Cardinals (Pallante) vs Cubs (Peterson): 7/3/26, 3:05pm

[Jason Ross]

6 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

I just don’t like using the Brewers as an example. No one knows how they do it and evidently neither does their former GM who’s employed by Steve Cohen does either. Unless you’re Dave Dombrowski with permission from ownership to spend as much as he wants, which doesn’t always work, you’re stuck meeting half way between playoff contention while keeping an eye on 2028. 
 

Draft more pitching and stop worrying about attrition. Maybe if you had a few quality farm arms instead of blocked positional prospects, that $ spent on Maton, Milner and other number 4 starters could’ve been used on a legitimate top of the rotation pitcher. Easier said than done but it’s not like the team is crippled financially either like the Padres for example. 
 

I'll agree that the Cubs should invest more in the pitching. But blaming them for "blocked prospects" is a misnomer. The "blocked prospects" are IFA guys like Rojas who they signed half a decade ago, or players like Kevin Alcantara who were traded for in 2021. Prospects are lottery tickets that don't begin to pay off for three, four, five (or more) years in the future. And it becomes impossible to guess which ones will cash out and which won't or what your organizational needs will be when they do. A good reminder; the Cubs drafted Cade Horton top-10 and he's on the shelf with TJS. Just because you invest, doesn't mean they pay out when you want them, if they ever do at all. 

The Cubs should definitely buy more lottery tickets into arms but there's no guarantee in four years when most start to cash in that they also won't be blocked. Or that they cash out. Their current system has meant that the Cubs have taken what looked like a bottom-5 system entering the year but has it probably sitting middle pack. 

Lastly, there are more than one ways to skin a cat. Prospects, are, at the end of the day, assets. They can be used directly to play for the org or to buy known quantities. The Cubs system should pay out here in one way or another. 

[Geographyhater8888]

38 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I'll agree that the Cubs should invest more in the pitching. But blaming them for "blocked prospects" is a misnomer. The "blocked prospects" are IFA guys like Rojas who they signed half a decade ago, or players like Kevin Alcantara who were traded for in 2021. Prospects are lottery tickets that don't begin to pay off for three, four, five (or more) years in the future. And it becomes impossible to guess which ones will cash out and which won't or what your organizational needs will be when they do. A good reminder; the Cubs drafted Cade Horton top-10 and he's on the shelf with TJS. Just because you invest, doesn't mean they pay out when you want them, if they ever do at all. 

The Cubs should definitely buy more lottery tickets into arms but there's no guarantee in four years when most start to cash in that they also won't be blocked. Or that they cash out. Their current system has meant that the Cubs have taken what looked like a bottom-5 system entering the year but has it probably sitting middle pack. 

Lastly, there are more than one ways to skin a cat. Prospects, are, at the end of the day, assets. They can be used directly to play for the org or to buy known quantities. The Cubs system should pay out here in one way or another. 

There’s an imbalance of bats to arms in the farm system and that’s been an organizational philosophy since Theo was in charge (sure, Wicks, Horton and Wiggins exist). You have Palencia and veteran free agents+DFA castoffs in the bullpen. Chalk it up to bad luck or simply luck of the draw but the lack of arms are hurting the team. And injuries are apart of the equation, no denying that, but there’s a lack of internal options and neglecting them past round 2 has reared its head. There’s no guarantee that injuries would impact every single arm either.
Whether or not we like the process the results haven’t been ideal. 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Geographyhater8888

[Jason Ross]

22 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

There’s an imbalance of bats to arms in the farm system and that’s been an organizational philosophy since Theo was in charge. You have Palencia and veteran free agents+DFA castoffs in the bullpen. Chalk it up to bad luck or simply luck of the draw but the lack of arms are hurting the team. And injuries are apart of the equation, no denying that, but there’s a lack of internal options and neglecting them past round 2 has reared its head. There’s no guarantee that injuries would impact every single arm either.
Whether or not we like the process the results haven’t been ideal. 

 

Well, the results haven't been ideal for pitching. But let's also be real; where did Justin Steele, Cade Horton and Daniel Palecia come from? It hasn't been entirely barren, either. That number needs to be more, especially today, but we too often act like it's zero. And there is more coming. There are some interesting arms in the system, and I'd guess more than one will pan out in some fashion to add to the list. 

