The Ultimate " So Its 2016 Now" Thread

[dabynsky]

Very convenient statement to make.

Probably also good that he didn't sign Prince Fielder last year or Ian Stewart again this one.

All I asked for was consistentcy in the way you analyze the team. Otherwise you are as much as a sheep as you claim your opponents are.

 

[mountsalami]

They are consistantly horrible and obviously built that way. But then again, I can't wait for a thread started on each home run Soler or Baez hits.

 

[dabynsky]

They are consistantly horrible and obviously built that way. But then again, I can't wait for a thread started on each home run Soler or Baez hits.

Well it is good to know that you are equally susceptible to confirmation basis as those you ridicule.

 

[CSF77]

Well it is good to know that you are equally susceptible to confirmation basis as those you ridicule.

Not a fan of the moves either. What they are doing right now is buying trade chips with the payroll they freed up. Case in point was signing Jackson and Villanueva after they had signed Baker and Feldman. So with this they signed 7 deep. These moves were set up to sell this year vs put a competitor on the field. 3B they did nothing. RF they are getting lucky right now. Closer they tossed big on a set up that already hit the DL. They invested 35 mil into F/A and only 5 mil of it is panning out. I'm worried about the future of the team.

 

[Shawon0Meter]

So 2016 is the year where the Cubs become an annual contender? Doesn't mean a lot to me because there's also a legitimate chance the plan fails and 2016 is the beginning of a new one. it's a different approach and I'm trying to trust what the Cubs do basically because they know more than I do and I don't have a choice but to sit back and watch.

 

[CSF77]

So 2016 is the year where the Cubs become an annual contender? Doesn't mean a lot to me because there's also a legitimate chance the plan fails and 2016 is the beginning of a new one. it's a different approach and I'm trying to trust what the Cubs do basically because they know more than I do and I don't have a choice but to sit back and watch.

I believe he made this statement in regards to the ETA of Baez, Soler and Almora. Almora could lose a year of development with the bone removal. I believe that injury was a key point. Add to it that the Ricketts are using their team funding towards the park vs F/A.

 

[Jntg4]

They have yet to deny being the most profitable.

So Pittsburgh is the mark of a successful franchise? that is in essence what you are saying.

No, I was saying that being the most profitable by Forbes' calculations doesn't mean much if Pittsburgh was ranked #1...

 

[Jntg4]

Amazes me to see people blindly defend Theo. Like Brett says, at what point can we question some of his decisions?

Or is it *Theoism* and stuffz???

To "blindly defend" Theo is not the same as to agree that this team obviously needed to rebuild and have some faith in what he is doing.

I've liked about 95% of his moves so far, but absolutely hated the Stewart trade, for instance. Bad moves come once in a while, but for the most part, he's doing what he needs to do right now: Build up the farm, acquire depth, and rid ourselves of some of the trash.

The only thing he hasn't done is personally woo mountsalami I guess.

 

[X]

These moves were set up to sell this year vs put a competitor on the field. 3B they did nothing. RF they are getting lucky right now.

Out of curiosity, who would you have preferred them sign this last offseason for 3b and RF? Youk? Reynolds for 3b? and in RF, who? Hunter? He's 38429 years old and got $26M over 2 years. Both markets were ridiculously weak this offseason. Free Agents in those two markets this year were kind of like picking the shiniest turds from the pot. :shrug:

 

[KBisBack!]

I am so tired of hearing how the team hasn't been able to spend on FA because of the team debt.

The Ricketts have owned the team for 3.5 years now and has yet to actually pay down any of the debt. The debt ratio has gone down, but only because the value of the franchise has skyrocketed.

And there TV deal isn't awful. It is only bad in comparison to the handful of deals that were made the last 2-3 years. That is how it works. The Cubs turn will come and they will be taken care of. They are probably still top ten in TV revenue.

That article in the Sun Times also mentioned something interesting in that the money invested in the scouting department has actually gone down.

The Theo Cult over on CBS has been slurping for years how the money not being spent on the major league team is being used to improve the scouting dept. Whoops. Guess not.

Revenue has gone up. Payroll has gone done. Clearly profits are a much higher priority than wins.

 

[Jntg4]

I am so tired of hearing how the team hasn't been able to spend on FA because of the team debt.

The Ricketts have owned the team for 3.5 years now and has yet to actually pay down any of the debt. The debt ratio has gone down, but only because the value of the franchise has skyrocketed.

And there TV deal isn't awful. It is only bad in comparison to the handful of deals that were made the last 2-3 years. That is how it works. The Cubs turn will come and they will be taken care of. They are probably still top ten in TV revenue.

