The Cubs Bullpen Issues Continue

[Willrust]

I'd love to be civil but Jesus Christ ho many times can someone call everyone an idiot slurping on the spank fest repetitive and never gets his point across in a constructive way.

sent from mars home of Ian Stewarts baseball skills using tapatalk

I understand. Believe it or not, this is one of the most civil conversations we have had in some time. It is rather refreshing to talk baseball without insults. It also helps that I blocked MountSalami

 

[KBisBack!]

I'd love to be civil but Jesus Christ ho many times can someone call everyone an idiot slurping on the spank fest repetitive and never gets his point across in a constructive way.

Which I did absolutely zero off in anything you quoted on this thread.

But that still didn't stop you from being a whiny, little punk did it??

Nope.

Go change your diaper.

 

[KBisBack!]

They spent quite a bit of money on the international signings (Soler & Conception), added personnel, purchased an analytics program and completed the facilities in the Dominican. And baseball reference has the difference in payroll between 2010 to 2011 as -11M not the 22M you reported:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/attend.shtml


Also

http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/...oms-what-to-expect-from-the-cubs-draft-picks/

They spend over 9M on the draft in 2011.

http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/...ould-be-the-kind-of-impact-player-team-needs/

And over 1.6M in International signings.

Looks like they spent the difference in payroll from 2010 to 2011 to me.

Cause you math fucking sucks,

Soler wasn't signed until 2012. Has NOTHING to do with the difference between 2010 and 2011, not a thing at all.

If you look at the salaries listed on each season in baseball reference they have $145.7M for 2010 and $125M for 2011.

Sorry only $20.7M instead of $22M.

HUGE mistake on my part.

The Concepcion deal was like $6M over FIVE years, so barely even $1M a year.

Yes they spent about $12M on the draft and international signings, but they spent almost $5M the year before. That is why I said they did spend $7M MORE. Clearly you missed that part in your rush to whine and argue everything.

The Dominican Academy was also 2012, not 2011.

The analytics program was also 2012 I believe with the start of the #TheoSpankfest.

Yet again there is no factual evidence to support the claims that the spending on the overall baseball budget from 2010 to 2011 was unchanged.

It was bullshit, but many people bought into it and apparently still are.

 

[Willrust]

If you look at the salaries listed on each season in baseball reference they have $145.7M for 2010 and $125M for 2011.

Sorry only $20.7M instead of $22M.

This link:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/attend.shtml

Shows Cubs payroll in 2010 as 146M and Cubs payroll in 2011 as 136M. If their figures are wrong...sorry, but took the numbers directly from baseball reference.

The Dominican Academy was also 2012, not 2011.

The Dominican Academy opened in 2012, but they built the thing and paid for most of the materials to build in 2011.

The analytics program was also 2012 I believe with the start of the #TheoSpankfest.

Yet again there is no factual evidence to support the claims that the spending on the overall baseball budget from 2010 to 2011 was unchanged.

In one sentence you use the term, "I believe," and in the next sentence you claim I did not use factual evidence.

Fact 1 - The Cubs spent 3M per year on Epstein beginning October 2011.

Fact 2 - The Cubs signed Jed Hoyer to a 5 year contract in October 2011.

Fact 3 - Cubs spent a minimum of 11.3M on the 2011 draft and 2011 international signings.

Fact 4 - The Cubs went from a franchise run bare bones in terms of number of personnel in 2010 to at least a medium sized staff from 2011 on.

I am not pulling numbers out of thin air. Now if you want to say that payroll took a massive drop from 2011 to 2012, I have no argument there. However, I would point out that although they did cut payroll in 2012 (by about 30M from 136M to 108M including the Zambrano money), they did also increase their expenditures (the McDonalds was 20M, Soler did sign a 6 year 30M deal) and likely had to pay for the renovation plans and coordination along with greasing about every palm in Chicago to even get the renovation stuff seriously discussed to close out 2012.

 

[The Bandit]

This link:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/attend.shtml

Shows Cubs payroll in 2010 as 146M and Cubs payroll in 2011 as 136M. If their figures are wrong...sorry, but took the numbers directly from baseball reference.



The Dominican Academy opened in 2012, but they built the thing and paid for most of the materials to build in 2011.



In one sentence you use the term, "I believe," and in the next sentence you claim I did not use factual evidence.

Fact 1 - The Cubs spent 3M per year on Epstein beginning October 2011.

Fact 2 - The Cubs signed Jed Hoyer to a 5 year contract in October 2011.

Fact 3 - Cubs spent a minimum of 11.3M on the 2011 draft and 2011 international signings.

