Jed Hoyer Disses Cubs Fans

[dabynsky]

I agree that the team needed to go in a different direction. We just differ a little on what they could have done. We will all see at the end and hopefully it ends up with none of us caring and celebrating a championship.

Agreed :beerbang:

 

[beckdawg]

I'm just going to leave this here.... it's about as good a summary as to what the cubs are doing as any

http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/...e-market-status-by-spending-indiscriminately/

 

[nwfisch]

I'm just going to leave this here.... it's about as good a summary as to what the cubs are doing as any

http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/...e-market-status-by-spending-indiscriminately/

And that's fine, the problem is there have been people to spend on. Grienke and Fielder for two. Signing those guys makes jobs easier for everyone else in the lineup/rotation. We don't win titles for least dollars spent per win either, we also don't win necessarily for most dollars spent per win either.

 

[Flacco4Prez]

What would be insulting is if they fed us this "Plan" and threw it out the window after 2 years just to get people to like them

 

[beckdawg]

And that's fine, the problem is there have been people to spend on. Grienke and Fielder for two. Signing those guys makes jobs easier for everyone else in the lineup/rotation. We don't win titles for least dollars spent per win either, we also don't win necessarily for most dollars spent per win either.

You're assuming that ownership gave them the money to do so. Fielder was clearly off the table because it was their first year before Zambrano came off the books and they went from $140 mil ish salary to $110 mil. Grienke might have been slightly more feasible, but he's 30 years old this year. And his average salary over the contract the dodgers gave him is $24.5 mil. Had they signed him instead of say Jackson you're talking about an additional $11.5 mil per.

Now sure, Grienke is a much better pitcher and I don't think anyone would argue differently. However, you have to understand that in all likelihood you're looking at a minimum of 2 years(this year plus next) before the cubs really have a shot to contend. That means by the time you're ready to contend Grienke is probably more of a #2 than a #1 just based off age related decline. However, you're now paying a #2 $24.5 mil per season for the next 4 years. And that's before addressing the fact the prospects might not progress as fast as that time line.

Let's take a different example. Let's say by some miracle the dodgers don't re-sign Clayton Kershaw next year. You're still in a some what similar situation to what I described above however Kershaw will be 26 next year. So, even if the prospects don't progress fast a 6-7 year contract for him still covers his prime years. Had Kershaw or another player been in that situation it makes sense for the cubs to go after him. This is similar to the case with Tanaka which the cubs have reported interest in.

The problem with free agency is that you usually get 1-2 years of what's left of a players prime and then they decline. So, in order for the contract to make sense you have to get an inordinate amount of value out of the first few years. If the cubs had signed either Fielder or Grienke that wouldn't have been the case. Maybe the cubs would have been closer to an 80 win team those years but you're not making the playoffs and you're not winning a title. So why waste the money?

It's not a case of the cubs should never spend. It's a case of spending when you have a team around you. What would have Fielder done that Soriano hasn't the past 4 years? He'd be the best hitter on a crappy team. And there realistically never was a case when you can sign both given the financial concerns. Even if they did I still don't think that makes the cubs a true contender.

 

[beckdawg]

And just to follow something up, consider for a moment that by not going after guys like Grienke and Fielder what they have done is given themselves the payroll flexibility to do so on similar level FAs when players like Baez and Bryant hit the majors. For example, if by some miracle Kershaw does hit the open market the cubs can be players on him or any other similar level player instead of having 33+ year olds making $20+ mil.

 

[DewsSox79]

Jed Hoyer disses Cubs fans

I saw the title and got excited for some northside drama. I was disappointed as hoyer is stating the obvious and it was nowhere near a diss.

 

[CSF77]

And that's fine, the problem is there have been people to spend on. Grienke and Fielder for two. Signing those guys makes jobs easier for everyone else in the lineup/rotation. We don't win titles for least dollars spent per win either, we also don't win necessarily for most dollars spent per win either.

My belief is they needed to revamp the system. That goes with out question. So what has been happening has been a short bump in the road.

My problem has been with the Rickett's. They bit off more than they can afford when they bought this team.

 

[chibears55]

And that's fine, the problem is there have been people to spend on. Grienke and Fielder for two. Signing those guys makes jobs easier for everyone else in the lineup/rotation.

signing players is a 2way street.. if all money/years are somewhat equal players are either going where they want to go or to teams that have a better chance of winning.. fielder has ties to detroit and a much better team, and teams just dont offer a 30 YO starter 25 mil a yr for 6 yrs unless that starter going to put them over the top and there less then a handful of those starters.

fielder would of cost around 10 yrs 230 mil to outbid the tigers..
greinke would of cost around 6 yrs 180 mil to outbid the dodgers..

i estimated more money, only because i figured it would take much more money to lure them away from world series contending teams to play for a bad team..