That article in the Sun Times also mentioned something interesting in that the money invested in the scouting department has actually gone down.

The Theo Cult over on CBS has been slurping for years how the money not being spent on the major league team is being used to improve the scouting dept. Whoops. Guess not.

Revenue has gone up. Payroll has gone done. Clearly profits are a much higher priority than wins.

The Cleveland Indians TV deal is almost as good as ours, wrap your head around that.

The Sun Times article honestly wasn't the best thought out, and there are a lot of inaccuracies in it, but that aside, they said player development, not scouting. The draft is capped now, and there are 10 less rounds. Makes sense that scouting too would go down similarly. Plus Epstein, Hoyer, and McLeod are much more into advanced statistics than Hendry was, which would again explain a lot.

That said, how about that new state of the art complex we built in the Dominican? That's a lot of money going towards Dominican player development, plus we moved back into Venezuela this off-season too...

I'm honestly not sure whose been claiming the debt is what is preventing us from signing free agents. Most have made it out to be a non-issue. It wasn't the right time to get caught up in more awful long-term contracts with Fielder or Pujols when we were still trying to unload Soriano, and we got Rizzo in a trade instead. I'll take Rizzo 5 years from now over Pujols 5 years from now with another 4 years of declining play at a huge cost waiting for us. Then last off-season there was a whole lot of crap piled up, and we actually did sign a lot of free agents, just not the big ones. In fact, we spent over $100 Million dollars on free agents between Hairston, Villanueva, Jackson, Schierholtz, Stewart, Feldman, Camp, Navarro, Baker, Rivero, Lim, Fujikawa, and then all the minor league deals. Plus we made a run at Anibal Sanchez, and got played by him, but it would have been a nice signing.

 

[KBisBack!]

The Cleveland Indians TV deal is almost as good as ours, wrap your head around that.

Almost. But almost isn't better is it??

Wrap your head around that.

And Cleveland JUST signed their new TV deal a few months ago and it still wasn't better than what the Cubs have. Whoops.

The Sun Times article honestly wasn't the best thought out, and there are a lot of inaccuracies in it, but that aside, they said player development, not scouting.

So what inaccuracies are there? The ones that don't fit your agenda that Theo is infallible??

And yes they did say scouting cost have been cut by leasing cars and cutting the scouts per diem.

Please feel free to enlighten us with the accurate facts that the article was wrong about. I am sure we would all enjoy the extra knowledge.

The draft is capped now, and there are 10 less rounds. Makes sense that scouting too would go down similarly. Plus Epstein, Hoyer, and McLeod are much more into advanced statistics than Hendry was, which would again explain a lot.

And you know this how?? Because the Cubs bought new computers or is this just an assumption of yours?

That said, how about that new state of the art complex we built in the Dominican? That's a lot of money going towards Dominican player development, plus we moved back into Venezuela this off-season too...

Oh yeah, the might complex in the Dominican. $7M built the entire complex. So the Cubs have only had to cut payroll by about $45M in order to fund that $7M complex??? Well now that you explain it that way, it makes perfect sense. Not.

I'm honestly not sure whose been claiming the debt is what is preventing us from signing free agents. Most have made it out to be a non-issue.

Many Cub fans have.

It wasn't the right time to get caught up in more awful long-term contracts with Fielder or Pujols when we were still trying to unload Soriano, and we got Rizzo in a trade instead.

Awful contracts??

The Cubs are a top revenue team. They can easily afford those contracts.

But it is clear you are one of the lesser educated fans who actually believe the Soriano contract has handcuffed the organization and been a bad deal.

Here is a tip for you. It has been neither.

According to Fangraphs, the Cubs have received about $67M in value from Soriano and paid him $97M. No it is not dollar for dollar return on the contract, but many contracts you will not get dollar for dollar return on. That doesn't make it a bad contract and actually looks like a bargain compared to the $18M spent on Chris Volstad last year.

I'll take Rizzo 5 years from now over Pujols 5 years from now with another 4 years of declining play at a huge cost waiting for us.

I'll take Prince Fielder in 5 years over both of them.

Hell, the way Rizzo has started off this year, we better hope he isn't playing in Japan in five years.

But you are already assuming he will be an All Star player in five years.

Then last off-season there was a whole lot of crap piled up, and we actually did sign a lot of free agents, just not the big ones. In fact, we spent over $100 Million dollars on free agents between Hairston, Villanueva, Jackson, Schierholtz, Stewart, Feldman, Camp, Navarro, Baker, Rivero, Lim, Fujikawa, and then all the minor league deals. Plus we made a run at Anibal Sanchez, and got played by him, but it would have been a nice signing.

