Quantcast

jacoby ellsburyAs expected, each of the 13 free agents who were extended a qualifying offer this year have declined the offer, which would have netted them a one-year, $14.1 million contract.

Thus, each of the following 13 free agents is now tied to draft pick compensation:

  • Carlos Beltran, Cardinals
  • Robinson Cano, Yankees
  • Shin-Soo Choo, Reds
  • Nelson Cruz, Rangers
  • Stephen Drew, Red Sox
  • Jacoby Ellsbury, Red Sox
  • Curtis Granderson, Yankees
  • Ubaldo Jimenez, Indians
  • Hiroki Kuroda, Yankees
  • Brian McCann, Braves
  • Kendrys Morales, Mariners
  • Mike Napoli, Red Sox
  • Ervin Santana, Royals

To sign one of these guys, the signing team will lose a draft pick. The pick will depend on where the signing team’s first round draft pick falls. If it’s in the top 10 picks (11 this year because the 11th pick is the one the Blue Jays got for failing to sign their first rounder last year, and that pick cannot be lost – I believe), the team will lose its second round draft pick in order to sign the player. If the team’s first round pick falls outside of the top 10, however, then the signing team will lose its first round draft pick. If you sign more than one qualified free agent, you lose more than one pick.

So, if the Cubs sign one of these guys, they’ll lose their second round pick (and if they sign two, they’ll also lose their third round pick). This gives the Cubs a slight advantage over teams that stand to lose a first round pick, since the value of those picks – and the pool money associated with them – is much, much higher than a second round pick.

Of the qualified free agents, the Cubs have been connected to Cano, Choo, Ellsbury, Granderson, and McCann, though I’d question the reality of Cano and McCann, and I think Ellsbury and Choo are increasingly becoming a stretch (and Granderson may be ill-fitting).

I think Cruz or Jimenez could make sense for the Cubs on the right deal, but that’s about it from the list. Santana stands to be way overpaid, Napoli and Morales aren’t fits, Beltran is going to sign a three-year deal with a contender, Kuroda is pretty much Yankees or Japan, and Drew very likely isn’t a fit.

It’ll be interesting to see which, if any, of the free agents are dragged down by the noose of draft pick compensation a la Michael Bourn and Kyle Lohse last year. If the Cubs do as I suggest, and wait out the free agent market this time around to see who’s left scrambling for a team come late-January/early-February, a couple of these guys could become intriguing why-the-hell-not targets.

  • YourResidentJag

    Surprised about Kuroda. Thought he would accept that. Also, Morales. Really, Boras?

    • North Side Irish

      Boras was on Keith Law’s podcast last week talking about how Morales was the only true middle of the order run producer hitter available in free agency. He was cherry picking stats and blaming the home parks to make his point. The man really is good at his job…

  • Cerambam

    Didn’t that just happen to the pirates or something? And they didn’t get the pick cause it was top ten picks not like bottom 10 records? Did I just answer my question?

    • Dudeski

      The Mets wanted to sign Bourn but they had the #11 pick because the Pirates didn’t sign Appel. If they signed Bourn they would have lost their pick

  • jh03

    I’m a little surprised Cruz hasn’t been mentioned to the Cubs more. I think he makes some sense for them. A little less sense after the QO, but he still fits a need.

  • Die hard

    None of these players are worth even 25% of that qualifying offer.. They were ill advised to reject the offers and any team that forfeits a draft choice for the privilege of being held up deserves what it gets

    • TWC

      Well well well. Oz has spoken.

      • DarthHater

        [img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7365/10809223953_c1b2f43a72_n.jpg[/img]

    • DarthHater

      Cano is not worth $3.5 million per year?

      • Die hard

        Not since he joined the over the hill gang

        • Jason P

          When did he join that?

      • Mike

        Not on a team that is not expected to compete he isn’t. Well, unless you manage to trade midsummer for someone entire farm.

  • Oswego Chris

    Factoring in age, positions…a very underwhelming group…I am not sure any of this guys will be worth what their contract brings…

    Shoot the moon on Tanaka

  • Aaron

    Brett, because the Cubs have such a high draft pick (#4) in each of the rounds, except compensatory, in the 2014 draft, I would prefer not a 2nd or 3rd rounder unless it could really help the team long-term.

  • Aaron

    Sorry…not to lose a 2nd round pick, or perhaps a 3rd round pick unless it could really help the team in the long-term.

    • Jono

      The only hedge to that argument is the possibility of trading the player down the road for a better player than an early second round pick. But there are too many variables there to start going down that road

  • Cheryl

    Would it make any sense to trade Sherhoth (sp?) and Castro to the Mariners for Ackley, and another Seattle pitcher plus another Mariners player that’s on the cusp of promotion to the majors? The cubs could then trade Shark and get a very good return from the Nats. Morales might be available for a two year contract and be a bridge to Vogelbach. This assumes that the cubs would be willing to listen to offers for Rizzo.

    • Patrick W.

      No.

