Bull

I’ve contended this all along. Theo is fancy like that.

While I agree with the sarcastic sentiment here, Zobrist is old and crusty, and there’s no guarantee he’ll continue to get on base at a —— holy crap! He had a .378 OBP last year?!? Nevermind.

This offseason can really go horsefeathers a goat. Even the rumors are idiot level Ffs the Mets are the most respectable ML team this offseason. The Mets! Just get used to it. This is the new normal. They should just move the Winter Meetings to late January. Front offices are far more cautious and less willing to be the first teams to make a big splash in free agency. Switch the arbitration deadline with the winter meetings. Get arb out of the way earlier and let the teams have a better handle on their actual budget. Winter meetings then return to their proper position, that being where things get done.

I was just reminded that Harper’s full name is Bryce Aron Max Harper. I have decided I prefer an outfield of Schwarber, Happ/Almora, Heyward.

Too late. You’re dead to me.

Casey's pizza is actually good and you're wrong. The more you get to know people the more your idealized notion of their greatness and nobility is destroyed.

Does this sound familiar to anybody else? I feel like some offseason there was thought of us having all this money to spend and then all a sudden we were broke because of X(renovations?) Are you thinking of the Tanaka money that was not spent that off-season but 'saved for later' after they didn't get him? I remember a quote about signing "two offeseason's worth" of free agents. I can't remember what year that was though.

Or Bryce is happening and they're waiting for the convention to announce it... please?

Ah, yes; Chicago's under-policed mini-Bourbon Street with the wonky crime stats to not scare away the suburban bros and bro-ettes and their precious, precious dollars. So deliciously and impressively revitalized now that there's a hotel, too. I'm very satisfied that that is the criticism you chose to offer. Doesn't really take away from my point. May add to it. I'm not an expert on the situation by any means, but its pretty clear to me that business people gonna business.

Hilarious that Kozma is batting 3rd for any team.

I don't know what to do with this. If you mean "owning a sports team shouldn't be a business," I can go along - but only so far. But that's just not realistic. Maybe I have some sort of strange Stockholm Syndrome from following the Cubs during Tribune ownership, but I don't see how its anything but a business. **I'm not a businessman, so forgive me if I misuse some terms** Have we forgotten the whole saga of tribune ownership, and underspending? Tribune in bankruptcy and selling the team? Sam Zell and the resrictions put on the Rickett's as far as requiring a certain debt load (if I'm remembering correctly)? The revitalization of the neighborhood? As much of a fan as Ricketts might be, you can't be naive enough to think that someone with a background in BANKING AND INVESMENTS would go through countless hours of meetings, fights with the neighborhood, the rooftops, and the city if they didn't think it would gain them a profit. These people live life by ROI. And all the other owners are business owners as well. I don't have to like them. I don't have to like big business, but to fail to recognize that an asset acquired for nearly a billion dollars is anything but big business is somewhere between gullible and dense. Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others. I feel the same way about capitalism. It is the worst economic system, except all the others. It really is the worst. but its what we have, and to expect people who have played that system for generations, and have invested the time and energy they have in it to not turn a HEFTY profit is to fail to understand the world around you. I wouldn't be surprised if they are leading the way on collusion. I'd image the penalties on baseball collusion will be much less than the same behavior in the banking industry and the Ricketts' know it. That said, the Cubs have a top 5 payroll, will continue have one. They have been more competitive this last 5 years than any other time in my lifetime or yours (I haven't checked the numbers, but I'd image even averaging in the "tank" years, they've set an 8 year high in W/L record at this point) due to quality hires and open wallets. I want Bryce and will be dissappointed if they don't get him. But to expect the Ricketts to be anything but what we knew they were walking in is just silly. They're investors and they're doing pretty well with this investment, both in terms of its success and thier profit. tl;dr. Baseball is a business. You don't have to like it, but its true. The Ricketts' are good at business and the Cubs are more successful than ever, while the Ricketts are making tons of money, which is kind of what bankers do.

What is the perceived negative connotation about Univision to which you are referring? He made no reference to any connotation whatsoever. He’s saying, “I don’t care what network they are on if it provides the finances to sign Harper.”

No clue what you are talking about but that’s ok. If you feel the franchise that blows the most money wins, keep telling yourself that. You’d be wrong and miserable like the yankee fanbase that rarely wins anymore and is never happy although always blows the most money. Listening to wfan this morning and all their blowhards could talk about was adding harper or machado or both as a last piece of the puzzle. It never ends. It guarantees nothing and rarely results in anything but a bigger financial hole You're stuck on this concept of a "financial hole". It is a fictional construct. There is no hole. It is an artificial barrier that league ownership has put in place in order to maximize their portion of the profits. The Cubs could easily run a $250M payroll, pay the associated luxury tax and still run a profit. They could probably run a payroll closer to $300M and be fine. Rough numbers: Ticket proceeds: $58 average face value ticket price * 3.18M in attendance = $184M in ticket revenue alone TV Contract Revenue: $65M in local tv contract revenue in 2016 So right there, that's ~$250M. That ignores the $50M all mlb teams got from the online business. And their share of the national tv contracts. And the radio revenue. And the concession sales. And the concert revenues. etc. Now, from that they have to cover much more than just the 25 man roster payroll. But the Cubs bring in a ton of profit. Is there an eventual limit to what they can spend and still make a profit? Of course. But they are not anywhere close to it. Yeah, but are they close to the limit to what they can spend and still make an obscene and ridiculous profit?

The discussion is all hypothetical about what he would receive (long term or short term). Since we being hypothetical, if his best offer was $300/10 yrs (with opt outs) I could see him accepting accepting $200 million/5 yrs (with opt outs) and hitting FA again at 28/29 years old when salaries have increased with new money floating around (i.e. Cubs network). I get that the millions make it harder to understand, but without knowing your income, if your boss guaranteed you that you’d make $100k per year pretty much no matter what for 10 years, and then another company offered you $133k per year for 4 years, would you really consider the second offer if the jobs were the same? Absolutely. In fact, I’ve made that decision. But I’m not a world class athlete whose career could be irreparably derailed by a poorly timed hangnail. Your point stands, but the broad brushed painting here doesn’t do the question justice. These guys are different.

Well for $3 I guess we could take a chance in 2020. Regular price, 3 bucks, 3 bucks, 3 bucks.

If he actually remains a Cub, I can’t imagine he will be with the team at spring training. They’ll avoid the media attention as much as possible. He will likely have an “extended spring trading” during the first 40 games of the regular season. Is that how PED suspensions at the beginning of the season are handled?

sir we're at yikescon1 I'm pretty sure airing of grievences on social media is excused during the festivus season.

Wrong. Nothing has ever happened and never will. This offseason is a black hole of signings.

I just pretend Heyward gives half his annual salary to Rizzo out of guilt. It makes me feel much better.

Back-up shortstop to start the season until Russell is off suspension.

Mine too. This is proof they were right.

Hi, Mark!

I can't imagine a big spending GM/owner getting all hot and bothered about missing out on a free agent to the White Sox. This isn't Steinbrenner and the Red Sox or Mets in the 90s/00s. I don’t think it’s the threat of losing him to the White Sox, it’s putting out a team that has money as being really interested to drive up the price and expedite the process possibly. The White Sox get to act like they’re relevant to their fans to drive interest because they were in on a premier FA and “are close to being relevant.” Their season ticket renewals are probably due around now, doesn’t hurt to dangle the Harper/Machado apple out there for fans to renew under the assumption something big might happen. While I agree this makes sense, I can’t imagine the Sox doing it if there was ANY chance they would ultimately lose out to the Cubs. Any other team, yes. But losing to the Cubs is not the happy ending you describe.

Which doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things because if they don't move another $20+ million this will be their 3rd consecutive year over and the penalties start getting really ridiculous. EDIT: And they just blew most of that on Joe Kelly. The Dodgers were under the tax line last year. Only Boston and Washington spent above the CBT. This has to change in the next CBA, right? This system encourages high spending teams to spend less every other year.

In 1930 he had 0 HRs and only struck out 3 times. His BA and BABIP nearly one and the same.