WrigleyField 22

"Putting the best product on the field." :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Hey you can ignore the qualifier, but when you take out guys who would have negatively impacted our ability to build from within, that's what we've done. Even considering guys we ultimately didn't get but were in play for, like Cespedes and Darvish, we've targeted some good players. Now obviously the midseason trades fly a bit into the face of that, but there's nothing wrong with cutting your losses midseason when you clearly aren't in the playoff race and A) that player doesn't look to contibute beyond this year-Dempster or B) the offer is a sell high steal, and the player still doesn't prohect to contribute long term -Maholm. Someone else mentions developing guys like Castro and Rizzo into stars, but we can't wait for that to happen before we add to them or we've wasted at least a year, and baseball is way to fluid to start wasting years. Especially when it will never be easier to spend on FA. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Those teams are locking up their star players now because every team has money. this is a weird thing to say, considering your stance. based on that, doesn't it makes more sense to try and create your own star players instead of having to overbid for star free agents? you said it yourself, everyone has money. you're going to have to overpay more and more for talent in free agency. Regardless of how much money everyone has it will always be cheaper to acquire talent via free agency than it is via trades. When a team is flush with money like the Cubs you can afford to spend money in years where you don't expect to contend, in order to have, ya know, actual talent on the team for years where you plan on actually trying to win games. Money is the greatest asset the Cubs organization has and you guys would rather not use it for 3 years and instead at that point use that money AND the farm system you've spent years of losing building up in order to acquire the same damn players you could've had for just the cash. +1 For some reason people have gotten the idea that Theo's master plan is just to tank. But really when you look at it closely the plan is to put the best product on the field without sacrificing our ability to build from within. With the new FA compensation rules, many more players will be available with no penalty. Right now is a great time to spend in FA. We should be flush with cash, we can't put it towards amatuers, theres no prospects of note that could be blocked (maybe one), and we have a serious talent gap until we develop players. People need to stop expecting some extreme turnaround. You have to add talent along the way, while also insuring you have a system that replenishes lost talent. We should have a pretty good shot at filling a lot of our major holes this offseason without depleting our farm of anything. The rest comes down to the development of guys like Castro, Rizzo, Shark, Wood, etc. No, its highly unlikely we get enough internal improvement from those guys to make a serious run, but they could turn into Mike Trout and it wouldn't matter if Rusin and Raley was the back of your rotation. Dual fronts. Everyone say it. Its really gonna happen, and thats a really good thing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah. I'm beginning to wonder if this was a bad move. Its always been a bad idea, because Tice is not an up and coming offense mind trained under a previous great offensive mind. The hope was that having Bates around and not having Martz around would be good enough. Yup. Just another wasted year with Cutler. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Flieta made minor leaguers hike up their pants? I mean its obviously a way better look, but ehat a weirdo. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ya I picked up Dalton as a speculitive late buy. But I have Brady and am scared to try and play matchups. Yet Dalton has outperformed him the last two weeks. But I have a keeper league, so my Dalton pick may yet pay dividends. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hahahaha thats pretty good. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Watching the replay and trying to compare it to that picture, I think that screen shot is well after any call should be made. I think it was an interception, but not sure that image as damning as it looks. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I feel like there was controversy a few years back with balls being tampered with so now the NFL holds the kicking balls until they're used. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hasn't he? The amount of money spent on combined baseball operations has appeared to be steadily dropping since he took over. So has revenue as far as I can tell. I dont think there was ever an expectation or indivation they would operate at a loss. Has revenue gone down? They've lost about 250k in attendance since he took over, but they've added some advertising and MLB shared revenues have gone up significantly. If it has, then much of it has been self-inflicted. From when Ricketts took over I think we're down more than 250k. Plus they've put money in a lot of places where it wasn't before. So that comes from the MLB payroll. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hasn't he? The amount of money spent on combined baseball operations has appeared to be steadily dropping since he took over. So has revenue as far as I can tell. I dont think there was ever an expectation or indication they would operate at a loss. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We'll never be in position to compete with that outlook. We need to add talent as it comes available at a worthwhile price. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How do we not have pitching? If Garza's comes back healthy and Shark can improve on or at least repeat what he did this season that's a solid 1-2. Neither is a "number 1" by the standards of the experts, but if you ask them, there's like 10-12 of those in the entire league. Wood's been as good as most 4s, mostly, and if they dont see Volstad, Rally, Rusin, or Germano as a 5, they can look into finding another Maholm. If they're willing to spend for Jackson, Sanchez, or Marcum, I really like the rotation. It's by no means 2003 or 2008, but it's not like the NL Central is stacked with pitching. Volstad, Raley, Rusin, and Germano are not 5th starters! Wood is our fifth stater. Of those other guys one can be the long man and the others are Iowa fodder waiting around for injuries. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

