Backtobanks

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing. Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. I'm sure most there won't necessarily be those kind profits in the near future, but I think they will continue to be extremely profitable. The owners who end up in trouble financially are the ones who screw up their personal lives or outside business ventures.

I think you're overstating it. None of these people bought teams primarily to make money off them. I think you're overstating it. I can't believe you know that there isn't any sports franchise owner who bought a team for the profit potential. I would guess that the overwhelming majority of owners bought primarily for profit/tax write offs as opposed to ego/bucket list.

If someone's just looking for profit, there are much much better ways than a sports franchise. They do make money, but for these mega-rich guys, owning a team is more a bucket list type thing. Bucket list type things are sailing to Tahiti, owning a sports franchise may be an ego thing, but it's extremely profitable. The Cubs were sold to the Tribune Co. in 1981 for $20.5 million and then sold to Ricketts for $900 million in 2009. If you know a better way to make that much profit, let me know. Some of the worst owners in sports end up selling for a lot more than they paid for a franchise.

If owners are reluctant to sign him to a big money, 6-7 year contract @ 27 years old, I can't imagine how many teams would be in on a big money contract when he's 30 years old.

And let's not forget that the owners get a tax write off on everything under the sun to add to their profits. These guys are smart, successful business men and none of them are losing money. That's why there's always lots of interest when a sports franchise goes up for sale.

Here's a better option than Reed Johnson: Yakult Swallows Sign Lastings Milledge By Ben Nicholson-Smith [December 27 at 6:26pm CST] The Tokyo Yakult Swallows have announced the signing of outfielder Lastings Milledge, according to a Sanspo report passed on by Patrick Newman of NPB Tracker. The deal is worth approximately $570K plus performance bonuses and includes a club option for 2013. The Mets selected Milledge, now 26, with the 12th overall selection in the 2003 draft. He made the Major Leagues in 2006 and posted a .787 OPS in '07 as a 22-year-old. However the Mets traded him to Washington after the 2007 season and before long the Nationals sent him to Pittsburgh. Milledge signed with the White Sox before the 2011 season, but appeared in just two games for Chicago. He spent most of the season at Triple-A, where he posted a .295/.364/.441 line in 505 plate appearances.

I think there's a whole lotta Theo koolaide being passed around.

The way they're going, Wood would get $100 million for 2012.

That's the one thing that everyone (especially the FO) needs to keep in mind. Don't settle for anything less than a perfect package because Garza is an ace and is still young enough, cheap enough, and under team control to help us build for the future.

I agree they need pitching, but I doubt that they would move Myers for a pitcher when they are quite ready to contend.

I would think trading Garza has to get you at least one young pitcher that can step right into the rotation. Also, we certainly need offensive help.

The trade that you said we were giving up too much had the Yankees giving up Banuelos (to the Cubs) and Betances (to the Padres). I told you that you are hard to please. Im not saying that I wouldnt like the last proposal, the Yankees wouldn't go for it. I really can't see them moving Banuelos and Betance. They'd probably try to move Nova well before either and I'm sure that a lot of NSBBers would waste little time with the Randy Wells comments if we got Nova. Well if the Yankees don't want to make the deal, I'm sure their rivals (Red Sox or Blue Jays) might want to make a deal. If Banuelos/Betances are so valuable, replace one of them with Hughes instead of offering Nova.

