You're the GM (Game)

[JimJohnson]

Cueto might be the guy we nab up. What do you guys think about that?

Cueto >> Shark

 

[JimJohnson]

I would have preferred JZ because of Shark's history with the Cubs but at this point he's their best bet as I'm reasonably certain they aren't in a position to spend on Price.

You know if Ricketts can't afford to put the team in a position to compete with the other high spenders, maybe he should sell to an owner who can? Cubs are too large of a market to be spending like a mid market team. Do I expect the Cubs to spend like the Dodgers or Yankees? No. Do I expect them to spend similarly to the Red Sox? Yes.

 

[FrankieLyrical]

Cueto >> Shark

I agree. I'm not against getting Shark, however. What I am against is Shark being the only pitcher we get

 

[TC in Mississippi]

You know if Ricketts can't afford to put the team in a position to compete with the other high spenders, maybe he should sell to an owner who can? Cubs are too large of a market to be spending like a mid market team. Do I expect the Cubs to spend like the Dodgers or Yankees? No. Do I expect them to spend similarly to the Red Sox? Yes.

You miss the point. I think they can and will spend, payroll is likely going to exceed $140 mil this year, but they are still beholden to the debt service limits they agreed to in the sale and those limits are in place until 2019 about the same time they'll start seeing the new TV revenue. This team was built for multiple playoff trips not a go for it type of mentality and another long term contract might not work, especially if they still have plans to extend Arrieta. We simply don't know what they're thinking. Maybe they do sign Price knowing they won't try to retain Arrieta in 2 years. Maybe they deal for a Danny Salazar and sign Samardzija. That would be one of the best staffs in the NL. There's more to building a team than big spending.

 

[CSF77]

Cueto's floor should be 22 per. 17 per for Shark should be his market. Price and Greinke should be at 27 mil per market value.

Guys like Leake and Kazmir should see around 15-17 now.

That is how the market is playing out.

 

[CSF77]

You miss the point. I think they can and will spend, payroll is likely going to exceed $140 mil this year, but they are still beholden to the debt service limits they agreed to in the sale and those limits are in place until 2019 about the same time they'll start seeing the new TV revenue. This team was built for multiple playoff trips not a go for it type of mentality and another long term contract might not work, especially if they still have plans to extend Arrieta. We simply don't know what they're thinking. Maybe they do sign Price knowing they won't try to retain Arrieta in 2 years. Maybe they deal for a Danny Salazar and sign Samardzija. That would be one of the best staffs in the NL. There's more to building a team than big spending.

I don't see them going up to 140 mil. I see them back loading a deal that starts to kick in after Jackson is off of the books. That is 13 mil freed up. Hammel is another 9 freed up also. That is when I expect to see Arrita extended. Seeing how Zimmerman pulled 22 mil with out having a Cy- Young season it would be silly to think Jake wouldn't command 25 mil on the market. Greinke's deal would be a blue print for Jake.

 

[PickSix]

You know if Ricketts can't afford to put the team in a position to compete with the other high spenders, maybe he should sell to an owner who can? Cubs are too large of a market to be spending like a mid market team. Do I expect the Cubs to spend like the Dodgers or Yankees? No. Do I expect them to spend similarly to the Red Sox? Yes.

Totally agree. This so called $140 mill is cheap skating for this market.

 

[CSF77]

Totally agree. This so called $140 mill is cheap skating for this market.

You have access to their books?

 

[chibears55]

Totally agree. This so called $140 mill is cheap skating for this market.

You do realize they would be adding 60 mil to what they have tied up now to get to 140 mil..?

That a good chunk of money left to spend if 140 is their magical number...

 

[JimJohnson]

You do realize they would be adding 60 mil to what they have tied up now to get to 140 mil..?

That a good chunk of money left to spend if 140 is their magical number...

Perhaps my memory is a bit foggy but when the Tribune use to own the Cubs, they were spending in the neighborhood of $140M and that was quite a few years ago. Why are people okay with $140M now? Ticket and merchandise prices go up every year so payroll should as well.

 

[beckdawg]

You know if Ricketts can't afford to put the team in a position to compete with the other high spenders, maybe he should sell to an owner who can? Cubs are too large of a market to be spending like a mid market team. Do I expect the Cubs to spend like the Dodgers or Yankees? No. Do I expect them to spend similarly to the Red Sox? Yes.

It's interesting you mention this considering the Royals who spend like a mid-market team have made the WS two straight years. The "ownership is cheap" angle is stupid and always has been. Ultimately, it's about getting value for your dollar. People are so short sighted in how they talk about spending because it's always on FA that they want. What people don't talk about is extending current players down the line with regard to spending. Additionally, every dollar you don't over spend is money you can dump into IFA presently. That doesn't make a huge difference today but those high price IFA's become stars(sometimes anyways) 5-6 years down the line.

That's why it's important to be responsible with your money and not over pay for marginal talent because no team(even the dodgers) has unlimited money.

 

[beckdawg]

Perhaps my memory is a bit foggy but when the Tribune use to own the Cubs, they were spending in the neighborhood of $140M and that was quite a few years ago. Why are people okay with $140M now? Ticket and merchandise prices go up every year so payroll should as well.

The Tribune also structured deals in such away that they wouldn't own the team when the hammer fell. That's why the first couple of years of the theo rebuild were so painful because they literally didn't have any money to put into the team and had to shed money wherever they could.

Also, I don't know where people get this idea that spending money = wins. The yankees have spent in the top 2 probably top 1 over the past 15 years and they've won what, one title? The dodgers since the new ownership has came on hasn't even made a world series. Meanwhile you have a team in the cubs division like the cardinals who've spent upper-mid market to lower-high market yearly and win all the god damn time. Point here being, there's a point in which not having money hurts you. However, the cubs aren't at that point. I mean for **** sake they were the third best team in baseball last year with a bunch of rookies and they are going to have a $20-30 mil higher payroll next year.

So, my opinion is if people are bitching about spending it's either A) someone who's entirely ignorant of how baseball works with regard to money allocation or B) they are people just trying to cause message board drama. Either way, it doesn't matter because if you're wanting the cubs to be a top 3 spending team I think you're likely going to be disappointed as long as the Ricketts own the team. The entire point in bringing in someone like theo is to find advantage that cost you less than market value. In other words, if the cubs are a top 3 spending team something has gone wrong.

 

[chibears55]

Perhaps my memory is a bit foggy but when the Tribune use to own the Cubs, they were spending in the neighborhood of $140M and that was quite a few years ago. Why are people okay with $140M now? Ticket and merchandise prices go up every year so payroll should as well.

Not that were "ok" with it or at least I'm not. .. But
Just like someone mentioned above, they have that agreement with Zell they made, plus it not like that the only place their spending money (roster/FA)..
Theyve been spending more money then normal on signing better draft picks and with the IFA(going above alloted amount )

So, Ricketts are far from being cheap and theyve been bringing in quality young talent. ...

Its just going to be small steps now til their able to spend freely and hopefully spend wisely. ..

 

[Boobaby1]

You miss the point. I think they can and will spend, payroll is likely going to exceed $140 mil this year, but they are still beholden to the debt service limits they agreed to in the sale and those limits are in place until 2019 about the same time they'll start seeing the new TV revenue. This team was built for multiple playoff trips not a go for it type of mentality and another long term contract might not work, especially if they still have plans to extend Arrieta. We simply don't know what they're thinking. Maybe they do sign Price knowing they won't try to retain Arrieta in 2 years. Maybe they deal for a Danny Salazar and sign Samardzija. That would be one of the best staffs in the NL. There's more to building a team than big spending.

Exactly. Rarely do teams that sign many high profile pitching staffs win the WS.

There is nothing wrong with having an ACE like Arrieta, and Lester aint exactly chump change either.

If you look at WS winners in the recent past, you will hard pressed to find any that had three legit TOR's in the rotation.

Bumgarner carried the Giants, the Royals had adequate starting and were relief loaded, the Phillies trotted out Hamels (young), Moyer, Myers, Eaton, and Blanton. The Red Sox received great performances from Lackey, Buccholz, and Peavy a few years back, and the Cardinals won the WS in 2011 with Carpenter, Garcia, and Lohse, and even more depressing is when they won it with Jeff Weaver, Jeff Suppan, and Anthony Reyes in 2006.

I think this must have 3 TOR's is a little blown out of proportion.

You need innings eaters, and even if they choose to go the route of Shark, and trade for another one, that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, as he would be a major upgrade to Dan Haren, and slide into the number 3 slot assuming that the said traded for pitcher isn't one already.

I would like for them to trade for a potential TOR pitcher like a Ross or Salazar just to ensure that there is a balance and a total preparation for when Hammel leaves in the following year.

And speaking of Hammel, I am not totally convinced that his injuries didn't hamper him more than what was said, seeing that he was elevating everything and had little movement, and hitters were feasting on him. He pitched well for the Cubs prior to the trade last year, and then he had a horrible start in July with the A's but went through August with a 2.86 ERA, and September with a 2.20 ERA to end the year, which is pretty stout in the AL.

At the start of this year, he went 3.55 (Apr), 2.57 (May), 2.80 (June), and then after the injury, went 4.03 (July), 4.88 (Aug), 5.34 (Sept). I think he could still be a really nice back of the rotation piece for the Cubs.

We will know a lot more in a couple of weeks, and if you thought the winter meetings were buzzing last year, this year will be double that with all of the marquee names out there and the possible trades that could go down. :yep:

 

[JimJohnson]

If they need to trade for a TOR, that's fine I guess. But I don't want to just throw away our hitters just yet when we're not sure which ones are going to become perennial all-stars. Let's say you trade away Schwarber or Soler for Salazar and one of those guys ends up hitting .320 with 40 HR and 140 RBI next year. We're going to run to the toilet and puke our f'in guts out.