lol at bold http://www.csnchicago.com/baseball-chicago-cubs/cubs-talk/Soler-puts-on-a-show-at-Wrigley-Field?blockID=773759&feedID=661&awid=5119870656440859932-914 If you listened to how he said it, he clearly meant "hear", just trying to quote accurately. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll give it a shot. 1. Sign Edwin Jackson to a 4 year deal. 10M per year reasonable? 2. Sign Brandon McCarthy to a 2 year deal with third option year. (8M avg?) (Failing those get two, theres also Dempster, Blanton, Francis, Haren, Villanueva, Sanchez, Liarano who are varying levels of acceptable, to intriguing, to underwhelming one year stop gaps to fill innings if we strike out- all depending on cost obviously. Bottom line though is filling 2 rotation spots for 2013, and hopefully filling spots beyond that) 3. Sign Angel Pagan to a 3 year deal. He should provide a decent CF option. I'm looking at him like DeJesus. 4. Find a couple mildly cost effective bullpen stop gaps. I honestly don't care enough to look who is available. No more than 3M/2yr for either. 5. Look to deal Jackson in a prospect for prospect swap. A pitcher would be nice or a 3B. If we don't find anything good I don't think we're hurting his value to keep him in AAA and let him work on things. If we end up finding a good package for Soriano, he is available to come up. 6. Keep Vitters in AAA to work on things. 7. Float LaHair as a trade chip for literally anything. 8. Would like something interesting for 3B, but it will be tough. If Youkilis isn't brought back by the White Sox, I would be up for a 1 year with an option contract. Even with my other three FA ideas, we should still have enough money. I'll say we get him. Otherwise maybe we are able to get another mildly interesting candidate to compete with Valbuena and Stewart. I'm showing something still under $115M, maybe closer to $105M, all depending on FA and arbitration costs. I don't think we owe anything to other teams either, so that's still plenty of money to pour into the developmental side and business ventures. Lineup: RF- DeJesus SS- Castro 1B- Rizzo 3B- Youkilis LF- Soriano CF- Pagan 2B- Barney C- Castillo SP- Samardzija SP- Garza SP- Jackson SP- McCarthy SP- Wood CL- Marmol BP (5) - Russell, a couple FAs and whatever else we wanna throw out from what we have. Long Man- Volstad Bench: C- Clevenger or Recker 2B/3B- Valbuena 3B- Stewart OF- Sappelt CF- Campana

I'm fairly confident the Bears put up 49, but I'm not sure GB gets on the board. Tough call. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The cost was valuable MLB playing time, which is a lot more valuable than the piddly cash we threw around on these players. Valuable playing time over which alternatives? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a disingenuous comparison. DeJesus and Maholm's "low" were still solid players, and their highs were above-average starters. Ian Stewart's low was a sub-replacement player and his high was a barely average starter in part-time duty. You could pick up some terrible career organizational minor leaguer coming off his worst season, give him a starting job and say "see! It's buy-low, just like DeJesus and Maholm!" But it's not just like them. Why not factor in cost? Maholm and DeJesus required a bit more financial commitment. But relative to cost commitment they were pretty similair. Although not exactly. Stewarts was more a bet on improved health, but the same general thought Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which is nuts when you consider 25% of our schedule is against Green Bay and Detroit. Yeah, but we get to play some soft divisions. Also, looking at our schedule, 5 of our last 7 games are divisional games....that's really odd scheduling. Is the NFL purposely trying to put more divisional games later? I believe they are. I remember it being a discussion point recently. I think the thought being you'll create more playoff race matchups. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So AFL is comparable to AA right? Is Baez in Chicago by 2014, with maybe a Sept call up next year? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Backloading is good. That is a little bit of an oversimplification. Backloading is not inherently good or bad. My personal preference would be to minimize backloaded contracts on a rebuilding team, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a bad thing. Either way, it really should not be much of a factor here. No, backloading is good. Only to the extent that the following is true. The increases on salary will be covered by future additional revenue, savings, or current capital. (dont dig into a hole) There is no risk of losing unspent capital to taxes. Of course if you have 30mil extra lying around the time value of money says it will be worth that and more. Salary is one of the easiest expenses to net against revenue to lower taxable income. Essentially you dont want revenue to outpace costs too much. This is the timing effect of taxes. If more salary now helps timing, thats good because a 15% tax you could have avoided now easily negates the time value if money. The above is also less true for salary cap sports where cap planning is a concern and frontliading is more often helpful. Although there is a lux tax in baseball so you could reach the point where forwarding some salary up front saves you money because of potential lux tax two years down the road. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm still glad he's hitting 2nd because he needs as many AB's as possible. But, shouldn't one of your better hitters bat 2nd? I.e. Castro If winning is your first priority, sure. If developing guys by getting them the most ABs possible is, maybe not. But then I guess they should hit him leadoff. I'm guessing Sveum is just trying to give him the most possible protection. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some additional cost in raises, agressively pursuing any over 23 IFA, and additional small pieces like Reed Johnsons and we should be close. Maybe down a bit just from lost revenue after our shitty season. Plus i think our restricted IFA budget will grow (everyone was equal this year and we'll have one of the hightest next year.) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm still wondering where all the money went this year. The 2011 Cubs spent around $160 million between the big leagues, the draft and IFAs. Add up this year's payroll, draft, IFA, organizational changes and infrastructure, and I'm still coming up way short of $160 million. I haven't done the math, but did you figure in our official payroll number or what we're actually paying guys? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The vision includes sucking for a few years on purpose. It's not a great vision. Well it included sucking for one year. Beyond this year, I think you'll see gradual improvements in both the short and long term until we're awesome at both. If we don't sign any free agents I can't see us being any better next year. We might even be worse. We're gonna sign free agents! Hell we signed free agents last offseason. And we've shed even more salary once this offseason is over. There's little space to shift that money unless you think it will go to Wrigley Field. And we have no reason to believe Ricketts will just pocket the money. We'll sign at least 2 SP in the Maholm mold and one starting position player. These players cumulatively will be have an AAV of around 25 and net us 4-7 WAR. We'll eventually get to the point where we have one big hole and splurge on a big time FA to fill it, while having plenty of prospects in the pipeline close to being ready, ensuring continued success. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The vision includes sucking for a few years on purpose. It's not a great vision. Well it included sucking for one year. Beyond this year, I think you'll see gradual improvements in both the short and long term until we're awesome at both. People aren't properly understanding that continuing to suck isn't going to have a significant effect on our ability to build for the future. We'll operate on more of a dual front going forward, trust me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk