Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 4  Next >

Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant

  • jb95695
  • Starter
  • 172 posts this site

Posted: 12/14/2012 9:42 AM

Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


For all of these kool aid drinking worshipers that created the love fest for the Cubs finally doing something of relevance, what do you think now. Throw the fans a bone and pull it back.
Maybe the actual goal is to lose 100 games again. It's fine to start a youth movement, but just because we are in that phase, doesn't mean the Cubs will win using that philosophy. The bottom line, no more postings by the kool aid drinkers until the ink is dry. The pressure of winning with just youth for this organization will not work. It will take an influx of veterans that truly want to win and some youth that doesn't care about the difficulties of trying to win with the loser mentality that has permeated this organization for the last century.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 9:44 AM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


Troll. Though the fact your life seems completely tied to the Cubs is so sad, it's rather funny.

I am not bothered by the fact they lost Sanchez at all. My life is great whether the Cubs go 162-0 and win the WS in a sweep or go 0-162. Sucks to be you and Cubs2007!!! LMFAO!! excitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcitedexcited


 

Last edited 12/14/2012 9:46 AM by PorkChopExpress12

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 12:00 PM

RE: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


I'm sure you were happy they didn't get Dirty Sanchez, since you're such a good fan.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 12:27 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


Nope. Never. Ever.

Now go find another team and leave us alone. Thanks.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 6:30 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


This team is still in phase one of a complete top-to-bottom rebuild. A great deal was accomplished toward the ultimate goal in one short year, more remains to be done before the FO can/should pull out all the stops. Getting to that point as well prepared/armed as possible is what is relevant currently. Up to this point, the only veteran additions this FO have added are value signings. The Sanchez offer was no different. At the going rate, had the Cubs been able to pull off the 5/$75mil. deal, it would have been a great value move. He's only one year older than Samardija, who is considered part of the core. Sanchez, at that price,  could have added value as a core player who would still be relevant when the club is ready to be a serious, longterm contender or he could have been used as a  big time trade chip that would bring back several core prospects.

Contrary to what the non-visionaries read into it, the Sanchez offer in no way changed the FO focus nor pushed up the process. The "Kool-aid drinkers" had enough sense to know this and not draw false conclusions. 

The deal was a shot-in-the-dark by the FO, for a pitcher they obviously had rated highly and it appeared he might be slipping-through-the-cracks. One of those "it can't hurt to try" situations. It will have no lasting impact. The only relevance will be to the imbicile patrol, now left feeling even lower about things.

Last edited 12/14/2012 6:45 PM by HolyMackeral

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 7:10 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



HolyMackeral wrote: This team is still in phase one of a complete top-to-bottom rebuild. A great deal was accomplished toward the ultimate goal in one short year, more remains to be done before the FO can/should pull out all the stops. Getting to that point as well prepared/armed as possible is what is relevant currently. Up to this point, the only veteran additions this FO have added are value signings. The Sanchez offer was no different. At the going rate, had the Cubs been able to pull off the 5/$75mil. deal, it would have been a great value move. He's only one year older than Samardija, who is considered part of the core. Sanchez, at that price,  could have added value as a core player who would still be relevant when the club is ready to be a serious, longterm contender or he could have been used as a  big time trade chip that would bring back several core prospects.

Contrary to what the non-visionaries read into it, the Sanchez offer in no way changed the FO focus nor pushed up the process. The "Kool-aid drinkers" had enough sense to know this and not draw false conclusions. 

The deal was a shot-in-the-dark by the FO, for a pitcher they obviously had rated highly and it appeared he might be slipping-through-the-cracks. One of those "it can't hurt to try" situations. It will have no lasting impact. The only relevance will be to the imbicile patrol, now left feeling even lower about things.
Ok, so they were ready to give $77M to a guy who will have "no lasting impact".  That's a little concerning. "can't hurt to try"..cmon, Theo and Jed deserve more respect than that.  IMO, the Sanchez deal is a prime example of why it's hard to attract the better free agents when you're coming off a horrific season.  That's why we end up with the Scott Bakers and Feldman's. 

