Optimism / Pessimism
I contemplated writing this diary for the last few days. Recently there has been a lot of discussion here about optimism and pessimism, and I would like to see a conversation about this.
I've always been an optimist. I'm optimistic about things that nobody is optimistic about (like peace in the middle east). This is even more true when it comes to the Cubs. Despite the fact that I like to use statistics, I thought the Cubs would win 90+ games last year. Sometimes I let optimism get in the way of reason.
Well, not any more. I've been recently labeled a pessimist, and maybe that is true. I don't have much hope for this team next year. I think that Jim Hendry - now mind you, I've been his #1 fan - has gone about the "win now" attitude all the wrong way. If this team wins next year, as it is currently constructed, it will be because the rest of the division is terrible, too.
I know I'm not the only person to lose optimism when it comes to this team. I'll never give up on them, but I just can't bring myself to feel optimistic about a team that should have won it all in 2003, but didn't, and should have been better in 2004, but wasn't. The team has finally opened its wallet in a way that we all knew they were capable of, but to what end? If the team decides to spend money, but spends money foolishly, not only does that not help for next year, but it will hurt the team for years to come.
Any I the only person who has lost optimism? Does anybody here really, honestly, and genuinely feel optimistic about the direction of this team? Can anybody help me regain my optimism, or is this a lost cause until the front office is reconstructed? Did anybody else notice that Jim Hendry justified signing Jason Marquis because he had 14 wins?!?!
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
0 recs |
74 comments
Comments
where'd he say that?
by Faith plus 1 on Dec 13, 2006 4:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm exaggerating
BTW how did I know that line would draw first response? :)
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 4:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
lol probably
by Faith plus 1 on Dec 13, 2006 4:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
To repeat
One thing to keep in mind is that baseball insiders may have more detailed reasons for their decisions, but feel like they have to "keep it simple" for fans. In other words, it's not entirely clear whether Hendry really values Marquis just because of wins and innings, or whether he thinks that's the best way to talk about it in public.
by zambranofan on Dec 14, 2006 7:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely.
But they are, without question, an improved team from the 96-loss mess that ended 2006. The rest of the NL isn't markedly better than it was in 2006. That instantly makes the Cubs competitive, and maybe even a contender.
You can't compare 2003/2004 to now. It's a different team, different era, new manager, hopefully new attitude.
Take a deep breath, OK? It's going to be OK.
Oh, and to whoever voted "less than 50 wins" in the poll: I was hoping for serious votes. I guess some people can't be bothered.
by Al on Dec 13, 2006 4:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I voted 70-79
I'm not necessarily trying to compare teams and eras. I'm just saying that this team is headed in a downward slope. This offseason they tried to clean house and take up a new approach - a large part of which is spending money. But when that money goes to mostly mediocre players (am I seriously supposed to get excited over DeRosa and Marquis???), and when the GM sounds like he hasn't changed philosophies, it just looks like nothing's really changed, and the downward trajectory will continue.
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 4:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree with you...
by Al on Dec 13, 2006 5:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The philosophy starts at the top...
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 5:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
They are improved...but........not a whole lot
Pierre to Soriano = big upgrade
Walker to Derosa = upgrade defensively, push at best offensively.
Cedeno to Izturius = terrible to just bad.
Rotation
2006 Zambrano, Wood, Prior, Marshall, Miller, Williams, Hill, Marmol, Mateo, Walrond
2007 Zambrano, Hill, Lilly, Marquis, Miller, Prior
Bullpen is pretty much the same with Wood somewhere in there.
With the exception of Soriano and a decent Lilly, we haven't added much else. If Lee returns to form it will defintely help, but I think the Cubs will still need Prior to pitch like he did in 2003 to have a realistic chance to contend.
The good news is that the Central Division looks pretty terrible and a few breaks or career years could push any team(except Pittsburgh of course) to the top.
