Cub's Prospect Watch And Development Discussion Thread

[patg006]

Probably because they had a better scouting system, ETC. in place then Cubs , Pirates ETC.

So then you don't have to draft in the top 5 to have success in the draft then?

You are finally seeing the light.

Sadly your such an ASSCLOWN and too dumb to remember that the discussion was you stating there not nuch difference in drafting top 5 from bottom 5.. THAT IT.. but way to change direction when proven wrong.

And if have shown the facts that support that there is not a huge difference between drafting in the top 5 and bottom 5 and certainly not enough to justify the 30 less wins it takes to get that top 5 pick.

I can see now why the Ricketts can continue to charge top 3 tickets prices, be top 6 in revenue and yet field a bottom 10 payroll and bottom two major league team and have people think they are doing a great job.

 

[chibears55]

So then you don't have to draft in the top 5 to have success in the draft then?

You are finally seeing the light.

you do if the plan is to build up the major league team with successful superior talent via draft first.

You need to step out of the dark...

And if have shown the facts that support that there is not a huge difference between drafting in the top 5 and bottom 5 and certainly not enough to justify the 30 less wins it takes to get that top 5 pick.

Maybe in your world, but most see a huge difference between 50% success rate for top 5 and 10% for bottom 5

can see now why the Ricketts can continue to charge top 3 tickets prices, be top 6 in revenue and yet field a bottom 10 payroll and bottom two major league team and have people think they are doing a great job.

Didn't know the topic changed into the job the Ricketts are doing now , payroll, and ticket prices. .

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[patg006]

you do if the plan is to build up the major league team with successful superior talent via draft first.

You need to step out of the dark...

And yet we have already established the Cardinals have been able to build their major league team and have a strong farm system without having to draft in the top 5.

You need to think for yourself instead of how you are told to think.

Maybe in your world, but most see a huge difference between 50% success rate for top 5 and 10% for bottom 5

In my world you better be drafting better than just successful players when drafting in the top 5, you better be drafting superior players where there is only a 1 in 4 chance difference between top 5 and bottom 5 which again is not enough of a difference to support losing 30+ more games a year as an advantage.

Drafting successful players will keep you drafting in the top 5. Yet you will claim that as a victory and progress.

By the criteria used in that graph, Darwin Barney would be considered a successful Top 5 draft pick since he has averaged a WAR of 1.5 or greater so far in his career.

I guess maybe I have a bit higher standard of what a successful top 5 pick would be.

 

[chibears55]

And yet we have already established the Cardinals have been able to build their major league team and have a strong farm system without having to draft in the top 5.

You need to think for yourself instead of how you are told to think.

That great for the Cardinals that they have had an established major league team and was able to draft well.. Cubs didnt on both counts...

In my world you better be drafting better than just successful players when drafting in the top 5, you better be drafting superior players where there is only a 1 in 4 chance difference between top 5 and bottom 5 which again is not enough of a difference to support losing 30+ more games a year as an advantage.

Drafting successful players will keep you drafting in the top 5. Yet you will claim that as a victory and progress.

By the criteria used in that graph, Darwin Barney would be considered a successful Top 5 draft pick since he has averaged a WAR of 1.5 or greater so far in his career.

I guess maybe I have a bit higher standard of what a successful top 5 pick would be.

No one arguing that we'd prefer to constantly draft in bottom 5 over top 5 because it means your team playing well.. but that not what our discussion was about. .



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[patg006]

but that not what our discussion was about. .

Nope.

So far our discussion has been me pointing out the facts and realities that you can still draft well without being in the top five, and you whined and cried that drafting in the top 5 was the only way to build the farm.

 

[chibears55]

Nope.

So far our discussion has been me pointing out the facts and realities that you can still draft well without being in the top five, and you whined and cried that drafting in the top 5 was the only way to build the farm.

Lmao. .you really do suck at twisting things around on here and trying to change up the original discussion to try and make yourself right.
Wake up call..... every poster on here except for maybe 2 knows this is what you do when youve been schooled...
I mean seriously ,You do realize others can read what has been posted right ?




Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[patg006]

Lmao. .you really do suck at twisting things around on here and trying to change up the original discussion to try and make yourself right.
Wake up call..... every poster on here except for maybe 2 knows this is what you do when youve been schooled...
I mean seriously ,You do realize others can read what has been posted right ?

Exactly how have I been schooled?

By pointing all the years that picks 25-30 were at least equal to the 1-5 picks that you claimed rarely happened?

That I have pointed out many teams have been able to successfully develop the farm systems without having to pick in the top 5?

That I have pointed out several teams that have sustained long term success that have rarely drafted even in the top 10 over the last 20 years?

Um ok.

 

[The Bandit]

Exactly how have I been schooled?

By pointing all the years that picks 25-30 were at least equal to the 1-5 picks that you claimed rarely happened?

That I have pointed out many teams have been able to successfully develop the farm systems without having to pick in the top 5?

That I have pointed out several teams that have sustained long term success that have rarely drafted even in the top 10 over the last 20 years?

Um ok.

