I admit it...

[Eli]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

[Internet Apex]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

I guess these fears are all valid. Sure their draft picks could all be busts, they could fail to find the best possible prospects in the overseas market and they could miss out on the best free agents who are signing big contracts with their current teams. But the idea is that they're going to operate like the most successful teams currently do. To not do that would be to guarantee a lack of success. But they're going to try. And they have a track record of being right on a lot of different aspects of this business. If it doesn't work, because they all of a sudden became bad at it, well, fuck. Read a book. Watch basketball. Make love to your wife. 

[BH]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

It's not all doom though, seems like Theo/Hoyer know ways to make the team better via other avenues. Teams competing have different needs than teams who are years away, so we can trade decent players to playoff teams for  prospects that might turn out, helping to rebuild our farm system faster. And there will always be stupid GMs. The good news is that we have a president/GM who are flexible and smart enough to understand how to work best with whatever rules are in place.  

[Eli]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

It's not all doom though, seems like Theo/Hoyer know ways to make the team better via other avenues.

Not doom. Just a snag, seeing that these other avenues are disappearing, so it's more difficult to find advantages. Draft spending is capped and free agency is becoming irrelevant (eliminating two potentially big advantages for the Cubs). I still think the team will be good, but it's going to be more difficult than we thought when Theo first came on board.

[Quality Start Machine]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

It's not all doom though, seems like Theo/Hoyer know ways to make the team better via other avenues.

Not doom. Just a snag, seeing that these other avenues are disappearing, so it's more difficult to find advantages. Draft spending is capped and free agency is becoming irrelevant (eliminating two potentially big advantages for the Cubs). I still think the team will be good, but it's going to be more difficult than we thought when Theo first came on board.

The first Cubs team I followed were the Durocher Cubs. They had everything but a center fielder. When you look at that team and how much talent was there, it's astounding that they never won division or pennant, let alone a World Series.

Epstein and Hoyer are assembling a wealth of talend, much as Jim Holland did back then - sure, he did Brock/Broglio, but he also did Larry Jackson/Fergie Jenkins - but everything could look like it's coming together, and there are still no guarantees. It's just nice to see the team finally has a plan that is geared toward achieving and sustaining success.

Also, Ricketts hasn't guaranteed anything, just stated a goal.

[Slaky]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

It's not all doom though, seems like Theo/Hoyer know ways to make the team better via other avenues.

Not doom. Just a snag, seeing that these other avenues are disappearing, so it's more difficult to find advantages. Draft spending is capped and free agency is becoming irrelevant (eliminating two potentially big advantages for the Cubs). I still think the team will be good, but it's going to be more difficult than we thought when Theo first came on board.

The first Cubs team I followed were the Durocher Cubs. They had everything but a center fielder. When you look at that team and how much talent was there, it's astounding that they never won division or pennant, let alone a World Series.

Epstein and Hoyer are assembling a wealth of talend, much as Jim Holland did back then - sure, he did Brock/Broglio, but he also did Larry Jackson/Fergie Jenkins - but everything could look like it's coming together, and there are still no guarantees. It's just nice to see the team finally has a plan that is geared toward achieving and sustaining success.

Also, Ricketts hasn't guaranteed anything, just stated a goal.

It might take a year or two longer than we want. I just hope they stick with it because look how much talent they've amassed in a relatively short amount of time. They're going to keep getting talent through the draft and through international scouting.

Chuck is probably wrong to keep wagging his baseball boner at Cano and the like. Those kinds of free agents just aren't going to be a thing anymore.

Something that will always be a thing though is trades. And teams that end up being terrible that need to unload good players for prospects will be something the Cubs can do when they need to.

It'll take time. They might suck next year too. They might suck until 2016. 2017.

Wouldn't you sit through that many years if it meant they'd be good for 10 or 15? If you wouldn't then I guess we're just very different.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

Meh.  Not all 29 other teams have had had the fuckload of strangling salaries which were completely out of proportion to the results on the field.  Yes, every team is purportedly bulding for the future but the foundation to this team was so rotted this is the only course of action, IMHO.  What's gotten into you, anyway?

[thehawk]

Building off the past few days of discussion and my previously-stated meatball skepticism, I think Patrick Mooney (who is a very good beat writer, by the way) sort of sums up my nagging feeling:

Through years of ownership instability, the Cubs have watched their big-market advantages vanish. Outside forces have leveled the playing field, from revenue sharing to a restrictive labor deal. New television money, a stadium construction boom and digital investments have fueled the industry.

Cubs fans have been sold the idea of building for the future, as if the other 29 franchises don't have long-range plans. Chairman Tom Ricketts has guaranteed winning the World Series when the Wrigley Field renovation is complete, which is nice. But those revenues can't buy the best free agents if they're already locked up, or pay for a monster draft class under this collective bargaining agreement.

