A theory on TheoJed's current thinking
by elgato on Jan 2, 2012 8:33 AM CST
Email
PrintHappy new year, BCBers! I had some time at a boring NYE party the other night to think about the Cubs and the current strategy of TheoJed. I have a theory as to what’s going on – and to why there’s been (relatively) little action in Cubland this offseason.
IMO, the Cubs' ultimate decision on Matt Garza is linked to the Cubs' ultimate decision on Prince Fielder, and, really, vice versa. If Garza remains a Cub, Fielder very likely could be one, too. Here’s my thinking:
It’s been widely reported that TheoJed are in talks with several teams about Garza. The decision to deal the right hander hinges, almost certainly and rather obviously, on whether what is offered is viewed as more valuable than keeping Garza in the long term. As is common in trades likes this, whatever the Cubs get back almost certainly won’t be as valuable in 2012 or 2013 as Garza. I’ve seen nothing to indicate that the Cubs would get big-league players back – or, at least, big-league players who would be as good or as established as Garza.
Maybe a Garza trade ends up being a dynasty-creating decision. But think of the Cubs’ rotation without Garza in the next two years. Assuming someone else isn’t added via trade of free agency – or something unexpected doesn’t happen like Cashner becoming a TOR starter -- the Cubs’ best starter in 2012 and 2013 could easily be (gulp) Travis Wood.
In such a situation, does it make sense to spend $50 million on Fielder over the next two years? Or, maybe better stated, is signing Fielder the slam dunk that many of us (myself included) have said it should be – because he’s a guy who could help now and later – given how bad the team could be in 2013-14 without Garza?
Turned around, the Cubs are probably trying to determine whether Fielder could be had at an agreeable price before they decide on Garza. If Bryan LaHair is projected to be at first on April 5, it makes more sense to trade Garza now, get prospects and regroup for 2013 and beyond. This would seem to jibe with Bruce Levine’s talk on Saturday (and various other reports) that the Cubs are still in the Fielder mix. Also, the Cubs can probably partly control the timetable of the Fielder talks, because they’re the biggest fish in the bidding (compared with Washington, Baltimore, Seattle, Toronto, etc.). This would seem to be especially true after Texas won the Darvish bidding.
For a while, I dismissed my own theories on all of this as hopefulness. I'd like the Cubs to rebuild around Garza, Fielder and Castro, because I thought such a rebuild would be more fun than the alternative -- which seems like it could be Starlin Castro and the Bad Contract Expiration Watch for at least a year, maybe two. Then I thought about one of the Cubs' only major moves this offseason: David DeJesus.
Signing DeJesus wasn’t a huge gamble, but it made no sense for a team going young and waiting for contracts to expire. The Cubs could have trotted Tyler Colvin out for another year, promoted Brett Jackson (and kept Marlon Byrd), given the job to Reed Johnson or even Jeff Baker or found somebody off the scrap heap in February to play right. Instead, they gave two years to DeJesus, a veteran who's a good bounce-back candidate – and they signed him early in the offseason. Hmmm.
Now, it’s possible that the Cubs’ strategy changed since the DeJesus signing – that the move was initially designed to help the Cubs be competitive in 2012 (which would favor getting Fielder and keeping Garza) but that facts on the ground (Rizzo's availability? Fielder's pricetag relative to Pujols'?) rendered the DeJesus signing meaningless as a predictor. Indeed, the major moves after the DeJesus signing (Marshall, Stewart) appear more geared toward a youth movement, but the addition of Wood and Stewart could be helpful to the 2012 team.
So, maybe, in this case, a DeJesus is just a DeJesus. But I doubt it.
Back to Fielder and Garza. It is still possible that Garza returns and Fielder goes elsewhere – the return for Garza might not be good enough. But I’d say Garza is more likely to return if Fielder is signed and that it’s almost unthinkable that Fielder will be a Cub and Garza isn’t one.
Anyway, have at it.
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.
325 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm not sure
signing Fielder would mean we’d need to keep Garza.
Let’s say we trade Garza for Turner and Smyly. We’d be cutting Garza’s salary, which is roughly 20-22 mil over the next 2 years, plus whomever Smyly would replace in the rotation. We’d also be picking up 2 pitchers who are probably ready this season or next.
So while losing Garza would mean a non-competitive team this year, we might pick up enough pitching that, with Fielder and a couple other moves, we could be competitive in 2013 if things break right.
by tomas21 on Jan 2, 2012 8:59 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
well said
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 9:09 AM CST up reply actions
Possibly so.
But I also think elgato’s scenario is plausible. We’ll see.
Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation
'Need'? No.
But I think Garza’s return is more likely if Fielder is signed.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
If you trade Garza and sign Fielder,
coupled with the losses of Z, Demp, and Byrd after this year, then you’re still going to have a lot of cash to spend next offseason. Add a TOR SP like Cain/Grienke/Hamels/Haren along with a second tier starter (Floyd/McCarthy/Liriano/Jonathan or Anibal Sanchez?), and fill in the rest of the rotation with the likes of Turner, Smyly, Wood, Cashner, McNutt, Wells,etc. That rotation might not be too shabby, and you could still add another big bat to pair with Fielder for 2013. Mix in Castro and BJax and you could have the makings of a decent lineup. I don’t trading away Garza necessarily rules out hope for 2013, depending on the route Theo and Jed choose to take.
It doesn't, as you say, "necessarily rule out hope for 2013."
But it makes it harder to be optimistic about 2013.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Sure does, but if Garza can be replaced by equal or better pitchers next offseason, it chhanges the look of things.
Especially if a couple guys from the Garza trade are also contributing in 2013.
The problem is COUNTING on them to contribute in 2013, when deciding whether Fielder is worth it.
Betting on the arrival date of young pitching is really tricky. A year ago, I suspect a lot of people would have predicted Trey McNutt being in the majors in 2012. Now, that seems like less of a sure thing.
If the pitching prospects acquired for Garza flame out or are delayed, then we’re paying $25 million per for a first baseman on a team that would have to go spend a ton after 2012 to get some good starting pitching.
Of course, Garza could also flame out/get hurt. But he’s a pretty sure bet for close to 200 innings. The other guys aren’t.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Prospects are tough to predict.
And I’m certainly no expert in the field, but it sounds like Turner is close to a sure thing. He was roughed up in the majors last year, but everything I’ve heard and read indicates he’s going to be a solid 2. Right now, I’d be OK with a Turner/Smyly trade AND a signing of Fielder.
Good point.
It’s about the risk/reward, and if by the time these prospects are ready to make big impacts in 2014 and beyond, will Fielder still be at his highest level? With the state of the franchise, it’s a risk I’d be willing to take. But it has to be for at least one pitcher extremely close to having an impact, such as Turner, who actually has already reached the bigs himself.
That's a big gamble on two young pitchers ...
when it comes in tandem with a $50 million price tag.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
truly what path brings a WS contender
forget the fun part, if you going into Epstein’s head, you must think in three priorities:
WS win
Building an organization that is in Rickett’s 7-8 top organizations
WS win again
A friend once told me: "I don't buy the idea that a team learns anything from a loss, the only thing they learn is how to lose games."---Knight
by Ivy Walls on Jan 2, 2012 9:11 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
I think it means
we have to be better than Ameritrade.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 2, 2012 8:43 PM CST up reply actions
It posts a comment on the blog...
…or it gets the hose again.
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
How would you rank Ricketts' organizations right now?
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
I think the DeJesus signing was just the Cubs taking a chance on what they felt was a better option than what's in house.
Giving Colvin, Reed, or Baker the RF job would be giving up. They believe DeJesus could bounce back and be decent, or at least better than what they already have. Considering all the money coming off the books, the salary is negligible the next two years.
DUMP GARZA
You beat me to it.
My similar thought below. The DeJesus signing was a cost effective signing of a major league player. Whether he fits into a competitive Cubs team in the future remains to be seen.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
Will DeJesus make the Cubs that much better than Johnson would have, considering the pricetag?
Considering what the rest of the team would look like without Fielder and Garza, why pay $10 million and guarantee two years for DeJesus when you can put Johnson in right for $1 million and only sign him for a year?
It’s not a lot of money — but it’s still $9 million or so.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Much as I like Reed Johnson
… I think DeJesus is a better player.
Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation
I'm not debating that.
My point is, is DeJesus worth an additional $9 million (compared with Johnson) on a team that won’t be competitive in 2012 and likely won’t be in 2013?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Then why sign Johnson for $1 million?
Sign Delwyn Young or someone for league minimum to start in RF. Why sign Kerry Wood, make Rodrigo Lopez the 8th inning guy. In the big picture $9 million isn’t much.
The Cubs will try and be somewhat competitive. It doesn’t slow or hinder the rebuild.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
Actually, I made the point above (and below) about bargain shopping/scrap heap acquisitions.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
And they have been doing that too.
See Andy Sonnenstein and Manny Corpas.
The point on DeJesus is that true he isn’t going to draw fans but there is no way the Cubs would intentionally tank the season and lose 110 games. That is what you seem to be saying. I don’t want to go all NBF here but the Cubs are a big market team. They should’t need to tank a season.
Maybe there might be a similar player they could have signed in a few weeks that would be a few million cheaper but planning for Reed Johnson as a full-time starter isn’t a real option.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
Responded to you and shoe below. :)
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
exactly
DeJesus has upside, RJohnson starting … not so much.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 10:31 AM CST up reply actions
You don't honestly think I'm arguing that Reed is better than DeJesus?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Well we can't say it's nine million since we don't know how much an alternative 2013 RF would be.
And Reed hasn’t played a full season in quite some time. As for the why, they simply don’t want to be worse than necessary. Penny pinching at every turn isn’t going to endear them to the fans if there’s no real benefit to it.
DUMP GARZA
David DeJesus isn't the type of move that endears fans, either.
He’s a good player, but no one will buy a ticket to see him play.
Your point is taken about Johnson not playing every day. But I still say that the DeJesus move doesn’t make a ton of sense — given the internal options and the bargain buys that will likely be available in a month — without some other significant moves.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
But EG, those internal options are bad.