The trade that you said we were giving up too much had the Yankees giving up Banuelos (to the Cubs) and Betances (to the Padres). I told you that you are hard to please.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-111224-mlb-whispers,0,7654232.story Come on B2B, it's christmas. Give it your best shot. Merry Christmas: Cubs trade Garza and Dolis to the Yankees and Junior Lake to the Padres. Yankees trade Betances to the Padres and Robert Segedin and Banuelos to the Cubs Padres trade Rizzo to the Cubs Cubs end up with Rizzo, Banuelos, and Segedin Padres end up with Lake and Betances Yankees end up with Garza and Dolis If we're giving up that much we best be ending up with either Montero or Headley as well. You guys are hard to please. Everybody criticizes me for making my proposals too one-sided in favor of the Cubs, so when I have the Cubs giving up more you complain. My original proposals for trading Garza to the Yankees included Montero, but people said he has no position (basically a DH). We could forget about Rizzo and the Padres completely and try something along the lines of: Garza + Russell for Montero + Banuelos + Segedin + prospect Obviously this deal wouldn't please the people who want Rizzo, but I'm sure they would get over it when they see Montero hit. Hopefully he would produce more runs offensively than he would give up defensively.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-111224-mlb-whispers,0,7654232.story Come on B2B, it's christmas. Give it your best shot. Merry Christmas: Cubs trade Garza and Dolis to the Yankees and Junior Lake to the Padres. Yankees trade Betances to the Padres and Robert Segedin and Banuelos to the Cubs Padres trade Rizzo to the Cubs Cubs end up with Rizzo, Banuelos, and Segedin Padres end up with Lake and Betances Yankees end up with Garza and Dolis

I guess I don't know what you're criticizing. Are you saying that the Cubs should have taken an extended period of not attempting to win games at the major league level in order to focus entirely on the farm system? If so, I strongly disagree with you. It's very possible to build a good, sustainable farm system while also making efforts to contend at the major league level. Plenty of big market teams have done it and the Cubs could have to - and they tried. However, their failure came in not targeting the right players. They focused solely on big time athletes with little to no baseball skills on the offensive side, and extremely hard throwers with little to no control on the pitching side. Too many of those players flamed out and that led to highly rated farm systems not panning out the way they should have. Their failure in the farm had nothing to do with their attempts at winning each season at the major league level and it wasn't due to lack of funds or resources put into the farm, there was plenty of both. The failure came in what types of players they targeted. No, not saying that at all. Quite the opposite. The goal should always be winning. I am in complete agreement that large market teams have options available that allow for building from within while also pursuing FA acquisitions. My criticism is that the Cubs have been terrible on both fronts to the point that a massive re-tooling is needed. I don't criticize Hendry for trying. I criticize the result. Fast forward to today, and we have a tear-down/ rebuild in progress. Much needed and long overdue. That said, I think that Theo and company will pull the trigger on a big ticket FA if a deal makes sense. The money and years of any such deal have to jive with the mission statement and benefit the future of the franchise. Thus far, I haven't seen any moves that I wish would have been made. I have every confidence in this group to build the team the right way moving forward. Both at the major and minor league levels. For that, I'm willing to give them some time to lay out the big picture. The only type of FA that would fit the highlighted section above would seem to be a 25-year old superstar and unfortunately most of them don't qualify for free agency.

I think you are being far too pessimistic and are drawing conclusions based purely on conjecture. Were you making these statements 2 years into the new front office, it would be understandable. Simply stated, we do not have any idea of the big picture just yet. So maybe the FO ought to tell the paying public exactly what the "big picture" is instead of expecting everyone to "keep the faith" when they sign Reed Johnson because it's part of a mysterious big plan. To address the bold above: Soto and Marmol are known commodities. They are not prospects and do not have large upside or downside. They are what they are. They are established major league players and their value will not change accordingly. They are both valuable trading chips. If Marmol's arm explodes or if either has another bad season, they become much less valuable. Signing Cespedes or Soler et al will have an impact on the farm system rating should those moves happen. In the case of Cespedes, he will not be in the minor leagues for long, if at all, so the point is moot. That said, the plan Theo and the front office is working as a whole will boost the farm system rating much quicker than signing a couple of high impact players. The farm is rated as a whole, from top to bottom, not by impact or major league ready prospects. What major league roster is this based on? The expected rosters of the 2012 & 2013 Chicago Cubs. Was there a poll taken? Yes, fans that have waited for better than a century will not wait another 2-3 years for a perennial contender. /hyperbole. The poll will be taken at the box office when the team loses revenue for 2-3 years. Looks like someone is trying to beat the rush.

