Backtobanks

Let's not resort to the argument from authority. It can go both ways. Some pretty smart teams acquired pitching at the deadline this year. Some pretty smart GMs sold pitching. It's a fallacious argument at best. The "smart teams" that acquired pitching at the deadline were the teams that are the teams now now favored to go deep into the playoffs or to win the WS. The "smart GMs" that sold pitching realized that they had no chance of winning, so it was best to cash in the most valuable asset they had (pitching).

What's the rush, Hoyer was quoted in today's Tribune that he knows they need to add pitching throughout the system and that's their goal in the next 18-24 months. So everyone just calm down and wait until 2017 (or until the next quote on when we might actually contend). I understand I'm simply wasting time here, but you do understand that adding pitching the the system over the next 18-24 months has little to nothing to do with when we will contend, right? Well unless we add some serious pitching to the ML rotation, we certainly won't be contending soon. Since the "Plan" seems to be to wait until our players get enough time in the minors to fully develop and we're not going to spend big money until we're "close". Even if most of our offensive prospects click, we still are woefully lacking in pitching and pitching prospects. The bottom line is that pitching is what wins for the most part as evidenced by all of the biggest names dealt at the deadline (and before).

What's the rush, Hoyer was quoted in today's Tribune that he knows they need to add pitching throughout the system and that's their goal in the next 18-24 months. So everyone just calm down and wait until 2017 (or until the next quote on when we might actually contend).

From MLBTR:Reds Dangling Mat Latos In Trades By Steve Adams [July 31, 2014 at 1:01pm CDT] Coming off a dreadful losing streak, the Reds have dangled right-hander Mat Latos in trades, according to ESPN’s Jayson Stark (on Twitter). The 26-year-old Latos would represent a huge impact on the starting pitching market. He’s posted a 3.31 ERA with 5.6 K/9, 1.9 BB/9 and a 32.5 percent ground-ball rate in 55 1/3 innings this season since being activated from the DL. While those strikeout and ground-ball rates are down, Latos has been among the NL’s best young starters over the past several seasons. He owns a a 3.27 ERA with 8.2 K/9 and 2.6 BB/9 in 850 2/3 innings dating back to 2010. I wonder what kind of package it would take for us to get Latos.

Which is a nice indicator that the Cubs will actually try in 2015. Not trading Schierholtz last year didn't indicate much.

Theo was brought here to win a WS. He has complete autonomy over baseball operations according to PTR and Theo. As for the money situation, Theo has made gigantic offers (but not enough) to Darvish and Tanaka, so I assume there's money there to spend. The way it looks now there's a chance that we might make the playoffs in 2016 (the last year of his 5-year contract). Getting to the playoffs is fine, but it's not that great of an accomplishment with the 2-wildcard system. I'm tired of reading about real estate, law suits, and what cheap FAs we can sign and flip next year. The time is now (2014 offseason) to show that ownership and the FO is serious about building the Cubs into a WS winner or 100-win juggernaut.

He's had a little more success since leaving Colorado (though he never really had worse numbers at home). He had some success in relief this year, before going back into the rotation in May. Valbuena has pretty much gone back to his previous norms average wise in the last month and a half, but is really not walking as much as he had been either. Ultimately, he'll be a utility guy and I think a 25-yo starter at best or decent reliever at worst is probably slightly more valuable. That being said, I'm pretty much with you. I'd probably do the deal, but I'd hope it would be on the table a little later. I know the ML team doesn't matter, but I really don't want the alternatives playing everyday at 3B (Olt, Watkins, Valaika?) if Valbuena is gone. And that goes for the start of 2015 until one of the young guys establishes himself at the ML level. The A's need a 2B bad and very soon. If Pomeranz is on the table, I'd jump on it. That said, Valbuena has value to the Cubs for his versatility and ability to be a decent stopgap until the kids are up AND have no problem coming off the bench when that time comes. His selectivity at the plate and the moderate pop in his bat profiles as a good pinch hitter. I like him but for the lottery ticket that is Pomeranz (5th pick overall, 25 years old, MOR ceiling, good reliever floor), I'd do it. Milone requested a trade according to MLBTR. It might be interesting to trade Valbuena + ??????? for Milone and Pomeranz to give us some possible depth to our future rotation.

