time to be sellers

[Guest]

why should this team ever be sellers? we aren't even close to violating the 60-40 rule.

 

selling now doesn't mean we get to use the money later. that just goes right into the trib. co.'s pockets.

 

btw, we aren't even close to being out of the WC race. :wink:

 

What is the 60-40 rule? :?

 

it's the mlb rule that says how much debt a club can have in relation to it's revenue (club can't have 40+% debt in relation to it's asset value). how the assets are defined is a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo that i really don't understand. the 60/40 rule is basically what caused the pittsburgh firesale...which netted us ARam for a couple low salary players since the pirates needed to dump salary.

 

basically, it is a de facto salary cap.

The "newly interpreted" 60/40 rule only counts long-term player contracts as debt. In other words, player salaries for the current season don't count against a team's debt total, only the future balance of long-term contracts. Since neither Ramiriez nor Lofton had a contract with the Pirates beyond 2003, their trade had nothing to do with the 60/40 rule and was more or less just a beaseball descision.

 

This new interpretation of debt of the 60/40 rule was cooked up by Selig around the time of the last labor negotiations. (The rule itself has been around since 1983.) While Selig claims he was merely efnorcing a rule that had previously been ignored, what he really did was change two interpretations of debt; the aforementioned long-term contracts and also any debt associated with the construction of a new stadium. (He also set the "value" of a franchise as twice it's yearly revenue for no apparent reason, but that's beside the point.) The goals of these interpretations were twofold; reduce the number of (and length of each individual) long-term player contracts and force teams seeking new stadiums to find public financing.

 

The 60/40 rule isn't a salary cap as teams can still spend $300 million on one-year player contracts and it woud be perfectly kosher as far as the 60/40 rule is concerned. While it doesn't have much of impact on the amount of a contract, it is a big reason why really long-term deals (5+ years) have beeen so rare over the past few years.

 

are you sure the 60-40 rule didn't cause the sale of ARam? I remember they had Giles, Benson, and ARam who all had huge raises the next year. Benson was originally the one tabbed to keep salary down until he was injured a little before the trading deadline and no one wanted him then...and they shipped Giles out too (not sure why). the trade was about money, not restocking the farm system or anything like that.

 

ah, i found an article from way back when:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pirates/20030724rebuildbuc2.asp

 

ARam had a contract with the Pirates for 6 million the next year and he was offloaded b/c of the 60-40 rule.

 

 

i was wrong about the 60-40 rule being a de facto salary cap. :oops:

I stand corrected on Ramirez' 2003 contract status. I could have sworn it was up after that season and he was just arbitration eligible.

[SCCubbieFAN]

We have a favorable schedule the rest of the way and have a chance to beat the teams in front of us.

 

The Cubs do not have a favorable schedule the rest of the way. IIRC, 60% of the games they have left are against teams with over a .500 w/l record including 14 more games against St. Louis and several more against Houston.

[HoopsCubs]

We have a favorable schedule the rest of the way and have a chance to beat the teams in front of us.

 

The Cubs do not have a favorable schedule the rest of the way. IIRC, 60% of the games they have left are against teams with over a .500 w/l record including 14 more games against St. Louis and several more against Houston.

 

I think the Cubs will be fine against St. Louis and Houston. I really liked what I saw this weekend from our boys. What concerns me more are those 12 games we play against the NL East teams (6 on the road against the Phillies and Mets and 6 at home against the Braves and Marlins). To me, our performance in those 12 games will tell us more about the fate of our season. Just to note: we're currently 8-14 against that division. Need to turn that around in august especially since those 12 games are head-to-head against 4 teams ahead of us in the wild card.

 

Hoops

[LoneStarCubFan]

We have a favorable schedule the rest of the way and have a chance to beat the teams in front of us.

 

The Cubs do not have a favorable schedule the rest of the way. IIRC, 60% of the games they have left are against teams with over a .500 w/l record including 14 more games against St. Louis and several more against Houston.

