Bearded_Beef

Right and thats somehow all Poles, and not the guy that we all knew was trading away the future for a chance to win now and restructuring contracts to sign mediocre talent that would saddle us further into the future. It's kind of bonkers how one note everyone is on their record when we all lived through the Pace era and knew what was happening at the time.

Disagree, that team was old and expensive and we had no future draft picks. The organization is stronger now than it was when we were "mediocre", despite the record. If the next regime inherits a team with picks and/or talent then it'll be easier to hold them accountable. He's doing what good teams do and building through the draft and being opportunistic with trading. Moore and Sweat are studs. Let's just hope he can draft well.

I get being a little perplexed about the move, I get being concerned about overpaying and I get having PTSD from the Claypool trade, but there is a ton of negative overreaction from Bears fandom. I'm pretty sure we have reached a level of fanbase misery that I haven't seen since 2003-2005 Cubs fandom. I think Poles gave pretty solid reasoning for making the move: “In terms of our process, really this is a situation where you try to forecast forward,” Poles said. “You look at the draft potential — our guys have been doing a really good job getting information in — as well as free agency. We felt like this was a really good opportunity to get ahead of that and get a top pass rusher in the building. And again, that’s short term but also for long term. We’re currently working on getting a contract done now.” Seems to me that he probably liked Sweat more than anyone who was available last offseason and more than anyone else in the upcoming draft or approaching FA this offseason. Who would you guys rather have than Sweat? I am excited that we got him. Our D-Line needed help desperately and I really do agree that pressure is a multiplier for defenses. Just like everyone saying we couldn't judge Fields last year because the O-line and WR's sucked, I really don't think we can truly evaluate our defense (specifically the secondary) when we can't even get to the QB. Sweat is worth a 2nd round draft pick, and yes I know that we have to pay him too. People always saying all of this is on Poles forget what he inherited. I think the organization as a whole is in a better position than it was when he took over. We were maxed out on salary cap with no hope for the future with Pace trading all of our future picks. Dudes made some mistakes and you can question whether or not you agree with his approach to the rebuild, but you all act like he's incompetent and I am just not seeing that at all.

"Obduracy" is a great word that I didn't know before reading this article, so thank you for that. I think that I have lost a lot of faith in Jed these past few years. Other than PCA, none of the prospects that he's traded for have looked that great and I think I'm still bitter about not paying the homegrown guys that we did have. I know Baez, Contreras and Bryant aren't lighting the world on fire or anything, but man, it would be nice to still have guys like Rizzo, Schwarber and Darvish out there. I hate the idea of buying a roster through FA and I also hate the idea of trading all of our prospects for vets but not paying our own known players just makes the Cubs look cheap. Like, where's the Cubs competitive advantage? What is it that the Cubs do well from an organizational stand point? I think I felt better about the team last year when I thought we might have developed some great pitching infrastructure that was going to allow us to patch together great bullpens and churn out mid tier (and higher) starters like candy. I guess Ferris and Horton are looking good so far.

Didn't you also strongly imply that the Cubs wouldn't win the WS with "the Plan" and that all/most of our prospects would be busts because they had really high K rates? I have honestly appreciated your doom bonerey takes on a lot of things, but you've been more wrong than right since the Theo era so its weird to see you taking victory laps.

I was more overwhelmed than underwhelmed yesterday, but I have read things that conflict with what rawaction says. Like Nate Davis being great in zone blocking and this years draft being DE heavy. We still need help on the lines, but I think we spent money in the only places where we could get some blue chip type guys (LBs) and then we have been smart in filling holes without putting all of our eggs in one basket. I am mostly fine with filling out most of the lines through the draft. I would like to have more threats on the Dline going into it though. The oline is supposed to be Poles bread and butter and I feel like this year is his first real shot at it with any resources. We are kinda bound to trust this guy on talent evaluation.

Can someone who knows more about this stuff explain to me why I should be remotely happy with Tucker Barnhart? I get that the FO seems to really appreciate what Gomes does behind the plate and they wanted him to be the full time catcher, mostly, it seems, to benefit the pitching staff somehow (though I am still not sure exactly how or why tbh). My question is at what cost? How much better would this lineup look with Contreras right now? Is Gomes/Barnhart really better than Contreras/Gomes at.. well.. anything? Would we still be pining for a guy like Conforto if we had Contreras? Tucker just seems like he really sucks and while I might still be a little bitter about basically throwing Contreras out the door, I also just don't feel like I am following along with any sort of logic the FO might be applying here.

Good horsefeathering grief. Are you on dope? What's so must have about those guys? A couple unvaxxed low 90s BOR arms on a team that, if they show some chutzpah this offseason, might be able to run Kyle Hendricks as a 4th or 5th starter next year. How long's Steele going to run a HR/FB 3% below league average with 92, a below league CSW, and a near double digit walk rate? Wesneski's another non-power arm. Both of these guys are more cheap than young, 28 and 25 next year. Canario...well I like Canario and tbh had Alcantara bc of the 40 situation...Yeah, if these guys make it through the offseason I'll be all woo Cubs but these aren't untouchable players And of course they'd be getting pitching of some kind back, someone Bryce Jarvis-ish to send to the pitching lab Honestly, I really appreciate your baseball acumen. I had no idea who Hearn was until you, you throw out stats that I have to google to understand why they're important and you generally seem to keep up with our system, maybe better than some of the people paid to write about it. On our last rebuild, I had no idea who Jerimeir Candelario was until you brought him up (often) on PSD. Similarly though, I remember you dumping on our highest prospects, including guys like Bryant (K%, contact etc). Do you really believe that Steeles ceiling is a BOR starter? Or are you just irritated at the disproportionate amount of love that he (and maybe some other prospects) are getting? Your posts read like you've been more wound up recently.

The NBA is so much different than the MLB though. The most sure fire way to acquire a bonafide star in the NBA is through a top 3 pick, and you can't really have a good NBA team without at least one bonafide star. I think there's more pressure to tank aggressively in the NBA than the MLB. It might be an unpopular opinion but I am actually really enjoying watching the Cubs right now. Much more so than at the beginning of the year, at least. Like, I know they're not good, but it's still fun to me to watch the emergence of the future Cubs team. Like a slow unwrapping of Christmas presents. Some are probably socks and others are hopefully a new NES. And the vets that we have seem like good guys for helping some of the kids adjust to life in the league. Happ and Contreras obviously love it here. I still hold out (probably false) hope that we resign Willson. Not trying to defend the decisions that got us here, or the merits/demerits of tanking. Just saying that I am enjoying watching them for the first time in a long time. They're kinda fun.

Eh, I guess I don't acknowledge the nuance in the way you guys use "retool" and "rebuild". To me thats corporate speak to sell us on revamping the team. In 2014 we weren't "rebuilding" either, we were acquiring long term assets! It becomes a rebuild if you have bad luck or do a bad job and everything takes long than it's supposed to. I think the Cubs should be able to be Yankees like competitive very soon, so I am not seeing the difference.

Yankees, Red Sox, Braves, Brewers, Giants, Royals, Cleveland, St. Louis Literally all of those teams except for the crappy ones. Yes. All of them.

I'd argue that all 3 of those teams did some kind of rebuild to get where they are. The Astros are cheaters who've lucked out in a lot of ways and honestly, I think a retool is likely to come up for them soon too. The only real way to sustained success is through good drafting, farm system developing, signing stars long term, spending a boat load of money and pure unadulterated luck. I'd also argue that spending boat loads of cash is by far the most certain path to sustained success. The Ricketts are simply not the Guggenheim group and hoping they get everything else right is a utopian pipe dream. The dream of sustained success died when no one signed long term and we failed to develop pitchers, or any other players who would out produce their cost. As a side note, I greatly prefer the 4-6 year window plan over the Tribune days of false hope and half assed team building. Of course, I'd also prefer sustained success, but I also want world peace, a bunch of money and honest politicians.

There's little doubt that better days are ahead. What I do doubt is they will ever try for sustained success. They'll be happy to take 4-5 year swings and restart. Is that not true for every team? With the possible exception of the Dodgers, I don't think many teams are consistently sustaining success. Dodgers are a bit of an outlier with their ownership and TV deal

Thanks guys, you definitely gave me some things to think about. I guess my own morality has some blind spots and sports in general are definitely one of them. Part of the reason I watch sports is because I want to see humanity at its physical peak and Im often amazed at what we as a species can do. I guess I lose sight of fellow fans and how this stuff affects them. I selfishly just want to see the best do what they do.

Murphy doesn’t belong in the same universe as the other two. It doesn't matter that Murphy isn't leading the "horsefeathers" competition. He's still competing in it. I am going to go ahead and commit NSBB suicide with my first post and ask why everyone cares so much about what athletes do? I mean we all watch these guys because they are really really good at baseball, not because they are heros or better people, right? Specifically with Murphy, I don't like him or anything he's said regarding homosexuality, but I'd rather he's hitting for us in the playoffs than the opposing team. Does that somehow make me a scumbag too?