the front office wont be signing guys to put butts in seats, they’ll be doing it to add wins which will eventually put butts in seats

Was Levine responding to a question about the Cubs signing Fielder and Darvish in the same offseason?

The reason that my argument is more compelling (in my humble opinion) is that you’re asking me to prove negatives (which is difficult) and (in some cases) go along with elaborate what-if scenarios.

Meanwhile, I’m simply asking for evidence that the Cubs will increase payroll — and other than subterfuge’s citation from Bruce Levine (who was much more tapped into the Hendry regime than TheoJed, BTW) I haven’t gotten any. I’ve mostly gotten speculation about moving a $30 million posting fee off the payroll books and nebulous talk about the famed impact a Darvish signing would have on making the Cubs more popular in Japan.

Sorry, until I see proof that the Cubs will (in essence if not in fact) add $30 million to their payroll in 2012, I’m not going to buy into the thinking that Fielder and Darvish could be Chicago bound.

The first, sorry to say, is 2005 Astros logic. This happens every year, around July, if the Cubs are hopelessly out of it. A few posters will say, “Hey, the 2005 Astros, or the 2003 Marlins, were left for dead! Anything is possible.” And then, they’ll fail to show how the current Cubs team has any similarities with the 2005 Astros or the 2003 Marlins.

The point is that the Cubs, in 2006, had an owner desperate to increase the value of the team so it could be sold, and figured spending like crazy was the way to do that. There’s no indication that Tom Ricketts will do anything similar.

Now, let’s talk about the numbers.

The Cubs have $14 million coming off the books for Kosuke, $14.5 million for Ramirez, $7 million for Silva, $4.8 for Grabow, and $5 million for Pena. You could actually make the case that the Grabow savings are eaten up by the deferred Pena money (Pena gets $5 million in 2012) but I won’t for the sake of this argument.

That comes to $45 million and change.

Now, we know that Carlos Marmol is getting a significant raise ($3.8 million more). Marlon Byrd is getting a raise ($1 million). Marshall is getting a raise ($1.5 million). DeJesus is another $4.25 million. Dempster and Z each get small raises.

That’s a little short of $11 million, meaning the Cubs have about $34 million left.

The arbitration eligible guys will get raises, too. Garza and Soto will each get bumps, as will newly acquired Ian Stewart. Let’s say Soto and Stewart only get $1 million raises, but with Garza’s raise, you’re still talking about $8 million more or so. Let’s throw Wells, Baker and the other arb guys in there.

(Note that I’m not discussing Wood (who wants a raise) or Shark (whom the Cubs control and might be able to get at a better price). Let’s say those two make about the same combined in 2012 as they did in 2011.)

That’s about $10 million, meaning the Cubs have about $24 million to spend. That’s quite a bit lower than the $43 million you’re projecting for Fielder and Darvish (and can posting even fees be amortized?). Best case scenario, the Cubs would have to increase their payroll (or effective payroll, if want to go all Enron with the posting fee) by $17 million — and that’s assuming posting fees can be amortized. It’s possible I’m off by a million here or there — but that kind of money won’t be enough for a $30 million posting fee.

All of this is why I’m not going to bank on the Cubs increasing their already high payroll by 15 percent until I see proof that such a thing is possible.

And how badly the M’s are going to want to react to that, I see them either going for 7 years, or exceeding 150 on a 6-year contract. Only takes 2 teams to have a bidding war.