Jump to content





Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays


Photo

Jed Hoyer Interview


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 jh03

jh03

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Twitter:@jh_03

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:58 AM

Jed Hoyer is being interviewed on MLBN radio here in a few minutes. I'm going to attempt to rapid fire quote what he says, assuming he says anything note-worthy (Brett, if you find anything note-worthy, you're more than welcome to use my account again to verify what he said. I'm just trying to relay information, not create it lol). TH will symbolize what Todd Hollandsworth asked, JM being Jim Memelo, and JH being Jed Hoyer. If I put something in quotes, I tried to nail it as well as I could. Everything else is paraphrased.

 

JM: What is the volume of interest you're getting from other teams?

 

JH: We've had a lot of phone calls, talked to every team, some teams multiple times. We've got a lot of good players, teams recognize that, different peices are interesting to different teams. We've gotten a lot of calls so far, with the new playoff system there's a lot of teams in the race, so there’s a lot of phone calls going on.

 

 

TH: Chance for a deal before the all-star game, like Theo said?

 

JH: That's about right. The challenge is if teams are willing to set the market early. Some teams want the market to be set early.

 

 

JM: Market opens early because buyer can get a rental for another month?

 

JH: Some teams that are in buying mode now, may be in selling mode in a month. But teams around .500 are going to be aggressive and 30 days of service time is a part of that.

 

TH: Open-ness for Sori to open no-trade clause?

 

JH: They've had conversations, but it's pretty much established that's it's going to be a case by case basis. It looked like Sori's bat quickened up and hopefully that will continue. The day off helped him and Castro because it helped cleared their heads. Even young players wear down and days off are important.

 

 

JM: Assess how the Cubs have performed so far this year?

 

JH: I think Theo nailed it with his quote yesterday. Our run differential is pretty solid. Our season hinges on the fact that we can't finish games out. We haven't won close games or beat the teams in the division. You are what you are.

 

 

JM: Cubs FO is not in the business of being .500. Is that accurate?

 

JH: "That's very accurate." When you have the right roster, finishing .500 can be a good thing, but that's not what we have now.

 

 

TH: Are you going to try to trade Kevin Gregg?

 

JH: We're happy for Kevin and he's been impressive. A lot of really dominant saves, 1-2-3 innings. He's been a lifesaver. Scary to think where we would've been without him. Teams will inquire, but teams will inquire about every guy on our roster.

 

JM: Asked about buy-low guys (Feldman/Scheirholtz/etc)

 

JH: We've been really happy with what we've been able to do on the free agent market the last couple of years.

 

 

TH: Latest on negotiations with Kris Bryant

 

JH: "We won't comment on the negotiations, but we hope to get him signed." They'll know pretty soon if a deal will get done or not.

 

 

JM: How many untouchables would you say you have, without naming names?

 

JH: That's a good question, there's obviously guys we've built around and have an age for that. We try to make sure the ages work out. Easiest way to say it is that there are certain players we are excited about fo the future and there are certain players who won't be in their prime when we are ready to compete. I look forward to being on this show and talking about who we can add and not who we can sell.

 

Also, Jim and Todd were asking about Shark with their last question and they both got the feeling/think that the Cubs are going to trade him to build up the depth, based on what Jed said. I didn't get that impression... but they said they did after the break.



#2 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,365 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:22 AM

 

"We won't comment on the negotiations, but we hope to get him signed." They'll know pretty soon if a deal will get done or not.

Did he really say "they'll know"? Guess he isn't in on the negotiations then.


"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#3 jh03

jh03

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Twitter:@jh_03

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:26 AM

 

 

"We won't comment on the negotiations, but we hope to get him signed." They'll know pretty soon if a deal will get done or not.

Did he really say "they'll know"? Guess he isn't in on the negotiations then.

 

No, my bad. Rapid fire error.  



#4 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,365 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:34 AM

 

 

 

"We won't comment on the negotiations, but we hope to get him signed." They'll know pretty soon if a deal will get done or not.

Did he really say "they'll know"? Guess he isn't in on the negotiations then.

 

No, my bad. Rapid fire error.  

 

OK, that makes sense, thanks.


"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#5 Cerambam

Cerambam

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 261 posts
  • Twitter:cerambam1736
  • Facebook:michael Anthony

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:50 AM

Good stuff, thanks for sharing.

 

JM: Cubs FO is not in the business of being .500. Is that accurate?

 

JH: "That's very accurate." When you have the right roster, finishing .500 can be a good thing, but that's not what we have now.

 

 

Finishing .500 should be a good thing when you have the wrong roster (now) and should be a bad thing when you have the right roster, shouldn't it?



#6 jh03

jh03

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Twitter:@jh_03

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:54 AM

Good stuff, thanks for sharing.

 

JM: Cubs FO is not in the business of being .500. Is that accurate?

 

JH: "That's very accurate." When you have the right roster, finishing .500 can be a good thing, but that's not what we have now.

 

 

Finishing .500 should be a good thing when you have the wrong roster (now) and should be a bad thing when you have the right roster, shouldn't it?

 No, his point is that right now the Cubs are building for the future. Finsihing around .500 hurts that because 1) you don't trade as many pieces and 2) you don't get as high of a draft pick / spending money.

 

Being a legit contender with the wrong roster *could* be considered a good thing, if you make the playoffs, but just flirting with .500 isn't being a serious contender.



#7 rcleven

rcleven

    Bleacher Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,069 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:57 AM

" I think Theo nailed it with his quote yesterday. Our run differential is pretty solid. Our season hinges on the fact that we can't finish games out. We haven't won close games or beat the teams in the division. You are what you are."

 

Very telling quote. Tells BP is an issue. (We all know that)

 

"That's very accurate." When you have the right roster, finishing .500 can be a good thing, but that's not what we have now.

 

Happy to hear this. .500 wins nothing. Head not stuck in the sand.

 

That's a good question, there's obviously guys we've built around and have an age for that. We try to make sure the ages work out. Easiest way to say it is that there are certain players we are excited about for the future and there are certain players who won't be in their prime when we are ready to compete. I look forward to being on this show and talking about who we can add and not who we can sell.

 

Hard to tell without actually hearing but Shark should be considered a trade target. A off season trade should not be off the board. People fall in love with players. This will be very unpopular but no one on this team should be untradeable. What doesn't kill you only makes you stronger.



#8 Cerambam

Cerambam

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 261 posts
  • Twitter:cerambam1736
  • Facebook:michael Anthony

Posted 01 July 2013 - 10:40 AM

 

Good stuff, thanks for sharing.

 

JM: Cubs FO is not in the business of being .500. Is that accurate?

 

JH: "That's very accurate." When you have the right roster, finishing .500 can be a good thing, but that's not what we have now.

 

 

Finishing .500 should be a good thing when you have the wrong roster (now) and should be a bad thing when you have the right roster, shouldn't it?

 No, his point is that right now the Cubs are building for the future. Finsihing around .500 hurts that because 1) you don't trade as many pieces and 2) you don't get as high of a draft pick / spending money.

 

Being a legit contender with the wrong roster *could* be considered a good thing, if you make the playoffs, but just flirting with .500 isn't being a serious contender.

 

 

 

Ohh ohh ohh, I see what he's getting at now. I just read that in a different context.



#9 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,637 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 01 July 2013 - 10:44 AM

Fantastic. Thanks for sharing this, jh. I'll have to include this in the next Lukewarm Stove.



#10 Scotti

Scotti

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 03 July 2013 - 04:57 PM

Thanks for posting this, jh.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).