2011 Cubs Thread

[iamshack]

You could also say their farm net them Scott Rolen, Larry Walker and Matt Holliday. And why are you forgetting about Jaime Garcia? He's now proven he was no flash in the pan. I'm not saying the Cards are the Red Sox. But they dwarf the White Sox.

Why do you have to go back 4, 5, or 6 years? I thought you were talking about RIGHT NOW!

 

This is such tired bulls***.

 

Our farm net us Gavin Floyd, John Danks, Alexei Ramirez, Carlos Quentin, Matt Thornton, Sergio Santos, Brent Lillibridge...I mean we can go on and on and on and on.

 

You love strong farm systems and young kids. That's impossible to miss. But it's not the only way to build a good baseball team.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Ok, so the Cardinals farm system gets credit for the guys they've netted...but the White Sox's farm system gets no credit at all for the dozens of guys KW has traded for over the last decade.

 

This is exactly why you piss people off so much with this. The standards you use to praise other people's farm systems are so much more loose than what you use to attack the Sox's system it's not even funny.

 

Unless you're the Yankees, it's pretty much a given that the best way to find young, and more importantly cheap talent, is through the draft and latin america. We've failed miserably at both. NOW, that said, we have been good (or had been good) at plucking talent from other team's systems and remaking them or reshaping them or whatever you want to call it. But that's a dangerous way to function long-term. You don't want to rely on reclamation projects year after year. 'Lexi was a great find. No problem. Floyd and Danks (though it looks like we're going to lose the latter to FA with nothing close to a legitimate replacement in-house) were also great finds. CQ, after two s***ty years, has rebounded to have a great season so far. Humber? I don't think it will last. But he's gotten it done to this point. And it appears Santos, though I have doubts, can be a fixture at closer for a while. Again, none of that has come from the system. That's the best way to survive long-term when you don't have an unlimited payroll.

[Balta1701]

I love how you call Danks a great "Find", when he was exactly the kind of acquisition you're giving the Cardinals credit for but the Sox no credit for. He was traded for a nearly ready White Sox MLB prospect developed pitcher.

 

Same thing with Quentin. Traded for a minor leaguer.

 

You give the Cardinals credit for those moves, but when the Sox do them it's luck.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Why do you have to go back 4, 5, or 6 years? I thought you were talking about RIGHT NOW!

 

This is such tired bulls***.

 

Our farm net us Gavin Floyd, John Danks, Alexei Ramirez, Carlos Quentin, Matt Thornton, Sergio Santos, Brent Lillibridge...I mean we can go on and on and on and on.

 

You love strong farm systems and young kids. That's impossible to miss. But it's not the only way to build a good baseball team.

 

Except I was comparing the Cardinals run to the Sox run under KW. I never gave a criteria to how far we could go back. You're the one that shrank it down to since 2006 to make a point. Ramirez was a FA signing. Santos was a product of the farm? If you say so. Look, I never said the ONLY wait to gather cheap talent was through draft/la. But a truly elite organization can do a little bit of everything.

 

I love how you call Danks a great "Find", when he was exactly the kind of acquisition you're giving the Cardinals credit for but the Sox no credit for. He was traded for a nearly ready White Sox MLB prospect developed pitcher.

 

Same thing with Quentin. Traded for a minor leaguer.

 

You give the Cardinals credit for those moves, but when the Sox do them it's luck.

 

Great finds? Trades? What's the difference? I've always given KW credit for those moves. But the fact we have to keep going back to those moves proves my point. It's a what have you done for me lately sport. And KW hasn't done much lately.

[iamshack]

The bottom line is the first-year player draft and international scouting are the traditional formats in which to build your organization.

 

But not the only ways to do so.

 

Again, someone PLEASE recognize not only all the money spent on wasted draft picks, but the OPPORTUNITY COSTS associated with failed prospects. It seems like I bring this up everytime this conversation occurs and yet none of you want to touch it. There is a cost associated with developing a prospect, giving him MLB at bats and extra attention from the coaching staff, penciling him in as the fixture at his position for years to come, making acquisitions (or not making acquisitions) based around such a proclamation, only to realize that after several call-ups and many years that this player simply does not have what it takes to make it in the major leagues or in your organization. A HUGE cost in resources, be it $, time, coaching, and the effect it might have had on your acquisitions. This is basically an opportunity cost. And it can be a very costly opportunity cost.

