Three Teams

[jimmer]

 

We seem to be acting like the Cubs are some kind of perenial powerhouse. While looking good now they haven't won a WS for 108 years.

And if the same players that were on the team 50 years ago were on the Cubs now that might mean something.

 

New players, new management, new philosophies. Failures of teams past doesn't really mean anything at all unless one believes in curses. Even if one did believe in curses, who was the GM that presided over the last team that broke a famously long curse not so long ago and then followed it up with another WS win just for giggles? Boston hadn't won a WS in a long time and then became a powerhouse for a decade winning 3 WS in 10 seasons.

 

Then there's the Giants who hadn't won a WS for more than half a century (and since before moving to San Francisco).  They won in 2010 and two more times since.

 

Because a team hasn't won a WS in quite some time means nothing when talking about now or the future.  The Cubs won 97 games this year, are pretty young (especially when talking about their best position players) and built to be around for quite some time.  Don't need to sell the Cubs short to boost the Twins (who, BTW, didn't win their 2nd WS until 63 years after winning it's first WS as the Senators and have only won  3 WS since the franchise came into existence in 1901).

[Squirrel]

We seem to be acting like the Cubs are some kind of perenial powerhouse. While looking good now they haven't won a WS for 108 years.

People in Chicago are acting as if they already won.

[jokin]

 

I don't think Ryan had the advantage of having a guy like Jeff Samardjiza already on the team. And if he did have someone equal to his talent, I'm pretty sure he would jump on the chance to trade him for Addison Russell.

 

And besides getting lucky on Jake Arrieta, I think the main reason why the Cubs are still playing right now is due to their high draft picks. It's just that their picks have been college guys and the Twins have picked high school guys. Let's see where they stack up after Buxton and Berrios get settled in.

 

Not sure how anyone could say Theo simply "got lucky on Arrieta"...  actually, it's kind-of ridiculous to say that. It seems obvious he: recognized Arrieta's raw, but unfulfilled talent, analyzed what wasn't working- via scouting and video, got feedback and assurances from his own coaches that it was fixable, and then boldy pulled the trigger- utilizing his "Rent-A-Free-Agent-For-Exactly-This-Type-Of-Opportunity-In-Order-To-Potentially-Make-The--Club-Stronger-Long-Term", Scott Feldman. 

 

It wasn't like this was just some obscure trade at the time.  Many of us on this forum praised it (including myself, of course), as conceptually, from start to finish, exactly the kind of shrewd deal you make as a mid-market franchise (Hello Terry Ryan!?), especially as opposed to the Yankees or Dodgers trying to just outbid everyone else for the best talent.

[jokin]

 

And if the same players that were on the team 50 years ago were on the Cubs now that might mean something.

 

New players, new management, new philosophies. Failures of teams past doesn't really mean anything at all unless one believes in curses. Even if one did believe in curses, who was the GM that presided over the last team that broke a famously long curse not so long ago and then followed it up with another WS win just for giggles? Boston hadn't won a WS in a long time and then became a powerhouse for a decade winning 3 WS in 10 seasons.

 

Then there's the Giants who hadn't won a WS for more than half a century (and since before moving to San Francisco).  They won in 2010 and two more times since.

 

Because a team hasn't won a WS in quite some time means nothing when talking about now or the future.  The Cubs won 97 games this year, are pretty young (especially when talking about their best position players) and built to be around for quite some time.  Don't need to sell the Cubs short to boost the Twins (who, BTW, didn't win their 2nd WS until 63 years after winning it's first WS as the Senators and have only won  3 WS since the franchise came into existence in 1901).

 

Thead. Winner.

[jokin]

 

While I hate to argue whether the Cubs would be better or worse in the AL - I think it's a dumb argument because the Cubs would build a different roster if they played in the AL - I think "mediocre" in the AL translates to "decent" in the NL.

The two leagues simply aren't playing on the same level because one has a distinct rule advantage. There's a reason the AL clobbers the NL pretty much every year.

 

Some on this board dispute that claim (Not Me, you're spot on).

 

Overall- +1 post

[TheLeviathan]

 

We seem to be acting like the Cubs are some kind of perenial powerhouse. While looking good now they haven't won a WS for 108 years.