    • Jason P

      No way, no how. Ackley’s essentially Castro without the track record of big league success. “Another Seattle pitcher and another mariners player that’s on the cusp of promotion to the majors” is pretty vague though. It would depend on the quality of those players.

      Signing a short term stop gap to placehold for a guy who’s never played above A ball when your future first basemen is already in place makes even less sense.

  • MightyBear

    I bet if the Cubs signed Cano, Choo, Ellsbury, Cruz, Jimenez and Santana, they would make the playoffs.

    • Professor Snarks

      Here’s your bleacher ticket, sir. That’ll be $5,681. Thank You.

      Sure, they get to play in the wild card play-in game, and because of injuries, Casey Coleman will need to start.

    • MichiganGoat

      Sure we could make the playoffs but after maybe a two year window we’d have 200M+ to pay those contracts for the next 7+ years. It would be Soriano times 10.

      • Kyle

        “Sure we could make the playoffs but after maybe a two year window we’d have 200M+ to pay those contracts for the next 7+ years. It would be Soriano times 10.”

        Oddly enough, being a playoff team would give us more revenue across the board in ticket sales, playoff games and TV rights. Helping to pay for those contracts.

        • MichiganGoat

          Then fine do it I really don’t care anymore

          • MightyBear

            “Then fine do it I really don’t care anymore”

            I really don’t have anything to say, I just wanted to put a statement in quotes like Kyle does.

            • Kyle

              ““Then fine do it I really don’t care anymore”

              I really don’t have anything to say, I just wanted to put a statement in quotes like Kyle does.”

              • MightyBear

                LOL

                • Patrick W.

                  “LOL”

                  Are you really laughing out loud?

                  • The Dude

                    “Are you really laughing out loud?”

                    It was pretty funny.

            • CubsFaninMS

              Pee Wee Herman would be impressed, guys. lol

    • Brian Peters

      Mighty ain’t got much book learnin’ on this here baseball knowin’, so we should maybe cut him some slack……ah……….naw, let’s not and say we done!

    • Mike

      Remind me, please, how does this approach work out for the Angels?

  • Oswego Chris

    Conservatively… That would add a cool 100 million to the payroll

    • MightyBear

      No problem. Sell some Ameritrade stock.

      • MichiganGoat

        [img]http://i.imgur.com/W7LhdQ5.jpg[/img]

        • Steve Ontiveros’ Mustache

          Well done.

      • Hee Seop Chode

        This. At least people can stop typing tat there were no FA to sign.

  • nkiacc13

    Also have to remember that the cubs aren’t going to be big IFA spenders on July 2 because of going over restrictions last year

    • Jono

      I completely forgot about that. According to a point brett made over the summer that made a ton of sense, they might trade a bunch of that pool money. So that should be another addition of minor league talent

      • Jono

        Or mlb talent, which would be nice

      • Edwin

        If other teams are looking to trade for IFA money, then yes.

        • Jono

          Teams traded international pool money this year.

  • Akabari

    With the Cubs having having really bad wOBA and OPS because no one on this team knows how to take a walk, and both of the “golden children” also have pretty awful BB%, wouldn’t it make sense to make a pretty good run at Choo? Otherwise it would seem like power pitchers may be able to just tear through the present and future Cubs without blinking.

    • Drew7

      Who are these “Golden Children”?

      • Akabari

        Bryant and Baez.
        Looking at the BA ranking today, it really seems that the prospects can be grouped into 2 classes: Potential all stars (Bryant and Baez) and everyone else. Not to say that the other guys aren’t good (or really good) but they haven’t prove themselves and haven;’t faced good enough competition to be really sold on them yet.
        And in both groups of prospects, NO ONE knows how to take a walk

        • jt

          did you look up Vogelbach, Solar and Alcantara?

          • akabari mobile

            Alcantara is the only one who has a chance making it to the bags this year, and Soler with 210 PA AND a very meh AFL is what I mean when I say he hasn’t proven himself yet at all. Vogelbach has some real struggles ahead of him, it seems like.
            so, again. Why would we not go after someone who isn’t speed based and has a great eye? Maybe he could teach a thing or two, too. Who knows.
            I hear a lot of clamoring for Jacoby when I think choo is the real guy to go after.

            • Scotti

              “Vogelbach has some real struggles ahead of him, it seems like.”

              Huh?

  • MightyBear

    The whole qualifying offer thing is stupid. 22 QO’s in the last two years and number of QO’s accepted? – 0.

    • Jono

      I completely agree. I don’t like the idea of having to give another team a high draft pick just for signing their former player

    • hansman

      How many times did guys accept arbitration previously?

  • http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/653cc0c5f0eded621ab13b4f631de7da.png Cizzle

    I was surprised that Drew was given a Q offer, but I’m amazed he didn’t accept it. Am I missing something with him? A 30 year old SS, with average defense who hasn’t posted an 800 OPS since 2010 and has averaged 1.25 WAR since then. I don’t get it.

    Not that I give it THAT much credence, but he’s 1 spot ahead of Joe Crede on BR’s all-time Player Rater.

    • Patrick W.

      If I were a 30 year old SS (and mind you, he’s a pretty good player) I might be inclined to try to get a 2 or 3 year contract with an option or so vs. a 1 year guarantee. He might get a 3 year contract with an average annual value of say, 10MM with an option year/buy out that takes it to AAV of 12MM.

  • The Dude

    Ellsbury (6/120M), Jimenez (3/45) , Tanaka (???). That’s my wish list, and I don’t think that’s too unreasonable. Nothing the FO has said, leads me to believe that my wish list will come true, but a guy can dream, right?

    Oh yeah, and Santa, throw in a nice bullpen arm as a stocking stuffer. I’ve been good this year.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com salesguy

      Pass, I’ll take my chances with the picks thanks. Knees and rotator cuffs tend to get brittle after 30.

      • The Dude

        So, you’re betting on 2nd/3rd round draft picks to produce more than Ellsbury/Jimenez? Wanna play poker?

        • Jono

          Or he just wouldn’t want the cubs to commit $20 million a year for the next six years for ellsbury. We all want better players, but there’s a point where it’s just too much money for too long

          • Blublud

            Right, and without those contracts, we’re never going to be competitive. But then again, I never felt like Soriano was overpaid.

            • hansman

              In conparison to other big dollar FA, Soriano earned his contract.

              • jt

                which goes to say that big dollar FA’s are not a good value.

            • Jono

              Without 6 year $120 million contracts for guys over 30 who rely on speed? Really? You have to judge contracts individually, on their own merits.

              • Blublud

                I wasn’t speaking of his contract specifically. If the Cubs are going to compete at some point, we are probably going to have to be willing to give guys like Ellsbury contracts. I, for one, feel like the Cubs will spend much more money this offseason then people think. I think one of Ellsbury or Choo is coming to Chicago. I also feel the Cubs will pay what it takes to get Tanaka. Maybe I believe more in Ricketts then most, but I don’t believe the guy or this team is broke. I don’t buy the rhetoric.

                • Jono

                  Well, of course. No one is saying they shouldn’t ever give out big contracts. We’re all cubs fans here. We all want the best possible players they can afford.

                • praying the cubs get ready to win

                  I agree

              • The Dude

                Yes, you have to judge contracts on their own merits, but the circumstances under which a player is signed hass a huge factor when considering how valuable it is to each specific team. So, if the only player we signed this offseason was Ellsbury at 6/120, to me, that contract isn’t as wise, as say, when you factor in complementary signings.

                Of the three I listed, Jimenez is the biggest gamble, but he’s also the most cost-effective. None of the contracts are expected to be “mega” by today’s standards, so it’s diversifying the risk, as well.

                • Jono

                  The more talent on the team, the closer the team is to being a legit world series contender. The closer a team is to being a legit contender, the more sense it makes to give someone a long, expensive contract. So if signing ellsbury was the thing to put the team over the top, id be much more in favor of it. But it’s not, so im not. It’s not the time ti give out that kind of contract to that kind of player

                  • cubes

                    the only thing you have to do to be a world series contender is make the playoffs consistently. the only way to do that is to not depend on high variance players and have a strong pipeline to replace the unstoppable force of injuries.

                    • Jono

                      The cubs are close enough to competing to make that 6 year $120 million deal. To make a deal like that, you want the player’s best years to come when you’re expecting to make runs in the playoffs. If they signed ellsbury now, he’ll be in his declining years when they’re expected to make deep playoff runs. That’s the point. When you sign an older guy to a long contract and expect him to underpeferm and decline, you time it so you get his best years when you’re expecting to makenplayoff runs. 6 years and $120the million is not just a piece type signing. That’s a major, center piece signing. Jackson was a piece type signing, and guess what, Epstein still kind of regrets it (according to Brett’s article)

                    • Jono

                      *the cubs are NOT close enough…..*

                    • cubes

                      “Seems so simple yet so many people are so angry that it is so blinding that it doesn’t make sense. It’s Veruca Salt “I want it now.” mentality.”

                      your assumption of my “spend all the money as dumb & as fast as possible”

                      “Just because I want them to spend wisely doesn’t mean im not rooting for them”

                      is equal to my assumption of your “the only way to spend wisely is to not spend any money”

                      hence the great divide. I think at least im a bit closer to reality… (as one will often do)…. given that ive never said anything like spend like crazy, where as many here are content to carry an 80mill pay roll for a team with a net worth over 1B.

                    • MichiganGoat

                      Cubes the response was not in response to what you’ve said, but a description of why so many are having such a tough time .

                    • cubes

                      ya reading back I should have only included the 2nd quote… hard to follow my bad

                    • Jono

                      Changing my argument then arguing against the made up argument doesn’t work. There’s a veteran way to spend $120 million than on a player who will be declining and underperforming by the time the cubs are expected to make runs in the post season

                    • Jono

                      *theres a BETTER way….*

                    • MichiganGoat

                      No worries there are a bunch of blank comments hard to see what is being said. This ignore script is really helpful.

                    • Jono

                      I consider giving ellsbury 6 years and $120 million to be unwise based on everything the previous posts I wrote.