Gotta start somewhere. May as well start with the highest percentage lottery ticket to win.

sent from Jimmer range using Tapatalk

 

[patg006]

Gotta start somewhere. May as well start with the highest percentage lottery ticket to win.

Why not start with bring quality players to the major league team?

That sure seems like a better place to start than lottery tickets.

 

[The Bandit]

Why not start with bring quality players to the major league team?

That sure seems like a better place to start than lottery tickets.

Can't sign a whole team of FA's. And if we did it wouldn't be that great wed have a massive payroll and not such a great team. FA quality isn't what it used to be.

sent from Jimmer range using Tapatalk

 

[patg006]

Can't sign a whole team of FA's. And if we did it wouldn't be that great wed have a massive payroll and not such a great team. FA quality isn't what it used to be.

sent from Jimmer range using Tapatalk

LOL!!!!

But you can draft a whole team?!?!?!?!?!? LOL!!!!!!!!

Great point about the massive payrolls and not a great team.

I mean if the Cubs had a massive payroll they might have to raise ticket prices to be the third highest in all of baseball, oh wait they already do.

I mean just look at the Dodgers and their massive payroll. It must suck to have such crappy players as Hanley Ramirez, Adrian Gonazalez, Carl Crawford, Zack Greinke and Puig.

Whew, that would just be awful when you can have players like Justin Ruggiano, Mike Olt, Anthony Rizzo and Ryan Sweeney.

I am sure the Cubs are the envy of the league.

 

[chibears55]

Exactly how have I been schooled?

By pointing all the years that picks 25-30 were at least equal to the 1-5 picks that you claimed rarely happened ?
Um ok.

Equal ??? Maybe you need to go back to math class or something. .
Not sure how you get equal when its 50% to 10 % of players success rate when you draft in top 5..


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[The Bandit]

LOL!!!!

But you can draft a whole team?!?!?!?!?!? LOL!!!!!!!!

Great point about the massive payrolls and not a great team.

I mean if the Cubs had a massive payroll they might have to raise ticket prices to be the third highest in all of baseball, oh wait they already do.

I mean just look at the Dodgers and their massive payroll. It must suck to have such crappy players as Hanley Ramirez, Adrian Gonazalez, Carl Crawford, Zack Greinke and Puig.

Whew, that would just be awful when you can have players like Justin Ruggiano, Mike Olt, Anthony Rizzo and Ryan Sweeney.

I am sure the Cubs are the envy of the league.

I'm not sure why you choose to be a pompous ass about how you try to make a point, but at this point it's pretty bland. BTW the Dodgers got most of those guys from trades, aside from Puig and Greinke, so yes, by your first idioticly rude question. You can draft a team, you bring some up, you trade some out, and get a quality return, and implement some FA's to gel with the core. That's how you put a team together. But I'll play along with your ignorant attitude and agree that they overcharge for tickets. Do I personally care? No, I live nowhere near Chicago and do not buy team gear anymore. So in that aspect I don't particularly care what they charge to go to Wrigley.

sent from Jimmer range using Tapatalk

 

[nwfisch]

Bryant hit a HR off Latos, 3-0 pitch :fap:

 

[zack54attack]

Soler 2B..

 

[patg006]

Equal ??? Maybe you need to go back to math class or something. .
Not sure how you get equal when its 50% to 10 % of players success rate when you draft in top 5..


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

Because every draft year 50% of the top 5 picks are successful right?

Maybe you need to go back to the years I pointed out that their was a player drafted 25-30 that was either equal to or better than any player drafted 1-5.

 

[The Bandit]

Because every draft year 50% of the top 5 picks are successful right?

Maybe you need to go back to the years I pointed out that their was a player drafted 25-30 that was either equal to or better than any player drafted 1-5.

Whine and cry and cherry pick some more. It comes down to development. Guess what the Cubs were bad at doing before? (Since I'm sure you'll twist the answer I'll write it for you), developing players.

sent from Jimmer range using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

Because every draft year 50% of the top 5 picks are successful right?

Thats not what was said Nimrod. .
Nice Try...

Maybe you need to go back to the years I pointed out that their was a player drafted 25-30 that was either equal to or better than any player drafted 1-5.

So out of those 20 yrs you opinioned 5 yrs of players drafted in bottom 5 to be equal or better then players in top 5..
So you still have 15 yrs of top 5 being much better then bottom 5...

listen you can try and spin it any way you want but bottom line is.. in the first round of drafts , you have a much more chance of landing a successful player in top 5 then you do bottom 5..

ThE END

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[patg006]

So out of those 20 yrs you opinioned 5 yrs of players drafted in bottom 5 to be equal or better then players in top 5..
So you still have 15 yrs of top 5 being much better then bottom 5...

First off you said it probably never happened and I showed that it did.

Secondly it was about 7-8 of the 20 years, so once again about 35-40% of the time.

A far cry from the rarely to never you ran your mouth on without having any facts to support it as usual.

THE END.

 

[Jntg4]

Patg has a positive reputation because Fisch likes 110% of his posts.

Bryant and Vitters went yard yesterday. Latos later threw and Bryant for it. Soler had a hamstring problem and left the game.