MSG T

The hell? That ish cray. Smartest fans in baseball, ya know.

That guy used to work in Des Moines and he would post on an Iowa Hawkeyes message board. He was pretty dumb. I can't listen at the moment, is it Matt Perrault? If so, he's douche of the highest order. I thought Matty P was still working in Omaha covering Creighton? Screw that guy. Go Shocks. He left Omaha for KXNO in Des Moines, the left there last spring (?) for the Boston area, where he's originally from. Couldn't wait to see him go.

That guy used to work in Des Moines and he would post on an Iowa Hawkeyes message board. He was pretty dumb. I can't listen at the moment, is it Matt Perrault? If so, he's douche of the highest order.

Boston gets Grienke and Castillo w/$6.5 mil Cubs get Theo and Prince Mil gets Lackey and Crawford Is that close to a B2B type deal?

141 pages ago, I had nothing against the Red Sox. I actually kind of liked them...141 pages ago.

It depends. I haven't seen a job description for either his current duties with the Red Sox or his future duties with the Cubs. If he has broader powers with the Cubs than he currently does with the Red Sox, it is most certainly as clear cut as moving from AGM to GM. I'm guessing no one here, on either side of this issue, has any idea how his duties are changing or remaining the same. From allusions made by both sides, it leads me to believe this is, in fact, a true promotion, with increased powers over what he currently has. However, until this comes to a conclusion and he starts working for the Cubs, I'm not sure anyone will really know.

The second part of that did not come out of Henry's mouth. That is somebody's interpretation of it. He did say that that protocol exists, and it WOULD seem to imply that that means if you offer someone a promotion, they will grant that person permission to interview. Still, granting permission doesn't at all imply anything about an agreement on compensation or that they'll agree to allowing the person out of his/her contract easily. In fact, he didn't even really come out and acknowledge that what the Cubs are offering is a non-lateral move (which is, to some extent, a subjective matter of opinion), though it's likely that they, at least somewhat, agree that it is. Bravo, David! Several people need to read the bolded as many times as necessary before it sinks in. Page after page of discussion about is it or isn't it a lateral move is completely irrelevant to the current issue of compensation. But whether it is a lateral move or not is relevant when people refer to other instances of compensation being given, when those situations were unlike this one, ie. Ozzie going to Florida to be their manager. A team receiving compensation for a manager moving into another manager's spot, with the added involvement of tampering isn't a precedent for a GM leaving to become President of another team. As was pointed out earlier, MacPhail leaving the Twins to join the Cubs would be the precedent for Theo, not Ozzie or Piniella or some other person making a lateral move. I fully agree with your point that the Red Sox should receive some compensation, in fact I've seen very little disagreement with that here. The disagreement is over how much compensation is appropriate. The mentioned packages and the precedent they set don't apply in most cases. MacPhail brought the Twins an A-ball player, the Cubs are far exceeding that by offering $6.5 mil and possibly any MiL ballplayer, even a middlin' low level player. Even if they sent Ridling (name chosen purely at random), along with the cash, that would set a new, higher precedent than the one set by MacPhail. Lastly, depending on the language in Theo's contract, which none of us have an understanding or knowledge of, he could have a basis for legal action if, according to his contract, he is allowed out for a promotion and they aren't granting that. You are speaking as if there is no possible way he could bring legal action, and you just don't know that. It is quite likely that there isn't, however unless the details of Theo's current contract come out, you can't make a blanket statement that he can't possibly make a legal case. It has happened where people have been let out of a contract by an employer for breach of contract. It's most definitely not common, but it does occur.

You must think very highly of the Cubs' farm system if you see a top 50 prospect who could be major league ready by next season as a mid-level prospect. You must think highly of the Cubs system if you consider him top 50. He had a step back, hes not top 50 until he proves something at the higher levels. Blisters are a concern, but I'm just not a fan...now that's me personally...my opinion is like all of yours it means nothing in the basis of these talks. It all depends on how these teams view the Cubs farm system. http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/top-100-prospects/2011/2611328.html Might want to look at #48 on this list.

That is ridiculous and just about as bad as the PR job that the Sox have been trying to do throughout the process. It really appears to be a bi-polar organization. One moment they trash Theo, the next moment they love him, they can't wait to get rid of him, they would love for him to stay. The sad part is that almost all of the early leaks were from Sox and have really backed them into a corner at this point. Theo clearly wants to leave, and management clearly wants him gone. Everything else is just fiction. I don't think any rational person believes that the Cubs will give up more than a few mid-level prospects to get him. Also, I think Sox fans clearly overestimate the impact of this deal falling through. Most of the Theo to the Cubs hype is from the more than casual fan. If you don't believe me, read the stories all over Chicago about how surprised the beat writers are that fans are not as excited about Theo coming as they expected them to be. The biggest story this offseason for the Cubs, is that they actually have an owner that "gets it". No more old cliches, but an owner that sees the significance of numbers and statistics. Even if the Cubs don't get Theo, they are going to get a GM in the same mold and for that they will be much better off. And McNutt is mid level...so we're back to square one again. I wouldn't say management clearly wants him gone at all, this is the same guy that Henry pretty much begged to come back once before, I haven't heard one report that has mentioned this. Just because you give someone permission to leave, doesn't mean you absolutely want them to leave. I do think the Cubs are in good hands and the fan base deserves that. What is your definition of mid-level? According to the BA rankings, McNutt is the Cubs #2 prospect (with Archer being gone) and is #48 among all prospects. How is that mid-level? Wellington Castillo is mid-level, McNutt is top 50. It appears, again based on BA's rankings, that if McNutt didn't immediately jump in as your top prospect, he'd be easily in the top 3. That's not a mid-level prospect. Now, that's not saying I'd be completely against giving him up. If the Red Sox were to let Theo bring some people with him, then McNutt would be fine compensation, though maybe a little high. But if we're talking Theo only, as I said earlier, McNutt is a good place to start negotiations, while expecting to settle for less than that.

I like this I bet if you look at every single trade negotiation you'll see instances like this more often than not. Only if backtobanks is involved.

You start high and you work your way down, by asking for a Low A ball player with no ceiling in return, you're making the Cubs fan base do handstands, and probably leaving something on the table. I have to negotiate contracts every day...it can be annoying as hell but people understand parameters before speaking and then you work your way to a middle ground in which both parties can agree to. I agree, but in this case McNutt or B. Jackson is starting high. Starting at Garza is stupid.

Here's a older fangraphs article, posted when it first came out, that brings up some of the candidates (Hahn's listed first). As was discussed when this first came up, pretty much everyone listed, short of Colletti, would be acceptable. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/candidates-for-the-chicago-general-manager-job/

The next-best candidate+prospects, AINEC. If you truly believe that, then you shouldn't want Epstein at all. You should want Ricketts to hire the cheapest GM available, and pump the savings into the draft to get more prospects. Wait, two weeks ago, prior to him actually being granted permission to speak with the Cubs, Theo was merely 1 of 6-8 really good choices, and not even the top choice of many on here, but now he's the only possible choice? Or at least the far most qualified choice? I'd be perfectly happy with someone like Byrnes, Hahn, Beane or someone else that wouldn't cost someone like McNutt. Want to explain how one of those guys, or someone else similar, wouldn't make an extremely good GM for the Cubs if they indeed move on. Why is Hahn considered a good choice? I don't get the hard-on for him. What has he done with the Sox to warrant this praise? The point is that 2-3 weeks ago, Epstein was merely one of a bunch of good choices, now all of a sudden he's the only possible savior to the franchise? I merely threw Hahn's name in because he was also one of the many that was mentioned at that time. I would be thrilled if they can work something out that brings Theo to the Cubs. But guess what, he's not the only good candidate out there. It could be argued, and was in the previous month, whether he is even the best possible choice.

The next-best candidate+prospects, AINEC. If you truly believe that, then you shouldn't want Epstein at all. You should want Ricketts to hire the cheapest GM available, and pump the savings into the draft to get more prospects. Wait, two weeks ago, prior to him actually being granted permission to speak with the Cubs, Theo was merely 1 of 6-8 really good choices, and not even the top choice of many on here, but now he's the only possible choice? Or at least the far most qualified choice? I'd be perfectly happy with someone like Byrnes, Hahn, Beane or someone else that wouldn't cost someone like McNutt. Want to explain how one of those guys, or someone else similar, wouldn't make an extremely good GM for the Cubs if they indeed move on. Honest question. What has McNutt done? Honest question. Why are you so willing to give up a guy that projects as a middle of the rotation pitcher for a GM when you can go find another, basically equal, GM candidate that won't cost you said pitcher?

The next-best candidate+prospects, AINEC. If you truly believe that, then you shouldn't want Epstein at all. You should want Ricketts to hire the cheapest GM available, and pump the savings into the draft to get more prospects. Wait, two weeks ago, prior to him actually being granted permission to speak with the Cubs, Theo was merely 1 of 6-8 really good choices, and not even the top choice of many on here, but now he's the only possible choice? Or at least the far most qualified choice? I'd be perfectly happy with someone like Byrnes, Hahn, Beane or someone else that wouldn't cost someone like McNutt. Want to explain how one of those guys, or someone else similar, wouldn't make an extremely good GM for the Cubs if they indeed move on.

If they actually thought that was appropriate compensation, instead of just a negotiating ploy, then Lucchino and Co. are insane. Granted, I think they probably threw that name out there to see if they could con the Cubs into something good, but still make it seem like a good deal.

He and Marshall are the only ones who have done anything. And Marmol is not exactly setting the world on fire anymore. Maybe you can help me with my dilemma. I'm hungry but the store wants to charge me $100 for a loaf of bread. Obviousy not starving to death is worth $100, so I should do it, right? For this analogy to work, you'd have to specify that bread is your clear favorite food, and the store you're at is the only one that has it. So you could go someplace else, spend less, and get something less satisfying. You're not going to starve in either case. ??? A better analogy would be that the store is the only one that has your favorite variety of bread. But you could leave and go buy your second favorite variety down the street for $5 buck per loaf instead of paying $100 for your favorite variety.

I read them purely for the entertainment value.

From the comments section, I really wish this guy would start posting here. My favorite: This guy doesn't even realize some of the players he listed are exactly what he says they need, but adds them to the list anyway.

You just ask them if they would be open to going, and respect each person's decision, and then bake that into your negotiating position. I don't see what is so odd about it. Exactly. Ask anyone he wants to come with him if they'd want to come with him, then tell the Red Sox how many. I'm sure at some point names would have to be involved prior to the deal being reached.

http://mlbbuzz.yardbarker.com/blog/mlbbuzz/another_battle_looming_between_cubs_red_sox/7435789?new_post=true They let us have Theo, we agree to let them hire Sandberg without competing.

In theory, yes, but that ain't gonna happen.

There's no chance in hell we'd go after Cherington if this Theo situation somehow fell through. Just saying. I agree. Was just mentioning one of many people comparable to Theo that the Cubs could hire. RedSox is actually positing that the Cubs would sit and wait a year for Theo if it came down to it and that's simply insane. Might as well just cancel next season if we don't get Theo, he's obviously the only person qualified to put a team on the field for the Cubs.

That's just not at all accurate. Lucchino is his mentor and the one who actually brought him to Boston in the first place. John Henry gave him his first GM job for his hometown team. Not only that, but he's been given complete control over Boston's baseball operations. Also, I still fail to see how the Cubs going with an interim general manager makes any sense. Here's this from SOSH: That's what awaits if the Cubs don't play ball. It's like the part in Moneyball where Beane is trying to convince Omar Minaya to add Youkilis into the Cliff Floyd trade. He tells him something to the effect of: "I can see the Boston papers now: 'Larry Lucchino misses out on Cliff Floyd to keep fat third baseman in Double A'" The Cubs knew that Theo would come at a price, that he'd require a fair amount of compensation and now they're getting sticker shock. You can't just have one of the elite general managers in all of baseball when he's under contract. A price has to be paid. Holding out hope that the Red Sox will "blink first" is amateurish. Missing out on getting him would be a disaster. If you think going with Randy Bush (worst case scenario, continuing as interim for a year) or much more likely going with Hahn, Byrnes or somebody like that instead of Theo will prevent the Cubs from being serious player for CJ Wilson, Pujols, Fielder or CC (if he's available) then you and your sources are insane. They may very well not be players for those guys, but that will have nothing to do with having or not having Theo as GM. Having or not having him will not be what prevents the Cubs from going after any FA.

Offering compensation that is much higher than what should be required, or appropriate, and having Boston still stall because of personal reasons will not make the Cubs look bad or incompetent if they walk away. On the contrary, it will make Henry and Lucchino (in particular) look like they were doing it purely to punish Theo. It already looks like that. If anything falls through, Ricketts simply tells fans that Boston was wanting more than what was reasonable, and go hire someone else. There would be little backlash amongst Cubs fans because of that. And Boston is stuck with a guy they don't want, don't have room for and still have to pay him $6.5 mil to do nothing.