Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Craptacular!
Jul 9, 2001

Fuck the DH


https://twitter.com/mlbastian/status/1421917763082326020

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

xbilkis
Apr 11, 2005

god qb
me
jay hova


In my mind Hoyer went "gently caress pushing myself to find a good return that'll just benefit the rear end in a top hat owners that are making me trade my best players; I'll just mail it in and trade em to nice places"

Willzilla
Aug 16, 2006

Rawr


Where did they find a different Alcantara??

tinstaach
Aug 3, 2010

MAGNetic AttITUDE




Maybe they'll all hit nasty slumps and want to come back to Chicago to reset things?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyE2euCbzcQ

oh

beejay
Apr 7, 2002



Atomizer posted:

I'd read that as well as this article earlier today and it sums up my thoughts from my previous post. If any of us are upset with the loss of Rizzo/Baez/Kris or any of the other guys, well keep in mind that even with them the team was hovering around a losing record. Might as well trade them and get something in return rather than keep them for a couple more months and get nothing; you'd be kidding yourself if you thought they were miraculously going to put it together again and reach the postseason, considering the aforementioned decline over the past ~4 years.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't want to see any of them go (including Darvish/Caratini/Schwarber,) especially not basically everyone good at once, but let's be real, we've all been watching the same team. :sigh:

Lol if you think this team will be competitive again under Ricketts ownership except for maybe a lucky playoff appearance here and there followed by a swift cashing in of anything that gets them there.

I think people are seriously misunderstanding things. Iím sad all these players left, but the real upset is the realization that the good times are done and the team is going to be poo poo for a long time. And not the fun kind of poo poo that the Cubs used to be, but the depressing kind where they are a farm for other teams.

beejay fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Aug 2, 2021

Kirios
Jan 25, 2010





Ah, yes...I remember the dark days of the Astros, where I paid attention to minor league scores far more than major league scores. Top 30 prospects for the organization? Child's play - I'd look at the top 120 and see how they were doing.

I do not miss those days at all.

SourKraut
Nov 20, 2005

CAUTION: POST QUALITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION





Yeah, except the Cubs exist now solely to increase the wealth of the Ricketts family, all other factors be damned.

R.D. Mangles
Jan 10, 2004




the chicago cubs are a real estate company

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007






That was another thing; I thought that it was pretty intentional on the part of Hoyer that he picked thoughtful landing places for pretty much all of the guys. They generally all ended up in playoff races and in places that they'd actually like to be; Rizzo ended up in the NE where he has family, Baez ended up with Lindor which has literally been his dream, and Kimbrel & Tepera don't even have to relocate which I'm sure their families appreciate.

(I actually don't mind the crosstown trades, even if it was for no other reason than the fact that it's the least stressful to the players themselves - for example Quintana, and if you really want to go back, Sosa and Santo. :shobon:)

xbilkis posted:

In my mind Hoyer went "gently caress pushing myself to find a good return that'll just benefit the rear end in a top hat owners that are making me trade my best players; I'll just mail it in and trade em to nice places"

I mean, all of that can be true. The team got something out of the trades, the players got meaningful transfers, and ownership looks lovely for blowing it all up. :shrug:

tinstaach posted:

Maybe they'll all hit nasty slumps and want to come back to Chicago to reset things?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyE2euCbzcQ

oh

It doesn't necessarily surprise me that the guys are rejuvenated and are playing better; they were clearly distracted and phoning it in towards the end, and were capable of performing much better than they had been.

beejay posted:

Lol if you think this team will be competitive again under Ricketts ownership except for maybe a lucky playoff appearance here and there followed by a swift cashing in of anything that gets them there.

I think people are seriously misunderstanding things. Iím sad all these players left, but the real upset is the realization that the good times are done and the team is going to be poo poo for a long time. And not the fun kind of poo poo that the Cubs used to be, but the depressing kind where they are a farm for other teams.