You have TOR's available on the market right now which allow the Cubs to keep all their hitters and gives them another year to sort out exactly who they want to keep. If the Cubs had gone out and signed Zimmerman and Price, they win the WS next year. Or Zimmerman and Greinke, same result. The WS is there for the taking right now!! It's up to the Cubs brass if they're going to deliver on what they've been promising fans.

 

[Boobaby1]

If they need to trade for a TOR, that's fine I guess. But I don't want to just throw away our hitters just yet when we're not sure which ones are going to become perennial all-stars. Let's say you trade away Schwarber or Soler for Salazar and one of those guys ends up hitting .320 with 40 HR and 140 RBI next year. We're going to run to the toilet and puke our f'in guts out.

You have TOR's available on the market right now which allow the Cubs to keep all their hitters and gives them another year to sort out exactly who they want to keep. If the Cubs had gone out and signed Zimmerman and Price, they win the WS next year. Or Zimmerman and Greinke, same result. The WS is there for the taking right now!! It's up to the Cubs brass if they're going to deliver on what they've been promising fans.

That's the point I was making. Rarely do teams win with those kind of staffs.

When it comes to the playoffs, it is about decent pitching and timely hitting. Price or Greinke do not guarantee you anything. Even if one of them was on the team, the Cubs still didn't hit the Mets staff.

And as far as trading away potential talent? Sure! Anything can happen.

I also remember Theo trading away the best prospects in the Red Sox farm at the time in H-Ram and Anibal Sanchez, to acquire Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell.

The phrase "you have to give something to get something applies here.

I am sure you can remember Cubs fans said that Corey Patterson should not be traded, nor Felix Pie, and the Cubs held onto them and they busted.

I am not saying to trade the whole team, and I am not sure who they might trade off of the current team and farm that would net them a TOR if that is the route they chose.

it could be as simple as sending Castro and McKinney to the Padres for Ross or Cashner and a pitching prospect. Who knows?

We don't have a clue now, but in a few weeks, we will know exactly what the FO is thinking.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

If they need to trade for a TOR, that's fine I guess. But I don't want to just throw away our hitters just yet when we're not sure which ones are going to become perennial all-stars. Let's say you trade away Schwarber or Soler for Salazar and one of those guys ends up hitting .320 with 40 HR and 140 RBI next year. We're going to run to the toilet and puke our f'in guts out.

You have TOR's available on the market right now which allow the Cubs to keep all their hitters and gives them another year to sort out exactly who they want to keep. If the Cubs had gone out and signed Zimmerman and Price, they win the WS next year. Or Zimmerman and Greinke, same result. The WS is there for the taking right now!! It's up to the Cubs brass if they're going to deliver on what they've been promising fans.

Well I wouldn't trade Kyle Schwarber for Sonny Gray and I don't think this FO wants to do that either. As far as Soler or Baez go, why not? Boobaby brings up a good example with Theo trading Ramirez and Sanchez for guys that helped them win a WS. Nobody in Boston pined for those guys or threw up as far as I know. When you're talking top talent for top talent, especially when it's young talent for experience, you're not looking to win every deal. The only reason Russell and McKinney for Samardzija looks like a bad trade now is because Oakland didn't win. If they had gone on to win the World Series you would call that trade a cost of doing business.

 

[JimJohnson]

Well I wouldn't trade Kyle Schwarber for Sonny Gray and I don't think this FO wants to do that either. As far as Soler or Baez go, why not? Boobaby brings up a good example with Theo trading Ramirez and Sanchez for guys that helped them win a WS. Nobody in Boston pined for those guys or threw up as far as I know. When you're talking top talent for top talent, especially when it's young talent for experience, you're not looking to win every deal. The only reason Russell and McKinney for Samardzija looks like a bad trade now is because Oakland didn't win. If they had gone on to win the World Series you would call that trade a cost of doing business.

Gray is different than Salazar. Salazar is certainly the lesser of the 2. But what have you seen that makes you think the Cubs are on the verge of acquiring either of these guys? As far I can tell, it's just a bunch of wishful thinking.

What I don't want to see happen is the Cubs simply signing Shark in the FA, and then everyone says "oh just be patient, we can make a deal by the deadline for Gray or Salazar" and then that deal doesn't come to pass. Guaranteed the Cubs will not win the WS in 2016 if their top 3 are Arrieta, Lester, and Shark. That will not get it done.

 

[brett05]

Well I wouldn't trade Kyle Schwarber for Sonny Gray and I don't think this FO wants to do that either.

It is Beane so there is a chance, but Kyle buys you no Sonny. He's just a starting point in an offer for Gray.

 

[JimJohnson]

It is Beane so there is a chance, but Kyle buys you no Sonny. He's just a starting point in an offer for Gray.

Kyle and a bag of balls then.