                    • Kyle

                      You can be a World Series contender without making the playoffs consistently.

                      If you don’t have that pipeline of prospects fully in place yet, it’s senseless to simply give up and wait for them to show up. You can try to compete in the short-term while you wait for them.

                    • Jono

                      6 years $120 isn’t a band aid, bridge type contract. That’s a huge commitment. And the amount of money you’d need to commit right now to compete in 2014 would hinder the team when the impact prospects start coming up. You’d need a lot more than just ellsburh

                    • Jono

                      It’s not like flipping a switch. You can’t just decide to be good. Like the jackson signing last year, it’s about adding pieces when the right ones come along. I don’t believe 6 years $$120 for ellsbury fits that right now. J think hart might fit. Maybe jiminez/jimenez

                  • MichiganGoat

                    Seems so simple yet so many people are so angry that it is so blinding that it doesn’t make sense. It’s Veruca Salt “I want it now.” mentality.

                    • Brains

                      you might be right, but there are other mitigating factors besides “let’s wait until some unknown date in the future when they tell us its ok to root for our own team again”. such as using revenues to invest in team talent.

                    • MichiganGoat

                      Again there is that empty space… I’ll check with the admin and see if anything is wrong.

                    • Jono

                      I root for the cubs every year. Just because I want them to spend wisely doesn’t mean im not rooting for them

                    • http://www.bleachernation.com salesguy

                      That’s exactly what it is, “Want it now” problem with that is if you try to compete in the short term (signing big name post 30+ year old FA) you get an aging MLB roster, contracts nobody wants to take off your hands, and 70ish wins, which qualifies you for mid level draft pics, not to mention a bloated payroll that handcuffs the organization for years to come. There was no doing both, espically in the era of the 100-200 million dollar man, and the QO. This thing needed to be completely gutted, fumigated, and rebuilt, that takes time, and some pain, we do not need Elsbury, Price, or any post 30 FA with a QO attached.

                    • Kyle

                      “That’s exactly what it is, “Want it now” problem with that is if you try to compete in the short term (signing big name post 30+ year old FA) you get an aging MLB roster, contracts nobody wants to take off your hands,”

                      You mean like how we got Corey Black for Soriano?

                      ” and 70ish wins,”

                      You mean like 2007 and 2008?

                      ” which qualifies you for mid level draft pics,”

                      You mean like the ones Boston and St. Louis consistently used to turn into the best franchises in the game?

                      ” not to mention a bloated payroll that handcuffs the organization for years to come.”

                      So to avoid that, we’ll preemptively handcuff ourselves. It’s sooo much better to lower payroll by $45m than it is to risk $45m in overpayments.

                      ” There was no doing both, espically in the era of the 100-200 million dollar man, and the QO. This thing needed to be completely gutted, fumigated, and rebuilt, that takes time, and some pain, we do not need Elsbury, Price, or any post 30 FA with a QO attached.”

                      Good teams can always do both, though it probably is too late for us now.

                    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

                      “You mean like how we got Corey Black for Soriano?”

                      You mean like how the Cubs are paying $13 million for Soriano in 2014?

                    • jt

                      How much were those contracts worth that Boston unloaded upon the “sign all the players” Dodgers?
                      Remind me, which team won the WS?

                    • http://www.bleachernation.com salesguy

                      Kyle, what you don’t realize was how sick this org was, Brett Jackson was our #1 prospect, radical surgery when Theo took over was clearly called for here. Point being if it’s 2014-15 to be competitive, it makes the 3 years of suck worthwhile. If it’s 2017-2018 with mediocre teams in the middle, I’d prefer to take the first option. Rip the bandaid off quickly and fix the problem, we both want the same thing, we just differ on how to get there, and how quickly.

                    • Kyle

                      Brett Jackson was a pretty good prospect. It’s easy to look back now and LOL at him being the No. 1 prospect, but like I said before, we’re going to look back in three years and LOL at some of the current top prospects too.

                      We’re about to head into a third straight putrid season under Epstein and fifth straight losing season overall. “Ripping the bandaid off quickly” is well in our rearview mirror.

                    • jt

                      Shark was considered by many to be not much more than a middle RP’er
                      Many considered that Castillo would never be more than a backup catcher.
                      Many wondered why anyone would trade Marshall for T. Wood.
                      Many thought Rizzo and Castro could occupy regular positions in MLB… and they have.
                      pick an argument… find an anecdote!

      • P Hertz

        You’re insane.

    • cub2014

      based on what theo said I think they will
      go after a starter like Santana or Jiminez.

  • Brains

    Really, in the end this isn’t a bad FA pool, especially compared to the next two years. We’d be remiss to let it pass in favor another Bison Hot Dog Stand investment.

    • hansman

      You do realize the same exact thing was said last year.

      • Brains

        and look where we ended up after doing nothing last year

  • anoymous-ly

    How much do you gain by “tanking” seasons when there are teams that cannibalize your early draft position advantage by acquiring multiple supplemental picks from qualifying offers and competitive balance rules?

    The Yankees potentially can have 5 picks before the Pirates second pick. World Series champs Boston can potentially pick four first round caliber players before the Cubs make their second round pick. NL Champion St Louis will receive two extra picks before the Cubs second pick.

    Therein lies the rub. You have guaranteed yourself multiple consecutive losing seasons on meaningful but marginalized draft advantages, for the chance to POSSIBLY field a good team later. All with too many, so many question marks. So many things that can go wrong at the expense of wasting all those “sacred years.”

    • hansman

      Once you get past the top 3-4 picks, you need ALL of those extra picks to make up the difference in projected future WAR from the draftees.

    • Blublud

      Look at it this way. If a team had the #3 pick, and we had the #28th, 32nd and 35th (randomly selected), would you be willing to trade those 3 picks for the chance to pick 3rd. I would without a thought.

      • anonymous-ly

        Yes, but the Yankees and Red Sox have the ultimate benefit that they were actually playing meaningful games. When you spend a little bit of smart money and sign free agents like Kuroda and Napoli you get the “dual” benefit of their contributions and if they leave for free agency you get compensation picks. An guess what? If you get enough of decent players you are in the playoff hunt and you get more attendance and more revenues and your players perform better because they are more focused and therefore create more trade value. And guess what? The fans are happier.

        • Blublud

          Of course. I would much rather win and be in the Red Sox’ position. There is no doubt. I was just comparing the value of the picks.

        • jt

          And as Napoli ages a bit closer to dotage, somebody else will be paying his bills while the RS can look for younger stronger players.
          long term big money contracts for aging players who can’t use greenies…
          hmmmmmmmmmmm!

  • cubsin

    I was interested in Cruz, assuming he’d get something resembling Melky Cabrera’s contract (2/$16) or even a make-good one year contract with an option year. I wouldn’t touch him with a fork at 1/$14.1.

    • jt

      +1

  • Brains

    I think Kendry Morales, if his ankle is healed, is a good gamble.

    • bbmoney

      For who? An AL team that needs a DH?

      He’s a DH/1b only.

  • Patrick W.

    For the Cubs? To play where?

  • Jon

    Sign no one ! That’s too much money coming daddy Ricketts trust fund!

    • Greenroom

      We get it. you don’t like Ricketts. That horse has been beaten for a while now. come up with another comment or something. do you have that comment saved on your “notepad”, with your other Ricketts is a sadist comments?

      • Brains

        our owner sucks. that’s the problem. it gets repeated by 100 people here because it’s obvious. why take it upon yourself to censor your peers on behalf of someone who thinks your a doorknob?

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

          Getting repeated by you 100 times is not the same thing as being repeated by 100 people.

          • MichiganGoat

            Brett I’m seeing a lot of empty blank space in some of these comments… is everything working okay.

            • Brains

              that empty blank space is what’s in your auto-dial of your phone

          • Brains

            hah, Brett regulating the severity of the impact of my occasionally harsh comments is my second favorite part of the blog

        • Greenroom

          So now you can read people’s minds? Interesting. And door knob is a bit offensive to say the least. I hope stating it makes you feel better. Interesting comment coming from someone who identifies as “brains”. may need to re-think that one. We get it, you and others do not like Ricketts. But must you state it every single time, for everything?

          “Wrigley development slowed by rooftop owners” Ricketts sucks
          “Rizzo is in a slump” Ricketts sucks
          “Heavy rains expected” Ricketts sucks

          We get it. Keep going scarecrow, Oz is waiting for you. Just follow the yellow brick road. peace~

          • Brains

            see, now that’s a retort. it took me all week to come up with “door knob”, that was the appropriate reaction, at least as i anticipated it.

          • MichiganGoat

            Greenroom you seem to be replying to blank empty space… might want to check your computer.

            • jh03

              Goat, I think it’s just you. I’m not having any problems whatsoever.

              • jh03

                Or this is supposed to be a joke, and I’m clueless.

                • Brains

                  he’s just a cardinals fan who trolls the blog, he gets mad when i bring it up

                  • jh03

                    Duh.

              • MichiganGoat

                Well that means my ignore script is working, good to know.

                • Greenroom

                  hahaha

          • MichiganGoat

            This is what I’m seeing
            [img]http://i.imgur.com/0dQ9Qoe.jpg[/img]

            • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

              Is that really a thing?

              • MichiganGoat

                It’s what I’m seeing

      • MichiganGoat

        Sorry Greenroom there appears to big a big empty space between your comment and this reply, I guess I need to work on that ignore script.

        • Brains

          i’m drinking founders beer tonight. i know it’s not bud, but you’ll have to deal with the fact that there might be better beers than what st. louis tells us to drink at wrigley field.

        • MichiganGoat

          I sure do hope there blank empty comments get fixed soon.

          • Greenroom

            Ah the lost art of humor and whats that word, oh yeah, fun. Thanks, MG. I hope we can figure out that space issue soon. peace~

  • THEOlogical

    The Braves announced that they’ll be building a new stadium by 2017! Parking being one of the biggest issues with this stadium now. I’m excited (being I live in Ga and frequent them a lot) but it makes me frustrated that the Cubs can’t get diddly squat done on renovations. And there is NO parking at Wrigley, compared to the Braves. They will have built the stadium 20 yrs ago and turn around and build a new one, whereas the Cubs biggest project being done over the last 20 yrs is take the crown out of the infield. I say if this renovation project doesn’t get started within a yrs time, we move. If Ricketts would look around and see how easy teams get their way, he’d be PO’ed. You don’t have to fight tooth and nail when some other city will bring you in with open arms and let you build that shiny new stadium. The fans will also forget about this whole rebuilding of the team when they check out all the new bells and whistles.

    • anonymous-ly

      The Cubs bring in almost twice the amount in gate receipts and stadium revenue as the Braves, close to $100 Million more annually. So it is an easier decision for the Braves to move than the Cubs.

      • THEOlogical

        So what you’re saying is that the Braves upper mgmt and owner are smarter than the Cubs? Because, if they are bringing in that kind of loot, then we should be having a whole lot better success or player potential on the field, than the Braves. If that’s the case, where is this money going? For 5 yrs we have continuously been awful in the MLB W/L dept. Our farm system has been dramatically improved, that’s great! But if they are banking on a few players to impact this organization for the near term, and come up snake eyes, then it will be another long and arduous journey once again to be competitive.

    • Brains

      stop taking the side of one random dude who hates chicago vs the entire city. it’s disgusting.

    • Caryatid62

      The braves deal, if it is as the atlanta journal constitution has described, is borderline criminal.

      • Jeff

        please explain ???????????????

        • Caryatid62

          You mean extorting $400 million in public funds without so much as a vote by the citizens? Public financing of sports stadiums is about a billion times worse than all the PED use in baseball history.

          • mjhurdle

            I see what you are saying…..but the public did have a vote. They voted in the representatives responsible for making the decision.
            Those representative make decisions all the time as critical as public funding for stadium, maybe more in some cases.
            Just because stadium financing is very front and center in the media does not make it more important.
            The residents of a particular city have the ability to vote in representatives that they feel will convey their desires the closest. If they choose not to exercise that right, or place that responsibility in the wrong person, that doesn’t change the fact that they are responsible for putting those people in the position to make those decisions.

            • Caryatid62

              Afctually, they didn’t vote in people who they thought were going to be faced with this decision, as it wasn’t on the table at the time of the election. Your post is a nice primer on representative democracy, but we all know the reality of that is far from your theoretical statements. For spending of over $100 million, the people’s voice should be heard. And for an expenditure of $450 million (the highest ever for the county), then it must be heard.

              • Jeff

                I don’t know where your from but I guarantee not many Georgian’s are going to be upset over the use of public funds over this move. People in Atlanta are excited about this news tonight.

                • Caryatid62

                  Well then the people are stupid. Publicly financed stadiums have never–not once–been net financial benefits. Good luck breaking that trend.

              • mjhurdle

                “we all know the reality of that is far from your theoretical statements.”

                well, seeing as how the deal was approved with no votes by the people, I would say that you are the one dealing in fantasy, and perhaps the idea of voting for people you feel can make the best decisions is in fact the reality, because you never know what situations those people may be faced with.

                • Caryatid62

                  If you think that we live in an ideal representative democracy where forward thinking citizens can anticipate activities of this magnitude while choosing from some ideal set of candidates that actually reflect and/or share their values, good on ya. I don’t buy it.

                  • mjhurdle

                    i didn’t say anything about “ideal”. Im simply dealing with the facts of the matter.
                    Like it or not, the government is not going to hold votes every time you think the issue is important. So you are left with either crying about it later, or voting for someone that best represents your interests.
                    Of course that doesn’t always work, but it is the system that we have.

                    • Caryatid62

                      Its actually not. Most local governments in this country have a referendum system set up for exactly this type of situation.

                    • Mike F

                      Little bit more complicated than all of this. In Illinois Chicago is a Hone Rule unit of local government. Some downstate communities are too. Unless specifically required by the State or Federal Statute it gives a City board latitude over you and S’s.

                      That said, I can tell you how these situations work, you won’t like it but I am intimately familiar. The people requesting are usually professional businessmen, the people listening or lacking there of professional self marketers with weak understanding of business. So generally unless you are the Cubs, what a fbombing story, get what they want. A campaign donation, a dubious number there and off and running. I know numbers they use, and they are over inflated usually.

                      But the fact remains, they cover the public funding unless the entity stiffs them or violates the agreement and gain something in the process. I don’t know that society or humanity are moved forward. I guess you can say it would be a hell of a lot better if a drug company would start research center, Caterpillar make a tractor or something that lifts are lives to make us better, but thus is where we find ourselves.

                      i think Jefferson would be disappointed in us all.

              • hansman

                True democracy is just asking 10 people what is for dinner. Only 4 of them actually care what is for dinner and have researched it. The other 6 wouldn’t mind or notice if you fed them the first 4.

          • Jeff

            You can argue the semantics of $400 Million in public funds, but the flip side is that Cobb county is seeing all the tax revenue for the next thirty years they will get from the Braves moving into their backyard.

            There is no enhancement ever going to happen by the Braves staying where they are.

            The windfalls that Cobb will receive by this move is huge…staggering if you take into consideration everything. I live close to the ATL, I’m there every other week, so this isn’t conjecture.

            Rich people live on the north side of Atlanta, poor people live on the south side, the Braves stadium is on the south side, you can figure out the rest.

            • Caryatid62

              No stadium, publicly financed, has EVER been a net financial gain for the surrounding area. This is not an argument; this is historical fact.

              The citizens of Cobb county will lose millions on this deal, as every other constituency has before them. The windfall will simply not happen.

              • Jeff

                wow, I’m glad your the definite expert here

                • Caryatid62

                  It’s not about being an expert–it’s just about facts. It’s never happened–that’s not hard to understand.

                  • Andrew

                    You can’t just say its a fact without providing some supporting evidence though. I would be much more inclined to believe you if you include a link to some study that supported your point.

              • mjhurdle

                Some stadiums have resulted in a gain for the community (see SF Giants and AT&T Park).
                The Giants funded it themselves, but it did result in a gain due to the fact it revitalized a previously unused area, generating sales and property tax from the ballpark, and surrounding amenities that resulted from having a ballpark in the area.
                The benefit of the ballpark appears to be highly dependent on where the stadium is located. Too far away from a city and it doesn’t generate enough surrounding business. Too close and you minimize your gain, because that land would have been utilized by some business even if a ballpark wasn’t there.
                The point is that a public financed stadium *could* be beneficial, if done correctly. At that point all that would be left to argue is how much benefit it would bring, and thus how much the city should be expected to pay.

                • Caryatid62

                  The only reason AT&T had benefits is because the cost to the public was zero. That’s my exact point.

                  Publicly financed stadiums are a boondoggle, and always have been. They do not benefit the public, no matter where they have been built. Study after study has proven this.

                  • hansman

                    Provided those studies aren’t done for groups that don’t want taxpayer funded stadiums.

                    Then again, you can get studies done by the folks that want the stadium built. Then they show gains to the community.

                  • mjhurdle

                    Then your point is poorly supported.
                    AT&T provides benefit to the city, regardless of who financed it.
                    What makes it a good or bad deal is dependent of how much a city pays.
                    If AT&T provides $10 million a year in benefit to the city, then the city could pay back 8 million a year to the Giants (or agree to a lump sum that paid for X years into the future at $8 million a year) and it would still be a good deal for the City.
                    If the city pays 15 million a year to the giants, then it is a bad deal.
                    So your problem is not with publicly financed stadiums, but rather cities over-valuing (and hence over-paying) what a franchise is worth economically and culturally to their city.

                    • Caryatid62

                      Sorry, we’re not going to agree on this. With interest, you cannot just choose to pay whatever you want. You’re utterly oversimplifying the issue.

                    • Blublud

                      Goverment funded anything that is not for 100% government use is wrong in my book. I don’t believe it should be legal for any city, town, county or state to give a company, sports team, or business tax breaks, incentives or anything else.

                      However, to argue that an area doesn’t benefit is plain dumb. If a town gives a team $300 mil and the return is $20 mil in taxes a year, then the town breaks even in 15 years and everything after is a gain. Not to mention jobs, which create taxes and other gains in taxes that is spent around the stadium that can’t be counted as gains directly from the stadium.

                      I don’t consider it a gain, because I believe the town should recieve that taxes without having to kick out funding. Its the personal business owners responsibility to provide those funds. 100% of those funds. But you can’t seriously argue that the opportunity for gains for the town isn’t there.

                    • caryatid62

                      “However, to argue that an area doesn’t benefit is plain dumb. If a town gives a team $300 mil and the return is $20 mil in taxes a year, then the town breaks even in 15 years and everything after is a gain. Not to mention jobs, which create taxes and other gains in taxes that is spent around the stadium that can’t be counted as gains directly from the stadium.”

                      Pretty much every study that’s ever been done is dumb, then, I guess.

                    • bbmoney

                      “If a town gives a team $300 mil and the return is $20 mil in taxes a year, then the town breaks even in 15 years”

                      To add…this isn’t even remotely true given the opportunity cost and the time value of money.

  • Blackhawks1963

    The Cubs are extremely unlikely to go after any free agent on the qualifying list. Therefore I can’t sweat any of these pricetags and the like. TheoJed have been very clear that this will be a relatively quiet winter while we wait for the fruits of the farm system to bear fruit, hope for incremental improvements from the few core players we have like Rizzo, etc.

    • Blublud

      I might not be willing to bet big, but I will bet a bucket of beers that they spend quite a bit.

      • Blackhawks1963

        I trust what Theo has been saying in recent days and am prepared for a relatively quiet offseason. I don’t see any free agent signing of magnitude. And I don’t see them trading quality prospects at this point either. The only thing I can envision of consequence is a possible trade of Samardzija if they can get a top of rotation pitching prospect in return.

