jts1207
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,449
- Liked Posts:
- 1,832
Continually ignoring the pen
CSF77
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 19,003
- Liked Posts:
- 2,897
- Location:
- San Diego
Pretty sure that Tom doesn't want to spend on pen arms. Last night the pen won the game so getting rid of 2 bad apples helped.
- Joined:
- Jul 12, 2013
- Posts:
- 21,165
- Liked Posts:
- 15,180
- Location:
- The sewers
My favorite teams
would you say that they only spent "peanuts" on the bullpen?!
Discus fish salesman
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Mar 31, 2018
- Posts:
- 16,646
- Liked Posts:
- 21,941
It's 100% a hoyer issue. My complaint is he won't go get an ace in the rotation which would allow Ben brown to slot into the pen
CSF77
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 19,003
- Liked Posts:
- 2,897
- Location:
- San Diego
I don't agree. If Tom wants a ace pitcher then he would let it be known that he would spend on one.
They are both opting to keep pitching internal and mid tier SP then 1-2 vets to put into the pen.
To suggest that Tom is saying to Jed spend on a closer and a Ace and Jed going na, hard pass? Come on now.
Discus fish salesman
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Mar 31, 2018
- Posts:
- 16,646
- Liked Posts:
- 21,941
Lol Tom doesn't decide how the money is used. He might not spend enough but he's not deciding how to use it.
CSF77
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 19,003
- Liked Posts:
- 2,897
- Location:
- San Diego
Ok
Let me put it this way who hired Jed?
Who sets the tone?
Now as an owner you always have the final say on things. That's a fact it's not Jed he may get together with his employees and put together deals but on a major deal there's always going to be a sign off by the owner.
Now that being said the chances that Tucker is resigned I think is higher and the chances that PCA gets an extension is higher because they do have this flexibility and they did not spend on a bullpen filled with vets that are overpriced and also for a ace level picture also.
This really comes down to a philosophy on how to run a business and Tom hired a guy with the same mindset that he wants to run his business. So this is not oh I'm going to do what the hell I want to do and the owner has no say so no the owner always has a say so and he's the one that molds the company into the image he wants. Not the president of baseball operations he is not the top dog in this company
Let me put it this way who hired Jed?
Who sets the tone?
Now as an owner you always have the final say on things. That's a fact it's not Jed he may get together with his employees and put together deals but on a major deal there's always going to be a sign off by the owner.
Now that being said the chances that Tucker is resigned I think is higher and the chances that PCA gets an extension is higher because they do have this flexibility and they did not spend on a bullpen filled with vets that are overpriced and also for a ace level picture also.
This really comes down to a philosophy on how to run a business and Tom hired a guy with the same mindset that he wants to run his business. So this is not oh I'm going to do what the hell I want to do and the owner has no say so no the owner always has a say so and he's the one that molds the company into the image he wants. Not the president of baseball operations he is not the top dog in this company
TL1961
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts:
- 36,055
- Liked Posts:
- 19,922
I don’t know how exactly I could determine whether it is the owner or the general manager/president but the bigger picture is if the owner is telling the general manager or president what players they can and cannot acquire, you’ve got a serious problem.
I understand setting a budget but beyond that the owner needs to keep his fucking nose out of it
I understand setting a budget but beyond that the owner needs to keep his fucking nose out of it
beckdawg
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Oct 31, 2012
- Posts:
- 11,765
- Liked Posts:
- 3,748
People constantly complain about the bullpen every year and while I get the frustration the reason the front office doesn't spend more there is the impact isn't that big. The difference between an average bullpen and the best is like 3 WAR over 162 games over 8+ players. More to the point, relievers are also super volatile and you have people like Nerris last year who seem like they are "ok" before the season then suck during it.
Dollar for dollar in the regular season you're better spending on position players and starters. This changes a bit in the post season because the margin of error is less. And historically when the cubs have been good Jed/theo have targeted relievers at the deadline to address that. It just hasn't been a priority in the offseason. But if you look at 2024, the dodgers had 4.4 fWAR from their RPs. The yankees had 3.1. The Cubs who most people would say had a terrible bullpen had 2.9.
Point here being, I'd rather the front office tie up money in extensions for PCA and hopefully tucker than lock themselves into $15-20 mil a year for a reliever. You could argue they should do both but the reality clearly is the cubs have a much lower budget. So, in that case your answer would be ownership. But, given the reality of the situation i'm fine with how they approached things. I would have liked for them to get Bregman but he obviously got a lot to go to boston.
Dollar for dollar in the regular season you're better spending on position players and starters. This changes a bit in the post season because the margin of error is less. And historically when the cubs have been good Jed/theo have targeted relievers at the deadline to address that. It just hasn't been a priority in the offseason. But if you look at 2024, the dodgers had 4.4 fWAR from their RPs. The yankees had 3.1. The Cubs who most people would say had a terrible bullpen had 2.9.
Point here being, I'd rather the front office tie up money in extensions for PCA and hopefully tucker than lock themselves into $15-20 mil a year for a reliever. You could argue they should do both but the reality clearly is the cubs have a much lower budget. So, in that case your answer would be ownership. But, given the reality of the situation i'm fine with how they approached things. I would have liked for them to get Bregman but he obviously got a lot to go to boston.
TL1961
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts:
- 36,055
- Liked Posts:
- 19,922
I understand the frustration. In 2024 the Cubs and Cards toed in the standings. The Cubs were better in everything but relievers. Cards closer was near perfect and the Cubs stunk out loud.
But I agree with the concern about spending. Relievers - with few exceptions - are not reliably consistent. The best closers are, but middle relief is hit and miss.
But I agree with the concern about spending. Relievers - with few exceptions - are not reliably consistent. The best closers are, but middle relief is hit and miss.