questionmarkgrace

good to have this for reference. great post

ok now lets go get yusineski gorrell. if that guy is ever convinced to leave cuba he will be a legit star.

one thing I always hated about kazmir is he seemed to struggle to get out of the fifth inning. Maybe its because strike out guys typically throw alot of pitches but he seemed to always be pushing his pitch count early in the game.

Oh I agree, I was surprised to hear him mentioned on comcast after the phillies series as a possible tradeble commodity. but yes it would take probably two high caliber major league ready starters to land him.

If they sign the right guys, this will be Wilkens best draft so far with the cubs. I havent been crazy with his previous drafts in comparison to what he did with toronto. But maybe that speaks to toronto's player development in comparison to the cubs.

1) Definitely the team was going to be pretty bad this year no matter who the gm or the owner due to the roster from 2010. But if he cleaned house immediately we probably could have gotten a gm in there who could have actually made some moves in offseason 09 to make the roster better. Explain what another GM would have been able to do before the 2010 season that Hendry couldn't have. I'm not talking not doing something stupid but ultimately irrelevant like overpaying for Grabow...explain what feasible moves that could have been done to actually make the team significantly better than how the 2010 season played out. I definitely wish Hendry had been out at that point, but no GM was going to make the Cubs much different than what we actually got last year and so far this year. I want Hendry out, but this last offseason was one of his best, all things considered. There wasn't much to be done about 2011, though it was largely Hendry who handcuffed himself. The first few months of this offseason will say much more about the Ricketts ownership than the preceding two years. Definitely. Hendry should have been gone already, but this offseason marks the first real test of the Ricketts' era ownership. Everything else up until then has largely been riding out what was inherited from the Tribune era. If you read the articles one claimed that the cubs were worth 750 mil on the high side. Fortune suggests they paid double what they are worth. Is that just me making nonsense claims about how I want them to run the team? they overpaid with multiple people including gammons saying they did. By the way the cubs are worth more than the mets according to this new forbes article. But for some reason people here know more than forbes? http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/33/baseball-valuations-11_land.html When it comes to lobbying the state, Ricketts says that they went about it the wrong way. Its pretty clear from his quote. Read it again, twice if you have to. As far as the tickets thats up for debate. i think they alienated fans with a combo of bad play and high priced tickets. people will take one or the other not both. Thats why they are now advertising reduced priced tickets and half priced beers. this is the first time the cubs arent in the top 5 in attendance in since 1998, and they have more seats now than ever. they are hovering around 33-34,000 on average right now. last year this time they were at 39,000 with an equally bad team. One bad year cubs fans can stand two in a row plus increases, and little improvement talent wise, that just poor management from marketing to gm. http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/4054/cubs-attendance-down-but-far-from-out As far as hendry goes we all agree he is terrible so why is it that much of a stretch to think that a different gm may have pursued different avenues for making the team better the last two offseasons? At any rate, this isn't just conjecture or some fantasy about management should work. They have made some poor decisions, not just by my estimation but by a host of journalists as well.

I have hoped that this all along was Rickett's CEO style. I have to believe that he is in fact not a dumb person, but wanted a bit of time to evaluate what he had in place. I am quite sure that he sees the empty seats. If there is any silver lining in this trainwreck of a season, it may be that this is the year the Cubs started to run like a real organization. There are a few signs that could lead one to believe that a organizational change is happening. In a few months we may actually be excited to see an actual philosophy. Maybe I am drinking the Kool Aid, but I still have some faith in Ricketts. Read more: http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/cubs-insider/2011/06/ricketts-maybe-thinking-of-overhaul-a-boston-overhaul.html#ixzz1PCS9cxcz I hope this is the case.

Moves like what? This has been a very inflexible roster for at least the past couple of seasons with few spots available to upgrade and even fewer actual possible upgrades out there. I'm not opposing letting Hendry go, however it's very unrealistic to think a new GM could have made any really impactful moves. That was two years before the sale and before negotiations began. That was probably a low estimate anyway and then the bidding vaulted the price up that much more. Anyone who bought the team/field/Comcast share would have paid in the same area the Ricketts did, so any owner would have overpaid - and I don't think the Ricketts outbid everybody else by all that much, so numerous smart businessmen (including Cuban) were willing to nearly reach $1 billion. And looking at what the Red Sox sold for 7 years before the Cubs sold isn't very productive. I could easily see them getting into the $900 mil to $1 bil range from 02-09. If the team is losing at the pace it is, it doesn't matter what price tickets are - they won't sell. You're not going to see the stands packed full when the team is awful whether we have the highest prices or the lowest. The likelihood is that if ticket prices dropped, you'd see a minimal increase in tickets sold and likely a decrease in overall revenue because the increase in tickets sold wouldn't offset the drop in price for every ticket sold the entire season. I doubt fans have quit coming to games because the Ricketts tried to get the state to pay for some of the Wrigley renovations. You could probably argue that an extremely tiny number of people stopped going because of it, but it'd be incredibly hard to prove a link between the state funding request and a significant drop in ticket sales. The only people who have said this is an issue is a couple of Chicago beat reporters. Selig came out and said the Cubs being on this list is meaningless, it was expected and the Cubs aren't in any financial distress over it. If the Ricketts didn't have the ability to finance that much money and if the debt had a chance to overwhelm them, I doubt MLB would have approved the sale. MLB wants the Cubs to be good and profitable, not bad and stuck in a quagmire. Search Scotti's posts and find the one he made on the Ricketts' financial situation and their upcoming plans - it was an excellent read and much better put than I just did. Moves like maybe trading D-Lee before the league thought he was worth nothing? It was clear he wasnt getting any younger and he had solid enough year to get some return. I don't know but they only made three moves that off season when they clearly needed more. As far as the estimates, the comcast share is only worth 25 million per an article I sited in the other thread. its just revenue sharing not a quarter of the actual company. Cuban bid around 600 million he thought that wrigley provided a huge obstacle. as for the red sox price a few years earlier the economic down turn should have lowered the price. Inflation doubles every 20 years not every 5 years. the fortune article suggests they overpaid by half, my guess is they are better at estimating such things than you or I. I think fans in general may be less apt to go to a game when the cubs are sucking but when the tickets have increased as talent has decreased its even harder to go. If the tickets were cheaper they would have more people there, maybe not like before in the 80's and 90's but people would go more often. As far as the politics of getting wrigley built I was merely speaking to the fact that Ricketts underestimated the situation. They thought that people would support it unconditionally because it was the cubs they didn't because it was poorly timed and conceived. As far as the debt thing, I think I have said what I wanted to. Short term they are at risk if they can weather it, long term its obviously a great investment. I guess I expected less growing pains. you guys think he's doing pretty well. I guess we will agree to disagree

When it's all said and done, I bet they are outside the top 5 unless they do a huge firesale at the deadline. There are enough useful parts here to pull another late fake rally if they get reasonably healthy. I think they sell off some of those parts but not all. My gut says that Z, Soriano, and Aram stay. Z being the only one of those three that could possibly go (soriano's contract and arams no trade will be pretty much stop them from trading them). But Pena, Byrd, Fukudome, I've even read Garza's name out there as a possibility, marshal or wood could go too. Not sure if any one would want grabow. Unfortunately, I dont see us getting that many useful parts back from this bunch. Maybe some low a guys who are a ways away.

generic or not, all of these things have blown up in his face will possibly hamper the team's success and growth going forward.

1) Definitely the team was going to be pretty bad this year no matter who the gm or the owner due to the roster from 2010. But if he cleaned house immediately we probably could have gotten a gm in there who could have actually made some moves in offseason 09 to make the roster better. 2) did they over pay for the team? yes multiple articles in fortune and in the trib suggest that the team itself was worth between 450-720 million on the highside. they overpaid. Is this hindsight? I dont think so, they paid over 300 million more than any other team in baseball was sold for. But beyond that, the tribune article came out before the team was sold. Did they somehow jump 200 million dollar based on the 08 season? If so that shows that the Ricketts thought the major league talent was pretty good, not overpaid and aging quickly. For reference the red sox weresold for 600mil in 02. are the cubs worth more than the red sox? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0704030231apr03,0,1173811.story 3) did they underestimate the effect of ticket increases on the fans? I would say so, this is the first time in the last 30 years they have offered half price beers and cheaper tickets to try to draw fans in. The cubs have now jacked their tickets up three years in a row. The average ticket going from $42 in 08' to in 11' 52.32. The point is if they could have kept the tickets from being the highest in baseball they could probably still pack the place as Joe Ricketts suggested. 4) did they underestimate public opinion on the use of government funds to pay for the team? Certainly, even Ricketts would agree. He suggests that "The plan that we threw out there was one that was relatively thoughtful but the timing and the explaining and the presentation of it probably could have been better,'' Ricketts said. He claims it was relatively thoughtful I think it lacked creativity and sensitivity. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-0324-haugh-cubs-chicago--20110323,0,7450187.column 5) did they underestimate the amount of debt accrued by purchasing and operating the cubs? Yes inaddition to the roster bottleneck, they are on mlb's debt list for a large amount of financed debt not pertaining to the roster, which is in many ways worse than having roster debt because such large amounts of money are financed at a higher rate of interest. The problem is it is hard to pay off 10 times the debt than the income your team generates(which is what gets you on the list) when the team is playing so poorly and people arent coming to the games. So now they have to pump more money into daily operations just to get their debt down to manageable levels. Half of the Ricketts family's net worth was invested into the cubs with there purchase. Do you think they are going to be willing to liquidate and gamble with much more of the other half? I dont. this goes back to point 3, they need public funds to subsidize wrigley field otherwise they will be having to dip into their own pockets again. sure long term it looks good, if the debt doesnt swallow them up in the short-term. THese are some things they could have avoided with some savy businessmen at the helm. But Ricketts was ill prepared and decided to stick with the tribune guys like crane kenney. If he knew what he was doing he would have avoided these things, by putting the right people in place whou could have anticipated these potential problems. As it is our minor league system needs better coaches and scouts throughout. THey need to stop hiring former players with no instruction experience and start getting some real player development guys. Our farm has been crap other than pitching for many years and these same scouts and coaches are still in place. You guys may think he's doing a good job, I expected more than tribune redux. he has followed their plan to a t and is paying for it now.

Really? You don't think the idea that the Ricketts family, billionaires, severely underestimated the financial situation of the Cubs, but YOU could see it clearly when they couldn't...is up for debate? yes. Anyone with a half-assed economics degree could have seen this coming. And their direct actions show that they underestimated the costs of being a team owner.

Even in the waiver process, Aramis will have his NTC/10-5 rights available to him. If someone on waivers claims him, he still has the option to reject the claim. So basically, if he'll agree to waive his 10-5 rights anyway, we'll be able to get something for him in trade. I was just about to ask that. I really don't get why he wants to stay that bad, or maybe that just public relations spin by his agent? its not like he would come out and say 'yeah trade me please' unless his name were Milton Bradley

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-gammons-wrigley-dump-tying-ricketts-hands-20110610,0,701998.story I know that this is just piling on Gammons but where the hell was he when the Cubs were trying to structure a $300 million dollar deal with the county/city/state AND talking about chucking in $200 million of the family's money ($500 million dollars total for Wrigley and the Triangle Complex)? That said, aside from his jumping on the Ricketts as if they were clueless, this is the kind of press the team needs to get the city/county/state of their respective derrieres. The city/county/state can't (and shouldn't) contribute any money at all to this project. Yeah, the Bears & Sox got it, but it's the Trib's fault for not striking while the iron was hot. They can handle this privately if they get creative. If they have to call it "Pepto Bismol presents Wrigley Field" so be it. I dont mind giving tax breaks or even some direct funding but what they proposed at the time was a bit ambitions considering the economic climate. You might even say arrogant. But back to the focus of this thread yes wrigley is a dump. I don't know of any other stadium that has nets holding up crumbling concrete over patrons heads. Yes it has its charm, it is our dump for sure, but it needs to be remodeled on so many levels. Gammons is spot on here, although he usually has no idea what is going on, I think Ricketts severely underestimated the teams talent level, attendence numbers/ticket sales/fan reception to ticket increases, wrigley fields problems, etc. Not sure why this is even up for debate, its pretty clear.

I have no doubt someone will throw $10 mil at him, I meant is it worth it to us. IMO the money would be better spent elsewhere. Probably. I'd have little problem with a combo of Baker/DeWitt over there as a stopgap instead of likely overpaying for Aramis. I agree this may be our best bet. with so many holes on the roster these two could put together some decent numbers especially if how baker has been this year and DeWitt as of late is any indication.

haha. good stuff. Also love the stache. I thought he was bigger for some reason though, maybe just the camera angle

I still think his comp is Alcides Escobar. But he has shown way more power this season and if thats for real, then we definitely lost a good one.

Unfortunately thats probably the case. There are virtually no quality third baseman available next year. So I guess we will get to watch him swing at the first pitch and pop up to the infield all next year too.

that was a misquote but what I should have said was that you claimed: I was pointing out how they were just following a road that had already been planned out.

haha well said

He's due. Let him play. This season is in the S-bend and we might as well find out if the Colvin we saw in 2010 was a mirage or not. I understand your thought process, but is the kid wrecked mentally by struggling so bad? Plus, facing the Phillies pitching staff later this week probably isn't going to help. Oh god, we better get a win against the reds otherwise we will be working on a double digit streak after the phillies. On the flip side maybe hendry gets fired if that happens. Although I'm guessing thats not the case.

He missed 3 plus weeks without a rehab start, which is just a typical cubs move.

32 walks to 3 strikeouts. I know high school numbers dont mean much and so there's some mixed reports on his plate discipline, but I think its best we withhold judgment on that until we've seen him play some games professionally. I have to wonder how plate discipline and swinging and missing are issues of his if scouts haven't seen him do it. I'm not trying to be facetious either, there's got to be a reason these are being reported about him. Anyone that's into high school scouting that can explain? Maybe just off summer games vs. better competition? Must be. Heck it could have been that one game that was heavily scouted when he went 1 for 3 while Lindor went 3 for 3.

I'm not sure what to think of this pick the scouting reports vary widely. But if he is 6-1 205 already, I cant see him at short. Third base definitely. One thing for sure I hope they dont move him to catcher. Seems like he is a really good fielder so this shouldnt be necessary. Originally I was thinking Gray or Springer, but as the draft went on Jungmann was I thought someone they might like but oh well.

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. I agree. A good owner will... a) hire the right people; b) open the checkbook; and c) stay the heck out of the way. The Trib definitely did b) and c), and tried to do a). In the end, MacPhail's small-market tendencies just didn't work here. Ricketts and co have yet to establish a), b), or c). But they haven't given us a reason to believe they'll fail on any of these, either. Nuts&Gum suggested that they had done these things already. I was merely pointing out that they have followed the track that was already in place and have yet to really make any clear decisions about a or b. I think scouting in asia is awesome I would like to see them get in china as well. But latin america has some great talent, maybe overpriced maybe not. But as a major market team we should be signing a million plus guy in latin america every year.