squally1313

Shots fired!!! I don't see those as shots fired at all. Schwarber is all class, he's not going to take shots at the Cubs. Unfortunately

That's not at all what I took from that, but also I could be missing some weird layer of your sarcasm, so....

Prior to Schwarber/Darvish, would you agree they were the favorites to win the division next year? Because if so, at that point there's not really a lot you can possibly do to 'significantly increase' your odds of winning a title. That's not to say we can't be frustrated that the Ricketts more or less pocketed 5 years of historic success and the associated profits, then took one bad year (that was bad for everyone) and decided to tear it down. We just traded our best pitcher for a different version of Cubs era John Lackey and four dudes who won't sniff Wrigley for 4 years. How long do you think a team with the Cubs resources should need to rebuild? Point taken. I think I'm the oddity that didn't think with Schwarber and Darvish we were good enough to win the division. I see it as being a crapshoot between the Cardinals, Cubs, and Brewers in 2021. I get the profits point, but you can show a profit and have poor cash flow. My guess is the cash flow hasn't been great because of all the investment they have done in the area. None of that really matters to me to be honest. I just don't think the team is good enough to win a World Series and I don't think we would have been good enough unless we invested heavily in the likes of Trevor Bauer and then completely remade our lineup so we don' rely as much on the long ball. If you expected Javy, Bryant, and Rizzo to all have bounce back years I could be on board. I think their are serious flaws in all of their games and the league has learned them. We are seeing the evolution of pitching against the three true outcomes and I think you will see teams readjust their approach again. But...we just won the division. And it certainly wasn't Jon Lester leading us there. Sure, you need to fill innings, and find someone who can replace Jeffress' mirage of a season, etc. but those would be minor fixes (like, say, just bringing those dudes back, or getting younger, also dirt cheap versions of those players). And, since you mentioned bounce back years from Javy/KB/Rizz...that just kinda proves my point. We won in spite of them being ass, and you can't point me to a single thing those other teams have done to improve their rosters. As far as profits, cash flows, whatever...I get that I'm oversimplifying it, but I also get that the Ricketts could start the process tomorrow on realizing that gigantic unrealized gain of team appreciation they're sitting on, and have zero problem in the midst of pandemic finding a willing buyer to more than solve all their problems. But they won't, because they know that continuing to own the Cubs will be incredibly profitable for them (and would remain that way with Darvish/Schwarber on the books, with a Bauer contract, etc).

I know this is a bleed post but, the Ricketts family gave millions of dollars to re-elect Trump. I have no time for PTR posts. I don't see the relevance of the amount of money they donated or how much we perceive them to have matters. Do you think the team could have won a title as currently constructed without adding Trevor Bauer and a few other pieces at an extra 50-70 mil a year for the next 3-5 years? I personally do not. If you are not significantly increasing your odds of winning a title why spend the money and if you are significantly increasing your odds will the odds still be that much higher in years 2-5 of the contracts? If the answer is no I do not see a reason why to invest that money and why as a fan I'd want that. All you would be doing is pushing out the inevitable by a year but making the rebuild even harder. You invest heavily in FA when you have a young core under team control. It is a proven model that works. Prior to Schwarber/Darvish, would you agree they were the favorites to win the division next year? Because if so, at that point there's not really a lot you can possibly do to 'significantly increase' your odds of winning a title. That's not to say we can't be frustrated that the Ricketts more or less pocketed 5 years of historic success and the associated profits, then took one bad year (that was bad for everyone) and decided to tear it down. We just traded our best pitcher for a different version of Cubs era John Lackey and four dudes who won't sniff Wrigley for 4 years. How long do you think a team with the Cubs resources should need to rebuild?

To be clear I was kidding because Contreras is fun and good at baseball and we should prioritize having those kinds of players on our team.

I wonder if there’s a veteran catcher out there with a long, storied career who could mentor Amaya for a season. Perhaps even has a ton of experience in the NL central and could pass along that expertise as well. (At this point, might as well right? Burn it all down)

Was that actually the pitch though? We signed him in the middle of February, and from what I recall it was more along the lines of 'well, you weren't in the plans, but the price is finally low enough that we aren't going to pass this up'. I love Yu and don't want him going anywhere, but this wasn't some Lester type recruitment.

Possibly, but two years of Wil Myers, even if cheap, isn't overly valuable to us after trading one of the best pitchers in baseball. I look at any offensive acquisitions as an attempt to change the dynamic of the offense to be more contact oriented. Myers seems to fit that profile, even though its very likely that last year was more of a SSS fluke (im sure someone here will do the research if this trade actually happens). I probably believe way too much in the pitch factory crap, but it seems to have yielded some great results, so while I know we can't replace Yu with it I do believe we can cobble together a solid rotation. Maybe I'm way wrong, but in terms of building for the future while cutting spending and still trying to be quasi-competitive you're gonna have to take some risks, and this seems like the best place to get unexpected results. Wil Myers has a 27% K rate (more than the Cubs team rate) and is projected for 30% this year.

I could be wrong, but I'd imagine the Padres are going to pay a decent amount of it. Possibly, but two years of Wil Myers, even if cheap, isn't overly valuable to us after trading one of the best pitchers in baseball. Replacing Kyle Schwarber with worse, older Kyle Schwarber just so we could dump our best pitcher is certainly making me consider just how much I enjoy sitting in the bleachers. Seems like if you've won 56% of your games the last 3 years and the rest of the division is openly broadcasting that they aren't trying, you'd want to focus on the couple minor moves it would take to make you comfortable favorites. But hey, what do I know.

