Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Interesting and Controversial Analogy

Guest

By Guest,
in Chicago Cubs Talk

 Share
Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Post Count Padder said:

I remember when I posted on this message board when I was in high school and thought I was super smart. Now I'm 38 and still posting on this message board and realize I am not THAT smart.

Participate in discussions, have fun, don't try to "outsmart" everyone on purpose in every conversation. No poster who has done that ever stuck around and I've seen many in the last two decades. 

Welcome to the forum,

It seems like a common theme for everyone.

Thanks, dude!

I wish there was a "fist bump" reaction.

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

I haven’t been visiting the board a ton lately. I’m not sure if this means I should visit more or less. 

I just joined yesterday, so it's not been going on a while. I mean, maybe just be on here the same.

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, ToolDRT said:

Genuine. I still think you might be trolling, but either way I’m enjoying reading your posts. But I watch Frasier every night before bed and am pretentious myself so…

Frasier? Is that a sitcom?

Granted, if I was a troll, I would be big and tall. I would have a face--ugly beyond comprehension--and would only make unintelligible grunts instead of cohesive conversation.

So I can assure you that I'm not a troll. 😀

Funniness aside, I am redeveloping my baseball passion and am trying to get into the stats aspect of this. I want to consider baseball through the lens of economics--supply and demand, deadweight loss, etc. I have a very scientific approach to it.

Generally, regardless of the forum, from one day to a month, people will realize I'm not here just for the fun of it.

To start things off, what do you believe about the average age of the team? How do you want to maximize possibilities now and in the future? When do you logistically see a World Series win?

@Jason RossI guess I could ask your thoughts as well, as you tend to develop decent responses.

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Thurman Merman said:

There's like a 25% chance this is a tree bit, but let's go with it for now. This place is always more fun with interesting characters.

I guess you could say I'm interesting.

Usually, on the third day of any new forum I join, I do a posting spree. So you'll see a lot more of my baseball side then.

Have an awesome day!

ToolDRT Draft Eligible

ToolDRT

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, The Cubs Dude said:

Frasier? Is that a sitcom?

Granted, if I was a troll, I would be big and tall. I would have a face--ugly beyond comprehension--and would only make unintelligible grunts instead of cohesive conversation.

So I can assure you that I'm not a troll. 😀

Funniness aside, I am redeveloping my baseball passion and am trying to get into the stats aspect of this. I want to consider baseball through the lens of economics--supply and demand, deadweight loss, etc. I have a very scientific approach to it.

Generally, regardless of the forum, from one day to a month, people will realize I'm not here just for the fun of it.

To start things off, what do you believe about the average age of the team? How do you want to maximize possibilities now and in the future? When do you logistically see a World Series win?

@Jason RossI guess I could ask your thoughts as well, as you tend to develop decent responses.

Yeah, I guess for age it’s contextual. I’m not worried about where we were as far as average team age last year comparatively. We did have some older bullpen guys that may have skewed it a little, as well as Justin Turner. But we have plenty of younger guys as well. We weren’t made up of dinosaurs by any stretch of the imagination. If your core is all out of their prime, not producing and you have no farm system then that’s one thing. But we’re not even close to that. 
 

If you’re talking about per player as in peak? Obviously you’d always like to buy guys slightly before they hit their prime or during it. But it’s important to look at the player as a whole as well. Guys age differently. Depends on many different factors. If you’re strictly paying for speed that will age differently than their power profile. For the cubs specifically, I think they need to be less concerned about value and more concerned with using the advantages they have. We’re not a small market team. We have to use our top asset which is our financial upside. 
 

Kyle Tucker should be a good example of that. You give him a 10 year deal and the odds are you’re gonna be hating that deal in year 9 or 10. But when you have the financial resources we have it shouldn’t matter. We can have a contract age poorly and still spend on other players. Thats the maddening thing about the combination of Ricketts and Hoyer. Ricketts is a cheap liar. And Hoyer is obsessed with getting value out of every dollar spent. 
 

As to win a World Series? It’s a crapshoot once you get in. We could fall into a win next year. Having said that, I think you should try and field the best regular season team every year and hope the law of averages hit during the playoffs. I don’t think any teams goal should be to field an 88 win wild card team and see what happens come postseason time. I think every team should be aiming to win the division. Control what you can control and roll the dice after that. 
 

Welcome to the forum! 

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, ToolDRT said:

Yeah, I guess for age it’s contextual. I’m not worried about where we were as far as average team age last year comparatively. We did have some older bullpen guys that may have skewed it a little, as well as Justin Turner. But we have plenty of younger guys as well. We weren’t made up of dinosaurs by any stretch of the imagination. If your core is all out of their prime, not producing and you have no farm system then that’s one thing. But we’re not even close to that. 
 

If you’re talking about per player as in peak? Obviously you’d always like to buy guys slightly before they hit their prime or during it. But it’s important to look at the player as a whole as well. Guys age differently. Depends on many different factors. If you’re strictly paying for speed that will age differently than their power profile. For the cubs specifically, I think they need to be less concerned about value and more concerned with using the advantages they have. We’re not a small market team. We have to use our top asset which is our financial upside. 
 

