The fun starts at 2 p.m. at the Cubby Bear on Monday.
That was nice of Theo to write Smilin' Rick the most glowing reference letter ever given to a fired employee. What a heartless asshole.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 01, 2014, 12:32:59 AM
That was nice of Theo to write Smilin' Rick the most glowing reference letter ever given to a fired employee. What a heartless asshole.
Ha! I've been forced to fire better.
I could write a whole book about having to do the dirty work of heartless assholes.
Maybe I'll write it under the pseudonym "Jack Welch".
Quote from: flannj on November 01, 2014, 12:58:46 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 01, 2014, 12:32:59 AM
That was nice of Theo to write Smilin' Rick the most glowing reference letter ever given to a fired employee. What a heartless asshole.
Ha! I've been forced to fire better.
I could write a whole book about having to do the dirty work of heartless assholes.
Maybe I'll write it under the pseudonym "Jack Welch".
Jack Donaghy
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/100401824/joe-maddon-chicago-cubs-manager
5 years, $25 million.
No opt-out.
Quote from: BH on November 03, 2014, 09:36:05 AM
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/100401824/joe-maddon-chicago-cubs-manager
Only two "I's" and one "Cardinals"? Will Leitch is growing up.
DPD. Theo Epstein gave Chris Bosio a shoutout before starting the presser today; Bosio was attending in person. Confirmation that he's staying?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 03, 2014, 05:04:49 PM
DPD. Theo Epstein gave Chris Bosio a shoutout before starting the presser today; Bosio was attending in person. Confirmation that he's staying?
Maddon mentioned him during the presser as well, like 2nd or 3rd question. I definitely took it as a sign that he's staying.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 03, 2014, 05:16:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 03, 2014, 05:04:49 PM
DPD. Theo Epstein gave Chris Bosio a shoutout before starting the presser today; Bosio was attending in person. Confirmation that he's staying?
Maddon mentioned him during the presser as well, like 2nd or 3rd question. I definitely took it as a sign that he's staying.
Oh that's interesting, I haven't heard the rest of the presser yet. I saw rumors today that Molitor might want Bosio for his staff in Minnesota, since the Twins have finally given up on finding someone/anyone better than Molitor to take the job.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 03, 2014, 05:37:08 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 03, 2014, 05:16:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 03, 2014, 05:04:49 PM
DPD. Theo Epstein gave Chris Bosio a shoutout before starting the presser today; Bosio was attending in person. Confirmation that he's staying?
Maddon mentioned him during the presser as well, like 2nd or 3rd question. I definitely took it as a sign that he's staying.
Oh that's interesting, I haven't heard the rest of the presser yet. I saw rumors today that Molitor might want Bosio for his staff in Minnesota, since the Twins have finally given up on finding someone/anyone better than Molitor to take the job.
I figured he wanted Lamar Hoyt as pitching coach and Tim Raines as hitting coach. Dave Parker could coach first base. Keith Hernandez, third base. And so on and so on.
Jemele Hill with a HOT SPROTS TAKE (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/11808793/joe-maddon-agent-calls-tampering-claims-chicago-cubs-silly) that definitely no one else has had yet. Just the latest outstanding content from ESPN.
Jeppson's Malort is offering $100 to anybody who gets a photo of Maddon drinking a shot of the tasty beverage.
Fuck it's silent in here.
LET'S GO ALREADY!!! SIGN SOMEONE!!!
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 07, 2014, 09:33:28 AM
Fuck it's silent in here.
LET'S GO ALREADY!!! SIGN SOMEONE!!!
Soriano's available.
Quote from: Fork on November 07, 2014, 12:57:16 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 07, 2014, 09:33:28 AM
Fuck it's silent in here.
LET'S GO ALREADY!!! SIGN SOMEONE!!!
Soriano's available.
[img ]CAN'TFINDTHATPICOFSORIANOFLIPPINGTHEBIRD.JPG[\img]
Cubs get Tommy La Stella from Atlanta for Arodys Vizcaino and swap bonus pool slots. JULIE SAID TRADE INFIELDERS NOT GET MORE, EPSTINK IS TERRIBLE
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 03:55:10 PM
Cubs get Tommy La Stella from Atlanta for Arodys Vizcaino and swap bonus pool slots. JULIE SAID TRADE INFIELDERS NOT GET MORE, EPSTINK IS TERRIBLE
Thinking the key to the deal was Atlanta's 4 International bonus slots.
Quote from: Fork on November 16, 2014, 04:28:03 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 03:55:10 PM
Cubs get Tommy La Stella from Atlanta for Arodys Vizcaino and swap bonus pool slots. JULIE SAID TRADE INFIELDERS NOT GET MORE, EPSTINK IS TERRIBLE
Thinking the key to the deal was Atlanta's 4 International bonus slots.
According to reports they only got Atlanta's #4 slot, not four total.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 04:45:23 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 16, 2014, 04:28:03 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 03:55:10 PM
Cubs get Tommy La Stella from Atlanta for Arodys Vizcaino and swap bonus pool slots. JULIE SAID TRADE INFIELDERS NOT GET MORE, EPSTINK IS TERRIBLE
Thinking the key to the deal was Atlanta's 4 International bonus slots.
According to reports they only got Atlanta's #4 slot, not four total.
They GAVE the Braves 3 slots.
Quote from: Slaky on November 16, 2014, 06:45:32 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 04:45:23 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 16, 2014, 04:28:03 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 03:55:10 PM
Cubs get Tommy La Stella from Atlanta for Arodys Vizcaino and swap bonus pool slots. JULIE SAID TRADE INFIELDERS NOT GET MORE, EPSTINK IS TERRIBLE
Thinking the key to the deal was Atlanta's 4 International bonus slots.
According to reports they only got Atlanta's #4 slot, not four total.
They GAVE the Braves 3 slots.
Other than that, great job, Fork and Sterling.
Quote from: Eli on November 16, 2014, 07:26:11 PM
Quote from: Slaky on November 16, 2014, 06:45:32 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 04:45:23 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 16, 2014, 04:28:03 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 16, 2014, 03:55:10 PM
Cubs get Tommy La Stella from Atlanta for Arodys Vizcaino and swap bonus pool slots. JULIE SAID TRADE INFIELDERS NOT GET MORE, EPSTINK IS TERRIBLE
Thinking the key to the deal was Atlanta's 4 International bonus slots.
According to reports they only got Atlanta's #4 slot, not four total.
They GAVE the Braves 3 slots.
Other than that, great job, Fork and Sterling.
Didn't realize I was supposed to list the entire trade instead of correct him on how many slots they're getting from Atlanta. Way to go, Sterling, you shitty mindreader.
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
That's an awful deal.
I can't imagine anyone really wanted the Cubs to do that.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
That's an awful deal.
I can't imagine anyone really wanted the Cubs to do that.
As much as I liked the idea of Martin I was even a little ugh at 4 years. 5 is insane.
Good for Toronto I guess. They can continue to have a frustrating and pointless team with a good Canadian boy at catcher.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Yea, I was talking myself into it... and then it didn't happen and the Cardinals got Heyward.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
That's an awful deal.
I can't imagine anyone really wanted the Cubs to do that.
I didn't. I'm just wondering if there are any other bats they are even interested in otherwise.
