The Ultimate " So Its 2016 Now" Thread

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,145
So far JZ and I greatly disagree on how we would run the team; and thats fine. I feel Ricketts and Theo shouldnt sacrifice the current state of the ML team for the sake of only focusing on the farm system we will be lucky if 1-2 of these highly touted kids becomes half of what they're hyped to be.

He listed the cardinals as a prime example of a consistent winning team; and I alluded to the fact the Cards didnt just build the farm, they did BOTH build the farm while signing/acquiring the right players. Earlier in the thread I listed a host of names that didnt originally come from the Cards, but mostly from signings and trades. They signed Chris Carpenter and Eckstein, and Kyle Lohse and Jason Isringhausen. They traded Major Leaguers (NOT prospects, if you think 6 and 7 year vets are prospects thats as dumb as saying a 30 year old man is still a child) for Scott Rolen, Jim Edmonds (who was traded for MVP David Freese). The big piece acquired for prospects was Matt Holliday; but still St Louis smells like roses because nobody can tell me what Brett Wallace and Clay Mortenson are doing.

The cards are NOT a prime example of building farm then cultivating and fielding talent; they make the SMART move at the RIGHT time. You want an example of building a great farm system; tampa bay rays. Oakland Athletics. Small market teams who cant afford to keep multiple stars.

The cubs are not small market. The cubs are not the A's or Rays; financially handicapped. The cubs are a top revenue team in baseball. The brand sells, wrigleyville and the stadium sell, losing sells, beer sells. They have money to spend, and yet they dont. A competitive team we feel is NOT too much to ask for. Eric Chavez's 2 year 8 million is something the cubs should have jumped all over; because I'm starting to believe a garbage bag is better than Ian Steward and Valbuena.

Ignoring obvious major league need to fill a pipeline who's ETA is looking like another 3 years is something the Miami Marlins, Athletics, and Rays do.

Not the Chicago Cubs.
I'll comment on the bolded here a bit. They were able to get Carp, and Lohse because they were kinda seen as washed up trash, hurt or not worth the risk. Those weren't "big" signings at the time and pretty much seen as roster fillers or reclamation risk/reward projects a bit.

Edmonds deal did have a "prospect" in it. Adam Kennedy. Kennedy had only made his MLB debut in late 99(after being drafted in 97) and I believe was the MVP of the PCL. He was a top 100 spec heading into that 1999 season. When Kennedy was traded for Edmonds he had played in barely 30 MLB games. The Rolen trade had a spec in it too. Bud Smith.(granted he was somewhat proven with 6 wins in 2001 but he was still on 22 years old and not an established vet). He was still playing in his first full MLB season when he was traded.


Also, tough to compare the Cards in the early and mid 2000's and even now to how the Cubs should be built right this second. The Cardinals have been competently built for the better part of 20-30 years on a really consistent basis at this point so they can supplement their holes in prospect building with FA signings and stay competitive over that time. The Cubs have never really been competently run in their entire modern history so I think the initial building phase of what the Cubs are trying to do can't really be compared to what the Cardinals were doing in the early to mid 2000"s with an already really well established well run organization. I agree I think the Cardinals model is beyond excellent and something for the Cubs to shoot for, I just don't think that it's really fair or accurate to compare the two processes at this point because the Cubs in 2013 don't have the organizational base the Cardinals did in the early 2000's when they were making those moves.
 
Last edited:

dabynsky

Fringe Average Mod
Donator
Joined:
May 17, 2010
Posts:
13,947
Liked Posts:
3,118
I'll comment on the bolded here a bit. They were able to get Carp, and Lohse because they were kinda seen as washed up trash, hurt or not worth the risk. Those weren't "big" signings at the time and pretty much seen as roster fillers or reclamation risk/reward projects a bit.

Edmonds deal did have a "prospect" in it. Adam Kennedy. Kennedy had only made his MLB debut in late 99(after being drafted in 97) and I believe was the MVP of the PCL. He was a top 100 spec heading into that 1999 season. When Kennedy was traded for Edmonds he had played in barely 30 MLB games. The Rolen trade had a spec in it too. Bud Smith.(granted he was somewhat proven with 6 wins in 2001 but he was still on 22 years old and not an established vet). He was still playing in his first full MLB season when he was traded.