Kyle Tucker should be a good example of that. You give him a 10 year deal and the odds are you’re gonna be hating that deal in year 9 or 10. But when you have the financial resources we have it shouldn’t matter. We can have a contract age poorly and still spend on other players. Thats the maddening thing about the combination of Ricketts and Hoyer. Ricketts is a cheap liar. And Hoyer is obsessed with getting value out of every dollar spent. 
 

As to win a World Series? It’s a crapshoot once you get in. We could fall into a win next year. Having said that, I think you should try and field the best regular season team every year and hope the law of averages hit during the playoffs. I don’t think any teams goal should be to field an 88 win wild card team and see what happens come postseason time. I think every team should be aiming to win the division. Control what you can control and roll the dice after that. 
 

Welcome to the forum! 

Thank you!

Honestly, I appreciate the longevity of the response. It's true that our average age problems should be contextualized, and that our prime players are on the younger side. What worries me are the trades at this point and the Hoyer/Ricketts dynamic that you have just mentioned.

I do agree that our financial situations are generally advantageous, and that we can have a contract age poorly as you mentioned. The thing is, however, that Ricketts and Hoyer, being thrifty guys and all, have a large, greedy problem--every dollar is obsessive to them.

I do have to disagree with you on one point--that we should unilaterally use our financial advantages and not be as concerned about value. That implies that you will have to trade off some advantages of player value for the financial greediness of the system. And I am firmly anti-system. Ultimately, here is an economic analogy for value and financial assets:

If you've heard of a PPF (Production Possibility Frontier) before, this downward-sloping line implies that there are trade-offs between two goods. If we have more of a a comparative advantage than Team X (let's say the Brewers or something like that) in financial assets, it would make sense to specialize in that. However, we cannot unilaterally produce decisions solely based on the financial assets. Although there should be less emphasis, we should also consider player value to an extent and be strategic in trades while asking the following questions: 1) Is the player a pitcher? (That's important at this point.) 2) How much streakiness does this pitcher have in terms of strikeouts? (To ensure consistency.) 3) What is the age of the player? (Least priority, but still important.)

So we can use our financial resources to our advantage, but we should still emphasize value a little more than we have at this point. In economic terms, this is a "return to quality." If the team experiences a Great Recession--where their players become less powerful or have less value than originally thought--that flight to quality would be detrimental to team composition.

Derwood GOAT

Derwood

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

Scientifically speaking, what percentage of our roster should be featured speakers at the Turning Point USA America First 2025 conference?

  • Haha 3
Tryptamine South Bend Cubs

Tryptamine

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Bobson Dugnutt said:

100% AI, right? I feel like I’m losing my mind reading these posts.

Either AI or the most perfect example of pseudo intellectualism you will ever find. Perfect to the point that there should be a case study.

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

Either AI or the most perfect example of pseudo intellectualism you will ever find. Perfect to the point that there should be a case study.

It's not AI. If you take the time or quality to review some of my other posts which are on-topic, you would redact that statement.

This is why I'm leaving. And there need be no case study about it. Maybe there should be a case study on this fractured fan base.

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, javy knows my name said:

Using longevity to mean length is my favorite, not even chatgpt is that stupid

Sorry, maybe I made one error, but you shouldn't be focusing on just that. Arguing about what/who I am is useless. That's why I'm leaving.

You happy?

EVERY SINGLE PERSON I've met--and I'm talking every single one, without any exaggerations--has given me some sort of hostility, lied to me, or thought I am just a robot.

©OpenAI. 2025

Edited by The Cubs Dude
Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

I wear my hats backwards because Ken Griffey Jr is the coolest human being to ever exist on a baseball field, I teach 7th and 8th grade history, and I think musicals are creepy, but I'm on a Napoleon kick (ADHD and Autism are two sides of the same coin and I got the ADHD version of neurospice) so I'll allow it. 

You're good man. Welcome. 

We are glad to have you man. Or at least I'm glad to have you. @Outshined_One was right on it; I'm a big softee. We need more people who care about the intricacies of baseball. It's a tough crowd here at times, but they're the best people. We all love baseball enough to post about it. 

And I do like you, a lot, and don't mistake that, but how you implicitly assumed something by inserting questionable content into the message is kind of unprofessional. Since you have that stuff yourself, it's understandable, but it's another one of the reasons that I want to leave.

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Bobson Dugnutt said:

Please don’t leave before telling us if you like thick onion gravy.

I've never had it. So I don't know.

Maybe one day you'll learn to be better.

See ya, dude.

Guest

Guest

Guests
Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Derwood said:

Nothing says "I'm leaving" like posting it over and over again

As usual, your comments are snobbish and pretentious. Consider 3x0=0, where 3 is the amount of the posts and 0 is their usefulness. (I got this from another user on another forum... one day.)

Instead of trying to bash new members who are trying to find a footing, you could be discussing baseball, for instance. Instead of looking at word choice, you could be looking at the content. But your condescending manners don't permit for any of that type of reflection.

If you're trying to build a fan base, you're actually destroying it. I live in Wisconsin, surrounded by Brewers fans. And I think a lot of 'em are nicer than all of you combined.

I'm "Miz"erable around here. 

Edited by The Cubs Dude
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

Become a Caretaker

  • Member Statistics

    6,793
    Total Members
    13,056
    Most Online
    Kevin OBrien
    Newest Member
    Kevin OBrien
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...