's season ticket package that would have been bought regardless of whether I went to any games or not.

 

I don't buy any official MLB merch, I don't spend any money in the parks, and I don't subscribe to their streaming service. I maintain it is very, VERY easy to follow the team, watch/listen to the games, and even go to the games, and not give one damn dime to them.

 

I respect this. Good answer.

 

Just as long as you didn't buy any food and/or drink while at the game, damn it.

[Sammy Sofa]

 

I think your cause is noble. The one thing I can't figure out is why you help put money in the evil empire's pockets then. Why are you paying money to actually go to games and give Ricketts what he wants? I know you've remarked you have been to games this season or are going to be going. If I'm mistaken, I apologize.

 

Nope, I've been to a game this season, but I didn't buy the tickets, and they weren't bought for me; they were part of someone else's season ticket package that would have been bought regardless of whether I went to any games or not.

 

I don't buy any official MLB merch, I don't spend any money in the parks, and I don't subscribe to their streaming service. I maintain it is very, VERY easy to follow the team, watch/listen to the games, and even go to the games, and not give one damn dime to them.

 

I respect this. Good answer.

 

Just as long as you didn't buy any food and/or drink while at the game, damn it.

 

Done and done (though I started doing that by default years ago via a combination of usually being broke and/or unable to eat/drink garbage). As with life in general, I just sit there and take up space.