 

Well, in a thread about comparing the state of the Cubs vs. the Twins it's worth pointing out that they are are a significant bit ahead of us after working under roughly the same time frame.

[Kwak]

People in Chicago are acting as if they already won.

Reading posts from TD an outsider might conclude the Twins are soon destined for the World Series--despite all of the factors in their disfavor.

[jimmer]

If the Cubs had to play in the AL they would have been able to play Schwarber all year at DH, which would have helped their team tremendously since he's a liability in the field, and they wouldn't have had to have their pitchers hit.  I don't think that would have hurt the team at all.  

 

Their strength came from young position players and superior pitching, which also translates well to AL. Playing in a league with the DH would have helped them not hurt them (because a full year of PAs for Schwarber without having to deal with holding him back because of defense).

 

Just my opinion.

[spinowner]

 

If the Cubs had to play in the AL they would have been able to play Schwarber all year at DH, which would have helped their team tremendously since he's a liability in the field, and they wouldn't have had to have their pitchers hit.  I don't think that would have hurt the team at all.  

 

Their strength came from young position players and superior pitching, which also translates well to AL. Playing in a league with the DH would have helped them not hurt them (because a full year of PAs for Schwarber without having to deal with holding him back because of defense).

 

Just my opinion.

My opinion that the Cubs' W-L record would have been worse in the AL is not because of the Cubs' roster. It's because of the rosters of the rest of the teams in the NL in comparison with the rosters of the teams in the AL. Inferior opposition leads to a better W-L record.

[jimmer]

 

My opinion that the Cubs' W-L record would have been worse in the AL is not because of the Cubs' roster. It's because of the rosters of the rest of the teams in the NL in comparison with the rosters of the teams in the AL. Inferior opposition leads to a better W-L record.

I forgot to mention earlier, but I will do so now.  Yes, we reached the agree to disagree point as you said, but I'd like to point out we have done it respectfully without taking any personal shots and/or any labeling. Kudos to you, Sir.

[spinowner]

 

Twins were 8-12 against NL Central this year. Overal central v central was 51-49 in favor of AL central. No significant difference.
 

As you say, this gives us an indication that the two divisions are similar in strength.

The NL Central was 188-142 against the other two NL divisions this year. AL Central was 169-161 against the other two AL divisions this year. This appears to indicate a significant difference in strength of schedule.

[spinowner]

 

I forgot to mention earlier, but I will do so now.  Yes, we reached the agree to disagree point as you said, but I'd like to point out we have done it respectfully without taking any personal shots and/or any labeling. Kudos to you, Sir.

Back at you.

[jokin]

 

As you say, this gives us an indication that the two divisions are similar in strength.

The NL Central was 188-142 against the other two NL divisions this year. AL Central was 169-161 against the other two AL divisions this year. This appears to indicate a significant difference in strength of schedule.

 

Or, that as I put up for debate and suggested last offseason*, the NL Central is by far the best division in the NL, and the AL could be both stronger and more competitively balanced across all 3 divisions (AL East was 167-163/AL West was 159-171 [Oakland skewing that total-controlling for the A's makes most of the AL fairly close to one another). 

 

More supporting data:

AL East vs. NL- 62-38 

AL West vs NL- 64-46

AL Cent vs NL 51-49

 

*(Of course, I was totally wrong in using the NL Central strength as the reason why the Twins would likely only win 72 games, they actually acquitted themselves pretty well, going 2-2 against both the Cards and Pirates). 

[jokin]

 

Our friends next door at Twinkie Town are running a GM approval poll, and TR has an approval rate of 77% at this time. Pretty clear indication that the millions of knowlegeable and loyal Twins fans, consider TR to continue to be the savior of our favorite team.

 

I would encourage you to read the members comments. You can't help but notice the lack of innuendo, myth building, and conspiracy theories. The membership appears to be constrained by the truth, and attach a great deal of significance to personal credibility.

