davearm2

Neifi, Miles, Macias, Grabow, etc., were inconsequential red herrings too, I guess. Reed's a bad player and will take up a chunk (small or not is irrelevant) of our payroll for no good reason. It's a poor move. Wood is a nice enough tweak if we had a good roster and just needed some good rotation depth. As it stands, he might keep us from dipping below 70 wins next year. The thing you disagreed with, though, was why we're in a rebuilding process. The point is, this team didn't need to be overhauled so radically that we completely ignore making the current roster better in the hopes that we might be decent in a couple of years. This team could have had a shot at contending this year while still fixing the minor leagues through the draft and IFA. We should have the payroll to do that, but it appears we've chosen the small-mid market path of punting multiple years while taking out time overhauling the roster. As I pointed out before, unless the renovations and other peripheral concerns are sapping our budget, we don't need to pretend we're a small market team. I don't agree that the Cubs are pretending they're a small market team. I also don't agree that they're close to contending in 2012. They're proceeding like a team that needs a large infusion of talent to be a contender. That harsh reality dictates the timetable, because acquiring those assets cannot be done overnight. Money really isn't the issue at all. If they could buy their way out of this situation, they probably would (and they still may do some of that, with the Cuban guys). But they can't. Put it this way -- if Prince Fielder or Albert Pujols had their best years still in front of them, then the Cubs would be all over them. The guys that have their best years in front of them also happen to be inexpensive (generally). The Cubs aren't interested in them because they're cheap, they're interested in them because they're improving.

So you sap even more talent from it and replace that sapped talent with Reed Johnson and Travis Wood? Unless this team is diverting its funds elsewhere, there's no reason we can't do the parallel fronts idea that Theo/Hoyer talked about after getting hired. There's no reason to punt at least 2012 and probably 2013-2014 as well when you're one of the biggest markets in the majors. Big market teams should reload (add talent to the major league roster while reforming the minor league roster as well) not tear completely down and rebuild for 2-3 years. Reed Johnson has instantly become a red herring. He's totally inconsequential in the big picture. Travis Wood, yes this is exactly the kind of player the Cubs should be targeting.

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode. It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good. So let's not try and improve the major league roster, let's try to improve the low minors. Your snide comment might actually have a thread of truth to it if the Cubs had actually done anything to improve the low minors. As it is, they replaced Ramirez with Stewart, and Marshall with Wood. Those new guys are major leaguers, FYI. See the point of a rebuild is to let go of the guys that won't be around by the time you're good again, and replace them with younger guys that can potentially be regular contributors, and help make you good again.

We need him because we need a good first baseman = good argument We need him because we need power = bad argument. I've heard both argued. The first is not even a good argument. The Cubs don't need a good first baseman, per se. The Cubs need good players, period. There's no specific positional mandate, because there are average or worse players pretty much all over the field, and plenty of flexibility to move guys as needed to accommodate new additions.

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode. It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good.

Not defending the signing necessarily, but I'd be willing to bet that Jed and Theo have predictive tools that are even more sophisticated than the method Rob applied for the article. Point being, this isn't news to them, and they decided to sign him anyway.

Because it doesn't cost anything, and they'd look like complete and utter incompetent boobs if they chose to sit out and the bidding didn't get as high as everyone expected.

Thankfully, putting the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012 isn't Theo's #1 priority. Building a perennial contender is Theo's #1 priority. Achieving that objective may involve trading guys like Garza and Marshall, even at the expense of 2012. But I'm sure you knew that. Because the only way to put a competitive team on the field in 2012 is by ruining the long-term future of the franchise. Don't start with this garbage again. Nobody's saying that.

Thankfully, putting the best baseball team possible on the field in 2012 isn't Theo's #1 priority. Building a perennial contender is Theo's #1 priority. Achieving that objective may involve trading guys like Garza and Marshall, even at the expense of 2012. But I'm sure you knew that.

Don't the ads populate based on other sites you've visited? It does for me. I keep seeing banner ads for triathlon gear I looked at awhile ago.

Because the team as comprised is really bad and the number of pieces out there that can change that are shrinking rapidly. I'm still going with 74 wins with what we have now, and that's with some awfully generous projections for guys like LaHair and Stewart. Fielder gets you to 78. A second base upgrade gets you to maybe 80. Where are the 10 wins worth of pitching depth to be had out there? Sadly, this. Start @ ~70 wins. Subtract Ramirez and Pena. Add DeJesus and Stewart. Even assuming good luck, it's hard to get above 75 with the current roster.

It's on MLB.com now too.

Agreed. And in other news, the Bay Packers finally lost a game.

I don't thin Bowden knows anything and he's certainly not breaking news with that tweet but it's curious he said "US" team... I surely would not assume that Jim Bowden knows that Toronto is not in the U.S.

I don't remember hearing a peep about DeJesus until the day he signed.

If none of Theo, Jed, Ricketts, etc are leaking anything, and if nobody from the Commissioner's office is leaking anything, then we don't know squat about where the Cubs stand. And both of those "ifs" have a strong likelihood of being true, IMO.

Did you read the 10 posts on this picture? A simple "Yes" would have required fewer keystrokes. And actually, you know, helped.

San Diego would be an odd destination for Garza. I can't wrap my head around all of this. All the connections between San Diego, Boston, and us. What with Hoyer leaving for San Diego, the Gonzalez/Rizzo deal, Epstein coming here, Hoyer coming here, Byrnes taking over there. Not sure if that would make a deal easier or more complicated. Definitely easier overall, IMO. Although everyone values the same attributes in the players, I'd say the trust/familiarity element is more impactful. I just don't see a guy like Garza going TO San Diego. They have spent the last decade shipping guys with FA on the horizon out of town.

I don't think we know anything more than the Blue Jays made a big bid.

San Diego would be an odd destination for Garza.

This trade went down like 5 minutes ago, how does heyman know we're interested in rizzo? The fact that he's a good prospect and was once in organizations led by the cubs' president and GM? I suspect he's just assuming we're interested without any real knowledge. Perhaps Heyman heard the Cubs are interested in Rizzo a month ago. It's not as though the Cubs' interest would be a byproduct of the Padres acquiring some other player. If they like Rizzo today, then they liked him yesterday too, I guess is what I'm trying to say.

Does anyone know why Nippon Ham is sitting on this?

you seem hung up on the 30 mil number when it's actually just over 5 million per year. either you're doing it wrong or you're being purposefully misleading. None of the above. I'm asking a different question that's only tangentially related to Cespedes.

That's all kinds of goofy. So a Canadian broadcast conglomerate is dictating the Jays' baseball operations? Maybe next they'll ask Jose Bautista to manage their 4G rollout. They also own the team. Yes I know. Then why do you find it goofy that the owner of the team is trying to control the operations of the team? That's all kinds of goofy. The executive officers of Rogers Communications valuating a Japanese pitcher doesn't strike you as odd? Kinda far afield from their area of expertise, no?

That's all kinds of goofy. So a Canadian broadcast conglomerate is dictating the Jays' baseball operations? Maybe next they'll ask Jose Bautista to manage their 4G rollout. They also own the team. That's all kinds of goofy. The Cubs have some sort of NEWSPAPER COMPANY telling them how much money they should spend? Have you heard this one guys?? Surely you can understand the difference between the parent company telling the team how much they have to spend, and dictating which players to spend it on.