You are right there was a whole lot of crap piled up.

Just like there was a whole lot of crap piled up the offseason before.

THAT is the problem.

Nothing but crap has been brought by this supposed Genius brain-trust the Cubs have hired that idiots seem to blindly believe are making the team better.

101 losses last year doesn't show me the team improved.

Well on the way to another 100 loss season doesn't show me the team improved.

 

[brett05]

No, I was saying that being the most profitable by Forbes' calculations doesn't mean much if Pittsburgh was ranked #1...

The ranking means a lot, what is done with the profit is another matter.

You saying it doesn't mean much because look at PIT, that means PIT like the Cubs are mismanaging the money for the MLB club

 

[Jntg4]

Almost. But almost isn't better is it??

Wrap your head around that.

And Cleveland JUST signed their new TV deal a few months ago and it still wasn't better than what the Cubs have. Whoops.

Fact is, we are still in the lower half of the league in TV revenue, while the small market Indians are about as close to ours. It will change eventually, but sure hasn't yet.

So what inaccuracies are there? The ones that don't fit your agenda that Theo is infallible??

And yes they did say scouting cost have been cut by leasing cars and cutting the scouts per diem.

Please feel free to enlighten us with the accurate facts that the article was wrong about. I am sure we would all enjoy the extra knowledge.

1. Read Bleacher Nation once in a while (oh, and WSD, since this whole forum is supposedly meant to be propaganda for us)... :smh: http://www.bleachernation.com/2013/...n-the-ricketts-familys-ownership-of-the-cubs/

You misunderstood me, I meant that the management said they would devote more money to player development, not specifically scouting. I wasn't referring to the article.

Oh my, we cut a few scouts when we now have both McLeod and Wilken covering a lot of it specifically.

And you know this how?? Because the Cubs bought new computers or is this just an assumption of yours?

You can't be this stupid, can you?

Oh yeah, the might complex in the Dominican. $7M built the entire complex. So the Cubs have only had to cut payroll by about $45M in order to fund that $7M complex??? Well now that you explain it that way, it makes perfect sense. Not.

Right, you're right, we shouldn't build a great complex at a cheap cost because we haven't inflated the payroll with over-the-hill free agents yet, ok.

Many Cub fans have.

And a lot of Cubs fans are ignorant, plain and simple.

Awful contracts??

The Cubs are a top revenue team. They can easily afford those contracts.

But it is clear you are one of the lesser educated fans who actually believe the Soriano contract has handcuffed the organization and been a bad deal.

Here is a tip for you. It has been neither.

According to Fangraphs, the Cubs have received about $67M in value from Soriano and paid him $97M. No it is not dollar for dollar return on the contract, but many contracts you will not get dollar for dollar return on. That doesn't make it a bad contract and actually looks like a bargain compared to the $18M spent on Chris Volstad last year.

It hasn't handcuffed the whole organization, but you do get stuck with a guy who flat out sucks being paid a tenth of the amount of payroll allowed without a luxury tax... but then he was resurgent last year, which helped a lot, and its finally almost over, but look at it from a 2009 perspective, his resurgence was a huge break for the Cubs. But look what happens when you sign a ton of FA's to deal with that, have fun with an outfield of 38 year olds after you again fail to win a championship.

I'll take Prince Fielder in 5 years over both of them.

If he can still play defense then... he actually could have been a good free agent signing, Pujols would have been awful.

Hell, the way Rizzo has started off this year, we better hope he isn't playing in Japan in five years.

Ya, because Baez is already an Advanced-A flameout, Castillo is immortal, Schierholtz is amazing, etc. SMALL SAMPLE SIZE ALERT.

But you are already assuming he will be an All Star player in five years.

Assuming? No. Does he certainly have that potential and goes he have a pretty decent chance of becoming one? Yes.

You are right there was a whole lot of crap piled up.

Just like there was a whole lot of crap piled up the offseason before.

THAT is the problem.

Nothing but crap has been brought by this supposed Genius brain-trust the Cubs have hired that idiots seem to blindly believe are making the team better.

101 losses last year doesn't show me the team improved.

Well on the way to another 100 loss season doesn't show me the team improved.

The free agent market has been nothing but crap, there wasn't much good to be brought in. Period.

And you, like salami and d3a, have seemed to miss the point that there hasn't been much intention of making the MLB team a contender just yet, the focus has been almost solely on player development and the minor leagues, and now we have a very good haul of talent down there, and even if just 2 or 3 of them work out, we have a pretty solid core forming to THEN surround with free agents and trade acquisitions in their prime.