I just don't see the improvement that others are talking about.
by Rotodaddy on Dec 13, 2006 9:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I try to be a realist
Personally, I'm tired of being optimistic for this team and getting burned. I'm practicing mild pessimism, and if they do well, I'll have the luxury of feeling pleasantly surprised. Everyone can and should feel how they want, but I think Cub optimists are being naive at this point.
by Thelonious on Dec 13, 2006 4:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Realist
by escapegoat on Dec 13, 2006 4:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Getting burned
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
I think you're just realistic and careful. That's what I'm trying to be, even though I still hope Mark Prior comes back and saves the Cubs. :)
by sparkles721 on Dec 13, 2006 5:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm one of those people...
And I'm still optimistic. Maybe it's just my nature. I think this team HAS improved.
I'm just not sure what it is that makes the pessimists pessimistic at this point. Is it just the dollar amounts?
by Al on Dec 13, 2006 5:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think
Jason Marquis?
JASON MARQUIS?????!!!!!
Justified because of his WIN TOTAL!??
WHAT?
I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm optimistic because this team is better than last year's but come on now, Hendry.
by tal1286 on Dec 13, 2006 5:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
I'm worried about Lilly and Marquis performing below average because they aren't great to begin with and we needed one more great pitcher to back Z.
I'm worried about Izturis, and I'm worried about 2nd base which is DeRosa.
And last but not least, I worry about health.
I'm not pessimistic. I'm just worried. You can't tell me there's nothing to worry about. I don't make my life miserable thinking about these things, but there's plenty to worry about and you know that Al.
by sparkles721 on Dec 13, 2006 5:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think that I'm a pessimist
Again, it's not that the organization is or isn't spending money, just the question of are they using their resources to the best of their ability. I'd have to believe that with the size and length of this years contracts, along with the raise due to Z, the Cubs have effectively taken themselves out of the race for signing FAs next year. That's fine if you have answers from within, but the Cubs really don't.
by Scott on Dec 13, 2006 5:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll have to agree that we've improved
While our lineup isn't a Murder's Row or The Big Red Machine we've bolstered the offensive side somewhat and patched up the rotation with guys who seem like they don't fall apart at the seams (I'd like to start fewer than 14 different pitcher this year).
To me, this team has a shot at the playoffs and that's what I want. Give me a team that's competetive and I'll be happy enough through the season. To help this end, the central is a more than a bit messed up (along with many other NL teams).
If Hendry has a few more trades or signings to do, then all the better. Let's just get this winter over and get back to baseball season.
by stelmodad on Dec 13, 2006 7:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
VERY easy answer
Luis
by Luis on Dec 13, 2006 8:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Loud, sustained applause!!
Sorry, Al, had to steal some of your oft-repeated phrases.
That is what I've been trying to say. I said it before the off-season, I tried to say it now.
Take out the Soriano signing and what do you see?
Aramis Ramirez
Mark DeRosa
Daryle Ward
Henry Blanco
Kerry Wood
Ted Lilly
Jason Marquis
He resigned his own guys for below market-value. This is an obvious skill Hendry has. I will not discredit him that. (I will point out that the two best players in the NL <subjectively> both play for the Cardinals below market value.)
As far as Soriano is concerned... well, if that wasn't a move mandated by the upper management (We have to do something to put butts in the seats!!!), or giving Hendry the benefit of the doubt... at BEST, as Luis said, he was finally given the money to sign the guy he wanted-an amazing "toolsy" player who doesn't have a great OBP and just happened to have a contract year in a year when there was crap for free agents. (if he happened to be a free agent next year, he'd be at best the third best OF, maybe worse--not even in the Top 5 of all FA's.)
Jim Hendry's philosophy has not changed. I said he had no reason to change it. I don't believe it has. I'm glad I was right. <---Loud, sustained pat on the back... or something.
by tyger1147 on Dec 13, 2006 8:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Gone for almost a month.....
I agree with you 100%. I had just landed in the UAE when I heard of the Soriano signing. I kept waiting for more....
As of now, I think this is the team we come North with. At best, we are a 81 win team. It all comes down to pitching. Unless Prior returns to form, I am afraid this team will not reach the promised land.
As for all of the folks who laughed at the Matsuzaki signing, the Red Sox have the last laugh now. Even with the $51 post fee, the contract averages 18 per. IMHO, it makes the Lilly and Marquis signing look that much more ridiculous.
by timeforachange on Dec 13, 2006 8:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Beware of my soap box.
