Spring Training Moves/Transactions Thread

[imb]

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Dr Brule will always get a reaction from me

[CubinNY]

57 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Rotfl this sounds familiar. From MLBTR:

After two half decade rebuilds under Ricketts, to applause ofc hail payroll efficiency big brained stuff (not that it can ever be efficient enough), the league:

- has 10% of the manager’s jobs going to Theo era Cubs (Martinez, Hyde, Venable)

- uses the rhetoric of Ricketts and Cubs

- has two more Ricketts era Presidents of Baseball/Chief Baseball Officers/other nonsense titles in this dollhouse reality (Breslow, Harris) 

I’m pretty sure the Cubs are going to be a Marquee franchise during 2.0, but also maybe more sure 2.0 is basically a nightmare era for anyone not a billionaire (granted in such a sycophantic, wealth worshipping, fascistic/corporatized culture many will whistle along until the heart disease kicks in the 40s or whatever the declining lifespan is at)

Anyone want to translate?

[imb]

12 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

??

 

accurate translation

[mul21]

16 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

Anyone want to translate?

He's lamenting the Cubification (Rickettsing?) of MLB and basically saying that they way they do business is the way of the future.  His inability to use words aside, it's probably accurate and definitely gross.  The organization does seem to have an outsized influence on the way things are being modeled in the rest of the non-NY/LA realm of MLB.

[CubinNY]

2 minutes ago, mul21 said:

He's lamenting the Cubification (Rickettsing?) of MLB and basically saying that they way they do business is the way of the future.  His inability to use words aside, it's probably accurate and definitely gross.  The organization does seem to have an outsized influence on the way things are being modeled in the rest of the non-NY/LA realm of MLB.

But the Atlanta guy said they are going over the CBT and that they still have money to pay for more in the future, so I guess I don't get it. 

[imb]

5 minutes ago, mul21 said:

He's lamenting the Cubification (Rickettsing?) of MLB and basically saying that they way they do business is the way of the future.  His inability to use words aside, it's probably accurate and definitely gross.  The organization does seem to have an outsized influence on the way things are being modeled in the rest of the non-NY/LA realm of MLB.

i dont know if league is taking their lead as much as very few owners actually care about going all out to win when it mostly just hurts their bottom line. they'll cost cut and penny pinch their way to 85 wins and lots of profit

[mul21]

12 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

But the Atlanta guy said they are going over the CBT and that they still have money to pay for more in the future, so I guess I don't get it. 

The reference to 3 managers and 2 GM/POBO roles being held by former Cubs employees was the key part there.  As IMB says above, owners mostly aren't interested in winning if it costs money because that cuts into profits.  There will of course be exceptions but it's not going to be the norm.

[CubinNY]

I agree with IMB, but it's always been that way. So that is nothing new. Wrigley traded Bill Madlock because he didn't want to give him a raise after he won the batting title. In 1977, eight year old me cried so hard when I found out. He was my favorite player. 

Things were a lot different then they are now. They used to close the upper deck of Wrigley on week day games. It wasn't until cable TV  and Harry that Wrigley became a destination.

Edited February 28, 2025 by CubinNY

[imb]

22 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

I agree with IMB, but it's always been that way. So that is nothing new. Wrigley traded Bill Madlock because he didn't want to give him a raise after he won the batting title. In 1977, eight year old me cried so hard when I found out. He was my favorite player. 

Things were a lot different then they are now. They used to close the upper deck of Wrigley on week day games. It wasn't until cable TV  and Harry that Wrigley became a destination.

yeah but the margins are slimmer today and the profit routes are much larger. owners arent rich fans anymore, they're businessmen trying to fund their other horsefeathers with guaranteed baseball profits

[imb]

every tom post

 

[imb]

see above

[CubinNY]

Jon Greenberg wrote an interesting piece about the Sox minority owner upping his stake in the club. He also briefly compared them to the Cubs. The part I found interesting is below 
 

Quote

It’s important to remember Tom Ricketts is not a billionaire. His father, Joe, is, but Joe has no role in running or funding the team. He just helped his kids buy it. And Tom seems content to run the Cubs with the goal of winning the NL Central, not competing for more World Series. At least in baseball’s current economic climate.

I’he seems to be insinuating Pa Ricketts helped the kids buy the Cubs and he’s not helping to maintain the Cubs and that they’re not billionaires, Pa Ricketts is. 
 

I always assumed it was Pa Ricketts team but he’s radioactive so the kids are the face.  
 

Anyway, it could explain the shallow pockets or be an excuse. 

[Crusader]

55 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

Jon Greenberg wrote an interesting piece about the Sox minority owner upping his stake in the club. He also briefly compared them to the Cubs. The part I found interesting is below 
 

I’he seems to be insinuating Pa Ricketts helped the kids buy the Cubs and he’s not helping to maintain the Cubs and that they’re not billionaires, Pa Ricketts is. 
 

I always assumed it was Pa Ricketts team but he’s radioactive so the kids are the face.  
 

Anyway, it could explain the shallow pockets or be an excuse. 

It wouldn’t explain how they seemingly have no limits when it comes to buying up property and building around Wrigley if their dad wasn’t involved.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I agree, I for one am sick of CubinNY's constant fawning over the Ricketts family and stumping for ownership

[Derwood]