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:28:59 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
That's an awful deal.
I can't imagine anyone really wanted the Cubs to do that.
I didn't. I'm just wondering if there are any other bats they are even interested in otherwise.
Johnny Gomes.
Best teammate ever.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:29:40 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:28:59 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
That's an awful deal.
I can't imagine anyone really wanted the Cubs to do that.
I didn't. I'm just wondering if there are any other bats they are even interested in otherwise.
Johnny Gomes.
Best teammate ever.
I just have to assume there's going to be some backlash from the angsty DO SOMETHING crowd now that the Cubs have whiffed on supposedly their top position player target, their top FA pitching target isn't likely to make a decision anytime soon, and the Cardinals just made a big move.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Right. I'm not going to be shamed into not feeling shitty about the last two moves both directly and negatively affecting the Cubs. Martin would have been a huge upgrade and now the Cardinals almost seamlessly replaced their latest drunk driving casualty.
The one ray of hope is that you can see what having a deep system allows teams to do. The Cubs building up their system the way they are means they should be in a position to augment their roster in the near future.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
Well, they probably do need to DO SOMETHING. But it's also November, not February.
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
But isn't the whole point of having a core of young, cost-controlled players that you have the flexibility to go further than you want to in years/money to get a veteran who you feel is a good fit and fills a need, understanding that the last year or two of the deal might be dead money? Martin fit that description perfectly.
I reserve the right to disengage my butthurt if they trade for Montero.
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Every free agent hopefully won't be a 33-year-old catcher.
Quote from: InternetApex on November 17, 2014, 11:49:50 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Every free agent hopefully won't be a 33-year-old catcher.
What 33-year-old catcher are you talking about?
Quote from: InternetApex on November 17, 2014, 11:49:50 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Every free agent hopefully won't be a 33-year-old catcher.
I think a lot of top FAs are going to be past 30. That's just how it is now. And everyone is right - you won't sign the top FA unless you give out a deal that looks foolish or seems like an overpay.
I hope they overpay for Lester or Scherzer.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Yeah. I don't disagree that they need to do something. I'm not saying people wanting them to DO SOMETHING are stupid. I just think the main something is clearly acquiring a Lester or Hamels caliber starting pitcher. If they walk out of this offseason without one of those I riot. I understand not wanting to commit to a terrible contract to Martin given that they probably feel confident in their offense going forward. I just will reserve the butthurt until they walk into a season where they hope to contend with Kyle Hendricks as their #2 starter.
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:51:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Yeah. I don't disagree that they need to do something. I'm not saying people wanting them to DO SOMETHING are stupid. I just think the main something is clearly acquiring a Lester or Hamels caliber starting pitcher. If they walk out of this offseason without one of those I riot. I understand not wanting to commit to a terrible contract to Martin given that they probably feel confident in their offense going forward. I just will reserve the butthurt until they walk into a season where they hope to contend with Kyle Hendricks as their #2 starter.
I'm with you here. I really don't care about Russell Martin, but without Lester, Scherzer, Hamels, Zimmerman, etc this offseason will feel like a failure.
Shields and Brett Anderson/Jason Hammel/Masterson is a letdown.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Stated much more succinctly than I could. I like having #smrt guys in charge as much as the next guy, but at some point I'd like to debate whether or not a big contract free agent signing was the right move for the Cubs, instead of consoling ourselves by congratulating the smart guys for being smart and adhering to said line in the sand.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:51:11 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on November 17, 2014, 11:49:50 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Every free agent hopefully won't be a 33-year-old catcher.
What 33-year-old catcher are you talking about?
My bad Martin will only be 32 on Opening Day.
Quote from: InternetApex on November 17, 2014, 12:05:28 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:51:11 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on November 17, 2014, 11:49:50 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:46:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I think that's fine in principle, but if they draw a hard line in the sand on every free agent, it's going to be really difficult for them to ever sign anyone good.
Every free agent hopefully won't be a 33-year-old catcher.
What 33-year-old catcher are you talking about?
My bad Martin will only be 32 on Opening Day.
We can still hope that every free agent won't be a 33-year-old catcher. There's nothing wrong with hoping against that.
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Probably. But anyone who talks to the Cubs is going to try prying one of the gems away (nobody's calling the Cubs looking for Mike Olt), and for cost/benefit, I don't know how much of an upgrade in RF Heyward would be over Soler over the next couple years anyway.
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 12:19:04 PM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Probably. But anyone who talks to the Cubs is going to try prying one of the gems away (nobody's calling the Cubs looking for Mike Olt), and for cost/benefit, I don't know how much of an upgrade in RF Heyward would be over Soler over the next couple years anyway.
I don't see how the Cubs having a bunch of really good prospects would have deterred Atlanta from taking a similar package from the Cubs for Heyward that they got from St. Louis. You don't think the Cubs could have thrown some decent relief prospects their way? I doubt they were like "well they won't give us Bryant/Soler/Russell/Baez so fuck them, lets make a deal with St. Louis that doesn't involve players of that caliber either".
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 12:31:11 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 12:19:04 PM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Probably. But anyone who talks to the Cubs is going to try prying one of the gems away (nobody's calling the Cubs looking for Mike Olt), and for cost/benefit, I don't know how much of an upgrade in RF Heyward would be over Soler over the next couple years anyway.
I don't see how the Cubs having a bunch of really good prospects would have deterred Atlanta from taking a similar package from the Cubs for Heyward that they got from St. Louis. You don't think the Cubs could have thrown some decent relief prospects their way? I doubt they were like "well they won't give us Bryant/Soler/Russell/Baez so fuck them, lets make a deal with St. Louis that doesn't involve players of that caliber either".
I'm not sure the Cubs had a similar package to put together, assuming the Braves were looking for mlb-ready pitching prospects. Hendricks is really the only one who fits that bill and I doubt that would have been enough.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 12:40:23 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 12:31:11 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 12:19:04 PM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Probably. But anyone who talks to the Cubs is going to try prying one of the gems away (nobody's calling the Cubs looking for Mike Olt), and for cost/benefit, I don't know how much of an upgrade in RF Heyward would be over Soler over the next couple years anyway.
I don't see how the Cubs having a bunch of really good prospects would have deterred Atlanta from taking a similar package from the Cubs for Heyward that they got from St. Louis. You don't think the Cubs could have thrown some decent relief prospects their way? I doubt they were like "well they won't give us Bryant/Soler/Russell/Baez so fuck them, lets make a deal with St. Louis that doesn't involve players of that caliber either".
I'm not sure the Cubs had a similar package to put together, assuming the Braves were looking for mlb-ready pitching prospects. Hendricks is really the only one who fits that bill and I doubt that would have been enough.
I guess I don't really know who the other guy St. Louis gave up is. Miller's just a reliever I thought?
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 12:40:23 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 12:31:11 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 12:19:04 PM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Probably. But anyone who talks to the Cubs is going to try prying one of the gems away (nobody's calling the Cubs looking for Mike Olt), and for cost/benefit, I don't know how much of an upgrade in RF Heyward would be over Soler over the next couple years anyway.