If they don't sign anyone, they didn't do anything to try making the team better. If they try to sign someone, but don't get them, then they didn't try hard enough. If they do sign someone, they signed them for way too much money.
It's frustrating, because there is no such thing as a sure thing anymore. People are saying how much better Suppan or Weaver would be then Marquis. Why? Because they pitched better last year? Maybe so, but every team has question marks every year. You cannot eliminate question marks completely. There was absolutely no way to fix the holes on this team without any question.
The way I see it, the Cubs got who they got and the fact that they did something makes me think that at least they're making an effort to improve. Sure, Lilly and Marquis aren't the greatest. But it takes a little luck to get anywhere nowadays, and trust me I know that the Cubs don't normally have any luck, but that's not Hendry's fault.
Look at Jon Garland, he went 36-36 with an ERA over 4.5 for three years consecutively before going 18-10 and 3.50 the year they won the whole thing. Let's face it, folks, players have bad seasons sometimes, players also improve. It does happen... occasionally. I don't think it's about optimism/pessimism, I think it's about faith that management is doing what they believe is right and whatever they can to accomplish it.
Jacque Jones got booed the first week of the season last year. Why? Because he struggled? That was part of it, but it was moreso because he struggled and everyone EXPECTED him to struggle because they didn't like the signing. He ended up having a great season, but people STILL don't like him because they didn't like the signing to begin with. Cub fans get these misconceptions about players and don't let them go. That's what did in Corey Patterson, might do in Jacque Jones and will probably do in Jason Marquis.
All I can do is hope that they come in and shut everyone up next year. Go Cubbies in 2007, and when they win next year, in the eloquent words of Clark Griswold, "we're gonna press on, and we're gonna have the hap, hap, happiest Christmas since Bing Crosby tap-danced with Danny f@!%ing Kaye. And when Santa squeezes his fat white a&# down that chimney tonight, he's gonna find the jolliest bunch of a&#holes this side of the nuthouse."
by eamuscatuli1881 on Dec 14, 2006 10:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Who cares about the $$$$$
Soriano is a good player who will help, but he has his limitations. Lilly should be decent. Those are the only upgrades I see.
Derosa? He'll play good D, but he can't hit. I don't care what he did down in Coors South.
Marquis? Please. Great, he'll give us 200 innings, so instead of 3 guys giving us 200 crappy innings, he'll do it on his own.
Izturius? Now I'm excited :-)
Could the Cubs contend in the central? Sure, If Lee returns to form.....If DeRosa repeats a career year.....If Hill is for real.......If Prior is healthy........IF,IF,IF
I'll be optimistic if Prior is throwing Baseballs when he reports to Spring Training, because I don't think we are close to competing unless he is the Prior of 2003. We are still counting on him. That's why I'm realistic.
by Rotodaddy on Dec 13, 2006 9:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Realist here..
by CubFaninCA on Dec 13, 2006 4:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Realist
The Mets and Dodgers will be the cream of the National League. And the Cardinals are always going to be tough when you factor in Carpenter, Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds. Surprise teams? the Diamondbacks and, you heard it hear first, the Pirates.
by BlueMike on Dec 13, 2006 4:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure...
Last year was horrible. I'm not sure I will ever get over it, even if I say I do. I was VERY disappointed like many other people. I may be in denial sometimes about this team. I learned in my psychology class that denial is a defense mechanism and with the Cubs I need one.
I'm not very optimistic about next year. I didn't want Soriano last year and until he hits 40 homeruns again I don't trust him. Marquis has a high probability of being below average, and same thing with Lilly. Mark DeRosa is probably not going to do great again. I'm just worried more than anything. I don't feel negative or positive, I'm just worried.
You can always hope though. I love baseball, but I love the Cubs more. I'm hoping the NL sucks again, and they at least get a shot in the playoffs.
I hate dividing into optimist and pessimist sides because both sides are sometimes mean to each other. There are two sides you can pick from and no side is wrong.
