2011-2012 Offseason Thread

[SoxSport]

I would be happy if they passed on 37yo Kuroda and Oswalt. They are both holding out for more than $10 mil. I read somewhere the Sox have about $5-6 mil to spend. I think Bard will make a respectable 4th starter, and Aceves is pretty much fixed as #5. The problems will start if one of the top 3 gets hurt, or if the bullpen springs a leak.

[jung]

Good grief the NY Jets are having their 2011 Red Sox moment right now. Sanchez is being crunched apparently by his fellow teammates. From what I can see so far, Sanchez and by extension the whole Jets management team is being thrown under the bus. May even be uglier than the Sox 2011 closure.

 

At least the way the Sox left 2011 with the exception of Lackey who catches a break via TJ the rest of the Sox could be welcomed back. Lackey is not the team leader anyway. Sanchez is the Jets QB. Can't see him coming back from this. Depending on where Jets management come down, they may end up tying themselves even more to the boat anchor that Sanchez has become and some of them may not survive if they go down that road. Ryan is probably on thin ice as it is.

[a700hitter]

I'm not sure if take this answer as a "yes" or as a "no" to my question.

You are not the only one who isn't sure. However, as E1 said, Theo will analyze all moves looking for under-valued assets. I guess he didn't find any this off season so he just took the trash to the curb. Unless he does something before the season starts, the 2012 Cubs might actually be worse than the 2011 Cubs. I thought that would be hard to do, but he might accomplish it. Contrast the Cubs' off season with the Marlins' off season. They had almost identical records in 2011. The Marlins made number of big key acquisitions that were fair market value (as opposed to undervalued) acquisitions. They signed Reyes, Buehrle, and Heath Bell. They made a strong run at Pujols. They should be an interesting and exciting team to watch in 2012. They didn't follow a Moneyball approach. It looks like Theo has stayed true to his Moneyball philosophy even though he had a ton of money to spend. He could have made some key FMV moves to improve the Cubs, but he didn't. Your usage of "Moneyball" in your original post was right on the money. Theo is a moneyballer. He has stayed true to his philosophy. He found no undervalued assets in the FA market, so he has chosen to do nothing up to this point. They should stink as a result of his doing nothing. The Marlins should be greatly improved in contrast.

[User Name]

This may be the dumbest post i have read on this site. Congratulations.

[FredLynn]

I would be happy if they passed on 37yo Kuroda and Oswalt. They are both holding out for more than $10 mil. I read somewhere the Sox have about $5-6 mil to spend. I think Bard will make a respectable 4th starter' date=' and Aceves is pretty much fixed as #5. The problems will start if one of the top 3 gets hurt, or if the bullpen springs a leak.[/quote']

 

I am not sure that both Bard and Aceves are going to be in the rotation this year. Thats a pretty big hit on the bullpen. It would be much smarter to allow only one of them to try out as a SP. Sure, we still need a #4, but with so much pondscum to choose from now one will almost certainly ripen in time for opening day.

[example1]

You are not the only one who isn't sure. However' date=' as E1 said, Theo will analyze all moves looking for under-valued assets. I guess he didn't find any this off season so he just took the trash to the curb. Unless he does something before the season starts, the 2012 Cubs might actually be worse than the 2011 Cubs. I thought that would be hard to do, but he might accomplish it. Contrast the Cubs' off season with the Marlins' off season. They had almost identical records in 2011. The Marlins made number of big key acquisitions that were fair market value (as opposed to undervalued) acquisitions. They signed Reyes, Buehrle, and Heath Bell. They made a strong run at Pujols. They should be an interesting and exciting team to watch in 2012. They didn't follow a Moneyball approach. It looks like Theo has stayed true to his Moneyball philosophy even though he had a ton of money to spend. He could have made some key FMV moves to improve the Cubs, but he didn't. [b']Your usage of "Moneyball" in your original post was right on the money. [/b]Theo is a moneyballer. He has stayed true to his philosophy. He found no undervalued assets in the FA market, so he has chosen to do nothing up to this point. They should stink as a result of his doing nothing. The Marlins should be greatly improved in contrast.

 

Yesterday you were arguing that the use of "moneyball" was irrelevant to his post. Now it was right on the money. My brain hurts.

[a700hitter]

Yesterday you were arguing that the use of "moneyball" was irrelevant to his post. Now it was right on the money. My brain hurts.

It was irrelevant to his observation that the Cubs might be worse in 2012 than 2011, but saying that Theo is a moneyball GM was not inaccurate although it wasn't relevant. He was criticizing Theo's moves, not moneyball.