Baez, Soler, Almora, Vizcaino are all Top 100's, then you have Jackson and Szczur who could still amount to something (but have obvious flaws), then the much more intriguing prospects who could crack the Top 100 as early as next year in Vogelbach, Candelario, Johnson, Amaya, Alcantara, Maples, Hernandez, Paniagua, Villanueva, Lake (not a fan to be honest), or players like Watkins that could be serviceable starters should a current player go down, hell even Vitters was young for AAA and had a very solid season there last season, the list goes on and on. And now we get the second highest draft pick, draft pool, and international spending pool to increase it even more. It is unfortunate that Garza's trade value plummeted through the floor by getting injured right before last trade deadline, or we could have another top 100 or 2 coming our way.

 

[KBisBack!]

Fact is, we are still in the lower half of the league in TV revenue, while the small market Indians are about as close to ours. It will change eventually, but sure hasn't yet.

You say it is a fact that the team is in the lower half of the league in TV revenue.

Please provide your source for this fact.

I have seen that when you include the revenue from WGN, the team is in the top 10 in TV revenue. On the local TV revenue, WGN is NOT including because they are considered a Superstation, so their revenue is not included in the local TV revenue. But of course you knew that already I am sure.

1. Read Bleacher Nation once in a while (oh, and WSD, since this whole forum is supposedly meant to be propaganda for us)... :smh: http://www.bleachernation.com/2013/...n-the-ricketts-familys-ownership-of-the-cubs/

Most of that article is more opinion with very little fact to support it. The only fact provided was that Darvish's posting was about a half million more than Dice-K. Whoopie!!!

But I guess I am supposed to accept some guy named Brett's opinion because it is posted on a Fan site?? No thanks.

Right, you're right, we shouldn't build a great complex at a cheap cost because we haven't inflated the payroll with over-the-hill free agents yet, ok.

Right, cause that is exactly what I said, right? No?? That wasn't remotely what I said?? Oh ok, thought so.

You have bought a PR campaign that has led you to believe that cutting $45M from the major league payroll was needed to pay for a $7M complex in DR and MAYBE a couple extra million in player development??

And you want to accuse others other being that stupid?? Wow.

And a lot of Cubs fans are ignorant, plain and simple.

Yes they are. You are showing a shining example of it.

It hasn't handcuffed the whole organization, but you do get stuck with a guy who flat out sucks being paid a tenth of the amount of payroll allowed without a luxury tax... but then he was resurgent last year, which helped a lot, and its finally almost over, but look at it from a 2009 perspective, his resurgence was a huge break for the Cubs. But look what happens when you sign a ton of FA's to deal with that, have fun with an outfield of 38 year olds after you again fail to win a championship.

And the $18M spent of Volstad sure was much better wasn't it??

The free agent market has been nothing but crap, there wasn't much good to be brought in. Period.

There were many options that were better than the ones brought in. Period.

And you, like salami and d3a, have seemed to miss the point that there hasn't been much intention of making the MLB team a contender just yet, the focus has been almost solely on player development and the minor leagues, and now we have a very good haul of talent down there, and even if just 2 or 3 of them work out, we have a pretty solid core forming to THEN surround with free agents and trade acquisitions in their prime.

Nope.

Haven't missed that point at all. In fact the organization IGNORING the major league level is the ENTIRE point.

The Cubs have the resources to field a quality major league at the same time as developing the minor league system. They can do BOTH at the same time.

It is not a complicated idea, but seems to fall well outside of your intelligence level.

There shouldn't have to be a choice between the two. The goal should be to do BOTH things at the same time.

Your plan has the team absolutely sucking for years with the HOPE that the minor league system can develop enough players who reach their peak at the same time and only then add FA.

Small market teams like the Pirates and Royals have been trying this plan for decades now, without success. But this is exact what you think the smart plan is?? Um ok.

Baez, Soler, Almora, Vizcaino are all Top 100's, then you have Jackson and Szczur who could still amount to something (but have obvious flaws), then the much more intriguing prospects who could crack the Top 100 as early as next year in Vogelbach, Candelario, Johnson, Amaya, Alcantara, Maples, Hernandez, Paniagua, Villanueva, Lake (not a fan to be honest), or players like Watkins that could be serviceable starters should a current player go down, hell even Vitters was young for AAA and had a very solid season there last season, the list goes on and on. And now we get the second highest draft pick, draft pool, and international spending pool to increase it even more. It is unfortunate that Garza's trade value plummeted through the floor by getting injured right before last trade deadline, or we could have another top 100 or 2 coming our way.

Oh boy, Yippie!!! Top 100 prospects!!!! Joy oh Joy.

You seem to miss the goal of major league baseball.

