Backtobanks

No he didn't, but I'm starting to see more posters finally wondering if this is going to turn around using a reasonable timeline. I've said all along that Theo is very smart and will end up making the organization much better, but I was hoping for a decent team in 2012, .500 team in 2013, contender in 2014, and WS appearance in 2015 and beyond. Many posters seem to think that a 95-win juggernaut yearly is a guarantee in a few years and I'm not convinced of that. All of this speculation is based on the vast majority of our home grown prospects becoming productive ML players and the odds of that happening aren't great. Good lord, for someone who LIVES for the fictitional trade scenario, you really have no clue how to grasp what a farm system does. I can unequivocally say that NO, we will NOT win 90ish games with basically a homegrown team within the next 2-3 years. Guess what? The FO doesn't think that either. But they know if you've got an excess of bigtime prospects, you can go out and add around a FEW of the younger guys that stick via trade(for younger cost controlled guys, not 33 year olds, for the most part) and still have more prospects either coming or that can be traded later on as well. Add in a few FA to fill in as well and not only do you have a very good, very young team, you still have plenty of financial flexibility as well moving forward. Go ask the Angels or the Marlins if they would have done things differently this past offseason right about now...... I totally understand what a farm system does. Perhaps you don't understand the odds of us having "an excess of bigtime prospects". Right now we have an excess of bigtime prospect's names. Until our ML prospects and our 19-20 year old prospects prove something at their respective levels, we aren't going to be able to trade for those young, cost controlled guys. As for the "fictional trade scenario", why don't you look at how many other posters have suggested trading Vitters or Jackson for some young, cost-controlled, and productive player. Yes, as I suspected, you have NO CLUE. The guys in our system now are not nearly enough to do anything with, as far as what I'm talking about. You need another year or two's worth of high impact guys before you have enough to bother attempting what I think the plan is. And guess what? It's not the current admin's fault as to why our farm system wasn't able to do that immediately for them. The last year was the only year they spent big in a time when you could and should have been doing it all the time. This takes time and as I just outlined, your idea of having a decent team on the field at all times hurts the longterm idea of having a great one at some point. As for trading Brett or Vitters? I'm actually one of the posters that's mentioned it. Unfortunately, either or both would have to really come on strong as hell the rest of the season in order to bother justifying it, because neither is worth anything close to being able to get a true young difference maker as the lead piece at this exact moment. So you rpobably work with them and hope they become a guy that can be thought of as a lead trade piece or a longterm starter, but right now, neither guy is either option. So you are in favor of tanking another year or two to get enough "high impact guys" in the farm system? So your plan is 3 years of lousy baseball to accumulate draft choices so we can then hope all of these prospects reach their potential and we can use them at the ML level or trade for young cost-controlled players? Of course that's dependent on most prospects reaching their potential and hoping nobody gets a career threatening injury. I guess you're much more patient than I am.

No he didn't, but I'm starting to see more posters finally wondering if this is going to turn around using a reasonable timeline. I've said all along that Theo is very smart and will end up making the organization much better, but I was hoping for a decent team in 2012, .500 team in 2013, contender in 2014, and WS appearance in 2015 and beyond. Many posters seem to think that a 95-win juggernaut yearly is a guarantee in a few years and I'm not convinced of that. All of this speculation is based on the vast majority of our home grown prospects becoming productive ML players and the odds of that happening aren't great. Good lord, for someone who LIVES for the fictitional trade scenario, you really have no clue how to grasp what a farm system does. I can unequivocally say that NO, we will NOT win 90ish games with basically a homegrown team within the next 2-3 years. Guess what? The FO doesn't think that either. But they know if you've got an excess of bigtime prospects, you can go out and add around a FEW of the younger guys that stick via trade(for younger cost controlled guys, not 33 year olds, for the most part) and still have more prospects either coming or that can be traded later on as well. Add in a few FA to fill in as well and not only do you have a very good, very young team, you still have plenty of financial flexibility as well moving forward. Go ask the Angels or the Marlins if they would have done things differently this past offseason right about now...... I totally understand what a farm system does. Perhaps you don't understand the odds of us having "an excess of bigtime prospects". Right now we have an excess of bigtime prospect's names. Until our ML prospects and our 19-20 year old prospects prove something at their respective levels, we aren't going to be able to trade for those young, cost controlled guys. As for the "fictional trade scenario", why don't you look at how many other posters have suggested trading Vitters or Jackson for some young, cost-controlled, and productive player.