Reed hasn’t played a full season in a long time. Baker’s strength is hitting lefties. Colvin wished he was near the Mendoza line last year. As for whoever else would’ve been available, it appears they simply like DeJesus more. They don’t want to be bad unless there’s a benefit to it (like letting a young guy who they think has potential work through the growing pains).
DUMP GARZA
How many more wins will DeJesus add ...
that the internal options (or someone off the scrap heap) wouldn’t add?
To respond to you and rlpete, I’m not advocating tanking the season. I’m saying that the DeJesus signing could very likely indicate that TheoJed aren’t tanking the season either — to the extent that they’re not done making additions (Fielder) or non moves (keeping Garza) that would help in 2012 and beyond.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Well Colvin showed that you can be a lot worse than DeJesus.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
$9 million worse for a team that probably won't get to .500?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
DeJesus has been worth
between 2.2 and 3.7 WAR the last four seasons. The Cubs got 0 WAR (IIRC) out of RF last season for a lot more money (thanks, Dome). I often hear that the “price of 1 WAR” is $5M.
So, in that case, DeJesus is a deal. Now, you could surely debate whether a mishmash of RJ, Baker, etc. could put up 1+ WAR for half the price, but based on his track record, DeJesus seems more of a “sure thing”.
I would also say that, although it was indeed a “small move” that won’t draw people to the park, it was an example of the “culture change” move Theo/Jed want to make. DDJ is a pretty “meh” offensive player, but who usually has a solid OBP and is a solid (or better) defender. Those seem to be two qualities the new FO is especially looking for, seeing as they are qualities virtually absent from most of the roster.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I'm not opposed to the signing.
I just don’t see how it makes sense for a full rebuilding effort that wouldn’t include the likes of Garza or Fielder.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
As I noted below, it has a lot to do with perception.
Personally, I honestly wouldn’t care (and I get the feeling you more or less agree) if the Cubs did a total Astros-style tear down. Just literally throw away 2012 and wait for the bad contracts to melt away.
I’d still be a “Cubs fan”, seeing that as a means to a better end.
But I’m not sure that works for the rest of the fanbase. It would surely infuriate many of the STHs who re-upped at major league prices only to get a truly minor league product. And it would basically incinerate walk-up sales.
So I think of these minor moves as ways to tide over the casual fan to keep them coming to the park while most of the work is done “behind the scenes” (i.e., farm system).
And to be clear, I’m not discounting your initial proposal… that the Cubs may very well have (had?) their eyes on Fielder. But Theo just isn’t going to move (at least not much) off his price point. So whether he’s a Cub will be largely up to Prince.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
We're in agreement ...
except that I don’t see any help in the perception department (for casual fans) when it comes to Travis Wood, Ian Stewart and DDJ.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
The perception doesn't come from their names.
It comes from being marginally competitive on the field instead of being the Astros.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
by fsuapollo on Jan 2, 2012 10:53 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
They care more about being good than saving four million dollars in 2012.
The Cubs aren’t going to use the logic, “well he’s bad, but at least he’s cheap” when there are better options available, unless they think those bad players will improve.
Also, we’re talking about the new full time RF who appears to be slotted to lead off. This isn’t a middle reliever or backup catcher. He’s taking over a valuable and important role.
DUMP GARZA
But DeJesus, on his own, won't make them good.
Will he?
I truly understand why David DeJesus is a decent ballplayer whom the Cubs signed to a good contract. What I don’t understand is why they would sign him to said contract if, at the time, they weren’t planning on doing a few other things.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
But they've already done "a few other things"
Traded for Stewart to (hopefully/presumably) upgrade 3B from Baker/DeWitt.
Traded for TWood to make the rotation better.
Let go Koyie.
Now those four things don’t make the Cubs “good”. But they move them further away from gawd awful.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
See below.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
So by that logic
if they don’t get Fielder then they should field all minimum priced players wherever they can? What is wrong with trying to be competitive? DeJesus is better than Johnson/Baker/DeWitt so why not sign him as long as it doesn’t hinder any long term plans. I would agree with you if this was Beltran for 3 years at $10million+.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
It's that DDJ, without help, doesn't really make them that competitive.
And Stewart and TWood don’t really either.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I agree DDJ doesn't make them competitive but
they needed a RF’er. Johnson as a full-time starter is not an option so they had to do something unless DeWitt and Johnson were going to platoon. Your argument seems to be if they don’t keep Garza and sign Fielder then no other moves should be made. Let’s start Rodrigo Lopez, Delwyn Young in RF, etc.
There is something to be said for trying to field a major league quality team that at least is somewhat competitive.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
This isn't about what I think 'should' happen, rlpete.
It’s what I expect WILL happen based on what has happened. Please understand that.
My argument is this: I doubt Fielder will be a Cub if Garza isn’t one, and I think the DDJ signing (at least, a month ago) was a sign that the Cubs aren’t planning to be the Iowa Cubs.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I just don't see any scenario
Where Theo and Jed believed Reed Johnson, Tyler Colvin, and/or Jeff Baker would have been the way to go in right field.
DUMP GARZA
There would have been bargain buys available later in the offseason, too.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Sure, but probably not ones who Theo and Jed like as much.
And how much would one expect to spend on bargain buys? A million or two? Still not massive savings.
DUMP GARZA
$10 million versus $2 million?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
That's still spread out over two years.
If your bargain buy is willing to sign for two years at one million a year each. And as fsuapollo pointed out, he’s a trade candidate if he works out. I just don’t see what’s so confusing to you about this, I guess. They don’t want to suck worse than they have to.
DUMP GARZA
You could use this logic to justify almost any move:
They don’t want to suck worse than they have to.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
While still servicing the long term.
In two years, DeJesus will be gone. There’s no real benefit to getting a worse player who is marginally cheaper with no future.
DUMP GARZA
Johnson hasn't been a full time starter in 6 years.
He’s best against LH’ers as well. The point is the Cubs are not going to try and field a $70 million dollar team and lose 110 games. They can try and put a competitive team on the field while rebuilding. DeJesus for that price is a decent deal. I suspect that if the Cubs don’t get Fielder that they pick up another mid-priced 1st base option.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
I agree with part of this:
The point is the Cubs are not going to try and field a $70 million dollar team and lose 110 games.
If they were, they wouldn’t have signed DeJesus. And that gives me hope that a) Garza will be back (and possibly signed to an extension) and that b) Fielder won’t be far behind.
Now, I rate the odds of Garza returning as much higher than Fielder being signed. My point is that if Garza is traded, I just don’t see much hope for (or point in) signing Fielder.
Also, what mid-priced 1st base options appeal to you?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I just don't think DeJesus implies anything.
Even if the Cubs trade Garza and miss on Fielder, I could see the DeJesus signing. As I said, they will try and field a major league team. Johnson in RF isn’t a major league alternative.
As for 1st base options, none really excite me but I could a Casey Kotchman type signed. I just don’t expect to see LaHair given the spot without a fallback option.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
Maybe a DeJesus is just a DeJesus, then.
Or, maybe it is NOW, but it wasn’t a month ago. It just seemed like a tablesetter move then, and it seems almost like a pointless move if Casey Kotchmann is at first and our Opening Day pitcher is Ryan Dempster.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
DeJesus is also about having a chance to contend in 2013
Keep Garza, sign Fielder, sign one of the high end post-2012 FA starters, and come up with a solid bat for LF and you could have a decent/contending team in 2013. Leave a black hole in RF and that gets harder to do.
The two are not connected necessarily
There are solid arguments to be made for all possibilities:
1. they keep Garza and do not sign Fielder
—Garza provides the foundation for a new rotation and the money they don’t spend on Fielder is spent on other needs
2. they trade Garza and sign Fielder
—Garza nets young pitchers who become part of a new rotation, while Fielder becomes the center of a rebuilt batting order
3. they trade Garza and don’t sign Fielder
—-Garza nets young pitchers who become part of a new rotation, and the money they don’t spend on Fielder is spent on other needs
4. they keep Garza and sign Fielder
—Garza provides the foundation for a new rotation and Fielder becomes the center of a rebuilt batting order
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 10:39 AM CST up reply actions
You seem to be painting what I said in absolutes.
You’re right that those are the four scenarios. My argument was that option 2 is almost unthinkable and that option 4 seems more likely given the DDJ signing.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I disagree, option 2 is highly plausible and highly practical
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 11:19 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, then there we are.
I don’t see much of a point in adding a $25 million first baseman on a team whose best starter in the next two years will very likely be Travis Wood.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
If the Cubs don't sign/acquire a TOR SP next off-season
then you can just write off the next three years. So I don’t think TWood will be the best starter in 2013, even if Garza is dealt.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
But if they keep Garza, do they need another TOR SP?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Absolutely.
IMO, Garza isn’t a true #1… but let’s say the Cubs keep him and he develops into that.
If TWood is the #2, how good is the rotation? At best, he needs to be a 3… and fits in better as a 4/5 (without significant development).
So unless Cashner makes the leap (and even though I want him to start, I don’t believe he can go that high that fast)… the Cubs don’t have another viable in-house #2 option.
So if you keep Garza in 2013 you have: Garza, ???, TWood, Cashner, McNutt/other FA?.
Whereas if you deal Garza for Turner and Smyly (just for example) and Turner does develop into a #2, then in 2013 you could have: Cain, Turner, TWood, Cashner, Smyly/McNutt/other FA.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I think i would prefer Matt Garza and FA TOR
I believe Garza can end up breaking out like Jered Weaver did in 2010 and 2011.
I’d rather go with Garza, Cain, Cashner, Wood. It would be expensive to keep Garza and get Cain. But that Rotation is young and affordable for a big market Team without the risk of Turner becoming a bust.
Trading for a guy like Turner who’s upside is maybe Garza seems like unnecessary risk when the Cubs can afford to extend Garza at his peak.
I'm actually on the fence
with “trade Garza”. It completely depends on the haul. I don’t have an inherent opposition to extending him, as long as it is on our terms.
Garza does not come without questions. He made a huge leap last year in production including completely altering his pitching pattern. So does he continue to grow from there or does the league counter-adjust with a season’s worth of data? Do his #s ebb a bit assuming Wrigley turns back into a hitter’s park (was 23rd in run factor in ‘11, a far cry from the norm)? My guess… and it is just that… is that the “real Garza” lies somewhere in between his Tampa production and his jump last year. In other words, I don’t expect him to match 5.0 WAR again… though if he remains a Cub I’d be ecstatic to be wrong.
