5/21 Yankees 4, Cubs 2 (13 innings)

If you gauge a pitcher’s performance by ERA, Jeff Samardzija is the best in baseball. If you judge someone on wins, he’s not.

Brendan Ryan scored the tie-breaking run on a wild pitch by Jose Veras and John Ryan Murphy added an RBI single in the 13th inning Wednesday to lift the Yankees to a 4-2 Interleague victory over the Cubs and Samardzija, who was was once again denied a win.

Ryan led off the 13th against Veras with an infield single that third baseman Luis Valbuena knocked down. Yangervis Solarte walked, and both he and Ryan moved up on Preston Claiborne’s sacrifice in his first Major League plate appearance. Veras’ 2-1 pitch to Murphy sailed to the backstop, and Ryan scored. Murphy then delivered a bloop RBI single to right.

The game should have never gone to extra innings but an error by second baseman Darwin Barney led to a tying run. Trailing 2-0 in the ninth against Hector Rondon, Mark Teixeira singled, Brian McCann walked and Solarte singled to load the bases. Ichiro Suzuki hit a grounder to shortstop Starlin Castro, who got the force at second. A run scored on the play, but the Yankees added another as Barney’s relay throw skipped past first baseman Anthony Rizzo for an error.

“It just got away,” Barney said. “Ichiro running, grass is slow. I thought I had to rush it a little bit. You look at it again and maybe I should’ve ate it. I’m trying to make the play and I’d rather go down that way than holding it.”

Barney hasn’t had consistent playing time this season as he did the last two years. Could that be the problem?

“Those are excuses,” he said. “I’m not going to make an excuse right now. I tried to make a play and the throw got away from me.”

And nobody felt worse for Samardzija than he did.

“I feel terrible,” Barney said. “The guy went seven scoreless again. He’s the best pitcher in the league right now — American League, National League, Japanese league. The wins will come. It’s one of those funny things — some days you come out and put up five runs in the first two innings and it hasn’t happened for him yet.”

Samardzija’s ERA now is 1.46. He has zero wins in 10 starts. The Cubs are 1-9 in his starts, and simply haven’t scored any runs.

Any team needing a starting pitcher has to be watching Samardzija’s outings and wondering what he could do for their staff. Since last season, Samardzija has been the subject of trade rumors, and knows the chatter will increase as the Trade Deadline approaches. Is he wasting his outings with the Cubs?

“We’re not wasting anything,” Samardzija said. “Modern technology, every game gets seen and watched. I don’t think it’s any secret with what I’m doing. I can get better, and I’m doing some things out there that are good and we look to keep building on that. It’s 10 starts in and we have another handful to go hopefully and just keep doing it.”

He was vying for his first win since last Aug. 24 in San Diego. Since that date, 383 different Major League pitchers have earned at least one “W.” How can he not be pulling his hair out?

“I’ve seen it go the other way, too,” Samardzija said. “I go back to early in my career in ’08, ’09, when I didn’t know what I was doing but somehow managed a ERA in the 2.00’s my rookie year. You keep throwing the ball, and it’ll turn around.”

— Carrie Muskat


Neither team deserved to win this game. Both teams sucked. I predict the Yankees will not be in the conversation when the play-offs begin in October. As for the Cubs, we were apprised before the season began that we would not be relevant, nor will we be in the conversation in 2015. We are told perhaps 2016. Are you content with this? To put it bluntly, I hate it.

Who on the Cubs is saying that they won’t be good until maybe 2016? There’s a lot that can and will happen between now and the start of 2015, much less 2016. A lot which includes some major milestones in the entire rebuild, which until they happen make any sort of projection or prediction for future seasons unreliable at best. Javier Baez and Kris Bryant come up and look like good players right away. Anthony Rizzo and Starlin Castro continue to prove that 2013 was a fluke. Jeff Samardzija gets signed long term or he gets traded for several good prospects, some of whom might be nearly Major League ready. There’s a good chance that the 2015 Cubs will look a lot different than the 2014 Cubs, and I’m almost certain that the 2016 Cubs will be nearly unrecognizable to the 2014 team, so is there really any way of knowing for sure how good or bad the 2015 or 2016 Cubs will be based on what we see today? But if you think they’re going to be bad for all that time and you don’t like it, you can always go away for a few years and check back to see what’s going on then because this is the plan, they’re sticking with it until it succeeds or until their contracts run out, and there’s no way around that. Or hey, how about you just pay attention to the minor leagues for the next year or two. That’s where the future is after all, and since you don’t like what’s going on at the Major League level, why not become a Tennessee Smokies fan or a Boise Hawks fan or a Cubs Dominican Summer League fan until the time comes where you feel comfortable with rooting for the Major League team again?

Speaking of the minor leagues, Bryant, Baez, and Alcantara all homered tonight.

