Article: Can Falvey Learn Anything From the Cubs' Turnaround?

[gunnarthor]

 

The argument for emulating the Cubs is that they have acquired and developed a cost-controlled core

Sure, I don't think anyone disagrees with that - the Cubs have done wonderfully smart things that the Twins can certainly try and emulate.  They've also used their payroll advantage successfully.  I'm not sure why that's controversial but it certainly seems to be for some.

[gunnarthor]

 

 

Theo has been lucky.  It's all been luck.  Any GM could have done what he did with the Red Sox and now the Cubs :-)

It's always nice to hear from the cheap seats.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Sure, I don't think anyone disagrees with that - the Cubs have done wonderfully smart things that the Twins can certainly try and emulate. They've also used their payroll advantage successfully. I'm not sure why that's controversial but it certainly seems to be for some.

The controversial part is implying their spending is an equivalent part of their turnaround as their other moves. They got to be a 90 win team with a great core basically without any great spending.

[gunnarthor]

 

The controversial part is implying their spending is an equivalent part of their turnaround as their other moves. They got to be a 90 win team with a great core basically without any great spending.

Well, that's demonstrably not true.  WAR is certainly not a great end-all but those 8 FA amassed 21.5 WAR so far and that ignores the impact of some large salaries the Cubs were able to add in-season (over 15m).  While Rizzo, Russell, Baez and Bryant are a great core, that wasn't a 90 win team without those FA. 

[markos]

Well, that's demonstrably not true.  WAR is certainly not a great end-all but those 8 FA amassed 21.5 WAR so far and that ignores the impact of some large salaries the Cubs were able to add in-season (over 15m).  While Rizzo, Russell, Baez and Bryant are a great core, that wasn't a 90 win team without those FA.

 

Sure. But I was factoring in that even a below-average GM, given 20 roster spots and $90M, should be able to scrape together an additional 10 WAR. Look at this terrible Twins team. If Dozier, Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Gibson and Berrios had combined for 30 WAR, the remaining players on this team, the worst team in baseball, (Grossman, Rosario, Nunez, Escobar, Santana, etc...) would have been enough to be in wildcard contention.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Well, that's demonstrably not true.  WAR is certainly not a great end-all but those 8 FA amassed 21.5 WAR so far and that ignores the impact of some large salaries the Cubs were able to add in-season (over 15m).  While Rizzo, Russell, Baez and Bryant are a great core, that wasn't a 90 win team without those FA. 

If you subtract ALL of their FA signings, they were a $74 mil payroll team on opening day.  That's not a valid baseline for showing their dependence on free agency above an average team.

 

The average MLB payroll on opening day this year was $131 mil.  Subtract Lester and Heyward, and the Cubs were right around that figure, with plenty of WAR remaining to clear the playoff threshold both this year and last year.  (And I think they've only added about $9-10 mil in salary this summer in trades -- the remaining 2016 salaries for Chapman, Coughlan, and Joe Smith.)

[old nurse]

 

 

Sure. But I was factoring in that even a below-average GM, given 20 roster spots and $90M, should be able to scrape together an additional 10 WAR. Look at this terrible Twins team. If Dozier, Sano, Buxton, Kepler, Gibson and Berrios had combined for 30 WAR, the remaining players on this team, the worst team in baseball, (Grossman, Rosario, Nunez, Escobar, Santana, etc...) would have been enough to be in wildcard contention.

What is the average cost of WAR, somewhere around 6 million. To add 10 WAR is then adding 60 million  to the payroll. One would hope that a team with a 150 million payroll would be competitive. The Angels say otherwise.  Yankees, Tigers say you can buy mediocrity. At 140 million spent, the Royals and White Sox are not getting their monies worth. SportRac data for payroll was used.

 

[gunnarthor]

 

If you subtract ALL of their FA signings, they were a $74 mil payroll team on opening day.  That's not a valid baseline for showing their dependence on free agency above an average team.

 

The average MLB payroll on opening day this year was $131 mil.  Subtract Lester and Heyward, and the Cubs were right around that figure, with plenty of WAR remaining to clear the playoff threshold both this year and last year.  (And I think they've only added about $9-10 mil in salary this summer in trades -- the remaining 2016 salaries for Chapman, Coughlan, and Joe Smith.)

Now we've gone from comparing their payroll to the Twins to the average team and you're asking us to ignore signing their ace and Heyward.  That's like saying, "except for Mauer, the Twins can't develop catchers."

 

I don't think it's controversial to say that the Cubs wouldn't have made it to 90 wins if they didn't sign 3/5 of their rotation, their entire OF and all-star second baseman.  They still had a great core but those FA were a huge, huge addition.  It wasn't window dressing or add-ons. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

Now we've gone from comparing their payroll to the Twins to the average team and you're asking us to ignore signing their ace and Heyward. That's like saying, "except for Mauer, the Twins can't develop catchers."

 

I don't think it's controversial to say that the Cubs wouldn't have made it to 90 wins if they didn't sign 3/5 of their rotation, their entire OF and all-star second baseman. They still had a great core but those FA were a huge, huge addition. It wasn't window dressing or add-ons.

But if you're saying they can't sign ANY free agents, that's not comparing them to the Twins, or almost any team in MLB. That's comparing them to the Rays, or the A's. Every team in MLB has a spending power advantage over those clubs.

 

The reason I am leaving out Heyward and Lester is because they haven't contributed much to their turnaround so far. The Cubs turnaround to a playoff caliber roster was largely complete when they brought those two aboard, especially Heyward. Maybe they or a future FA will put them over the top, but that wasn't the context of the discussion, it was the turnaround that I think you attributed too much to their FA spending power.

Edited October 1, 2016 by spycake

[gunnarthor]

 

But if you're saying they can't sign ANY free agents, that's not comparing them to the Twins, or almost any team in MLB. That's comparing them to the Rays, or the A's. Every team in MLB has a spending power advantage over those clubs.

The reason I am leaving out Heyward and Lester is because they haven't contributed much to their turnaround so far. The Cubs turnaround to a playoff caliber roster was largely complete when they brought those two aboard, especially Heyward. Maybe they or a future FA will put them over the top, but that wasn't the context of the discussion, it was the turnaround that I think you attributed too much to their FA spending power.

I'm not really sure that's true.  They signed Lester coming off a 73 win season.  I think it's fair to say that Lester helped them go from a losing team to a winning team. 

 

At a certain point, we're probably talking past ourselves.  I think we both agree that the Cubs have created a great core through great trades and some solid draft picks - something that the Twins could also do to some extent.  We probably disagree to the degree the FA signings have helped the Cubs but we both can agree that the Twins can do better at FA signings than they have while recognizing they have less room for error than the Cubs. 

[Doomtints]

The Cubs only have the one great draft pick.  The rest of their success can be attributed to spending money. 

 

Note that the Twins also could have picked up some of those guys but passed.  Dexter Fowler's salary is not out of line and he signed very late with the Cubs.  The Twins could have signed him a year earlier and paid even less.  A team that has been in the Twins position passing on Fowler is baffling when they had two chances to get him.  The fact that he signed with Houston when Houston was as bad as Minnesota indicates he wasn't picky.

 

Also note that Kris Bryant would be picked on a bit by fans in the Twins market due to his defense and his strikeouts.  I was at Wrigley on the 4th of July and saw him collide with two different players and let several balls drop.  The conversations around Bryant would all be about regression and how dare the Cubs let a 3rd baseman play in the outfield.  The grass is always greener, I suppose.

Edited October 2, 2016 by Doomtints

[jimmer]

Kris Bryant is a very good defender at multiple positions and he's a stud on offense. He's also going to be NL MVP.

Edited October 2, 2016 by jimmer

[dgwills]

I don't really see any kind of comparison between Epstein and Falvey. Epstein already had an excellent track record as an executive in MLB before joining the Cubs. There really isn't anything that impresses me about Falvey.  He didn't really make any important decisions with the Indians. His education is mediocre so there's no reason to think he's some kind of genius.

Sure Epstein can get Jed Hoyer as GM and put together a top notch staff. There's no shortage of people who want to work for him and money is no object with the Cubs. Who's Falvey going to get? The best thing I read about him is that he does everything and is conscientious. Not a bad person to have on the staff, but not really the guy you want running the place.

I see no reason to give someone like that the title of President. I would even question the wisdom of making him GM. I don't know the guy of course, so maybe there's something I'm missing.

It seems to me that Pohlad found someone he liked on a personal level and is going to hire him. Not exactly the way to make decisions in an ultra competitive environment.