Turner’s upside is really at least as high as “Garza”.
All that said, it might be a bit of a challenge for the Cubs to sign Fielder, extend Garza, and add a FA TOR next off-season. Possibly/Probably doable, but could really impact flexibility.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I don't think so, fsu.
If Garza gets Danks money, he essentially takes the money Dempster has been making. Fielder at $25 million per is less than Ramirez and Kosuke ($5 million or so less — which is basically what DDJ is making). And the Cubs could use the Zambrano money for pitcher who makes about the amount of CJ Wilson.
Sure, you figure Castro will get an extension at some point. But Byrd’s money is gone after 2012 and Soriano’s is (thankfully) gone after 2014. The only guy due for a big raise after 2012 is Marmol.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Well my thought process
was that you’d also need to pay for other upgrades.
They could definitely sign those three guys, but that still leaves you with less than ideal productivity from 2B (unless Barney develops), 3B (unless Stewart develops / resurrects), & LF (unless Sori finds the fountain of youth or is dealt in a Cub-friendly way that provides more savings). It relies on Jackson working out in CF and DDJ in RF. It relies on the “youngsters” filling out the rotation (Wood, Cashner, & McNutt?) cost-effectively. It relies on Kerry staying healthy as the lone set-up guy. And it relies on Soto staying healthy (unlikely and he’ll also probably be looking at a fairly good raise coming up).
So I guess I view probably (and I acknowledge I’m just taking a stab here since I am not privy to the budget and I haven’t really pieced together the math) affording two of the three and then taking that other hunk of money and spreading it around for other upgrades.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I believe Garza can repeat the numbers
People have been expecting Garza to breakout for the last 2 years. He had his ups and downs in the first half with his new approach but during the 2nd half he had figured it out.
Wrigley might go back to being a neutral park but it also looks like Theo is upgrading the defense.
I also believe he can.
I’m only raising questions. Hopefully Garza did “break out” and all those questions are moot points.
But lots of Garza’s WAR was tied to his FIP numbers, so improving the defense won’t have a ton of affect on his peripherals and “value”… though it certainly might improve the traditional pitcher window dressing numbers.
Of course, oddly enough for Garza… Theo can’t do much about the defender who cost MG the most…… himself. His 7 errors “led” all of MLB, two more than anyone else and nearly doubling any other NL pitcher.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Garza's 7 errors were most likely anomaly
2 errors the last 2 season.
I assume that a good defense behind him will give him confidence to attack hitters and help his FIP. Also faulty errors can lead to a starter being yanked early and his WAR can be increased by more innings.
Garza will also most likely get 2 or 3 more starts this year if he stays healthy. He will most likely be the starting day pitcher and match Dempster’s 34 starts.
Garza threw enough innings
and didn’t seem to lack at all for “attacking hitters”… that’s actually one area where he grew fairly exponentially.
Other than thinking/hoping he stays healthy, which would add two to three starts and thus around 18 innings, I don’t think there’s a reason to believe his innings would jump demonstrably.
Simply watching him try to field and throw a baseball last year… his weakness as a fielder is not an anomaly, even if he won’t get to 7 again.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Clearly if they are to be contenders
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 12:29 PM CST up reply actions
Why get him now?
The value is not in 2012 and maybe not even 2013, but beyond. He is available now, they can easily afford him, and he will remain highly productive for years to come.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
There's that Votto guy who might be available in two years ...
and he wouldn’t cost $50 million when the Cubs aren’t competitive.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Might be, that is the point
Fielder IS available now
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 2:18 PM CST up reply actions
No question on that.
But his availability now means he could be 20 percent of the budget on a team that, without Matt Garza, might be lucky to win 75 games in the 2012 and 2013.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
so? (he said as politely as possible...)
If TheoJed are confident in Fielder’s ability to perform at a high level in years 5 & 6, does it really matter what percent of the budget he is in years 1 and 2? I mean, it’s only money.
I realize that sounds very flippant and obviously very easy to say since it isn’t my money, but in the new world order of post-CBA MLB, teams that can spend money have to spend it somewhere.
And yes, even with the realization that 2012 and even 2013 could be not so good, I think you could easily position a Fielder signing as a long-term investment. Again, though, you need to be pretty confident on that year 5 and 6 production.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
So what?
But his availability now means he could be 20 percent of the budget
As for the money he will cost, so what? The Cubs have the money now. And in a few years they will have a whole lot more. Getting Fielder now is a smart and affordable investment.
on a team that, without Matt Garza, might be lucky to win 75 games in the 2012 and 2013.
Again, so what? There is nothing they can do to compete this season, so your mission is to start acquiring the pieces that will help you compete asap. You get young players to stock the farm system AND while you do that, you start acquiring key veterans to be the foundation of the new team. Fielder is a great first step.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 5:27 PM CST up reply actions
Yes - Johnson can't last a full season as a starter
250-300 PAs appears to be his limit; more and he breaks down. Then who plays RF?
It's possible but
I think you are wrong on DeJesus. He is filling a hole with a major league player. Even if TheoJed don’t think the Cubs aren’t competing for a few seasons, they aren’t going with the silly “Play the Kids” mantra that many here wished for last season. They can see that Campana, Colvin, Flaherty, DJL, etc. are not major league ready starters. TheoJed will try and field a competitive team even while rebuilding. They aren’t going to lose 110 games as some here have discussed.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
I don't think the upgrade from Johnson et. al to DeJesus ...
makes a ton of sense if we’re talking about 68 wins versus 74 (or whatever the stat guys predict the difference would be).
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
IMO it is about perception as much as anything.
You’re right… there probably won’t be a demonstrably better product on the field. But if they just rolled out the Iowa Cubs, there would be virtually zero ticket sales. I think much of the fanbase can tolerate a “rebuild”… but it can’t be by going the Astros’ route. You still have to appear to be trying to be competitive-ish.
I’d also add that isn’t just about DDJ instead of Reed. It’s also (presumably) Kerry Wood instead of Scott Maine. Stewart instead of DJLM/Flaherty/Baker, it’s TWood instead of RoLo, etc.
In the grand scheme of competition, it doesn’t make a ton of difference whether the Iowa Cubs lose 115 games or the scrap heap brigade loses 93… but it will matter on the bottom line.
And I’d also toss out that a guy like DDJ should be imminently flippable at the deadline if he’s producing.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I don't think DDJ will have ...
a measurable effect on the fanbase, fsu. And he won’t in combination with the other moves you mentioned (other than Kerry). Can you imagine an extra 200,000 people buying tickets, and going to games, to see Travis Wood, DDJ and Ian Stewart? Can you imagine the Cubs being good enough based on those four moves to bring more fans to the games?
But Stewart and Wood make sense if you’re rebuilding because they’re young and cheap, and Kerry makes sense (sorry, Easy Ed) because he’s Kerry Wood and a very special case.
But DDJ just doesn’t compute if you’re going for the longer-term rebuild (the one without Fielder/Garza). Now, maybe the signing made sense in November — and doesn’t hurt you now, because it is a relatively small deal.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
He won't draw fans but starting April 5-20 would drive them away
and the Iowa Cubs as you are proposing could result in something like that. As I said before I don’t want to go all NBF here but the Cubs are one of the biggest franchises in the league. There is no reason they have to play a AAA team.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
Mind you ...
I’m not really advocating that the Cubs go Iowa Cubs. I’m saying that the DDJ signing was a sign they weren’t going in that direction — at least at the time of the signing — and that, to them, DDJ wasn’t enough to NOT go all Iowa Cubs.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
It's the name on the front of the jersey, not the name on the back.
You’re right… nobody outside of his family is buying a ticket “to see DDJ play”.
But if you roll out the Iowa Cubs + the aging/expensive Cub brigade, the chances are really, really good that the team gets off to something like a 10-20 start. That tells the fans you’ve thrown in the towel.
Adding incremental improvements at least gives you a puncher’s chance of being marginally competitive, at least for a while.
But more directly, and off the topic of ticket sales, the DDJ move is really simple to me. It’s two parts: First, Theo/Jed see him as a clear upgrade over the other internal options (whether that’s true remains to be seen, but I’ll trust their evaluation). They just don’t believe he is “blocking” a better (younger) option. You could even go a step further and say that if they believe JH Ha will be ready to take RF at some point in 2013 or to start 2014, DDJ is simply a bridge to that point. Second, even though he’s the most “expensive” move of the off-season to date, he’s still cheap by major league standards. Heck, he’ll be the cheapest among the likely opening day OF. So I just don’t see his signing as impeding anything… or being in conflict with a “rebuild”.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
We're discussing in multiple places. Let's consolodate here.
Your bad start argument is interesting — and it’s not something I had considered. Still, DDJ is only one decent player. If the Cubs are so bad without him that they would go 10-20, they probably won’t be good enough with him to go more than 12-18, would they?
Again, I don’t despise the move. I just don’t understand it if something else relatively big happens.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
No, he's not enough to move the meter a ton.
It is entirely possible that the Cubs, as currently constructed, could belly flop out of the gate.
I just think he fits what Theo/Jed are trying to do with the club. He also allows the other pieces to fit in place better. The Cubs have been awful recently with trying to fit round pegs in square holes: Soriano in CF, Dome in CF, Miles as a “SS alternative”, to name a few.
So, to me, signing DJJ keeps LaHair out of RF where he’s a disaster waiting to happen defensively (LF would still be cringe worthy, but less so, IMO). He keeps Reed as a 4th/5th OF to spot start instead of as a starter who you would then have to fill-in for when (not if) he goes on the DL. He keeps Baker out of RF, where he shouldn’t be more than, say, 10 games a season. He keeps them from possibly rushing Jackson and sliding Byrd to RF, where he loses almost all of his value (his “offense” makes him marginally useful in CF, but not in RF…… and I’m still really, really hoping he’s dealt).
Theo/Jed recognize defense matters. The Cubs were last in errors and fielding% and gave up oodles of unearned runs.
So after looking at the numbers and seeing the Cubs being deficient in two OF spots, they figured this was a cheap way to upgrade the OF defense while also adding a (potentially) strong OBP to the top of the line-up. He’s also a good base runner, another tragic Cub weak spot.