It's not all doom though, seems like Theo/Hoyer know ways to make the team better via other avenues.

Not doom. Just a snag, seeing that these other avenues are disappearing, so it's more difficult to find advantages. Draft spending is capped and free agency is becoming irrelevant (eliminating two potentially big advantages for the Cubs). I still think the team will be good, but it's going to be more difficult than we thought when Theo first came on board.

It may be true that some of the easier ways for big money teams to gain an advantage (free agency and paying 'out of slot' for draft choices come to mind, are now gone.  What I do know is that a team that has more resources can always find some advantage if they are smart enough, and I think Epstein and Hoyer are smart enough to know how to use their dollars to the Cubs advantage.  I think the Cubs for the first time are likely to have money and brains at the same time and, that while there are no guaranties, they should be able to build a perennially successful team

[Quality Start Machine]

From a general manager's standpoint, free agency is a game with no winning outcome.

You have to bid for players in the open market, paying for past performance. In order to outbid teams like the Yankees a team has to offer more money and years than is prudent.

The Soriano deal is a perfect example of this - the Cubs signed a player for a short-term gain (which didn't pan out - at least not in terms of championships), knowing the back end of the contract would be a nightmare.

While the Edwin Jackson deal is pretty cringeworthy, it's still only four years. And by the end of the contract, he can either be a servicable number 3 starter, or somebody else's problem.

One of the most positive aspects of this team's management is that they're not looking to plug holes with overpaid veterans with long-term deals. None of the Cubs' veterans are world-beaters, but (with the exception of Jackson and Marmol) at least they're all disposable.

[Eli]

Something that will always be a thing though is trades. 

Yeah, that's the random and unpredictable thing. They're connected to every David Price trade rumor, which could mean a rotation headed up next year by Price, Samardzija and maybe Mark Appel. That's a lot of ifs, but that would certainly speed things up.

[R-V]

Something that will always be a thing though is trades. 

Yeah, that's the random and unpredictable thing. They're connected to every David Price trade rumor, which could mean a rotation headed up next year by Price, Samardzija and maybe Mark Appel. That's a lot of ifs, but that would certainly speed things up.

What I like so far about this regime is that they've shown an ability to find good mid-to-back-end of the rotation pitching without giving up too much to get it - Maholm, Wood, Villanueva. So if they can get an ace either in the draft or via trade, and Snork keeps doing his thing, I like their chances of putting together a really good rotation once the rest of the roster catches up.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

Something that will always be a thing though is trades.  

Yeah, that's the random and unpredictable thing. They're connected to every David Price trade rumor, which could mean a rotation headed up next year by Price, Samardzija and maybe Mark Appel. That's a lot of ifs, but that would certainly speed things up.

I'm afraid I'm not sure what your point is, Eli.

You seem to be lamenting both that (a) the player acquisition advantages for bigger market teams (in free agency and the draft) are disappearing, and that (b) the Cubs are approaching this rebuild like a smaller market team.

But, isn't (b) exactly what the Cubs should be doing in response to (a)? I.e., build through the draft and stockpile prospects in the lean years, try to lock up guys like Castro and Rizzo while they're young, and only move to sell the farm in a trade for sure-thing "right now" major leaguers when the time is right?

I mean, yeah... We don't know yet that the path Theo and Jed have the Cubs on will lead to a magnificent sunshiny future where the Cubs are contenders year after year after year. But I'm not sure what else anyone would want to see from them in the present to get us there.

[Quality Start Machine]

Something that will always be a thing though is trades. 

Yeah, that's the random and unpredictable thing. They're connected to every David Price trade rumor, which could mean a rotation headed up next year by Price, Samardzija and maybe Mark Appel. That's a lot of ifs, but that would certainly speed things up.

They passed on Appel last year for Almora. They might do the same thing this spring for Clint Frazier.

[Eli]

Something that will always be a thing though is trades. 

Yeah, that's the random and unpredictable thing. They're connected to every David Price trade rumor, which could mean a rotation headed up next year by Price, Samardzija and maybe Mark Appel. That's a lot of ifs, but that would certainly speed things up.

They passed on Appel last year for Almora. They might do the same thing this spring for Clint Frazier.

No, they won't.

[Eli]

I'm afraid I'm not sure what your point is, Eli.

That's because I don't have one and I never have in this thread.

There's nothing else that the Cubs should be doing that they aren't. I'm mostly irritated Hendry (or the Tribune's demand that Hendry spend recklessly, depending on what you believe) left them in such a hole that this sort of total tear-down is necessary. I think most of us are rational, smart people who understand what's happening here. But at the same time, it'd be fun if the Cubes didn't suck. And it'd fun if they didn't suck next year, too. That's all I was saying.

Also, on some smaller level, I was engaging in a minor bit of Paul Tanner better-for-having-trolled behavior. But hey, people are posting at Desipio again!