Hopefully a better 2013 team helps us land a good FA next offseason.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/14/2012 7:34 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


welcome to the "ignored" list.
#23 OF CHICAGO SPORTS:
         23 - SANDBERG
         23 - JORDAN
         23 - HESTER
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 7:37 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



doughboy981 wrote:
HolyMackeral wrote: This team is still in phase one of a complete top-to-bottom rebuild. A great deal was accomplished toward the ultimate goal in one short year, more remains to be done before the FO can/should pull out all the stops. Getting to that point as well prepared/armed as possible is what is relevant currently. Up to this point, the only veteran additions this FO have added are value signings. The Sanchez offer was no different. At the going rate, had the Cubs been able to pull off the 5/$75mil. deal, it would have been a great value move. He's only one year older than Samardija, who is considered part of the core. Sanchez, at that price,  could have added value as a core player who would still be relevant when the club is ready to be a serious, longterm contender or he could have been used as a  big time trade chip that would bring back several core prospects.

Contrary to what the non-visionaries read into it, the Sanchez offer in no way changed the FO focus nor pushed up the process. The "Kool-aid drinkers" had enough sense to know this and not draw false conclusions. 

The deal was a shot-in-the-dark by the FO, for a pitcher they obviously had rated highly and it appeared he might be slipping-through-the-cracks. One of those "it can't hurt to try" situations. It will have no lasting impact. The only relevance will be to the imbicile patrol, now left feeling even lower about things.
Ok, so they were ready to give $77M to a guy who will have "no lasting impact".  That's a little concerning. "can't hurt to try"..cmon, Theo and Jed deserve more respect than that.  IMO, the Sanchez deal is a prime example of why it's hard to attract the better free agents when you're coming off a horrific season.  That's why we end up with the Scott Bakers and Feldman's. 

Hopefully a better 2013 team helps us land a good FA next offseason.
Well, come on now. Sanchez re-signed with his former team, where presumably he has made a couple friends, etc. And the Tigers are as good of a shot to win the World Series as anyone. If the Tigers did not meet (or in this case exceed) the offer, Sanchez may very well have been a Cub.

True, the Cubs find them having to sell different things than playoff contenders at present. This is one of the reasons they can beat out the Angels, Yankees, etc. for some players...the players believe they have a much better chance to get playing time and the opportunity to prove themselves with the Cubs than they would get with a contender that cannot afford to be patient. Also, there are less qualified people to beat out to get that playing time for most of the Cubs positions. Hence, the Bakers and Feldmans of the world. Not the worst thing, by the way.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 7:55 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



doughboy981 wrote:
HolyMackeral wrote: This team is still in phase one of a complete top-to-bottom rebuild. A great deal was accomplished toward the ultimate goal in one short year, more remains to be done before the FO can/should pull out all the stops. Getting to that point as well prepared/armed as possible is what is relevant currently. Up to this point, the only veteran additions this FO have added are value signings. The Sanchez offer was no different. At the going rate, had the Cubs been able to pull off the 5/$75mil. deal, it would have been a great value move. He's only one year older than Samardija, who is considered part of the core. Sanchez, at that price,  could have added value as a core player who would still be relevant when the club is ready to be a serious, longterm contender or he could have been used as a  big time trade chip that would bring back several core prospects.

Contrary to what the non-visionaries read into it, the Sanchez offer in no way changed the FO focus nor pushed up the process. The "Kool-aid drinkers" had enough sense to know this and not draw false conclusions. 

The deal was a shot-in-the-dark by the FO, for a pitcher they obviously had rated highly and it appeared he might be slipping-through-the-cracks. One of those "it can't hurt to try" situations. It will have no lasting impact. The only relevance will be to the imbicile patrol, now left feeling even lower about things.
Ok, so they were ready to give $77M to a guy who will have "no lasting impact".  That's a little concerning. "can't hurt to try"..cmon, Theo and Jed deserve more respect than that.  IMO, the Sanchez deal is a prime example of why it's hard to attract the better free agents when you're coming off a horrific season.  That's why we end up with the Scott Bakers and Feldman's. 

