SouthSideRyan

Who was the OF the White Sox somehow acquired like 3 separate times in a two year span about a decade ago? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Carl Everett or do you mean when they kept having to unretire Harold Baines's number because they retired it at like age 31.

~20%K rate if you guys are wondering .957 OPS at A ball as a 20 year old. SAD

It appears several people believe just that.

They preferred him AND Nix to the 2nd pick next year. No Aiken = No Nix, No Marshall. I don't understand why that is so hard to comprehend. They already HAD Nix if they signed Aiken. So, they decided Mac Marshall(their version of Carson Sands) was the make or break point of a draft? They let their rep take a humongous hit for THAT? No. Just no. . Wait, isn't that exactly what you're arguing?

I'm just concerned because I figured we'd have Dopirak play DH when it started. Where are we going to move him to? your trolling has no effect on me because i didn't care about minor leagues back then so HA Also Theo's prospects are different. Just ask Lars Anderson and .Casey Coleman Now I think you're being too hard on him.

I'm just concerned because I figured we'd have Dopirak play DH when it started. Where are we going to move him to?

They preferred him AND Nix to the 2nd pick next year. No Aiken = No Nix, No Marshall. I don't understand why that is so hard to comprehend.

Only if you really worry about K rates and think Bryant and Baez are destined for failure. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I don't have to think they're destined for failure to feel more comfortable in Schwarber becoming a competent and productive MLB hitter. Uh they're mashing AAA despite K rates so that's basically what it means when the other reference point is in A ball as mentioned above. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Plenty of guys mash AAA and don't succeed in MLB because of contact issues. Guys that strike out less than Bryant. Guys who mash A ball for 100 ABs though...

Only if you really worry about K rates and think Bryant and Baez are destined for failure. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I worry about K rates, but FFS, Bryant has been a monster at levels that matter. Schwarber pooed all over SS Ball, was sub-Bryant at A, and is now speedless Dwaine Bacon in 32 Hi-A ABs

wtf, how is Schwarber one of our safest bats? He has 135 professional ABs, none above high A

Foresight, depending on whether you were talking post or pre '95 season, you're looking at a team with a .566 winning percentage the previous 3 seasons or .575 winning percentage the previous 2. That comparison is something I'd expect out of Neeley

The point is that was never hopeless. Fans have become enamored with the idea of the success cycle, and that bad teams are doomed to stay bad for long periods until they build the Right Way from the bottom-up. It feeds the ridiculous idea that because the Cubs were bad in 2011, and didn't have Dodgers-level FU money, then it's perfectly understandable and acceptable for them to still be awful after three offseasons. With today's standings, the Brewers and Angels are set to be the 14th and 15th different teams to make the playoffs in three seasons that Epstein's been in charge of the Cubs. The Mariners are half a game out of being the 16th. Meanwhile, the Tigers and Cardinals are set to extend the longest current playoff streaks to four. (edit, wait, the Cardinals would be out as of today. That's smile-worthy) There is no "guaranteed to make the playoffs every year" anymore, and there's no "guaranateed to miss" unless your FO wants it to be so. Right now what we have, though, is a possibly unprecedented collection of prospects, young talent, combined with payroll flexibility that the smaller market teams who usually take this approach do not have...and the bigger market teams never try to get away with (not that I'm throwing a party about it) what we've done to acquire that young talent...not to mention increasing revenues on the horizon. The closest comparison I can come up with for that situation is the Yankees circa 1995 or something. Right now what the A's have is the best team in baseball and a soon to be 3 playoff berth headstart on us. Umm? What does that have to do with what I said? You were responding to Kyle talking about how the siutation was never hopeless. YOu responded about how we have all this great stuff right now, so there.

The point is that was never hopeless. Fans have become enamored with the idea of the success cycle, and that bad teams are doomed to stay bad for long periods until they build the Right Way from the bottom-up. It feeds the ridiculous idea that because the Cubs were bad in 2011, and didn't have Dodgers-level FU money, then it's perfectly understandable and acceptable for them to still be awful after three offseasons. With today's standings, the Brewers and Angels are set to be the 14th and 15th different teams to make the playoffs in three seasons that Epstein's been in charge of the Cubs. The Mariners are half a game out of being the 16th. Meanwhile, the Tigers and Cardinals are set to extend the longest current playoff streaks to four. (edit, wait, the Cardinals would be out as of today. That's smile-worthy) There is no "guaranteed to make the playoffs every year" anymore, and there's no "guaranateed to miss" unless your FO wants it to be so. Right now what we have, though, is a possibly unprecedented collection of prospects, young talent, combined with payroll flexibility that the smaller market teams who usually take this approach do not have...and the bigger market teams never try to get away with (not that I'm throwing a party about it) what we've done to acquire that young talent...not to mention increasing revenues on the horizon. The closest comparison I can come up with for that situation is the Yankees circa 1995 or something. Right now what the A's have is the best team in baseball and a soon to be 3 playoff berth headstart on us. [expletive] I just realized you compared OUR CURRENT SITUATION to the motherfucking New York Yankees on the verge of 4 titles out of 5.

The point is that was never hopeless. Fans have become enamored with the idea of the success cycle, and that bad teams are doomed to stay bad for long periods until they build the Right Way from the bottom-up. It feeds the ridiculous idea that because the Cubs were bad in 2011, and didn't have Dodgers-level FU money, then it's perfectly understandable and acceptable for them to still be awful after three offseasons. With today's standings, the Brewers and Angels are set to be the 14th and 15th different teams to make the playoffs in three seasons that Epstein's been in charge of the Cubs. The Mariners are half a game out of being the 16th. Meanwhile, the Tigers and Cardinals are set to extend the longest current playoff streaks to four. (edit, wait, the Cardinals would be out as of today. That's smile-worthy) There is no "guaranteed to make the playoffs every year" anymore, and there's no "guaranateed to miss" unless your FO wants it to be so. Right now what we have, though, is a possibly unprecedented collection of prospects, young talent, combined with payroll flexibility that the smaller market teams who usually take this approach do not have...and the bigger market teams never try to get away with (not that I'm throwing a party about it) what we've done to acquire that young talent...not to mention increasing revenues on the horizon. The closest comparison I can come up with for that situation is the Yankees circa 1995 or something. Right now what the A's have is the best team in baseball and a soon to be 3 playoff berth headstart on us.

And the plan has been in the works for years back to when they hired an incompetent doctor who doesn't know a UCL from an ACL

The point Kyle's making by bringing up Beane is that the A's were in just as bad a position as we were after 2011 - at least on paper - and since then the A's have won two straight AL West titles and are currently the best team in baseball by a lot, while we're having the worst 3-year stretch in the history of the franchise. And that some people seem to think there was no other option to make us better than what we've chosen. Turns out there was a much better option.

As 2013 payroll: 70.8 (1.3 dead money) As 2014 payroll: 88.6 (2.6 dead money) - pre-Jim Johnson DFA Cubs 2013 payroll: 75.4 (17.5 dead money) Cubs 2014 payroll: 79.7 (21.4 dead money) Those are end of season payrolls. If the Cubs came into 2013 with a 75M payroll Tom Ricketts house would have long been burnt to the ground by somebody. Me, it would've been me.

As 2013 payroll: 70.8 (1.3 dead money) As 2014 payroll: 88.6 (2.6 dead money) - pre-Jim Johnson DFA Cubs 2013 payroll: 75.4 (17.5 dead money) Cubs 2014 payroll: 79.7 (21.4 dead money) Those are end of season payrolls. If the Cubs came into 2013 with a 75M payroll Tom Ricketts house would have long been burnt to the ground by somebody.

And Castro, Shark, and Rizzo put up 20. 10 wins behind the A's puts us 1.5 games out of the wild card.

And prior to that still had less than $3 mil in dead money. Whereas we've had Soriano and Z as dead money in the Theo regime. That can be worked around if we could carry payrolls above $100 mil, but not if we're in the As salary realm. As PTR PTR has been, we haven't been in the A's realm until this season. A's-Johnson is still slightly lower than Cubs - Soriano. In years past it's not even close when including dead money (Soriano in '13, Zambrano in '12)

How many of our current core prospects are in the system due to the major league team sucking? Five? Everyone but Soler and Alcantara Unless you're talking about sucking brought about by this PLAN, and to the depths they sucked. Then it's Kris Bryant, and whoever we draft next year. And Russell, Hendricks, Ramirez, etc. those trades don't hallen if the Cubs are contending for a post season berth I was told it was IMPOSSIBLE to contend for a postseason berth by trying, so I guess that wouldn't matter and we could make the trades anyway. And if we did contend for a postseason berth...isn't that better than not contending and having a handful more prospects???

You're right, he's had an excellent 3 year run after missing the playoffs for the 5 previous ones. But circa 2011, they had a bad MLB record and a low-ranked farm system. It should have been impossible for them to make the playoffs by 2013 without massive payrolls. Their farm system provided Donaldson, Gray, Chris Carter(who became Jed Lowrie), Griffin, Doolittle, and Straily since the start of 2012. They also used their young MLB pitching in trades to get Parker, Milone, Cook, Reddick, and Norris. It's not fair they did stuff that made their team better.

Beane also doesn't typically have as much wasted money in years that the As contend as the Cubs had. Wasted money isn't a big problem if you can carry a $130-150 mil payroll as we were doing in the Hendry era. But if we have that type of wasted money with a payroll of less than $100 mil, it'll take things going just right to put together a contender. If I remember right, most or all of the scenarios that had us contending also had us with a payroll over $100 mil in 2012. Well they just DFA'd their 2nd highest salaried player.

How many of our current core prospects are in the system due to the major league team sucking? Five? Everyone but Soler and Alcantara Unless you're talking about sucking brought about by this PLAN, and to the depths they sucked. Then it's Kris Bryant, and whoever we draft next year.

That's almost certainly how it went down. Nailed it.