Why Do Fans Overpay?

[KBisBack!]

Not sure how tradeable Haren would have been with a 15 million dollar price tag this year as a half season rental when he's not really pitching that great.

More trade-able than Marmol.

 

[KBisBack!]

Preceded by...




I'm getting mixed messages here...

You are not getting mixed messages.

You are an idiot.

Let me know which part needs to be explained slower to you.

 

[FirstTimer]

More trade-able than Marmol.

Was he? I don't recall Haren getting traded

 

[FirstTimer]

Of course, dealing Marmol for Haren nets you a middle of the rotation starter that isn't pitching that well, but since Theo has openly said that the Cubs are going in for the long haul and the Cubs are not spending money and rebuilding, wouldn't it have been the wiser choice to go for a 1 year deal in Haren at 15 million, then a 4 year deal at 52 million for a middle of the rotation pitcher in Jackson, who by the way is also not pitching that well?

The Edwin Jackson signing I hated at the time and still do. But just to throw this out there...Haren would have cost 15 million this year had the Cubs not bought him out. He just signed for 13 million with the Nats. Same price as Jackson this year only the amount of years is different and had Jackson pitched to career averages that 13 million a year may not have looked so awful in coming seasons depending on other FA pitching signings. The savings may have been hidden...but like I said..**** the Jackson signing. yuck.
They would have been better off to not trade for Haren and sign him to the 1yr 13 million.

 

[KBisBack!]

Was he? I don't recall Haren getting traded

Cause you are an idiot.

Like I said, spend more time learning about what you are trolling about then masturbating to male steriod freaks in tights rolling around with each other.

Troll on loser.

 

[FirstTimer]

Cause you are an idiot.

Like I said, spend more time learning about what you are trolling about then masturbating to male steriod freaks in tights rolling around with each other.

Troll on loser.

No, I think it's "cause" he was never traded.

 

[SilenceS]

Link?

Ok..so was that Theo's call alone on ARam? That doesn't answer my question. You're just telling me what Aram said Theo told him...was it Theo's choice to not spend the money on ARam or was that a decision Theo had to make based on what Rickett's told him to do and or gave him money wise to fill out the roster.

Still never read anything definitive on who pulled out of what in the Haren trade..and even still you're still trading Marmol for a meh arm. Is that really that much of an issue? It could have been a money issue with lining up the contracts of the two guys(not in an NBA sense but in a spending sense), wasn't Haren's contract pretty easily larger than Marmol's last season..plus the buyout the4 Cubs would had to of paid to not take on like another 15 million? Was that for sure Theo's final call on the deal?

I just find it odd you're fully aware Ricketts has his hand in all the Cubs financial wheelings and dealing at the MLB level but then when situations come up where it could clearly have financial implications that by your own admission Ricketts is very actively involved in...you still seem to place all the blame at Epstein's feet.

http://www.bleachernation.com/2012/08/28/aramis-ramirez-is-surprised-by-the-cubs-and-other-bullets/ Ramirez quotes

The Cubs trade for Dan Haren then they dont sign either Feldman or Baker. Seems like the cubs could avoided paying Baker for not pitching.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/1611...plug-on-carlos-marmol-for-dan-haren-swap.html

If you blame Hendry for what he did for the tribune company, then you can blame Theo for these moves.

 

[SilenceS]

Scott Baker 5.5 million and Ian Stewart 2 million and havent played an inning. Seems like Haren was a steal. And yes, Haren has more trade value then Marmol. A starter with a proven track record over a closer that cracks under pressure on a bad team. Not even close. Marmol is worth about $3.50.

 

[FirstTimer]

http://www.bleachernation.com/2012/08/28/aramis-ramirez-is-surprised-by-the-cubs-and-other-bullets/ Ramirez quotes

"[The Cubs] told him that they were going young. That is what happens when you rebuild but I did not know they were going to start from zero.” We’ll see what happens in 2013, but it is becoming increasingly fair to describe what the Cubs are doing as “start[ing] from zero.” I’m not saying that’s wrong, of course. Just accurate."

Was this Epsteins call? Rickett's call? etc. Still not answering my question.

If you blame Hendry for what he did for the tribune company, then you can blame Theo for these moves.

No you can't. It's illogical.

