Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
I'm pretty sure CollegeHockeyAddict is at the game. That would have been a nice treat for him.
I'm pretty sure CollegeHockeyAddict is at the game. That would have been a nice treat for him.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
MLB 2011 Part 1
- Thread starter Proud2baLaker
- Start date
- Status
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
I'd say any Twins win this year is a special night for Twins fans.
I was going to call Valencia a ****** for the way he flipped his bat on the game-winning hit like he wasn't a terrible player on the worst team in baseball, but frankly, I'm just impressed he knew how many outs there were in the inning.
I'd say any Twins win this year is a special night for Twins fans.
I was going to call Valencia a ****** for the way he flipped his bat on the game-winning hit like he wasn't a terrible player on the worst team in baseball, but frankly, I'm just impressed he knew how many outs there were in the inning.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
Summer hasn't even started yet and I'm ready for autumn. It was too freakin' hot today.
Summer hasn't even started yet and I'm ready for autumn. It was too freakin' hot today.
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
Ok, time for my annual MLB rant (Early Season Edition):
Instead of simply ragging on a team, I'm actually going to explain how I've come to accept the team I'm ragging on and why.
The team, of course, is the Chicago Cubs.
For years, I've ragged on the Cubs for saying what they don't mean...essentially lying to us about this being "the year" and inevitably falling flat on their faces about 2 weeks into the season. I've come to realize now that all of this animosity was based upon a lie disguised as faith in the Cubs.
The Cubs aren't about winning the World Series. They don't have to win to succeed. There was only a push to win it all in 2008 because it marked the centennial of the last time they won the World Series. 2008 has come and gone and, with it, the drive to win it all.
No, I'm not suggesting that the Cubs players are just going out there as a group and going through the motions. There are a few players like that, but not all.
I'm also very aware that the loser in this (besides the fans) is Mike Quade. He'll inevitably (or already depending upon who you've listened to) get blamed for the Cubs woes.
But I argue that the Cubs have no woes outside of the thoughts of their fanbase. Look. The Cubs biggest strength is their biggest weakness. Their fanbase is passionate, loyal, and will bleed Cubbie Blue win or lose. They will fill Wrigley whether they are in first place or dead last. They will buy merchandise because they are classy, perhaps stylish, and they depict their favorite team.
I'm not sure how much profit the Cubs are making at this time (no financial reports are out and there is some sort of skirmish regarding the Ricketts' financials regarding the Cubs) but... Whether the Cubs win or lose, the Cubs go on without much of any sort of accountability by the fanbase or heart/drive from the playerbase to succeed.
So, my animosity towards Jim Hendry is misplaced. He's not the GM to try to make a team that can win the World Series. Ed Lynch, McPhail, and the others that came before them weren't either. They are there to look good to the media, schmooze the media, etc. much like many groups have people whose job it is to schmooze potential investors or donors. Sure, he'll sign a big name or two every now and then, but it is just for show. He doesn't have to be competent. It's not part of the accountability standards Ricketts (or the Trib before him) has in place for the Cubs staff. All he has to do is to make a show of it, and keep the fanbase happy enough to keep coming to Wrigley. Not a hard job giving what I said about the Cubs fanbase.
So, the Cubs are simply doing what the market requires them to do: Put a product on the field that will put butts in the seats. The clientele doesn't seem to require any more of that from them, so they won't invest any more into the team such as that. They do spend money on the team, so the detractors can't say they play small budget in a big market. They're essentially covered. If the Cubs fanbase starts expecting wins and not just wins but playoff wins, and is willing to make tough decisions on their own to force Rickett's hand, then yeah. I think the Cubs could improve. But I don't see that happening.
So, I accept this as the "way it is" for the Cubs. Sure, it could change. Sure, I want it to change. But there is no need to change at this time. There are rumblings, sure. Rumors about Hendry's future preseason. It's all drivel because the Cubs are doing what they do best. So, the world turns and I'm at peace.
Yeah, I do have a proposed solution. However, I will say that my proposal's likelihood of implementation is infinitesimally small. It is a drastic plan, for sure. And it would require the fanbase to basically implode or at the very least go on temporary hiatus. Yup. In order for the Cubs to improve in the long run, people must stop coming to Wrigley on the short run. Told you it wouldn't happen.
So, what's my plan?
I say start over. No, I'm not saying "fire the manager and go youth." That's being tried and is failing. The youth movement on the Cubs, especially in the pitching ranks, shows just how bad the Cubs are as an organization. I say start COMPLETELY over.
