Backtobanks

Well they need a 3B assuming ARod isn't playing and they need pitching. A friend told me he saw someone floating a Gardner and prospects for Samardzija but I'm sure there's no truth to that and as much as I like Gardner, the Yankees' pitching prospects aren't interesting enough that I would do that trade. Villanueva + Valbuena for Gardner + pitching prospect? I really can't fathom why the Cubs would go after Gardner (and this is coming from somebody who really likes Gardner.) Grab him in free agency after this season. Don't give up prospects or valuable pieces like Valbuena for him when we aren't going to compete this year anyways. At some point you need to start filling holes with players that could be around for a few years. What if someone gets him before we do (in a trade plus extension)? As for the "we aren't going to compete this year anyways" argument, we might be using that more times than we want if we don't start filling holes. Better yet, certainly would rather give up Barney than Valbuena.

Well they need a 3B assuming ARod isn't playing and they need pitching. A friend told me he saw someone floating a Gardner and prospects for Samardzija but I'm sure there's no truth to that and as much as I like Gardner, the Yankees' pitching prospects aren't interesting enough that I would do that trade. Villanueva + Valbuena for Gardner + pitching prospect?

We can judge what they've done at the ML level "so far" and it's been embarrassing. I think a lot of posters (including me) are willing to wait for our prospects, assuming the timeline is reasonable. Unfortunately, the 2014 Cubs look like they will again be awful. Much of this discussion was based on the hypothetical situation of the Cubs "not turning the corner" by the end of Theo's contract. I stand by my statement that if the Cubs aren't a serious contender by the end of Theo's contract, then Theo and his plan failed. If that happens we shouldn't overlook 5 years of frustration because of a million excuses and his IQ. Hopefully all of this is moot and the prospects will be everything we hoped for so that we can win a WS in the near future.

If the Cubs don't make an on-field turnaround while Theo is here, why would you be upset that he leaves? If we're still floundering after 5 years, he failed and it's time to let someone else try to fix it. Please go away. Well it's true. If they have 5 years of not contending, that's not doing his job. If somehow that scenario were to play out, my belief that Theo is one of the smartest and most capable people at doing what he does would incline me to believe that whatever it was, it probably wasn't his fault. It's either the money continued to dry up further and the revenue increasing stuff was a colossal failure, horrific injury luck, or some other crazy thing. In other words, like Brandon said, basically my position is if Theo can't do it, who the hell can? Theo might not be as superior to the replacement level GM as he used to be, but I don't think you can do much better. So you're saying that just because Theo is smart, he can't fail. The idol worshipping of Theo by some of you borders on insanity. This is the first time Theo took a bad team (and system), tore it apart, and is trying to rebuild it from scratch. The Red Sox were a solid team (89 win average) when Theo took over and he made it an excellent team (93 win average). He is very smart and very capable, but he is human and humans are capable of failure.

If the Cubs don't make an on-field turnaround while Theo is here, why would you be upset that he leaves? If we're still floundering after 5 years, he failed and it's time to let someone else try to fix it.

Haha, that's awesome for some reason. Player-coach, plz. As a player, he'd probably cost more than Ricketts wants to spend.

Sometimes you make a deal like this in order to have a TOR guy available when you do need him. It's not much different than paying a FA for years after he will be productive in order to get him when you need him. No. You never make a deal like that. I've been saying all along that at some point you need to start adding players that will fill a need now and in the future. Waiting until 2016 to find whatever missing pieces you need assumes that the right players are available and we will outbid all of the other teams to acquire them.

Sometimes you make a deal like this in order to have a TOR guy available when you do need him. It's not much different than paying a FA for years after he will be productive in order to get him when you need him.

Fun 3-way trade proposal from Schoenfield at ESPN: Cubs, White Sox, Yankees Cubs: Trade Mike Olt, C.J. Edwards, Jorge Soler, Dan Vogelbach, acquire Chris Sale, David Phelps Yankees: Trade Gary Sanchez, Zoilo Almonte, Vidal Nuno, Phelps, acquire Addison Reed, Olt, Vogelbach White Sox: Trade Sale, Reed, acquire Edwards, Soler, Sanchez, Almonte, Nuno OK, OK, OK, the White Sox aren't going to trade Sale -- especially to their city rivals. But we can dream, right? And there's no denying the White Sox are a franchise in need of a reboot, with talent issues on the 40-man roster and in the minors. Sale is an enticing trade bait since he's signed through 2019 and would help get some talent to the South Side as the team rebuilds. The Cubs have a deep list of prospects, but what they don't have is an ace. They give the White Sox their top pitching prospect in Edwards, who came over from the Rangers in the Matt Garza trade last summer. Edwards dominated Class A, allowing just 76 hits in 116.1 innings while striking out 155 -- and giving up just one home run. The White Sox also get Cuban outfielder Soler, a powerfully built 21-year-old who could reach the majors in 2015. Desperately in need of a catcher, from the Yankees the White Sox get Sanchez, the Yankees' top prospect who can be dealt with the signing of Brian McCann. Almonte and Nuno are cheap roster fillers who have some potential to contribute. Olt and Vogelbach are blocked in Cubs land by Kris Bryant and Anthony Rizzo, so they go to the Yankees. Olt can replace Alex Rodriguez at third base -- immediately -- and Vogelbach would give the Yankees a power-hitting prospect for first base or DH.