 

The Cubs have 11 games remaining with St. Louis but eight are in Chicago. Rolen's hurt, Walker's hurt and something's wrong with Pujols.

 

They have 10 left with Houston, seven are at the Little League park in Houston.

 

Playoff caliber ballclubs beat these teams in must-win situations. If the Cubs can't do that they don't deserve to be in the postseason anyway.

[cheapseats]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php

 

Based on the remaining schedule, the Astros are the team we should be rooting against. They have a 19% chance of winning the wild card, and the Cubs have a 17% chance.

 

I don't believe the odds include allowances for injuries that may occur in the future, and of course the odds don't take into account acquisitions that may occur before the trade deadline.

[CubinNY]

In the NL the Cubs are further out of the WC race than the Tigers are in the AL. Anyone think the Tigers have a shot at the WC?

 

Not saying the Cubs should be sellers but if the right deal came along for Hollandsworth, Walker, Burnitz, Remlinger, Perez, Willams, or a few others I would do it.

[XZero771679666304]

In the NL the Cubs are further out of the WC race than the Tigers are in the AL. Anyone think the Tigers have a shot at the WC?

 

Not saying the Cubs should be sellers but if the right deal came along for Hollandsworth, Walker, Burnitz, Remlinger, Perez, Willams, or a few others I would do it.

 

The Tigers aren't nearly as good as the teams ahead of them. The Cubs are every bit as good or better than the teams ahead of them. Two very different situations, IMO.

[Fro]

The big key is we have Nomar and Williamson coming back in the next week or two. Add a LF bat or another BP arm and this is a lot better team.

 

We have a lot of games with the Astros and the WC contenders in the east are going to beat each other up down the stretch. There's no reason we can't make a run at the Wild Card.

[LoneStarCubFan]

In the NL the Cubs are further out of the WC race than the Tigers are in the AL. Anyone think the Tigers have a shot at the WC?

 

Not saying the Cubs should be sellers but if the right deal came along for Hollandsworth, Walker, Burnitz, Remlinger, Perez, Willams, or a few others I would do it.

 

The Cubs aren't chasing the Nationals. They're chasing the Phillies, who are only a game and a half ahead. And the team to beat is actually Houston, who is only a game ahead and has to play the Cubs 10 times down the stretch. The wildcard team is coming out of the Central this year.

[Rooster]

We have a favorable schedule the rest of the way and have a chance to beat the teams in front of us.

 

The Cubs do not have a favorable schedule the rest of the way. IIRC, 60% of the games they have left are against teams with over a .500 w/l record including 14 more games against St. Louis and several more against Houston.

 

Anyone got a report on the strength of schedule for the other Wild Card contenders?

 

And, BTW, those games we have against teams over .500, many of those are the teams we're trying to gain on, so we clearly have our destiny in our hands.

 

We have at least a three game set with every team that's ahead of us in the Wild Card standings with the exception of Washington. Are those the guys we're really worried about?

[CubinNY]

 

The Cubs aren't chasing the Nationals

 

They're not? =;

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/standings?type=wild&br=5&year=2005&column=gamesBehind&order=false&st=2

[SCCubbieFAN]

The wildcard team is coming out of the Central this year.

 

That's a pretty bold prediction considering 3 out of the top 5 teams vying for the WC are in the East.8

[nolanwood]

I still can't believe there's a thread 3 pages long on the Cubs being sellers.....

 

We just left a series @ Busch where we were one double play from sweeping them....and Nomar and Williamson are returning in a couple weeks.

 

WHY WOULD WE BE SELLERS???????????

[HoopsCubs]

After seeing wood go down again and watching the so-so play of walker, Burnitz, perez, left fielders and Center Fielders, Time to start to pass out our more experienced players to the contenders and get some younger pplayers in return and have them play some signifant innings to plan next year. I would name Prior, Zambrano, aram, and Lee as the Backbone of next years team. Hang on to Hill also, the rest can go.

As usual, wait until next year.

 

I think it all depends on what your definition of selling happens to be. In my mind, a big market franchise with a solid farm system should always be buying regardless of record. In the Cubs case, they appear to be poised to repeat their September '03 and '04 (minus the last week) perfomance and make a solid run for gaining a postseason berth. The Cardinals series showed me how tough these Cubs are. A little execution by either Todd Walker or Jeromy Burnitz over the weekend would have given the Cubs a sweep. The obvious holes are in the OF and another bullpen guy - it would be nice to get two bats (a slugger and an OBP guy), and an 8th inning guy. With the big drop off in free agent talent after Giles and Damon, Hendry absolutely must make a deal for an OF either now or in the Winter. That's just a no brainer - he has the need, he will have freed up dollars. Keep in mind that it is entirely possible that all three positions will have new faces Opening Day 2006 compared to Opening Day 2005 - Hollandsworth, Patterson and Burnitz.

 

Getting an 8th inning guy means you're serious about making a run - it will have to cost us.

 

I also wouldn't mind seeing an upgrade to the bench (i.e get rid of JM).

 

 

Hoops

[hawkeyecub]

Hoops I'm sure you get sick of being asked this but do you have any inside information as to who the Cubs are targeting now?

 

To me Kearns seems like the guy that we'll end up with if we land an OF at the deadline based on everything that's been reported. Is there anyone off the radar that Jim has been working on?

[HoopsCubs]

Hoops I'm sure you get sick of being asked this but do you have any inside information as to who the Cubs are targeting now?

 

To me Kearns seems like the guy that we'll end up with if we land an OF at the deadline based on everything that's been reported. Is there anyone off the radar that Jim has been working on?

 

Not much new information, unfortunately. The Mike MacDougal trail went pretty cold as KC was asking for a boatload of prospects, and the Kearns talk was pretty much, just talk - nothing was close as of Saturday.

 

I still think Hendry will address the bullpen if the Cubs have a good week between today through Sunday. Me definition of good week: 5-2 at minimum (2 of 3 from SF, and 3 of 4 from AZ). Like you and almost everybody here, I feel Hendry must address the OF situation for 2006. If Jeromy Burnitz is brought back, I want him to be the 3rd best OF in the line-up (OPS wise). If he's #1 again, then we should consider the offseason a failure. I have faith that it will be addressed.

[CubfaninCA]

Hoops I'm sure you get sick of being asked this but do you have any inside information as to who the Cubs are targeting now?

 

To me Kearns seems like the guy that we'll end up with if we land an OF at the deadline based on everything that's been reported. Is there anyone off the radar that Jim has been working on?

 

Not much new information, unfortunately. The Mike MacDougal trail went pretty cold as KC was asking for a boatload of prospects, and the Kearns talk was pretty much, just talk - nothing was close as of Saturday.

 

I still think Hendry will address the bullpen if the Cubs have a good week between today through Sunday. Me definition of good week: 5-2 at minimum (2 of 3 from SF, and 3 of 4 from AZ). Like you and almost everybody here, I feel Hendry must address the OF situation for 2006. If Jeromy Burnitz is brought back, I want him to be the 3rd best OF in the line-up (OPS wise). If he's #1 again, then we should consider the offseason a failure. I have faith that it will be addressed.

 

If they pickup Giles in the offseason, I'll be happy. He's not a budget buster and gives the team what they need, obp. Baker will probably bat him 6th though and waste him though. :cry:

[HoopsCubs]

If they pickup Giles in the offseason, I'll be happy. He's not a budget buster and gives the team what they need, obp. Baker will probably bat him 6th though and waste him though. :cry:

 

I would love Giles on this club for a couple of years. 2 year deal would be ideal, but I can't imagine he would go for it since I suspect a few other teams (Braves) might be happy to give him 4 years.