The Tribune was wanting Hendry to sign good players to build the value of the team and make them good. Hendry's signings ended up getting him fired and caused the Cubs to suck.

You're saying Epstein is being hamstrung by Rickett's and not being allowed to spend money on the MLB roster at this point in time during the rebuilding. Epstein is doing just that and rebuilding. Yet when Epstein encounters situations where spending at the MLB level is obviously or could very well be an issue you ignore the directive you yourself say that Epstein has been given and blame him.

Blaming Jim Hendry for overpaying for guys like Soriano, Bradley, etc who underperformed their contracts wildly is not the same thing as blaming Epstein for not spending money at the MLB level when you've admitted and pointed out that he's been told not to.

 

[Boobaby1]

http://www.bleachernation.com/2012/08/28/aramis-ramirez-is-surprised-by-the-cubs-and-other-bullets/ Ramirez quotes

The Cubs trade for Dan Haren then they dont sign either Feldman or Baker. Seems like the cubs could avoided paying Baker for not pitching.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/1611...plug-on-carlos-marmol-for-dan-haren-swap.html

If you blame Hendry for what he did for the tribune company, then you can blame Theo for these moves.

Nah! Can't be. Every move that Theo & Co. make get applauded as the right thing to do.

Back-to-back playoff appearances...Bad!

Back-to-back 100 loss seasons.......Good!

 

[FirstTimer]

Scott Baker 5.5 million and Ian Stewart 2 million and havent played an inning. Seems like Haren was a steal. And yes, Haren has more trade value then Marmol. A starter with a proven track record over a closer that cracks under pressure on a bad team. Not even close. Marmol is worth about $3.50.

The Baker signing was odd but honestly signing Haren for 1 year at 13 million really does what? Or are you advocating signing him long term?..which would have basically been the Edwin jackson contract on a team going nowhere and Haren isn't a difference maker..so...what's the point?

 

[FirstTimer]

Nah! Can't be. Every move that Theo & Co. make get applauded as the right thing to do.

Back-to-back playoff appearances...Bad!

Back-to-back 100 loss seasons.......Good!

No one has said.

Shh..

 

[SilenceS]

"[The Cubs] told him that they were going young. That is what happens when you rebuild but I did not know they were going to start from zero.” We’ll see what happens in 2013, but it is becoming increasingly fair to describe what the Cubs are doing as “start[ing] from zero.” I’m not saying that’s wrong, of course. Just accurate."

Was this Epsteins call? Rickett's call? etc. Still not answering my question.



No you can't. It's illogical.

The Tribune was wanting Hendry to sign good players to build the value of the team and make them good. Hendry's signings ended up getting him fired and caused the Cubs to suck.

You're saying Epstein is being hamstrung by Rickett's and not being allowed to spend money on the MLB roster at this point in time during the rebuilding. Epstein is doing just that and rebuilding. Yet when Epstein encounters situations where spending at the MLB level is obviously or could very well be an issue you ignore the directive you yourself say that Epstein has been given and blame him.

Blaming Jim Hendry for overpaying for guys like Soriano, Bradley, etc who underperformed their contracts wildly is not the same thing as blaming Epstein for not spending money at the MLB level when you've admitted and pointed out that he's been told not to.

Lol Theo told Ramirez what he was doing. Second, the rest of what you wrote is so hypocritical it is not even funny. Also, Hendry never signed Soriano. He was on a plane. Do I have to spoon feed you that article as well? Dude, I really hope you are trolling because, if not, I sure hope you dont vote in this country,

 

[FirstTimer]

Lol Theo told Ramirez what he was doing. Second, the rest of what you wrote is so hypocritical it is not even funny. Also, Hendry never signed Soriano. He was on a plane. Do I have to spoon feed you that article as well? Dude, I really hope you are trolling because, if not, I sure hope you dont vote in this country,

I never disputed that Theo told Ramirez what was going on.

My original question was this:
Was ARam his call alone? So was that Theo's call alone on ARam? That doesn't answer my question. You're just telling me what Aram said Theo told him...was it Theo's choice to not spend the money on ARam or was that a decision Theo had to make based on what Rickett's told him to do and or gave him money wise to fill out the roster?

So Jim Hendry, the GM of the Cubs...didn't sign Alfonso Soriano. Great stuff....He was already offering him 6 years....

And nothing what I typed was "hypocritical" it was pointing out your absurdly bad logic.

 

[KBisBack!]

These two...I've bolded the specific parts that need to be explained slower to me.

What I didn't expect when Theo was hired was back to back 100 loss seasons.

Are you really that dumb or just like to troll??

Once Theo was hired and seeing the shitty moves and talent that was brought in, it was clear there were going to be 100 loss seasons.

Troll on.

 

[Sunbiz1]

I tried to explain the issue at hand with the draft. Theo did great in Boston drafting because he over slotted a lot. The Red Sox spent money on the draft. Hendry's hands were tied because ownership would not allow the same spending for the Cubs. They wanted it to be spent on the parent club because they wanted to sell them. Draft spending tripled when Ricketts came in office. There is a reasoning for that. Those Hayden Simpson picks and so on was directly related to what the Cubs ownership allowed Hendry to spend on the draft. Hendry was also not allowed near the staff Theo has. You want to blame someone for the minors blame the ownership for not letting Hendry care. This is what I tried to explain. The last Hendry draft looks like a damn good one. Baez, Volgelbomb, Rock Shoulders, Zeke Devoss, Dunston, Gretzky, Dillion Maples and so on. You can only do so much with what you are given. I dont blame Theo for not spending. Ricketts will not allow the payroll to be any higher. Its not Theos fault. Its Ricketts.

The Tribune used the Cubs as an overvalued asset to gain a favorable ruling during the ch 11 bankruptcy proceedings, during which time period they owed millions in SEC fines to the Feds. I'd certainly like to see the actual $$ figures on minor league systems during this time period, unfortunately appears they are not available.

As for Hendry, my response is always the same...Milton Bradley.

 

[FirstTimer]

Also, I have never found anything stating that the Hendry/Plane/Soriano deal actually happened. Just a bunch of rumors of stuff with no quotes or sourcing.

 

[SilenceS]

I never disputed that Theo told Ramirez what was going on.

My original question was this:
Was ARam his call alone? So was that Theo's call alone on ARam? That doesn't answer my question. You're just telling me what Aram said Theo told him...was it Theo's choice to not spend the money on ARam or was that a decision Theo had to make based on what Rickett's told him to do and or gave him money wise to fill out the roster?

So Jim Hendry, the GM of the Cubs...didn't sign Alfonso Soriano. Great stuff....He was already offering him 6 years....

And nothing what I typed was "hypocritical" it was pointing out your absurdly bad logic.

Um Theo decided not to sign Ramirez when he had the budget to sign him. It would have been before the DeJesus contract. The Maholm contract the Stewart contract who cost more than Colvin and Lemahieu combined. So, if Ricketts gave him a budget then he still could have signed him.

How is my logic bad? You blame Theo for none of his moves, but blame Hendry for 3 contracts. 1 which he didnt even sign. Should we go into Theos contracts that he signed in Boston? I would, but it doesnt matter because none of those players on the Cubs. You keep spinning your arguments. When you dont have anything to say, you jump to something else to twist. I very much know you are trolling now so good day. Hope you get laid for the love of humanity but please dont reproduce. America has enough slow people as it is.

 

[FirstTimer]

Um Theo decided not to sign Ramirez when he had the budget to sign him.

Prove it.

Theo had to fill out a roster with a certain amount of money. If Ramirez was going to take up too much of that money in order to fill out the other spots within his allotted budget from Ricketts...how did he have the money to do so?

So now it's IF Rickett's gave him a budget? Talk about moving goal posts.

This is approaching remydat levels of idiocy.

You blame Theo for none of his moves

Wrong. Absolutely wrong. I've blame Epstein for bad signings. I just think your logic and reasoning is horseshit. Which it is based on your own words..which now you have quasi gone back on.

Should we go into Theos contracts that he signed in Boston?

Sure. Go for it. Some of them are turds.......? I've never said any different.

You keep spinning your arguments.

LOL at this. I took something you directly said and applied it directly to MLB contracts and money and I'm "spinning"?

 

[SilenceS]

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/base...rys-fall-as-cubs-gm-wasnt-only-his-fault.html

Is Gordon Wittenmyer a good enough source? Im sure you will spin this.