Theo Watch

Quote :

There is no question that Theo Epstein is one of the game's great GMs, but the reverence with which he's been treated in the media is approaching absurd, messianic proportions. SIs John Heyman referred to him as a "savior" in the Cubs eyes (well, at least that's his interpretation), while Paul Sullivan wrote this in his article last night,

Quote :

The Cubs are trying to portray Boston as being unreasonable in its demands. A major league source called such talk "nonsense," suggesting the Red Sox are only seeking fair value to replace one of the game's few rock-star executives.

Of course, he doesn't define what "fair" is, but let's be clear here. The Red Sox asked for Matt Garza. If Sullivan thinks that is being fair then the implication here is that Epstein is a special, elite talent with skills that no one else possesses and that he is worth practically whatever Boston is asking. When you call someone a "rock-star", you're implying a unique ability. Sullivan uses such an emotive, yet essentially meaningless word and expects readers to take that on a leap of faith. There was no thought put into this. What it really amounts to is hero-worship.

Sullivan is essentially saying that Epstein is so far and above every GM candidate that he is worth giving up top on the field talent rather than choosing another candidate where the Cubs would have to surrender nothing.

Giving up someone like Garza as compensation would be absolutely unprecedented. To suggest this is in any way "fair" shows little understanding of a GMs worth or, more precisely, the difference in value between Epstein and a similar minded GM.

This is what Dave Cameron of Fangraphs says,

Quote :

I’d argue that the individual ideas that any GM candidate can offer are now probably so similar that they aren’t worth paying that much for. Smart, analytical baseball executives have essentially become commoditized.

The one problem I have with the statement is when he says any GM candidate, but I otherwise agree. I will say there are a few GM candidates with similar ideas, talents, and analytical abilities, some of whom we've talked about on this site in the past. Cameron uses Rick Hahn specifically as an example, but the same reasoning could apply to Andrew Friedman, John Coppolella, Josh Byrnes and Ben Cherington.

Along that line of thought, Cameron goes on to say...

Quote :

I don’t know that spending a lot of money to buy big name guys to fill out a baseball operations department would actually be exploiting a market inefficiency. As the hires in Texas, Toronto, Tampa Bay, and other places have shown, there are plenty of terrific GMs just waiting for an opportunity to shine.

Let's go back to Garza. It took the Cubs 4 very good prospects to acquire Garza, but they essentially have 3 years of control. Is it acceptable to trade that kind of value for just one year of Epstein, which is all Boston is losing in this case? Epstein is due to be a free agent in 2012 and it now seems impossible that he would return to Boston, especially given the circumstances that have transpired since the end of the season. In that vein come these thoughts from the excellent analyst Tangotiger, who compared Epstein to a similarly compensated ballplayer.

Quote :

It seems to me the market for that kind of player, one already paid his full value (*), with one year of exclusive control, must be pretty weak. I’m thinking some mop-up reliever should be fair compensation, and fit in with the precedents of other baseball assets similarly traded.

I'd be willing to pay more than that, but the point is that once we stop looking at Epstein with starry eyes and look at it more objectively, the value isn't as high as we might think. That is, at least not relative to other top GM candidates.

To be fair, Epstein does bring some intangible value, as Cameron pointed out, that is unique to the Cubs franchise because of the similar history, market, and payroll. He also has the ability to bring people to Chicago, whether they be more front office people or, perhaps, players that may come specifically because of Epstein's presence as GM. So, taking all that into accout, you could say his value might be higher than what Tangotiger suggests. But how much more? Is it Matt Garza more? Trey McNutt more? A mid-level prospect more?

It's not an easy answer. The Cubs GM position is a job that will put a talented GM in a position to succeed. It's in a large market with a strong fan base. There is an owner committed to winning and the job offers near complete autonomy when it comes to baseball operations. It is fairly certain that Theo Epstein could succeed under such conditions, but it's also fairly certain that a number of other similar minded GMs could also succeed in such a situation.

Epstein is a great GM and we would certainly welcome here in Chicago with great enthusiasm and great expectations. But why let the Red Sox roll us over? This team needs a smart, energetic GM, but not (necessarily) one who also happens to be a rock star.

Now...let me reiterate that I really do think Epstein is coming here when all is said and done. I'm just glad it's Ricketts and not Paul Sullivan at the negotiating table.

Cubs Don't Need Rock Star

Looks like the Theo saga may be coming to an end. Multiple Chicago reporters have said that the deal may be finalized and announced on Friday, an off day for the World Series. Theo Epstein is expected to be name President of Baseball Operations while the Padres GM, Jed Hoyer, and his assistant, Jason McLeod, are expected to join Theo as GM and assistant GM respectively.

This is a huge coup for the Cubs IMO. They instantly go from one of the worst front offices in all of baseball, to one of the best. Still don't know who the Cubs are giving up in compensation for Theo. Hoping it isn't Brett Jackson, Matt Szczur, or Trey McNutt. I'm hearing maybe Chris Carpenter and Ryan Flaherty tops. Anything more would be BS. Let's get it done Cubbies!