Anyway, I'm never going to be as optimistic as I was because disappointment is not fun. I'm always going to be there though because I'm loyal, and baseball is too fun. Plus, when spring training gets closer and they start saying all those wonderful things about working together as a team, and then I'm like 'awwwww' and I feel all pumped. Regardless of my thoughts on the team, the energy I spend on them will be the same.
by sparkles721 on Dec 13, 2006 5:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You are right
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't do that.
I'm very picky. I have high expectations for myself, and therefore the Cubs get part of that. I want the Cubs to win. I know winning isn't everything, but it means a lot to me.
by sparkles721 on Dec 13, 2006 5:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You are right again
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 7:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd just like to point out
by Thelonious on Dec 13, 2006 5:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
so is being a "pessimist" or
by CubFaninCA on Dec 13, 2006 5:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
not really
Optimism and pessimism are readily definable as thinking either the best or worst of any given situation respectively. On the other hand, being a "realist" is entirely predicated on what "reality" is exactly, and that can be both a subjective definition, and impossible to define for a biased observer (all of us).
by Thelonious on Dec 13, 2006 7:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Hendry's signings...
Now, before you jump down my throat, let me make my argument. Last offseason, Hendry had holes in the outfield, shortstop, bullpen, bench depth and rotation. What did he do? Well, nothing with the rotation, missed out on Furcal because he didn't pay enough, signed JJones to what is now considered a bargain contract (that many thought was too high and/or too long at the time), signed John Mabry, signed good bullpen help (Eyre and Howry were bright spots last year) and panicked when it came time to get a leadoff hitter, giving up three pitching prospects for a one-year rental of Juan Pierre.
End cost: a year of suffering with Cedeno at SS, an ineffective John Mabry, the loss of three prospects that might have been used to land something better (or, at least, fill in the rotation when it was decimated by injuries).
End bonus: a solidified/improved bullpen, and JJones, who performed at least up to what we could have hoped.
Looking at that year, we messed up when we didn't offer enough money to guys we really wanted (Furcal), which left us scrambling and trading in a panic parts that we maybe should have kept (the Pierre trade). The guys we "overpaid" are, just one year later, a bargain (JJones), or a bargain and solid piece of the bullpen (Eyre and Howry).
This offseason, what does Hendry do? Learning from past mistakes, he's thrown money at the problem, realizing A) what he spends today may not seem so onerous in a year or so, since baseball's long term labor peace and international expansion means baseball revenue may permanently keep salaries high, and B) spending now is easier than trading prospects, who land you much more towards the trade deadline when you may need that extra piece (not to mention the fact that the prospect you trade in a panic may come back to haunt you).
We landed Soriano, Lilly, Marquis (yeah, probably for too much, but so what? At least we have a healthy rotation), DeRosa, and Ward. That addressed weaknesses we ALL knew we had, at least to some degree. (Offense is better merely due to Soriano, and our rotation with Lilly and Marquis is at least healthy and "untested rookie" free).
Do some of these contracts look onerous or bad right now? Sure, perhaps. But remember, we were saying the same thing about JJones' deal last year, and now his deal is downright cheap....
by Chadnudj on Dec 13, 2006 5:36 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post.
by Al on Dec 13, 2006 5:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
again, al
pardon me if i don't think hendry's moves will turn into gold just because either 1. we want them to or 2. jacque jones worked out ok. first of all, jacque still has 2 years left on his contract, wants to be traded, disappeared the first month or two and played below average defense. so lets temper our enthusiasm for him a bit.
derosa is a terrible signing, plain and simple. he is a utility player, an average one at that, and was paid starter money. we have a very similar player already in theriot, and a very promising second baseman in patterson that will be ready soon.
soriano is a nice player, but he was paid like he's the best player in the league, and that he will continue to be that good into his late thirties, despite one of the most important aspects of his value being speed. he will play a position he's never played before, and if its right field, he moves from being one of the best players at his position to a slightly above average one. if jones is traded, soriano only modestly upgrades the offense, since he would effectively be replacing jones bat instead of pierre's. pierre is the worst contract of the off-season, but soriano's will be a head-scratcher in a few years.
marquis signing is pretty tough to defend. he's not a good pitcher, nor is he liked in the clubhouse. the two best pitching coaches in baseball have failed to keep him from deteriorating in his performance. he had an ERA over 6 this year, and had the two worst outings in baseball. even if you subtract those outings, he still had a very bad year. the only thing going for him is that he pitches a lot of innings every year, though i would submit that if your ERA is 6 the team would be best served keeping your innings to a minimum. I don't see why a combination of young pitchers couldn't give you 200 innings of 5+ERA pitching. And they are free. estes pitched a lot of innings too, and that wasn't a good thing, iirc.
Lilly probably will be one of the better signings this year. But i would prefer to take the money given Lilly and Marquis and signed Schmidt or Matsuzaka. I don't think we had a desperate need for a number 3 and 5 starter, i think we had a desperate need for a number 2. That they didn't sign a number 2 makes me wonder if hendry is, yet again, waiting on makr prior to salvage the seaosn. because at this point, without a healthy prior this is a very average team.
ward is a good bat off the bench. i don't have a problem with that signing.
i am an optimist by nature. i hope for the best in things and people. but i don't expect the best from something or someone that continually disappoints and takes advantage of me, like the cubs do. thats why i hope things go well with the cubs, but i don't expect them to. but hendry, in this off-season, didn't make me think all his folly the last few years was him giving baker what he asked for. he's just made me think he's not a good general manager. give a good general manager 300 million to build a team around derrek lee, zambrano, howry, eyre, barrett hill, and jones, and i think they would give you a little more room for realistic optimism.
by tomas21 on Dec 13, 2006 6:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You make some valid points...
by Al on Dec 13, 2006 7:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I completely agree...
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 7:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's not good enough.
Is 'at least' enough to win games? I don't think so. That's when I think people set their expectations to low.
I understand that people are thrilled the Cubs are spending because they never do. I am too. However, we should not be happy with just that otherwise they will be too. They should have done this a long time ago, but it is a step in the right direction. It's not enough though and if we have another losing season I'm not going to be saying 'Well, at least the Cubs tried.' That's not enough.
I can't say so what. Hendry spent lots of money on contracts for multiple years. If we don't like these players later, they won't just go away.
by sparkles721 on Dec 13, 2006 5:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes!
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I won't jump down your throat
To answer you and Al, it isn't necessarily the sizes of the contracts that bother me (they do, but that is probably a separate issue). I'm more concerned with the fact that Hendry doesn't seem to be able to adequately evaluable talent, and thus pursues players (and then throws tons and tons of money at them) for all the wrong reasons.
You are entirely correct that last year the team had obvious holes, and that Hendry did little to fix them. He did a great job with the bullpen, and his signing of Jones pleasantly surprised (and admittedly proved many of us wrong) us. But because he didn't fill the other holes, he learned the lesson for this offseason that one cannot stand pat when there is work to be done.
But Hendry seems prone to knee-jerk reactions. He needs starting pitching, so he signs Lilly (who I have little reaction to, positive or negative), and Marquis, who is awful. He needs a second baseman, so he signs a player coming off of a career year who showed no signs previously of being able to hit on that level. And he signs Soriano, whose career numbers a just slightly above average.
What I'm pessimistic about is that Hendry is going to get little return on his investment. This team didn't need replacement-level players, it needed a #2 pitcher and a left-handed slugger, among other things. It didn't need more guys who OBP .320, it needed guys who knew how to draw a walk. But Hendry looked at batting averages and wins and figured that DeRosa, Lilly, Marquis, and Soriano address the needs of the team, when I believe they do not.
Moreover, these moves reduce flexibility for the future. When and if this team tanks, someone else is going to have to deal with a $140 payroll of absolutely atrocious talent.
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
Luis
by Luis on Dec 13, 2006 8:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
and...
by Chadnudj on Dec 13, 2006 9:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
You're hoping Prior (always hurt), Marquis (returning to "form" or one good year?), DeRosa (career utility infielder and career/contract year) and Soriano (career/contract year and career .325 OBP) all play up to and above expectations.
Or, we could hope Matsuzaka (World Baseball Classic MVP, but never "in the majors"), Drew (career .393 OBP, hurt, annoying) and Julio Lugo (definite upgrade in a place we need) do well.
There are ton more questions in the first one than in the second. And I would say more upside, even overall, in the second. But to each his own, right?
by tyger1147 on Dec 13, 2006 10:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
As you well know...
My point here is, yes, the Cubs would be better with him. But he's gone. I think the Cubs are an improved team with who they've acquired. Are they as good as they COULD have been? Maybe not.
But they have gone from "putrid" to "competitive". That's a start, at least.
by Al on Dec 14, 2006 8:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My problem, Al...
What it would have meant, though, is that next year's payroll would have been $10 mil less. In one of the worst years of free agency, it should be assumed that next years will be better. Will it? None of us know as all productive players may get locked up before then.
But the point is, IF it IS better, and say a $10 million dollar player might actually want to come here, and he is better than what we have, well, the Cubs will have $10 mil less to offer him.
The question is: Was that important to "win now" at the possible expense of next year or the next or was it more important to "do something" to get the seats filled?
To me, all signs point to the latter.
by tyger1147 on Dec 14, 2006 8:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well..
I mean, as a club I may tell a free agent we're really going to be spending money and building a winner, but if I'm the Devil Rays and have never done it before, they'll laugh at me. Spending money now makes us more attractive to free agents down the road, who will look at us as a team willing to pay big and seeking to build a winner.
by Chadnudj on Dec 14, 2006 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No offense...
Second, if a player actually LOOKS at past performance on spending and who you bring in, he'll notice that the Cubs have only once in recent years gone after the best free agents and got them. He'll also notice that they tend to overpay for average talent. They'll notice the franchise really doesn't understand what it takes to make a winner. So they'll walk away. If any of that matters, which I doubt.
by tyger1147 on Dec 14, 2006 12:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But...
Let's break down the signings:
Soriano - I don't see how you can say his career numbers are "just slightly above average." The guy steals bases, hits for power, and has an OBP that is trending upwards as he improves his approach at the plate. This was a great signing, adding a 3rd head to the ARam-Lee monster (in other words, if one goes down like Lee did last year, I don't think our offense suffers the same catastrophic collapse).
Lilly - AL East pitcher who was pretty damn competitive in that league, coming to a MUCH weaker offensive division and league; young, and pretty talented. Yes, quite a bit of money, but compared to the $55/5 years Meche got, not a bad deal. I'd give this signing a solid B to B+
DeRosa - here's a guy who plays a bunch of positions, had a great year last year (what you call a career year), and gets on base. Now he's our 2B, but he offers flexibility in case of injury to play SS, OF, and 3B. We had NO flexibility on the lineup last year, which is why losing Lee KILLED us. I really don't fault this signing.
Marquis - I agree, too much money. I'd actually prefer Meche for 5 years at $55 million than this contract. But if you're going to complain about the large payroll on the one hand, and want a non-Prior-Miller dependent top 4 in the rotation on the other, where would you have saved money? Probaby with DeRosa, I predict. Fine, but then you're relying on Theriot AND Izturis in the lineup to contribute, and an avoidance of injuries (since DeRosa offers flexibility if there are injuries). The current status quo with DeRosa gives us flexibility, and the ability to play the "hot" hand (Izturis OR Theriot) at SS, and give EPatterson a chance to improve in the minors without the "contribute now" pressure his brother wilted under. Marquis was probably too much given that guys like Piniero, Duckworth, and VZambrano came available with non-tenders....but at least we guaranteed to get a guy who has won (say what you will about it being luck, but he kept his team in it enough to win 14 games last year, and I'd take that out of our #4 starter) and left only one spot open for the Prior-Miller-Marshall-Guzman-rookie carousel. At this point, if Prior or Miller or Marshall comes out and plays awesome, Marquis as a #5 pitcher is really not bad....even for that money, since we all know the Cubs can pay it. And the fact that in 2 years, this won't be that onerous.
I don't see how meeting the market price now (if, as it appears, market prices will only escalate in the future given international expansion of the game and labor peace into the foreseeable future) is "reducing flexibility" or mortgaging our future. In fact, it might be smart planning....spending what seems to be big money now to avoid spending way too much in the future.
by Chadnudj on Dec 13, 2006 9:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm pessimistic about being optimistic
I'm not looking at the whole picture, but my gut tells me the pitching is not where it needs to be to get us to where we want to be.
In the end, so much depends on the chemistry and dynamics of the people involved. If we could win the World Series on optimism alone, I think we would have clinched it years ago. Aren't we, after all... eternal optimists? What else could explain "Die-Hard-Cubs-Fans"? I know for myself, win or lose, next year and the year after that, I'll still be a Cubs fan.
Federer
It's like deja`vu all over again ....
by tigerperson on Dec 13, 2006 5:46 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Skeptical...
I still wish they would have stopped after they re-signed Aramis. But Soriano doesn't kill them. But they definitely should have stopped there.
Signing Blanco, Ward, DeRosa, Lilly and Marquis makes this team WORSE than not signing any of those guys. You'll see. All the guys those guys were signed to replace because they hadn't proven themselves will all be tearing up either AAA or doing good in spot duty. The above signings will not be so good so we will have to trade the young guys for someone better. Then we'll have expensive parts sitting on the bench of an 85-win team. Meanwhile, someone coveted Theriot or Mateo or Marmol they'll be on a different team making us look stupid. It's the Cubs' curse. And they'll fall short of the playoffs-and cost roughly $120 mil.
I know, I know. I'm an idiot. Everyone will say that. So no need to do it. We'll just have to wait and see. Like I've thought all along, a World Series ring and I don't really give a crap.
by tyger1147 on Dec 13, 2006 6:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
No one reply...
by tyger1147 on Dec 13, 2006 6:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I just figured out my optimism...
All short-term free agent signings pitch and play average (Lilly, Marquis and DeRosa mainly).
Next year's off-season market, bolstered by Wells and Zambrano turning down extensions and getting huge money (maybe Big Z by the Cubs) goes as gonzo as this one.
Hendry and is fired.
The Cubs are sold.
Lilly, Marquis and DeRosa's contracts become tradable. And are traded at season's end for good young prospects. Howry and Eyre were traded at the deadline for real-close prospects.
All the young guys: Mateo, Pie and Veal are my bets: prove they are big-league starters. Prior comes back healthy at the end.
In 2008, with a new GM:
#1 - Zambrano
#2 - Prior (now healthy after a rocky start to 2007 but a hellacious tear in August and September)
#3 - Hill (proven great starter at this point)
#4 - Mateo
#5 - Veal
Soriano - RF
Theriot - 2B (proven hitter somehow)
Ramirez - 3B
Lee - 1B
Murton - LF (proven LF power)
Pie - CF
????? - SS (young stud acquired in trade like Henly Ramirez)
????? - C (young stud like... whoever)
Marmol, Wuertz and Ryu dominate as right pen guys.
Marshall and Rapada become wacky LOOGY's.
Wood becomes the incredible closer we know he can be.
Yeah, there's my hope. It's still there.
by tyger1147 on Dec 13, 2006 6:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I have to give
by sue369 on Dec 13, 2006 8:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Hell....
by timeforachange on Dec 13, 2006 8:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's for damned sure!
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 8:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Color me pragmatic
How will Piniella manage to get this team winning?
Bottom line...There are too many variables to determine what the season will deliver. Hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst.
by tharr on Dec 13, 2006 9:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst
by gravedigger on Dec 13, 2006 9:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Color me pragmatic
How will Piniella manage to get this team winning?
Bottom line...There are too many variables to determine what the season will deliver. Hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst.
by tharr on Dec 13, 2006 9:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Goodness Gracious
I would have to say the pessimism runs about 80/20 in the majority at this site. Gets pretty old.
I like the moves, are they all great, no. But damn look where the Cubs came from, and also what was available. OK who thought the Red Sox where going to offer D.Mat 51 million JUST for the rights to sign him? No one. Everyone throws trades around like they happen on a daily basis. Trades are not that easy to construct. Could the Cubs made a play for Jennings, yes, but most likely Murton and Veal would have been involved. Maybe went after Schimdt harder, who knows, Does anyone know Jason Schimdt personally? Maybe he is telling the truth and wanted to stay on the west coast, and took less money.
You know there are so many freaking sites for rumors now, and you know what they are freaking rumors, THATS ALL.
I overall like the job they have done so far. Cubs bullpen is in still solid, there lineup gains Soriano and D. Lee, Lilly and Marquis I like better than Rusch/Mateo/Marmol/Marshall/O'Mally/Warlond/Guzman
Been a Cub fan since 1970, Lets see what June 1st looks like. Right now I am optimistic.
by Johnny Callison was a Cub on Dec 13, 2006 9:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Nobody wins in this argument
In other news, my girlfriend reported that Alfonso Soriano was at Children's Memorial Hospital today and every child received an autographed hat and a Nintendo DS. She was not sure if Alfonso donated the Nintendos or not. Karma has to come back sometime.
by MerigoldBowling on Dec 13, 2006 10:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
That is
by Johnny Callison was a Cub on Dec 13, 2006 10:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
by Faith plus 1 on Dec 14, 2006 12:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A few points
First off, I wanted to address the overall idea that the Cubs spent money...look at what they've acquired...everyone should be happy. To that I pass along these three names: Dave Smith, Danny Jackson, and George Bell. Prior to the 1991 season, the Cubs opened up the checkbook, signed the best available starting pitcher, a bonafide closer and a power hitting outfielder. Smith and Bell were coming off of All-Star seasons. My point? Spending money just guarentees that your payroll is going to go up.
Secondly, I think people are failing to really grasp the long term consequences of these moves. Yes, if they do not work, Hendry will be fired. The Cubs may or may not decide to maintain a high payroll. Whoever comes in to replace Hendry will have a tremendous mess to clean up.
Finally, it irks me that people are looked at as pessimistic or optimistic in regards to their opinions about the Cubs. This has been an ongoing struggle and people seem to just use that label in regards to other people when they don't want to actually address their overall opinions.
DmL
by dmlichte on Dec 14, 2006 12:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
You make
This is a little off the subject, but I wanted to point out that Wilken could develop us a very productive farm system which should bold well for the future of this organization. This system has produced some very good pitchers, but has failed badly in producing good position players. That has to change in order for this franchise to become consistent winners. So when these big contracts run out, we'll have some cheap and talented position players waiting in the wings.
by Macy on Dec 14, 2006 3:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wilken
last year the Cubs lost picks in rds 2, 3, and 4 because of Jones, Eyre, and Howry
This year we will lose our 2nd rd pick for Soriano
i believe we got a bit luckier with the system in that type B FA's do not cost draft picks in return and i believe Lilly was a B, if he was an A we'd lose our 3rd rd pick as well
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 14, 2006 8:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I believe...
by Al on Dec 14, 2006 9:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
draft position
Kasey
by kaseyi on Dec 14, 2006 10:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yea,
by Macy on Dec 15, 2006 12:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hendry
What we do know is that, assuming that Carlos Zambrano is retained beyond 2007, the Cubs will have seven players under contract through at least 2009, costing $82M a season. Unless the Cubs are willing to see the payroll go beyond $120M, the Cubs will be very much hamstrung in terms of adding significant payroll.
DmL
by dmlichte on Dec 14, 2006 12:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hated this team last year
This year's team has improved. I'd put them at a mid-80's win ballclub. There's 2 things that I think this team is still missing: more talent at starting pitching, and more pop from the 5, 6, and 7 spots in the order.
This off season, so far, is meeting my realistic expectations of what they could have done. With a couple of career years, they could be WS contenders. Now, I'm not expecting that to happen, but I do think they will be playoff contenders. I think that at the end of 2007, the Cubs will have something strong to build on for 2008.
by NO100 on Dec 14, 2006 9:42 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
You have to be
UZI
by Ozgreeder on Dec 14, 2006 10:44 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Realist with an optimism complex
At the end of the night you part and exchange numbers. A few days later you give her a call excited at the prospect of her calling you back, you wait a day, two days, a week, a month, 98 years. She never calls you.
Such is life, do you wallow in self pity? Nope, you go back and do it all over again with the same optimism that tells you someday, just someday, you'll find the right one and you'll win the ultimate prize. (not in that way)
by Faith plus 1 on Dec 14, 2006 10:55 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Every year
Kasey
by kaseyi on Dec 14, 2006 11:00 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

by 



