No he didn't, but I'm starting to see more posters finally wondering if this is going to turn around using a reasonable timeline. I've said all along that Theo is very smart and will end up making the organization much better, but I was hoping for a decent team in 2012, .500 team in 2013, contender in 2014, and WS appearance in 2015 and beyond. Many posters seem to think that a 95-win juggernaut yearly is a guarantee in a few years and I'm not convinced of that. All of this speculation is based on the vast majority of our home grown prospects becoming productive ML players and the odds of that happening aren't great.

Volquez would be a hollow acquisition. Someone to acquire for the sake of acquiring him without providing any sort of major positive repercussions on the team's chances for success in the future. The FO does have to field a team in 2013. The rotation filler that we've used since the trade deadline certainly doesn't inspire confidence for 2013 or the future. Of course all of this is based on getting Volquez cheaply.

If it takes this administration 3 years to make us competitive than that's fail. That's crazy for a major market team to suck for three years just to gain draft picks, and never knowing if any of those picks will even pan out. We aren't the freaking Marlins. It's been my point all along that my big disagreement with this administration has been the timeline. It looks like 2012 & 2013 are going to be historically bad and with the CBA it's going to be hard to make a 20-25 game turn around in 2014 to become competitive. As others have pointed out that Shark and Wood are good for the middle and back of the rotation, there's nothing on the horizon to be optimistic about for the rest of the pitching staff. We can keep our fingers crossed about Jackson and Vitters, but they're certainly questionable at best. The bright hopes all seem to be 3-4 years away, but they are still just promising prospects that could be great ML players or busts.

From MLBTR: Edinson Volquez On Waivers By Ben Nicholson-Smith [August 22 at 3:32pm CST] The Padres have placed right-hander Edinson Volquez on waivers, Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe reports (on Twitter). Volquez drew interest leading up to the non-waiver trade deadline, so it would be surprising if he goes unclaimed. Teams routinely place players on waivers, even if they don't plan on trading them, so this is not an indication that the Padres intend to move Volquez. If he goes unclaimed, the Padres will be able to complete a trade just as easily as they could have before the current waiver period began three weeks ago. If a team claims Volquez, the Padres will have three choices. They can let him (and his contract) go to the claiming team, they can complete a trade with the claiming team, or they can pull him back off of waivers. National League teams will have claiming priority on Volquez. Volquez earns $2.24MM this year and is under team control through 2013 as an arbitration eligible player. The 29-year-old has a 4.18 ERA with 8.7 K/9 and 5.4 BB/9 in 148 2/3 innings over the course of 26 starts. Might be worth making a claim and getting him in a trade. Can't be worse than Volstad/Coleman/etc.

From MLBTR: •"It's no secret, we're going to need to improve our offense," said Indians manager Manny Acta to Paul Hoynes of The Cleveland Plain-Dealer when asked what his team needs to improve in 2013. "We're going to have to find a solution in left field, we're going to have to find a solution at first base and we're going to have to find a solution at DH. That's pretty obvious. And the third base situation is not determined either."

sometimes it's a player turning 27 and hitting their prime. The key word in your post is "sometimes".

Not too surprised about this. When a mediocre player suddenly turns into a superstar, it's usually not just a player suddenly discovering how to hit.

Yeah, that was too strong. I got a bit carried away. Out of curiosity, what is our current pace? We'd have to go 19-40 to finish the year with 100 losses, but I'm not sure what we're actually on pace for. 68-94. That pace is probably about to take a pretty big hit. I take it you don't think Germano/Volstad/Coleman can match Dempster and Maholm's production. :lol:

I thought I was the one who brought him into every discussion. :lol:

Not part of the master plan. Got to keep sucking to gain draft picks.

That doesn't make any sense. You think every team that bid besides the Rangers was just [expletive] around? Every article I saw before the bidding thought that the winning bid would be in the $48 - $50 million range, so unless you were going to bid somewhere near that you were just [expletive] around.

Obviously I'm talking about all of the 19-21 year olds that are in A ball or below. Like whom, exactly? Villanueva, Torreyes, Soler, Almora, etc.

Obviously I'm talking about all of the 19-21 year olds that are in A ball or below.

I don't hate Theo, I'm just anxiously awaiting results that we can see at Wrigley. As for mentioning Hendry, go through all of the deadline trade threads and see how many posters brought up Hendry. What's really one-note and tiring is that many posters can't discuss a topic for two pages without bringing up Hendry. He's gone, let's move on and discuss the moves that are being made (or need to be made) by this FO. you are the one who always gets hendry back into the same conversation. Obviously you didn't look at the hundreds of pages on trading, Garza, Dempster, Soto, etc. and notice who brought up his name. I certainly want Theo making good moves, but the problem is that we won't know if the moves he made are good until 2015 and beyond.

I don't hate Theo, I'm just anxiously awaiting results that we can see at Wrigley. As for mentioning Hendry, go through all of the deadline trade threads and see how many posters brought up Hendry. What's really one-note and tiring is that many posters can't discuss a topic for two pages without bringing up Hendry. He's gone, let's move on and discuss the moves that are being made (or need to be made) by this FO.

It's amazing to me that some of you can't get past your dislike for Hendry to see anything good that he did. I guess it's pretty much the same group that loves Theo so much that you can't admit he ever made a bad decision in his life. As for me, I've moved past Hendry and I'm hoping Theo & Co. can win a WS before we need to extend their contracts.

That's a big statement. While most GMs make their fair share mistakes,its one of the most desired jobs in sports, and there's only 30 of them out there. Whether we're talking Coletti, Hendry, Epstein, or Friedman, anyone who's ever made it to that point and stayed for any length of time, these guys are a lot more competent than even the smartest fans give them credit for. Most of these guys clawed their way up a ladder to get to where they are, and if they're doing a poor job, there's no shortage of guys waiting in line to take over. Also, a big market GM and a small market GM are very different jobs. With big market teams, the GMs job is to put a contender on the field every year. Obviously, unless you're the White Sox, the farm system's important. However, theres more pressure to contend each year and those prospects often become currency.With smaller market guys, it's to put a cost effective team on the field, and keep the farm system growing to work toward a window in which to contend sometime in the near future. When players become expensive, swap them out for cheaper ones. It's not often that you see a big market team do what Epstein and Hoyer are doing with the Cuba. I often wonder how Hendry, Colleti, or Cashman would make out in KC or Oakland Alternately, how would Andrew Friedman, Billy Beane or even Dayton Moore do with the Red Sox or Yankees. Well said! Also, all of the discussion comparing different GMs is ridiculous because of your point about big market/small market. Ownership told Hendry that his job while he was here was to spend a lot of money and try to buy a winning team. Theo's philosophy (backed by Ricketts) is to cut payroll and rebuild with the farm system. I think most guys who got this far in baseball would figure out a way to survive in another situation. Let's not forget that Theo took a very good Red Sox team (avg. 89 wins a season) and made them better (93 win avg.) with a huge payroll, but he has never dealt with a bad team that's going to rebuild with a decreasing payroll. I'm sure he will make the system better, but I'm not as confident as many of you that he will have a perennial 95-win juggernaut in the NL Central.

Only if you agree that half of all GMs are above average.

Maybe he subscribes to Theo's philosophy of making sure he gets the right number of AB at AAA because we know it has nothing to do with starting his ML "clock". :^o

Exactly my point. Coletti came out of this trade deadline with 4 big additions to his team without giving up his top prospects. Explain to me how this makes him an idiot or a bad GM.

Theo might be a very smart guy, but it bothers me that posters refer to most other GMs as idiots and somehow any success that they have had has been luck. Most of these guys have been in and around baseball all of their lives. I'm sure most owners wouldn't leave an "idiot" in the GM post for many years. All of the sabermetric analysis that Beane and Theo initiated has been implemented by most teams.

I don't agree with all of the posters who say that Maholm and DeJesus are easily replaced during the offseason. The expectation level of both signings wasn't super-high, but I'm not sure you would be able to replace their production for what we paid them. A random cheap OF and BOR starter don't describe the contributions they've made this year.

2013 - Horrible (prospect tryouts and dumpster diving) 2014 - showing signs of being decent (hopefully a few prospects show they belong in the ML and possibly 1 trade/signing of a young "star") 2015 - should be a contender with the FO finally spending some money. (prospects mature after 1-2 years in ML and FO buys/trades to fill in the remaining holes)