I don't see how the Cubs having a bunch of really good prospects would have deterred Atlanta from taking a similar package from the Cubs for Heyward that they got from St. Louis. You don't think the Cubs could have thrown some decent relief prospects their way? I doubt they were like "well they won't give us Bryant/Soler/Russell/Baez so fuck them, lets make a deal with St. Louis that doesn't involve players of that caliber either".
I'm not sure the Cubs had a similar package to put together, assuming the Braves were looking for mlb-ready pitching prospects. Hendricks is really the only one who fits that bill and I doubt that would have been enough.
Anyway, my point wasn't "what could the Cubs have offered for Heyward" my point was to point out how bizarre Fork's "no one would trade with the Cubs unless they were trying to acquire one of the Big Five (or whatever the hell we're calling them)" stance was, when that wasn't even close to similar to what the Braves got.
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 12:43:09 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 12:40:23 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 12:31:11 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 12:19:04 PM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Probably. But anyone who talks to the Cubs is going to try prying one of the gems away (nobody's calling the Cubs looking for Mike Olt), and for cost/benefit, I don't know how much of an upgrade in RF Heyward would be over Soler over the next couple years anyway.
I don't see how the Cubs having a bunch of really good prospects would have deterred Atlanta from taking a similar package from the Cubs for Heyward that they got from St. Louis. You don't think the Cubs could have thrown some decent relief prospects their way? I doubt they were like "well they won't give us Bryant/Soler/Russell/Baez so fuck them, lets make a deal with St. Louis that doesn't involve players of that caliber either".
I'm not sure the Cubs had a similar package to put together, assuming the Braves were looking for mlb-ready pitching prospects. Hendricks is really the only one who fits that bill and I doubt that would have been enough.
Anyway, my point wasn't "what could the Cubs have offered for Heyward" my point was to point out how bizarre Fork's "no one would trade with the Cubs unless they were trying to acquire one of the Big Five (or whatever the hell we're calling them)" stance was, when that wasn't even close to similar to what the Braves got.
Well yeah...I mean, Fork.
But no, Miller is not a reliever. He pitched some in relief for the Cardinals, but that's not the plan.
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
Baez, Almora and Edwards, for sake of discussion.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 01:29:36 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
Baez, Almora and Edwards, for sake of discussion.
I'd probably pull that trigger. I just don't know why exactly Hamels would be worth that given what Price and Lester moved for. I guess he's under contract long term and they aren't and winter deals tend to be bigger. I don't know. I'd probably pay that price tho.
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
OK, frame it another way -- what prospect package would you give up to have Hamels at that contract rather than sign Lester to a huge 7-year deal?
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:35:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
OK, frame it another way -- what prospect package would you give up to have Hamels at that contract rather than sign Lester to a huge 7-year deal?
I'll trade Baez, Almora and Edwards for Hamels and then still pay 7/$185 for Lester.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 01:38:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:35:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
OK, frame it another way -- what prospect package would you give up to have Hamels at that contract rather than sign Lester to a huge 7-year deal?
I'll trade Baez, Almora and Edwards for Hamels and then still pay 7/$185 for Lester.
Well, now you just sound like me.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:54:23 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 01:38:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:35:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
OK, frame it another way -- what prospect package would you give up to have Hamels at that contract rather than sign Lester to a huge 7-year deal?
I'll trade Baez, Almora and Edwards for Hamels and then still pay 7/$185 for Lester.
Well, now you just sound like me.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/921/3313706150.jpg)
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 01:38:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:35:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
OK, frame it another way -- what prospect package would you give up to have Hamels at that contract rather than sign Lester to a huge 7-year deal?
I'll trade Baez, Almora and Edwards for Hamels and then still pay 7/$185 for Lester.
Sounds good. I'd also make the offer Baez or Castro, their choice. Assuming payroll has a limit, getting Castro's money back helps offset the Hamels/Lester money.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 17, 2014, 02:07:28 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 01:38:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:35:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
OK, frame it another way -- what prospect package would you give up to have Hamels at that contract rather than sign Lester to a huge 7-year deal?
I'll trade Baez, Almora and Edwards for Hamels and then still pay 7/$185 for Lester.
Sounds good. I'd also make the offer Baez or Castro, their choice. Assuming payroll has a limit, getting Castro's money back helps offset the Hamels/Lester money.
Well, I don't think Baez's value is as high as Castro's (or at least I don't think it should be) but I'm okay if they move Castro in a Hamels deal. I just don't want to give up Almora and Edwards in that same deal.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 02:08:32 PM
Well, I don't think Baez's value is as high as Castro's (or at least I don't think it should be)
When reading another Chuck post about Castro:
(http://i54.tinypic.com/33ljv3o.jpg)
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 02:08:32 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 17, 2014, 02:07:28 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 01:38:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:35:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
Someone mentioned this on Twitter, but given how elite FA contracts are always larger than expected, would you guys rather give up prospects to have Hamels for 4/$96 mil or sign Lester outright for 7/$185 mil?
Think it depends on the prospects.
OK, frame it another way -- what prospect package would you give up to have Hamels at that contract rather than sign Lester to a huge 7-year deal?
I'll trade Baez, Almora and Edwards for Hamels and then still pay 7/$185 for Lester.
Sounds good. I'd also make the offer Baez or Castro, their choice. Assuming payroll has a limit, getting Castro's money back helps offset the Hamels/Lester money.
Well, I don't think Baez's value is as high as Castro's (or at least I don't think it should be) but I'm okay if they move Castro in a Hamels deal. I just don't want to give up Almora and Edwards in that same deal.
If you add Hamels and Lester and you have Arrieta and Hendricks, the need for Edwards is a lot lower. Almora looks like he won't be ready until at least mid-2016. I can see a load of value in having Hamels for all of 15 and 16 over Almora.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 01:03:39 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 12:43:09 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 12:40:23 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 12:31:11 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 12:19:04 PM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
Probably. But anyone who talks to the Cubs is going to try prying one of the gems away (nobody's calling the Cubs looking for Mike Olt), and for cost/benefit, I don't know how much of an upgrade in RF Heyward would be over Soler over the next couple years anyway.
I don't see how the Cubs having a bunch of really good prospects would have deterred Atlanta from taking a similar package from the Cubs for Heyward that they got from St. Louis. You don't think the Cubs could have thrown some decent relief prospects their way? I doubt they were like "well they won't give us Bryant/Soler/Russell/Baez so fuck them, lets make a deal with St. Louis that doesn't involve players of that caliber either".
I'm not sure the Cubs had a similar package to put together, assuming the Braves were looking for mlb-ready pitching prospects. Hendricks is really the only one who fits that bill and I doubt that would have been enough.
Anyway, my point wasn't "what could the Cubs have offered for Heyward" my point was to point out how bizarre Fork's "no one would trade with the Cubs unless they were trying to acquire one of the Big Five (or whatever the hell we're calling them)" stance was, when that wasn't even close to similar to what the Braves got.
Well yeah...I mean, Fork.
But no, Miller is not a reliever. He pitched some in relief for the Cardinals, but that's not the plan.
I'm not saying the Braves would hold fast to getting one of the guys, that's just where the bargaining would begin. And the Cubs didn't just have a right fielder turn into road pizza, so they probably weren't that interested.
But any GM would get Jepstink on the phone and doesn't at least ask, "What would it take to move Baez?" isn't very good at his job.
