Sammy Sofa

Ugh. I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least. All I was alluding to is that it's hard to compete when players like Soriano and Zambrano make up roughly 25% of your payroll, and it's been that way for several years. It puts you in an unnecessary hole that's difficult to get out of. It does, but it's hardly insurmountable, especially when you're talking about 25% of a nearly $130 million dollar payroll. Look, signing Soriano for the years and money he got was a bad move from day 1, everyone knows that. It was not, however, an "albatross" contract for a team with the resources of the Cubs. Looking at the Soriano contract as being indicative of the main problem is looking backwards at how poorly the team was constructed overall. Soriano's deal didn't make or break the Cubs. Hell, Soriano's deal coupled with Zambrano's (and it's ridiculous revisionist and alarmist history to lump that in with Soriano's deal as if they're readily comparable) didn't make or break the Cubs. What broke the Cubs was crappy, crappy drafting and player development.

Ugh. I swear, it's like Soriano has left Cubs fans with PTSD. The 2010 Cubs were the result of poor team construction from the top to the bottom. Blaming it on "bad big contracts" or whatever the [expletive] is a stretch to say the least.

Really hope this is true. It would explain a lot with the spending, too.

http://www.mostphotos.com/preview/176075/frustrated-businessman.jpg

Yeah, $18 million is all it takes to build a hell of a contender. no one said that 18 million is all it takes to be a contender. only that they arent willing to spend on a big free agent with that contract hanging around. 18 million may or may not make us a contender with this division you never know. 18 mil spent properly probably makes us more interesting to watch though. Thats all im looking for really. Field a team that has a chance to be .500 while all the guys in the minors continue to progress. The Cubs are in REALLY bad, bad, bad shape financially if the remaining three years of Soriano's contract are anything more than a frustrating annoyance. Fortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case.

Yeah, $18 million is all it takes to build a hell of a contender.

You're horrible.

Update thread title, please.

Yes, the "many" are right.

You don't?

We got any of that popcorn left?

Somebody here actually has a VoR post as their sig.

What?

i'm sure they did. i'm saying that miami is the only location where he visited and checked out the stadium. Not coming to Wrigley definitely works in the Cubs' favor.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JN5Ep8Ym6_U/Tk70XFAdzEI/AAAAAAAANbI/KCaDlKAsgnA/s1600/SNL+Rachel+Dratch+as+Debbie+Downer.png

Yes, your expectations towards big ticket FA are unrealistic. I have zero interest in chasing this particular tail for the zillionth time, so I'll just end it here and pretend like you don't exist going forward.

Yes, we know that's your opinion. Let's just leave it in that box over there. FA "impact players" aren't these catch-all constructs that you can just mash into whatever you spot you want them on the team. It's a matter of both who is available and the needs/openings you have on the team. I really cannot understand why you don't see how hard it is to plan for all of those factors to line up to just right to justify spending big ticket FA money by the rather narrowly defined standards you've repeated ad nauseum.

Huh. That's actually a pretty good way of putting it.

To me the middle ground does include moving Marshall. For all the much vaunted talk of rebuilding the Cubs really haven't made any moves that had to have been done without the intention of competing in 2012, and yes, I include the Marshall deal in that. Trading for Rizzo really hurt that goal because he is good enough to not want to acquire somebody great for 1B, but not ready enough to really help the 2012 team. I'd still want them doing something like the trade for Rizzo even if they had sign Fielder. Blocked or not, he'd still be a valuable chip that could be spun off if necessary. Well, yeah, this is what I'm talking about when I sarcastically mention "the time to panic is past;" that's out of the realization that the Cubs simply don't have a ton (relatively speaking) of money freed up right now. Despite my hyperbole over guys like Fielder and Darvish and co., I have no problem with how the Cubs are spending their money right now. I just can't wait until they get to the point where they can be the Red Sox or even the Yankees of the Midwest.

You realize that's nearly impossible to predict and align, right? It's impossible to predict when you're one or two elite players away from being the sort of consistent 95-win team I described? Yes, that's the part that's very, very difficult to align. It's not a matter of, "welp, we've got our young core established...now bring on the plethora of under 30 elite free agents!" If you keep waiting for "synchronicity" you're not going to to have it most of the time.

Guys like Kuroda and Oswalt can be dealt. It's inevitable a team will be "saddled" with overpaid big ticket FA; it's unavoidable if you want to actually utilize them at any point. You have an unrealistic idea of big name FA being available lining up just right when a team has enough internal talent developing so as to avoid payroll bloat. That's not going to happen.

You realize that's nearly impossible to predict and align, right?

To me the middle ground does include moving Marshall. For all the much vaunted talk of rebuilding the Cubs really haven't made any moves that had to have been done without the intention of competing in 2012, and yes, I include the Marshall deal in that.

I wouldn't go that far. There were ways to make this team a fringe contender in 2012 without handing out bad contracts. Go on. Which free agent contracts did you wish the Cubs had handed out this offseason? Of the biggies, CJ Wilson's deal is the easiest to defend, but that price almost certainly wasn't available to the Cubs. Reyes? Fielder? Pujols? How did you get from what I said to "Rob wants to sign 'biggies'?" I was talking about spreading the money around on marginal upgrades and making a handful of smart, low-cost trades. Targeting Edwin Jackson and one of Kuroda / Oswalt would likely be better in the short term than Wood/Volstad/Wells. Trading for Alberto Callaspo would be better than Ian Stewart, and only cost marginally more. This wasn't a 71 win team last season. There was enough room in the payroll to add players to take us to a mid 80's win team. That doesn't always put you in the playoffs, but it gives you a shot. I get why the front office decided to target a future window instead of opting to make slower yearly gains. And I don't necessarily disagree. But let's not pretend it was the only option. Right. I made no secret about my desire to see the Cubs take advantage of the big name FA market this offseason, but I certainly didn't want to see them only spending money on big names. Hell, I didn't even see it as a necessity to spend on any of the big names (Pujols, Fielder and Darvish). What I was hoping for, however, was at least a middle ground like Rob is talking about, where they both look to take a shot at competing in a weakened division in 2012 AND build for the future. It's certainly not an unrealistic expectation given the resources available to the Cubs. Again, middle ground was perfectly realistic, but the middle ground is a place dave can't process.

Absolutely ludicrous. You're stupidly conflating the desire to see the Cubs rebuild AND compete with the made-up idea that there's anyone here that thinks the Cubs didn't and don't have to rebuild. There's not a single person here that's going to argue against the general approach that Theo and co. seem to be taking with bolstering the team and farm system with cheap, young talent/reclamation projects, and to continue with that plan. The disappointment stems from seeing a huge major market club apparently not willing or, more worryingly, able to also take advantage of the financial resources they should have available to them. It was hoped that it's not, as you so desperately want everything to be, an either/or situation.