WrigleyField 22

This thread is bizarre. Some seem to be inferring that the possibility of a lower big league payroll is leading to the ticket prices being lowered. Thats backwards. The tickets are going to be priced at the level that they feel will bring the most revenue. Unfortunately after 190 losses in the past two years, revenue will be down, but hopefully they max out the returns available. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I dont know. Maybe. But again, we plucked Theo with the biggest leak being purple shirt guy, right? Its possible some executive who knows him well would move swiftly if they felt he was the right guy. That being said I don't even know of any GM spots currently open, which is the position I would think it'd have to be for him to leave. Bush isn't a bad guess, but I think Wilken leaving as a director of amateur draft for another team would be more likely. I don't feel like Bush would be in demand to leave for another job and if someone was just being fired it would have happened earlier. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kasper is pretty dreamy. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hm, I wonder if its a departure for another job or just a straight firing. Obviously any Hendry holdover is an easy guess, but you never know if someone like McLeod might leave for an opportunity elsewhere. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think we have the package. I think a team trading a guy like Wright wants talent that is closer to major league ready.

Kendall Wright, hurry! That's who I had. Glad you agree.

Late post here. Have to decide on my flex tonight. Kendall Wright vs Pit (tonight) Greg Little vs Cin Davone Bess vs StL Alex Green @ Hou Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If it was a movie about football, they'd have to use computers to get that shot. I didn't know Bush was capable of that. It's amazing the difference between the first and second half today. 2 completely different Bear teams showed up today. I'll take the credit. Turned the game on at half time. I changed into my Urlacher jersey at half. I think that had a bigger impact.