Well, don't misinterpret what I wrote. All I said was that they got some good prospects from the trades, not that that would guarantee they'd immediately be competitive again. But I wouldn't be so pessimistic, because if the ownership is only interested in making money (which by the way I don't think is totally true for Tom and Laura in particular) then it'd be in their interest to field a competitive team. Nobody wants to watch a tanking team, and fairweather fans (not that I have anything against them) are attracted to a winning team.

Also, they ate quite a bit of money in the trades to get better prospects, which directly contradicts the "ownership is only interested in making money and not winning" mindset....

Kirios posted:

Ah, yes...I remember the dark days of the Astros, where I paid attention to minor league scores far more than major league scores. Top 30 prospects for the organization? Child's play - I'd look at the top 120 and see how they were doing.

I do not miss those days at all.

Yeah, that's what it's been like to be a Cubs fan for most of the past century.... :rolleyes:

Chris James 2
Aug 9, 2012



Atomizer posted:

Nobody wants to watch a tanking team

Most of the fans don't get to watch them period given that the money-making TV network said money-loving owners just built doesn't give them access in their areas

Atomizer posted:

I'm not so pessimistic

We can tell. Doesn't make it realistic

Kevlar v2.0
Dec 25, 2003

ホームラン!


I'm legitimately happy for all the 2016 guys that are playing well on their new teams. Those on the 2016 team will always be Cubs for life, regardless of how the rest of their careers go.

Craptacular!
Jul 9, 2001

Fuck the DH


Rosenthal did a story on the Rays trade offers. Since The Athletic is paywalled and I don't pay for it, you'll have to put up with tweets from randos summarizing it:

https://twitter.com/RaysMetrics/status/1422239625955921926

https://twitter.com/TheCubsReporter/status/1422242890634440709

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



Craptacular! posted:

Rosenthal did a story on the Rays trade offers. Since The Athletic is paywalled and I don't pay for it, you'll have to put up with tweets from randos summarizing it:

https://twitter.com/RaysMetrics/status/1422239625955921926

https://twitter.com/TheCubsReporter/status/1422242890634440709

I wonder what role picking up Bryant's remaining salary played too. There is no way the Rays were going to take that all on and that is probably something that mattered to the Cubs.

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



Also I don't know what prospects were available but Glasnow isn't that great of a get. He'll be out all next year so you'll be trading for 1 year of control from a guy coming off TJS.

For a team that is likely not going to spend or be competitive for some time, prospects who you will have control of for 6-7 years seems more appealing.

Kevlar v2.0
Dec 25, 2003

ホームラン!


Two of the prospects we got for Darvish have been mashing this season.

Owen Caissie: .373/.543/.667
Reginald Preciado: .361/.434/.500

Bird in a Blender
Nov 17, 2005

It's amazing what they can do with computers these days.



I am not giving up hope that the Cubs are doomed to be bad forever as long as the Ricketts own the team, but they have definitely moved into a tank window. I wouldn't expect much until 2024 at the earliest. I will say that the Ricketts definitely aren't interested in being a perennial top 5 spender like the Dodgers, Yankees, and Boston. For as long as they own the team I think we're going to see them go in 4-5 year swings as they load up prospects, and then unload everyone as they finish their rookie contracts.

With them owning so much of Wrigleyville, it actually does motivate them to put out a good team. Yea a lot of people will still show up, but attendance will still be down if they suck. They had 2.6 million in 2013 & 14, but that shot up to almost 3.2 million in 2016, 17 and 18.

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



I think they'll take the Tribune approach of spending just enough to be competitive here and there, but never really serious about winning. They'll sign a nice free agent every so often and boast about their farm system. That keeps the park mostly filled and they can always rely on the attraction that is Wrigley Field. The TV network gives them a lot of extra revenue that can make up for fluctuations in attendance.

Today's game is much different than where things were 6-7 years ago. Prospects are held on much tighter and internal development is more important (something the Cubs are really bad at as an organization). Barring some revolt from the fanbase and half-empty stadiums, the Cubs will revert back to pretending to be a mid-size market that has to have a bunch of luck to be a contender.

Craptacular!
Jul 9, 2001

Fuck the DH


What you say reminds me a lot of how I felt about the Giants around 2018, when we seemed to be picking up expensive players just to look serious and misusing them everywhere. It turned out Bobby Evans just was not cut out to be GM. And of course, thereís the Mission Rock development happening outside of the stadium by McCovey Point, which will give ownership an equivalent to the Ricketts assets around Wrigleyville.

I suspect by the time the guys Chicago have picked up are ready, somebody will be selling. Probably the Dodgers, since I donít see how they keep their Postseason Every Season motto going when theyíve spent so much in prospects and salary to build their current fantasy team.

It was likely smart for Hoyer to not take an injured pitcher Tampa is trading. I still think Kilian ends up a big-league reliever but weíll see.

(Edited because I confused guys named Jed)

Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Aug 2, 2021

Popete
Oct 6, 2009

This will make sure you don't suggest to the KDz
That he should grow greens instead of crushing on MCs



Grimey Drawer

Preface this with, gently caress a Ricketts.

If I'm being honest with myself watching the team post 2016 I really don't see how you can blame the FO for this outcome, at least not entirely. Of course in retrospective you'd make some different choices but at the time I never really disagreed with any of the signings the Cubs made along the way. They did show a willingness to spend money, they went out and signed Darvish/Kimbrel and of course some signings just really didn't pan out like Brandon Morrow and Tyler Chatwood and Heyward has never really reached his potential. The real issue was the offense lacked consistency, you'd have some bright spots where everything seemed to click but if the top 4 (Contreras/Baez/Rizzo/Bryant) weren't hitting the offense was basically nothing. Happ has had a pretty abysmal year, Almora had regressed every year since 2017 and Schwarber did hit for power but never really put up huge numbers. Obviously the team was committed to selling after they traded Darvish but even with him this year wouldn't have gone much different. With everyone's contracts coming due at the end of this season it made sense to do this, it sucks of course but it was really the only option.

The only thing I really hated was the Cubs obsession with signing aging utility players and giving them way too many ABs. I don't really get the purpose of signing Jon Jay/Daniel Descalso/Jason Kipnis and Eric Sogard, just felt like a cost savings thing with the hope that it would somehow magically give the lineup some veteran guidance.

more falafel please
Feb 26, 2005

forums poster



Just realized that since my dad fell asleep during game 7, if I'm being totally honest, he'll probably never see the Cubs win a World Series.

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



Popete posted:

Preface this with, gently caress a Ricketts.

If I'm being honest with myself watching the team post 2016 I really don't see how you can blame the FO for this outcome, at least not entirely. Of course in retrospective you'd make some different choices but at the time I never really disagreed with any of the signings the Cubs made along the way. They did show a willingness to spend money, they went out and signed Darvish/Kimbrel and of course some signings just really didn't pan out like Brandon Morrow and Tyler Chatwood and Heyward has never really reached his potential. The real issue was the offense lacked consistency, you'd have some bright spots where everything seemed to click but if the top 4 (Contreras/Baez/Rizzo/Bryant) weren't hitting the offense was basically nothing. Happ has had a pretty abysmal year, Almora had regressed every year since 2017 and Schwarber did hit for power but never really put up huge numbers. Obviously the team was committed to selling after they traded Darvish but even with him this year wouldn't have gone much different. With everyone's contracts coming due at the end of this season it made sense to do this, it sucks of course but it was really the only option.

The only thing I really hated was the Cubs obsession with signing aging utility players and giving them way too many ABs. I don't really get the purpose of signing Jon Jay/Daniel Descalso/Jason Kipnis and Eric Sogard, just felt like a cost savings thing with the hope that it would somehow magically give the lineup some veteran guidance.