Also, tough to compare the Cards in the early and mid 2000's and even now to how the Cubs should be built right this second. The Cardinals have been competently built for the better part of 20-30 years on a really consistent basis at this point so they can supplement their holes in prospect building with FA signings and stay competitive over that time. The Cubs have never really been competently run in their entire modern history so I think the initial building phase of what the Cubs are trying to do can't really be compared to what the Cardinals were doing in the early to mid 2000"s with an already really well established well run organization. I agree I think the Cardinals model is beyond excellent and something for the Cubs to shoot for, I just don't think that it's really fair or accurate to compare the two processes at this point because the Cubs in 2013 don't have the organizational base the Cardinals did in the early 2000's when they were making those moves.
:clap:
 

KBisBack!

New member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
1,497
Liked Posts:
1,424
The Cardinals have been competently built for the better part of 20-30 years on a really consistent basis at this point so they can supplement their holes in prospect building with FA signings and stay competitive over that time.

Not accurate.

20 years ago the Cardinals started a streak of 5 out of 6 seasons that they finished third or worst in the division.

They were in the midst of that streak in 1997 when they traded for Mark McGwire at the age of 33. You know, a little bit older than most of the FA's that will be too old by the time the Cubs are competitive agenda.

They didn't make the playoffs until 2000 when McGwire was 36 and too old to help the club. Well help the club much other than hitting .300 with 32 HR's and 73 RBI's in half a season.

So if the Cardinals are so smart and such a well run ballclub, why would they have gone out and added a player in his 30's several years before the team was ready to compete like you have repeatedly said is a dumb thing to do??
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,145
Not accurate.

20 years ago the Cardinals started a streak of 5 out of 6 seasons that they finished third or worst in the division.

They were in the midst of that streak in 1997 when they traded for Mark McGwire at the age of 33. You know, a little bit older than most of the FA's that will be too old by the time the Cubs are competitive agenda.

They didn't make the playoffs until 2000 when McGwire was 36 and too old to help the club. Well help the club much other than hitting .300 with 32 HR's and 73 RBI's in half a season.

So if the Cardinals are so smart and such a well run ballclub, why would they have gone out and added a player in his 30's several years before the team was ready to compete like you have repeatedly said is a dumb thing to do??
I'm not sure you understand what "for the better part of" means.
And I haven't repeatedly said anything.

So I'm entirely accurate. it's also possible to be competently run during a rebuilding and not have a winning record for brief stretches or even not make the playoffs as long as they are building towards something...which the Cardinals obviously were. Mac wasn't an expensive get for them so comparing it to wanting te Cubs to break the bank for Fielder or Hamilton doesn't even hold weight.

Pretty funny talking about the Cardinals rough patch seeing as the year before the Mac trade they were in the NLCS but yeah, totally comparable situation to the Cubs losing 100 games last year and wanting them to go out and make trades.....the Cards being several years from contention wasn't really true seeing as they had just competed in 1996, were in the wild card chase for almost all of 1998 then made the playoffs again in 2000. The Cubs haven't made the playoffs since 2008, and haven't made the NLCS in 10 years. Hell, they haven't had a winning record since 2009.

The two situations aren't even similar, not only that the Cards had the specs to go out and make moves and let's not discount the LaRussa wanting McGwire thing either. Apples and oranges.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Last edited:

Boobaby1

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
2,236
Liked Posts:
1,180
I'm not sure you understand what "for the better part of" means.
And I haven't repeatedly said anything.

So I'm entirely accurate. it's also possible to be competently run during a rebuilding and not have a winning record for brief stretches or even not make the playoffs as long as they are building towards something...which the Cardinals obviously were. Mac wasn't an expensive get for them so comparing it to wanting te Cubs to break the bank for Fielder or Hamilton doesn't even hold weight.

Pretty funny talking about the Cardinals rough patch seeing as the year before the Mac trade they were in the NLCS but yeah, totally comparable situation to the Cubs losing 100 games last year and wanting them to go out and make trades.....the Cards being several years from contention wasn't really true seeing as they had just competed in 1996, were in the wild card chase for almost all of 1998 then made the playoffs again in 2000. The Cubs haven't made the playoffs since 2008, and haven't made the NLCS in 10 years. Hell, they haven't had a winning record since 2009.