I’m an eternal optimistic and think the Cubs could be good next year. Add Vizciano and Black to the bullpen and it’s solid. Hopefully among Bryant and Baez and Alcantara, two of them will be key contributors next year. Olt seems to be showing signs that he could improve his BA and OBP (to go who great power). Sign Shark for fours years $80m. Sign a quality free agent outfielder. And next year could be a fun ride. Great game for Shark today – he’s a beast.

I like your thinking, but I honestly think that Samardzija is looking for a $100 million contract. He must think if Homer Bailey is worth $105 million, I’ve got to be worth at least that if not more. And the way he’s pitching so far this season, he’s certainly making a case for that kind of money. I think the 2015 Cubs will be something like:
C – Castillo
1B – Rizzo
2B – Baez or Alcantara
SS – Castro
3B – Olt or Baez
LF – Lake
CF – ???
RF – ???
1 – Samardzija
2 – Wood
3 – Arrieta
4 – Jackson
5 – Hendricks
*maybe Neil Ramirez slides into the rotation… better chance of that happening if Samardzija is traded, of course if Samardzija is traded then all of the above will depend on what players are received in the deal and who might be Major League ready right away. I will spare the bullpen and bench, as it’s too far off to make projections for them.

With Almora at AA to start next year (or following the Baez path and going to AA for the second half of this year and AAA to start next year) and the possibility of Bryant moving to RF if third is occupied by Olt or Baez, the Cubs probably won’t make a big move to answer the ??? in the OF. But still, they can get a decent placeholder who can add a veteran presence to the young club. Plus looking at free agent OF for next offseason, there is no Jacoby Ellsbury or Shin Shoo Choo type on the market. Nick Markakis might be the best potential free agent OF available, and he’s no Ellsbury or Choo.
Personally, with all of those names we’ve heard about over the past few seasons finally making their ways up to the Majors or close to it, next season should be an interesting one to say the least. Will they be good? Who knows… as I said, a lot can and needs to happen between now and then. But we’ll finally get to see some of the players that we are all hoping will be the core of the Cubs when they finally get back to being contenders. So people can gripe all they want about Darwin Barney making a thowing error or Nate Schierholtz barely hitting .200 or is Emilio Bonifacio really a good leadoff hitter, but really it won’t matter because I don’t think any of them will be around in 2015.

Aloha Doug- yes there are a lot of what-ifs in this game but especially with our Cubbies. I do not know how old you are or not and it does not matter but suffice to say, for our fellow fans like jhosk, CubsTalk and other “veterans,” on this blog, I am blessed that they are still around as it has not been easy being a fan all of these years, gosh look at Carrie and the book she wrote! So, in terms of perspective there are many fans who have waited a long time and it is hard to watch other franchises like the Cardinals, Yankees, Dodgers and more recently RedSox win over an over again, then to have start-ups like Arizona and Miami between them have 3 W.S. in just the last 17yrs. I am actually encouraged by your above post as it shows Jeff S. as a possibility for next year as well as the ideal of signing a good “veteran” or two to fill in spots and work with the “younger” team. Sounds strange but you could be a player in the MLB for 3 seasons and only 25 but still a veteran with many great years ahead. Mahalo!

Doug…. I think you give Alcantara a LONGGGG look at CF for 2015…. he has all the tools to be a decent OFer and allows Baez at 2B and Olt at 3B with Bryant coming up in July to man LF or RF. At least that lineup would have some production.

Then offer Shark five years $100m. He’s going to get that from someone. As for free agents, I’d like them to make a run at Melky Cabrera. Put him in left and Bryant in right. They need to sign a quality free agent – building a team with only prospects is as non-sensical as trying to build a team through free agency. If they don’t sign a free agent then I have trouble seeing by their outfield being playoff-caliber. And they should have the money. If they do trade Shark, they better get a lot, lot, lot, a lot. A Hershel Walker-type trade.

We’ll see. A lot of what they do in the offseason will have to do with what happens for the rest of this season. I know they will have to add some pieces from outside of the organization, but they also have to give the prospects they invested so much into the chance to succeed or fail on their own too. I do hope that Theo, Hoyer, & Co. know the moves to make and when to make them. Cabrera is having a good year so far, so it’s possible he might be the #1 outfielder next offseason, which means he could be asking for quite a lot. It will be interesting to see how everything unfolds as the season moves on, and that’s all I will say about that.

Aloha Cubs Win, that would be an interesting run to go after Cabrera, as Doug said he is having a great season thus far. I wonder Doug if it is still fresh in folks mind what happened just a couple of years ago with him? Here in the Bay Area folks have not forgotten because he was a big part of that 2012 season and to lose him really hurt but the team rallied without him for almost the last third of the season and won the W.S.. Having said that, he might offer his services for a discount just to get a 2-3 year contract, without that scandal I think he is still a Giant signed to a 5yr deal. Anyhow, he is only 29yrs old. Would be an interesting pick up for the Cubs and one that could solidify the lead-off spot for a while, not to mention good defense in the outfield. Mahalo!

Hello k.g. I noticed Doug did not answer your question about his age. If it helps, I recall him typing once that he was too young to recollect 1984 when our Cubbies were relevant and in contention etc. That should give you a reference point. Here`s something I do not get, and wonder if you can help me with, k.g: why would anyone think Jeff S. would want to re-sign with the Cubs after this season`s experience? Did you note that Mark Buehrle garnered his eighth win yesterday in this relatively young season and the baseball world is praising the man, as I reckon it`s the highest win total of any pitcher in mlb? That could be Shark receiving the accolades. One can easily make the case that Jeff S. should have eight pitching wins or more considering the work he has done in 2014. Alas, he performs for a team which has been incompetent offensively, at least when he toes the rubber. That is not his fault. But why would he want to continue to toil in meaningless games for this team? If one has pride, and I believe Shark does, one would want those superb pitching performances to count for something. Do you follow me k.g.?Mahalo!

I guess I missed that question. I either skipped over it to answer something else, or it got lost in the mix of 70+ responses on this thread. But if you want to know, I was born in 1982, which means I was just two during most of the 1984 season, so I obviously don’t remember any of it. I do remember 1989, and all seasons after that the Cubs were relevant and in contention, as well as the seasons where they were out of the playoff race by Memorial Day. Hope that answers your question.
As for the rest, Samardzija would want to return to the Cubs because they give him the money that he wants and because he thinks the players that will be on the team in the coming years will be better than the players that are on the team now. Plus, Samardzija can’t really dictate where he winds up right now. If the Cubs do trade him, they will trade him to whatever team gives them the best prospects in return. Maybe that’s a first place team, maybe that’s a .500 team, maybe it’s the Mets. All he can do right now is keep pitching the way he’s been pitching and he’ll get paid by someone, or traded, or both.
And I’m pretty sure Samardzija is receiving plenty of accolades despite having zero wins because he is leading the majors in ERA. Wins are a function of your team’s overall performance for the entire game, while ERA is mostly a function of how you pitched for the time you were in the game independent of your team’s performance. That’s why a pitcher with a 5.00 ERA can have a winning record, while a pitcher with a 3.00 ERA can have a losing record. So wins really don’t matter much as far as individual pitching performances go.

Aloha jhosk and Doug- thank you for the replies-input. I remember as a youngster 1984 very very well. It was awesome seeing a pitcher name Rick Sutcliffe not only for his size be able to pitch with his “wrist-wrap” style but go long in games, he had seasons of over 240innings! Was great seeing him hit a shot-home run against the Padres. Having said that, jhosk I know what you mean in terms of someone’s “pride” or sense of self if they are with an organization that is just not where they need it to be at a certain time where they are, I have no problem them moving on. This is a business after all and I believe in the free market and being compensated for one’s worth. Doug is correct, at this point Jeff S. has no real say so of where he could end up, if the last place NY Mets gave the Cubs an absolute sweetheart deal that no one could refuse, well he could end up there. Or if the Giants out my way did the same thing in terms of a package for him, he could be out here. He just does not or should I say have earned that “no-trade-clause” part that more veteran players can request so the Cubs do have some control here. On the other side I feel if the Ricketts are very serious about moving forward not backwards and can have some “real” conversations about where they want to be and a timeline and that it would include Jeff S, like other teams have done with players that were important to the organization (i.e. the Braves including Chipper Jones in certain discussions, I know this might not be the same but for the Cubs at this junction I use it), and also discuss how they might be able to compensate him, who knows Jeff if he feels it is not all talk might just take them up on it. And if he did and we see the fruits of it say especially in 1-2yrs, we will all be talking about how he matured and wanted to be with a team and was a part of the process bringing one together. In the end it will be up to the FO office and then Jeff but I would hope the FO would at least try and if not, they can say they tried and I would hope that Jeff if it did not work out would also thank Chicago. If from an organization stand point the FO does not make a serious play for him and he goes, there could be more “chatter” about this organization that has a culture that is not about excellence and I do not want to see that happen. So, I admit I am looking at this from many angles and anyone who has read some of my comments knows that I was hard on Jeff early on because of how he “talked” a lot before the season started, felt it was not building up the team by putting the spot light on himself. At the same time, it would be a testament to the organization and one of their players if they could work things out and strengthen the organization, I would be all for that. Anyhow, enough of my ramblings, I hope you both have a great Aloha Friday! Mahalo!

That`s fine that Doug answered my post, but I would still like for k.g. to reply to it as well, because, after all, it was addressed to him.