The issue is they lost good players and never spent money to replace them. Instead, they had to gut their farm system to find replacements for Arrieta, Zobrist, Fowler and Chapman. Sure they snuck into the top 5 in payroll a couple of years ago, but that's where they should have been from 2017 on. They have the most expensive tickets in baseball and knew a giant TV deal was in the works. Plus, they barely spent before 2016 under Ricketts, so it wasn't asking much for them to spend huge with this core.

I just think it's a cop-out to argue that they did spend. They should be spending like the Red Sox and Dodgers every year they are competitive. The benefit of being a big market is you can buy your way out of mistakes and don't need to crush your farm system to fill holes. This team doesn't trade Cease and Eloy if they had been willing to take on Verlander's contract.

And the aging utility players were a necessity because they weren't given a budget to sign a guy like Castellanos. Heck, even a guy like Kolten Wong or Cesar Hernandez would have been huge upgrades over the minor league free agent route they went with at 2B.

Popete
Oct 6, 2009

This will make sure you don't suggest to the KDz
That he should grow greens instead of crushing on MCs



Grimey Drawer

Niwrad posted:

The issue is they lost good players and never spent money to replace them. Instead, they had to gut their farm system to find replacements for Arrieta, Zobrist, Fowler and Chapman. Sure they snuck into the top 5 in payroll a couple of years ago, but that's where they should have been from 2017 on. They have the most expensive tickets in baseball and knew a giant TV deal was in the works. Plus, they barely spent before 2016 under Ricketts, so it wasn't asking much for them to spend huge with this core.

I just think it's a cop-out to argue that they did spend. They should be spending like the Red Sox and Dodgers every year they are competitive. The benefit of being a big market is you can buy your way out of mistakes and don't need to crush your farm system to fill holes. This team doesn't trade Cease and Eloy if they had been willing to take on Verlander's contract.

And the aging utility players were a necessity because they weren't given a budget to sign a guy like Castellanos. Heck, even a guy like Kolten Wong or Cesar Hernandez would have been huge upgrades over the minor league free agent route they went with at 2B.

I mostly agree with this. I really wanted them to sign Castellanos and instead we wound up with Joc Pederson. But I also think it was fair for the FO to expect guy like Schwarber/Almora/Happ/Russel to improve during that time and to give them a chance, it just didn't really work out.

My argument for them spending money is that regardless of how much money the team makes ownership will always try to get out of the luxury tax, if you take that as a granted as lovely an excuse as it is then they were spending money but probably not in the right places.

Bird in a Blender
Nov 17, 2005

It's amazing what they can do with computers these days.



The front office definitely had some moves that made sense, but didn't pan out. Like Darvish was injured most of his first year, and very average his second year. If the 2018 Cubs had the 2020 version of Darvish, then they probably aren't stuck in the play-in game that they lost to Milwaukee. Heyward, unfortunately, has been not good at the plate nearly his entire time here.

The FO approach at relievers has been bad though. Seems like most years they go out and find whoever they can on the junk pile and hope they pan out. Not surprising when most of them turn out to be bad. They also failed to find good free agents for weak spots on offense, I assume because they didn't want to spend the money. Another bat from the FA market would have helped when the main 4 of Rizzo, Bryant, Baez, and Contreras weren't hitting. Some of this I guess the FO expected some prospects to step up and then they just didn't pan out, like Almora and Happ, but then they also refused to move on and find a better alternative.

I get why they hung onto Schwarber after 2016, but that turned out to be a bad move. They probably could've traded him to an AL team looking for a good DH hitter and gotten a good return. Instead he got planted in LF and he proceeded to be fairly average all around.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what they do over the next few years, either they reload and follow the game plan when the Ricketts first arrived, or they just aim for that "sweet spot" of being competitive, but never good enough to win a WS.

Craptacular!
Jul 9, 2001

Fuck the DH


Niwrad posted:

The issue is they lost good players and never spent money to replace them. Instead, they had to gut their farm system to find replacements for Arrieta, Zobrist, Fowler and Chapman.

Secondary pieces like Zobrist and Fowler were basically lost and and never to return. Youíll get their thrift store equivalents, and have to hope the core three can pick up the dead weight.

If youíre known as a Moneyball GM, you need to know at some point when you have to go full Dombrowski and convince billionaires to open their wallets to strengthen the team. And apparently, Bill Murray calling them the real-life guy from Scrooged doesnít do it.

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



Popete posted:

I agree on these points. I really wanted them to sign Castellanos and instead we wound up with Joc Pederson.

My argument for them spending money is that regardless of how much money the team makes ownership will always try to get out of the luxury tax, if you take that as a granted as lovely an excuse as it is then they were spending money but probably not in the right places.

They definitely hosed up some things, but that's why being a big market with a big payroll matters. I feel like paying the luxury tax is fine since you made a poo poo ton of money back in 2014 or whatever with the 23rd ranked payroll in baseball. If you're going to be cheap during a rebuild, you better spend when you have a competitive team filled with good players in their prime.

Just look at the Dodgers. Bauer contract is a disaster and they were able to just fix it because they hadn't decimated their farm system plugging holes of guys they lost to free agency. If the Ricketts ran the Dodgers, they would have been trading prospects to replace Turner, Kershaw, Jansen, and Pollock.

Kevlar v2.0
Dec 25, 2003

ホームラン!


Fangraphs had the Cubs' trade deadline deals change their farm system rank from 23rd best to 9th best in the majors. A couple more years of being in the basement should get them some good draft picks to make their farm system even better. 2016 had a lot of homegrown talent on it: Bryant, Baez, Contreras, Schwarber, and Almora were all draft picks that came up through the Cubs system. Hendricks, Rondon, Edwards Jr, Russell, and Soler were all signed via trades, the Rule 5 draft, or as unsigned free agents before reaching the majors and they all made their major league debuts as Cubs. Cramming the farm system full of as many prospects as possible was a major component to them winning it all in 2016, so I'm okay with them doing the same strategy to win again, even if it might be a few years before the prospects pan out.

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



I don't have a problem with the trading for prospects now that they're out of contention. But I don't believe the only way to build a winner here is to be atrocious for 5 years and then having a self-imposed window for winning before doing it all over again. They are in a division where they should be bullying everyone with their payroll.

Craptacular!
Jul 9, 2001

Fuck the DH


Really what is the club's biggest missed opportunity with that payroll, though? We all know with hindsight that Bauer was a bad move. You can't really say Harper because Philadelphia has taken on the most outrageous obligation this side of Bobby Bonilla.
About the only thing I've got is not getting involved in the Mookie Betts sweepstakes. Taking on the salary dump LA did would have pushed Chicago over the luxury tax, but as noted this is the point where you're supposed to do that, and it would have meant him not going to the Dodgers when "but take a look at what LA is doing goddamn" is the most compelling argument for giving up and going back into the cellar.

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



Craptacular! posted:

Really what is the club's biggest missed opportunity with that payroll, though? We all know with hindsight that Bauer was a bad move. You can't really say Harper because Philadelphia has taken on the most outrageous obligation this side of Bobby Bonilla.
About the only thing I've got is not getting involved in the Mookie Betts sweepstakes. Taking on the salary dump LA did would have pushed Chicago over the luxury tax, but as noted this is the point where you're supposed to do that, and it would have meant him not going to the Dodgers when "but take a look at what LA is doing goddamn" is the most compelling argument for giving up and going back into the cellar.

Passing on Verlander was probably their biggest mistake. There is no reason they shouldn't have been at least kicking the tires on Cole, Betts, Greinke, and other big names. Although I understand the risk with massive deals.

But it's not the big ones that are the problem, it's the little savings here and there that killed them. There was no one better than Daniel Descalso, Jon Jay, Jason Kipnis, Eddie Butler, Brett Anderson, Eric Sogard, and on and on? What exactly was the plan at 2B and CF the past couple seasons?

