Sammy Sofa

Three of those players are gone after this year regardless, so "getting out of their contracts" isn't really a pertinent issue. And why would the Cubs need to "get out" of Byrd's contract?

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. They made Ryno the highest paid player in the game in the early 90's. From the late-90's through the 2000's, when Wrigley actually started selling out on the heals of success they rose the payroll from middle of the road to top of the NL. It wasn't just prior to the sale. They very selectively did so. By the time they started doing B "for real" the failings of A brought everything crashing down. Your issue should be with MacPhail, and his small-market mentality, not with the Trib. The Trib was making money available, MacPhail was just too cheap to spend it on a bigtime free agent. Instead he spread those dollars across 3 or 4 okay free agents. So it comes back to A). My issue was with both. He may not have been spending as much money as he had, but it's not like there was a ton. This might just be me getting things wrong or making things up, but I could swear the talk has been that Hendry wanted to go after both Guerrero and then Beltran in the mid-00's but both signings were effectively nixed due to money constraints.

Yes, injuries are the reason we had Doug Davis start tonight. The fact we could not find someone better than Doug Davis is the bigger problem. No, finding a less crappy spot starter is not a bigger problem than a starting pitcher going down for a significant period of time with an injury. Not in any kind of sane universe.

[expletive] yes.

Yes, injuries are the reason we had Doug Davis start tonight.

I have to say, I'm pretty shocked about this. This isn't hitting .230something and OPSng in the low .700s, which id expected to be Colvins floor. Obviously, as everyone said, his start last year wasn't sustainable, but I don't think that even the biggest doubters would have predicted him to bottom out this bad. Nope. I definitely was opposed to the "Colvin as a starter" idea, but even I didn't think or expect he'd be THIS bad.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. They made Ryno the highest paid player in the game in the early 90's. From the late-90's through the 2000's, when Wrigley actually started selling out on the heals of success they rose the payroll from middle of the road to top of the NL. It wasn't just prior to the sale. They very selectively did so. By the time they started doing B "for real" the failings of A brought everything crashing down.

SCOTTI FOR PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD.

... which would tend to support the notion that perhaps the Trib wasn't so bad after all. Nah. Most of those plans were just sale hype.

Bull [expletive]. The 2006 Cubs had different pieces, not more.

I didn't suggest the Ricketts had done A, B or C.

I doubt that happens. Lame duck managers are avoided when possible. A new GM probably gets to hire a new manager. It's also the best option for making sure you get a chance to make a second hire. Eh. I get that, but I really don't care.

Gross. Right now the manager is all but irrelevant going froward after this season. Hire the right front office and there's zero issue with Quade finishing out the last year of his deal.

It wasn't terrible. That's what owners do whenever they need to do major renovations or a new stadium. What are you proposing, that the Ricketts wait until the Illinois economy gets out of the toilet until they ask for backing (that, again, owners do ALL THE TIME) for something that needs to be done sooner rather than later to help maximize their investment and thus help improve the team? Well, I've got bad news for you then...

I think the second half of the Tribune ownership did some real things. The biggest mistakes they made was not hiring the right baseball people. But in the early 90's they went out and got a hot shot young exec in Andy MacPhail to run things and make a commitment to building through the minor league system. They also spent more and more every year on payroll, giving unprecedented resources to the team. They also laid the groundwork for the first real upgrades to Wrigley Field and got them done. True. It would be nice to see the same FO overhaul again.

The funny thing is, recent good teams for the Cubs have mostly been rapid turnarounds. '97-98. '00-'01 '02-'03 '06-'07. I am shocked that you think this team plus a couple FA's will be good in 2012. Pujols, maybe Felix Hernandez -- that would be great. Maybe the team finishes with 85 wins. That might be good enough to get the WC or win the division but that is not a WS winning team. Why are you "shocked?" What about this season makes it so inconceivable that the Cubs could have a turnaround like they did with pretty much every season they've contended in the last three decades? Explain why this season is so much worse than, say, 2006.

That (and the Latin American "academy" and expansion) is what you can point to if you wonder what the Ricketts' commitments are to this team being better down the line. Again, I really want them to take another huge step and drop the deadweight that is Hendry, but the repeated insistence that they're doing "nothing" or idiots like Rosenbloom and his "fanboy" garbage are just ignorant. I'm not sure if I agree with you. Yes it seems like he is doing more, but in actuality the majority of this stuff was already in place under the tribune. We had already been scouting big in asia in 06,07, and 08. Before Ricketts owned the team. Guys like Dhee Eun Rhee and Hak Ju Lee were tribune(Sam Zell) signings. In Latin America nothing has really changed we still sign mid level guys and refuse to get into bidding wars for the top talents. We may have signed more of those guys last year, im not sure, but we also put up top dollar for guys like larry suarez with the tribune. Also dont forget, the cubs didnt decide to begin building a new latin america complex until multiple articles detailed the deplorable conditions and slave like quarters the kids were being kept in. The fight for a new spring complex has been going on for years and any owner would have been negotiating with Mesa to get a new stadium built as Ho Ho Kam was severely out dated and our contract was up. Plans for the wrigley complex and the triangle building have been in place since I think 05 or 06 when they first hit the papers. I guess my point is he is doing pretty much what the tribune already had planned or were in the process of doing. Sure thats an improvement off of the tribune in the 80's and 90's but its not what most expected a new owner to do. The only decisions that I have seen him make were concerning new revenue sources, increasing ticket prices, soliciting the state for more revenue (with really bad timing), overseeing the choice for a new manager. I think I speak for most when I thought a new owner would bring more to the table. And what exactly did you hope a new owner would bring to the table in a season and a half outside of getting rid of Hendry? And the Tribune was all talk. The Ricketts are actually laying the groundwork for improving this organization across the board. It's all well and good what the Tribune claimed it WANTED to do, but the Ricketts are already actually taking the steps to get these things done.

Nice article. Thanks for sharing.

That (and the Latin American "academy" and expansion) is what you can point to if you wonder what the Ricketts' commitments are to this team being better down the line. Again, I really want them to take another huge step and drop the deadweight that is Hendry, but the repeated insistence that they're doing "nothing" or idiots like Rosenbloom and his "fanboy" garbage are just ignorant. The Wrigley complex didn't happen, mostly because they wanted $200M from the state. CubTV hasn't happened. I may be wrong here, but wasn't much of the spring training complex paid for by the city/county as well? They went cheap in the 2010 draft (a big market team should not be spending in the middle of the pack on the draft). When Henry bought the Red Sox, he spent piles of his own money to make changes starting from within the organization. He didn't cry poor to an already cash-strapped state. This conversation is deviating from the topic of this thread so I'll make my final point: 1. I have seen little from Ricketts that makes me think he is committed to change anything 2. You are a fool if you assume that $60M will be spent this offseason 3. If you think this team (plus some offseason acquisitions) is going to complete next year you're delusional. Rapid turnarounds happen but not that often and not this severely. I'm sorry, but I can't take this any further. You've already come to a melodramatic conclusion and you're going to twist everything you hear to fit it. Your expectations are unrealistic given the short time the Ricketts have owned the team and your thinking that CubsTV and the complex aren't going to happen because they haven't happened yet is baffling. Hey guys, rapid turnarounds don't happen! Guess 2006-2007 didn't actually occur!

For BeerHere, from the debt thread: That (and the Latin American "academy" and expansion) is what you can point to if you wonder what the Ricketts' commitments are to this team being better down the line. Again, I really want them to take another huge step and drop the deadweight that is Hendry, but the repeated insistence that they're doing "nothing" or idiots like Rosenbloom and his "fanboy" garbage are just ignorant.

Which is completely realistic. I certainly don't think all of the money is a lock to be put back into the team, but between this offseason and the next they have more than enough to make some big moves even if some of it isn't being put back into the team. BeerHere is obviously proposing the worst-case scenario of the Ricketts slashing payroll into the cellar and just staying there because nobody is buying tickets as if that's realistic.

Stop saying this like it's fact. With the money coming off the books the Cubs could very easily be competitive as early as next season. No, it's by no means a lock, but that so many people have this automatic assumption that the Cubs are going to so hopelessly suck and can do nothing about it for the next 3+ seasons is absurd. It certainly isn't a fact but has there been any indication otherwise? The payroll was cut coming into this season. Attendance is WAY down this year and I think it is foolish to assume that the money coming off the books will automatically be put back into the payroll for 2012. What exactly has Ricketts done or said that makes you think he's committed to winning at all costs? Again, why do people expect the Ricketts to spell out their plan for them going forward? Owners simply do not do that in the middle of the season, especially when it will inevitably involve FA signings. They can't just start talking like, "yeah, we suck right now, but just you wait until we sign Pujols!" Go read the thread about the debt situation. It's clear you have little to no idea of the actual financial situation and wherewithal of the Ricketts and are just assuming the worst for no reason than to just be a pessimist. What's foolish is to assume that the Ricketts are severely constrained financially from improving this team or that they'd inexplicably do nothing significant to improve the team in the near future (the next 1-3 seasons). Your expectations are unrealistic. Yes, as I have said, I wished they had cleaned house in terms of Hendry and co., but even if they had this season would still be awful. You're talking like they opted to not spend on a plethora of good FA players when in reality in the brief time they've owned the team little has been available FA-wise that would have significantly changed this team's fortunes for this season. The Ricketts have shown they are very, very serious about building this entire organization for the long haul instead of the penny ante approach that Wrigley and then the Tribune had. If you can't be patient and levelheaded in recognizing and dealing with that, then you're best served looking elsewhere.

Bruce swooping in with some common sense yet again.

Why would you possibly expect the team owners to have their post-2011 plans spelled out for us at this point?

Stop saying this like it's fact. With the money coming off the books the Cubs could very easily be competitive as early as next season. No, it's by no means a lock, but that so many people have this automatic assumption that the Cubs are going to so hopelessly suck and can do nothing about it for the next 3+ seasons is absurd. Its not fact, if they do spend some of that money in the offseason, they could be competitve again as soon as next year, but if they try to take what we already have and sprinkle in some middling free agents of the Jeromy Burnitz/Jacque Jones variety, it could be 3 years if were lucky, especially since our farm system seems to be producing some solid building blocks, but no foundation. This is a very important offseason coming up. You're stating the painfully obvious.