[iortiz]

You are not the only one who isn't sure. However' date=' as E1 said, Theo will analyze all moves looking for under-valued assets. I guess he didn't find any this off season so he just took the trash to the curb. Unless he does something before the season starts, the 2012 Cubs might actually be worse than the 2011 Cubs. I thought that would be hard to do, but he might accomplish it. Contrast the Cubs' off season with the Marlins' off season. They had almost identical records in 2011. The Marlins made number of big key acquisitions that were fair market value (as opposed to undervalued) acquisitions. They signed Reyes, Buehrle, and Heath Bell. They made a strong run at Pujols. They should be an interesting and exciting team to watch in 2012. They didn't follow a Moneyball approach. It looks like Theo has stayed true to his Moneyball philosophy even though he had a ton of money to spend. He could have made some key FMV moves to improve the Cubs, but he didn't. Your usage of "Moneyball" in your original post was right on the money. Theo is a moneyballer. He has stayed true to his philosophy. He found no undervalued assets in the FA market, so he has chosen to do nothing up to this point. They should stink as a result of his doing nothing. The Marlins should be greatly improved in contrast.[/quote']

 

I found out a mass of contradictions in some posts. He is a moneyballer, but suddenly he is not using this approach/philosophy this season?. They are in rebuild mode but they only have acquired short-term stop-gaps? What kind of rebuild strategy is this?, plus... Aren't prospects part of finding undervalued sources of production?... Then a guy said, one thing is rebuild mode and other moneyball approach....so, what? , then I asked, can you use moneyball in order to rebuild your tem? The answer was yes. Then I asked... Can you use the moneyball approach in order to fill some specific positions? Still no answer. IMO yes. Some say: use the term properly, and I :blink:ed ...

 

I have no idea what is the strategy of Theo and the Cubs in the short/mid/long term. Some around here are pretty sure. The only thing I can say is that all of their 2012 offseason moves seems to me a combination of under-valued assets and prospects who can give them big rewards (at least I suppose, they expect), wait... Isn't it part of the moneyball approach? . Yes, Some of those moves can be taken as moneyball moves and some as short-term stop-gaps, who knows?. I don't have telepathy in order to know what Theo is thinking.

 

IMO big market teams like the Cubs should do what the fish is doing right now and mostly if you are in rebuild mode. Seems like they have interchanged their roles. They say that they going to splash in 2013 because the FA will be better, fine. Still they could sign elite players this offseason. They didn't. Sorry I don't like at all this strategy and mostly if they see their current acquisitions as short-term stop-gaps; or what? Are they going to start splashing and playing moneyball till 2013? And 2012? Waste year?

 

Sometimes we tend to complicate the things. Some claim to know this moneyball concept very well and try to put it as a chemical-transport-phenomena-matter in order to gain credibility, respect or some kind baseball certificate. This concept is actually pretty simple. Have the Cubs been using this approach this season? The evidence tells me, yes, at least in some positions. Some say no, fine. I don't share their approach to this matter

[iortiz]

It was irrelevant to his observation that the Cubs might be worse in 2012 than 2011' date=' but saying that Theo is a moneyball GM was not inaccurate although it wasn't relevant. [b']He was criticizing Theo's moves, not moneyball.[/b]

 

Exactly.

[User Name]

They are blowing up the team. There is absolutely nothing complicated about that.

 

They have no design on contending in 2012, because the 2011 team was a piece of s*** loaded with bad contracts, a barren farm system, and incompeten coaching/managing.

 

There is nothing "Moneyball" about it. It is not rocket science.

[a700hitter]

I found out a mass of contradictions in some posts. He is a moneyballer, but suddenly he is not using this approach/philosophy this season?. They are in rebuild mode but they only have acquired short-term stop-gaps? What kind of rebuild strategy is this?, plus... Aren't prospects part of finding undervalued sources of production?... Then a guy said, one thing is rebuild mode and other moneyball approach....so, what? , then I asked, can you use moneyball in order to rebuild your tem? The answer was yes. Then I asked... Can you use the moneyball approach in order to fill some specific positions? Still no answer. IMO yes. Some say: use the term properly, and I :blink:ed ...

 

I have no idea what is the strategy of Theo and the Cubs in the short/mid/long term. Some around here are pretty sure. The only thing I can say is that all of their 2012 offseason moves seems to me a combination of under-valued assets and prospects who can give them big rewards, wait... Isn't it part of the moneyball approach? . Yes, Some of those moves can be taken as moneyball moves and some as short-term stop-gaps, who knows?. I don't have telepathy in order to know what Theo is thinking.