The two situations aren't even similar, not only that the Cards had the specs to go out and make moves and let's not discount the LaRussa wanting McGwire thing either. Apples and oranges.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

The Cardinals have been the beneficiary of great trades and acquisitions made by Walt Jocketty and he doesn't get half the credit he deserves. Everything he touched seemingly turned to gold. People tend to overlook who spearheaded their run in the 21st century and his remnants continue to perform to this day.
 

CherokeeReds

New member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
24
Liked Posts:
9
If you are the type of person bothered by insults on a computer screen............you probably shouldn't be on the computer.

Hey if it makes you feel powerful hurling insults at me or anyone else, fire away. I don't need to be affirmed by anybody here.

I don't like where the Cubs are right now any better than anyone else does, but I realize calling you a pathetic little loser because your outlook is different than mine doesn't really accomplish much.

It just amazes me how many people use these forums to build up their sad little egos rather than have meaningful discussions.
 

KBisBack!

New member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
1,497
Liked Posts:
1,424
I don't need to be affirmed by anybody here.

Hey look guys, It's Stuart Smally!!!

He is good enough, smart enough and gosh darn it, people like him.

Your outlook has been consistently been countered with facts and examples of the overwhelming majority of teams who have been successful doing things you claim are dumb.

Put on your big boy pants and deal with it, or provide factual and intelligent discussion of how your outlook deserves merit which you have never really done.
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,145
Put on your big boy pants and deal with it, or provide factual and intelligent discussion of how your outlook deserves merit which you have never really done.

Perhaps you should do the same first.
 

KBisBack!

New member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
1,497
Liked Posts:
1,424
Perhaps you should do the same first.

Already have.

Provided plenty of facts of how your opinion of the Cards is factually wrong.

Perhaps you should go back to watching male steriod freaks in tights roll around with each other. That appears to be more your thing.
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,145
Re: The Ultimate " So Its 2016 Now" Thread

Already have.

Provided plenty of facts of how your opinion of the Cards is factually wrong.

Perhaps you should go back to watching male steriod freaks in tights roll around with each other. That appears to be more your thing.

Opinion is factually wrong......lulz. You haven't shown anything except your own foolishness
 

BearsWillWin

Active member
Joined:
Apr 23, 2013
Posts:
265
Liked Posts:
155
Location:
Durango, CO
Hey if it makes you feel powerful hurling insults at me or anyone else, fire away. I don't need to be affirmed by anybody here.

I don't like where the Cubs are right now any better than anyone else does, but I realize calling you a pathetic little loser because your outlook is different than mine doesn't really accomplish much.

It just amazes me how many people use these forums to build up their sad little egos rather than have meaningful discussions.

For one, I haven't insulted you yet.

And I think the insults come because they are deserved. People blindly support moves the Cubs are making and continously make excuses for them and it's kinda frustrating to fans that actually have some common sense.

I was a supporter of Hendry getting shit canned and I liked the move of bringing in Theo and Hoyer and expanding what was a very small front office. But I have seen little to nothing done so far outside of double talk and moves being made to increase revenue. The team on the field has not improved, it's gone backwards. Yet instead of a lot of fans getting pissed, they seem to be enjoying this and I don't understand it. I sat through last season without saying much because I thought it was a one year thing and they would make a leap forward this year. Then they resigned Stewart and made a bunch of other short term, low money deals that do nothing to improve the team on the field. And it's debatable if the farm has improved. So............a year and half in and this team has gotten worse while profit has gotten better. And fans shouldn't be pissed? Screw that.

I'm pretty sure KB is capable of having a meaningful discussion. Say what you want about the guy but he knows a lot about baseball. But he has a habit of pointing out stupidity when he sees it so everyone gets offended and then ignores any baseball comments he makes.

If insults bother you, then the internet is the wrong place for you. I think that is pretty clear regardless of what message board you decided to frequent.
 