So I actually see quite a bit of a domino effect with the addition of DDJ. Of course, it is all predicated on him “bouncing back”, but there’s plenty of statistical reason to think he will (.274 BABIP last year… 42 points below his career average!!!…. which explains a 40 point drop in BA and 30 point drop in OBP).
I just see it as a rather low risk, potentially medium/high reward move.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Let me reiterate that I don't hate the signing by any measure.
It just makes very little sense to me if the Cubs don’t much more.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
*don't do much more
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I think it makes enough sense
regardless of other moves, so we’re probably at the “agree to disagree” point.
But, as I mentioned below, I also agree that there was/is no plan for DDJ to be the off-season headliner. If it works out that way, then…. gulp. But, IMO they simply picked him up at a time and price that they liked rather than wait for the scrap heap market to shrink on this side of the new year.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Tigers have made Jacob Turner available.
I read he may not be ready for 2012, but if he is the major pitching prospect that is reported, I bet Garza is gone (with the right throw in players). With Garza gone, we are in a rebuild and Fielder does not fit.
I’ve been posting the Cubs need Fielder to fill the seats. I still think this is part of the equation. How will the Cubs go forward with the rebuild of Wrigley, the triangle building and a rebuild of the roster with attendance being down for yet another year? I know we are looking for money from other sources, but each time it’s mentioned the Cubs will still have to fund a significant portion of whatever project they do. The chance to see Fielder hit his 40th or maybe a 50th home run takes us back to the Sosa days with attendance. The Cubs do need Fielder. I just don’t know now with Garza potentially gone whether that is as important.
We'll miss you Big Boy. #10 is going into the Hall of Fame!!
by mrcubsfan on Jan 2, 2012 9:45 AM CST via mobile reply actions
Turner should definitely be ready at some point in 2012.
He might need a little polish at AAA, but I’m betting he throws more innings in the majors than in the minors.
If they are going to make this deal
… Turner has to be in the 2012 rotation. Otherwise you are looking at another year of Rodrigo Lopez, and what’s the point of that?
Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation
Not necessarily.
In this most likely uncompetitive year, there is no need to rush Turner if he could still use some AAA polish, which I don’t think would be more than the first couple months at most. Turner at AAA doesn’t mean Lopez at all, hell Rolo isn’t even with the team right now and may not be brought back. You could go with Demp, Z, Wells, Wood, and Samardzija/Sonnanstine/Coleman/Struck/Rusin (none of which I’d be too pleased with), or more likely, a FA addition such as Maholm. And best case scenario Cashner is ready to be the five starter out of spring training, although I know you’re opposed to letting Cashner start for some reason.
Sure it’s not an exciting rotation by any means, but let’s face it, if Garza is traded it probably won’t be an exciting season in general. We’re in rebuild, and in that case I think it’d be ok and take it slow with Turner. If he’s ready in April, then great. If not, let him get some work at AAA and call him up in June, no harm done.
Your last graph sort of goes with what I'm saying.
If they trade Garza, it’s a longer-term rebuild.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Most likely.
But with lots of money availible next offseason, adding two major pieces could certainly help speed the process up.
Again, it's just less of a sure thing.
Extending Garza now allows TheoJed to know what they will be paying — and avoids the possibility that they would be outbid for starters in a year or two.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Fielder makes sense even in rebuild mode
At some point in the rebuild process the Cubs will need big middle of the order bats. It makes sense to get an elite one like Fielder now since he is available and you have no idea who might be available down the road. He is young enough to remain highly productive for several more years, during which he would be the center of a rebuilt lineup.
Bird in the hand …
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 10:43 AM CST up reply actions
I agree, but
when I said this, with exactly the same words, I was ripped up and down.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 3, 2012 12:14 PM CST up reply actions
I have been saying as much for some days now
not all agree, but I can’t say I have been ripped. I find you get ripped when you misrepresent what people say.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 3, 2012 12:16 PM CST up reply actions
When I do that, let me know
Don’t think it’s happened so far, but I don’t want to get into it again.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 3, 2012 12:19 PM CST up reply actions 7 recs
Well then let me refer you to the Cath Lab at Evanston Hospital
Dr. Feldman is a dick but he is the best in the business
"Hey.....Cubs win!!!" ---Harry
"Cubs win....what a lucky break!!" ---Harry
you have to be joking
or ignorant to reality, not sure which
Q: Why did Theo Epstein cross the road?
A: To Dump Garza
great googlie mooglie
we have let you know, we have shown you the exact quotes where you have and you still deny it, wow. you really do live in fantasy land it seems
Q: Why did Theo Epstein cross the road?
A: To Dump Garza
What NBF really means to says is:
I AM THE VICTIM, I AM THE VICTIM.
by BrewCrew'sPrinceofDarkness on Jan 4, 2012 12:36 AM CST up reply actions
No, what he really means is, it's all Shanghai Badger's fault.
Step Two: Develop an organizational plan
by Shanghai Badger on Jan 4, 2012 10:00 AM CST up reply actions
Not at all.
Plenty of people, including myself, would love to see Fielder sign. I’d guess over 50% of people here want Fielder. Some people don’t like the Fielder route and think we should go a different direction. The only time you get ripped is when you twist people’s words and dismiss those who share a different opinion from your own.
If there's any question ...
I would like to see Fielder playing for the Cubs. It’s just my opinion that the odds of him signing here decrease dramatically if Matt Garza is traded.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
On the oft chance you get invited to another boring party in the not-so-distant future...
…I hope you chew on that opinion a bit more and I’ll do the same. At this point though, I just can’t see how the decision to sign Fielder (or not) is tied to the Cubs SP being not-so-good the next two years (assuming Garza’s dealt).
Besides the obvious factors like total $ and years (and the evil whims of Boras), signing Fielder (or not) is going to depend on the perceived value over the whole contract timeline, not just the first two years.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
You'll notice ...
that I was careful not to say, “If we don’t trade Garza, we’ll definitely sign Fielder” at any point. For example, a crazy offer from the Nationals (who now appear to be the favorites for Prince) could trump everything that is going on in the Cubs’ front office.
I simply think that getting one of them increases the chances of getting both of them. But it’s clear that I haven’t exactly stumbled upon a theory that everyone agrees with. :)
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
What you need to do is create one of them horizontal bar charts.
Make a list of all the Cubs key players – start with the 40 man roster and add in any good young’uns that don’t have to be there yet. Then across the top, list the years through at least 2017, maybe longer.
Then extend a horizontal bar for each player and color code it to what you think their productivity/performance will be. i.e. maybe it’s various shades of cost-controlled green in their formative years, changing over to various shades of Cubbie-blue as they hit their peak performance years (roughly speaking, late 20s, early 30s), and then shift over to various shades of contract-burdening red in their later years.
Add any FAs you’ve got your eyes on, and since all this is behind closed doors and Bud can’t see, go ahead and add the Matt Cains, Cole Hamels and Joey Vottos of the world. And just for laughs, add Adam Lind and Brian Roberts too.
Now you’ve got your personnel roadmap for the next decade or so. Extend a black border around a 2-3 year range. Start with 2012-14 and see what the colors look like for that range. Ideally, I’d think you’d want a good mix of blues and greens (heavy on the blues) and maybe a few reds here and there. If you don’t like what you see, move the range over and look at 2013-2015.
Keep moving the range until you come up with the color combo that best matches your ideal team makeup and voila! There’s your window of opportunity for winning it all. Figure out how who you have to swap, sign, extend to get there and then stay there.
Why yes, I have been watching a lot of “The Price is Right” over the holidays. Why do you ask? ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
LOL
And just for laughs, add Adam Lind and Brian Roberts too.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Fielder - opt out clause?
Maybe Boras is insisting on an opt-out clause after three years, in which case us signing Fielder (now) would make no sense at all. Maybe if/when Boras drops that demand Fielder makes more sense from a long-term prospective.
And Elgato, I, for one, completely agree with you on DeJesus. He is an okay player, and perhaps a good bounce-back candidate, and many believe he is a good value at nine mil for 2 years. But we don’t need him now and I still don’t understand why he was signed, especially so early in the off-season.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
That makes perfect sense
Fielder with a relatively early bail out clause, makes no sense for the Cubs.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 10:44 AM CST up reply actions
I think we was signed because the Cubs figured he would be the first of many moves ...
designed for a shorter-term rebuild — and that if those plans failed, he’s not that expensive to have around and he will be a slight upgrade.
It’s possible those plans have failed since, and now we have DeJesus. That’s not a problem, in my eyes, mind you (and as fsu pointed out, he could be a great trade candidate). But the move, at least a month ago, was almost certainly indicative of much more to come.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
And I largely agree with that assessment.
I don’t think Theo/Jed have/had any intention of DDJ being the biggest off-season addition.
It might end up that way… and that just means other things didn’t work out.
But there’s still Fielder, there’s still Cespedes, there’s still Soler…. as “big moves” still out there.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I'd be shocked if we sign Cespedes.
Even if we dump Soriano or Byrd, we still have a crowded outfield. Soler makes some sense because he’s cheaper, and the Cubs can afford to wait.
I still don’t see much of a chance that Fielder is signed after a Garza trade. I know the predictions on Turner are good, but we could easily end up paying Fielder $50 million over two years on two fifth-place teams.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I'll be shocked if we sign anyone
let’s face it, the Cubs are acting like they are broke. Maybe they are …. or saving their pennies to buy more fast food franchises.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
I think that's overly pessimistic.
We don’t have any track record on which to judge how TheoJed will conduct business. They might be really great at managing PR to help their bargaining position. We’re not used to that because of the way Hendry conducted business.
I wouldn’t be shocked if, by the convention, Fielder is a Cub and Garza has been signed to an extension.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I know,
I wasn’t being quite literal. I’m old enough to remember the 1970s when the Cubs wouldn’t even try to get better in the off-season, and this year reminds me a little bit of those years.
