hope you are wrong, will be like the nba where any scrub can get in.

_________________

theo did not spend that 88 million though..he was handed a payroll and a roster..he has made a few minor moves but he did not construct this garbage.

_________________

That's true to a degree. But he did decide to drop money to Ricketts' bottom line rather than signing a couple big league players to one year deals for $10 or $12 million each, which would have had little effect on the future and undoubtedly would have made this team at least watchable for the fans that come out to see it. And he still would have been working with a lower budget than any Cub team ever should be.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

He's given real effort most often, even with bad knees. His numbers are not great by any means, but on this team, he is amonst the better hitters. They won't get anything for him trying to deal him, so he will likely get released when Rizzo comes up, or shortly after if Rizzo shows he's up to the task of playing at the major league level better than he had in San Diego.None of this really matters much this season. LaHair will make people wonder which is the worse outfielder (LaHair). But they need to try to do something to get more offense to entertain fans more-if not win more games.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!

i am glad he did not do that..i was pissed when hendry signed pena...hendry was all about saving his ass ...theo has job security and is not in that position..i honestly think he is tanking this season to get the number 1 pick..that is why koy hill plays.If you are going to suck, may as well pick 1st...this division blows..in 2014/15 this team should run this division.

_________________

I agree. The idea that Theo should have spent 20-22M on a couple players so they could maybe get 80 wins is totally ridiculous.

I hope they finish dead last and get the top pick so they can rebuild this thing the right way, like Washington.

Having a 5 year plan is fine, but I think people like to invent their own definition of what a 5-year plan is, thus debating what hyper sensationalism is being cultivated for the sake of shocking meatballs and generating buzz over a dead team is playing into what the whole purpose of score hosts discussing this kind of stuff was.

_________________

How many games will you go to this season? And Pena was a great signing for $10 million. Do you guys know anything about baseball?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

I really dont think it was. Obviously a team that spends more is going to have diminishing returns. But I can see how you think that. Originally this was Hoyer's Padres vs. Hendry's Cubs. So if you use that stat either Hoyer is better than Hendry or Theo is better than Hendry

I cant say for sure, it wasnt my statement




I completely disagree. Yes BA has made people think they're GMs but you act like its impossible to judge GMs. Its not.

Its like anything else. The ones who have consistent success are good. Larry Himes was real good. Being run out of places doesnt mean anything. It happens to every manager/GM no matter how good they are.



This feels like off season hot stove arguing. Its pointless. I think one thing we can all agree on is Theo has all the power in the organization and will make his mark on the Cubs one way or another.

Let's just see what he does. It will be obvious if he's successful or not.

I still dont get the arguement here.


Its a results based business. Theo had great results in Boston. There is really no arguing that.

And Id say he's probably better than Cashman. (I think thats the only fair comparison because the two are in direct competition with similiar resources)



JORR, the TV fan just doesnt agree with your stance on making the team watchable. Certainly you understand.

TV fan doesnt care that Pena had a good year for 10m. He's gone and there is nothing to show for it. Guy who goes to games might feel differently.

I don't think hot stove arguing is pointless. It's just baseball talk. Hendry was a successful general manager for the Cubs.

And what tricky was doing was spin. He went further by calling the 2011 Red Sox a top team that just happened to collapse. As if suddenly events on the field don't count. Teams that collapse aren't top teams. trickybeck is usually a sharp baseball guy but he seems blinded by Theo.

If that's how we're going to look at it, I call the 2004 Red Sox an abject failure that proved their inferiority to the Yankees over 162 games and then got lucky in the playoff crapshoot. Now, I don't really believe that and I don't think that's fair, but you can't have it every which way when it comes to Theo Epstein.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

The 2011 Red Sox choked. They were a good team.

The 06 White Sox lost out to the Tigers. They were a good team.



I like hot stove arguing. I just mean it seems like we're aruging over nothing. He hasnt really made his mark yet.

Right. But the team doesn't exist without people at the ballpark. The guy that thinks putting a competitive team out there is "ridiculous" wants someone else to pay the freight until they're good and then he'll complain about how he's "priced out". I'm glad cp guy is so concerned about Ricketts' profits. Because you and I both know that the $30 million they saved by putting shit on the field isn't going to be spent on a $200 million team in the next few years. That's just money in Ricketts' pocket. And it's a slap in the face to the fans. The TV fan can just change the fucking channel.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

This is a horrible baseball thought. Washington is the second team in a small market. The Cubs are a big league behemoth.

You want to charge big league prices and fill that antique ballpark? The fans deserve to see better than this. This isn't a Cubs/Sox thing. I feel the same way about the Sox who- though they aren't the Cubs- sometimes like to use the Cubs to pretend they're a small market team. That's bullshit too.

If you spent that extra $25 million properly- and why wouldn't the great Theo Epstein spend it properly?- you might have a team around .500. And baseball is a funny game. All of a sudden a couple Cardinals get hurt. It looks like 85 might win the division. Then a guy like Samardzija has a crazy year and wins 17 games that nobody expected. You're right there.

But you prefer to be sold on this bullshit they're selling over there. jimmypasta isn't sold on it. And I bet he spends more money in that park than you.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

I see once again JORR that you are having your fun "debating" but the bottom line is winning the World Series. Winning 80 games by having a couple Carlos Pena's does not get you there and leaves you in baseball hell with mid round draft picks, etc.