        • Brains

          this is exactly right, as far as i can tell. it will be another 90 loss season next year, with some much wanted draft picks. the following year there will be few if any good free agents, so we’ll have an excuse not to sign anyone. then four years will have passed, and by year 5 theo’s contact will be in its last year and he’ll go to a team with an owner that doesn’t make him look bad, having left us a good minor league system, and having accumulated the single worst composite 5-year record of any GM in the history of baseball.

        • Blublud

          I never said they’ll trade anyone. In fact, I have consistently argued against trading prospects right now. However, the Cubs have quite a bit of money to spend right now, and if the player is there to spend it on, they spend it. I remember the Angels were broke on week, and the next week they had sign Pujols and CJ. Never be eve the rhetoric. If the Cubs are “broke” then the League should step in amd take that team. We’ll be in on Tanaka doesn’t sound like broke to me.

  • SenorGato

    Cano would so be worth it, but my worry is that we have the poorest owners ever.

    • MichiganGoat

      And what would you offer Cano if you could?

    • Brains

      we should sign him for 6 years 170m or something. i know it’s a pipe dream, but it would expedite improvement, give a mentor to younger players, fix the middle of the lineup a little, and most importantly for Brett, shut me up forever.

      • Brains

        in fact i’ll make a pledge – if we sign cano or tanaka, i promise to never post on this blog again.

        • D.G.Lang

          Can we just pretend that we signed them and you go away?

    • MichiganGoat

      Damn there is that empty space again
      [img]http://i.imgur.com/aRNjN3B.jpg[/img]

      • Brains

        the important thing is that you’re having fun, goatee

      • hansman

        This is weird, im seeing an empty space as well. But fo reals

  • Die hard

    Now that MLB is on MTV a Jumbotron is superfluous … People will be watching on their smartphone during game

    • Really

      It would be nice if the trolls could be extinguished. You are exhibit A. If you don’t understand the multi million economics of a Jumbotron and more advertising sources, then maybe sign up for a principles if business class once you finish up on that GED.

  • praying the cubs get ready to win

    I think the Cubs will make a splash but it will be via the trade route, maybe a free agent as well. I hope they do not trade any of their top minor leaguers.

  • thissitehasgonenutso

    If they showed all their cards, that would be bad buisness. The fans want to hear that we will be in on this guy and that. The off season is like a game of cards. Hold them close to your chest, let the crap teams fold, and then BAM! make a move. That’s what we will do. Teams dont want to give up draft picks. They are too precious in today’s game. Look what happened last year with bourn and lohse. Patience, as fans, is key. Calm down and don’t get pissed about things before they do or don’t happen. This blog used to be a half full blog. Now its a whine, and full of bull$h*t, blog. Go Cubs, GO!

  • jt

    Bryant will be 22 y/o next year. He is considered a prospect.
    Rizzo and Castro were 23 this year. They were not considered prospects.
    At the beginning of the year posters pretty much universally stated that have Castillo catch full time was a bad idea.
    Samardjiza has transitioned to a sought after starter. Before the 2012 season most posters considered that a bad idea.
    Wood, who earned his way onto an AS team, was considered a mistake until after May of 2012. His acquisition resulted from Marshall.
    Folks, the prospect train has already made more than a few deliveries.
    That is 3 positions and 2 rotation spots that are already filled.
    There is an indication that Lake could be adequate as a short side platoon in CF. That remains to be proved.
    Vitters will try to convince the FO that he can be a short side platoon in LF. That remains to be proved.
    But Lake and Vitters have earned the right to audition. This is not a bad thing.
    Baez, Alcantara and C. Villanueva will be at Iowa this year. They are a step away from 3 needs at Wrigley. Bryant is catching up fast. This is not a bad thing.
    Cabrera, Hendricks, Rosscup, Grimm and Ramirez will be competing against Rodon, Arietta, Russin and Parker for time on the bump for The Cubs. This is not a bad thing.
    *
    My head is not in the sand. Reliance Bogusevic/Vitters, Sweeney/Lake and Valbuena/Murphy platoons is not a great thing. But it is not a long lasting thing. They actually may work for a while. When they get over exposed it may be time to elevate a few of the prospects in waiting. I don’t see this as a bad thing. I don’t see it as a bad thing at all.
    And that is before any moves have been made in the hot stove.
    The one contract most posters which could be rescinded? The FA SP’er.

  • Kevin B

    What does anyone think of the Cubs signing Matt Garza as a FA? Getting him back? No draft pick compensation, and if we trade Shark …….

  • hogie

    I think Granderson could be one of the players to really get his price dropped by compensation. He has said to be picky on where he wants to play, but New York doesn’t sound all that eager about him. He probably wont, but if he sticks to the idea that it is New York or Chicago, and New York doesn’t make a play for him, he could really come as a value. The injuries last year were of the fluke variety, but they could still bring his cost down. This is still a guy that has big time pop and can play all over the outfield. I don’t see the fit as that bad, at least something to keep an eye on.

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+