I really didn’t know what to expect this off-season, but so far the moves made and not made have been puzzling. I trust that there is an overall plan in mind, and strictly from a baseball perspective I am completely okay with fielding a very poor team next year if leads to better things by 2015.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 12:42 PM CST up reply actions
It is not so much what I like or don't like
but they did say the payroll would stay about the same as last year, which means we should have. what, about 30 mil to spend? And we’ve spent what, 6? So a little puzzling, that’s all.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 2:56 PM CST up reply actions
FWIW I was just listing possibilities.
I don’t think Cespedes is likely, either. But, I do think Byrd is fairly moveable. Washington is still looking for a CF. So if you really, really wanted to move Byrd, you just call them and say “send us a C+ prospect… we’ll send you Byrd and $3M”. There’s really no way they turn that down.
And I agree on spending the money on a 5th place team in 2012, but I wouldn’t completely write off 2013. If you trade Garza for Turner & Porcello/Smyly/other viable SP, sign Fielder… I think you’re “only” signing one strong SP the next off-season from at least competing for .500.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Hmmm.
I’m still not convinced … but if TheoJed think one of the two pitchers acquired in the Garza trade could be as good as Garza in 2013, then I suppose signing Fielder and trading Garza makes more sense.
I just don’t like hinging SO much on pitching prospects. Having a sure bet in Garza for the next two years would be really nice.
I gotta run some errands. I’ll return to this fun discussion later …
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Enjoy the running around... fortunately mine is done for the day.
I agree on the traps of relying on young SP. But I would say you’re not necessarily relying on Turner to be as good as Garza right away. You’d sign a SP next off-season to be “as good as Garza” and then hope Turner quickly develops into a 2/3 by, say 2014 (as I laid out above). That surely wouldn’t help the Cubs in 2012, but that obviously wouldn’t be the goal of a Garza trade, anyway.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
But if he's not as good as Garza until 2014 ...
why pay Fielder $25 million in 2012 and 2013?
Maybe you put up with one season of having a $25 million first baseman on a fifth-place team, but two — and the possibility that Turner won’t even be as good as Garza farther down the road?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Because rebuilding has to start somewhere
getting Fielder now would be the first big addition upon which Theo can build
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 2:19 PM CST up reply actions
We're arguing in circles.
But Fielder makes a helluva lot less sense to me if the Cub are banking on Travis Wood, Turner and a FA pickup after 2012 to anchor a rotation.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Because you cannot think past 2012
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 5:28 PM CST up reply actions
Uncalled for.
Seriously.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Not at all, dead on the mark ... seriously.
The crux of your whole argument is that there is no sense spending money on Fielder if the team is not contending this season. You cannot see his value beyond this season when clearly he should have quite a bit of value well into the future.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 3, 2012 7:43 AM CST up reply actions
I don't see the value ...
in having Fielder for the next two seasons unless we have good starting pitching. I think that’s clear in several of my comments.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
But do you see value in having Fielder in years 3-6?
That’s the real question here. Because you’d have to think that even under the most gloomiest of scenarios, the Cubs will be able to have good starting pitching by 2014.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
I do see value in those years, yes.
But I don’t think that’s the real question, hawk. I think the real question is whether the Cubs would pay $50 million to Fielder in 2012 and 2013 when the team might not place better than fifth because of a lack of starting pitching after the Garza trade.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
But you can't divide the timeline - it's a package deal
Cubs aren’t going to sign Fielder to a two-year deal. Now if you’re saying the value in Years 3-6 does not outweigh the value in Years 1-2, that’s a different story.
IOW, you think it’s not worth keeping Fielder around for what you think will be a couple of lean years until the Cubs can get better starting pitching and all cylinders (hitting & pitching) will be going strong in 2014 and beyond.
Is that a fair representation?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Almost.
I think TheoJed will think it’s not worth keeping Fielder around for what look to be a couple of leaning years until the Cubs can get better starting pitching and all cylinders (hitting & pitching) will be going strong in 2014 and beyond.
My point in this post was not to say explicitly what I think should happen, but what I think WILL happen. And I can’t see TheoJed (or Ricketts, for that matter) giving $50 million to Prince when the rebuilding effort is SO long term that they’ll trade a 28-year-old pitcher who’s under team control for the next two seasons.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
*lean years
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
You don't think Theo and Co
can upgrade the pitching and at the same time upgrade the lineup? Really? Is that what you are saying. They must do pitching and then hitting?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 3, 2012 9:07 AM CST up reply actions
I think that ...
it will be much more difficult to improve the pitching in the short term without Garza. And, I don’t limit the short term to 2012 but to 2013, as well.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
So you think Cubs will wait until pitching is improved before they go out and improve hitting?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
I think they won't downgrade the rotation for two years ...
and sign on to pay Fielder $50 million in those two years.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
so essentially you're saying the Cubs are thinking...
…that the short-term pain is not worth whatever offensive glory Fielder could bring to this team for the next six years.
I hate keep trying to put words in your mouth and I get where you’re coming from on the state of the Cubs SP in the short-term. I just want to know that you acknowledge what the Cubs would be giving up in the long-term by not signing Fielder now.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Right.
And the short-pain dwindles if Garza stays or if the Cubs get pitching prospects that could be ready (and effective) before 2014.
By the way, an unspoken part of all of this is that the Cubs have no starting pitching in the high minors. The interesting thing is the reason to make the trade (no pitching depth) is also the reason why it’s tricky to make this trade.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Also, you keep talking about Fielder, $50M and two years
but you do realize it’s now or realistically never on Fielder (unless Boras suckers some team into agreeing on a 3 yr opt out clause), don’t you?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Well, there is the out-clause possibility.
Maybe the core of this argument is that I think Fielder is very good and worth signing … but I don’t think he’s one in a million, or anything.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
My last post on this as it is getting tiresome
It is highly unlikely the team will be contenders in 2013 either. Trading Garza helps them rebuild the pitching staff so it will be ready to contend by 2014. There is little to nothing they can do to make the pitching staff worth of a contender now or in 2013, so they need to re-tool. Garza can bring talented young arms in return. Now I do admit that there is also a good argument for keeping Garza and extending him so he would be the foundation of a rebuilt rotation, but that seems to be based on the notion that the young arms the Cubs have currently will become productive.
Finally, spending money on Fielder now, will not negatively impact the team’s ability to improve their pitching. The Cubs have the wherewithal to do both at the same time.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 3, 2012 9:31 AM CST up reply actions
I'm sticking to my guns here.
I don’t see a Fielder signing and a Garza trade UNLESS the Cubs are very certain that someone coming back in the Garza deal will be a good big-league starter by 2013.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
which is why I said you cannot see beyond 2012
I think that’s clear from your statements.
Your position is a perfectly valid position, I just happen to think it is short-sighted. Sort of penny wise, pound foolish.
When you have a chance to improve your team that much, you take it. Fielder will be productive for years and he is available now. He probably won’t be available a few years from now, and there might not be anyone comparable available then either.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 3, 2012 9:04 AM CST up reply actions
I don't know what this even means.
Sort of penny wise, pound foolish
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
it means
you are more worried about the short term and not seeing the big picture.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 3, 2012 9:23 AM CST up reply actions
Sigh.
For whatever reason, what I want to happen and what I predict will happen keep getting confused.
The original point of this post was to try to answer why there had been fairly little movement by the Cubs this offseason. I think the Cubs’ decisions on Garza and Fielder are linked. I think trading Garza adds to an uncertain rotation for the next two years, to the point where giving Fielder $50 million could mean paying a guy top dollar to play for a 70 win team. I don’t think TheoJed will do that — unless they are very sure that the return from the Garza trade could be ready in the rotation by 2013.
Otherwise, I don’t see the point — and I don’t think TheoJed would either. That said, if the Cubs signed Fielder and traded Garza, I wouldn’t bitch and moan about it. It would just be … well, very odd in my opinion.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Extending Castro?
Cespedes? Soler? Maholm? Crisp?
I know that none of them would get as much individually — and I’m not advocating the Cubs get Coco — but there are other players out there who have been linked to the Cubs.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
You save close to 25 mil by
swapping Garza for Turner, so that pays for one of Fielder’s “wasted” years (years where he’s on a non-competitive team).
If Turner can pitch well in 2013 and they add another starter from the Cain/Hamels etc class, then they can be potentially be competitive in 2013.
'Close to $25 million'?
Garza made $5.95 million in 2011. I read today that he might make around $8 million this year — so are you saying he’s going to make $17 million in his final arb-eligible year? I’d say, if he’s not given an extension, he won’t make more than $20 million over the next two seasons.
All bets are off if Garza is given an extension (Danks money means he gets probably $13 million per) if he stays with the Cubs. But that’s far from assured.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Most of the projections
I’ve seen were closer to $9M for this year and probably $14M the following year. Even if that slides to 8 & 12, you’re still essentially “paying for” one of the “wasted” years with Fielder.
If the Cubs can get Garza to sign an extension with an AAV of $13M (say 4/52, buying out the last two arb years and then getting two of his FA years?), they should probably do that and shut down trade talks unless some team got “desperate” enough to obscenely overpay (Theo: Hey Tigers… we’re about to extend Garza and take him off the table. Any final offers? Tigers: OK, OK… Porcello, Turner, Smyly and another piece or Turner, Smyly, and Castellanos.)
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Seems like a solid plan
You would then still have the option to trade Garza if teams get desperate unless he gets a full no trade clause.
Because to me
in this situation I’m not all that worried about if just Turner ends up “equaling” Garza.
If you deal Garza (a “2” in my view) and get Turner (3) and Smyly (4) you’re still “winning”.
As for Prince, I fall back to “you get pieces when they are available”. Even if the Cubs have to “waste” two years of Fielder’s salary, to me, that’s worth it to have him anchoring the line-up in 2014 and beyond (hopefully not more than three more years for six total).
Because if you deal Garza because you judge it to be in the best long-term health of the organization and don’t sign Prince then you’re back to “ok… we need a TOR and an elite run producer”.
I’m not at all opposed to Theo/Jed keeping Garza if he can be extended on a reasonable deal. If they feel trading him is the best option, that’s ok with me, too.
I just don’t think the two (trading Garza and signing Fielder) are inextricably linked. I think Theo/Jed can build a strong organization by doing both, doing neither, or one or the other. Those two moves will certainly influence how long it takes to build… but so will lots of other factors.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
If you sign Cespedes, simply dump Byrd.