The way to do it is the way Washington is doing it. Get high picks, draft the right guys, then buy guys like Werth and trade for guys like Gio Gonzalez to make yourself a legit contender for post season play.

It worked for the Bulls when they drafted Jordan and the Hawks when they drafted Kane.

This year they should end up with a Top 3 pick at worst and hopefully they get a guy who emerges as an elite talent as opposed to drafting 18 and having to get lucky on a guy who slides or who develops far beyond what his skill set projects to.

Yes the draft is a crap shoot but it is always better to be drafting at the start of each round as opposed to the middle levels.

Would have left Werth signing out of that Pro Washington argument

Agree 100%. BUT, he also took over a team there that was in FAR better shape than the Cubs are. The team he took over in Boston in '04 was 3 outs (or 1 run) away from going to the World Series the previous year. Given that, a 5 year plan seems like it makes sense.

The Cubs are probably gonna lose 100 games this year, or close to it. So if next year they lose say 87. Thats a decent improvement. Maybe in 2014 they are slightly over .500, 2015 contend for a division, and in 2016 really start to become a force in the NL.

That doesn't seem farfetched at all.

_________________

LOL, your ad hominem attacks are so typical. How many wives have you gone through?

Yes, a team may get lucky and win a division with 85 wins and then run the table in the playoffs by getting hot, but what this front office and magt team is doing (and postulating as an operating premise) is building a team that will compete EACH YEAR. The only way to do that is with a nucleus of talent, not with guys you have to buy each year for 10-12M. The great Jim Hendry was to damn nice. Instead of dumping some of these guys who produced and got them in the playoffs and reloading, he gave them mega deals with no trade clauses thus hampering the team for years to come.

Get young talent, develop it, mix in free agents when you get to a certain point in the teams development, then sustain that level of performance so the odds improve that your team will get hot in the post season.

Wow! Back to the subject!

Is this team worse than the 03 Tigers?

Losing 87 wont be enough of an improvement in my eyes.

It doesnt take a lot of moves to get to 500. Thats the easy part. Getting 20 games over is the tricky part.

But even in your timeline, they're in the wild card race in year 3, and contending for a division in year 4.

Score hosts present it as a team that will be bad for 4 years, then win the WS in year 5.

They overpaid with Werth becasue they had to start getting free agents to commit to the team which at that point was a last place ballclub. Consider him a bridge player, albeit a very expensive one.

You clearly don't know what an ad hominem attack is. I'm merely pointing out that your viewpoint is colored by the fact that you want someone else to pay the freight by attending games while you wait until they're ready to win a World Series. There have been people waiting 103 seasons for that but you have no issue with them throwing seasons away. That's any easier stance to take from the comforts of your home. Judge Judy is on in the same timeslot.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

I know what you mean BUT

They overpaid for Soriano, because they lost 95 games the year before and they needed to make a big splash in free agency.


Im done excusing GM's for getting players for any other reason than winning. If you get a Reggie White guy who is awesome AND draws other players thats fine. But signing a guy, just to sign him is stupid.

Imagine that money being saved and spent on Fielder in the off season

I know it doesn't make for a fun couple of seasons Roger, but lets say the Cubs go 61-101 this year, and in 2013 go 78-84. You wouldn't see that as a fairly significant improvement?

With the added wild cards they should expect to contend in a couple of seasons, and while I don't think the big league club is worse than the '03 Tigers, they are still pretty bad. That Tigers team at least had a young rotation that was being built upon, and I think that you can look at the '06 WS Tiger's team and say that what some of those hurlers went thru in '03 definitely helped them.

I did not hear the conversation in question on the Score. But I think what was meant was that for the Cubs to really become a true force in the NL, its going to take 4-5 seasons. I can't disagree with that.

_________________

Again, my viewpoint is the team needs to win championships. Period.

Let the frat boys and the people from Iowa buy tickets while they suck as that is a means to an end. The problem with the great Jim Hendry is that he failed to develop a base of talent allowing them to dump high priced or post prime players and when they all started to suck (like last year) the team tanks and they're fucked.

Fans will pay the freight (myself included) when they know the organization has a plan, sees exciting young talent being developed, and sees a philosophy at the major league level that they can appreciate, unlike employing the ARam's of the world who loaf around and collect 15M.

But if they don't fall victim to the playoff crapshoot in '08 and win the World Series as the best team in the NL, was Soriano really overpaid?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

I'm going to bookmark this post for the next time someone tries to say all fans are equal.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don

78-84 seems a lot better than 75-87 for some reason but you're right


This particular conversation was centered around trading Garza (and even Samardzija leaving) because neither will be around when the Cubs are good in 5 years.

Thats crazy and Ive heard it from almost every host

I agree. The Soriano signing was a Sam Zell move designed to increase the value of a franchise he was selling and Hendry failed to step in and make an argument against the number of years. No one offered 8 years except Zell. Hendry should have insisted on 6 years max and this would be the last year of the contract.

Werth at least is an elite defensive talent, unlike Soriano.

I'm curious what your definition of "successful" entails.