 

[ChiSoxCity]

signing players is a 2way street.. if all money/years are somewhat equal players are either going where they want to go or to teams that have a better chance of winning.. fielder has ties to detroit and a much better team, and teams just dont offer a 30 YO starter 25 mil a yr for 6 yrs unless that starter going to put them over the top and there less then a handful of those starters.

fielder would of cost around 10 yrs 230 mil to outbid the tigers..
greinke would of cost around 6 yrs 180 mil to outbid the dodgers..

i estimated more money, only because i figured it would take much more money to lure them away from world series contending teams to play for a bad team..

At some point, the Cubs will have to spend this kind of money if they plan on building a team that can win. Elite players won't come cheaply, especially to the Cubs. The thing is, the Cubs CAN afford to do this. And if you think they're going to build a championship caliber team with minor league prospects, you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

[beckdawg]

At some point, the Cubs will have to spend this kind of money if they plan on building a team that can win. Elite players won't come cheaply, especially to the Cubs. The thing is, the Cubs CAN afford to do this. And if you think they're going to build a championship caliber team with minor league prospects, you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

That's not necessarily the case. The only big money player the cardinals have had is holliday and they acquired him via trade. The yankees have won one title in the past 13 years. The simple fact is developing your own talent is far more important than signing players. Sure, signing players can help but buying a team for today doesn't. Do we really need to look any farther than the Marlins and Toronto to see this? And even if you want to include the Dodgers in this conversation, they had 2 MVP type candidates as home grown players in Kemp and Kershaw.

 

[chibears55]

At some point, the Cubs will have to spend this kind of money if they plan on building a team that can win.

of course, i dont think anyone would disagree with that...
that point will most likely come when their close to competing and in need of adding a high priced player that could put them over the top..

Elite players won't come cheaply, especially to the Cubs.

especially if they have a bad team, which is why they didnt get fielder or greinke...

The thing is, the Cubs CAN afford to do this

sure they can.. but i think we seen that having a couple players with 20+ mil contracts dont guarantee a trip to the playoffs..
you need to build up a solid roster first via system, trades, etc.
then once thats established, you spend the big money on star players to put you over the top..

And if you think they're going to build a championship caliber team with minor league prospects, you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

of course not...

i think the cubs plan is to rebuild most of their major league core with high end prospects and once their established, then add in players via trades, and FAs..

i also think they do need to have a solid established minor league system to be able to sustain a championship caliber team..

im not saying this will be their team come 2017, but heres a projection i saw and it looks pretty good..

CF. Albert Almora
3B. Javier Baez
1B. Anthony rizzo
RF. Jorge Solar
LF. Kris Bryant
C. Wellington Castillo
SS. Starlin Castro
2B. Arismendy Alcantara
P. C.J Wilson

again, not saying all these kids will be in their lineup but you have to like the talent and all their projections...

 

[Boobaby1]

First off, we have yet to even sniff one ounce of talent out of these prospects at the parent level.

Sure I am all for having a farm, and yes, having a surplus of good players increases your chance of succeeding. The pipedream of most of these players coming together is just that.....a pipedream.

Sooner or later, the Cubs are going to have to make moves. I have heard how the past contracts have hamstrung the Cubs for going on 5 years now, and each year, another one or two substantial ones come off the books and not much if anything has been added.

Can someone give me a logical explanation of how the Cubs should get beat out by anybody for the services of Tanaka considering the horrendous contracts already tied to the Yankees and the Dodgers, and the Cubs payroll at a low that hasn't been seen in years?

And please don't tell me about the TV contracts considering that the Cubs payroll is probably 100 million lower than both of those two teams without even looking.

 

[ChiSoxCity]

That's not necessarily the case. The only big money player the cardinals have had is holliday and they acquired him via trade. The yankees have won one title in the past 13 years. The simple fact is developing your own talent is far more important than signing players. Sure, signing players can help but buying a team for today doesn't. Do we really need to look any farther than the Marlins and Toronto to see this? And even if you want to include the Dodgers in this conversation, they had 2 MVP type candidates as home grown players in Kemp and Kershaw.

The Cardinals have never had to spend money because they play in the worst division in baseball historically. The Cubs, Astros, Pirates, Brewers and Reds have been horrible the past 20-30 years, so there's that. As a consequence, they win with the 14th highest roster salary in baseball. The other teams have a legitimate excuses. The Cubs, on the other hand, just make bad organizational moves. This can be overcome by scouting and spending the right amount of money on the right players, something the Cubs even now struggle with.

 

[ChiSoxCity]

of course, i dont think anyone would disagree with that...
that point will most likely come when their close to competing and in need of adding a high priced player that could put them over the top..



especially if they have a bad team, which is why they didnt get fielder or greinke...



sure they can.. but i think we seen that having a couple players with 20+ mil contracts dont guarantee a trip to the playoffs..
you need to build up a solid roster first via system, trades, etc.
then once thats established, you spend the big money on star players to put you over the top..



of course not...

i think the cubs plan is to rebuild most of their major league core with high end prospects and once their established, then add in players via trades, and FAs..

i also think they do need to have a solid established minor league system to be able to sustain a championship caliber team..

im not saying this will be their team come 2017, but heres a projection i saw and it looks pretty good..

CF. Albert Almora
3B. Javier Baez
1B. Anthony rizzo
RF. Jorge Solar
LF. Kris Bryant
C. Wellington Castillo
SS. Starlin Castro
2B. Arismendy Alcantara
P. C.J Wilson

again, not saying all these kids will be in their lineup but you have to like the talent and all their projections...

Nice post, I agree with you on most points. I just think Cubs fans should keep their perspective about prospects. They rarely pan out at the big league level, and most of them end up with other teams long before they become productive. That's why elite players cost so much; they're a proven commodity.

 

[ChiSoxCity]

First off, we have yet to even sniff one ounce of talent out of these prospects at the parent level.

Sure I am all for having a farm, and yes, having a surplus of good players increases your chance of succeeding. The pipedream of most of these players coming together is just that.....a pipedream.

Sooner or later, the Cubs are going to have to make moves. I have heard how the past contracts have hamstrung the Cubs for going on 5 years now, and each year, another one or two substantial ones come off the books and not much if anything has been added.

Can someone give me a logical explanation of how the Cubs should get beat out by anybody for the services of Tanaka considering the horrendous contracts already tied to the Yankees and the Dodgers, and the Cubs payroll at a low that hasn't been seen in years?

And please don't tell me about the TV contracts considering that the Cubs payroll is probably 100 million lower than both of those two teams without even looking.

Word. Generations of Cubs fans have been born and died without seeing their team make it to a WS. That alone should be enough motivation for ownership and management to open the pocket book. Not just for the best players available, but the best scouts, coaches and executives too. The time for making money and paying bills will come after a championship. Even if they pulled a move like the Marlins did and dump everybody afterwards, I'm sure Cubs fans wouldn't care as long as they won it all.

 

[beckdawg]

First off, we have yet to even sniff one ounce of talent out of these prospects at the parent level.

Sure I am all for having a farm, and yes, having a surplus of good players increases your chance of succeeding. The pipedream of most of these players coming together is just that.....a pipedream.

Sooner or later, the Cubs are going to have to make moves. I have heard how the past contracts have hamstrung the Cubs for going on 5 years now, and each year, another one or two substantial ones come off the books and not much if anything has been added.

Can someone give me a logical explanation of how the Cubs should get beat out by anybody for the services of Tanaka considering the horrendous contracts already tied to the Yankees and the Dodgers, and the Cubs payroll at a low that hasn't been seen in years?

And please don't tell me about the TV contracts considering that the Cubs payroll is probably 100 million lower than both of those two teams without even looking.

I don't get those that proclaim building through prospects is a pipedream. In the early 2000's minnesota was successful with it. Tampa has been successful with it. Numerous teams across the majors have been successful with it. Some teams have failed with it sure but it's not like it's a case of even 1 in 10. It's more like teams that have good front offices tend to be able to consistently pull prospects out of their farm and bad front office don't. There's then a case when your pipeline runs dry(see minny currently) but most of these teams have decently long runs of success.

As for being out bid, tv contracts do matter.

Cubs

$450,000 per game broadcast on Comcast.Fee for games broadcast on WGN:N/ATotal local TV revenue approximately $50m per year

Yankees

$90m per year in revenue, increasing to $300m by 2042

Dodgers

25 years/$6b – $7b$240m – $280m per year

Additionally, neither of those 2 teams are about to undertake $300 mil in renovations nor did the owners just shell out a bunch of money for the team. If you want to make the case that the Ricketts shouldn't have been allowed to buy the team if these issues held them back fine. I think it's a valid concern. But, at the end of the day these things impact the year to year budget for the front office. With that being said, I truly hope that if the front office pushes for a guy like Tanaka that the ownership might give them an advance on future payrolls in order to push them across the finish line.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Again, would you rather be the Marlins, or the Cardinals?

 

[ChiSoxCity]

Again, would you rather be the Marlins, or the Cardinals?

You mean the Marlin team with NL Rookie of the year Jose Fernandez and Giancarlo Stanton? They were able to spend money on the big league team while developing their minor league system, and still have the talent to show for it. I truly don't understand why you guys make excuses for Cubs management. They're clearly tanking with these mediocre roster moves every offseason, which should be frowned upon by a loyal fanbase of a big market club, with the highest ticket prices in the league to boot.

 

[X]

You mean the Marlin team with NL Rookie of the year Jose Fernandez and Giancarlo Stanton? They were able to spend money on the big league team while developing their minor league system, and still have the talent to show for it. I truly don't understand why you guys make excuses for Cubs management. They're clearly tanking with these mediocre roster moves every offseason, which should be frowned upon by a loyal fanbase of a big market club, with the highest ticket prices in the league to boot.

lmfao @ citing Fernandez. The fact that he won ROY over Puig is laughable at best.

Stanton is nice. He's not elite. He hits balls really far, and he could be a core piece if surrounded by good talent...but there's a reason no one blew the minds of the Marlins brass in a trade for Stanton. The dude missed about 50 games, batted under .250 and hit 24 homers last year.

Not sure if you're just upset @ the Sox right now or what...Why you upset?