The weekend debate was about the New Cubs. A few people are still in full honeymoon mode with the Epstein crew. They admit that the Cubs will do nothing this year, but they are happy that the new crew is getting rid of the deadwood of the past roster. Except, the latter is not quite true. Even if the honeymoon period is still in the fandom, the operations look more like a continuation of the Old Guard.
Example 1: is DeJesus in RF just a different version of Kosuke Fukudome? An above average defender who came to town with some batting credentials that never panned out?
Example 2: is the replacement at third base as good as the last one? Hendry traded with the Pirates for Aramis Ramirez because the Pirates could not afford to keep him because he was good and would demand a huge salary increase. Epstein traded for Ian Stewart because the Rockies could not afford to keep him because he was bad.
Example 3: the old organization put its future in three superstar starters (Prior, Wood and Zambrano) and only Z had a legitimate starting career. The new organization has brought in their first three starters as the core of rebuilding (Maholm, Travis Wood and Volstad). T. Wood has been awful, and Maholm under the weather most of the spring. Not a good beginning.
Example 4: the old guard held on to declining veterans too long, like Derek Lee at first base. Now the new guard is handing first base over to a veteran AAA player that the old Cubs failed to promote for years. The old guard signed Pena to be a stop gap player until something; the new guard is using LaHair as a stop gap until Rizzo is ready.
These examples don't instill confidence that the New Cub organization is operating that much different than the old organization.