 

IMO big market teams like the Cubs should do what the fish is doing right now and mostly if you are in rebuild mode. Seems like they have interchanged their roles. They say that they going to splash in 2013 because the FA will be better, fine. Still they could sign elite players this offseason. They didn't. Sorry I don't like at all this strategy and mostly if they see their current acquisitions as short-term stop-gaps; or what? Are they going to start splashing and playing moneyball till 2013? And 2012? Waste year?

 

Sometimes we tend to complicate the things. Some claim to know this moneyball concept very well and try to put it as a chemical-transport-phenomena-matter in order to gain credibility, respect or some kind baseball certificate. This concept is actually pretty simple. Have the Cubs been using this approach this season? The evidence tells me, yes, at least in some positions. Some say no, fine. I don't share their approach to this matter

^ An early but strong candidate for POTY 2012. This is a great post.

[User Name]

By the way, comparing the Marlins to the Cubs is asinine.

 

The Marlins have newfound revenue and reason to spend: They had no bad contracts, a solid farm system, a new stadium and internal stability.

 

The Cubs are quite the opposite, it's comparing apples to dragons.

 

And like dragons, the Cubs' chance of contending in 2012 is a mythical creature who many believe exists, but no one can provide proof of its existence.

[User Name]

I must have missed the article where Pedroia, Beckett, Lester, Ortiz, etc etc were placed on the trading block. The 2011 had all the pieces to be dominant and WERE dominant through an entire 130 games. They couldn't finish what they started and that was their downfall.

 

They have a roughly top 10 farm system in baseball btw also.

 

I was talking about the Cubs bro. I've been one of the most ardent defenders of the current Red Sox team on this board. Please don't lump me in with the "disaster strikes" crowd.

[Rdsxmbnt]

I was talking about the Cubs bro. I've been one of the most ardent defenders of the current Red Sox team on this board. Please don't lump me in with the "disaster strikes" crowd.

 

haha ya my bad, havent been keepin up on the discussion

[iortiz]

This may be the dumbest post i have read on this site. Congratulations.

 

I don't find out this post as a dumb one. He has an opinion. You don't share it?, fine. Show your arguments, instead of insulting other posters. Wait... I almost forget that you love insult others. :thumbdown

[User Name]

I don't find out this post as a dumb one. He has an opinion. You don't share it?' date=' fine. Show your arguments, instead of insulting other posters. Wait... I almost forget that you love insult others. :thumbdown[/quote']

 

I'm not insulting the poster, i'm insulting the post. Also, he's a big boy and can defend himself.

 

The "daddy-son" relationship is beautiful though.

[iortiz]

I'm not insulting the poster, i'm insulting the post. Also, he's a big boy and can defend himself.

 

The "daddy-son" relationship is beautiful though.

 

You are insulting his ideas but not the poster? Daddy-son relationship?

 

Dude, I'm not going to fight with you. Hopefully you reconsider my advise. You shouldn't insult others, instead, debate. You have actually great ideas at times. The problem is that they are opaque with your insults.

[User Name]

Whatever bro. Read into it what you want. I will continue to call a spade a spade.

[ORS]

Exactly.

I got that you were primarily criticizing Epstein's moves for Chicago this offseason. Your motiviations are pretty transparent. You've ranted all offseason about how horrible a GM Epstein was in Boston. You are compiling what you believe to be confirming evidence of your rants.

 

Here's the thing, though. This criticism is, for the most part, irrelevant and meaningless if you really mean what you said in your previous post. As you stated in your previous post, none of us know what Chicago's goals are for the 2012 season. However, the writing on the wall, in other words, what they have been doing, suggests that fielding a competitive team is not on the 2012 agenda. Which is fine.....as long as it is part of their long-term goals. Critiquing their offseason moves against an irrelevant standard of your choosing, that they should be competitive, is pointless.

 

And, just so I am clear, this post applies to a700 as well, since you and he echo each other so often. I will not engage in the implied-meaning followed by plausible deniability subterfuge he employs. I will say what I mean. You two are so engaged in congratulatory back-patting that you are virtually indecipherable at this point.

[User Name]

Please post more. Please.

[example1]

I found out a mass of contradictions in some posts. He is a moneyballer, but suddenly he is not using this approach/philosophy this season?. They are in rebuild mode but they only have acquired short-term stop-gaps? What kind of rebuild strategy is this?, plus... Aren't prospects part of finding undervalued sources of production?... Then a guy said, one thing is rebuild mode and other moneyball approach....so, what? , then I asked, can you use moneyball in order to rebuild your tem? The answer was yes. Then I asked... Can you use the moneyball approach in order to fill some specific positions? Still no answer. IMO yes. Some say: use the term properly, and I :blink:ed ...