Bear Pride

Bears Gonna Shock the World!
Joined:
Aug 28, 2012
Posts:
10,615
Liked Posts:
3,091
Fisch ain't smart enough to be right about anything. Let's remember that this year was originally supposed to be the last year of the rebuild. Pretty darn good rebuilding year for the Cubs.
 

JP Hochbaum

Well-known member
Joined:
May 22, 2012
Posts:
2,059
Liked Posts:
1,288
Right now Rizzo is on pace for 200 strikouts. He seriously needed help in the middle of the line up to protect him and once again Theo balked at adding help for the sake of hating mid round draft picks.

Jntg4; theres no reason to slurp the hand that feeds you bullshit. There's no reason a top revenue team in MLB should be run like the Marlins.

I've told myself this upcoming offseason is Theo's make it or break it for me. He has to get a big fish. Its required. A big trade, a big signing or two. He will have the money. And even the Nationals spent money on Jason Werth during their "rebuilding." How about we stop signing the Scott Feldmans, and acquire David Price? Rays cant pay him 7 years 180 million. But guess who can? Epstein. Get Price, pay him; get 2 hitters (Cory Hart and , lose Dejesus, lose Valbuena and Iham Stewshart.

Price, Shark, and EJax is a more formidable rotation than anything Scott Feldman is near......and its a reason to go to a game. I dont want to sit around hoping Pierced Johnson becomes an A-OK #5 starter. I dont want to sit on fancy lottery tickets. I want a team put in place that doesnt look like dogshit, and doesnt make pitchers like Derek Holland look like first ballot hall of famer.

and just because its fucking hilarious; :fap:

This thread is a gem. Gonna have to repost some of the ones that couldn't be more wrong.

Look at what Feldman turned into! Jason Werth turned into a major issue in Washington, and Wash has grossly underachieved.
 

JP Hochbaum

Well-known member
Joined:
May 22, 2012
Posts:
2,059
Liked Posts:
1,288
I will say this about the Cubs right now. Yes, we have been fed some garbage and have not been treated to very good players but theres one thing I think can happen soon. I think this rotation could be setting up to be a monster with one key, David Price. it is going to cost a good bit to get him but I think the Cubs are going to go hard after him. Now, think about this rotation. Price, Shark, Garza, Jackson, and either Appel or Gray. Talk about a dynamite rotation. Thats a type of rotation that could dominate on a regular basis. The Cubs are really positioning themselves for this. I have read many of baseball minds that think the Cubs are one of the leaders for Price soon. Now, Garza could be traded but if it is for some good prospects that could help us land Price then I have no problem with it. We can find someone to maybe not completely replace Garza, but still be a functional major league pitcher. By then, the Cubs lineup should be a serviceable lineup. I am not saying a juggernaut or even real good just serviceable. I am a big believer that the Cubs will find hitters out of the minors. Im not talking just top prospects. I am talking a pipeline. I do see some sunshine coming. It just sucks that its going to take a couple of years. I also have another belief behind why the Cubs will go after Price. They will want a superstar to go with the new Wrigley. It will sell tickets. It could be a big PR campaign. Ricketts loves money and it would make a **** ton.

None of those starters are here now, crazy!
 

JP Hochbaum

Well-known member
Joined:
May 22, 2012
Posts:
2,059
Liked Posts:
1,288
I just don't see David Price to the Cubs happening.

First, it goes against the rewarding journey of building up the farm system. A team will have to empty out their top prospects to get him probably. You are talking probably three top prospects.

The last top pitcher I can think of that was traded that still had a year of control left (assuming Price gets traded this season or next offseason) was Greinke to Milwaukee and the Royals scored Lorenzo Cain (now the starting CF), Alcedes Escobar (who was already a major league starting SS) and Jake Odorizzi (who was a major piece in the Shields/Davis trade). So that means the likely starting price to the Cubs is at least two of the following three, Soler, Baez and Almora.

That trade worked out great for KC.
 