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 02:36:57 PM
But any GM would get Jepstink on the phone and doesn't at least ask, "What would it take to move Baez?" isn't very good at his job.
The answer is, "A ball in the dirt."
So according to Mooney and Cafardo, Cubs were the runners-up for Martin. After Anibal Sanchez & Tanaka, I think I've reached my limit of stories on how the Cubs front office went all-out to snag a FA target only to fall just short because of (insert excuse).
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 02:36:57 PM
And the Cubs didn't just have a right fielder turn into road pizza, so they probably weren't that interested.
Heyward is only 25 and has averaged just over 5 WAR a year since 2012. Or, another way to look at it:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=FFb98
I sure as hell hope they were interested.
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2014, 03:05:19 PM
So according to Mooney and Cafardo, Cubs were the runners-up for Martin. After Anibal Sanchez & Tanaka, I think I've reached my limit of stories on how the Cubs front office went all-out to snag a FA target only to fall just short because of (insert excuse).
Just wait until the Red Sox re-sign Lester and the Cardinals sign Scherzer to replace Shelby Miller.
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2014, 03:05:19 PM
So according to Mooney and Cafardo, Cubs were the runners-up for Martin. After Anibal Sanchez & Tanaka, I think I've reached my limit of stories on how the Cubs front office went all-out to snag a FA target only to fall just short because of (insert excuse).
Don't worry, they responded to the Anibel Sanchez situation by giving essentially the same deal to Edwin Jackson.
This will
all turn out just fine once the Cubs sign J.P. Arencibia for 4/$65.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 03:14:18 PM
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2014, 03:05:19 PM
So according to Mooney and Cafardo, Cubs were the runners-up for Martin. After Anibal Sanchez & Tanaka, I think I've reached my limit of stories on how the Cubs front office went all-out to snag a FA target only to fall just short because of (insert excuse).
Just wait until the Red Sox re-sign Lester and the Cardinals sign Scherzer to replace Shelby Miller.
I am actually positive that this is going to happen. But Masterson for 1/6 and maybe Jason Hammel.
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 03:13:08 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 17, 2014, 02:36:57 PM
And the Cubs didn't just have a right fielder turn into road pizza, so they probably weren't that interested.
Heyward is only 25 and has averaged just over 5 WAR a year since 2012. Or, another way to look at it:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/share.cgi?id=FFb98
I sure as hell hope they were interested.
There's still hope for would-be shirsey buyers. The Cubs can get ready to give him $200+ million next offseason as they hand St. Louis a first-round pick for their trouble, unless the Cardinals can extend him during the next 12 months.
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/534691788364451840
QuoteOn CBS Sports Radio, @pgammo said that the #Cubs believe that Jon Lester is going to return to the #RedSox
Quote from: Yeti on November 18, 2014, 08:25:02 AM
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/534691788364451840
QuoteOn CBS Sports Radio, @pgammo said that the #Cubs believe that Jon Lester is going to return to the #RedSox
I hope his cancer returns and kills him.
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 08:25:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 18, 2014, 08:25:02 AM
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/534691788364451840
QuoteOn CBS Sports Radio, @pgammo said that the #Cubs believe that Jon Lester is going to return to the #RedSox
I hope his cancer returns and kills him.
Quoted in case there's a Johnny Knox need for a takeback
For those unaware, when Johnny Knox almost killed himself in 2011, I was at the game (THANKS TJ) and Huey texted me something to the effect of "Good. Serves him right for dropping the ball"
And then 3 hours later recanted it when he realized what really happened
Quote from: Yeti on November 18, 2014, 08:31:52 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 08:25:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 18, 2014, 08:25:02 AM
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/534691788364451840
QuoteOn CBS Sports Radio, @pgammo said that the #Cubs believe that Jon Lester is going to return to the #RedSox
I hope his cancer returns and kills him.
Quoted in case there's a Johnny Knox need for a takeback
I never took back my sentiments on Knox.
I'm also not 100% sincere...or is Slaky the only one allowed to play the hyperbole card?
But seriously, fuck Jon Lester and fuck the whole commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 08:34:58 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 18, 2014, 08:31:52 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 08:25:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 18, 2014, 08:25:02 AM
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/534691788364451840
QuoteOn CBS Sports Radio, @pgammo said that the #Cubs believe that Jon Lester is going to return to the #RedSox
I hope his cancer returns and kills him.
Quoted in case there's a Johnny Knox need for a takeback
I never took back my sentiments on Knox.
I'm also not 100% sincere...or is Slaky the only one allowed to play the hyperbole card?
But seriously, fuck Jon Lester and fuck the whole commonwealth of Massachusetts.
https://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/534718799829041152
Quote from: Buster OlneyThe Braves have a meeting with Jon Lester this week.
Quote from: Eli's Favorite BloggerSo, there you go. Still probably early-ish in process.
Quote from: Buster OlneyVery
I miss when I didn't care. Caring hurts. Caring is painful.
Still probably maybe kinda early-ish.
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Stop it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNkpIDBtC2c)
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:08:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Stop it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNkpIDBtC2c)
I think I'm more with Huey at this point. They need to make some key additions this offseason, but free agency is just one way to do that. If they go into the season with Maddon and Brandon McCarthy as their big moves for the winter, then we can all go crazy. I'd be kind of surprised if that happened though.
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:08:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Stop it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNkpIDBtC2c)
If the Bears have taught me anything it's that being the guy constantly trying to talk everyone off the ledge sucks and will only leave you wringing the tears out of your Cutler shirsey. I want to be the panic guy for once. It's way easier.
WE'RE DOOMED
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:17:14 AM
I want to be the panic guy for once. It's way easier.
As someone who played the role of devil's advocate panic guy for roughly 18 months, I will admit that it's pretty fun. I say go for it.
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:17:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:08:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Stop it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNkpIDBtC2c)
If the Bears have taught me anything it's that being the guy constantly trying to talk everyone off the ledge sucks and will only leave you wringing the tears out of your Cutler shirsey. I want to be the panic guy for once. It's way easier.
WE'RE DOOMED
Nothing is fucked here. Stop parroting the sniveling fatalism that is 95% of Cubs Twitter. I come here to get directions
away from there.
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:30:50 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:17:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:08:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Stop it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNkpIDBtC2c)
If the Bears have taught me anything it's that being the guy constantly trying to talk everyone off the ledge sucks and will only leave you wringing the tears out of your Cutler shirsey. I want to be the panic guy for once. It's way easier.
WE'RE DOOMED
Nothing is fucked here. Stop parroting the sniveling fatalism that is 95% of Cubs Twitter. I come here to get directions away from there.
And I came here to get away from the braying of the sheeple, but all I hear from you is "baaaaaa".
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:30:50 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:17:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:08:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Stop it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNkpIDBtC2c)
If the Bears have taught me anything it's that being the guy constantly trying to talk everyone off the ledge sucks and will only leave you wringing the tears out of your Cutler shirsey. I want to be the panic guy for once. It's way easier.
WE'RE DOOMED
Nothing is fucked here. Stop parroting the sniveling fatalism that is 95% of Cubs Twitter. I come here to get directions away from there.
And I came here to get away from the braying of the sheeple, but all I hear from you is "baaaaaa".