 

I have no idea what is the strategy of Theo and the Cubs in the short/mid/long term. Some around here are pretty sure. The only thing I can say is that all of their 2012 offseason moves seems to me a combination of under-valued assets and prospects who can give them big rewards (at least I suppose, they expect), wait... Isn't it part of the moneyball approach? . Yes, Some of those moves can be taken as moneyball moves and some as short-term stop-gaps, who knows?. I don't have telepathy in order to know what Theo is thinking.

 

IMO big market teams like the Cubs should do what the fish is doing right now and mostly if you are in rebuild mode. Seems like they have interchanged their roles. They say that they going to splash in 2013 because the FA will be better, fine. Still they could sign elite players this offseason. They didn't. Sorry I don't like at all this strategy and mostly if they see their current acquisitions as short-term stop-gaps; or what? Are they going to start splashing and playing moneyball till 2013? And 2012? Waste year?

 

Sometimes we tend to complicate the things. Some claim to know this moneyball concept very well and try to put it as a chemical-transport-phenomena-matter in order to gain credibility, respect or some kind baseball certificate. This concept is actually pretty simple. Have the Cubs been using this approach this season? The evidence tells me, yes, at least in some positions. Some say no, fine. I don't share their approach to this matter

 

If I asked someone to take the time to explain a complicated concept to me--say, the theory of gravity--and I struggled to comprehend what they said, I would take it upon myself to read from the source material and gather from it what I could, rather than highlighting inconsistencies in those who did their best to explain the theory.

 

I certainly wouldn't question whether the person who I initally asked to explain it knew the concepts he or she was talking about by saying "some claim to know this gravity concept...".

 

Go read the book if you are having trouble understanding it. It is nowhere near as complicated as the theory of gravity.

 

Having read the book multiple times, and having read about the influence of it and used it to increase my understanding of the game, I--like others here--contend that you misued the term, and applied it when it wasn't relevant to the discussion.

 

Rebuilding and moneyball are different. A true rebuild takes years, and in the time that takes players still need to take the field. That doesn't mean those players are the manifestation of the broader approach. It's not an all or nothing thing.

[User Name]

If I asked someone to take the time to explain a complicated concept to me--say, the theory of gravity--and I struggled to comprehend what they said, I would take it upon myself to read from the source material and gather from it what I could, rather than highlighting inconsistencies in those who did their best to explain the theory.

 

I certainly wouldn't question whether the person who I initally asked to explain it knew the concepts he or she was talking about by saying "some claim to know this gravity concept...".

 

Go read the book if you are having trouble understanding it. It is nowhere near as complicated as the theory of gravity.

 

Having read the book multiple times, and having read about the influence of it and used it to increase my understanding of the game, I--like others here--contend that you misued the term, and applied it when it wasn't relevant to the discussion.

 

Rebuilding and moneyball are different. A true rebuild takes years, and in the time that takes players need to take the field. That doesn't mean those players are the manifestation of the broader approach. It's not an all or nothing thing.

 

An early candidate for POTY award!

[a700hitter]

I got that you were primarily criticizing Epstein's moves for Chicago this offseason. Your motiviations are pretty transparent. You've ranted all offseason about how horrible a GM Epstein was in Boston. You are compiling what you believe to be confirming evidence of your rants.

 

Here's the thing, though. This criticism is, for the most part, irrelevant and meaningless if you really mean what you said in your previous post. As you stated in your previous post, none of us know what Chicago's goals are for the 2012 season. However, the writing on the wall, in other words, what they have been doing, suggests that fielding a competitive team is not on the 2012 agenda. Which is fine.....as long as it is part of their long-term goals. Critiquing their offseason moves against an irrelevant standard of your choosing, that they should be competitive, is pointless.

 

And, just so I am clear, this post applies to a700 as well, since you and he echo each other so often. I will not engage in the implied-meaning followed by plausible deniability subterfuge he employs. I will say what I mean. You two are so engaged in congratulatory back-patting that you are virtually indecipherable at this point.

iortiz asked some very specific questions of you and E1 about Money Ball. In response the two of you talked out of both sides of your mouth and through your hat at the same time. The answers you gave him were a mass of contradictions.

[FredLynn]

I'm not insulting the poster, i'm insulting the post. Also, he's a big boy and can defend himself.

 

The "daddy-son" relationship is beautiful though.