Wallace. I'm tempted to try and get two RB from him, say Johnson and Green Ellis and then move some other things around to get another WR back, buts its risky unless i can have both trades down. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So another team offerred me Ryan Williams and Chris Johnson for Mike Wallace. I turned him down but now he texted me asking what I wanted and seemed desperate, so maybe there is an opportunity to rip him off. I'm set at QB and TE. Heres my W/R vs his W/R. Mine Spiller, Sproles, Bradshaw, Ingram, Lloyd, Little, K Wright, J Battle His Forte, Gore,R Williams, CJ, Steve Smith(Car), A Hawkins, Green-Ellis, Mendenhall, LeShoure, Mike Williams Obviously he has some good backs, but I'm not sure I want to put myself in a spot where I have to chose Little or Wright every week. But maybe I'm falling too in love with Wallace cuz of his strong start. Thoughts? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjL2eBSl-d4RdEpNRk1wZl9kb2FBUWpGbUEyYllfLWc Edit to your heart's content. A team of all replacement players would project at like 45-55 wins right? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not suggesting we ask Derrick to brush up on his medical studies. What I'm saying here is that almost any person will have physocolgical factors that hold them back way more than any NBA front office could. As long as thats monitored by physicians who are way more qualified than John Paxson, theres literally nothing to worry about. "On schedule" should be music to any Bulls fans ears. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I obviously don't have any visual evidence, but by all accounts Hummel's re-injury was not a freak accident. Look, I understand that there are highly trained medical professionals working towards getting Rose to 100%. That doesn't mean people shouldn't be concerned with the progress of his recovery or worry about setbacks. These are still valid concerns. Well I don't know Hummels situation at all. But I doubt there is any legitimate connection, unless he just totally botched the doctors recommendations. And sure I'm worried about setbacks, but thats totally different than worrying about him rushing it, and certainly doesn't mean I want Paxson or someone to arbitrarily start adding to the timeline, because theres nothing to indicate as far as I can tell that it will aid him by being extra cautious. The added cautiousness just makes people feel better because it seems reasonable. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here is what I do know: It sucks to watch the Cubs losing 85 games nearly as much as it does to watch them lose 100. If one promises even a marginal gain over the other, I'm not sure why you wouldn't take it. I'm not going to openly root to lose out loud like a twonk or take "pleasure" in losing, but the top-3 draft pick makes the pill a little easier to swallow. What would really suck is wasting a few years tanking and then realizing it probably will take one "85 loss season" anyways. Its just highly improbable we can go from 100 losses to 90-95 win team. And if we do, its almost guaranteed to happen because of development of young players already on our roster exploding into star players. So it just makes sense to add players when they are available because FA is almost always scarce of resources. The marginal draft slot just doesn't make up for a lost season. Besides if Theo's plan for sustained success and minor league development requires top 5 picks we're screwed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not suggesting we ask Derrick to brush up on his medical studies. What I'm saying here is that almost any person will have physocolgical factors that hold them back way more than any NBA front office could. As long as thats monitored by physicians who are way more qualified than John Paxson, theres literally nothing to worry about. "On schedule" should be music to any Bulls fans ears. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally not the same thing, but okay. Bottom line is if he is ready to cut or jump the actual surgically operates knee is fine. The overuse thing brought ip above is somewhat of a concern, but not more so than any injury. But everything I've read about ACL injuries is that its mostly mental. So holding back on physical recuperation is unecessary and delays the time when we have a 100% Derrick Rose. Basically, the doctors schedule and Rose's own brain should be plenty on their own to ensure he doesn't rush back. If they do more beyond that they're delaying things. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5691032 ACLs are freak accidents. Nothing there indicates the second was a result of the first not being healed. Its not like throwing a baseball which is pretty much a degenerative motion. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally not the same thing, but okay. Bottom line is if he is ready to cut or jump the actual surgically operates knee is fine. The overuse thing brought ip above is somewhat of a concern, but not more so than any injury. But everything I've read about ACL injuries is that its mostly mental. So holding back on physical recuperation is unecessary and delays the time when we have a 100% Derrick Rose. Basically, the doctors schedule and Rose's own brain should be plenty on their own to ensure he doesn't rush back. If they do more beyond that they're delaying things. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Once the doctor's say he is healed there really isn't a chance for re-injury. I don't think the Bulls management has a better idea than the doctors. As long ad Rose listens to the doctors he is okay. Babying him further just delays a process that is mostly mental. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't see the concern on a 5 year deal other than injury, with pitchers just being susceptible to injuries. We don't have an outlook of wildly exploding costs and hopefully we have an outlook of large revenue increases (Wrigley renovation and I think a new T.V. contract soon). Now mixing in some less risky contracts may be prudent, but one or two 5 year deals shouldn't be a concern when looking at our guaranteed contract outlays and who's hitting FA soon.

Yea I kind of agree on the last point, but I think you can make someargument of execution over philosophy for why the Cubs may not see a lot of use for their overslots in 2011. With the right front office, it absolutely is still an advantage to spend more. Sure there is a dwindling return, like any inefficiency, such as OBP. I don't think it had gotten to the point where it wasn't still an advantage. Still, I think this advantage was less than the advantage of teams who simply stockpiled more picks than the other guys. If that's not a way of saying crapshoot, I don't know what is. Yea, a bit lazy. But its also pretty true. Hendry had an attitude that the developing the minors was secondary to the major leagues. And I'll reiterate, its not about a second or even a first rounder for me. Its about limiting your opportunities. I feel roughly the same if I were to lose a 4th to a 2nd. But if you only consider the major league impact you may i find yourself losing 2-4. And while doing that once isn't going to kill a system it has to be weighed against the alternatives, with a realistic view of where you stand. Its simple economics of allocating resources and every transaction has its obvious costs, its hidden ones and its opportunity costs. Where does the cost of minor league development fall within the major league impact? The second round pick is just like any other cost you consider. No I'm not avoiding any MLB FA, for any reason (other than sucking), but yes, I'm going to consider all costs as it relates to the entire organization and compare it to the other options available. No doubt, its harder, but you can still do it, you just are penalized (in money and picks). But if you felt spending overslot was the most important factor, you still could. I wouldn't argue that to be the case, but just lying out all the varying theories on how one might go about building a strong farm system. I never was. If you got that, I'm sorry. But you did say this: Sounds like more than just any singular pick to me, but an overall philosophy that dries our organization of picks. Although since you misunderstood me, I'll concede I may have read too much into your words. Please correct me if I did. Not scared. Not fetishing. Just trying to look at the entire organization as a single entity that attempts to allocate resources. Simple as that. I'd just say to see all my previous thoughts regarding it not being about one pick, but of the attitude of any player being worthy of signing worth a pick (assuming we are talking starting type players here when we say "any"). When looking at our roster holes there are a lot of players who I would consider. Not every player would I give up a pick for because there are a lot of players who most likely won't cost picks and may even cost less money, allowing other opportunities.