And why is it that we can reply directly to some posts, and not others. I do not get that. I suppose there is a simple answer for this conundrum, and I`d like to hear it. Why is there a “Reply” item we can hit at the very end of some comments, and it disappears or was never there in the first place after other posts?

To answer Doug, I disagree that it all about money with Shark. Most major leaguers who have any character and pride want to be compensated well, but also want to perform for a team which has championship aspirations. When you say Shark has little say in where he performs, I challenge that statement too. He can make it very uncomfortable for the Cubs` organization, by making it crystal clear he wants to be sent to another organization. Plenty have done so prior.The landscape is filled with their ilk. Clubs do not want malcontents. It is not good for their look. And wins are also very important on one`s resume. Please do not tell me that because Shark has a remarkable ERA, which he no doubt does, that he receives the equivalent praise and attention that a man like Beuhrle does with his superb eight wins. It should not be that way, meaning ERA should be given the kind of attention wins receive, but that is not the perception. And as you well know, perception is reality.

Aloha jhosk- I did reply to your post, I hope you see my long-winded reply just after Doug’s. Let me know if you did not see it. Take care now. Mahalo!

Yes, k.g. I did realize a little too late that you did indeed reply and I thank you for that. While I have you here, I`d like your opinion of Junior. When some on here project a future outfield, they seem to leave Lake out of the conversation. I see him with tremendous untapped potential. He`s just finding his way.These are early days for him. He makes bad decisions on defense at times etc. and he needs to be more selective with pitches at the dish and he fans far too often, but I see that as all part of his development. He`s just scratching the surface of what he can be and what he can contribute. Am I going overboard with this guy, k.g.? Do my expectations need to be reeled in?

Aloha jhosk- I have to say that Lake is growing on me. He is only 24yrs. I am hoping that his defense will pick up even more. What is amazing is that he began his career with our Cubbies at 17/18yrs of age and last year split his time between AAA and up with the team. There are things that we do not know from where we sit but I am sure he is being encouraged to work on certain aspects of his game because he must hear a lot of the those right below him in AAA & AA that are “hungry” to come up and take a spot. I think he has the tools to be better but would like to see a little of the “Pete Rose-Charlie Hustle” come out of him. I was blessed to actually see Rose play some and was just amazed at how he hustled even later in life. It is like folks out here in the SF Bay area talking about Hunter Pence how he runs hard to first base every time no matter if the plays looks like for sure he is out, because what if someone makes a bad throw or misses the catch and he has because of his running created opportunities for himself. I would like to see more of a drive out of Lake and hope if we could get a good “veteran” with lots of life left that he could mentor a Lake, encourage him. Many times it really helps younger players to have the veterans around and learn that what they are going through is nothing new and how to work through it. I would be happy if the lineup could include more regularly Lake and Olt, just my bias but would love for them to succeed. Tough game tonight, there is always tomorrow. Take care now. Mahalo!

I agree I like Melky…. he is a productive OFer

Shark will look for Six years $130 million…….
as for players in return….Quality over Quantity.

you just said the other day that we would get 6 players for shark…. now you are saying quality over quantity MAKE YOUR FREAKING MIND UP!!!!! Have you taken your bipolar meds lately?

I’m the biggest Barney fan and many people know that. I have been surprised that he hasn’t been played but at least he didn’t make a dumb excuse and know that he made a mistake.

yeah it’s a shame they’re not giving Barney more starts. It’s not like the team has any chance of contending this year. They could at least give him a shot at bringing up his average. I gotta think his lack of playing time had something to do with his error though.

True Chico.

why give him a shot when you have better players on the team than Barney…. How long have I been saying Barney sucks….. what do you have to see to realize he is truly not a starting player in the MLB. Valbueno is playing awesome…. Bonafacio is playing good… barney is playing terrible. He should only get to come off the bench on the off days and if he can’t prove himself there then he is going to have a tough time staying in the major leagues.

I agree Chico and Petry just because you think that he cant start doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t have a chance. He can be up to the challenge. I can care less if you think he sucks because to me he does not. I am pretty sure they don’t have practice in between games so it does affect the way he plays. You cannot just go into a game with days without playing. And by the way it’s Valbuena not Valbueno.

Agree with Petrey10, time to say goodbye.

lol you don’t think the cubs players practice?

and actually him sucking and not able to start is the exact reason he should not be given anymore playing time. We are bad enough… And when there are significantly better options on this team than Barney then Barney should not play. This isn’t little league where everyone gets a certain portion of PT… this is the MLB

You know what Perry? I agree with you. I truly love barney with all my heart but I think its time for our prospects to be brought up or new players. That or we wait for the “rebuilding”.

Seems most fans are not supportive of Ricketts comments regarding the time to move forward with the expansion plan propaganda video base upon the sour comments following; I’m guessing its due to many of Tom’s comments being very subjective. First, our central div. competitors not being hindered by revenue generating signage when in 2013 the Cubs were 4th in revenue at $274m, far ahead of all central teams. Second, the signage will provide the kids Hoyer/Theo money to build a winner when if one is willing to put up $500m to renovate where’s the money now to start building a winner; chicken or the egg here. Third, worked endlessly with the RTO which I understand is not the whole story and the team was purchased with the contract in place understanding the restrictions; it wasn’t hiding in some dark closet. Forth, we want to fund this expansion ourselves when they did indeed try to get the city to help fund while considering to offer shares to generate revenue for this expansion and still may do so. Fifth, is the building of a hotel required to build a winner; the plan could be put into action in stages utilizing these funds for players not capital investment. Six, The Ricketts insist they loan based upon corporate protection which is making hard to get investors (in other words, they will not guarantee the loan outside the Cubs, Inc/LLC). Seven, there is simply no guarantee the revenue will be spent on the team; the Ricketts are known to be very frugal. There is more but these are just simple facts; you guys tell me…no ownership here. It seems to me the Ricketts like to tell a partial story; typical of the corporate world.

Huh? Are you affiliated with the rooftop owners? I fully support there renovation plan. I hope they break dirt the day after the season ends.

As I said, no ownership here, just the facts.

Sorry but, didn’t include the Cubs generate $650m in local revenue annually; $8.25m per game on average…really? I would like to see that spreadsheet. Remember, the Chamber of Commerce always puts up these elevated numbers in every area and can never justify.

O and you also forgot that those figures DO NOT include the debt agreement made at the time of sale with Zell/Tribune…. THAT IS THE PROBLEM…. its a huge payment and the debt the Cubs have is HUGE!!! I think you better research a little more on which MLB team has the most debt bc the Cubs are quite high on that list

if you want to read a little on the Cubs debt please read this article it is a great read….. http://www.bleachernation.com/2014/03/19/the-chicago-cubs-financial-story-the-payroll-the-debt-and-the-syncing-of-baseball-and-business-plans/ ……. he goes into more than jsut the debt but there are so many things currently holding back the Cubs from really “spending” but the future after 2019 could be ridiculously bright. And yes I know that is a longgggggggg way off but that wasn’t the doings of the Ricketts or this FO. It was/is the cards they were dealt. Maybe the IRS will find something to help our rebuild speed up. If you don’t know what that means please read the article first

Wow, this is a long winded article that goes nowhere even admitting this could all be incorrect. Clearly you do not understand that the debt is merely artificial; a loan from themselves (trust) at low interest rates which is very common with large purchases…they most likely would have purchased it in this manner with or without the leverage partnership; when you buy something the money must come from somewhere, duh. With this, equity plays a large part here and as the article indicates the trust could infuse funds without paying off the loan being of any consequence and I will add there is about 5 others ways. The IRS issue is solely a concern of Tribune and all leverage partnerships are view by the IRS when in conjunction of a large sale due to potential tax avoidance. Make no mistake that the MLB takes artificial loans into consideration in such cases and also are aware that not all revenue is reported when a private concern…they are not stupid. This is simply a matter of corporations playing with shadow entities to reduce taxes, interest, etc. As I said, I have no ownership here but this article is clearly one-sided. The point is, one buys the rebuilding issue or not…I think more do not than do. However, some of you know it all’s think you have the only wise answer and clearly do not because only time can tell the story.

the partnership wasn’t started by Ricketts side…. it was started and a MUST for anyone buying the Cubs on the Tribune Side. It was due to their bankruptcy and being able to pay back creditors. With a regular sale and “capital gains” taxes there would not have been enough money leftover to pay the creditors. Just because the article was too long for you to read doesn’t mean it went nowhere. If you want to whine and complain about a corporation everytime you post how bout you whine and complain about the one who dug us into the hole ( Tribune). If the IRS sees the parnership as a “sale” and enforces tax penalties then there is no reason to have the “partnership” which then Ricketts CAN PAY OFF THE DEBT. So in reality it might be a great thing to have the billion dollar family money backing. That in return would allow us to have more money available for spending than putting those millions into paying off a debt.

– If you think the Cubs can compete in 2015 without Shark or Hammel, you need to hear that Styx song, “You are Fooling Yourself….Believe It”…..

– Shark’s bags are packed……it is a matter which team at this point Shark gets traded to……

– Ricketts going with the “original” renovation plan….no more talks with RTO……the smaller outfield sign compromise offer is off the table……and the Cubs are adding more signs !…….can’t deal with greedy business owners!

– When will Shark get traded?……some say sometime in middle of June !

Question of the Day………..

What Year Will the Cubs Be Back in the Playoffs?