 

This may be the dumbest post i have read on this site. Congratulations.

 

This hardly debates the post. The clear implication is that you think that the poster is dumb. Thats the way any sane person would interpret it.

Its something you have a problem with.

[User Name]

This may be the dumbest post i have read on this site. Congratulations.

 

This hardly debates the post. The clear implication is that you think that the poster is dumb. Thats the way any sane person would interpret it.

Its something you have a problem with.

 

I find this to be deliciously ironic mind you.

[a700hitter]

Rebuilding and moneyball are different. A true rebuild takes years, and in the time that takes players still need to take the field. That doesn't mean those players are the manifestation of the broader approach. It's not an all or nothing thing.

The Marlins and Cubs had almost identical records in 2011. Their approaches to the off season have been starkly different. You have termed the Cubs approach as a rebuild. What would you call the marlins approach? And does a GM abandon money ball philosophy in one and not the other. You said in an earlier post that Theo would be employing an analysis to his moves where he is looking for undervalued assets. The fact that he has not made any big acquisitions to improve his team is probably indicative of the fact that he didn't see any good values available. Certainly, if he did, he would have acted on them. Ridding the team of bad contracts doesn't preclude also making value acquisitions during the same off season... does it? You have been telling me for years that Theo walks on water, but now he can't walk and chew gum at the same time? He can't divest assets and acquire assets during the same off season? Of course he can. He just has not seen value assets under his philosophy so he hasn't made any acquisitions.

 

The Marlins did not wait for undervalued assets to hit the market. They paid full fair market value (some would argue that they paid above market value) to make acquisitions to improve the team to bring the fans into the new stadium. They didn't have the luxury of waiting like Theo thinks he does.

[a700hitter]

And, just so I am clear, this post applies to a700 as well, since you and he echo each other so often. I will not engage in the implied-meaning followed by plausible deniability subterfuge he employs. I will say what I mean. You two are so engaged in congratulatory back-patting that you are virtually indecipherable at this point.

^ This is quite funny. Is ORS saying that iortiz and me are the same poster, and that when I am posting as iortiz, I use a Spanish accent, or is he saying that iortiz uses a Brooklyn accent when he posts as me? Very funny. I am laughing at you on this especially because you did not intend it in any humor.

[ORS]

iortiz asked some very specific questions of you and E1 about Money Ball. In response the two of you talked out of both sides of your mouth and through your hat at the same time. The answers you gave him were a mass of contradictions.

This is BS. I answered every question he directed to me, and none were contradictory.

[iortiz]

I got that you were primarily criticizing Epstein's moves for Chicago this offseason. Your motiviations are pretty transparent. You've ranted all offseason about how horrible a GM Epstein was in Boston. You are compiling what you believe to be confirming evidence of your rants.

 

Here's the thing, though. This criticism is, for the most part, irrelevant and meaningless if you really mean what you said in your previous post. As you stated in your previous post, none of us know what Chicago's goals are for the 2012 season. However, the writing on the wall, in other words, what they have been doing, suggests that fielding a competitive team is not on the 2012 agenda. Which is fine.....as long as it is part of their long-term goals. Critiquing their offseason moves against an irrelevant standard of your choosing, that they should be competitive, is pointless.

 

And, just so I am clear, this post applies to a700 as well, since you and he echo each other so often. I will not engage in the implied-meaning followed by plausible deniability subterfuge he employs. I will say what I mean. You two are so engaged in congratulatory back-patting that you are virtually indecipherable at this point.

 

I want to clarify some things ORS.

 

1. I don't like Theo's management in the last 3 years. I believe that it was the main reason he walked. You think different? Others think different? fine.

 

2. Yes, none of us know what are the Cubs' plans (short/mid/long). Nevertheless, I don't like how the Cubs are starting this"rebuilding", thus far. Is this a good "strategy"? Only time will tell. I'm not sure why this opinion cause conflicts to you.

 

Sorry if I'm indecipherable to you. You are not for me. I've been saying that you are a great poster. I like the way you see the game. I won't change my opinion because of this. Nevertheless I do not always agree with you. Not this time.

 

Yes, A700 and I often see the game eye to eye, just as others, I guess. Maybe you and E1 see the game eye to eye as well, and it's great.

 

Yes, A700 is a great poster. I consider him a very knowlageble one. I consider him my friend. He is a very passionate poseter maybe just like you and me. I'm not always agree with him, tough. I could cite some examples. Surly you are not interest.

[FredLynn]

I find this to be deliciously ironic mind you.

 

That fact does not detract from how true the observation is.