2025 Cubs

[funkster]

Well the unkempt poster child Justin Turner is your newest cub.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Butcher]

He's a fine bench guy who can give Busch a day off when we face a lefty starter.

But it feels like...oh, we didn't get Bregman; here's the consolation prize.

[1060Ivy]

He's a fine bench guy who can give Busch a day off when we face a lefty starter.

But it feels like...oh, we didn't get Bregman; here's the consolation prize.

Hmmmmm that consolation prize is akin to your girlfriend telling you that we were going to vacation in Cabo for a week but instead we will be visiting with her parents while her mother has her bunions removed.  Fun times 

Buster Olney calls Cubs management more interested in profits than winning

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/4390...ree-agency

[jeffy]

He's a fine bench guy who can give Busch a day off when we face a lefty starter.

But it feels like...oh, we didn't get Bregman; here's the consolation prize.

Hmmmmm that consolation prize is akin to your girlfriend telling you that we were going to vacation in Cabo for a week but instead we will be visiting with her parents while her mother has her bunions removed.  Fun times 

Buster Olney calls Cubs management more interested in profits than winning

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/4390...ree-agency

I don't hate it, although he has fallen off recently. I didn't realize he was 40 already, but then again it does feel like we've had to endure his ugly mug for quite some time now.

[1060Ivy]

Turner provides a nice, veteran presence, right handed back up for first basemen and DH and emergency back up for a few games at third but an aging Turner is not in same league for production that Bregman might have provided

Few rationales that Cubs couldn’t have signed both Bregman and Turner - other than the potential biblical losses that might hit at any moment in time

[rok]

Age difference aside, his numbers haven’t actually fallen off that much since 2021 compared to Bregman’s. And I’d rather have Turner for $6M vs. Bregman for $40M. There, I said it.

[1060Ivy]

Turner’s value is likely more in the $8 - 12 MM range while Bergman’s is more likely in the $32 - 38 MM range (based on 2024 WAR and my professional keen skill set of pulling numbers out my ass)

Turner gave the Cubs a discount while Bregman would not so no need to guess who the Cubs have on their roster and who will not be. Again, would prefer to act like a team that isn’t forced to go the discount rack for free agents and have both players on the roster

[rok]

Meanwhile the addition of Bregman is causing some drama in Boston. Devers doesn’t want to move off third, so they’ll likely shift Bregman over to 2B. Not ideal, as Bregman is the superior fielder at 3B.

[Butcher]

He's a fine bench guy who can give Busch a day off when we face a lefty starter.

But it feels like...oh, we didn't get Bregman; here's the consolation prize.

Hmmmmm that consolation prize is akin to your girlfriend telling you that we were going to vacation in Cabo for a week but instead we will be visiting with her parents while her mother has her bunions removed.  Fun times 

Buster Olney calls Cubs management more interested in profits than winning

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/4390...ree-agency

Olney ripped him a new one. Well deserved, too.

[1060Ivy]

Sun Times Morrissey plies on ripping the Ricketts a new one

https://chicago.suntimes.com/cubs/2025/0...ex-bregman

[MrSheps]

I wonder what changed to trigger the backlash in the media against the Ricketts? If it was not landing Bregman, I get it, but I'm ok with that deal not getting done. It's weird though that they won't defer money. My understanding is that teams who defer money set the money aside for the player and generate interest. They pay the player out of the dog-eared fund, keeping or using they interest generated to make the whole deal cheaper. Did the Cubs not do this with Lester and Heyward?

[Butcher]

I wonder what changed to trigger the backlash in the media against the Ricketts? If it was not landing Bregman, I get it, but I'm ok with that deal not getting done. It's weird though that they won't defer money. My understanding is that teams who defer money set the money aside for the player and generate interest. They pay the player out of the dog-eared fund, keeping or using they interest generated to make the whole deal cheaper. Did the Cubs not do this with Lester and Heyward?

It seemed like there was a snowball effect with the backlash against the Ricketts. Fans have been complaining about them for a while, but it seemed to jump from the fanbase to a writer, then another, then 10 more.

The deferred money thing is just weird -- to me it's just a good economic/business strategy. But what the fuck do I know?

[1060Ivy]

It’s now more clear than in the past that Cubs should be “all in” for competing in 2025. Ricketts and Jed have repeated that when it was time, Cubs would add greater talent free agents so increased salaries to better compete.

Front office added Tucker but then subtracted Bellinger without spending the full savings from Bellinger’s compensation. Jed’s public “thank you” for allowing him to make a competitive offer to Bregman seems to counter the “resources would be ready when team was ready” mantra.

Cubs are a top 3-5 from revenue perspective and in 2025 are trotting out a roster that ranks 13th from roster payroll perspective. Cub fans pay highest from ticket/game experience perspective yet Tom goes into his “we are just trying to breaking even” BS annually.

Writers decided they had enough of Rickett’s hogwash as Cubs with an additional $30-45 MM in salary could have the significantly upgraded the roster to blow away the NL central from a talent perspective. Unlike other major market teams, Cubs ownership have clearly decided that short term profits outweigh winning at a time when several other teams have concluded that using financial resources to greatly outspend competitors is a market inefficiency.

[Butcher]

Good analysis, Ivy.

I would also add that when they first bought the team, the line was that all of the new revenue sources (more rooftops, more ads and signage throughout Wrigley, more exclusive clubs/seats, their own network, etc.) would all be reinvested directly into the team. That was *clearly* a giant pile of bullshit.

[jstraw]

"Dad, if you co-sign this purchase, I promise you that once we break the curse, we'll be able to milk this cash cow for the next 100 years."