Hopefully a better 2013 team helps us land a good FA next offseason.
Repeating, "no lasting impact." When the young, talented core that is being assembled shows signs of breaking out, there will be pitchers every bit as appealing (or more) as Sanchez. At that point in time, the FO, who I have shown a great deal of respect for  through my support of their plan, will show a much more serious tone  when looking to negotiate a longterm contract. And the Detroit's of the baseball world will no longer be a more attractive option. Nor will they outbid a Cubs team on the verge of assembling a potentially dominate, young contender. That's the ultimate plan and the reason for the current mode of looking for value deals-- including Sanchez.

You are showing definate signs of feeling even lower about things............

Last edited 12/14/2012 7:57 PM by HolyMackeral

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 8:43 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



HolyMackeral wrote:
doughboy981 wrote:
HolyMackeral wrote: This team is still in phase one of a complete top-to-bottom rebuild. A great deal was accomplished toward the ultimate goal in one short year, more remains to be done before the FO can/should pull out all the stops. Getting to that point as well prepared/armed as possible is what is relevant currently. Up to this point, the only veteran additions this FO have added are value signings. The Sanchez offer was no different. At the going rate, had the Cubs been able to pull off the 5/$75mil. deal, it would have been a great value move. He's only one year older than Samardija, who is considered part of the core. Sanchez, at that price,  could have added value as a core player who would still be relevant when the club is ready to be a serious, longterm contender or he could have been used as a  big time trade chip that would bring back several core prospects.

Contrary to what the non-visionaries read into it, the Sanchez offer in no way changed the FO focus nor pushed up the process. The "Kool-aid drinkers" had enough sense to know this and not draw false conclusions. 

The deal was a shot-in-the-dark by the FO, for a pitcher they obviously had rated highly and it appeared he might be slipping-through-the-cracks. One of those "it can't hurt to try" situations. It will have no lasting impact. The only relevance will be to the imbicile patrol, now left feeling even lower about things.
Ok, so they were ready to give $77M to a guy who will have "no lasting impact".  That's a little concerning. "can't hurt to try"..cmon, Theo and Jed deserve more respect than that.  IMO, the Sanchez deal is a prime example of why it's hard to attract the better free agents when you're coming off a horrific season.  That's why we end up with the Scott Bakers and Feldman's. 

Hopefully a better 2013 team helps us land a good FA next offseason.
Repeating, "no lasting impact." When the young, talented core that is being assembled shows signs of breaking out, there will be pitchers every bit as appealing (or more) as Sanchez. At that point in time, the FO, who I have shown a great deal of respect for  through my support of their plan, will show a much more serious tone  when looking to negotiate a longterm contract. And the Detroit's of the baseball world will no longer be a more attractive option. Nor will they outbid a Cubs team on the verge of assembling a potentially dominate, young contender. That's the ultimate plan and the reason for the current mode of looking for value deals-- including Sanchez.

You are showing definate signs of feeling even lower about things............
I think they were very serious about signing Sanchez.  No need to make excuses, they lost out, it happens. According to Levine, even Ricketts was in Miami trying to seal the deal.  btw, I agree with your hopes for the future Cubs, but I think getting a 28yr old poised to enter his prime would have been a key step to get there.  It'll be interesting to see how the Cubs counter.  Unfortunately, a counter a lot of us can get excited about will now cost prospects, which is why the Sanchez deal stings a little.