It is to win the most games at the major league level, not have the most Top 100 prospects. Having the most top 100 prospects is not an automatic path to winning the most games either.

The Royals a few years ago had the most top 100 prospects at the same time. How has that worked out for them??

There has not one of those players who have turned into quality major league players yet.

Hosmer still has major questions. Moustakas has struggled big time and there is talk about sending him back down. Most of the others haven't even made it.

But somehow ALL of the Cubs prospects will succeed and become All Stars??

Ok.

Keep buying those lottery tickets as your retirement plan.

 

[Jntg4]

You say it is a fact that the team is in the lower half of the league in TV revenue.

Please provide your source for this fact.

I have seen that when you include the revenue from WGN, the team is in the top 10 in TV revenue. On the local TV revenue, WGN is NOT including because they are considered a Superstation, so their revenue is not included in the local TV revenue. But of course you knew that already I am sure.




Most of that article is more opinion with very little fact to support it. The only fact provided was that Darvish's posting was about a half million more than Dice-K. Whoopie!!!

But I guess I am supposed to accept some guy named Brett's opinion because it is posted on a Fan site?? No thanks.





Right, cause that is exactly what I said, right? No?? That wasn't remotely what I said?? Oh ok, thought so.

You have bought a PR campaign that has led you to believe that cutting $45M from the major league payroll was needed to pay for a $7M complex in DR and MAYBE a couple extra million in player development??

And you want to accuse others other being that stupid?? Wow.



Yes they are. You are showing a shining example of it.





And the $18M spent of Volstad sure was much better wasn't it??



There were many options that were better than the ones brought in. Period.



Nope.

Haven't missed that point at all. In fact the organization IGNORING the major league level is the ENTIRE point.

The Cubs have the resources to field a quality major league at the same time as developing the minor league system. They can do BOTH at the same time.

It is not a complicated idea, but seems to fall well outside of your intelligence level.

There shouldn't have to be a choice between the two. The goal should be to do BOTH things at the same time.

Your plan has the team absolutely sucking for years with the HOPE that the minor league system can develop enough players who reach their peak at the same time and only then add FA.

Small market teams like the Pirates and Royals have been trying this plan for decades now, without success. But this is exact what you think the smart plan is?? Um ok.


Oh boy, Yippie!!! Top 100 prospects!!!! Joy oh Joy.

You seem to miss the goal of major league baseball.

It is to win the most games at the major league level, not have the most Top 100 prospects. Having the most top 100 prospects is not an automatic path to winning the most games either.

The Royals a few years ago had the most top 100 prospects at the same time. How has that worked out for them??

There has not one of those players who have turned into quality major league players yet.

Hosmer still has major questions. Moustakas has struggled big time and there is talk about sending him back down. Most of the others haven't even made it.

But somehow ALL of the Cubs prospects will succeed and become All Stars??

Ok.

Keep buying those lottery tickets as your retirement plan.

You lack both reading comprehension and intelligence, head over to PSD, you'll fit right in.

 

[nwfisch]

You lack both reading comprehension and intelligence, head over to PSD, you'll fit right in.

What a great way to foster discussion.


Just because he doesn't buy into Theo's plan doesn't make him an idiot. I think there are valid questions at this point to be raised and asked about the plan.

 

[nickofypres]

But, Fisch, haven't you ever heard of 2004!!!1 and 2007!!!1

 

[nwfisch]

But, Fisch, haven't you ever heard of 2004!!!1 and 2007!!!1

And like Dews says, though I won't agree that Theo had 0% to do with those titles, Theo wasn't the motor that drove the Red Sox. An improbable 3-0 series comeback when they were down to their last strike against the Yankees was a big reason they won the WS. So let's not kid ourselves by saying Theo built the best team to win that year like they were the 27 Yankees.

And in 07 that team also was down 3-1 to the Cleveland Indians of all teams in the ALCS.

Sure they got to the dance and won it, but are 3-0 and 3-1 comebacks something I want this organization (especially the Cubs) to depend on?

 

[Jntg4]

And like Dews says, though I won't agree that Theo had 0% to do with those titles, Theo wasn't the motor that drove the Red Sox. An improbable 3-0 series comeback when they were down to their last strike against the Yankees was a big reason they won the WS. So let's not kid ourselves by saying Theo built the best team to win that year like they were the 27 Yankees.

And in 07 that team also was down 3-1 to the Cleveland Indians of all teams in the ALCS.

Sure they got to the dance and won it, but are 3-0 and 3-1 comebacks something I want this organization (especially the Cubs) to depend on?

Because being down in a series before coming hack indicates whether or not the team was good or deserved to win? Go back to trolling.