I have no clue whether or not Theo is interested or believes in him, but if he did I don’t think he’d let Marlon Byrd stand in his way when it comes to signing Cespedes. Sure I want to see Jackson opening day, but I feel like that’s becoming less and less likely, and if he’s ready by June have him come up and take Soriano’s spot. I just don’t see anyway Theo let’s Soriano start in LF the next three years, and if he’s blocking Brett Theo may decide it’s time for a change.
So keep Tyler Colvin and his .150 average?
The Cubs have to play the 2012 season. Even if they struggle they can’t forfeit the season. I don’t understand why people don’t see that DeJesus is just a reasonably priced player who will give the Cubs a few seasons.
By your logic, why does any team that can’t win sign any free agent. Just play AAA guys after all they won’t win in any case. This logic befuddles me.
John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?
I think DDJ was an over buy
and much too soon in the off season. That’s all. Now we have Reed back, and have added Sappelt, and BJack is almost ready. Crowded outfield, unless Soriano or Byrd gets traded. I’ve written enough about DDJ, and why I don’t get this signing, and was glad to see at least one other BCBer agrees with me.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 11:06 AM CST up reply actions
Just to be clear ...
I wouldn’t view the DDJ signing as bad if the season started today.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Great, just when I thought I had a friend
Thanks eg.
And just so I am clear … I hope I am wrong on DDJ, hope he wins the mvp.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 11:08 AM CST up reply actions
I would view the DDJ signing as 'puzzling', if that helps.
It beats Jacque Jones, Marlon Byrd or Milton Bradley for three years.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Comparing DDJ to Bradley and Jones is damning with faint praise
I think Byrd has played pretty much to his contract.
Eg, may I add to your overall thesis? If ARAM had accepted arbitration, maybe this offseason plays out differently — Fielder, maybe Oswalt or another SP on a 1 or 2 yr deal, no Marshall or Garza trades etc. With Aram gone (and I think we all expected this and I don’t think too many are disappointed), the hole at 3b is too big to expect to be able to compete in ’12.
Just a thought …
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 12:47 PM CST up reply actions
I think all parties knew ...
that Aramis would never accept arbitration.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
not to mention i think theo is smart enough to realize that this team needs more than a jim hendry band aid approach
Just wee-un.
by jesus christos on Jan 2, 2012 2:17 PM CST up reply actions
I agree, no one expected Ramirez to accept
But if he had I suspect this off-season would have gone in a different direction. And you have to be prepared for the offer to be accepted. No one really expected Krod to accept in Milwaukee, and which pretty much meant they could not keep Fielder.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 2:59 PM CST up reply actions
i don't think the offseason would have changed
if he accepts, they can still trade marshall, do whatever they’re going to do with garza and ship a-ram out at the trade deadline. that said, theo wouldn’t have offered arb if there was any chance of ramirez accepting
Just wee-un.
by jesus christos on Jan 2, 2012 3:06 PM CST up reply actions
DeJesus does not have to win an MVP to be a good deal for the Cubs
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 11:20 AM CST up reply actions
Yes, I was oversimplifying
If he reverts to 2010 form it is a good signing. Might help us avoid 100 losses.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 12:38 PM CST up reply actions
You seem to do that a lot
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
Sorry, I tend to post for TJ11, though I don't see him around today.
"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester
by Jose's Eyelid on Jan 2, 2012 3:00 PM CST up reply actions
If TJ stays away much longer
I am going to sell my stock in exclamation points.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 5:31 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think the decison on Garza is related to Fielder at all.
The Cubs have an impending disaster on their hands with no quality starting pitching to promote from within the organization. Looking ahead to 2013, the Cubs only have 3 solid starting pitching options under control (Garza, Wood, and Cashner). Then you need a miracle from Trey McNutt, Randy Wells, or Hayden Simpson to plug into the rotation.
The market for Garza right now is currently such that the Cubs can acquire possibly two future starters in a deal (Turner and Smyly). This is a risk they need to take.
Then with Dempster and Z and Byrd coming off the books, the Cubs can target the pitching rich FA class of 2013, and spend the $ required to extend sign Garza on a FA like Matt Cain, Zack Grienke, Shaun Marcum or Cole Hamels.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
prepare to face the wrath of NBF
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 11:21 AM CST up reply actions
Ehh... who cares.
This is the reality of the situation…. Jim Hendry has left the cupboard bare. The Cubs simply don’t have the organization pitching required to compete for a division. So, TheoJed have to start acquiring it somehow.
Pitching wins championships… slugging first basemen win awards.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
by SackMan on Jan 2, 2012 11:27 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Same thought
I don’t think Garza is related to signing Fielder either. It only makes sense to trade Garza to yield multiples of prime young talent and they would have to be high potential starting pitchers. They might also get a position player as part of a deal, but without the pitchers they wouldn’t have anybody else to trade to get the low cost pitching depth. Without Garza in the rotation it’s likely they would have to sign another pitcher at market price, unless a lower ceiling major league ready pitcher came in the deal. Signing Garza now to a 4-5 year deal is probably something he doesn’t want to do, and it isn’t in the direction that TheoJed are going. TheoJed want to have pitchers in the wings to defray cost when Zambrano and Dempster leave.
They could probably trade LaHair for a good prospect, but I don’t think Ricketts is going to spring for a anchor contract like Fielder. They would rather put the money into the system at this time or just save the money.
my. head. hurts. :]
There are no facts, only interpretations.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Lets Go Theo!!! 10/13/2011
by jeffstorm2 on Jan 2, 2012 12:55 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
DeJesus was a good move early on because it can fit with most any contingency
It was obvious that the team didn’t have enough competent starting OF’s. At 2/10 DDJ doesn’t kill the budge this year or next. If everything fell perfectly, and Theo/Jed felt like they could put together a competitive team for 2012, he could be a valuable part as a semi-regular. If not, he can play well enough to be a starter and prevent them from rushing Jackson or maybe another young OF yet to be acquired, and without having to start the likes of Campana or the departed Colvin.
And if the Cubs are out of it by the trade deadline (a likely scenario), he could be a decent deadline trade chip, since he’s signed at a reasonable amount for next year as well. The acquiring team wouldn’t be just getting a two-month rental, they would be getting a good player, cost controlled form 2013, making him more valuable. If a team like the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, etc. get bit by injuries, he may be an attractive target.
"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin
Why did the board settle on the name Theojed?
Vs something like Thed or Jeeo? Something that’s more a true smash up.
it varies from person to person
Just wee-un.
by jesus christos on Jan 2, 2012 4:14 PM CST up reply actions
Theocracy
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 2, 2012 5:29 PM CST up reply actions
There's at least one who says "Hoy-Stein".
But wouldn’t “Epster” be more appropriate?
Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation
Moreso if TheJed chose to buy homes in Bucktown.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I dont know who wrote it first, but I liked Theo-Jedi :)
"Well-behaved women seldom make History"---Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
I hate to be a bore...
…but I’m sticking with the simple and elegant “Theo & Jed.”
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
Ten years from now, after back-to-back WS wins, the title of their "how we did it" book will most definitely be...
“Theo & Jed’s Excellent Adventure”
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Jan 3, 2012 3:05 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
6.9 WAR, dude!
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
It better take less time than that
A lot of us aren’t getting any younger.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 3, 2012 11:53 PM CST up reply actions
We, your forefathers,
were brought forth upon a most excellent adventure conceived by our new friends, Theo… and Jed.
These two great gentlemen are dedicated to a proposition which was true in my time, just as it’s true today. Be excellent to each other. And… PARTY ON, DUDES!
by BrewCrew'sPrinceofDarkness on Jan 4, 2012 12:46 AM CST up reply actions
Can't have an adventure without Rufus
"/>
by Mitchener on Jan 4, 2012 4:39 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Awesome!
Rec’d for the george carlin reference.
by BrewCrew'sPrinceofDarkness on Jan 4, 2012 1:30 PM CST up reply actions
my 2¢
I think once fielder signs the ball will start rolling. I just cant see this major market team having its biggest move be DDJ and wood and fielding a poor product. I consider ’12 a wide open race. no white flag here. everyone in the central is on fair game. will we win a WS? hell no but if the right management is in place we can always hang near the top(see the Rays)
I am on the keep/acquire fielder,Garza,Soler bandwagon. That will salvage something for ’12 and have a great outlook on ’13 when we get a TOR SP
Mike Brown is the true definition of a businessman:
1.Build bare essentials to run business(PB Stadium)-✔
2.Hire cheap players-✔
3.When you suck don't give in to anyone's demands-✔
4. Change is a bad thing-✔
by RIP Slim on Jan 3, 2012 2:47 AM CST via Android app reply actions
I’m honestly surprised how many people here still doubt how serious Theo/Jed are about rebuilding. I think signing Fielder is completely out of the question right now, and rightfully so. No way they will waste such a significant amount of the payroll for one single contract when there are a dozen different holes to fill.
As I see it, they entered a kind of rebuilding mode that focuses on replenishing the farm system, getting young MLB talent and whoever else seems to be good value to plug a hole without breaking the bank.
I.e. I like a lot what tehy have done with the now seemingly crowded outfield:
There’s definitely some talent that might help form the future OF core for a contending Cubs team some years down the road (Jackson, maybe Sappelt and several other prospects the have restocked the farm with).
There is some immediate help for little money (DDJ), which I think was a great move, because he can help to provide some stability and qualitiy while figuring out the optimal OF configuration with all the other guys.
And most importantly, it gives the Cubs incredible flexibility for the next couple of seasons at almost no extra cost. If they can find someone to take Soriano: great, there’s enough alternatives to put in his place. And if the can’t find any takers, the can finally bench him if he stinks, because they now have some depth on the roster. If Jackson doesn’t work out, they can still try Szczur or whoever. They can move the guys around in the outfield because there are several versatile players. And if all else fails, they can score an FA next season because they haven’t spent much yet.
So the pieces are on the table and now they need to puzzle them together. It might take year or two, it might take more trades and aquisitons, put I see something good happening. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for pitching or the Cubs top of the order bats, but I suppose they will tackle these problems the same way, even though it might take longer than just 1 or 2 years to become competitive there.
by DamageControlFreak on Jan 3, 2012 4:47 AM CST reply actions
as much as I agree
with points you made, when was the last time a POPULAR major market team just acquired mediocre talent and prospects and basically gave up for the immediate future? don’t get me wrong I’m for rebuilding but there are issues I have.