I also don't see how $77M would be a value deal for Sanchez.  To me it's an overpay, but the Cubs could've afforded it.  Anyway, they gave it their best shot, these guys are smart enough to have a back up plan.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/14/2012 10:47 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



doughboy981 wrote:
HolyMackeral wrote:
doughboy981 wrote:
HolyMackeral wrote: This team is still in phase one of a complete top-to-bottom rebuild. A great deal was accomplished toward the ultimate goal in one short year, more remains to be done before the FO can/should pull out all the stops. Getting to that point as well prepared/armed as possible is what is relevant currently. Up to this point, the only veteran additions this FO have added are value signings. The Sanchez offer was no different. At the going rate, had the Cubs been able to pull off the 5/$75mil. deal, it would have been a great value move. He's only one year older than Samardija, who is considered part of the core. Sanchez, at that price,  could have added value as a core player who would still be relevant when the club is ready to be a serious, longterm contender or he could have been used as a  big time trade chip that would bring back several core prospects.

Contrary to what the non-visionaries read into it, the Sanchez offer in no way changed the FO focus nor pushed up the process. The "Kool-aid drinkers" had enough sense to know this and not draw false conclusions. 

The deal was a shot-in-the-dark by the FO, for a pitcher they obviously had rated highly and it appeared he might be slipping-through-the-cracks. One of those "it can't hurt to try" situations. It will have no lasting impact. The only relevance will be to the imbicile patrol, now left feeling even lower about things.
Ok, so they were ready to give $77M to a guy who will have "no lasting impact".  That's a little concerning. "can't hurt to try"..cmon, Theo and Jed deserve more respect than that.  IMO, the Sanchez deal is a prime example of why it's hard to attract the better free agents when you're coming off a horrific season.  That's why we end up with the Scott Bakers and Feldman's. 

Hopefully a better 2013 team helps us land a good FA next offseason.
Repeating, "no lasting impact." When the young, talented core that is being assembled shows signs of breaking out, there will be pitchers every bit as appealing (or more) as Sanchez. At that point in time, the FO, who I have shown a great deal of respect for  through my support of their plan, will show a much more serious tone  when looking to negotiate a longterm contract. And the Detroit's of the baseball world will no longer be a more attractive option. Nor will they outbid a Cubs team on the verge of assembling a potentially dominate, young contender. That's the ultimate plan and the reason for the current mode of looking for value deals-- including Sanchez.

You are showing definate signs of feeling even lower about things............
I think they were very serious about signing Sanchez.  No need to make excuses, they lost out, it happens. According to Levine, even Ricketts was in Miami trying to seal the deal.  btw, I agree with your hopes for the future Cubs, but I think getting a 28yr old poised to enter his prime would have been a key step to get there.  It'll be interesting to see how the Cubs counter.  Unfortunately, a counter a lot of us can get excited about will now cost prospects, which is why the Sanchez deal stings a little.

I also don't see how $77M would be a value deal for Sanchez.  To me it's an overpay, but the Cubs could've afforded it.  Anyway, they gave it their best shot, these guys are smart enough to have a back up plan.

If they were that serious about signing Sanchez, they could have topped the Tigers offer easily.  They tried hard to seal the deal by face-to-face meetings because it would have been gravy to get the best pitcher remaining on the market for what really is a bargain.  But he's not close to being among the best pitchers in baseball, a can't miss.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 11:22 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


Wow. I didn't think there could be a worse GM than Jim Hendry, but Epstein is giving him a run for the money.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/14/2012 11:34 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



KatieCubFan wrote:
doughboy981 wrote:
I think they were very serious about signing Sanchez.  No need to make excuses, they lost out, it happens. According to Levine, even Ricketts was in Miami trying to seal the deal.  btw, I agree with your hopes for the future Cubs, but I think getting a 28yr old poised to enter his prime would have been a key step to get there.  It'll be interesting to see how the Cubs counter.  Unfortunately, a counter a lot of us can get excited about will now cost prospects, which is why the Sanchez deal stings a little.

I also don't see how $77M would be a value deal for Sanchez.  To me it's an overpay, but the Cubs could've afforded it.  Anyway, they gave it their best shot, these guys are smart enough to have a back up plan.