JP Hochbaum

Well-known member
Joined:
May 22, 2012
Posts:
2,059
Liked Posts:
1,288
To be fair at the end of 2012 I was pretty off as well:

"As the first year of the Epstein era draws to a close it’s time to evaluate the organization from top to bottom.
I won’t go that in-depth in this post, leaving the pitching prospects for a later post, but I have projected out what the current crop of minor league products could produce as far as the Cubs’ everyday lineup by 2015, focusing on the position players at hand.
This assumes, however, there won’t be any trades, which obviously is a long shot, but I am forced to work with what we have and not what we will have.
So around the diamond we go…
FIRST BASE
In less than a full season Anthony Rizzo has already show strong plate discipline and the ability to be a yearly .300 hitter, 30 HR’s and 100 RBI machine, plus an above average fielder–always a plus. Cleary, a lock for the foreseeable future.
SECOND BASE
I doubt Darwin Barney is a Cub come 2015, and I say that because of Junior Lake, who I believe is likely to replace Barney in the next year or two.
While Lake’s not the fielder Barney has become, he shows more upside offensively. He is, however, currently playing SS in the minors, but it makes sense to move him to second base with Castro and Baez appearing better prospects at the position. Lake’s arm also shows the potential to be moved to a corner outfield spot.
THIRD AND SHORT
There’s a logjam of prospects at both positions.
Castro, for the time being, remains the man at short with Javier Baez serving as the Cubs’ No. 1 prospect behind him. Not a bad problem to have at one of the most important defensive positions.
However, I see Baez or Castro being moved to third base, barring one of them being traded, and Josh Vitters serving as potential trade bait.
Vitters could eventually become a decent hitter and a serviceable fielder once he adjusts better to the major league game. But there’s also an outside chance his below-average fielding forces a position change to the outfield, which we can only hope raises his appeal on the trade market.
CATCHER
The Cubs are lacking in the catching department behind Welington Castillo and Steve Clevenger. It’s an area of need the Cubs likely improve upon through the amateur draft or minor trades.
CENTER FIELD
Brett Jackson or Matt Szczur could be the answer. Jackson reminds me of a faster version of Jim Edmonds in the field, and a similar version to Edmonds at the dish–league average hitter, above average power and a good on-base percentage.
Matt Szczur also shows solid speed and a knack for getting on base. His walk and strikeout ratio is ideal for a leadoff hitter, a spot the Cubs have long been in need of filling.
So with the power coming up at other positions, I prefer the Cubs develop Jackson as trade material for pitching prospects and open the door for Szczur to play centerfield.
CORNER OUT FIELD
Albert Almora and Jorge Soler appear on the fast track to being called-up to the big club in 2014, or sooner, if they develop as quickly as planned.
Both guys show good bat speed and the potential to develop big league power. Soler has quickly been dubbed “Soler Power” in just the few short months he’s been in the Cubs’ system.
Soler is projected to exhibit the most power in the Cubs’ farm system and is likely to become the cleanup hitter in the lineup behind Rizzo.
Almora is the youngest, but more polished, of the prospects and could also potentially be the center fielder pending the development or trade of either Jackson or Szczur.
Almora currently stands as the No.2 prospect behind Baez and could move up very quickly to the major leagues if he continues to dominate minor league pitching the way he has this summer.
This gives us a look at the Cubs’ potential 2015 lineup:
Szczur
Castro
Rizzo
Soler
Almora
Baez
Lake
Castillo
WHAT TO EXPECT
As Cub fans we’ve grown accustom to preaching patience. After all, what’s a few more years when we’ve already waited as long as we have for a World Series contender?
But what’s most exciting is the position players in the Cubs’ system are pretty darn good, granted most are still pretty far away from fielding a contending team together in the NL Central.
It’s likely, of course, the prospect landscape changes as Team Theo works the trade market to supplement pitching and acquire the finishing touches, which will eventually include the addition of free agents.
In the meantime, the objective remains to accumulate depth at every position, moving pieces that no longer fit and maintaining a strong prospect base for future success.
Like many of you, I’m a believer this era, in time, will pan out to be a perennial playoff team. But it does come at the cost of waiting, waiting and waiting some more. And in baseball years that could spells five seasons or more to fully complete the rebuild.
Even so, there’s no high-degree of certainty in developing prospects to perform at the desired levels needed in the majors.
Only time will tell, but pinning down the formula or the time frame is difficult in a sport as unpredictable and every changing as the game of baseball."

http://www.bullpenbrian.com/2012/09/08/cubs-lineup-2015-chicago-cubs-blog/
 

Top