As much as I want to just scrap it all too, you just cant do that. Not this team or this market. Its easy to sit here and say we will be good in ‘14 and beyond but the everyday fan doesn’t see it that way . for example parents bring kids to the ballpark to enjoy the game and to see the super stars and role models they idolize. Not to mention the hit on the finances from lack of sales on tickets merchandise etc.
The proper way to do this is to acquire a good talented household name that will be a part of your franchise for years to come WHILE tearing down other positions for depth. I don’t want to be the pirates and stros who are always rebuilding. For what purpose. I suppose that they get good cheap talent that fuses and they make a run. about once every 10 years at that rate.
all I’m saying is you cant cash all your chips in. I understand you want to rebuild but it cant be done overnight. move a piece or 2 each season so you can contend WHILE getting younger
Mike Brown is the true definition of a businessman:
1.Build bare essentials to run business(PB Stadium)-✔
2.Hire cheap players-✔
3.When you suck don't give in to anyone's demands-✔
4. Change is a bad thing-✔
by RIP Slim on Jan 3, 2012 12:35 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
Nice post, RIP
You’re absolutely correct. People who want to do a total rebuild are oblivious to reality in some ways.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 3, 2012 11:54 PM CST up reply actions
As much as I agree with your view in a way, there are 2 issues I’m having with that:
1) The Cubs already ARE DOING IT. They have acquired prospects, young talent, cheap players and forgone alle the big name players available. Theo/Jed made it clear they are rebuilding the Cubs and that it will take a while. The ship for signing “household names” has sailed weeks ago.
2) I think the cubs have reached a point where building the team for the future and trying some “win now” moves are mutually exclusive. Basically, that’s what Hendry tried to do for the last 2 years and it has left the Cubs in an increasingly bad shape.
The team as a whole has not enough left to build anything from it. The team had horrible defense last year, subpar starting pitching, a bad team OBP which is likely to hit MLBs rock bottom now that Dome and Aram are gone etc. On top of that, except for Brett Jackson the farm is basically empty since the day of the Garza deal. There is simply no quick fix to coming anywhere near contending here.
What they can do though is trying to control the risks and costs of rebuilding, by giving themselves payroll and roster flexibility. That way, they can try to exploit the market when they see a chance, i.e. by asking the monn for Garza as they are doing now. After all, restocking the farm with ONE legit Top 50 prospect can easily cost $20+ million.
by DamageControlFreak on Jan 4, 2012 2:38 AM CST up reply actions
Lost in all this discourse on the possible ruminations going on in TheoJed's mind is this key point...
How boring does a New Years Eve party have to be in order to start thinking about a 71-91 team’s offseason moves???
I mean, c’mon elgato. Seriously…
Well, I’m tired of hearing about what TheoJed are or aren’t thinking – I want to hear more about this party. Were the appetizers spam and cheeze-whiz on saltines? Who was the band – Murph and the Magic-Tones? Was there a Scrabble tournament at midnight?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
There was Bananagrams at midnight.
I think that should tell you all you need to know. :)
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Speaking of anagrams... Did you know an anagram of Cubs is Bucs?
Hmm… this might be Pittsburgh after all!
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
The best way to understand their thinking is from what they've said
A great bonus from Theo and jed is that they speak very well and will provide insight into their thinking when announce a free agent signing or trade. I think their 3 points that provide the best
1. Pitching, Defense, and more Athletic on the bases.
2. Don’t sacrifice the long-term for short-term success.
3. Turning short-term assets into long-term assets.
Given the trade market this off-season for starting pitching, I would expect Matt Garza to be traded for prospects. Given the likely long-term contract demand for Prince Fielder, I would not expect the Cubs to sign him.
"Just shut up and play" - Matt Garza
"Pain is inevitable, suffering is an option." - Dale Sveum
by RiskyBusiness on Jan 3, 2012 11:55 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
I am Rick b and I approve of this message. I'm sorry, too many political adds coming out of Iowa.
I agree Risky. I think Theo and Jed have been pretty clear. It’s a long term rebuild. They won’t sacrifice the future for the present.
Is this code for signing DeJesus and possibly Crisp? ;-)
and more Athletic on the bases
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
It's The DeJesus Code
A new conspiracy themed suspense novel I working on. It involves a network of Greek Orthodox priests and an agile new cubs right fielder who discovers their 100+ year old plot for world domination that is secretly encoded in the seating chart of an old ballpark.
"Just shut up and play" - Matt Garza
"Pain is inevitable, suffering is an option." - Dale Sveum
by RiskyBusiness on Jan 3, 2012 2:21 PM CST up reply actions
crisp
back to Oakland. so much for that
Mike Brown is the true definition of a businessman:
1.Build bare essentials to run business(PB Stadium)-✔
2.Hire cheap players-✔
3.When you suck don't give in to anyone's demands-✔
4. Change is a bad thing-✔
by RIP Slim on Jan 3, 2012 4:35 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
If true ...
this kind of goes with what I’ve been saying:
http://twitter.com/#!/TheCCO/statuses/154301960319803392
(@Ken_Rosenthal) Exec:#Cubs,#BlueJays might prefer hold off on Prince knowing Votto will be free in 2 yrs, when both clubs will be stronger
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Hmpf, the Votto Factor.
Interesting.
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
Oh it gets better...
2012
- Pass on Fielder
- Trade Garza for FutureGarza and a few other key pieces
- Sign Soler
2013
- Sign one of the TOR FA SPs (Cain would be my 1st choice)
2014
- Sign Votto
- Trade for Ryan Zimmerman
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
its been made mention
that the dodgers and Mets will be off of life support and will have money to spend. more competition.wonderful. I say get prince while there is like 3 legit teams bidding instead of 10 in 2 years for votto
Mike Brown is the true definition of a businessman:
1.Build bare essentials to run business(PB Stadium)-✔
2.Hire cheap players-✔
3.When you suck don't give in to anyone's demands-✔
4. Change is a bad thing-✔
by RIP Slim on Jan 3, 2012 4:37 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
Might be more than three legit teams bidding now.
And I don’t see how 10 teams would be bidding on Votto in two years. The Yankees, Red Sox and Angels are out of the mix, as would anybody (presumably) who signed Fielder.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Good catch
I’d be happy with David Wright as well but if he can survive this offseason without the Mets trading him, I think he becomes the face of that franchise for the rest of his career.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
I'm leery of his health and defense.
And Zimmerman is probably the better overall player at this point. But in terms of you’re plan above, I like the way you think!
The "problem" to me is that
Fielder definitely is available.
Votto may never hit the FA market and would likely cost a bunch of prospects to trade for.
So, to me (and TheoJed may well disagree), it makes more sense to “buy” Prince now when they (presumably) have available $ rather than wait/hope Votto becomes reasonably available in two years.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
THE CHICAGO CUBS WILL NOT SIGN PRINCE FIELDER IN 2012.
I know you guys are holding out hope of a competitive season but just look at the facts.
The Cubs have Zero, Zilich, None, Nada, the absence of anyone on the team that can realistically be expected to hit 3rd, 4th or 5th in a quality MLB line up.
Theo and Jed let walk two guys that could be a power threat (Aramis and Pena).
Theo and Jed shipped off our best reliever for a long shot 3rd starter.
Theo and Jed are actively shopping our best pitcher.
Why would the Cubs invest 125 million on a guy who can’t make them competitive while they are clearly rebuilding this team from the ground up.
Right now the Theo and Jed are looking for 2 things, Quality AAA talent or Young MLB ready talent. If it takes a few years of blowing up the MLB team they are clearly willing to do that.
by BrewCrew'sPrinceofDarkness on Jan 4, 2012 12:55 AM CST reply actions
and your solution at 1b
for the foreseeable future is lehair? rizzo? why are people scared to lock up almost guaranteed talent? he gets on base,and when he doesn’t its a homerun. Every competitive team has one guy that has a huge contract and I feel he would be worth every penny. maybe not in ‘12, but when the pieces come together you will thank me later. “oh but we are wasting money in the short term.” so what. the power bats we lost cover a good chunk of his salary and we’re already wasting money on Sorryano. I’d rather waste on fielder than some aging contract like soriano. In all honesty I think the Cubs made him a solid offer at 6 years. obviously prince wants more but if he doesn’t get his original plan..I think he will take the bait. so many reasons TO join then not (money aside).
/rant
by RIP Slim on Jan 4, 2012 2:45 AM CST via Android app up reply actions
almost forgot
let them walk? they wanted to test free agency.. not much you can do there.
by RIP Slim on Jan 4, 2012 2:48 AM CST via Android app up reply actions
Try looking beyond 2012
Signing Fielder now has nothing to do with trying to be competitive now, it has to do with upgrading the talent level in the organization. If the Cubs pitching is rebuilt and they have a rotation worthy of a contender say in 2014, Fielder will still be under contract and still in his prime productivity years, but only if you make a move to get him now. Signing Fielder does make sense.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 7:34 AM CST up reply actions
Not necessarily
Would I prefer Votto over Fielder? Yes, but if they can lock up Fielder now, getting a big bat for the middle of the lineup box is checked and they can focus on other needs. Bird in the hand concept.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 8:36 AM CST up reply actions
There's no guarantee
Votto will even be available, or that he’ll want to come to Chicago. A lot of things can happen in two years.
Just because things don’t fit into someone’s particular fantasy timetable doesn’t mean they should be ignored.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 10:22 AM CST up reply actions
there is no guarantee that Garza doesnt get hit by a loose Rhino
while at the Milwaukee County Fair either, every move in sports is a gamble,
Q: Why did Theo Epstein cross the road?
A: To Dump Garza
It is
Some are more of a gamble than others.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 11:20 PM CST up reply actions
That's a lot of bird to rely on in 3-6 years when we might be competitive.
I’d rather take my chances on the Votto market and see who else becomes available down the road.
So now we might be competitive in as many as six years?
Heck, why don’t we just aim big for 2022 while we’re at it?
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 11:41 AM CST up reply actions
Umm, that was stated as "years 3-6," not "it's going to take 6 years"
I assume 2012 and 2013 will be difficult years during the rebuild and we’ll start to see the fruits of labor in 2014.
Straw man ruling!
My vote…this is a straw man arguement.
by BrewCrew'sPrinceofDarkness on Jan 4, 2012 1:33 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Was that what the post said or wasn't it?
Light that “straw man” on fire, please.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
whatever
usually smarter to grab the piece you need when it becomes available rather than waiting a couple of years and hope something that might be a bit better comes along.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 12:52 PM CST up reply actions
wait - we're still talking about ballplayers, right?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
elgato, the above is real humor
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 4:40 PM CST up reply actions
I agree - if he can be signed for 6 years, they should do it
For reasonable $, obviously. That kind of a bat doesn’t become available that often.
I’d be leery of anything longer, though.
Step Two: Develop an organizational plan
by Shanghai Badger on Jan 4, 2012 10:24 AM CST up reply actions
taking a step back
its crazy to think people don’t want to sign fielder, because we will suck next season and he costs too much and not because of his defense or you know anything to do with him.
I can assume the same would be said about pujols?
The only way we don’t sign prince is because he chose a different team. Cant pass up offensive talent like this
/2ndrant
by RIP Slim on Jan 4, 2012 2:57 AM CST via Android app reply actions
It's not crazy at all.
The closer a team is to contending, the bigger is the value of some extra wins becomes. In BPs “Baseball between the numbers” there are some interesting calculation on that. Obivoulsy in rebuilding mode, the value of extra wins decreases.
From a more conventional wisdom standpoint is not too hard to come to the same conclusion. Would Fielder be a great deal for the Pirates, even if they had to pay $10 million less for a contract than every other team for some reason? Well, if they have no chance to compete ever either way, probably not. Right?
I know people like to claim the big names are neccessary to appease the fan base and boost ticket sales, but I’ve nver seen any number to support that notion.
As for the Cubs I think they won’t (and shouldn’t) sign Fielder for 3 reasons:
1. It’s totally unclear when the Cubs will be competing again. Obviously a lot of people here hope it will be 2013, but it might just as well be 2014 or 2015 or… So there is a risk they will not only be “wasting” $25 million for one year but multiple times that.
2. By the time they’re ready to contend, we don’t know if their biggest problem then will be bad offense or lack of starting pitching or horrible fielding or… As of now they have big trouble without any immediate solution in sight in all these areas.
3. It’s Prince Fielder we’re talking about. He’s obese, posing a high risk of early and or strong decline when aging, injuries yadda yadda etc, I guess everybody heard that before a million times.
by DamageControlFreak on Jan 4, 2012 4:03 AM CST up reply actions
Self-fulfilling prophecy
We’re not going to be any good for a while, so we shouldn’t even try to get better. That’s basically what you’re saying.
And now the fantasy window of “being competitive” is being pushed to 2015 or beyond? Great. When did Chicago become infiltrated by Pittsburgh refugees?
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 10:24 AM CST up reply actions
That's not really what he's saying at all.
He’s saying that getting Fielder won’t make us better ENOUGH to justify spending $25 million per over the next two or more seasons.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
He's saying a lot more than that
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 11:38 AM CST up reply actions
You forgot to start that sentence with, "In my mind."
by bdlugz on Jan 4, 2012 11:39 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
remember NBF has never misquoted
and did ask to be made aware of when he starts doing so
Q: Why did Theo Epstein cross the road?
A: To Dump Garza
and just like when you say that, it still makes little sense
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 12:52 PM CST up reply actions
Wait, so you disagree with me?
Gee, I didn’t realize. Thanks for clarifying.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
weak attempt at humor, or are you that clueless?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 3:10 PM CST up reply actions
Wow.
You’re really a charmer, you know that.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
No kidding
What the heck is up with all the name calling from people lately?
" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico lose a ball in the Sun? "
not saying which it was?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 3:55 PM CST up reply actions
weak attempt at humor, or are you that clueless?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I don't think Epstein is interested in taking 3 years to be competitive
Step Two: Develop an organizational plan
by Shanghai Badger on Jan 4, 2012 10:25 AM CST up reply actions
#3 is a main factor in my opinion....
I’m sorry, but my feelings are, no matter how athletic Prince is now, his knees are going to give out soon. We are all too familiar with how debilitating that can be to a player. Long term contract on him makes no sense to me unless we can 100% be a serious contender in the immediate future. IMO it was not a choice of Fielder or Albert ….it was Pujols or nothing.
"Well-behaved women seldom make History"---Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
by cooliogirl47 on Jan 4, 2012 10:28 AM CST up reply actions
You become better any time you can.
If that means signing Prince, then sign him. If he asks for too much let him walk and hamstring another organization.
You can’t wait until you are good to make moves because you will never make any moves. You have to make the right moves to get good. Right now no moves = at best 4th place, probably 5th.
Of the projected 25 man roster, I think at most 15 will be on it come September, there will be many moves.
Even with Fielder in 2012 ...
this team won’t get above third. The key is whether Fielder could be part of a competitive team in 2013-14.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Fielder would do his part
little reason to assume he would not be highly productive for several more years, so the question is can the Theocracy do its part and build a team around him. .
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 12:55 PM CST up reply actions
I dont feel the money is the problem as much as the years of the contract.
I really dont think he fits long term….I’m probably wrong, I usually am. I’m the type of person who would rather have a pair of 5 carat earrings than one 10 carat ring :)
"Well-behaved women seldom make History"---Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
by cooliogirl47 on Jan 4, 2012 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
Agreed in that
waiting until you’re good to make moves is stupid. You’ll never be any good with that approach.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 11:39 AM CST up reply actions
not bruce, I didn't mean for it to sound like I didn't think ANY moves should be made, just not that one.
"Well-behaved women seldom make History"---Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
by cooliogirl47 on Jan 4, 2012 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
Understood
I think it’s the move of moves, but we’ll see.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 1:14 PM CST up reply actions
for those who think wood is a waste of money
Epstein said Wood is "exactly the type of guy we want to build a winning culture here in Chicago." The Cubs are negotiating with Wood’s agent about a new contract.
"You have a team that really respects a player, wants him back desperately, and you have a player who loves the city, is a huge part of the community here with his family and his foundation and wants to be back," Epstein said. "If we can’t work this out, we’re doing something wrong."
JUST PAY THE MAN
by RIP Slim on Jan 4, 2012 3:28 PM CST via Android app reply actions
I for one and glad to hear this
If Ricketts is going to rape and pillage our beloved franchise for every last penny. The least he can do is bring back a washed up middle reliever to make the fans remember the “good old days”!!!
" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico lose a ball in the Sun? "
I appreciate that you don't let facts ever get in your way.
They are such pesky little things, after all.
no wonder you and elgato stick together
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 4:12 PM CST up reply actions
'Stick together'?
Get your facts straight. Aaronb and I don’t agree on much at all. I took him to task for several comments he made just last week.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
lookingdeadred has been infected with TJ-itis
Just wee-un.
by jesus christos on Jan 4, 2012 4:23 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
clearly not, JC ... no exclamation points.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 4:28 PM CST up reply actions
don't get all holier than thou just because of your handle, jc
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 4:43 PM CST up reply actions
no wonder you and elgato stick together
TJ does this crap to people he disagrees with all the time
Just wee-un.
by jesus christos on Jan 4, 2012 4:54 PM CST up reply actions
if you say so, I never read his stuff, not worth the time
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 4:57 PM CST up reply actions
I just find it hilarious
That the same people who are totally fine with gutting payroll to half of previous levels and an 8 year rebuilding effort of a top 3 profit MLB organization. Tend to be the same people who cheer the fact that we are resigning an injured 35 year old Middle reliever.
Why do I feel these are the same folks who have over a hundred dollars worth of “believe bracelets” and “it’s gonna happen” signs?
" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico lose a ball in the Sun? "
This is like NBF shit or something.
You: They’re gonna cut the payroll in half.
Everyone Else: Yeah, that’s not gonna happen.
You: OH SO YOU’RE OKAY WITH THEM CUTTING THE PAYROLL IN HALF?!?!?!
DUMP GARZA
by shoemile on Jan 4, 2012 5:11 PM CST up reply actions 6 recs
bulls-eye
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Jan 4, 2012 5:14 PM CST up reply actions
it's all the same in the end, man
Just wee-un.
by jesus christos on Jan 4, 2012 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
Dust in the wind... All we are is dust in the wind...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Not quite
Needs more personal attacks followed by bursts of sanctimony.
Step Two: Develop an organizational plan
by Shanghai Badger on Jan 4, 2012 7:53 PM CST up reply actions
Good point
Again, if you’re OK with a total rebuild, you should know Kerry Wood has no place on this team.
I’m OK with bringing him back if it isn’t a total rebuild.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 11:24 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah -- and I know how the Woodaholics feel
Your point is what?
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 4, 2012 11:55 PM CST up reply actions
Even in a "total rebuild"
There’s still a place for veteran players.
Since other pitcher’s have spoken highly of Kerry, I’d think he’d have some value as a mentor to the younger guys in the pen while also serving as set-up / middle-man.
What “has no place” in a total rebuild is long-term contracts to mediocre/declining veterans. One-year contracts for some veterans don’t conflict with a “total rebuild”.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
by fsuapollo on Jan 5, 2012 3:23 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
OCCUPY WRIGLEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Just shut up and play" - Matt Garza
"Pain is inevitable, suffering is an option." - Dale Sveum
by RiskyBusiness on Jan 5, 2012 12:13 AM CST up reply actions
Honestly, I think if Kerry Wood wasn’t Kerry Wood, no one would care to even really discuss bringing him back to the team.
Maybe the youngens can learn from his veteran experience, but since we’re all clubhouse outsiders, we don’t know jack about that.
However, he still IS Kerry Wood. He left several million dollars on the table last year to be with a club he cares about and probably there was some gentlemen’s agreement involved about keeping him and/or giving him some off-field position in the future.
I think Theo has not honor that and he will. If the Cubs end up overpaying Wood by a million for his service, so what.
by DamageControlFreak on Jan 6, 2012 1:44 AM CST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bleed Cubbie Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Chicago Cubs Game Threads
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