If they were that serious about signing Sanchez, they could have topped the Tigers offer easily.  They tried hard to seal the deal by face-to-face meetings because it would have been gravy to get the best pitcher remaining on the market for what really is a bargain.  But he's not close to being among the best pitchers in baseball, a can't miss.
Why would've it been a bargain? I keep hearing bargain, value for a guy who just got $80M and is the #4 on the Tigers.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/14/2012 11:47 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



doughboy981 wrote:
KatieCubFan wrote:
doughboy981 wrote:
I think they were very serious about signing Sanchez.  No need to make excuses, they lost out, it happens. According to Levine, even Ricketts was in Miami trying to seal the deal.  btw, I agree with your hopes for the future Cubs, but I think getting a 28yr old poised to enter his prime would have been a key step to get there.  It'll be interesting to see how the Cubs counter.  Unfortunately, a counter a lot of us can get excited about will now cost prospects, which is why the Sanchez deal stings a little.

I also don't see how $77M would be a value deal for Sanchez.  To me it's an overpay, but the Cubs could've afforded it.  Anyway, they gave it their best shot, these guys are smart enough to have a back up plan.

If they were that serious about signing Sanchez, they could have topped the Tigers offer easily.  They tried hard to seal the deal by face-to-face meetings because it would have been gravy to get the best pitcher remaining on the market for what really is a bargain.  But he's not close to being among the best pitchers in baseball, a can't miss.
Why would've it been a bargain? I keep hearing bargain, value for a guy who just got $80M and is the #4 on the Tigers.
I think I read that the Cubs' top offer was $77.5M/5 years. That is as sincere an effort as any fan can expect for a pitcher who may top out as a solid #3. As critical as I have been of many of the actions and non-actions of our current front office, I would never list this among them. Going over $15M a year for 5 years is about as committed as I would want Theo & the Gang to get on A. Sanchez... now lets see if they can make any moves that contribute to more of our long term than flip candidates and injury reclaimation projects. There are other guys able to be had that wouldn't require losing any picks...

"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”  ~Albert Einstein

Reply | Quote
  • jb95695
  • Starter
  • 172 posts this site

Posted: 12/15/2012 10:18 AM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


I know you can't always win with signing FA every year, but it does give the fans a sense an organization is attempting to improve. The question right now for Cubs fans? Would you rather be the Angels, Yankees, Red Sox or Cubs? No one can seriously say they would want to be the Cubs. There are many teams that have tried this youth movement over the years with only a few having success. I would personally want to win 85-90 games every year signing FA, sprinkled with a few youngsters than losing 100 games in consecutive years, keeping your fingers crossed the youth will blossom. Are there any true stars in our minors that will be a superstar one day?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/15/2012 10:41 AM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



jb95695 wrote: Are there any true stars in our minors that will be a superstar one day?

Nothing is guaranteed, but Baez for instance looks like a stud.  A "future Ryan Braun at shortstop" might be going overboard but it tells you something when scouts make these comparisons.  Soler too has raw power.  Almora is a ballplayer as they say, great instincts.  You can build a team with guys like these as they mature.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/15/2012 11:35 AM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 


Trolls should never be feed. biggrin
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/15/2012 12:12 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



PorkChopExpress12 wrote: Trolls should never be feed. biggrin

I disagree, someone/something might find them tasty.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/15/2012 12:40 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



KatieCubFan wrote:
jb95695 wrote: Are there any true stars in our minors that will be a superstar one day?

Nothing is guaranteed, but Baez for instance looks like a stud.  A "future Ryan Braun at shortstop" might be going overboard but it tells you something when scouts make these comparisons.  Soler too has raw power.  Almora is a ballplayer as they say, great instincts.  You can build a team with guys like these as they mature.

Next year is a really big year for the Cubs minor leaguers like Baez, Almora, and Soler.  Baez and Soler could finish the year in AA, it will be interesting to see how they fare against AA competition.  If they both struggle, then our return to relevance will be delayed even further.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/15/2012 2:25 PM

Re: Cubs did not get Sanchez, will this team ever be relevant 



freakmaster wrote: Wow. I didn't think there could be a worse GM than Jim Hendry, but Epstein is giving him a run for the money.
if you believe this at all, you're intolerably dumb.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 4  Next >