An example of how corporations/companies think. Union Pacific railroad made $300 million one year and $250 million the next year. When they started negotiations with the union, they said that they would have to make cuts because they "lost" $50 million. Starting off in public accounting and we’d have firm wide meetings at the beginning of the fiscal year showing targets of 12% profit growth from the year before. At the end of the year we’d only be at 9%, and that would be used as justification for less than ideal bonus/raise packages.

Alright I'll bite. Oversimplifying? Sure. But the players and the businesses both received less revenue than expected (and contractually guaranteed) while maintaining a certain level of fixed expenses. Where is the 'massive misunderstanding'? Happ is comparing players taking a reduced salary (there are no "fixed" expenses there) against a business where there are massive fixed expenses for stadiums, front office personnel, coaches, minor league operations, scouting, etc. All this said, I'm for the players getting a much bigger percentage of the sport's revenues. Screw the billionaire owners. But it doesn't help to have a union representative showing a basic lack of understanding of the difference in finances for individuals vs businesses. But doesn't Happ/the players have fixed expenses too? Obviously a different scale, but you establish a lifestyle based on projected or contractually guaranteed income amounts. Player X only got 37% of the income he was projected to receive in 2020, but his costs stayed relatively the same...mortgages, etc.

Alright I'll bite. Oversimplifying? Sure. But the players and the businesses both received less revenue than expected (and contractually guaranteed) while maintaining a certain level of fixed expenses. Where is the 'massive misunderstanding'?

No Mountain time or West coast games for the Hawks is just fine with me. Could see it getting a little monotonous, but never really had that feeling with the baseball schedule so I'm sure it'll be fine.

God that's bleak.

I always kinda figured that if they were going to lose the 'Braves' name, it was going to be because of the Chop. I think I recall the team trying to move away from it, and then people doing it at the games just to be spiteful. Hopefully that dies out, and yeah, don't think the name is overly offensive on its own.

That's amazing. How'd you get it? Shorter par 5, driver/hybrid got me to about 50 yards, then one hop and hit the pin and went straight down. Was hitting over a bunker with a raised lip, so actually didn't see it go in, but heard the pin and then the people on the green let me know. Didn't quite get me into double digits, but I'll take the 102.

First eagle ever yesterday (and I have like, 5 career birdies). Pretty awesome timing doing it during the (assumed) last round of the year.

Anyone played in the last couple weeks in the Chicago area on a course still in good shape? Looking like I'm going to be playing Wednesday/Thursday due to just need to take some time off and it warming up a little bit, but I know this time of year courses can be pretty hit or miss. I'm in the Wicker Park area, but trying to get out of the city/away from the lake for warmth, so pretty open in any direction within like...45-60 minute drive.

Ignoring the Cubs dynasty obituary conversation for a second, I see and agree with all the comments about Len vs Ricketts/Sinclair, etc. But while that explains his potential frustrations/discomfort working for the Cubs, it doesn't really explain why he went where he did. No one who has followed baseball (or basketball) in the last 20 years is going to point to Reinsdorf as one of the good owners (to the extent they exist), and their most recent hire prior to Kasper was one of the most universally panned decisions that I've seen in a long time. I think we need to see how things play out for Len the next couple years to figure out exactly why he made this decision. Although if we end up with someone like Chris Myers (or worse), part of me may think it might not have been fully his decision in the first place.

It's bizarre clicking through to that link and being like 'oh, turns out I played a part of that'.

I tend to agree with this just because they have so much MIF prospect depth not so far behind him. Pretty much everyone in the org around his age and experience or younger is a better defensive player except maybe Rafael Morel, who has alot of similarities to Strumpf IMO Our starting second basemen OPS+ed a solid 63 last year and our actual best option has a real good shot at ending up at third base. I know we have a couple teenagers down there, but calling this a strength either seems like a stretch or is a sign of how much trouble we're in.

I love Len and think he will have a much better broadcast than Marquee but the first time I hear him getting excited for a White Sox player doing something against the Cubs, I will die inside. I'll just stick with Pat and Ron To be fair, the White Sox roster is incredibly fun. That being said, Kasper trying to stay somewhat neutral on La Russa and everything he does will be pretty entertaining.

I don't know why anyone 'likes' anything on Twitter. If I like something enough to signal I like it, I'll retweet it. If I don't like it enough to retweet it, or don't want people seeing that I like it, then I shouldn't be clicking the button anyway. My likes were essentially my bookmarks for a while, until they actually introduced the concept of bookmarks. But that's still a little clunky, so I use a combination of both. Not super worried about my 6 followers. When you have a large Twitter presence (as Chris Myers does), I assume you know exactly what you're doing.

I pushed my 2020 credit forward to 2021 so fairly positive I'm locked in and regretting it more and more every day. Whatever, can still enjoy the bleachers before the Ricketts start assigning seats and handing out sun umbrellas to GOP donors in a couple years.

this is dumb as horsefeathers why the hell is he obligated to put up with dumb horsefeathers he doesn't like at work if he doesn't have to? that makes him a child? FOH and i'm pretty sure he never complained about the suits publicly (and even sorta did the opposite). if he had a problem with it, he has every right to look elsewhere and it's none of your damn business why he was or wasn't happy with his work environment. The dude seems like a great guy and he can do whatever he want: I hope that he’s happy! Fixed your response.