The Quintana trade was made because they wanted cheap starting pitching. The Chapman trade was made because they chose not to invest in the bullpen before the 2016 season. Even moves like trading Soler and Candalerio were because they were unwilling to be a player in free agency before the 2017 season when elite closers were on the market.

I don't have a problem with trading prospects to make a run, but they used their farm system to save money over the years. That ended up burning them later on when their payroll did go up due to arbitration numbers and they had no one in the pipeline to help out.

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



I would also have been cool with Harper because he is a really good player in the prime of his career who would have helped the Cubs offense immensely the past few seasons. But I don't give a poo poo if the billionaire owner has to pay a few million in luxury tax money.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007





Popete posted:

Obviously the team was committed to selling after they traded Darvish but even with him this year wouldn't have gone much different.

I don't think the team would've been a serious postseason contender in the absence of the Darvish trade, but things definitely would've been different in that we'd have had a legit ace plus a reliable backup catcher in Caratini. Instead the rotation and catching situation have both been disasters.

Niwrad posted:

This team doesn't trade Cease and Eloy if they had been willing to take on Verlander's contract.

I've said this before, but I'm still content with the Quintana trade. The Cubs got a few years of a serviceable, slightly above-average starting pitcher and payroll flexibility in exchange for a pair of players who weren't really going to be ready in their contention window. Cease has potential but hasn't been a particularly impressive starter (and neither has Alzolay, while I'm on the topic) and Eloy was another DH on an NL team, and he injured his dumb self in the field earlier this season (in other words, I'm saying he literally shouldn't be playing the field as he's a mediocre defender at best and is a liability to himself at worst.)

One of you said that a better trade would've been those two guys for deGrom around 2017 when he was at his lowest value, but even then that's totally speculative, although I'd agree that'd have been a better trade if it was possible at all.

Miz Kriss
Mar 17, 2009

It's only an avatar if the Cubs get swept.


I know logic wise, I should be okay since the boys were in a slump post 2016, but drat I really liked them, and them being tossed out for prospects just makes the reality sink in that this era is over.

Whatís even worse is that I have tickets to see the Cubs later this month and Iím barely gonna recognize anyone there. :smith:

tadashi
Feb 20, 2006



I changed my favorite team on the MLB app to the Mets because they're obviously a very competent baseball team
:mets:

tadashi fucked around with this message at 08:00 on Aug 3, 2021

more falafel please
Feb 26, 2005

forums poster



I think the moment it became clear the club wasn't going to do everything they could to improve was when the Marlins sold off like 15 WAR from the previous season for nothing, and 2/3 of it went to the central. Like, Yelich could have been playing at Wrigley.

Miz Kriss
Mar 17, 2009

It's only an avatar if the Cubs get swept.


tadashi posted:

I changed my favorite team on the MLB app to the Mets because they're obviously a very competent baseball team
:mets:

Javy is already injured :mets:

Troy Queef
Jan 12, 2013

I was 12 when I made love for the first time, in Tropea, with a Roman girl who was 17 years old.





Niwrad posted:

I think they'll take the Tribune approach of spending just enough to be competitive here and there, but never really serious about winning. They'll sign a nice free agent every so often and boast about their farm system. That keeps the park mostly filled and they can always rely on the attraction that is Wrigley Field. The TV network gives them a lot of extra revenue that can make up for fluctuations in attendance.

Today's game is much different than where things were 6-7 years ago. Prospects are held on much tighter and internal development is more important (something the Cubs are really bad at as an organization). Barring some revolt from the fanbase and half-empty stadiums, the Cubs will revert back to pretending to be a mid-size market that has to have a bunch of luck to be a contender.

They donít even have to look too far to see a team that is by and large successful with that strategy: the Cardinals have made ďwin 85-90 games, maybe make the playoffs as a WC, and have 3 million fans+boffo business at Ballpark VillageĒ into an art form over the past 4-5 years

(This year has seen the limitations of that strategy, as even after St Louis allowed full capacity they canít draw more than 30-35k on even a Friday night because nobody wants to watch a deeply mediocre team with Jake Woodford in its rotation. Even though this may be Waino and Yadiís last dance, too.)

