pccubfan

They definitely have to be coming close to desperation by now. They once held a healthy lead in the NL West, and are now tied with the Giants who have better pitching and better offense. Take Kemp and Ethier out of the Dodgers lineup, and they look like, well, the Cubs. Give us Eovoldi, and they can have as many of our non Castro or Rizzo hitters as they want. You make the statement that without two of their best hitters the Dodgers look like the Cubs. Then you say give us a good prospect and you can pick from all but the two best hitters from the same team you just compared them to unfavorably? What don't you understand?

Unless they make some moves to improve the team this coming offseason, without a substantial amount of luck, they will be giving up on 2014 also.

toonsterwu, Where are you accounting for Baez in your ratings?

I really can't dispute the return you suggest, but what's the point of trading him if that's what you're getting back. Might as well just keep him.

You don't think GMs looked at an offer and weighed it against draft pick compensation they would be entitled to if they lost the player in FA? No, they didn't weight it against it, because by and large, any decent prospect package is going to be worth the chance that you might get sombody with the 42nd pick who can one day be as highly rated as the prospects you got. It obviously influenced decisions, but compensation was no guarantee (there was always the threat that the player would accept your arbitration offer) and the value of those things just aren't close to equal. What if the package wasn't "decent"? It seems to me that the draft pick compensation set a floor for GMs. I would agree that different GMs valued that compensation differently, but I think that when a GM was considering a trade they would want to obtain more in trade than what they perceived the value of the pick(s) was worth.

You don't think GMs looked at an offer and weighed it against draft pick compensation they would be entitled to if they lost the player in FA?

Why would the Tigers ever want Soto? Because Soto is one of the Cubs' better chips? If the Tigers are going to give up a bunch of prospects for Garza, getting Soto back may make the trade easier for them to swallow. So you're proposing Soto to be a throw-in? I'm not proposing that, but I think it would explain why the Tigers would have interest in Soto.

Why would the Tigers ever want Soto? Because Soto is one of the Cubs' better chips? If the Tigers are going to give up a bunch of prospects for Garza, getting Soto back may make the trade easier for them to swallow.

Yep you nailed it. There's only been one FA in the last 4 years that I would have been comfortable signing. :lol: Whatever. You know in what context you gave that response. If you want to twist it to get a laugh, have at it. The context was, I didn't like Fielder or Pujols, so I gave some recent examples of big-ticket 1Bs that I would have been comfortable signing. The ginormous leap you're making deserves a laugh. Sorry. I didn't understand that you were strictly talking 1B. I thought you were saying out of all the top offensive free agents that had been available recently, Teixera was the only one you would have signed. My mistake.

Yep you nailed it. There's only been one FA in the last 4 years that I would have been comfortable signing. :lol: Whatever. You know in what context you gave that response. If you want to twist it to get a laugh, have at it.

LaRoche is slower and worse defensively. LaRoche with plus defense? I'll take that. Laroche was a decent player until he passed his prime. But Laroche was 2 years old than Rizzo projects to be when he becomes a full time ML. Rizzo also has superior minor league numbers. I think Laroche is the floor for Rizzo. If that is the case, I would think that Cashner would have to be a #2 or better, and pretty soon, for this to go the wrong way for the Cubs.

Again, there are no perfect free agents. In your scenarios the Cubs will never sign a free agent. That means you must be willing to wait for three or four years for the Cubs to be competitive. It should come as no surprise that I have heard this response from a lot of folks around here. And they're all wrong. Admittedly, I haven't read all of your posts, but the only free agent signing I've ever seen you promote was Texeira. That doesn'tmake me think you are a big proponent of free agency. Which free agent signings have you seen me oppose? Pujols and Fielder (albeit for different reasons). Any others? Surely you're not forming such a universal opinion based on me not liking two guys. You were specifically asked in the Pujols thread which offensive free agents you would have been comfortable signing. Your answer was Teixera and Gonzalez (who never made it to free agency so he doens't count). That's one guy in four years. I have gained the impression that it is going to be pretty tough to meet all of the conditions you set forth in order to sign a bat. I certainly don't see anyone on the list of potential free agents available in 2013 that will meet your terms.

Again, there are no perfect free agents. In your scenarios the Cubs will never sign a free agent. That means you must be willing to wait for three or four years for the Cubs to be competitive. It should come as no surprise that I have heard this response from a lot of folks around here. And they're all wrong. Admittedly, I haven't read all of your posts, but the only free agent signing I've ever seen you promote was Texeira. That doesn'tmake me think you are a big proponent of free agency.

Interesting. With all the back and forth I would not have thought that.

Where is anyone make such a general claim? People have been adament in their stance on the matter, and the movement is growing. Okay. Find me ONE person who doesn't think we should have bid heavily on any of Pujols/Fielder/Darvish/Cespedes. Just one person. Surely if this board is so scared of spending any money, that shouldn't be a feat at all. I'm guessing that the phrase bid heavily is the key here? Because bid heavily and acquiring are two different animals. When it comes down to it, if the Cubs are going to want to compete in the next three years they are not only going to have to bid heavily they are going to have to win a couple of those bids.

BUT THEY DIDN'T SIGN PUJOLS OR GIVE ARAM 3 YEARS! THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE TEAM WORSE, CAN'T YOU SEE IT?!? For someone who likes to use the term hyperbole and mocks those using it, this is a strange post. If I was being serious, it would have been a strange post. I understand you were not being serious, but using a writing technique you seem to have such disdain for seems strange.

To a point I agree with you. I didn't want them over-extending to sign three or four guys this year. But I do want them to take some steps forward in building this team this offseason. I understand that most free agents are going to perform at a level below their salary in the latter years of their contract. However, I also understand that Theo and Hoyer are supposed to be brilliant baseball men who can find the team cheap production to soften the blow of the free agent that isn't earning his way anymore. I just want to see strides made this offseason to improve the team. If Volstad and Stewart prove to be very useful, I'll happily admit to being wrong. Just not seeing a lot to get excited about on this roster. Or, Theo and Hoyer are brilliant enough not to get themselves into this situation in the first place, given the current FA options available and the state of the roster. Again, there are no perfect free agents. In your scenarios the Cubs will never sign a free agent. That means you must be willing to wait for three or four years for the Cubs to be competitive. I don't know what promises Ricketts made to Theo in terms of timeline but I don't think this fanbase is really ready to watch three more years of non-meaningful games in July.

BUT THEY DIDN'T SIGN PUJOLS OR GIVE ARAM 3 YEARS! THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE TEAM WORSE, CAN'T YOU SEE IT?!? For someone who likes to use the term hyperbole and mocks those using it, this is a strange post.

To a point I agree with you. I didn't want them over-extending to sign three or four guys this year. But I do want them to take some steps forward in building this team this offseason. I understand that most free agents are going to perform at a level below their salary in the latter years of their contract. However, I also understand that Theo and Hoyer are supposed to be brilliant baseball men who can find the team cheap production to soften the blow of the free agent that isn't earning his way anymore. I just want to see strides made this offseason to improve the team. If Volstad and Stewart prove to be very useful, I'll happily admit to being wrong. Just not seeing a lot to get excited about on this roster.

Luckily we're not talking about a diner, because you can build a quality organization in the future while still trying in the present. There is no need to punt 2012 no matter how hard davearm works to convince you people otherwise. I seem to recall a lot of excitement about this offseason on this site. Money off the books and the Cubs would be players in the big free agent sweepstakes. I am getting old so maybe my memory isn't very good. Am I remembering wrong? One by one the zombies have been convincing themselves that spending money on baseball players is foolish. I'd choose a much different word than "zombies" to describe folks that think it would be foolish to hand out the contract Pujols got, or the one Fielder is asking for. There is always going to be an excuse as to why you shouldn't sign a free agent. Again, don't sign one and see what happens. There aren't any guaranties that the farm is going to pan out either.

They aren't actively trying to win yet, that's for certain. They're not placing 2012 ahead of the long term, which is the only thing I think you can say with any degree of certainty right now. Saying the FO is actively trying to lose in 2012 is ludicrous. They have not yet done anything to make the team better in 2012. That can be said with certainty. Not doing anything to improve a bad team make not be actively trying to lose, but if you aren't doing anything to try and get better, it's the same damn thing. There is nothing ludicrous about being upset at what they are currently putting out there for 2012. Your anger is misplaced. This season wasn't going to be saved by a few big-ticket free agent signings. If anything, be mad at the folks that created this mess, not the ones doing what's necessary to clean it up. Build the organization! But start now, don't put it off until next offseason to begin to acquire major league talent.

Luckily we're not talking about a diner, because you can build a quality organization in the future while still trying in the present. There is no need to punt 2012 no matter how hard davearm works to convince you people otherwise. I seem to recall a lot of excitement about this offseason on this site. Money off the books and the Cubs would be players in the big free agent sweepstakes. I am getting old so maybe my memory isn't very good. Am I remembering wrong?

He's the easiest, and still allows you to make those other moves you are hoping for. Or wait and make pitching moves next offseason.

But if you add a Fielder, Cespedes and trade Garza for a package of elite prospects this year, then add a top of the rotation guy and a mid-rotation guy in FA next offseason, this team could definitely compete in 2013 and still be ready to dominate in 2014 and beyond. As a side note first, if you add Fielder/Cespedes (and I'm really not for a Cespedes signing), I would think that you would keep Garza and try to find another big bat in the winter of 2012 to compete in 2013. Without knowing what the rest of this hypothetical situation involves, I'd note that - Adding a top and mid-rotation arm in one off-season is easier said than done with the rising number of teams with money to spend and the general demand for pitching throughout. It's possibly doable next off-season, but tough. - the lineup is a Fielder/Cespedes away. I'm still concerned about finding a better top of the order guy, and another big bat is needed. - this somewhat presumes that Cespedes is going to be ... good. Are there ways to open the window earlier? Sure, but it'd take a massive dump truck of money to make it happen, and it assumes that we'd be able to outbid everyone else without going into silly numbers, which is a debatable notion. Ok wait until 2015 and see if the drafts have panned out. I'm probably not going to be too interested in following them in the mean time but there seems to be a good number of people on the board that will be.

But if you add a Fielder, Cespedes and trade Garza for a package of elite prospects this year, then add a top of the rotation guy and a mid-rotation guy in FA next offseason, this team could definitely compete in 2013 and still be ready to dominate in 2014 and beyond.