A – 2015
B – 2016
C – 2017
D – 2018
E – Not With Theo / Jed

Theo’s Record so far as Cubs President of Baseball Operations…………….143 – 225

Rebuilding takes time, record is of no concern.

106 years and counting………I just hope to see this Rebuilding Project end at some point.

i hope your comments end at some point

Who cares if it’s been 106 years? Wouldn’t you rather the Cubs do it the right way rather than recklessly?

Time to Write Off the Cubs 2014 Season………..

What Need to be done…….

– Limit Shark’s Pitch Count to 90…….no need to have an injury at this point.
– Make a Shark trade sooner then later…….several key trading partners might be out of the race by July
– Play Barney at second every game to increase trade value…..
– Include Baker in any Hammel trade…..I cannot take Baker’s weak swings anymore.
– Avoid drafting a H.S. Pitcher in the first few rounds…….we need pitching by 2017….not 2020.
– By August 1st, Alcantara, Hendricks, & Vizcaino should be on this team.
– Cubs FO need to decide where Bryant will play in the majors …3B or OF
– With a stock pile of 3B in the system, good time to trade C.Villanueva for pitching prospect……
– Play Junior Lake all the time…….coming off the bench is not his role.
– Make Anthony Rizzo “Captain” for this team…….this team will be filled with youngsters, and Rizzo will be looked up to when their time come to play here.

you can’t take Bakers weak swing but yet you want Barney in there??? LOL wow good call! When do you see good prospects traded one for one? Rarely especially when the prospect is decent as Villanueva. It just doesn’t happen very often. Why does the FO need to decide now on Bryant? We have time to do that. Again you were saying to raise Barneys value but moving Bryant to LF is only going to devalue him sooooo again another one of the hypcritcal comments.

Did you see petrey’s response to the article he highlighted? One could say he doesn’t understand what he reads…I’m shocked!

umm well I think you are mistaken but please go on and elaborate on how I am mistaken from the article. Why don’t you try to read the whole article FIRST.

What I find interesting in the Yankee series is; the Cubs scored 8 runs, Olt batting 7th in 1st game, then 8th the second game, knocks in half those runs. 2 with SAC fly’s, 1 with a single and 1 with a bases loaded walk.
They take Olt out of the game for defensive purposes, the Cubs dont score another run.

yes I didn’t like seeing Olt taken out of the game either. But again I like seeing him down in bottom of order just so the pressure is taken off him a bit. This guy barely got to play last year and the year before. He just needs to be in the game to see pitches.

Looked like he was seeing pitches pretty well. Half of the runs knocked in, in two games from the 7th & 8th spot in the lineup.
Scoring runs seems to be a problem for the Cubs, Olts AVG ma be low right now, but he knocks in runs.
Olt leads the team by 1 RBI, Castro is second, batting cleanup with 71 more At Bats than Olt.

Another 15 strikeouts. Takes so many options off the table. Surely there must be those in the minor league who can make some contact. They cannot be any worse than the breeze kids.

if you are looking for guys not to strike out you might want to just go root for another team. Even the top guys in the minors look to be striking out at an above average rate. Soler, Candelario and Villanueva might be the guys who really don’t strike out a lot.

You are nothing but a no brain; that may too good. Read what I put you nut, Tax consequences are to the Tribune. The Tribune did nothing, an inter corp. loan is common place and they can inject funds at any time but will not. There would have been debt one way or the other you no brain…with or without the partnership they would have done the loan structure the same way…that is how it’s done; what don’t you understand? Where do you think the funds for the expansion is most likely coming from, the Ricketts pocket money? It will come from a loan either outside or from intercompany…no brain.

Deancee, you lost a debate, so you become very rude, no reason for it!! Why dont you run your big business and let the Ricketts run theirs?

Where is Carrie, she deletes baseball related topics, this one should be very gone.

lol no you are incorrect lol if the tax consequences are the reason for the partnership to save the Tribune money…. NOT RICKETTS…. If the IRS penalizes the TRibune for the “sale” due to the IRS investigation then there is no reason to have the partnership between Tribune and Ricketts. THEN the Ricketts could pay off the debts and save money on interest and the debt payments each year. THUS allowing for more cash flow. The Ricketts would be getting the money from their other Family’s money/trust/entity which yes would need to be repaid but they would be gaining more cash flow to do that and most likely would be fine with recouping that money thru asset appreciation of the Cubs. Not of mandatory debt payments like is established at this time. It would greatly improve the Cubs Cash Flow each year. And again whats up with the name calling? Why are you so heated on the corporate key points?

The loan is to themselves…they pay interest to themselves which is called an intercompany loan or corp. family loan. One does not pay out of pocket from personal funds when this can be accomplished. Therefore, a loan would be present in any case and one would not pay it off unless the other entity required (needs the cash). This is common place so what did the Tribune do to hurt this situation petrey?

OMG !!!!!!!!!!!! Read the freaking article you dingbat….. For the sale to happen between Tribune and Ricketts a partnership between the TRibune and Ricketts HAD to be established. The agreement is for 10 years… after the 10 years the “sale”/partnership is gone and the Ricketts get full ownership (basically). Then when the partnership was established it required funds to be paid out on a certain schedule from the renevue generated from the partnership BECAUSE the Tribune Co could not pay the debtors and pay the Capital gain tax with a regular sale up front. SO there is a high amount of that REVENUE going towards paying all this crap off. Sucking funds from our Cash Flow every year (until the end of the agreement which is aroudn 2019-2022)….. SOOOOO if the IRS comes in and investigates and says “hey this is still a sale and we are still going to tax you on those capital gains” there is NO REASON FOR THE PARTNERSHIP!!!!!! Which would allow Ricketts to use his OWN MONEY (whether its from an entity owned by Ricketts doesn’t matter) to pay off the debts IN FULL…. resulting in a higher CASH FLOW EACH YEAR!!!!! Would the money coming from the Ricketts need to be put back? Yes I would guess they would want that but its going to be on their own schedule and at a lower interest rate PLUS a lot of it could be recouped in appreciation of Rickett’s asset, the Cubs/Wrigley Field. The Ricketts are multibillionaires so the money is available…. its just a matter of jumping through all the hoop of the partnership that is the problem. I don’t if I can spell this out anymore….. just read the article and put your “corporation” biases aside.

I will explain this to you one more time, they will not pay off the debt even after the partnership is over; no prudent business person would. At best they will transfer all of the debt to trust in order to make interest on the loan…there will always be interest expense. This begs another question, if the Rickets have soooo much money they could just pay off the loan in 2019, and then why so much loaned from outside lenders and not from the trust or intercompany where they benefit from all interest? When they refinanced why not from intercompany or trust? With this, what makes you think they would just pay it off…no brain? And if the Rickets are soooo loaded even the article states they can inject funds at any time aside of the partnership arrangement, why do they refuse? This would be equity, a principle asset class. I will tell you why; the Wrigley project is an investment that’s what the Ricketts do (remember the shops, hotel, etc.)…they (the trust) see the Cubs holdings as a poor investment. You are indeed a real winner petrey as you just pick out you want and the hell with all the other facts and don’t respond when you’re cornered. Must be good to be you wonder boy.

We may all have a PHD in business by the end of the day! :)). Anyone need any special Oregon brownies yet?

no lets stay on topic here

Good interesting, informative debate there petrey.

Carrie….I am calling YOU out again on Petrey’s remarks on me……..He can say 50 nasty remarks on me, but if I say one remark on him, YOU are calling me out…….is Petrey a relative ?

You know what, it really doesn’t matter………..everyone can see what that guy is all about.

lol wow…

CubsTalk, I tried to contact you via email but it kept bouncing back. Please send me a correct email address to CubsInbox@gmail.com, and thank you.

To be honest everyone knows how Petry is but I was respect what he has to say just because that’s HIS opinion. and just because someone calls you out on it doesn’t mean that theyre one his side. Petry gives us that facts and “realistic” look about things but he’s right (most of the time) that’s just him.

Good interesting debate Deancee AND Petrey. It takes TWO or more to debate. – in my opinion. Hope everyone enjoys the game tonight!

These business models are too difficult for someone to understand when they have never held a decision making top level corporate position…I have sat in the chair 5 times learning along the way with highly educated financial advisors by my side. Done with petrey as this is over his head. Enjoy the game.

No deance u can try to belittle me all you want but you are not understanding the whole principle of the debt structure.. Try rereading the article and my comments. I don’t care what u were in your imaginary life but there may be a reason you were on five different ones and never stuck…. The “sale” was structured so no tax would have to be paid on tribune side so that creditors coukd be paid. Why doesn’t ricketts just pay it off now? Bc they can’t legal do that under the partnership agreement. But if the IRS charged the tribune for taxes after their investigation them there is no point of the partnership and Ricketts coukd then buyout the debt/agreement. The money could come from another one of ricketts trust funds or entities no problem. Would there be interest expense on that? Doubtful but possible Bc instead of interest they would receive appreciation of assets from the cubs side but money or revenue coukd still be transferred back over time when a tv deal is done etc etc. If I am so wrong please show me evidence as I have shown you all mine… The cards are on the table show me your hand! I will gladly say I’m wrong if you show me the proof and relax

Yes my friend, there would be interest on that because it would be a loan or the trust (or other) would need to show ownership in the Cubs holdings which is not what they want. You see, this has nothing to do with the Tribune deal unless one would clearly state the Ricketts would put up more cash at the time purchase…personal cash and not loaned from the trust. They want (and rightfully so) to have Cubs holdings as its own entity with no downstream channel due to tax, bankruptcy, etc. corporate protection. The IRS says it’s either a loan, ownership or a taxable forgiven loan. I’m just trying to help you understand that the Ricketts would have loaned money from the trust one way or the other simply because it good business and done this way all the time. Why would one pay off a loan they are making money on from interest on one side and a deduction on the other. It is interesting that not all the money came from the trust which indicates the lack of liquid cash, not willing to drive all in, or lack of confidence because it only makes sense to profit on the interest while deducting on the other side along with controlling the interest rate. And by the way, an answer to your nasty comment, average time for a CEO is 3-7 years (longer is nowhere) and now I own…purchased the company I ran from a billion $ corporation, but thanks. I thought you were just playing me but this just shows you really don’t understand so I will back off.

The ” loan ” could also be 0% or heck they could even sell assets included in the trust. Also since you are such a big wig you should also know that assets are routinely transferred between entities all the time. Also I again think you understate the wealth of ricketts and the various ways they own or hold that wealth. And who are we to know that there aren’t provisions in the trust that would allow them or disallow them from distributing finding as they see fit. The ricketts are worth around 2 bill so I’m sure the debt load of the cubs coukd easily be taken care of if they see fit and it allowed for more income to be made. Again you come back at me with nothing to back up your claims … All I have done is shown you what could happen … It’s just a possibility … Take it for what it’s worth and if you have proof behind your claims I would love to learn something from your big wig head

Also I think you are forgetting that the current ownership is a certain partnership we have spoke of …. What’s not to say when tribune is out of picture that ricketts doesn’t merge the current entity into the family trust or some other entity . Your big wig brain must also know this happens in the all so evil corporate world . Who says the trust has to loan them anything . Why not just purchase it ? No gains tax would be there if they sell at the same price …. Again not saying I know it all but this is a very complicated situation … Lots of things have to go right for cubs to get their way. .

The IRS is absolute (know what that means), can’t pick what you want to do; all that one can do is work within the system to your advantage. Just look up loaning from a trust…corporate chain protection…transfer of company assets…Etc. What, can’t come to the conclusion to just google this stuff…proving just how bright you are once again. The loan cannot be 0%; it must in somewhat in line with current market rates, but this can be fudged a little…there is a little thing called the IRS that says any income is taxable and a taxable income cannot be fudged. They may be worth what you say but it most likely is not liquid as they are diversified. If they absorb into the trust, it is no longer its own entity and liable to any debt/tax/legal the holding is…downstream chain capture. They could have purchased outright (artificial) by all funds coming from the trust and all transactions become internal but clearly did not do that for the reasons I already mentioned. IF they do pay off all tax and interest benefits go away…that would be stupid. All this is why the Cubs accountants said the loan is not a main issue. But, here you go again picking and choosing what you want and just forget about what you have no ground on. For example, they can inject cash at any time (equity) to offset any burden from the loan but don’t. Final answer, no trust can just distribute funds; it must go thru the legal process or it could lose a trust status and the IRS/courts would see it as a bank account. But thanks, I copied your comments to a managing partner of my audit firm (a Cubs fan) and he got a good laugh…commented you may want to stay clear from your own business.

What part of ricketts coukd not buy the cubs outright do you not understand ? U just said it again…. And it’s completely false and again shows your lack of reading comprehension.? If ricketts were to absorb the current partnership he would be fine paying off the debt that’s the reason for doing it. Not a loan or any other bs u keeps quacking about. That way he has more CASH FLOW!!!!! He will make his money back and have a huge appreciation of assets. Again this all was hypothetical and u come in firing from hip about the wrong points

O who is your magical audit guy? Timmy from across the hall?

Also don’t get hung up on the word LOAN… if the trust were to LOAN the money for the buyout then why wouldn’t the trust just purchase or buy? That is definitely allowed and is done all the time. The way it is currently structured is once again due to the requirements the Tribune had with the sale…… Ricketts wanted to buy the Cubs and just move on but that was NOT ALLOWED!!!!!!!!!!!

Please, I request that you just stop as I have no desire to belittle anyone. You are indeed a rare bird because all the answers are there in my previous comments but you just keep going around…a person while playing scrabble would say the dictionary is wrong. No more free advice/learning; this information is a $250K salary min. in the business world. All I did was comment that the article was one sided by omitting critical information but I also don’t expect the author to be a financial wizard and you petrey by nature had to comment lacking…well whatever. So please, a wise man once said let it die.

gladly… if you figure out how the transaction is actually working and want to just talk about it I am always here

You win; got the last word…I bow to your superior intellect. It simply just must be good to be you, according to you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: