Sammy Sofa
-
Posts
98,227 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
208
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Sammy Sofa
-
[expletive] you humps. Go jump in a fire. Or go hug Kyle. This thread is for JOY.
-
They got where they are by pitching, which seems to have collapsed aside from Gallardo and of course, Braun and Fielder. Even after their red hot August, they're still a sub .500 team on the road 24-16 road record in the 2nd half, 14-6 in the final 20 road games.
-
I am humping you with karma right now.
-
He's a big circus fan.
-
One fourth of that would be, yeah.
-
Actually, they do need to be in the top 10 teams in terms of spending, ideally the top 5. It makes it much, much easier to deal with the mistakes and catastrophes that can and will happen. They don't have the farm system in place that can bolster a sub-$100 million payroll and will not for quite some time. They need to maintain a higher payroll while they work to achieve the latter instead of just wallowing in the doldrums as a team that can maybe compete if the division sucks and they can hover around .500. I think we all realize that the transition we're discussing here is going to be phased in over several years. The payroll is not going below $100M immediately, nor is the farm system going to be fixed overnight. It shouldn't be phased into reality ever. Not for the Cubs. They don't have to go cheap, even relatively speaking. They can have both.
-
Doug Glanville book excerpt - being eliminated from playoffs
Sammy Sofa replied to David's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
Glanville for manager? -
Actually, they do need to be in the top 10 teams in terms of spending, ideally the top 5. It makes it much, much easier to deal with the mistakes and catastrophes that can and will happen. They don't have the farm system in place that can bolster a sub-$100 million payroll and will not for quite some time. They need to maintain a higher payroll while they work to achieve the latter instead of just wallowing in the doldrums as a team that can maybe compete if the division sucks and they can hover around .500.
-
He's right, though. Most of those acquisitions have been more of a hindrance than a help. Yes, they at least managed to get production out of some of them, but they could've gotten similar or better production for less money (that's not to say that every major FA signing they've made has been a flop, but most have). I never said he wasn't right; the Red Sox have had plenty of FA flops. But their success this decade has also been based in part on big FA signings that WEREN'T busts. Again, it's not the either/or situation he's trying to make it out to be. Plus there's no really no reason for the Cubs not to be a team like the Yankees or Red Sox that can absorb bad contracts instead of playing the pauper. Why can't the Cubs be a team that says "OK, yeah, Dice-K sucked, but [expletive] it, we're still signing Adrian Gonzalez to a huge contract"?
-
The thing is, he doesn't owe a large part of his success to being able to spend money. He owes a large part of his success to drafting and developing better than everyone else. You can't with a straight face sit here and tell me that the main reason the Red Sox have won is because of the huge free agent money they've thrown around. The truth is, the return they've gotten on those players is pathetic, and they've won more despite them, than because of them. Yes, I am telling you that one of the main reasons they won was because of the big FA money they spent. Again, it's not an either/or proposition for them nor is it for the Cubs, so stop pretending like it is.
-
Wait, gooney's not saying what I think he's saying, is he?
-
They're taken from Cots. If they're not spot on, they're as good as any other source's. The point surely doesn't change if you tweak the numbers. Really? You'd argue that outside of the pitching that those 2003 and 2004 teams were constructed to win in the long run? The same for 2007 and 2008?
-
Then pursue someone other than Epstein. The Red Sox formula for success and creating teams that are continually competitive this past decade was a combination of big spending and smart Moneyball-esque team building and farm development. The Cubs farms system is nowhere near what the Rays' and Twins' are and what the Red Sox' has been (and making it better should obviously be a huge goal, but not at the expense of the Cubs spending like they're a much, much smaller market team than they actual are). The Red Sox' success has been driven almost entirely by their smart Moneyball-esque team building and farm development. More often than not their big spending has been a massive failure -- Lackey, Dice-K, JD Drew, Lugo, etc. It's clear (to me anyway) that Ricketts covets Epstein for the former skill, and not for his history of spending in free agency. Yes, massive failures like Johnny Damon, Curt Schilling, Pedro Martinez, Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz (yes, I know how they got Ortiz. They still ended up paying him a [expletive]-ton of money) (and yes, I know Epstein wasn't behind all of those signings. The point is that the Red Sox spent big money in addition to their smart player development to get them to where they've been the past decade).
-
Only if he's saying that's the only thing needed. The point is that the Cubs are a big market team with big market money and there's little reason they can't do both big spending and smart player development. It shouldn't be an either/or proposition. Under $100 million would have given the Cubs the 13th highest payroll this season. That would only be acceptable if the farm system was a LOT better.
-
The Red Sox got more WAR from farm products than any of the playoff teams, including Tampa Bay. I don't think you can assume any one executive will copy an organizaton's success, but I see no reason not to pursue Epstein for that reason. I just think it's dumb to bring in a guy who owes a large part of his success to being able to spend money and then cut him off well below his typical minimum budget for nearly a decade now (during which he's won 2 WS). The Red Sox haven't had a payroll below $100 million since 2001 and haven't had one below $120 million since 2004. If such stipulations were actually the case I'd actually prefer someone who has more experience with an organization that is constrained by budgets. That said, I agree that this type of speculation is mostly B.S..
-
Why not? 3 years as an excellent starter in a very hitter's-friendly ballpark. Much less wear and tear on his body than the usual 31-year-old starter due to him having been a reliever.
-
Then pursue someone other than Epstein. The Red Sox formula for success and creating teams that are continually competitive this past decade was a combination of big spending and smart Moneyball-esque team building and farm development. The Cubs farms system is nowhere near what the Rays' and Twins' are and what the Red Sox' has been (and making it better should obviously be a huge goal, but not at the expense of the Cubs spending like they're a much, much smaller market team than they actual are).
-
Hopefully one of the things holding this up would be Epstein laughing in the face of the Ricketts when they tell him the payroll is capped at $100 million.
-
Going to have to print this article out, so I can wipe my ass with it in the AM. :shock: Don't forget to credit @Kapman.
-
Bears game 5: Monday, Oct. 10 at DET, MNF on ESPN
Sammy Sofa replied to jersey cubs fan's topic in Other Sports
-
Name the first obscure 90's Cub you can think of
Sammy Sofa replied to David's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
[expletive], I MENTIONED HIM ON THE FIRST PAGE. So gimme that ball. -
I've eaten there twice, and both times I had explosive diarrhea afterwards Be honest: you have explosive diarrhea more often than not.
-
THIS IS THE BEST THING EVER.
-
Yeah, the site seems to be running between "shitty" and "really shitty" more often than not these days.
-
I like how Sullivan thought it important to note that the witness was wearing a purple t-shirt, like that had anything to do with anything.