Plus, on the flip side, where did Ian Happ, PCA, Javy Baez, Willson Contreras, Michael Busch (acquired for drafted prospects), and Nico Hoerner come from? Among others (such as Matt Shaw, Pedro Ramirez, Moises Ballesteros...)

The pitching can certainly be better. But when we complain about the pitching development it also ignores how well the Cubs have done with position players. They have drafted and developed there phenomenally. So there are two sides of the coin. 

If you want the Cubs to be experts at both simultaneously, then I think that's an unfair ask. I would like it a little more balanced, but because the Cubs have spent their prospect capital on hitters, they have panned out well there. Very few teams have developed as many players as the Cubs have there, as well. 

It's probably best to look at everything holistically. Because more lottery tickets into pitching almost assuredly means their position player output is much lower, too. With no guarantee those pitching lottery tickets panned out. 

[Backtobanks]

2 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

Not going to argue he is great at his job, but you leave a lot out with going to “not good”. Since the start of the 2023 season the Cubs have won 307 games. They are 11th in baseball in wins. 1 games out of a tie for 6th. Aside from the Rays, Brewers and Orioles (whose record is really due to one great year) all the teams ahead of them have spent more money. Aside from the Brewers the next best team in the division is 25 wins behind them. While the Cubs can spend more and act like a big market his hands are tied every year to be under the LT(except, finally, this year). While you are correct that he does spend more, the rest of the division gets advantages the Cubs don’t get. Spending more only tries to balance the teams out. But when you don’t take full advantage if your advantage due to ownership, you are actually playing at a disadvantage. If you want to say the Brewers are a much better FO, I agree. Same with the Rays.  But if the bar is the Brewers than every FO with the exception of the Rays and Dodgers is bad. Jed is not the best POBO in the game. Far from it. But he is far from bad and far from the worst. Cubs can do much worse. 

Going back in time a little bit, I was always criticized for defending Jim Hendry.  Well, Jim Hendry's record with the Cubs (55%) is better than Hoyer's (54%) and that's with not counting the first 2 years when poor Jed had to rebuild. 

[Rcal10]

11 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Going back in time a little bit, I was always criticized for defending Jim Hendry.  Well, Jim Hendry's record with the Cubs (55%) is better than Hoyer's (54%) and that's with not counting the first 2 years when poor Jed had to rebuild. 

I didn’t have an issue with Hendry when he was in charge. But you are comparing him to Jed when he had different ownership and allowed him to spend freely. In fact when he signed Soriano it came from ownership that they wanted him to spend more. Rules where also way different them. Large market teams had a far greater advantage over the small markets. Unlimited spending on IFA. No real penalties for spending freely. Just different and difficult to compare the two because of different owners and different rules. 

[Geographyhater8888]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

Well, the results haven't been ideal for pitching. But let's also be real; where did Justin Steele, Cade Horton and Daniel Palecia come from? It hasn't been entirely barren, either. That number needs to be more, especially today, but we too often act like it's zero. And there is more coming. There are some interesting arms in the system, and I'd guess more than one will pan out in some fashion to add to the list. 

Plus, on the flip side, where did Ian Happ, PCA, Javy Baez, Willson Contreras, Michael Busch (acquired for drafted prospects), and Nico Hoerner come from? Among others (such as Matt Shaw, Pedro Ramirez, Moises Ballesteros...)

The pitching can certainly be better. But when we complain about the pitching development it also ignores how well the Cubs have done with position players. They have drafted and developed there phenomenally. So there are two sides of the coin. 

If you want the Cubs to be experts at both simultaneously, then I think that's an unfair ask. I would like it a little more balanced, but because the Cubs have spent their prospect capital on hitters, they have panned out well there. Very few teams have developed as many players as the Cubs have there, as well. 

It's probably best to look at everything holistically. Because more lottery tickets into pitching almost assuredly means their position player output is much lower, too. With no guarantee those pitching lottery tickets panned out. 

I don’t know where you’re getting these assumptions from about my thoughts and expectations of him as a GM. Your second paragraph and third paragraph are why I push back on the idea that he’s a bad GM. I’ve defended him. The topic is his imperfections as a GM and it’s pitching.
 

Edited 1 hour ago by Geographyhater8888