It will be great to walk up to the gate to buy tickets on game day though. I remember the pitiful teams in the late 50s when attendance was 6,000 on many dates. Ticket revenue, concessions, advertising, and souvenirs all go downhill with a losing team. Back then they had a disinterested rich owner using the team as a tax write off as opposed to a rich fan owner.

Everything you posted is fine except you're now talking 5 years down the road instead of 2013 or 2014. I had high expectations when Theo was hired, but I expected results in 2-3 years and not after he signs an extension to his 5 year contract. It's almost like a President who doesn't get much done in his first term because he's running for re-election and finally can get stuff accomplished in his second term.

If Sappelt is a corner guy only, then I think it's a pretty big longshot that he's more than a marginal starter. I'd be all for some hybrid form of platoon between him and Soriano to try to keep Soriano healthy, but I wouldn't tank what little chance we have to get value out of Soriano on the longshot chance that Sappelt improves with the beat enough to hold down a corner OF spot. If he can play CF well, though, that's a different story entirely. Does Sappelt have to improve to beat out Soriano? I mean, what's a realistic projection for Sappelt? 280/320/400 with good defense? "Marginal starter" is a good tag for that production, but I'm not sure Soriano can do better at this point. You aren't going to put an $18 million OF that you are trying to trade on the bench to play a "marginal starter".

Not all upcoming opportunities are apparent to us right now. Obviously Pujols and Prince were/are top tier assets at a position that needs to be filled. It's also true that there aren't a lot of FA options in coming years. That being said, you can't let those facts put you in a "must get" position. Albert went for too much and if someone gives Prince 9-10 years, you just have to let it go (if you're smart). The Cubs have money, but by no means does that mean they should adopt a "we'll get player X at any cost" mentality towards anyone. That's foolishness; you pay up until the point it stops making sense. You say you're discouraged the Cubs didn't make a "competitive offer" for Pujols. IMO, an offer in the 9-10 year 250/275 range would have been something more than competitive: it would have been stupid. And fortunately, not all potential solutions are ones that we here see. If Theo and Jed decide they want to load up on prospects and young player via trades and turn some of those into trades for ML players later, that's one avenue. Surely they have things in mind that we aren't thinking about. The Cubs can't field a team of buy-low veteran players for more than a year without impacting revenue, they surely know that. IMO, the frustration here is stemming from them not making moves (so far) that we wanted them to, but as much or more so from the lack of transparency regarding what's going on. And really, you can't make any valid judgement about what they're doing without looking at it in a larger context that we can't see yet. I was hoping for the team to be aggressive about 2012, but was prepared for the possibility that the year would be spent clearing the table. I can't believe it will take very long. With the money the Cubs have and if the Theo and Jed keep making moves and adding assets like they did this week they'll be in a position go out and acquire pieces we need later. And again, the offseason isn't over yet. Again, I try to be as optimistic as many of you, but "acquiring the pieces we need later" makes it sound like everybody else is going to sit on the sideline when it comes to FAs or give in to Theo on trades. The Yankees and Red Sox basically sat out this offseason, but I wouldn't count on that happening in the coming years. Other GMs have learned to overprice their impact players and their top prospects. A lot of Theo's plan is based on hope - hoping Jackson can be a star, hoping Stewart bounces back to his original draft potential, hoping Byrd/Soriano/Marmol/Zambrano/Dempster can have great 1st halves to become trade bait, etc.

Every move they've made to this point has signaled a classic burn it down and start all over again rebuild. Some of the moves have been good (DeJesus, Marshall), some have been kinda neutral (Stewart, Corpas), some have been mind-boggling (Reed). But the common thread has been filling holes with cheap vets/high risk youth in the hopes that you can look respectable for a season or two while you rebuild the minors. I'll admit I'm still frustrated over missing on Pujols. I'd have been ok with 10/275 for a historically great hitter who fills a major need where we have 0 ML talent above rookie ball. I'd have certainly preferred that to doling out huge sums of money to multiple FA pitchers next offseason to have any hope of contending. Adding Pujols would be a big risk, but a calculated one and one that fills a hole that will be incredibly difficult to fill going forward. They're going to have to give up assets at this point to get a first baseman and we have much more money available than assets. My biggest frustration there, though, is that we reportedly didn't even make a competitive offer. On Darvish, that's not Theo/Jed's fault. They put in what they felt was a fair bid and likely were in line with everyone else. If the bid was $20 million or less, I'll be disappointed they didn't go higher, but they likely hit right around market value and it can't be helped that a team went way above market in a blind bid. I really wanted Wilson, but I don't fault them there either. It was clear he was going to the Angels and it would have taken a silly contract to pry him away. There are other free agents out there, but I have serious doubts about whether we'll pursue them. If the philosophy going forward is to not overpay for FAs, then that's admirable but it's going to guarantee an extended rebuilding process. Given the lackluster attempt at pursuing Pujols and the carelessness of tossing around needless millions (Reed and Corpas), I'm beginning to think the reports that they're not serious or don't have the funds for Prince are the more likely to be accurate. I could be wrong and I hope I am, but I've not seen anything this season that leads me to believe differently. If I was seeing some parallel fronts stuff, I'd agree. But the only improvements they've made to the major league roster have been Wood over our 5th starters and DeJesus over our RF. Third base is likely a major downgrade and they didn't make a serious attempt at improving first when Pujols was available. If they go get Prince and, say, Cespedes then I'll be wrong and happy about it. But I think the trend we're seeing is indicating otherwise. It's not about resources at this point, it's about opportunities. This becomes less a full rebuild and more a lengthy reload if we go get Prince, but if we miss on him what impact talent is out there? Nothing this offseason (Cespedes might be potential impact, but that's it) and only pitching next offseason. We'll basically go into the offseason absolutely needing 2 of the FA starters to have any shot at contending next year with how mediocre (optimistically) our offense is likely to be. First off how likely are we to sign two of those free agents, and how smart is it to give 6-8 years to one pitcher with a decent amount of mileage on his arm, much less two of them? And even if we sign two of the FA pitchers, we're still losing Dempster and Zambrano. Neither is great anymore, but both are still solid 2-3 win players (adding in Z's offense there). We're really only gaining a few wins over the two of them and may still have questions at the back end of our rotation - what if Shark doesn't cut it as a starter, what if Cashner doesn't develop enough arm strength to start? If we don't get Prince, I simply think there's way too many needs, questions, and unknowns to realistically think we can contend in 2013. But Theo's really good at what he does, so he may make me look silly on this. And I hope he does. Great post. The only thing I disagree with is your comment about looking respectable for a season or two while you rebuild the minors. Right now the 2012 Cubs are nowhere near respectable and 2013 looks about the same. As you posted, I hope Theo proves me wrong.

They almost certainly wouldn't accept that, but they might accept a 6-7 year deal written so Fielder could opt out after year 3 or 4. 6-7 year deal with an opt out after 3-4 years sounds great if we can backload it. $18m., $20m., $22m., $24m., $26m., $28m., $30m with opt out after 3 years. it sure wouldn't be great if prince starts to suck No realistic contract would be great if he starts to suck.

They almost certainly wouldn't accept that, but they might accept a 6-7 year deal written so Fielder could opt out after year 3 or 4. 6-7 year deal with an opt out after 3-4 years sounds great if we can backload it. $18m., $20m., $22m., $24m., $26m., $28m., $30m with opt out after 3 years.

One of my problems is that Theo seems to be following Hendry in adding veteran "filler" in spots where prospects could easily do the same job (i.e. Johnson, Corpas, etc.). If we're going to suck next year, let's see what the kids can do.