 

I still don't understand why SD has not signed him to an extension unless Giles has secretly made it clear to Towers that he doesn't want to play for the Padres in 2006, or there is something about SDs' 2006 payroll that I'm not understanding. Personally, I think there is money to do it. Maybe they're seeing if there is any cash relief in the Ponson for Nevin deal, if Phil accepts it. Maybe they are still making their minds up on whether or not to bring back Trevor Hoffman, Ramon Hernandez and Woody Williams in 2006.

[CubfaninCA]

If they pickup Giles in the offseason, I'll be happy. He's not a budget buster and gives the team what they need, obp. Baker will probably bat him 6th though and waste him though. :cry:

 

I would love Giles on this club for a couple of years. 2 year deal would be ideal, but I can't imagine he would go for it since I suspect a few other teams (Braves) might be happy to give him 4 years.

 

I still don't understand why SD has not signed him to an extension unless Giles has secretly made it clear to Towers that he doesn't want to play for the Padres in 2006, or there is something about SDs' 2006 payroll that I'm not understanding. Personally, I think there is money to do it. Maybe they're seeing if there is any cash relief in the Ponson for Nevin deal, if Phil accepts it. Maybe they are still making their minds up on whether or not to bring back Trevor Hoffman, Ramon Hernandez and Woody Williams in 2006.

 

Well it seems they're trying to find room for Nady and the Nevin trade could really help them restructure. Perhaps they've been thinking of letting Giles walk w/out a fight and just replace him w/ Nady in rf.??

 

I just don't see the Pads offering Giles a big deal. 3 years w/ an optionfor a 4th could get him in Chicago. Would love to see him stacked w/ Lee and ARam. He doesn't have near the support in SD.

[LoneStarCubFan]

 

The Cubs aren't chasing the Nationals

 

They're not? =;

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/standings?type=wild&br=5&year=2005&column=gamesBehind&order=false&st=2

 

Don't care what the standings say. The Nats are crashing and burning. The Cubs don't need to chase them. They just need to step aside so they don't get hit on the head as Washington free falls down the standings. Houston and the Cubs will decide the wild card. They're in better shape than NY, Philly and Florida.

[biittner77]

Hoops I'm sure you get sick of being asked this but do you have any inside information as to who the Cubs are targeting now?

 

To me Kearns seems like the guy that we'll end up with if we land an OF at the deadline based on everything that's been reported. Is there anyone off the radar that Jim has been working on?

 

Not much new information, unfortunately. The Mike MacDougal trail went pretty cold as KC was asking for a boatload of prospects, and the Kearns talk was pretty much, just talk - nothing was close as of Saturday.

 

I still think Hendry will address the bullpen if the Cubs have a good week between today through Sunday. Me definition of good week: 5-2 at minimum (2 of 3 from SF, and 3 of 4 from AZ). Like you and almost everybody here, I feel Hendry must address the OF situation for 2006. If Jeromy Burnitz is brought back, I want him to be the 3rd best OF in the line-up (OPS wise). If he's #1 again, then we should consider the offseason a failure. I have faith that it will be addressed.

 

 

Hoops,

 

Given the Cubs long list of Rule 5 eligibles I can't help thinking that a deal will come sooner rather than during the offseason. Particularly since Hill and Greenberg have already been added it will be a crowded 40 man roster once the injury exemptions come back.

[HoopsCubs]

Hoops I'm sure you get sick of being asked this but do you have any inside information as to who the Cubs are targeting now?

 

To me Kearns seems like the guy that we'll end up with if we land an OF at the deadline based on everything that's been reported. Is there anyone off the radar that Jim has been working on?

 

Not much new information, unfortunately. The Mike MacDougal trail went pretty cold as KC was asking for a boatload of prospects, and the Kearns talk was pretty much, just talk - nothing was close as of Saturday.

 

I still think Hendry will address the bullpen if the Cubs have a good week between today through Sunday. Me definition of good week: 5-2 at minimum (2 of 3 from SF, and 3 of 4 from AZ). Like you and almost everybody here, I feel Hendry must address the OF situation for 2006. If Jeromy Burnitz is brought back, I want him to be the 3rd best OF in the line-up (OPS wise). If he's #1 again, then we should consider the offseason a failure. I have faith that it will be addressed.