Yeah, he's going to play the role of Bonifacio for now. Is it just me or is it very clear EXACTLY who (and in the same role) each of our super prospects will be replacing? Almost as though each of the stop gaps was brought in to hold a very specific spot... I think it's very much up in the air. Are you saying Starlin is a placeholder for Russell? I really think that they have a lot of options with the types of players they have in the minors. Everything is up in the air because some of the super prospects may not make it and/or will be traded for pitching at some point.

If we're not better next year, there's always 2016 (or 2017) to look forward to.

I think most active people here are 30-50. I'll bet the one I responded to isn't in that age range.

Mine is just as obvious - Mr. Cub. Ernie came along when I was the age to start getting into baseball and was basically the only reason to follow the Cubs for quite a few years. Wait, you're in your 60s? He's Backtobanks. As in, he goes all the way back to Banks. I guess I was picturing douchebag, 20-something meatball, not old, curmudgeon meatball...but really, either works. Yeah, I'm an old curmudgeon meatball that doesn't mind posting with a bunch of douchebag, 20-something meatballs.

Mine is just as obvious - Mr. Cub. Ernie came along when I was the age to start getting into baseball and was basically the only reason to follow the Cubs for quite a few years.

Also, that more or less confirms that Theo does all the real work and Hoyer just fetches coffee or something. That's been pretty much a given since day one.

It's pretty incredible. My DBacks fan friends are just beyond exasperated at this point. This might be the reason (MLBTR) -The Diamondbacks placed now-Yankees pitcher Brandon McCarthy on waivers six to eight weeks ago, Joel Sherman of the New York Post tweets. That means anyone could have claimed him and assumed the remainder of his $9MM salary for 2014. No one bit.

Quite a few posters got pretty excited when the Cubs started playing better and winning some games. Good thing you kept a level head. Somebody has to do it.

Quite a few posters got pretty excited when the Cubs started playing better and winning some games.

I understand how good Russell is and I've not said a bad thing about that portion of the deal. But Shark is a legit TOR pitcher and he has fewer innings on his arm than pretty much any 29 year old stud you're going to find. We got a great talent, but we gave up a great talent too and the 2nd and 3rd pieces are intriguing, but questionable. Not a bad deal by any stretch, but I'm not sure it's exciting either. It's certainly not a bad deal, but just 1-2 days ago we were hearing that the asking price for Samardzija alone was 3 top prospects plus one other. It will be interesting to see what kind of deal the FO makes for pitching by using the surplus offensive prospects. Vogelbach, Soler, Almora, and Alcantara could all be expendable depending on how prospects develop and take to playing new positions.

That would be okay if we had seven other above average position players and a great pitching staff.

I didn't say that he's not a "damn good talent judge". The Padres might want him because they hired him before and obviously thought he had talent.

It could also have something to do with the fact that McLeod came from the Padres.

I think that's a good thing for the Cubs. It sets the price and takes Price off the market. Yeah, but how many teams are willing to pay 3-4 good prospects for a top pitcher? Whatever that number might be will be reduced by one if Price is traded first. Also, whatever the Rays get for Price might have been the guys we were going to get for Shark.

Hope the Cubs don't wait too long or the market might be reduced. From MLBTR: While no deal is imminent at the moment, rival officials tell ESPN’s Buster Olney that the Rays are prepared to move David Price “right now” if the right offer presents itself

Ken Rosenthal mentioned that trading Cashner would speed up rebuilding for the Padres. After loading up on prospects from trading Hammel, Shark, and whoever else, it might be interesting to check on what the Padres might want for Cashner.

I don't think they want or need Barney.

I have read some of the posts that other members have posted, but I do have a little trouble understanding how a player with a negative WAR (Ruggiano this year) has better numbers than someone (Schierholtz) who had a positive WAR last year. Am I wrong in assuming a positive WAR is better statistically than a negative WAR? Well, let's go super simple then. One guy made an out 69.9% of the time and the other made an out 64.6% of the time. Which one was more successful? Which is one problem with all of the statistics thrown around - often one stat contradicts another.