Red (Lodolo) vs Cubs (Brown): 6/2/24, 1:20pm

[Geographyhater8888]

On 6/6/2024 at 9:29 AM, 1908_Cubs said:

It does feel like it's more of a "right now" plan. I'm simply guessing here, but I think Jed Hoyer looks up to someone like Andrew Friedman. I know the Dodgers have blown the doors off monetarily the last couple of years, but before the Freeman contact, much of how the Dodgers operated relied around:

1. Prospects, prospects and prospects - being smart at drafting and developing, especially arms. 
2. Filling out an MLB roster that forced those prospects to take a job not just be given one.
3. Finally, adding the big, big piece in Mookie via trade

They did FA shopping, and he was gifted some guys like Kershaw, but Friedman with the Dodgers didn't blow the doors off with aggressive adds via trade or free agency right away. They used the money they had to buy players but never really the 6+ year type or the huge trade. Go back and look at like, the 2016 Dodgers or something. They had good players but it was built on Pederson (prospect), Turner (reclamation), Seager (prospect), Adrian Gonzalez (trade - ate the contract), Utley (older), Kerhsaw (former-prospect), Puig (prospect), Maeda (mid-level FA), Urias (prospect)...

This feels like the path Hoyer would like to take. The Cubs are a little behind where the Dodgers were in 2016, I think. Maybe a year off or so, with the prospects. But I'd assume this is the strategy when you take a broad spectrum look at how the Cubs have operated. They've drafted. They've gone after mid-level FA's. They even kind of handle the MilB and prospects in a similar way. It's hard to replicate the best; I think it's almost inarguable that Andrew Friedman is the best at what he does right now. We'll see if Hoyer has the ability to make his own Mookie Betts deal sometime. That was the real "take off" of the Dodgers from "really good team" to "powerhouse", IMO.

That’s the only path that logically makes sense. Difference is those Dodgers teams still had elite players outsourced from other organizations like Adrian Gonzalez, Greinkies and previously Hanley Ramirez, sort of win now players mixed in with young farm talent. They were built for now and the future.

 

difference between Theo and Jed is Jed loves holding on to his expensive role players while Theo would flip the Taillons, Stromans, Happs and Bellingers for farm talent while Jed tries building around these guys instead building around elite bats with these complimentary pieces.

This half a$$ed approach accomplishes nothing but mediocrity while doing nothing to help with the future fetching prospects for these expendable pieces.

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

That’s the only path that logically makes sense. Difference is those Dodgers teams still had elite players outsourced from other organizations like Adrian Gonzalez, Greinkies and previously Hanley Ramirez, sort of win now players mixed in with young farm talent. They were built for now and the future.

 

difference between Theo and Jed is Jed loves holding on to his expensive role players while Theo would flip the Taillons, Stromans, Happs and Bellingers for farm talent while Jed tries building around these guys instead building around elite bats with these complimentary pieces.

This half a$$ed approach accomplishes nothing but mediocrity while doing nothing to help with the future fetching prospects for these expendable pieces.

I mean. I wouldn't call Adrian Gonzalez "elite" at that stage. He had a decent run of being worth three wins but that's just...pretty good. By 2016, Gonzalez was a 1 win player. Gonzalez, as well, was acquired well before Andrew Friedman; he was acquired in the summer of 2012, and Andrew Friedman was hired as the VP of the Dodgers in October of 2014. Hanley Ramirez, as well, as acquired by the Dodgers in 2013 and his final season was 2014, so Friedman had nothing to do with Ramirez as Ramirez was a free agent that winter and the Dodgers did not resign him. Zack Greinke was on the Dodgers in 2015 under Andrew Friedman, but he was acquired in 2013. It was Andrew Friedman who did not retain Greinke after 2015, his first in LA. I don't think any of those players are good examples of the plan that Hoyer is following; I believe his blueprint is not "Dodgers every year" but specifically "Dodgers under Friedman". 

I would also not say that's true, that Jed keeps his expensive "role players". Hoyer moved on from plenty of players at the deadline, including players with control (i.e. Kimbrel). As such, Happ has a NTC and has been the 7th best LF in baseball the last two years combined, Taillon is in year two of his contract (when exactly do you think he was going to be traded? Last year when he was hurt and mediocre? Who do you think wants the last 2.5 years of that deal desperately now?). Stroman was hurt last year at the deadline and the Cubs were two games over .500 - they were going to trade a hurt pitcher while they had a winning record? 

I really am not trying to be a jerk here, but this feels pretty uninformed. You've highlighted three players on the Dodgers who were acquired before Andrew Friedman and complained about Hoyer not flipping players who were next to impossible to flip, either because of circumstance or contract. Hoyer has some faults, and trust me, if we need to, I'll go on my gripes with him; his ability to enact a Friedman-style-plan really hasn't gone as well as I'm sure any of us would have hoped (and I think his seat should be warm at this stage of the plan if the Cubs cannot come out of this tailspin right now). But I don't think much in your post here is the reason why.

[Geographyhater8888]

14 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I mean. I wouldn't call Adrian Gonzalez "elite" at that stage. He had a decent run of being worth three wins but that's just...pretty good. By 2016, Gonzalez was a 1 win player. Gonzalez, as well, was acquired well before Andrew Friedman; he was acquired in the summer of 2012, and Andrew Friedman was hired as the VP of the Dodgers in October of 2014. Hanley Ramirez, as well, as acquired by the Dodgers in 2013 and his final season was 2014, so Friedman had nothing to do with Ramirez as Ramirez was a free agent that winter and the Dodgers did not resign him. Zack Greinke was on the Dodgers in 2015 under Andrew Friedman, but he was acquired in 2013. It was Andrew Friedman who did not retain Greinke after 2015, his first in LA. I don't think any of those players are good examples of the plan that Hoyer is following; I believe his blueprint is not "Dodgers every year" but specifically "Dodgers under Friedman". 

I would also not say that's true, that Jed keeps his expensive "role players". Hoyer moved on from plenty of players at the deadline, including players with control (i.e. Kimbrel). As such, Happ has a NTC and has been the 7th best LF in baseball the last two years combined, Taillon is in year two of his contract (when exactly do you think he was going to be traded? Last year when he was hurt and mediocre? Who do you think wants the last 2.5 years of that deal desperately now?). Stroman was hurt last year at the deadline and the Cubs were two games over .500 - they were going to trade a hurt pitcher while they had a winning record? 

I really am not trying to be a jerk here, but this feels pretty uninformed. You've highlighted three players on the Dodgers who were acquired before Andrew Friedman and complained about Hoyer not flipping players who were next to impossible to flip, either because of circumstance or contract. Hoyer has some faults, and trust me, if we need to, I'll go on my gripes with him; his ability to enact a Friedman-style-plan really hasn't gone as well as I'm sure any of us would have hoped (and I think his seat should be warm at this stage of the plan if the Cubs cannot come out of this tailspin right now). But I don't think much in your post here is the reason why.

The conclusion to draw from this is Jed is no Friedman or Theo and his qualifications are being Theos right hand man. 
 

the 2021 sell off was very needed. Now he’s building his own roster and has spent $240 million on an aspirational mediocre roster with a little give and take a manager who people are treating as a 7 WAR player based off last season because of Ross’s pen management.

 

im open to critique. I don’t take it personally. He’s just built a directionless team while likely copying Theos format and that’s really the only way to make sense of it.

[Jason Ross]

4 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

The conclusion to draw from this is Jed is no Friedman or Theo and his qualifications are being Theos right hand man. 
 

the 2021 sell off was very needed. Now he’s building his own roster and has spent $240 million on an aspirational mediocre roster with a little give and take a manager who people are treating as a 7 WAR player based off last season because of Ross’s pen management.

 

im open to critique. I don’t take it personally. He’s just built a directionless team while likely copying Theos format and that’s really the only way to make sense of it.

I think Hoyer was hired because the Cubs were familiar with him and on paper, his ability to articulate the plan made both business sense to an owner who seems adverse to spending above the LT and looks solid on paper; following the Friedman model *sounds* good. I also agree, to date, he's well below Friedman (though you can argue just about every exec is). He's not Theo good either, but I think he's very different than Theo too.

I think there's still hope for Hoyer. The Cubs aren't dead today and with some positive variance (injury and on the field) and with a strong cast of prospects (to either call up or trade) Hoyer has tools at his disposal. So while I think it's fair to point out disappointment and that he *really* has to get it right this summer, that there's still enough there for hope to see the Cubs on a solid path under Jed. I remain hopeful, just...cautiously hopeful. Much more cautiously than in the past.