Fact 4 - The Cubs went from a franchise run bare bones in terms of number of personnel in 2010 to at least a medium sized staff from 2011 on.

I am not pulling numbers out of thin air. Now if you want to say that payroll took a massive drop from 2011 to 2012, I have no argument there. However, I would point out that although they did cut payroll in 2012 (by about 30M from 136M to 108M including the Zambrano money), they did also increase their expenditures (the McDonalds was 20M, Soler did sign a 6 year 30M deal) and likely had to pay for the renovation plans and coordination along with greasing about every palm in Chicago to even get the renovation stuff seriously discussed to close out 2012.

2013: $106,837,810
2012: $109,316,000
2011: $134,004,000
2010: $144,359,000
2009: $134,809,000
2008: $118,345,833

according to Cots

 

[kchicub08]

Because going on the airwaves and telling faithful fans that hey we're gonna blow pretty bad for at least 2 years but you should keep buying tickets anyways would have worked out so well...

So are we blind? they assembled a minor league team and are just fortunate that Wrigley is a tourist attraction.

 

[The Bandit]

So are we blind? they assembled a minor league team and are just fortunate that Wrigley is a tourist attraction.

Some are, you need to understand how a business is run though, they won't and can't go out and say yes we are going to suck there is no point in going to games but you should anyways, they have to say we are going to compete, it's PR.

 

[kchicub08]

Some are, you need to understand how a business is run though, they won't and can't go out and say yes we are going to suck there is no point in going to games but you should anyways, they have to say we are going to compete, it's PR.

I get that. I run a business. But find it more prudent to be truthful to the consumer.

It's all rhetoric anyway though.

 

[KBisBack!]

If their figures are wrong...sorry, but took the numbers directly from baseball reference.

I took the numbers from there as well.

The Dominican Academy opened in 2012, but they built the thing and paid for most of the materials to build in 2011.

Wrong.

They announced the plans for the new academy in Feb of 2012 and it was said that the construction will run anywhere from 12-18 months.

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120202&content_id=26549778&c_id=chc

Right from the Cubs site before you start crying about it not being a credible source.

Seriously, do you have any idea what you are talking about?

they did also increase their expenditures (the McDonalds was 20M

I don't give a damn if the McDonald's parking lot cost $200M to purchase, it was purchased to build a luxury hotel that has nothing to do with baseball operations which is what Ricketts was saying spending would not be decreased and it did, end of story.

 

[Willrust]

I get that. I run a business. But find it more prudent to be truthful to the consumer.

It's all rhetoric anyway though.

So, if you are in a business that has aging employees and you decide to fill their jobs with new, younger employees; would you openly tell your clients to expect less customer service and expertise due to these new employees?

 

[CSF77]

They are kinda being truthful.

Theo has said it is going to be a long and rewarding journey...

We will not sacrifice the future for now.

We are spending up the the max.

These statements are pretty strait forward.

They spent their max which was a set amount. He didn't get into what and why they spent on. And why the spending limit was at that point.



You want layman's terms:

Ownership has allotted x amount for the baseball operations department. If you have worked in a department store or have been in the military most can get this basic concept..piece of the pie.

So they have say 150 mil (guessing) to spend. 106 mil went to the major league team payroll. Leaves 44 mil to business ops which deals with maintenance, employee payroll, future renovations, lawyers, etc.




So the fact is as we are seeing most fans don't want to hear all the red tape issues and want to see results put on the field.



My main problem is not the fact that 106 mil was the limit in place to payroll. That number is not Theo's fault. That is a limit placed on his department.

My problem is what he(Jed etc) spent it on.

Edwin Jackson rhp
4 years/$52M (2013-16)

Scott Feldman rhp
1 year/$6M (2013)

Scott Baker rhp
1 year/$5.5M (2013)

Carlos Villanueva rhp
2 years/$10M (2013-14)

Kyuji Fujikawa rhp
2 years/$9.5M (2013-14), plus 2015 option

Scott Hairston of
2 years/$5M (2013-14)

Nate Schierholtz of
1 year/$2.25M (2013)

Dioner Navarro c
1 year/$1.75M (2013)

Shawn Camp rhp
1 year/$1.35M (2013)

Kevin Gregg rhp
1 year (2013)

Luis Valbuena inf
1 year/$0.93M (2013)

Cody Ransom inf
1 year/$0.55M (2013)

Julio Borbon of
1 year/$0.496M (2013)



So what have they done with what they spent? Bunch of trash pick ups IMO.

Don't get me wrong. Some are playing over expectations some are playing under expectations. But that is what happens when you spend on trash.