 

 

Hoops,

 

Given the Cubs long list of Rule 5 eligibles I can't help thinking that a deal will come sooner rather than during the offseason. Particularly since Hill and Greenberg have already been added it will be a crowded 40 man roster once the injury exemptions come back.

 

I'm with you. I get the sense that a deal is going to happen very soon.

[biittner77]

Looking at the Rule 5 list, Pie obviously gets protected. Hill, Murton and Greenberg have already been added to the 40 man roster.

 

Pitchers at risk:

Brownlie: he's close enough to take a chance on

Marshall: on talent if nothing else- I'd hope the Cubs protect him though

Pignatello: because he's LH

 

Position players:

Bacon: seems like he'd be easy to hide on a 25 man roster given his speed

Sing: having another good year

Dopirak: too far away?

Fox: haven't kept up with him

 

This doesn't even count other guys like Ryu, Nolasco, Marmol O'Malley etal.

 

Few of these guys by themselves bring much in return but the right package could bring a key element.

[CubFanPhilly]

Anyone got a report on the strength of schedule for the other Wild Card contenders?

 

PLAYOFF RACE 07/24/05
                          Games Remaining - (Contenders)     | TOTAL V.  TOTAL V.                     
Div. Leaders   W-L  GB-WC  ATL CHI FLA HOU NY PHL SD STL WAS  | CONTEND   NON-CONTEND
St. Louis     62-36         3  11   7   8   3   0  3   X   3  |    38        26
Atlanta       55-44   -     X   3   6   0   6  11  3   3  11  |    43        20
San Diego     50-49         3   0   3   3   3   3  X   3   6  |    24        40
                                                             |
Wildcard Race                                                 |
Washington    55-44        11   0  10   3   9  10  6   3   X  |    52        11
Philadelphia  52-47  3.0   11   3   6   6   9   X  3   0  10  |    48        15
Houston       51-47  3.5    0  10   3   X   4   6  3   8   3  |    37        27 
New York      51-47  3.5    6   3   6   4   X   9  3   3   9  |    42        22
Florida       49-47  4.5    6   3   X   3   6   6  3   7  10  |    44        22
Chicago       50-48  4.5    3   X   3  10   3   3  0  11   0  |    33        31 
______________________________________________________________|
Totals                     43  33  44  37  43  48 24  38  52  |                 

[TB_11]

Anyone got a report on the strength of schedule for the other Wild Card contenders?

 

PLAYOFF RACE 07/24/05
                          Games Remaining - (Contenders)     | TOTAL V.  TOTAL V.                     
Div. Leaders   W-L  GB-WC  ATL CHI FLA HOU NY PHL SD STL WAS  | CONTEND   NON-CONTEND
St. Louis     62-36         3  11   7   8   3   0  3   X   3  |    38        26
Atlanta       55-44   -     X   3   6   0   6  11  3   3  11  |    43        20
San Diego     50-49         3   0   3   3   3   3  X   3   6  |    24        40
                                                             |
Wildcard Race                                                 |
Washington    55-44        11   0  10   3   9  10  6   3   X  |    52        11
Philadelphia  52-47  3.0   11   3   6   6   9   X  3   0  10  |    48        15
Houston       51-47  3.5    0  10   3   X   4   6  3   8   3  |    37        27 
New York      51-47  3.5    6   3   6   4   X   9  3   3   9  |    42        22
Florida       49-47  4.5    6   3   X   3   6   6  3   7  10  |    44        22
Chicago       50-48  4.5    3   X   3  10   3   3  0  11   0  |    33        31 
______________________________________________________________|
Totals                     43  33  44  37  43  48 24  38  52  |                 

 

More backup to all those who say we aren't chasing Washington - as if their run differential wasn't enough to expect them to fall to .500.