HOTLANTA MAN
Jul 4, 2010

by Hand Knit


Lipstick Apathy

Kevlar v2.0 posted:

I'm legitimately happy for all the 2016 guys that are playing well on their new teams. Those on the 2016 team will always be Cubs for life, regardless of how the rest of their careers go.

Theyre not actually cubs for life! Theyre on different teams now!

Niwrad
Jul 1, 2008



Atomizer posted:

I've said this before, but I'm still content with the Quintana trade. The Cubs got a few years of a serviceable, slightly above-average starting pitcher and payroll flexibility in exchange for a pair of players who weren't really going to be ready in their contention window. Cease has potential but hasn't been a particularly impressive starter (and neither has Alzolay, while I'm on the topic) and Eloy was another DH on an NL team, and he injured his dumb self in the field earlier this season (in other words, I'm saying he literally shouldn't be playing the field as he's a mediocre defender at best and is a liability to himself at worst.)

One of you said that a better trade would've been those two guys for deGrom around 2017 when he was at his lowest value, but even then that's totally speculative, although I'd agree that'd have been a better trade if it was possible at all.

I get why the front office made the move and it wasn't necessarily wrong, but it was necessitated by the fact that ownership wasn't going to be a big player in free agency. They paid a big price to get someone who at the time was considered a value contract.

Eloy could have been moved later on for a better piece and Cease would likely be their #2 starter right now despite his flaws. He's only 25 with ridiculous stuff.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007





Niwrad posted:

I get why the front office made the move and it wasn't necessarily wrong, but it was necessitated by the fact that ownership wasn't going to be a big player in free agency. They paid a big price to get someone who at the time was considered a value contract.

Eloy could have been moved later on for a better piece and Cease would likely be their #2 starter right now despite his flaws. He's only 25 with ridiculous stuff.

(This is not all directed at you, Niwrad, I just got interested in the payroll stuff as I started writing this so I'm sharing it here.)

I agree about the Quintana trade, but I do understand that they didn't want to spend a lot on FAs considering the payroll situation at the time. The team was at or above the CBT threshold for the past several years, and it doesn't matter how much money you have to spend on your team when every dollar you have to pay in penalty for being above the limit is essentially wasted as it doesn't make your team any better, to say nothing of the draft penalties. I'm not making excuses for billionaire team owners, but I get that they've figured out that spending tens of millions in penalties doesn't make sense as that's money that could buy actual talent, but instead is going directly into the shredder.

For the hell of it I checked the Cubs' payroll on Cot's; the CB taxable value jumped from $112M in 2014 to $155M in '15 and then $206M in '16, which I believe was the first year they've paid the tax. Then it went $183M, $193M, $237M (!), $216M (in the shortened '20 season) and finally this season's $173M value is probably not current considering all the trades. As far as I understand, the '19 and '20 payrolls were also above the limit, although I don't remember how the penalty was handled for '20.

While the team was under the limit for '17-'18, they were very close to it, and I'm not sure how aware some of you are of the penalties, which get severe, especially for consecutive offenses. There's a 20% tax on the overage amount for the 1st year alone, and an additional 12% tax if the overage is by $20M+; taxes of course increase with successive overages and increased overage amounts. So being ~$31M over in '19 cost the team an additional $10M, which went towards $0 of player talent (and resulted in another unceremonious postseason non-appearance.) If they'd brought in say an ace starter and another FA bat they could've easily added $50+M per year for those two guys and added $50-100M in taxes over the several years of those contracts.

So yeah, it's one thing to say "gently caress it" and splurge like the Dodgers or Yankees or whatever, but then eventually you need to do a sell-off anyways to get back under the threshold and reset the tax.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Kirios
Jan 25, 2010





It really goes to show just how awful that Heyward contract is. Imagine the Cubs if that money was given for a reliable solid starter instead.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply