Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic - Is jimmy accidently on to something?

I think the previous 5 years of both MLB teams in this city should show you that just losing for 5 years is not the sole answer, because one of them is coming out of the tailspin with a future. The other is still serving bacon on a stick as the primary prize.

bigfan wrote:

The Sox haven't lost for 5 years. They've lost for 3 years, and they are already building a nice farm system even without counting Rodon.

We really don't have to make this more difficult than it is. The Cubs had more hits than most but losing for 5 straight years is the best way to build yourself into a championship contender. It doesn't always work and sometimes it takes longer but the results here are clear for teams who need to rebuild.

There is no best way, these things are dynamic.

rogers park bryan wrote:

There is no best way, these things are dynamic.

So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way?

rogers park bryan wrote:

There is no best way, these things are dynamic.

So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way?

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

There is no best way, these things are dynamic.

So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way?

Oh Rick, you lost this one...

and Ya know when the Sox have bad years....like this one...and the reason is always 'Well sometimes it just happens" and its never "We just stink, beause we picked the wrong guys"

Well 4 of the last 5 years they have been below .500, so maybe that one year of 85 wins was just a "hey it just happened"?

Anyway to build a team that will consistantly get to the playoffs is the best way. Will they consistantly get to the playoffs for years to come? Maybe, but its the way to start.

I am 100% fine with what the Cubs have done and the only ones I see that arent are Sox fans, Jimmypasta and Murph. That's your all "Self hating" team.

Also, please use the Bears as example A of 5 years of losing...what did that get us? THIS MESS?

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

There is no best way, these things are dynamic.

So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way?

Im on record as saying they should have been contending for a WC last year and a title this year.

But Epstein and Hoyer only had 3 of those years. Even with the losing the 2 years prior, Hendry was acquiring guys who wouldnt be part of the future for them and you cant put those two years on them.

There are two options.

rogers park bryan wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

There is no best way, these things are dynamic.

So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way?

Ok, so you agree with jimmy.

Denying what Theo inherited is bad too. At a minimum, the last losing season of Hendry was helpful to Theo.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

There are two options.

Always

You're twisting yourself into a pretzel trying to frame things so that Cub fans look bad somehow.

You attempting to attribute a losing season to Epstein before he got here is hilarious.

rogers park bryan wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

There are two options.

Always

This is your fallback when you have no answer.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

There are two options.

Always

This is your fallback when you have no answer.

No, its not.

It's an absolutely perfect summation of how you argue about everything. You attempt to force people into a yes/no or black/white definitions in pretty much every argument as a means of control.

As usual, the answer is in the middle of your wildly polar opposite options. Losing for a few years to rebuild was probably the best way to rebuild but it probably took a little longer than it had to.

rogers park bryan wrote:

You're twisting yourself into a pretzel trying to frame things so that Cub fans look bad somehow.

It isn't about looking bad. This is about a bunch of people arguing with me last week that losing 5 straight seasons is the best way to rebuild based on a bunch of mlb teams, and then suddenly jimmy saying that they shouldn't have done that and then a bunch of people saying "jimmy, you idiot, the Cubs did it the right way and are setup great".

rogers park bryan wrote:

You attempting to attribute a losing season to Epstein before he got here is hilarious.

Are you saying that those two years of losing didn't give him a head start on a rebuild?

Every team and situation is different so your initial argument is flawed

Every Cub fan has the right to be annoyed at anything until they win. The losing may have been needed and understandably annoying to Jimmy at the same time.

rogers park bryan wrote:

Every Cub fan has the right to be annoyed at anything until they win. The losing may have been needed and understandably annoying to Jimmy at the same time.

That's fair, so why are so many people attacking jimmy?

Hendry's way of building a "winner" left the team old, overpaid and with a horseshit farm system. No thanks.

Author:	Darkside [ Sun Sep 27, 2015 10:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Is jimmy accidently on to something?
In the NBA, you really can't tank and get guaranteed high drafts. Course you're more likely to... but in the other leagues, there's no draft lottery. Could he be on to something here? Should more leagues run a lottery system to avoid the tankers?

Author:	bigfan [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
While Picking a high draft in MLB helps, they are far from the NBA Impact in 1 of 5 guys. I think the previous 5 years of both MLB teams in this city should show you that just losing for 5 years is not the sole answer, because one of them is coming out of the tailspin with a future. The other is still serving bacon on a stick as the primary prize. Also, please use the Bears as example A of 5 years of losing...what did that get us? THIS MESS?

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:47 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
bigfan wrote: I think the previous 5 years of both MLB teams in this city should show you that just losing for 5 years is not the sole answer, because one of them is coming out of the tailspin with a future. The other is still serving bacon on a stick as the primary prize. The Sox haven't lost for 5 years. They've lost for 3 years, and they are already building a nice farm system even without counting Rodon. We really don't have to make this more difficult than it is. The Cubs had more hits than most but losing for 5 straight years is the best way to build yourself into a championship contender. It doesn't always work and sometimes it takes longer but the results here are clear for teams who need to rebuild.

Author:	rogers park bryan [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
Boilermaker Rick wrote: bigfan wrote: I think the previous 5 years of both MLB teams in this city should show you that just losing for 5 years is not the sole answer, because one of them is coming out of the tailspin with a future. The other is still serving bacon on a stick as the primary prize. The Sox haven't lost for 5 years. They've lost for 3 years, and they are already building a nice farm system even without counting Rodon. We really don't have to make this more difficult than it is. The Cubs had more hits than most but losing for 5 straight years is the best way to build yourself into a championship contender. It doesn't always work and sometimes it takes longer but the results here are clear for teams who need to rebuild. There is no best way, these things are dynamic. Every league gives the worst team the top draft pick in hopes of creating parity and being cyclical. The whole teams rising from the bottom on the strength of draft picks is not new.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:57 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: There is no best way, these things are dynamic. So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way?

Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Is jimmy accidently on to something? https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=96264	Page 1 of 2

Author:	denisdman [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:59 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: There is no best way, these things are dynamic. We don't always see eye to eye, but this is spot on. My preferred way is drafting and development, but we've seen all sorts of successful strategies. Even with the Cubs, you have a big free agent signing in Lester and nice trades for Arrieta and Rizzo as the main cogs in their current success.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:03 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
What also makes baseball different is they basically let you own a player for a decade or more right out of high school even if they can't play on your MLB roster for years. Only hockey also has a legit minor league system but it doesn't really seem to factor in quite as much as most of the elite players seem to get pulled up pretty quickly. The NFL and NBA do not have a minor league system worth anything.

Author:	bigfan [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:03 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
Boilermaker Rick wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: There is no best way, these things are dynamic. So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way? Oh Rick, you lost this one... and Ya know when the Sox have bad years....like this one...and the reason is always 'Well sometimes it just happens" and its never "We just stink, beause we picked the wrong guys" Well 4 of the last 5 years they have been below .500, so maybe that one year of 85 wins was just a "hey it just happened"? Anyway to build a team that will consistantly get to the playoffs is the best way. Will they consistantly get to the playoffs for years to come? Maybe, but its the way to start. I am 100% fine with what the Cubs have done and the only ones I see that arent are Sox fans, Jimmypasta and Murph. That's your all "Self hating" team.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:08 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
bigfan wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: There is no best way, these things are dynamic. So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way? Oh Rick, you lost this one... and Ya know when the Sox have bad years....like this one...and the reason is always 'Well sometimes it just happens" and its never "We just stink, beause we picked the wrong guys" Well 4 of the last 5 years they have been below .500, so maybe that one year of 85 wins was just a "hey it just happened"? Anyway to build a team that will consistantly get to the playoffs is the best way. Will they consistantly get to the playoffs for years to come? Maybe, but its the way to start. I am 100% fine with what the Cubs have done and the only ones I see that arent are Sox fans, Jimmypasta and Murph. That's your all "Self hating" team. There is nothing winning or losing here. There are two options. 1) Losing 5 straight years was the best option to rebuild. 2) jimmy being upset about losing 5 straight years is a valid opinion to have.

Author:	Peoria Matt [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:09 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
bigfan wrote: Also, please use the Bears as example A of 5 years of losing...what did that get us? THIS MESS? Wrong people making the personnel hires. Now they can sit and watch their cash cow suck even longer because of their mistakes.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:09 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: There is no best way, these things are dynamic. So you agree with jimmy then that the rebuilding didn't need to lose like it did and probably shouldn't have wasted 5 years if it wasn't the best way? Im on record as saying they should have been contending for a WC last year and a title this year. But Epstein and Hoyer only had 3 of those years. Even with the losing the 2 years prior, Hendry was acquiring guys who wouldnt be part of the future for them and you cant put those two years on them. Ok, so you agree with jimmy. Denying what Theo inherited is bad too. At a minimum, the last losing season of Hendry was helpful to Theo.

Author:	bigfan [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:12 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
I wanted to chase a WC as well last year. Just to get a taste of winning, plus I also felt losing helps dig a hole. Makes it harder and harder to turn things around. Yet, they sure have done an OK job. Despite the unreal "Cowards" talking about "The past", I am looking forward because "This too shall pass'

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:15 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: There are two options. Always This is your fallback when you have no answer. It is true though. jimmy is either right or wrong. If he is wrong, then Theo chose the best option to rebuild. If he is right, then Theo could have, and should have, chosen a better option which had them winning quicker.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:17 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: You're twisting yourself into a pretzel trying to frame things so that Cub fans look bad somehow. It isn't about looking bad. This is about a bunch of people arguing with me last week that losing 5 straight seasons is the best way to rebuild based on a bunch of mlb teams, and then suddenly jimmy saying that they shouldn't have done that and then a bunch of people saying "jimmy, you idiot, the Cubs did it the right way and are setup great". rogers park bryan wrote: You attempting to attribute a losing season to Epstein before he got here is hilarious. Are you saying that those two years of losing didn't give him a head start on a rebuild?

Author:	jimmypasta [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:31 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
Part of the "plan" that used to set me off is the dumping of SP at the All-Star break. I didn't mind it IF they acquired some major league ready rookies in return. It seemed like he was always acquiring guys that would be ready in 2 or 3 years. The future always seemed "down the road" for these Cubs. Even now,Theo's apologists walk around telling everybody: "This is a year early",which in turn sets up the "It's OK we lost,wait till next year." Next year might never come.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:20 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: There are two options. Always This is your fallback when you have no answer. No, its not. It's an absolutely perfect summation of how you argue about everything. You attempt to force people into a yes/no or black/white definitions in pretty much every argument as a means of control. As usual, the answer is in the middle of your wildly polar opposite options. Losing for a few years to rebuild was probably the best way to rebuild but it probably took a little longer than it had to. There are two options. Respond or don't. Is jimmy right or wrong? What other option is there?

Author:	Darkside [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:22 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
Jimmy is wrong to be angry about it. It is how you do a complete rebuild in the MLB. A complete top down rebuild takes 4 to 5 years.

Author:	jimmypasta [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:26 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
No,I am not on anything. Say no to Drugs

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:29 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: Every team and situation is different so your initial argument is flawed Well then we might as well not talk about anything.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:30 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
rogers park bryan wrote: Every Cub fan has the right to be annoyed at anything until they win. The losing may have been needed and understandably annoying to Jimmy at the same time. That's fair, so why are so many people attacking jimmy?

Author:	Peoria Matt [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:34 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
Hendry's way of building a "winner" left the team old, overpaid and with a horseshit farm system. No thanks.

Author:	jimmypasta [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:39 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
Peoria Matt wrote: Hendry's way of building a "winner" left the team old, overpaid and with a horseshit farm system. No thanks. I think the Cubs farm system under Hendry was trying to develop pitching and had some success. Theo's plan seems like there is no viable starting pitching in the farm system after 4 seasons. Somebody like IMU might know differently,but I haven't read much about help from the minors for SP.

Author:	Peoria Matt [ Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:44 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Is jimmy accidently on to something?
So where are the pitchers Hendry drafted? Shark was great because Theo traded him for Russell. Chris Archer, who was traded by Hendry in another "win now" move. Not sure who else. That's 2 guys in 8 years. Has a Angelo vibe to it, doesn't it?