As in: Get rid of everyone involved with player development, management, and acquisition. So, all of the scouts, GMs, Board of Directors associated with such activities, everyone involved with the scouting and signing of free agents, drafting players, player development through the minor leagues.... I can't find an organizational chart of the Cubs so I apologize for not having job titles to make this idea easier to follow.
In any case, the Cubs go back to square one: Basically the same level of beginning Florida, Arizona, etc. had when they first game into the Major Leagues. For all extensive purposes, the Cubs would be an expansion team in a traditional team's uniforms and locale.
The Cubs need to reinvent themselves completely: from philosophy to corporate culture to accountability at all levels to player strategies at the acquisition level (draft, free agency, development, etc.).
And they should do it by looking at the teams that are doing it right, such as the Phillies, Rays, Red Sox and perhaps the Braves, Rangers, and Angels. Yes, I'm mostly citing AL teams because, in my mind, that's why the Phillies have been so successful. They've modelled themselves after AL teams.
I believe in balance, solid development, and accountability. The Cubs have none of this. And until they do, they won't go anywhere.
My father is a diehard Cub fan. He's lived and breathed the Cubs since the 1950s. His one dream is to see the Cubs make the World Series. He doesn't even care if they win it all. He just wants to see the Cubs in the World Series. I feel bad for him. He'll never see it.
Ok, time for my annual MLB rant (Early Season Edition):
Instead of simply ragging on a team, I'm actually going to explain how I've come to accept the team I'm ragging on and why.
The team, of course, is the Chicago Cubs.
For years, I've ragged on the Cubs for saying what they don't mean...essentially lying to us about this being "the year" and inevitably falling flat on their faces about 2 weeks into the season. I've come to realize now that all of this animosity was based upon a lie disguised as faith in the Cubs.
The Cubs aren't about winning the World Series. They don't have to win to succeed. There was only a push to win it all in 2008 because it marked the centennial of the last time they won the World Series. 2008 has come and gone and, with it, the drive to win it all.
No, I'm not suggesting that the Cubs players are just going out there as a group and going through the motions. There are a few players like that, but not all.
I'm also very aware that the loser in this (besides the fans) is Mike Quade. He'll inevitably (or already depending upon who you've listened to) get blamed for the Cubs woes.
But I argue that the Cubs have no woes outside of the thoughts of their fanbase. Look. The Cubs biggest strength is their biggest weakness. Their fanbase is passionate, loyal, and will bleed Cubbie Blue win or lose. They will fill Wrigley whether they are in first place or dead last. They will buy merchandise because they are classy, perhaps stylish, and they depict their favorite team.
I'm not sure how much profit the Cubs are making at this time (no financial reports are out and there is some sort of skirmish regarding the Ricketts' financials regarding the Cubs) but... Whether the Cubs win or lose, the Cubs go on without much of any sort of accountability by the fanbase or heart/drive from the playerbase to succeed.
So, my animosity towards Jim Hendry is misplaced. He's not the GM to try to make a team that can win the World Series. Ed Lynch, McPhail, and the others that came before them weren't either. They are there to look good to the media, schmooze the media, etc. much like many groups have people whose job it is to schmooze potential investors or donors. Sure, he'll sign a big name or two every now and then, but it is just for show. He doesn't have to be competent. It's not part of the accountability standards Ricketts (or the Trib before him) has in place for the Cubs staff. All he has to do is to make a show of it, and keep the fanbase happy enough to keep coming to Wrigley. Not a hard job giving what I said about the Cubs fanbase.
So, the Cubs are simply doing what the market requires them to do: Put a product on the field that will put butts in the seats. The clientele doesn't seem to require any more of that from them, so they won't invest any more into the team such as that. They do spend money on the team, so the detractors can't say they play small budget in a big market. They're essentially covered. If the Cubs fanbase starts expecting wins and not just wins but playoff wins, and is willing to make tough decisions on their own to force Rickett's hand, then yeah. I think the Cubs could improve. But I don't see that happening.
So, I accept this as the "way it is" for the Cubs. Sure, it could change. Sure, I want it to change. But there is no need to change at this time. There are rumblings, sure. Rumors about Hendry's future preseason. It's all drivel because the Cubs are doing what they do best. So, the world turns and I'm at peace.
Yeah, I do have a proposed solution. However, I will say that my proposal's likelihood of implementation is infinitesimally small. It is a drastic plan, for sure. And it would require the fanbase to basically implode or at the very least go on temporary hiatus. Yup. In order for the Cubs to improve in the long run, people must stop coming to Wrigley on the short run. Told you it wouldn't happen.
So, what's my plan?
I say start over. No, I'm not saying "fire the manager and go youth." That's being tried and is failing. The youth movement on the Cubs, especially in the pitching ranks, shows just how bad the Cubs are as an organization. I say start COMPLETELY over.
As in: Get rid of everyone involved with player development, management, and acquisition. So, all of the scouts, GMs, Board of Directors associated with such activities, everyone involved with the scouting and signing of free agents, drafting players, player development through the minor leagues.... I can't find an organizational chart of the Cubs so I apologize for not having job titles to make this idea easier to follow.
In any case, the Cubs go back to square one: Basically the same level of beginning Florida, Arizona, etc. had when they first game into the Major Leagues. For all extensive purposes, the Cubs would be an expansion team in a traditional team's uniforms and locale.
The Cubs need to reinvent themselves completely: from philosophy to corporate culture to accountability at all levels to player strategies at the acquisition level (draft, free agency, development, etc.).
And they should do it by looking at the teams that are doing it right, such as the Phillies, Rays, Red Sox and perhaps the Braves, Rangers, and Angels. Yes, I'm mostly citing AL teams because, in my mind, that's why the Phillies have been so successful. They've modelled themselves after AL teams.
I believe in balance, solid development, and accountability. The Cubs have none of this. And until they do, they won't go anywhere.
My father is a diehard Cub fan. He's lived and breathed the Cubs since the 1950s. His one dream is to see the Cubs make the World Series. He doesn't even care if they win it all. He just wants to see the Cubs in the World Series. I feel bad for him. He'll never see it.
Last edited:
JF_Gophers
2147483647
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
All of the Cubs problems would be solved if they left Wrigley Field. But that won't happen.
All of the Cubs problems would be solved if they left Wrigley Field. But that won't happen.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
The Cubs are run like the Red Sox used to be -- turn a profit, fill the building, winning is unnecessary. People used to blame that streak on Fenway, when it was just the ownership's (admittedly dirtbag, but quite rational) philosophy.
The Cubs are run like the Red Sox used to be -- turn a profit, fill the building, winning is unnecessary. People used to blame that streak on Fenway, when it was just the ownership's (admittedly dirtbag, but quite rational) philosophy.
Last edited:
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
I'd rep you for this but I must "spread some Reputation around..." yadda yadda.
Right on there.
I'm ok with it now.
I'd rep you for this but I must "spread some Reputation around..." yadda yadda.
Right on there.
I'm ok with it now.
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
That's not a bad description of the Red Sox. But that franchise occasionally put together genuine runs, and spent the money to do so.
It's a maddeningly perfect description of the Jacobs/Sinden, pre-salary cap Bruins, though.
That's not a bad description of the Red Sox. But that franchise occasionally put together genuine runs, and spent the money to do so.
It's a maddeningly perfect description of the Jacobs/Sinden, pre-salary cap Bruins, though.
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
That's not how I understood the report.
I understood that Ricketts only paid for part of the Cubs up front and put the rest on some sort of a payment plan. Here's where I become more uncertain:
Does that debt factor into how much profit the team is making? If it does, then obviously the profit margin would either decrease or disappear completely. Seems pretty obvious to me that it would but perhaps there are different rules that I'm unaware of.
If the Ricketts financing of the Cubs doesn't factor into it, then really, the ownership is rather poor... which is, again, nothing new with the Cubs.
That's not how I understood the report.
I understood that Ricketts only paid for part of the Cubs up front and put the rest on some sort of a payment plan. Here's where I become more uncertain:
Does that debt factor into how much profit the team is making? If it does, then obviously the profit margin would either decrease or disappear completely. Seems pretty obvious to me that it would but perhaps there are different rules that I'm unaware of.
If the Ricketts financing of the Cubs doesn't factor into it, then really, the ownership is rather poor... which is, again, nothing new with the Cubs.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
That's an interesting list with a lot going on there. Seems to me that it's a combination of teams that are headed into a trough in the natural performance cycle* (Rangers, Tigers) teams that are emerging from that trough (Marlins, maybe the Natinals), teams with severe off-field financial issues not related to the performance cycle (Dodgers, Mets) and teams that have no excuse and are just terribly run (Orioles). The Cubs could arguably fit three of those four categories. I don't know why the Phillies have debt -- they're expensive now but they should be rolling in dough after the last 3-4 years.
Under normal circumstances, the performance cycle is:
Unsuccessful but promising, inexpensive, young team (Spring -- 1983 Mets)
On-field success and revenue before salaries catch up (Summer peak -- 1986 Mets)
Success continues but salaries begin to overwhelm revenue (Autumn -- 1989 Mets)
Aging, expensive team fails on field and at box office (Winter trough -- 1992 Mets)
That's an interesting list with a lot going on there. Seems to me that it's a combination of teams that are headed into a trough in the natural performance cycle* (Rangers, Tigers) teams that are emerging from that trough (Marlins, maybe the Natinals), teams with severe off-field financial issues not related to the performance cycle (Dodgers, Mets) and teams that have no excuse and are just terribly run (Orioles). The Cubs could arguably fit three of those four categories. I don't know why the Phillies have debt -- they're expensive now but they should be rolling in dough after the last 3-4 years.
Under normal circumstances, the performance cycle is:
Unsuccessful but promising, inexpensive, young team (Spring -- 1983 Mets)
On-field success and revenue before salaries catch up (Summer peak -- 1986 Mets)
Success continues but salaries begin to overwhelm revenue (Autumn -- 1989 Mets)
Aging, expensive team fails on field and at box office (Winter trough -- 1992 Mets)
Last edited:
unofan
Well-known member
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
That has more to do with the previous owners' "business" strategy and accounting and less to do with the operations of the ball club. The guy who bought the Tribune leveraged the entire buyout - the Cubs were collateral damage when he couldn't afford to pay the bills on the his corporate takeover, and he shifted as much debt as he could to the team when he sold em to Ricketts.
The ball club itself is still highly profitable on an operating basis.
The Cubs do it too, occasionally ('69, '84, '03, '08). They had the best offense in baseball and the best record in the NL in 2008 - they just choked in the playoffs.
That has more to do with the previous owners' "business" strategy and accounting and less to do with the operations of the ball club. The guy who bought the Tribune leveraged the entire buyout - the Cubs were collateral damage when he couldn't afford to pay the bills on the his corporate takeover, and he shifted as much debt as he could to the team when he sold em to Ricketts.
The ball club itself is still highly profitable on an operating basis.
The Cubs do it too, occasionally ('69, '84, '03, '08). They had the best offense in baseball and the best record in the NL in 2008 - they just choked in the playoffs.
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
------------------------------------------------
In other news:
Gene Woj<and so forth> is an idiot, unless you don't get how the Cubs operate or find the Cubs on field performance to be gratifying (which would make Zambrano's claims wrong).
Carlos Zambrano doesn't get it. He should read my "rant." If he understood what the Cubs do year in and year out, he'd not get so upset. He'd just understand that this is the way things are for the Cubs and the way that things will be for the immediate future (speaking optimistically on the long term). He shouldn't get so upset about the performance of his team seeming embarrassing. He should just go out, pitch and bat as best he can, and when the Cubs inevitably blow it, just shrug his shoulders and go on about his life. It's not hard. Hendry does it every game and every season and he's allegedly the most accountable person behind the team's performance as a whole.
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
------------------------------------------------
In other news:
Gene Woj<and so forth> is an idiot, unless you don't get how the Cubs operate or find the Cubs on field performance to be gratifying (which would make Zambrano's claims wrong).
Carlos Zambrano doesn't get it. He should read my "rant." If he understood what the Cubs do year in and year out, he'd not get so upset. He'd just understand that this is the way things are for the Cubs and the way that things will be for the immediate future (speaking optimistically on the long term). He shouldn't get so upset about the performance of his team seeming embarrassing. He should just go out, pitch and bat as best he can, and when the Cubs inevitably blow it, just shrug his shoulders and go on about his life. It's not hard. Hendry does it every game and every season and he's allegedly the most accountable person behind the team's performance as a whole.
bigblue_dl
Armed
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
Holy ****. The Rays have a ton of picks in the first round and supplementary round.
Holy ****. The Rays have a ton of picks in the first round and supplementary round.
First Time Long Time
Rebuilding
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
Huskies 3B Jordan Smith taken in the 9th round by Cleveland.
Highest Husky ever taken I believe.
Also, Trevor Gretzky taken by the Cubs in the 7th.
Huskies 3B Jordan Smith taken in the 9th round by Cleveland.
Highest Husky ever taken I believe.
Also, Trevor Gretzky taken by the Cubs in the 7th.
bigblue_dl
Armed
Re: MLB 2011 Part 1
Classy move by Texas: http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/06/09/texas-rangers-draft-partially-paralyzed-player/?test=faces
Classy move by Texas: http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/06/09/texas-rangers-draft-partially-paralyzed-player/?test=faces
- Status