Good point. I'll bet they won't be ignoring the local hacks if/when the Cubs actually become a good team.

Yeah, I don't see too many other teams jumping in on 8years/$200 million.

I know for a fact that the Cubs are interested in having Youkilis be their back-up 1B/3B and a veteran presence/clubhouse leader. My understanding is that the FO will wait to see if Youkilis gets an offer to start somewhere, and will follow up with him in late December/early January if he's still on the market. Assuming he would be cheap enough, Michael Young might be an interesting FA signing. Fits the role of backup 1B/3B (or even middle IF) and a veteran presence/clubhouse leader.

So does Brad Ziegler get to decide the max contract somebody suspended for PEDs gets to receive? Or do we need blood from the stone and ban guys for multiple seasons? I didn't say that and honestly I don't know what the answer is. Here is how it looks to me though, I could easily be wrong: Player A is going into the final year of his contract. He decides to take the chance at getting caught and juices up to boost his numbers in that final year. It works but he does get caught. He apologizes and sits for the required 50 games, comes back that season, gets to play in the playoffs and signs a large contract that offseason with another contender. To me, it doesn't seem like the punishment was adequate. Like I said, I could be wrong, but the timing and the results cannot be argued. 50 games is probably not enough but I don't know what is nor do I know if the team, the Tigers in this case, shouldn't be forced to feel some of that pain too. Unfortunately that's the penalty that's in place right now. That's why so many players and prospects are willing to take the chance of getting caught. The reward (increased production, big contract, etc.) certainly outweighs the risk (50 game suspension). Nelson Cruz Seeking Four-Year, $75MM Deal

I don't think it's been expressed enough, but thank you for sharing your rumor-mill knowledge. It doesn't really matter to me connecting actual moves to rumors for some kind of accuracy count, it's a great read either way and puts a little shape around front office thinking. I agree that it's interesting to get actual names tied to teams and nothing extra. Too many of these threads go off on a tangent.

So does Brad Ziegler get to decide the max contract somebody suspended for PEDs gets to receive? Or do we need blood from the stone and ban guys for multiple seasons? I didn't say that and honestly I don't know what the answer is. Here is how it looks to me though, I could easily be wrong: Player A is going into the final year of his contract. He decides to take the chance at getting caught and juices up to boost his numbers in that final year. It works but he does get caught. He apologizes and sits for the required 50 games, comes back that season, gets to play in the playoffs and signs a large contract that offseason with another contender. To me, it doesn't seem like the punishment was adequate. Like I said, I could be wrong, but the timing and the results cannot be argued. 50 games is probably not enough but I don't know what is nor do I know if the team, the Tigers in this case, shouldn't be forced to feel some of that pain too. Unfortunately that's the penalty that's in place right now. That's why so many players and prospects are willing to take the chance of getting caught. The reward (increased production, big contract, etc.) certainly outweighs the risk (50 game suspension).

Absorb some of the money that we don't have to spend.

Sure could've fooled me. After he signs with another team, we'll hear that the FO made a "serious bid".

Absolutely nothing absurd about exploring different scenarios on paper and assigning weighted probablities to see what decisions bubble up. Scenario planning is a tool used by many in and out of baseball. I totally agree with you Hoops. I thought the whole point of hiring Theo was using technology to evaluate players and plan scenarios to acquire the players needed to win the WS. Many of the discussions here involve which amateurs will be drafted next year, which FAs will be available, etc.

I don't know what you're drinking (or smoking), but it's pretty potent stuff. You're right. We just need to bring Hendry back. He can work out a three way deal where we move Vitters, Jackson, Barney, and Lake for Trout and Cabrera. Then we are golden. I guess you're still fixated on Hendry. If you think signing a few mid-tier FAs are going to get us to about 88 wins, then you're drunk, stoned, or crazy.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value. It's not nonsense. If they make out better by moving, whether they bought those properties or not, then they make out better by moving. You realize that the possibility of making more money despite those other assets not appreciating (or depreciating) exists as well, right? Saying otherwise is pure nonsense. They might "make out better" eventually, but they would start out with the huge debt they would take on all of the real estate investments they made around Wrigley. Not necessarily, for [expletive]'s sake. If the Cubs moved out of Wrigley, property values would plummet. Do you really think all of those buildings in Wrigleyville are worth what they're selling for?

I don't know what you're drinking (or smoking), but it's pretty potent stuff.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value. It's not nonsense. If they make out better by moving, whether they bought those properties or not, then they make out better by moving. You realize that the possibility of making more money despite those other assets not appreciating (or depreciating) exists as well, right? Saying otherwise is pure nonsense. They might "make out better" eventually, but they would start out with the huge debt they would take on all of the real estate investments they made around Wrigley.

The official song for this offseason:

Most teams that finish 16 games under .500 with the oldest roster in baseball don't attempt to get older in the offseason Well at least they won't be lacking in experience and veteran leadership. :lol:

Yeah, Rookie league and low A ball.