At least try to read everything I've written. Nowhere do I discuss avoiding major leaguers. At this point you've only responded to bits of my posts and ignored all other points. Simple question. Is developing the minor league important? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is silly. It's possible to believe that amateur talent is important but still needs to be weighed against professional talent. Almost all professional talent is more valuable than a single second-round pick. Its not a singular draft pick thats the issue. Its an overall mindset towards developing on both fronts. How can we maximize both. There are major leaguers who will and those who won't affect our ability to develop the minor league system. Its Theo's jobs to manage that in the most efficient way. If you believe the most efficient way is to say every decent major leaguer is worth picks, you may as well ask for Hendry back. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure what Jackson will cost, but we should have enough to spend more than just one big fish. Dempster 14M, Zambrano 17M, Byrd 6M, Soto 4.3M and Maholm 4.25M is some of the notable salary we are losing, without much in the way of raises due. I don't think we'll go crazy with Greinke and Hamilton or something, but Zambrano alone is 2-3 Maholms plus some. And I don't think we have enough 40 man spots for 9 Maholms. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can look at a few things that clubs who have successfully built from within have done. Spend a lot more is the first. That can't be done anymore without effecting the other part which is having more picks. The last is development, which our previous FO by all accounts didn't really focus on. It also should be a strength of our new FO. So the best we can do is 2/3. If you do believe the draft is a crapshoot it makes no sense to focus on spending more and losing picks (both by signing FA or going overslot). So you're left with trying to have more opportunities, or more likely trying to minimize your lost opportunities. Splurge on a young player at a position of need at a position of scarcity at a fair contract? Thats probably when we forget the pick. But the attitude that any player worth having is worth a pick just leaves us closer to being the Hendry era Cobs. Now if you believe spending is the more important factor then we can not worry about picks, but the more we put towards amateurs, the less we have for such big time players. And finally if you believe that amateur talent just isn't that important, go cheer for the White Sox. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The position matters a lot. Early first-round pick = extremely valuable. Everything else = Pick two dozen vaguely interesting guys and hope one sticks. Avoiding a useful player because you don't want to give up a second-round pick is more like swinging at the first pitch because you are scared you won't get a better one. I'd add even the top 5 picks to that for most drafts. Unless theres a Strasburg its a total crapshoot. But that still underscores my point of it not just being about a second rounder, but any pick. Its giving away a commodity thats limited, so you better be sure its worth it. Being worth it entails way more than just the talent of the player in question. On a side note I hope our current FO can hold a slight advantage in scouting to give us that edge. However the development is where they really should be able to gain the competitive advantage. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The compensation this year would be a 2nd-round pick. If a guy is worth having, he's worth giving up a 2nd-round pick for. What will Angel Pagan cost in relative terms? And what do we think they will each offer going forward? Where else could the money saved be put? Maybe towards Greinke who won't cost any conpensation? What do we think of Greinke? Is he worth it at whatever cost? Can we even get him? Draft picks are a valuable commodity because they are limited. The position of the pick matters obviously, but from a macro view of the system building, losing a pick is a little bit like bunting with the pock in question being like the hitter. You can do it and justify it, but you better be sure. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk