Top Prospects List, Offseason

[Balta1701]

With the system that they are building and the ability to have a payroll north of $150 million annually, yes they better get to a position in which they are the favorites to win that division every season. Do you think they are going to stop adding players? They will also have high pick at the top of each round next year again. Most people on this board hate the Cubs because they are on the other side of town, or blue, or their parents told them they should a long time ago. That doesn't matter. I am trying to look at this objectively. I think Theo and Jed are smart guys. I am not going to dismiss them just because they are running the Cubs and for some reason that makes them destined to fail. Doesn't make any sense. I think in 2015 they are contending.

Where do they get this ability to have this payroll larger than any other team in the division?

 

Yes they have a large fanbase that will sell out the park, but they also don't have the high-priced amenities (luxury boxes, ad space) that other teams enjoy. Furthermore, they're locked into the same TV deal as the White Sox; it gets renegotiated in 2019, they're not going to have Dodgers money coming any time soon.

 

They'll get an extra $25 million from the national TV deal, but so will every team.

[southsider2k5]

With the system that they are building and the ability to have a payroll north of $150 million annually, yes they better get to a position in which they are the favorites to win that division every season. Do you think they are going to stop adding players? They will also have high pick at the top of each round next year again. Most people on this board hate the Cubs because they are on the other side of town, or blue, or their parents told them they should a long time ago. That doesn't matter. I am trying to look at this objectively. I think Theo and Jed are smart guys. I am not going to dismiss them just because they are running the Cubs and for some reason that makes them destined to fail. Doesn't make any sense. I think in 2015 they are contending.

 

That's an organization to be proud of. They can't even sell wait til next year anymore.

 

Honestly I think this is doomed to fail, but more because of the rule changes and ballpark factors than anything else. Theo can't exploit the draft and Latin America like he used to. He also has an owner that is paying a huge debt payment for his purchase of this team, so he isn't going to be able to spend like they used to. It is also a massive leap of faith to assume that these guys are going to pan out. We see KC and Pittsburgh draft high and get praised for their farm system year after year... how has that worked out for them? A full rebuilding is by far the riskiest way to build a title winner. Anytime it is suggested, I offer up this question. How many teams have undergone a full out teardown and rebuild, and been successful in a relative short (even say five year) cycle? Even the Tampa Bay's of the world took way longer to get back. Same with the Orioles. Way more often it fails, just because so many low percentage variables have to work out, and work out at the same time period. Baseball is a funny game like that.

[southsider2k5]

Where do they get this ability to have this payroll larger than any other team in the division?

 

Yes they have a large fanbase that will sell out the park, but they also don't have the high-priced amenities (luxury boxes, ad space) that other teams enjoy. Furthermore, they're locked into the same TV deal as the White Sox; it gets renegotiated in 2019, they're not going to have Dodgers money coming any time soon.

 

They'll get an extra $25 million from the national TV deal, but so will every team.

 

$150 million a year will soon be the new $100 million. It will be a pretty standard number with the revenue increases coming down the pipeline.

[Chicago White Sox]

With the system that they are building and the ability to have a payroll north of $150 million annually, yes they better get to a position in which they are the favorites to win that division every season. Do you think they are going to stop adding players? They will also have high pick at the top of each round next year again. Most people on this board hate the Cubs because they are on the other side of town, or blue, or their parents told them they should a long time ago. That doesn't matter. I am trying to look at this objectively. I think Theo and Jed are smart guys. I am not going to dismiss them just because they are running the Cubs and for some reason that makes them destined to fail. Doesn't make any sense. I think in 2015 they are contending.

I don't think the Cubs are destined to fail. I just think rebuilding takes a hell of a lot longer and is much riskier now because of the CBA changes. Theo can't just outspend everyone on amatuer talent like he used to. And quite franky, draft position helps but only so much. They actualy need to out-scout and out-develop the competition. I'm not sure if Theo and Jed will actually be able to do that. Regardless, it's going to take a lot of time before that system, even if everything goes right, starts making positive contributions at the major league level. 2015 is a complete pipe dream for the Cubs to become competive unless they start buying major free agents. I mean, two of these top 100 prospects have like 30 games of minor league experience.

[shakes]

This has to be the most comical statement I've seen on this site yet.

 

So having 4 top 100 prospects, several which are 2-3 years away, will guarantee them favorite status in the NL Central in 2-3 years. This despite you already acknowledging they have almost no pitching in their system. How does that make any sense to you?

 

Also, can we please stop pretending systems automatically lead to major league success. It's getting really tiring to bring this up, but look at the Royals for god's sake. They've had monster systems in the past few years and yet they haven't been able to win at all. I get the Cubs have a big financial edge over them, but money isn't going to be enough to build a consistent winner. At some point they'll need their prospects to turn into major league contributors and I'm still skeptical of these four guys who are ranked so highly because of their tools and not their production.

 

Not to mention the consensus #1 farm system in baseball is the Cardinals, and they have a great track record of player development. That team isn't going anywhere. They are probably the model organization in baseball.

 

The Cubs have to really improve their pitching in their minor leagues and their talent at the upper levels. Both, are practically baron. They have a long way to go.

 

I think it will be real interesting to see how this turns out for Theo. I don't really remember a similar case, in which a team with their resources, decided to tear it all down and start from scratch. It's the perfect place to do it. The Cubs revenue won't change much even if they tank another 3 years.

[cabiness42]

The Cubs have to really improve their pitching in their minor leagues and their talent at the upper levels. Both, are practically baron. They have a long way to go.

 

One or two good drafts and they can at least make it to Viscount. Earl is probably 3-5 years away though.

[shakes]

One or two good drafts and they can at least make it to Viscount. Earl is probably 3-5 years away though.

 

Auto correct is awesome.

[Y2Jimmy0]

Where do they get this ability to have this payroll larger than any other team in the division?

 

Yes they have a large fanbase that will sell out the park, but they also don't have the high-priced amenities (luxury boxes, ad space) that other teams enjoy. Furthermore, they're locked into the same TV deal as the White Sox; it gets renegotiated in 2019, they're not going to have Dodgers money coming any time soon.

 

They'll get an extra $25 million from the national TV deal, but so will every team.

 

The WGN contract is up before that though. They don't need Dodgers money. They are still a big market club. The biggest market club in the division. When the Rays, Royals and whoever else attempted to rebuild, there wasn't the ability to supplement with marginal to high priced free agents on top of it. This was the only way for them to approach this. It may not work. I think it will but it may not. There is no reason for that team to try and finish .500 and rebuild at the same time. Why would anyone do that? Part of the rebuilding is trying to secure really high picks and hoping that you draft the right players.

 

They will have a good system and outspend STL, MIL, CIN, and PIT. You guys could be right though. Maybe it doesn't work. It is the right plan though.

[Y2Jimmy0]

That's an organization to be proud of. They can't even sell wait til next year anymore.

 

Honestly I think this is doomed to fail, but more because of the rule changes and ballpark factors than anything else. Theo can't exploit the draft and Latin America like he used to. He also has an owner that is paying a huge debt payment for his purchase of this team, so he isn't going to be able to spend like they used to. It is also a massive leap of faith to assume that these guys are going to pan out. We see KC and Pittsburgh draft high and get praised for their farm system year after year... how has that worked out for them? A full rebuilding is by far the riskiest way to build a title winner. Anytime it is suggested, I offer up this question. How many teams have undergone a full out teardown and rebuild, and been successful in a relative short (even say five year) cycle? Even the Tampa Bay's of the world took way longer to get back. Same with the Orioles. Way more often it fails, just because so many low percentage variables have to work out, and work out at the same time period. Baseball is a funny game like that.

 

 

I agree with a lot of this actually. It hasn't worked. It hasn't worked for teams that can't spend on top of it. The Cubs are trying to build a system the right way and they will have the funds to supplement with talent in free agency. That is the luxury that those other teams didn't have. Those teams didn't have the luxury of signing two starting pitchers, or a starting RF for big money, or a closer. The thought process is that they will be able to do that. There is no point in doing that now though.

 

If you were a Cub fan, would you rather have them try to build a farm system and try to win right now? They would end up winning 80+ games and not having picks as good or dumping off veteran deals to supplement the system. Makes zero sense doing it that way. Especially when that Wrigley is full.

[southsider2k5]

I agree with a lot of this actually. It hasn't worked. It hasn't worked for teams that can't spend on top of it. The Cubs are trying to build a system the right way and they will have the funds to supplement with talent in free agency. That is the luxury that those other teams didn't have. Those teams didn't have the luxury of signing two starting pitchers, or a starting RF for big money, or a closer. The thought process is that they will be able to do that. There is no point in doing that now though.

 

If you were a Cub fan, would you rather have them try to build a farm system and try to win right now? They would end up winning 80+ games and not having picks as good or dumping off veteran deals to supplement the system. Makes zero sense doing it that way. Especially when that Wrigley is full.

 

The Orioles were a big market team that had a huge level of attendance at the start of their rebuild (a long, long time ago). So was Cleveland. They had a sell out streak of something like five years. How'd that all work out?

[Y2Jimmy0]

The Orioles were a big market team that had a huge level of attendance at the start of their rebuild (a long, long time ago). So was Cleveland. They had a sell out streak of something like five years. How'd that all work out?

 

 

I agree but it was because of personnel moves. The Orioles and Indians both got rid of household names that the fans loved. Cleveland inherited a ton of talent with those deals and almost went to World Series because of it. Baltimore has one of the worst owners in the game. They drafted horribly and didn't spend in FA. Your points are well taken. The Cubs have not been trading away household names and fan favorites because there weren't any. They depended on free agency for so long. If the Cubs end up in a 10 year rut of minimal playoff appearances and bad records like Cleveland and Baltimore then it will be just another case in which it happened. I think they will have talent though. If Cleveland or Baltimore would have made better decisions and somehow competed, the fans would have been right back in the seats. This year should be telling for Cleveland. They are better. They made free agent additions. They may still be 4th in the division but they went out and signed players. Players also did not want to sign with the Orioles. They still don't. Players will always want to come to Chicago.

[southsider2k5]

I agree but it was because of personnel moves. The Orioles and Indians both got rid of household names that the fans loved. Cleveland inherited a ton of talent with those deals and almost went to World Series because of it. Baltimore has one of the worst owners in the game. They drafted horribly and didn't spend in FA. Your points are well taken. The Cubs have not been trading away household names and fan favorites because there weren't any. They depended on free agency for so long. If the Cubs end up in a 10 year rut of minimal playoff appearances and bad records like Cleveland and Baltimore then it will be just another case in which it happened. I think they will have talent though. If Cleveland or Baltimore would have made better decisions and somehow competed, the fans would have been right back in the seats. This year should be telling for Cleveland. They are better. They made free agent additions. They may still be 4th in the division but they went out and signed players. Players also did not want to sign with the Orioles. They still don't. Players will always want to come to Chicago.

 

The Cubs in general have made horrible personnel moves. Signing Zambrano to an extension? The Soriano signing that everyone said was bad when it happened?

[caulfield12]

I agree but it was because of personnel moves. The Orioles and Indians both got rid of household names that the fans loved. Cleveland inherited a ton of talent with those deals and almost went to World Series because of it. Baltimore has one of the worst owners in the game. They drafted horribly and didn't spend in FA. Your points are well taken. The Cubs have not been trading away household names and fan favorites because there weren't any. They depended on free agency for so long. If the Cubs end up in a 10 year rut of minimal playoff appearances and bad records like Cleveland and Baltimore then it will be just another case in which it happened. I think they will have talent though. If Cleveland or Baltimore would have made better decisions and somehow competed, the fans would have been right back in the seats. This year should be telling for Cleveland. They are better. They made free agent additions. They may still be 4th in the division but they went out and signed players. Players also did not want to sign with the Orioles. They still don't. Players will always want to come to Chicago.

 

 

The Indians actually succeeded in rebuilding once, but then gave up against after 2007...which really demoralized the fanbase and which they haven't recovered from as of yet, although they're fairly optimistic coming into 2013 for the first time in half a decade.

 

A team with a very successful record and fanbase that has gone into the rebuilding and still hasn't come out the other side is SEA. Toronto's performance in 2013 will be another example of seeing if a team's fans will return when the team has largely been abandoned or given up on.

 

And, on the other hand, teams like Colorado, Milwaukee (the new park helped tremendously, and the connection to the Commissioner) and Atlanta were able to become contenders and bounce back after being down for different reasons...the Rockies and Braves, like the Sox/Indians/Royals, have fanbases that are oriented more around winning than marketing and iconic stadium appeal.

Edited March 14, 2013 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

The Cubs in general have made horrible personnel moves. Signing Zambrano to an extension? The Soriano signing that everyone said was bad when it happened?

They did what they had to do at the time. Their #1 goal was to put together a playoff team using back-loaded contracts to maximize revenue right at the time the team needed to be sold.

 

The ownership didn't care if they hamstrung the next ownership group, as long as they maximized the value of the team during the sale.

[Eminor3rd]

This has to be the most comical statement I've seen on this site yet.

 

So having 4 top 100 prospects, several which are 2-3 years away, will guarantee them favorite status in the NL Central in 2-3 years. This despite you already acknowledging they have almost no pitching in their system. How does that make any sense to you?

 

Also, can we please stop pretending systems automatically lead to major league success. It's getting really tiring to bring this up, but look at the Royals for god's sake. They've had monster systems in the past few years and yet they haven't been able to win at all. I get the Cubs have a big financial edge over them, but money isn't going to be enough to build a consistent winner. At some point they'll need their prospects to turn into major league contributors and I'm still skeptical of these four guys who are ranked so highly because of their tools and not their production.

 

The Royals have also done a poor job leveraging their system in trades. Plus literally all of their pitchers bombed. You're right that nothing is guaranteed and you're right that any setbacks will likely push their window beyond 2-3 years, but they are positioned very well for success in a few years. The fact that Epstein hasn't pissed his first few years away like Moore gives him a longer leash and, though you acknowledged it, the financial advantage is massive. The Cubs can easily handle a payroll around $150m if they're filling that park, whereas I don't think the Royals have ever even touched $100m.

 

If you consider the average outcomes, the Cubs are going to be competitors in 2-5 years. Everything might go wrong and the front office might make dumb decisions like Moore, but those are both less likely outcomes at this point.

[Balta1701]

The Cubs can easily handle a payroll around $150m if they're filling that park, whereas I don't think the Royals have ever even touched $100m.

Just remember though, everyone is going up. The Cubs will be able to handle $150 once the extra $25 million National TV deal money kicks in, the Cardinals (Currently ~115 mil) will be able to afford $140 million, the Reds will be able to afford $135 million, the Pirates will be able to afford $90 million, the Astros will be able to afford $15 million. Oh, and I don't know when any of those teams gets a new local TV deal, but the Cubs won't until 2019.

 

The Cubs weren't making money when they were spending $130 million a few years ago, and that was with the stadium a lot more packed than it will be now and less debt.

 

Even if that stadium is full, there is still so much revenue they can't get. They can't name the stadium. They can't sell luxury boxes. They can't load it with ads. The dollar amounts will not win them anything. And on the FA market, they have new nightmares like the Dodgers to contend with.

[Marty34]

Why spend $40 million on Edwin Jackson when the team isn't going to be in a position to compete for the first 2 years of the deal?

 

Wait a second, Balta . . .

[Balta1701]

Wait a second, Balta . . .

If we could just get it into your head that the white sox aren't rebuilding...

[Marty34]

If we could just get it into your head that the white sox aren't rebuilding...

 

What about you using the big scary $40M though?

[Balta1701]

What about you using the big scary $40M though?

Unlike you, I'll happily admit that it's $10 million a year

[Marty34]

Unlike you, I'll happily admit that it's $10 million a year

 

Actually it's $13M per . . . according to BR.

[Balta1701]

Actually it's $13M per . . . according to BR.

Man, for a team that shouldn't win 75 games, that's terrible.

[Marty34]

Man, for a team that shouldn't win 75 games, that's terrible.

 

Houdini has nothing on you Balta. You are The Great Escape Artist.

[Balta1701]

Houdini has nothing on you Balta. You are The Great Escape Artist.

That kind of deal for Jackson is what a team in need of pitching depth but on the verge of contending ought to be giving out. I dunno, someone like the Orioles, or the Angels, or the Rangers.

 

If a team is signing a guy to a 4 year deal, it ought to be a team able to contend in the first 2 years of that deal. You can always sign someone in a year or two once you've seen which of your younger guys are developing and you're more certain about your needs.

[Marty34]

That kind of deal for Jackson is what a team in need of pitching depth but on the verge of contending ought to be giving out. I dunno, someone like the Orioles, or the Angels, or the Rangers.

 

If a team is signing a guy to a 4 year deal, it ought to be a team able to contend in the first 2 years of that deal. You can always sign someone in a year or two once you've seen which of your younger guys are developing and you're more certain about your needs.

 

I think part of it is they were surprised by the attendance erosion last year, they had to do something. It will be interesting to see the attendance numbers for the April games at Wrigley this year.