 

No innuendo or myth-building here:

 

Terry Ryan W-L as GM:  1361-1485 (.478 winning percentage)

Terry Ryan post-season record: 6-21 (.222 winning percentage) 

Terry Ryan playoff series wins in 18 seasons: 1

Terry Ryan World Series wins in 18 seasons: 0

 

Theo Epstein W-L as GM: 1136-970 (.539 winning percentage)

Theo Epstein post-season record: 36-21 (.632 winning percentage)#

Theo Epstein playoff series wins in 13 seasons: 9*

Theo Epstein World Series wins in 13 seasons: 2

 

# Through tonight with Cubs win

* Counting Cubs Wild Card win 

 

 

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Our friends next door at Twinkie Town are running a GM approval poll, and TR has an approval rate of 77% at this time. Pretty clear indication that the millions of knowlegeable and loyal Twins fans, consider TR to continue to be the savior of our favorite team.

 

I would encourage you to read the members comments. You can't help but notice the lack of innuendo, myth building, and conspiracy theories. The membership appears to be constrained by the truth, and attach a great deal of significance to personal credibility.

Twinkie Town had millions of unique visitors to their site to answer a poll question?

[jokin]

 

Twinkie Town had millions of unique visitors to their site to answer a poll question?

 

At least a "pretty clear indication..."

[jokin]

 

Our friends next door at Twinkie Town are running a GM approval poll, and TR has an approval rate of 77% at this time. Pretty clear indication that the millions of knowlegeable and loyal Twins fans, consider TR to continue to be the savior of our favorite team.

 

I would encourage you to read the members comments. You can't help but notice the lack of innuendo, myth building, and conspiracy theories. The membership appears to be constrained by the truth, and attach a great deal of significance to personal credibility.

 

By "encourage", you probably meant "constrained by the truth" comments like this one, for example:

 

TR gets a D (at best)

 

The only thing I think you can argue that TR has done a great job of since returning, is lower expectations to a level that people will be happy with anything that even resembles success.

 

His Free Agent Signings have largely been busts. He’s taken the "best of the rest" philosophy, only targeting 2nd tier players like Nolasco, Hughes, Pelfrey, Santana, etc. What it has left the team with is a lot of money spent on several mediocre players, that are making far more than would be spent one just one "ace" type. (Yes, I know the apologists will say XXXX would never come to Minnesota, ignoring the fact that money can trump a lot of things, and you will always fail if you don’t even try).

 

In the cases where Ryan’s signings have shown some level of success, he’s doubled down, often with very poor results. Signing Suzuki to a long term deal based on a good half season is a great example. Locking up Hughes on a big long term deal after his career year, when he was still under control for 2 more years seems like a poor idea.        Pelfrey didn’t even have to have any success to get an extension, and it sure looks like Ryan is going to try to double down on a 41 year old Torii Hunter, when the system already has more OF talent than can fit onto the field right now.

 

Speaking of the farm system, nearly all of the talent that helped fuel the Twins success this season was signed during the Smith era. Certainly, there is some very good talent signed since Ryan returned (having a top 5 pick every year will help that), like Buxton, Berrios, Duffey, but with those guys, as well as the numerous guys signed under Smith graduating off of the prospect lists, there’s not a lot coming up behind, and I’d bet the Twins are about to fall pretty fast down the Organizational Rankings.

 

Of course, then there’s the fact that with the Twins actually in a playoff race, they were content to making moves as small as possible. I’m not saying they should have mortgaged the future for a wild card run, but You can’t tell me they couldn’t make a move for a serviceable backup catcher, or gotten something useful for a player like Arcia or Vargas. It’s downright criminal that Berrios never made his major league debut, and the fact that they didn’t manage his innings so he could be available to pitch down the stretch is no excuse.

 

It was fun watching the Twins actually put a competitive product on the field this year, but the worst possible thing the Twins could do is see this year's just-about-.500 record as a victory and a sign that everything is going great and they just need to "stay the course". Of course, if there is one thing the Twins have shown over the past 15 years, they are perfectly happy being just good enough to be competitive and put fans in the seats. If they can go from there to a championship, that’s great, but with the Twins, that never really seems to be the goal, and it’s certainly never the expectation.

 

by nowheresville999

 

 

[RedBull34]

 

I believe the Twins are pretty set in their ways and unlikely to change. That doesnt make us a negative nelly and we can continue to love them.  

 

Not sure the Twins are capable any more of finding guys like Collin McHugh or Jake Arrieta, who were castoffs and magically turning them into dominant pitchers. But if J.R.Graham or Alex Meyer becomes that guy in a year or two I will gladly eat my words.

 

Molitor is a lone voice in the wilderness decrying the upward trend in strikeouts, while the Cubs and Astros lead the majors in strikeouts and wear it proudly. Win loss records are similar this year but organizational philosophies are completely different. 

He's definitely not alone.  The whole Royals team is built around this.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-royals-are-basically-the-best-contact-team-ever/

[Platoon]

I wish I had written the Nowheresville999 post Jokin quoted. When one looks at the Twins orginisational philolosophy this quote from Nowhere guy might spell it out. "Of course, if there is one thing the Twins have shown over the past 15 years, they are perfectly happy being just good enough to be competitive and put fans in the seats". I phrased it thusly in a different post, "winning is not important, but winning enough to put people in the seats is mandatory". This could have been the much maligned Bill Smiths problem. He erroneously thought he was the GM of a MLB team, but in reality he was supposed to be running an entertainment venue, based on a PL statement.

[bluechipper]

 

Not sure how anyone could say Theo simply "got lucky on Arrieta"...  actually, it's kind-of ridiculous to say that. It seems obvious he: recognized Arrieta's raw, but unfulfilled talent, analyzed what wasn't working- via scouting and video, got feedback and assurances from his own coaches that it was fixable, and then boldy pulled the trigger- utilizing his "Rent-A-Free-Agent-For-Exactly-This-Type-Of-Opportunity-In-Order-To-Potentially-Make-The--Club-Stronger-Long-Term", Scott Feldman. 

 

It wasn't like this was just some obscure trade at the time.  Many of us on this forum praised it (including myself, of course), as conceptually, from start to finish, exactly the kind of shrewd deal you make as a mid-market franchise (Hello Terry Ryan!?), especially as opposed to the Yankees or Dodgers trying to just outbid everyone else for the best talent.

He didn't get lucky that Arrieta became a good pitcher, he got lucky that Arrieta became one of the best pitchers in baseball, which no one could have expected. 

 

Terry Ryan did make a similar acquisition in Phil Hughes, and he got rewarded with Hughes become a solid starter, he just didn't get lucky by him becoming a Cy Young guy.

[PseudoSABR]

Only if the Twins had actually tried to win the World Series.  Well, at least we now know what's been wrong.

[howieramone2]

 

I wish I had written the Nowheresville999 post Jokin quoted. When one looks at the Twins orginisational philolosophy this quote from Nowhere guy might spell it out. "Of course, if there is one thing the Twins have shown over the past 15 years, they are perfectly happy being just good enough to be competitive and put fans in the seats". I phrased it thusly in a different post, "winning is not important, but winning enough to put people in the seats is mandatory". This could have been the much maligned Bill Smiths problem. He erroneously thought he was the GM of a MLB team, but in reality he was supposed to be running an entertainment venue, based on a PL statement.

Sounds like another myth to me.

[Platoon]

Sounds like another myth to me.

Check the standings, and the records for the Ryan years. While inflation may have driven the salary numbers up, there seems no change in the orginisational policies. Low to mid level FA signings, scrap heap bullpens, extensions to average talent already under control, a disregard for strikeouts by our pitchers, AKA PTC. And signing a 39 yr old fan favorite, with a declining skill set, when you had a plethora of young OF's who needed not only playing time but evaluation. And, letting him dictate his playing position and his playing time. This at a time when even Ryan admits her never thought they would sniff WC contention. If Ryan brings Hunter back on Toriis terms, which appears the only way possible, then I think it makes further positive commentary on Ryan's job performance seemingly indefensible. I M H O

[jokin]

 

He didn't get lucky that Arrieta became a good pitcher, he got lucky that Arrieta became one of the best pitchers in baseball, which no one could have expected. 

 

Terry Ryan did make a similar acquisition in Phil Hughes, and he got rewarded with Hughes become a solid starter, he just didn't get lucky by him becoming a Cy Young guy.

 

Not much foresight involved with Hughes, the deals aren't really that similar. His 2014 and 2015 seasons have pretty much followed his up and down career arc of effectiveness/mediocrity/health issues, Terry made the type of buy-low deal that he specializes in- and this was a deal that many of us endorsed- for a flawed, but talented pitcher playing in the wrong park and available on the cheap- months before he pulled the trigger.

 

In stark contrast to Ryan's deal in taking a chance on a FA that has performed as expected, Theo pulled a midseason deal, and in exchange for a rental player, he got 4.5 years of cheap team control of a very talented, but consistently underperforming, arm in Arrieta (plus a very good RP in Pedro Strop- who also turned his career around with the Cubs). The Cubs coaching staff have definitely helped make him a better pitcher, while he's become a premier command/control pitcher, he's at the same time actually increased his historical velocity numbers for his FB and Slider by over 1 MPH each- that doesn't happen often (if ever) to guys pushing 30. He's become a "pitcher" under the Cubs tutelage, relying much less on his FB and mixing in more sinkers and sliders- to obviously great effect (re: his out-of-zone swing and contact rates became far better from the very first day he joined the Cubs).  In parts of 4 seasons he had produced replacement level WAR with the Orioles, even if you throw out this season, he was still a 5.3 net bWAR SP for the Cubs in 2014 (his FIP was actually lower in 2014 than 2015). This was a well-conceived plan, faithfully executed, not some freak accident. 

 

Did lightning strike and Arrieta get an arm transplant the day he joined the Cubs? Don't think so.

 

Were the Cubs a better team behind Arrieta than the Orioles?

Don't think so.

 

Was Wrigley a more favorable park than Camden for Arrieta, vis a vis Target-from-Yankee definitely was for Hughes?

Don't think so.

 

He's been a positive WAR pitcher ever since joining the Cubs on July 2, 2013, in direct contrast to years of struggle previously- identifying an improvable talent and then getting the desired improvements- that's more than just luck. While this year is lucky, beats expectations and is possibly a career year, it's important to note that the 2014 Arrieta, with an ERA+ of 150 is a darn fine pitcher (the sparkling ERA+ numbers with the Cubs all 3 seasons allows us to throw out the NL/AL disparity as a defining factor), and probably representative of his expected ceiling, making this a very prescient trade by Theo, ones that other teams demonstrably lacked the imagination to attempt.

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

 

My opinion that the Cubs' W-L record would have been worse in the AL is not because of the Cubs' roster. It's because of the rosters of the rest of the teams in the NL in comparison with the rosters of the teams in the AL. Inferior opposition leads to a better W-L record.

The Cubs are essentially built to be an AL team. They have good position players on the bench, that could be starters elsewhere. 

 

 

        2nd Half Position wRC+/WAR (AGE):          

                      

C) Montero 119/1.0 (32) vs  Suzuki 71/.1 (31)             

1B) Rizzo 126/1.8(26)      vs   Mauer 97/.2 (32)

2B) Castro 109/1.1(25)   vs  Dozier 73/.4 (28)

SS) Russell 101/1.9(21)   vs Escobar 120/1.3 (26)

3B) Bryant 138/3.2 (23)   vs  Plouffe 92/.7 (29)

OF) Fowler 137/2.5 (29)   vs  Buxton 63/-.2 (21)

OF) Coghlan 124/1.7 (30) vs Hicks 96/1.0 (25)

OF) Soler 104/.2 (23)       vs  Rosario 98/1 (23)

DH) Scwarber 129/1.6 (22)    Sano 141/1.5 (22)

 

Bench:

 

Baez 98/.5 (22)

Jackson 87/.2 (28)

Denorfia 79/.3

L Stella  109/.3 (26)

 

 

Move Schwarber to DH, and slot in whomever you want and shift the lineup around and play anyone anywhere. That is what I like about them, not afraid to play guys out of "normal" position. Whereas Twins fans scoff at the idea of moving guys around to maximize our roster/lineup. So and so will never play there, so and so has never played there so its not going to happen, etc. 

 

However the Twins you would think would fit better in the NL, but they don't. 3 of our best hitters are Sano, Plouffe, and a forced to play Mauer. So, where do those 3 play in the NL? One either has to sit out, or someone needs to be moved to another position, and then who do they replace? 

 

I would safely bet on the Cubs young position player any day over the Twins. I still love the Twins guys, just like the Cubs guys more. 

 

 

Okay; You have to pick 10 guys from both teams for you now and future to start a new team:

 

C)  Scwarber (cheating), otherwise Montero over Suzuki

1B) Rizzo, over Mauer or Sano because he is BAT and GLOVE

2B) Castro, over Dozier  because age, upside, talent, defense going forward at 2B

SS) Russell, over Escobar if just for the defense and age, but think Russell will be the better hitter too

3B) Bryant, over Plouffe no explanation needed. Over Sano at 3B as well due to the defense and similar

OF) Buxton, over Fowler because of age, defense, and hope, otherwise production isn't close right now

OF) Rosario, over Coghlan because age and defense only, not sold on him being a great hitter over time

OF) Soler, over Hicks because of age, power, last year

DH) Sano, can play the corners in OF and IF too if Maddon were coach

ALT) Baez, over Dozier or Hicks because age, upside, power, defense, positional flexibility, and might go to the OF if needed.

 

That is 3 Twins to 7 Cubs. I cheated by putting Schwarber at C, but that was only so I could put Sano at DH or Rosario in the OF. I can concede Dozier over Castro due to Doziers last two 1st halfs, but think Castro will be the better overall player going forward (and the last half.) I wouldn't be surprised if Baez outperforms Dozier overall going forward of the next few years either, but he is 6 years younger. I'd take any 3 of those players right now, but would prefer the two young athletic guys going forward in the long run. 

 

Just a few different ways of looking at who is currently on the roster, without going into minors. It really doesn't look like the Cubs will really need too much from the minors even, especially of someone gets converted to the OF, like Bryant, Baez, or Castro to CF or LF, which has been discussed. It actually seems like the smart move, if they can't get full value for Castro or Baez in a trade. Wait a minute...they need a CF'er and we have 3 young guys that can play there very well right now, and they have 3 SS/2B that are all young and athletic? Hmmmm.

 

 

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

The teams play the games they are scheduled to play, and the outcomes this year are clear. Arguing over the AL vs NL seems like it misses the point.....the Cubs have better younger players than the Twins.

 

Arrieta turning out this good is luck, Arrieta being acquired as part of a plan to flip assets for higher upside is not. The Twins doubled down on Suzuki, the Cubs trades their FA signings for other stuff. It isn't hard to see the difference in philosophy, really.

[howieramone2]

 

Check the standings, and the records for the Ryan years. While inflation may have driven the salary numbers up, there seems no change in the orginisational policies. Low to mid level FA signings, scrap heap bullpens, extensions to average talent already under control, a disregard for strikeouts by our pitchers, AKA PTC. And signing a 39 yr old fan favorite, with a declining skill set, when you had a plethora of young OF's who needed not only playing time but evaluation. And, letting him dictate his playing position and his playing time. This at a time when even Ryan admits her never thought they would sniff WC contention. If Ryan brings Hunter back on Toriis terms, which appears the only way possible, then I think it makes further positive commentary on Ryan's job performance seemingly indefensible. I M H O

 

 

83-79

[Mike Sixel]

83-79

If your argument is that he did a good job, and you can tell from the record......what will be your stance if they win 78 or less games next year? We've been told to be patient, that this takes time. Well, his entire career as GM has been filled with decent journeys (regular seasons), but no payoffs in the playoffs. I'm not arguing with you at all, I'm just asking you a question, if they are bad again next year, how many more years does TR get if you are the owner?

[howieramone2]

 

If your argument is that he did a good job, and you can tell from the record......what will be your stance if they win 78 or less games next year? We've been told to be patient, that this takes time. Well, his entire career as GM has been filled with decent journeys (regular seasons), but no payoffs in the playoffs. I'm not arguing with you at all, I'm just asking you a question, if they are bad again next year, how many more years does TR get if you are the owner?

What would be your stance if they go undefeated and unscored upon? Do you believe membership would feel the need to move the goalposts again?

[Mike Sixel]

If they win every game, I'll eat crow and call him the greatest GM ever. I've never moved the posts, many have not. I expect them to win games, not lose 90+ games 4 years in a row, not to win 1 playoff series in a nearly 20 year career for the leader of the team, and not to not use all their available assets when they have a chance to make the playoffs*.

 

Also, instead of answering the question, you asked me one. It's a great rhetorical device, but doesn't work as well in this medium.

 

*note, I did NOT say trade assets to acquire other ones.