 

[kchicub08]

So, if you are in a business that has aging employees and you decide to fill their jobs with new, younger employees; would you openly tell your clients to expect less customer service and expertise due to these new employees?

Now you are making it a semantics debate. In all aspects of business some embellishing occurs of course.

But Baseball is not only a business it is also entertainment. The product the Cubs have put on the field the last two seasons is certainly not equivalent to the prices they charge. Will you agree?
So it goes back to what I said before. If Wrigley was not a tourist cash cow they could A/ be the Marlins or B/ put a better product on the field.

They benefit from location location location.

 

[KBisBack!]

They are kinda being truthful.

Theo has said it is going to be a long and rewarding journey...

We will not sacrifice the future for now.

We are spending up the the max.

These statements are pretty strait forward.

If you are talking about amateur spending, then yes they are spending to the max. They are not spending to the max on the entire baseball operations.

It is true that they are not sacrificing the future for the now, but they sure as hell as sacrificing the now on the hope that the future will be great.

 

[Boobaby1]

So, if you are in a business that has aging employees and you decide to fill their jobs with new, younger employees; would you openly tell your clients to expect less customer service and expertise due to these new employees?

If I am running a business and filling it with younger employees, I am going to get the best young employees I can find. Obviously, the older ones were making more money probably just in terms length of service.

So instead of hiring minimum wage employees and hope one or so stick around, why don't I split the difference with what I was paying for the veterans versus going the cheap route so the transition would be more seamless, thus lessening the chance of me losing customers?

 

[Willrust]

Now you are making it a semantics debate. In all aspects of business some embellishing occurs of course.

But Baseball is not only a business it is also entertainment. The product the Cubs have put on the field the last two seasons is certainly not equivalent to the prices they charge. Will you agree?
So it goes back to what I said before. If Wrigley was not a tourist cash cow they could A/ be the Marlins or B/ put a better product on the field.

They benefit from location location location.

They absolutely do benefit from location. No denying that. However, they still aren't going to tell the entire truth and tell people that they are going to be awful. As to the ticket prices, they are set based upon demand. If the demand is up they increase the prices, if it is low they decrease the prices. The Cubs have decreased their average ticket prices since Ricketts have taken ownership.

Speaking of the Marlins, they got their new stadium and their attendance nearly doubled, along with their average ticket prices.

 

[Willrust]

If I am running a business and filling it with younger employees, I am going to get the best young employees I can find. Obviously, the older ones were making more money probably just in terms length of service.

So instead of hiring minimum wage employees and hope one or so stick around, why don't I split the difference with what I was paying for the veterans versus going the cheap route so the transition would be more seamless, thus lessening the chance of me losing customers?

Now we are talking about the pool of available employees and what their demands are. If your company is based out of an historic building, that happens to be falling apart, it might be difficult to attain the best young employees when the competition has state of the art facilities. Also, company X (the Cubs) doesn't have any vendors with replacement parts; whereas company Y (1/2 the teams chasing after the high dollar FA's) have a healthy supply of replacement parts available to them when needed. Think that is a closer analogy.

 

[chibears55]

My problem is what he(Jed etc) spent it on.

So what have they done with what they spent? Bunch of trash pick ups IMO.

thats a problem in itself.. when you dont have much to spend but need to fill out a roster, your not going to get much talent wise for the dollar spent.
when your spending 1-6 mil for a player, your really not going to get a whole lot of talent in return for that amount unless you get lucky, which they have on certain players but for the most part no.. edwin jackson was a bad choice and wasted 13 mil ..

 

[KBisBack!]

The Cubs have decreased their average ticket prices since Ricketts have taken ownership.

But not by 1/3 like they have with the payroll.

 

[KBisBack!]

when you dont have much to spend but need to fill out a roster,

They had more to spend on this season then several entire teams payrolls.

You have been educated to the facts previously.

But keep grasping to your Fairy Tale about your poor little Theo not having any money to spend.

It is everyone and everything's fault put precious Theo.

 

[CSF77]

If you are talking about amateur spending, then yes they are spending to the max. They are not spending to the max on the entire baseball operations.

It is true that they are not sacrificing the future for the now, but they sure as hell as sacrificing the now on the hope that the future will be great.

We don't know what they say is true for sure.

This year I kinda took a step back with the whole overhaul of the stadium thing going on. The cash has to come from somewhere and seeing payroll getting hacked to get re-allotted towards the rebuild is expected.

Let me put it this way:

If the go through this rehab and it leads into more overall income and the payroll goes up to the 120-135 mil range. I'm ok with it.

If it sticks at 120 mil after everything is said and done while they are turning profit hand over fist....I'm done and over it. Got better things to do with my time then get pissed at these clowns.