 

Now multiply that by several times and this is why it isn't just as simple as pouring money into the draft, into international scouting, and waiting for all your young superstars to emerge in a few years.

 

This is certainly no excuse to do a subpar job drafting or with international scouting, but it's simply an indicator that you can commit to these endeavors in degrees, and shift resources towards more known quantities, such as proven veterans, or more advanced players in other systems which need a little tweaking, or simply more advanced players in other systems that can be poached due to timing/financial considerations, etc.

 

It's no secret which camp the White Sox fall into.

 

And I still haven't seen anything that proves to me it is the wrong camp.

Edited June 13, 2011 by iamshack

[iamshack]

Except I was comparing the Cardinals run to the Sox run under KW. I never gave a criteria to how far we could go back. You're the one that shrank it down to since 2006 to make a point. Ramirez was a FA signing. Santos was a product of the farm? If you say so. Look, I never said the ONLY wait to gather cheap talent was through draft/la. But a truly elite organization can do a little bit of everything.

 

 

 

Great finds? Trades? What's the difference? I've always given KW credit for those moves. But the fact we have to keep going back to those moves proves my point. It's a what have you done for me lately sport. And KW hasn't done much lately.

 

No, you really haven't. You've done exactly as Balta and I and other have accused you of doing - played the grass is always greener game - and again, this is simply because you aren't as knowledgeable about these organizations and so you don't focus on their failures, but only their successes, because that is what is highlighted in most media outlets, whether it be television or internet sources.

[Balta1701]

Great finds? Trades? What's the difference? I've always given KW credit for those moves. But the fact we have to keep going back to those moves proves my point. It's a what have you done for me lately sport. And KW hasn't done much lately.

You yourself just drew the distinction when you were trying to find a way to give the Cardinals credit for moves they made in the early 2000's without having to do the icky thing of giving KW credit for more recent moves.

 

It's a what have you done for me lately sport. Man the Cardinals cleaned up when they traded for Scott Rolen and Larry Walker. But KW was lucky when he found Danks and Quentin. What has KW done for me lately?

[Jordan4life_2007]

Anyway, you can accuse me of what you want to accuse me of. I'm a baseball fan first. White Sox fan second. I follow other organizations and how they operate. If I was White Sox 24/7 and nothing else, I would have nothing to gauge them against. There's absolutely no excuse that the best position player a big market franchise like the White Sox can produce in 10 years is Joe f***ing Crede, or the best pitcher, is, um, s***, I can't even think of one. You keep talking about how risky it is to invest in the draft and LA? It's a risk for EVERY team. I fail to see your point there. Now if 83-85 wins tickles your fancy because, well, it's better than it was in the 50's, good for you. I'm not accepting that s***. And will always be a one postseason appearance every 3-4 years in a s***ty division until we address these glaring weaknesses.

[Jordan4life_2007]

You yourself just drew the distinction when you were trying to find a way to give the Cardinals credit for moves they made in the early 2000's without having to do the icky thing of giving KW credit for more recent moves.

 

It's a what have you done for me lately sport. Man the Cardinals cleaned up when they traded for Scott Rolen and Larry Walker. But KW was lucky when he found Danks and Quentin. What has KW done for me lately?

 

lol. I ran off like 6 guys from their farm that are producing like crazy for them THIS year. If you want to pimp Lillibridge and Humber, I can do the same for their no-name guys that have them in first place (or I guess a game behind the red-hot Brewers right now).

[iamshack]

lol. I ran off like 6 guys from their farm that are producing like crazy for them THIS year. If you want to pimp Lillibridge and Humber, I can do the same for their no-name guys that have them in first place (or I guess a game behind the red-hot Brewers right now).

You did. You brought up Jon Jay!

[Jordan4life_2007]

You did. You brought up Jon Jay!

 

Yup. He's holding it down until their superstar LF comes back from injury. They're not relying on him long-term.

[iamshack]

Anyway, you can accuse me of what you want to accuse me of. I'm a baseball fan first. White Sox fan second. I follow other organizations and how they operate. If I was White Sox 24/7 and nothing else, I would have nothing to gauge them against. There's absolutely no excuse that the best position player a big market franchise like the White Sox can produce in 10 years is Joe f***ing Crede, or the best pitcher, is, um, s***, I can't even think of one. You keep talking about how risky it is to invest in the draft and LA? It's a risk for EVERY team. I fail to see your point there. Now if 83-85 wins tickles your fancy because, well, it's better than it was in the 50's, good for you. I'm not accepting that s***. And will always be a one postseason appearance every 3-4 years in a s***ty division until we address these glaring weaknesses.

Yes, you are failing to see the point here.

 

If the draft and international scouting are such guessing games, why not try building through methods which are characterized by less risk?

[bigruss]

Yes, you are failing to see the point here.

 

If the draft and international scouting are such guessing games, why not try building through methods which are characterized by less risk?

Because they haven't worked consistently yet.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Yes, you are failing to see the point here.

 

If the draft and international scouting are such guessing games, why not try building through methods which are characterized by less risk?

 

Aren't you the one that likes to bet on games? Could've fooled me. So let's ignore the draft and LA because it's too risky? No. That's no good.

[iamshack]

Aren't you the one that likes to bet on games? Could've fooled me. So let's ignore the draft and LA because it's too risky? No. That's no good.

Read my post again.

 

This is certainly no excuse to do a subpar job drafting or with international scouting, but it's simply an indicator that you can commit to these endeavors in degrees, and shift resources towards more known quantities, such as proven veterans, or more advanced players in other systems which need a little tweaking, or simply more advanced players in other systems that can be poached due to timing/financial considerations, etc.

[iamshack]

Because they haven't worked consistently yet.

They haven't? Many of the best players on our team are a product of those methods, Russ.

[southsider2k5]

The bottom line is the first-year player draft and international scouting are the traditional formats in which to build your organization.

 

But not the only ways to do so.

 

Again, someone PLEASE recognize not only all the money spent on wasted draft picks, but the OPPORTUNITY COSTS associated with failed prospects. It seems like I bring this up everytime this conversation occurs and yet none of you want to touch it. There is a cost associated with developing a prospect, giving him MLB at bats and extra attention from the coaching staff, penciling him in as the fixture at his position for years to come, making acquisitions (or not making acquisitions) based around such a proclamation, only to realize that after several call-ups and many years that this player simply does not have what it takes to make it in the major leagues or in your organization. A HUGE cost in resources, be it $, time, coaching, and the effect it might have had on your acquisitions. This is basically an opportunity cost. And it can be a very costly opportunity cost.

 

Now multiply that by several times and this is why it isn't just as simple as pouring money into the draft, into international scouting, and waiting for all your young superstars to emerge in a few years.

 

This is certainly no excuse to do a subpar job drafting or with international scouting, but it's simply an indicator that you can commit to these endeavors in degrees, and shift resources towards more known quantities, such as proven veterans, or more advanced players in other systems which need a little tweaking, or simply more advanced players in other systems that can be poached due to timing/financial considerations, etc.

 

It's no secret which camp the White Sox fall into.

 

And I still haven't seen anything that proves to me it is the wrong camp.

 

This is a really good post. It isn't as easy as spending overslot. You have to be able to put the time and effort in too for sure. The Sox seem to just use those players they draft to trade up a few years in experience.

 

[bigruss]

They haven't? Many of the best players on our team are a product of those methods, Russ.

And it's built an inconsistent team (which is what I was going for, could've been more clear).

 

And although you stated that it isn't an excuse to not draft or sign international talent well, at the same time you are saying it's working or hasn't been found to not be working.

 

If you combine the Sox ability to pick up projects and turn them into servicable or better players along with drafting and developing well then you would be looking at the Sox as a gold standard organization. Instead, they tend to shoot themselves in their foot and hold themselves back.

[Balta1701]

And it's built an inconsistent team (which is what I was going for, could've been more clear).

Inconsistent? There are some words I'd use to describe the White Sox (underachievers), but inconsistent isn't one of them. They're still a team that's been under .500 what, once in the last decade? They're consistently in the race, and occasionally push to the top of it.

[bigruss]

Inconsistent? There are some words I'd use to describe the White Sox (underachievers), but inconsistent isn't one of them. They're still a team that's been under .500 what, once in the last decade? They're consistently in the race, and occasionally push to the top of it.

2 seasons under .500 in the last 5 seasons.

[iamshack]

And it's built an inconsistent team (which is what I was going for, could've been more clear).

 

And although you stated that it isn't an excuse to not draft or sign international talent well, at the same time you are saying it's working or hasn't been found to not be working.

 

If you combine the Sox ability to pick up projects and turn them into servicable or better players along with drafting and developing well then you would be looking at the Sox as a gold standard organization. Instead, they tend to shoot themselves in their foot and hold themselves back.

Well it's pretty easy to admit that our draft philosophy was horrible from about the time Kenny took over as GM until about 2006. At least in terms of the top end of the draft.

 

But I liked the Beckham pick, the Mitchell pick, the Sale pick. Not so sure about the pick this year, but I haven't seen this guy at all yet.

 

Clearly we need to draft better. And I'd like to go over slot because we do compete on an annual basis and that means we're drafting lower in every round, so we should take advantage of talent falling due to financial reasons.

 

I'd like to improve scouting in LA, but I think that will take time after the whole fiasco that occurred there. So I am trying to be patient.

 

I am certainly NOT SATISFIED with our drafting and international scouting. I DO NOT think it is ok to draft and scout as poorly as we have.

 

However, I do love the philosophy of player acquisition that we do have, and that may be driven entirely by budget. And perhaps it is time to shift how the budget is allocated.

 

What I was saying in my previous post is that I'm not sure that our current method of player acquisition is not as good as the traditional methods utilized by the rest of baseball. Obviously there are some teams, such as the Red Sox, Phillies and Braves that I admire. But I think we are very competitive with the model we use.

[RockRaines]

Wow this thread blew up with tremendously long posts.

 

Cubs still suck.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Well it's pretty easy to admit that our draft philosophy was horrible from about the time Kenny took over as GM until about 2006. At least in terms of the top end of the draft.

 

But I liked the Beckham pick, the Mitchell pick, the Sale pick. Not so sure about the pick this year, but I haven't seen this guy at all yet.

 

Clearly we need to draft better. And I'd like to go over slot because we do compete on an annual basis and that means we're drafting lower in every round, so we should take advantage of talent falling due to financial reasons.

 

I'd like to improve scouting in LA, but I think that will take time after the whole fiasco that occurred there. So I am trying to be patient.

 

I am certainly NOT SATISFIED with our drafting and international scouting. I DO NOT think it is ok to draft and scout as poorly as we have.

 

However, I do love the philosophy of player acquisition that we do have, and that may be driven entirely by budget. And perhaps it is time to shift how the budget is allocated.

 

What I was saying in my previous post is that I'm not sure that our current method of player acquisition is not as good as the traditional methods utilized by the rest of baseball. Obviously there are some teams, such as the Red Sox, Phillies and Braves that I admire. But I think we are very competitive with the model we use.

 

This is hilarious. Russ said basically what I've been saying. I say it and you act like Hitler on acid.

[iamshack]

This is hilarious. Russ said basically what I've been saying. I say it and you act like Hitler on acid.

No, he sure as hell didn't.

 

And he sure as hell didn't start claiming the Cardinals are a model of efficiency while the White Sox are crap right now.

 

I've been saying this same stuff to you over and over and yet you choose not to reply to it. Instead you use hyperbole and ridiculously over-the-top phrasing to trash the White Sox organization. And you do this continuously, with different organizations as the subject of your lust, on a monthly basis.

 

Finally, maybe Russ gets a different kind of response because of the tone and tenor of his posts.

Edited June 13, 2011 by iamshack

[RockRaines]

Remember when Soto was on the juice? Man he was good.