As soon as they sign Cano, you'll all relax.
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:30:50 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:17:14 AM
Quote from: PANK! on November 18, 2014, 09:08:34 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
There are rumors going around the Red Sox have had trade talks about Hamels, too.
This is going to suck.
Stop it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNkpIDBtC2c)
If the Bears have taught me anything it's that being the guy constantly trying to talk everyone off the ledge sucks and will only leave you wringing the tears out of your Cutler shirsey. I want to be the panic guy for once. It's way easier.
WE'RE DOOMED
Nothing is fucked here. Stop parroting the sniveling fatalism that is 95% of Cubs Twitter. I come here to get directions away from there.
And I came here to get away from the braying of the sheeple, but all I hear from you is "baaaaaa".
This made a laff like a damn idjit...
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 09:24:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 09:17:14 AM
I want to be the panic guy for once. It's way easier.
As someone who played the role of devil's advocate panic guy for roughly 18 months, I will admit that it's pretty fun. I say go for it.
Done.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 08:55:11 AM
Also, if Gammons is plugged in anywhere, it's the Red Sox so there's probably some validity to it. I don't think the face-to-face meetings mean all that much, since I'm sure teams have floated numbers out to Lester's agent by this point. And it's not like Lester has never met Theo before.
I'm thinking the Hamels thing might have to happen, since they haven't been linked to Scherzer at all.
Has anyone been linked to Scherzer? I'd think Lester is the first/biggest domino to fall because all he costs is money. After he signs, the other also-rans can decide if they want to lose a draft pick for Scherzer.
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 09:43:45 AM
Has anyone been linked to Scherzer?
The Cardinals, but a lot of that may just be because Scherzer grew up near St. Louis.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 10:06:07 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 09:43:45 AM
Has anyone been linked to Scherzer?
The Cardinals, but a lot of that may just be because Scherzer grew up near St. Louis.
Does anyone really think the Yankees will actually sit out on the elite free agents this year like the rumors say? Because I still sorta think they're grabbing Scherzer.
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 10:12:02 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 10:06:07 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 09:43:45 AM
Has anyone been linked to Scherzer?
The Cardinals, but a lot of that may just be because Scherzer grew up near St. Louis.
Does anyone really think the Yankees will actually sit out on the elite free agents this year like the rumors say? Because I still sorta think they're grabbing Scherzer.
Most reports that I've seen say the Cubs don't want Scherzer for whatever reason. If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
In all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 10:12:02 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 10:06:07 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 09:43:45 AM
Has anyone been linked to Scherzer?
The Cardinals, but a lot of that may just be because Scherzer grew up near St. Louis.
Does anyone really think the Yankees will actually sit out on the elite free agents this year like the rumors say? Because I still sorta think they're grabbing Scherzer.
Most reports that I've seen say the Cubs don't want Scherzer for whatever reason. If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
In all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
That's pretty much it.
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 10:12:02 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 10:06:07 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 09:43:45 AM
Has anyone been linked to Scherzer?
The Cardinals, but a lot of that may just be because Scherzer grew up near St. Louis.
Does anyone really think the Yankees will actually sit out on the elite free agents this year like the rumors say? Because I still sorta think they're grabbing Scherzer.
Most reports that I've seen say the Cubs don't want Scherzer for whatever reason. If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
In all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
I'd be somewhat pissed if they got no one, at least via free agency. They've spent 3 years cutting payroll for this exact reason. Ownership has seen the value of the franchise go up by 100% in some estimates. They're getting their additional money from the Jumbotron and other revenue enhancers.
If after 4 offseasons, the only guy they've gotten to sign a long term deal with is Edwin Jackson because the Cubs are unwilling to spend a billionaire's money, I'd be somewhat upset.
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
Shields
feels like a disaster waiting to happen, but after looking at it closer, I'm not so sure. His fastball velocity has actually gone up four straight years and his peripherals have been remarkably consistent. He's a risk like every pitcher, but there haven't been any real signs that he'll fall off a cliff.
I don't think Shields alone makes them a contender next year, but there's an argument for Shields at 4/$80 million being more palatable than Lester at $7/$160 million. And the actual on-field production may not end up being all that different.
QuoteIn all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Fun to watch, sure. At times. But a good team? Probably not.
Plus, I don't really want them to go into next winter having missed out on every desirable target in the last four offseasons.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
Shields feels like a disaster waiting to happen, but after looking at it closer, I'm not so sure. His fastball velocity has actually gone up four straight years and his peripherals have been remarkably consistent. He's a risk like every pitcher, but there haven't been any real signs that he'll fall off a cliff.
I don't think Shields alone makes them a contender next year, but there's an argument for Shields at 4/$80 million being more palatable than Lester at $7/$160 million. And the actual on-field production may not end up being all that different.
QuoteIn all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Fun to watch, sure. At times. But a good team? Probably not.
Plus, I don't really want them to go into next winter having missed out on every desirable target in the last four offseasons.
Other than Maddon and Theo.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 18, 2014, 11:21:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
Shields feels like a disaster waiting to happen, but after looking at it closer, I'm not so sure. His fastball velocity has actually gone up four straight years and his peripherals have been remarkably consistent. He's a risk like every pitcher, but there haven't been any real signs that he'll fall off a cliff.
I don't think Shields alone makes them a contender next year, but there's an argument for Shields at 4/$80 million being more palatable than Lester at $7/$160 million. And the actual on-field production may not end up being all that different.
QuoteIn all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Fun to watch, sure. At times. But a good team? Probably not.
Plus, I don't really want them to go into next winter having missed out on every desirable target in the last four offseasons.
Other than Maddon and Theo.
Well, if Theo himself hasn't translated into actual wins going into Year 5 and he's laid four straight offseason turds*, that takes the shine off that one a bit.
* Which, again, I'd be really surprised by. I just can't see them doing nothing again this offseason.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:29:02 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 18, 2014, 11:21:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
Shields feels like a disaster waiting to happen, but after looking at it closer, I'm not so sure. His fastball velocity has actually gone up four straight years and his peripherals have been remarkably consistent. He's a risk like every pitcher, but there haven't been any real signs that he'll fall off a cliff.
I don't think Shields alone makes them a contender next year, but there's an argument for Shields at 4/$80 million being more palatable than Lester at $7/$160 million. And the actual on-field production may not end up being all that different.
QuoteIn all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Fun to watch, sure. At times. But a good team? Probably not.
Plus, I don't really want them to go into next winter having missed out on every desirable target in the last four offseasons.
Other than Maddon and Theo.
Well, if Theo himself hasn't translated into actual wins going into Year 5 and he's laid four straight offseason turds*, that takes the shine off that one a bit.
* Which, again, I'd be really surprised by. I just can't see them doing nothing again this offseason.
I can. Who can forget when Ditka said ol' Ricketts throws around nickels like they're manhole covers.
Brace yourselves for the return of Jason Hammel and 78 wins, folks.
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 11:44:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:29:02 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 18, 2014, 11:21:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
Shields feels like a disaster waiting to happen, but after looking at it closer, I'm not so sure. His fastball velocity has actually gone up four straight years and his peripherals have been remarkably consistent. He's a risk like every pitcher, but there haven't been any real signs that he'll fall off a cliff.
I don't think Shields alone makes them a contender next year, but there's an argument for Shields at 4/$80 million being more palatable than Lester at $7/$160 million. And the actual on-field production may not end up being all that different.
QuoteIn all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Fun to watch, sure. At times. But a good team? Probably not.
Plus, I don't really want them to go into next winter having missed out on every desirable target in the last four offseasons.
Other than Maddon and Theo.
Well, if Theo himself hasn't translated into actual wins going into Year 5 and he's laid four straight offseason turds*, that takes the shine off that one a bit.
* Which, again, I'd be really surprised by. I just can't see them doing nothing again this offseason.
I can. Who can forget when Ditka said ol' Ricketts throws around nickels like they're manhole covers.
Brace yourselves for the return of Jason Hammel and 78 wins, folks.
Being a doomsayer is a bit like exercise -- you should ease into it. Be sure to stretch first. Don't just start sprinting.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:29:02 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 18, 2014, 11:21:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
Shields feels like a disaster waiting to happen, but after looking at it closer, I'm not so sure. His fastball velocity has actually gone up four straight years and his peripherals have been remarkably consistent. He's a risk like every pitcher, but there haven't been any real signs that he'll fall off a cliff.
I don't think Shields alone makes them a contender next year, but there's an argument for Shields at 4/$80 million being more palatable than Lester at $7/$160 million. And the actual on-field production may not end up being all that different.
QuoteIn all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Fun to watch, sure. At times. But a good team? Probably not.
Plus, I don't really want them to go into next winter having missed out on every desirable target in the last four offseasons.
Other than Maddon and Theo.
Well, if Theo himself hasn't translated into actual wins going into Year 5 and he's laid four straight offseason turds*, that takes the shine off that one a bit.
* Which, again, I'd be really surprised by. I just can't see them doing nothing again this offseason.
Well that's the thing: they have very desirable assets in the minors to trade for good players on teams looking to cut salary. That will be an option from here on out. Once acquired the money can be spent on extensions, etc.
Free agency as we knew it when we were kids is dead. It's a different world. The thing about free agency is you can offer the most money and still lose out. Russell Martin went to his home town. Jon Lester has been a Red Sox player his whole career save a few months. They took care of him when he had cancer. He won there. He's settled down there. If he chooses Boston over Chicago and the money is equal how can anyone be upset?
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 11:51:42 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:29:02 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 18, 2014, 11:21:37 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
Shields feels like a disaster waiting to happen, but after looking at it closer, I'm not so sure. His fastball velocity has actually gone up four straight years and his peripherals have been remarkably consistent. He's a risk like every pitcher, but there haven't been any real signs that he'll fall off a cliff.
I don't think Shields alone makes them a contender next year, but there's an argument for Shields at 4/$80 million being more palatable than Lester at $7/$160 million. And the actual on-field production may not end up being all that different.
QuoteIn all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
Fun to watch, sure. At times. But a good team? Probably not.
Plus, I don't really want them to go into next winter having missed out on every desirable target in the last four offseasons.
Other than Maddon and Theo.
Well, if Theo himself hasn't translated into actual wins going into Year 5 and he's laid four straight offseason turds*, that takes the shine off that one a bit.
* Which, again, I'd be really surprised by. I just can't see them doing nothing again this offseason.
Well that's the thing: they have very desirable assets in the minors to trade for good players on teams looking to cut salary. That will be an option from here on out. Once acquired the money can be spent on extensions, etc.
Free agency as we knew it when we were kids is dead. It's a different world. The thing about free agency is you can offer the most money and still lose out. Russell Martin went to his home town. Jon Lester has been a Red Sox player his whole career save a few months. They took care of him when he had cancer. He won there. He's settled down there. If he chooses Boston over Chicago and the money is equal how can anyone be upset?
I think the response there would be make sure the money isn't equal. At some point they're going to have to back up the Brinks truck for someone knowing it's going to hurt later. This is the cost of contending.
Also I don't think Martin being Canadian was a bigger factor than the extra year/18 million dollars over the rumored 4/64 deal the Cubs were supposedly dangling. Not saying they should have matched it, but there's reason to believe the Cubs not being willing to pay stupid money is a factor.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 18, 2014, 11:15:28 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 10:57:00 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 10:12:02 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 10:06:07 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 09:43:45 AM
Has anyone been linked to Scherzer?
The Cardinals, but a lot of that may just be because Scherzer grew up near St. Louis.
Does anyone really think the Yankees will actually sit out on the elite free agents this year like the rumors say? Because I still sorta think they're grabbing Scherzer.
Most reports that I've seen say the Cubs don't want Scherzer for whatever reason. If they don't get Lester and won't trade for Hamels I guess there's still Shields. That doesn't do a lot for me though.
In all honesty if they can't land A Guy this offseason I personally won't be upset. I'll be annoyed and a little embarrassed since the Cubs will, as always, be the butt of many awful jokes. But I still think they'll be fun to watch next year and I think most of you do too.
I'd be somewhat pissed if they got no one, at least via free agency. They've spent 3 years cutting payroll for this exact reason. Ownership has seen the value of the franchise go up by 100% in some estimates. They're getting their additional money from the Jumbotron and other revenue enhancers.
If after 4 offseasons, the only guy they've gotten to sign a long term deal with is Edwin Jackson because the Cubs are unwilling to spend a billionaire's money, I'd be somewhat upset.
Well guys it was nice knowing you because I just blew my brains out after agreeing with every. damn. word. of a Chuckpost.
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 11:51:42 AM
If he chooses Boston over Chicago and the money is equal how can anyone be upset?
It wouldn't just be that move by itself that would make people angsty, but if missing out on Lester coincided with also missing on Scherzer and Shields, then not going after Hamels, Zimmermann, etc. to compensate.
Maybe we all need to pump the brakes a bit on the Doom Bus here. Martin took an illogical contract fro the Blue Jays. If Lester goes elsewhere, you know the Cubs will be in the mix. And if Boston blows their financial wad on him, the Cubs can move on Scherzer, since their pick is protected.
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
If the Cubs are sitting where they currently are on February 18, then we have cause for unhappiness, or whatever emotion is deemed appropriate by the torch-wielding mob. But the fact that we haven't even gotten to Thanksgiving means it's a little too early to get the despair going.
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Maybe we all need to pump the brakes a bit on the Doom Bus here. Martin took an illogical contract fro the Blue Jays. If Lester goes elsewhere, you know the Cubs will be in the mix. And if Boston blows their financial wad on him, the Cubs can move on Scherzer, since their pick is protected.
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
If the Cubs are sitting where they currently are on February 18, then we have cause for unhappiness, or whatever emotion is deemed appropriate by the torch-wielding mob. But the fact that we haven't even gotten to Thanksgiving means it's a little too early to get the despair going.
(http://i.imgur.com/WprudJM.jpg)
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
I think that's how Cubs fans who have been wrapped up in the rebuilding look at it. But realistically, there's no reason for a free agent to prefer the Cubs over any other team with money and lots of enviable young talent that's actually won at the major league level recently, like the Cardinals, Dodgers, Nationals, Orioles, Red Sox, and so forth.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 12:59:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
I think that's how Cubs fans who have been wrapped up in the rebuilding look at it. But realistically, there's no reason for a free agent to prefer the Cubs over any other team with money and lots of enviable young talent that's actually won at the major league level recently, like the Cardinals, Dodgers, Nationals, Orioles, Red Sox, and so forth.
Yeah. The Cubs a few years ago were at a point where simply over-paying top free agents probably wasn't going to get them to come. They've hopefully moved past that point, but that doesn't mean they don't still have to make their offer considerably more lucrative than the offer of a proven contender.
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 12:59:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
I think that's how Cubs fans who have been wrapped up in the rebuilding look at it. But realistically, there's no reason for a free agent to prefer the Cubs over any other team with money and lots of enviable young talent that's actually won at the major league level recently, like the Cardinals, Dodgers, Nationals, Orioles, Red Sox, and so forth.
Yeah. The Cubs a few years ago were at a point where simply over-paying top free agents probably wasn't going to get them to come. They've hopefully moved past that point, but that doesn't mean they don't still have to make their offer considerably more lucrative than the offer of a proven contender.
Not to pick on Fork too much, but I had to chuckle at the idea of Max Scherzer lying in bed and thinking, "Man, I can't wait to pitch for the Cubs once that Baez kid stops striking out in half of his at bats."
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 01:25:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 12:59:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
I think that's how Cubs fans who have been wrapped up in the rebuilding look at it. But realistically, there's no reason for a free agent to prefer the Cubs over any other team with money and lots of enviable young talent that's actually won at the major league level recently, like the Cardinals, Dodgers, Nationals, Orioles, Red Sox, and so forth.
Yeah. The Cubs a few years ago were at a point where simply over-paying top free agents probably wasn't going to get them to come. They've hopefully moved past that point, but that doesn't mean they don't still have to make their offer considerably more lucrative than the offer of a proven contender.
Not to pick on Fork too much, but I had to chuckle at the idea of Max Scherzer lying in bed and thinking, "Man, I can't wait to pitch for the Cubs once that Baez kid stops striking out in half of his at bats."
Maybe it's because I primarily follow Cub-related news, but what's the deal with Scherzer? I know Lester has met or will meet with the Red Sox, Cubs and Barves but feel like there's not much being reported about Scherzer.
Quote from: R-V on November 18, 2014, 01:38:40 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 01:25:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 18, 2014, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 12:59:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
I think that's how Cubs fans who have been wrapped up in the rebuilding look at it. But realistically, there's no reason for a free agent to prefer the Cubs over any other team with money and lots of enviable young talent that's actually won at the major league level recently, like the Cardinals, Dodgers, Nationals, Orioles, Red Sox, and so forth.
Yeah. The Cubs a few years ago were at a point where simply over-paying top free agents probably wasn't going to get them to come. They've hopefully moved past that point, but that doesn't mean they don't still have to make their offer considerably more lucrative than the offer of a proven contender.
Not to pick on Fork too much, but I had to chuckle at the idea of Max Scherzer lying in bed and thinking, "Man, I can't wait to pitch for the Cubs once that Baez kid stops striking out in half of his at bats."
Maybe it's because I primarily follow Cub-related news, but what's the deal with Scherzer? I know Lester has met or will meet with the Red Sox, Cubs and Barves but feel like there's not much being reported about Scherzer.
Not to be Chuck, but Boras.
Generally his guys sign later. Or at least that's what people say.
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 12:59:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
I think that's how Cubs fans who have been wrapped up in the rebuilding look at it. But realistically, there's no reason for a free agent to prefer the Cubs over any other team with money and lots of enviable young talent that's actually won at the major league level recently, like the Cardinals, Dodgers, Nationals, Orioles, Red Sox, and so forth.
The best recruiting tool Jepstink could use would be for members of the 85 Bears to tell free agents how much they can milk a single championship year in this town.
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 02:19:53 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 18, 2014, 12:59:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
Even if both Lester and Scherzer go elsewhere, you have to think every free agent in the game can see what is about to happen in Chicago, and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
I think that's how Cubs fans who have been wrapped up in the rebuilding look at it. But realistically, there's no reason for a free agent to prefer the Cubs over any other team with money and lots of enviable young talent that's actually won at the major league level recently, like the Cardinals, Dodgers, Nationals, Orioles, Red Sox, and so forth.
The best recruiting tool Jepstink could use would be for members of the 85 Bears to tell free agents how much they can milk a single championship year in this town.
"What?" - Jermaine Dye
Call me the pessimist, I'm gonna go ahead and say Theo and Jed's best bet is to offer the most money to people.
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
... and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
Now that is what I call a Cub fan during the off season!
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 03:14:18 PM
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2014, 03:05:19 PM
So according to Mooney and Cafardo, Cubs were the runners-up for Martin. After Anibal Sanchez & Tanaka, I think I've reached my limit of stories on how the Cubs front office went all-out to snag a FA target only to fall just short because of (insert excuse).
Just wait until the Red Sox re-sign Lester and the Cardinals sign Scherzer to replace Shelby Miller.
I mean, I know it's Bowden, but you shut your whore mouth.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/922/0150132417.jpg)
Quote from: PenFoe on November 18, 2014, 04:14:15 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 03:14:18 PM
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2014, 03:05:19 PM
So according to Mooney and Cafardo, Cubs were the runners-up for Martin. After Anibal Sanchez & Tanaka, I think I've reached my limit of stories on how the Cubs front office went all-out to snag a FA target only to fall just short because of (insert excuse).
Just wait until the Red Sox re-sign Lester and the Cardinals sign Scherzer to replace Shelby Miller.
I mean, I know it's Bowden, but you shut your whore mouth.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/922/0150132417.jpg)
Gonna be a real dick move by the Cardinals to bogart the golden age of the Cubs by being better than them every year.
I kind of want to see Lester sign with St. Louis. Just for the reax.
Quote from: Slaky on November 18, 2014, 04:37:19 PM
I kind of want to see Lester sign with St. Louis. Just for the reax.
Torque Penderloin, Twitter and Vine Star, has officially taken precedence over Andrew Cieslak, Cub fan.
Starlin Castro's pants (http://instagram.com/p/vg1CWztpUV/) give zero fucks about the Cubs' offseason.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/922/3420500580.jpg)
Quote from: CBStew on November 18, 2014, 03:06:28 PM
Quote from: Fork on November 18, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
... and any pitcher can fall asleep dreaming of the run support he can get here once Baez rounds into form and Bryant is here.
Now that is what I call a Cub fan during the off season!
Stew's kind of on a roll today.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 05:11:23 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
I'm with you — $25MM/season seems fair for Lester. Unless Theo goes with Al's suggestion and trades for John Danks, because reasons.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 19, 2014, 05:20:59 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 05:11:23 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
I'm with you — $25MM/season seems fair for Lester. Unless Theo goes with Al's suggestion and trades for John Danks, because reasons.
Those were 4 really impressive starts, to be fair.
I mean, he beat the ROYALS for Christ's sake.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 06:06:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 19, 2014, 05:20:59 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 05:11:23 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
I'm with you — $25MM/season seems fair for Lester. Unless Theo goes with Al's suggestion and trades for John Danks, because reasons.
Those were 4 really impressive starts, to be fair.
I mean, he beat the ROYALS for Christ's sake.
The comments on this article are now closed.
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 05:11:23 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
If the Cubs are going in, might as well go all-in. Especially because a lot of other components will be cost-controlled for most of the next 6 years anyway.
Quote from: CT III on November 20, 2014, 06:41:36 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 06:06:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 19, 2014, 05:20:59 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 05:11:23 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
I'm with you — $25MM/season seems fair for Lester. Unless Theo goes with Al's suggestion and trades for John Danks, because reasons.
Those were 4 really impressive starts, to be fair.
I mean, he beat the ROYALS for Christ's sake.
The comments on this article are now closed.
This is an admission from me that this article wasn't well thought out and pretty weak. As such, I'm closing comments. Let's move on.The rest of the articles, however, are fully thought out and incredibly strong.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 20, 2014, 12:20:59 PM
Quote from: CT III on November 20, 2014, 06:41:36 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 06:06:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 19, 2014, 05:20:59 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 05:11:23 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
I'm with you — $25MM/season seems fair for Lester. Unless Theo goes with Al's suggestion and trades for John Danks, because reasons.
Those were 4 really impressive starts, to be fair.
I mean, he beat the ROYALS for Christ's sake.
The comments on this article are now closed.
This is an admission from me that this article wasn't well thought out and pretty weak. As such, I'm closing comments. Let's move on.
The rest of the articles, however, are fully thought out and incredibly strong.
BleedCubTweets indicated that apparently some guy writing an article on Al's main page advocated the Cubs give 5 years, $75 million to Chase Headley. I can't even process the level of stupidity behind that.
Quote from: SKO on November 20, 2014, 12:28:45 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 20, 2014, 12:20:59 PM
Quote from: CT III on November 20, 2014, 06:41:36 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 06:06:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 19, 2014, 05:20:59 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 19, 2014, 05:11:23 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/923/5822066670.jpg)
I'm totally fine with the Cubs offering more than this.
6 years feels like the right amount, but if the Cubs want to go $150 that's cool.
I'm with you — $25MM/season seems fair for Lester. Unless Theo goes with Al's suggestion and trades for John Danks, because reasons.
Those were 4 really impressive starts, to be fair.
I mean, he beat the ROYALS for Christ's sake.
The comments on this article are now closed.
This is an admission from me that this article wasn't well thought out and pretty weak. As such, I'm closing comments. Let's move on.
The rest of the articles, however, are fully thought out and incredibly strong.
BleedCubTweets indicated that apparently some guy writing an article on Al's main page advocated the Cubs give 5 years, $75 million to Chase Headley. I can't even process the level of stupidity behind that.
"Use some of that money to buy yourself a catcher's mitt, Chase. You're our new Russell Martin."
Quote from: SKO on November 20, 2014, 12:28:45 PM
BleedCubTweets indicated that apparently some guy writing an article on Al's main page advocated the Cubs give 5 years, $75 million to Chase Headley. I can't even process the level of stupidity behind that.
I actually like Headley well enough, but I have no idea how he would fit into the Cubs' plans over the next five years.
Quote from: Eli on November 20, 2014, 03:01:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 20, 2014, 12:28:45 PM
BleedCubTweets indicated that apparently some guy writing an article on Al's main page advocated the Cubs give 5 years, $75 million to Chase Headley. I can't even process the level of stupidity behind that.
I actually like Headley well enough, but I have no idea how he would fit into the Cubs' plans over the next five years.
Well that's what I mean. I'd argue 3B is the deepest position in the entire Cubs system if you factor in the possibility of the surplus shortstops moving in there. Even Valbuena is a perfectly average MLB 3B it appears. Giving $75 million to a guy to block your own prospects seems really, really stupid, even for BCB.
Quote from: SKO on November 20, 2014, 03:16:48 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 20, 2014, 03:01:59 PM
Quote from: SKO on November 20, 2014, 12:28:45 PM
BleedCubTweets indicated that apparently some guy writing an article on Al's main page advocated the Cubs give 5 years, $75 million to Chase Headley. I can't even process the level of stupidity behind that.
I actually like Headley well enough, but I have no idea how he would fit into the Cubs' plans over the next five years.
Well that's what I mean. I'd argue 3B is the deepest position in the entire Cubs system if you factor in the possibility of the surplus shortstops moving in there. Even Valbuena is a perfectly average MLB 3B it appears. Giving $75 million to a guy to block your own prospects seems really, really stupid, even for BCB.
Next up for GM Rob Huff: Sign 1B Adam LaRoche for 5/$100M. HE'S GOOD VALUE.
Are we freaking out about this yet?
Quote from: Slaky on December 01, 2014, 02:10:45 PM
Are we freaking out about this yet?
If any of the pitchers had signed, I would be.
But not QUITE yet.
Still, do something good already.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 01, 2014, 02:11:48 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 01, 2014, 02:10:45 PM
Are we freaking out about this yet?
If any of the pitchers had signed, I would be.
But not QUITE yet.
Still, do something good already.
SHOOOOOOOOT!
Quote from: PenFoe on December 01, 2014, 02:11:48 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 01, 2014, 02:10:45 PM
Are we freaking out about this yet?
If any of the pitchers had signed, I would be.
But not QUITE yet.
Still, do something good already.
Agreed. No panic until Lester and Scherzer are both off of the market and not Cubs. Both of them gone? OH SO MUCH PANIC.
Quote from: SKO on December 01, 2014, 02:26:17 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 01, 2014, 02:11:48 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 01, 2014, 02:10:45 PM
Are we freaking out about this yet?
If any of the pitchers had signed, I would be.
But not QUITE yet.
Still, do something good already.
Agreed. No panic until Lester and Scherzer are both off of the market and not Cubs. Both of them gone? OH SO MUCH PANIC.
I'm never going to PANIC about free agency. If most of the top prospects don't pan out I'm going to take all of the pills though.
Quote from: SKO on December 01, 2014, 02:26:17 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 01, 2014, 02:11:48 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 01, 2014, 02:10:45 PM
Are we freaking out about this yet?
If any of the pitchers had signed, I would be.
But not QUITE yet.
Still, do something good already.
Agreed. No panic until Lester and Scherzer are both off of the market and not Cubs. Both of them gone? OH SO MUCH PANIC.
Even then, if there's somebody willing to spend stupid money on these guys, at least we'll know the Cubs are only willing to spend wisely. But even if they're both gone, the Cubs' vaunted farm system means they can explore trade avanues if they're out there.
Quote from: Fork on December 02, 2014, 10:02:25 AM
Even then, if there's somebody willing to spend stupid money on these guys, at least we'll know the Cubs are only willing to spend wisely.
They'll be heavy favorites for the 2015 Spend Wisely Championship.
Quote from: Eli on December 02, 2014, 10:11:32 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 02, 2014, 10:02:25 AM
Even then, if there's somebody willing to spend stupid money on these guys, at least we'll know the Cubs are only willing to spend wisely.
They'll be heavy favorites for the 2015 Spend Wisely Championship.
This. If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015. If you're on the "winner in 2015" train then stop telling yourself it's fine if they don't land another top pitcher. It's not.
If you just view the Cubs as a savvier Royals who need to go bargain shopping and rely almost entirely on homegrown players for the major contributions, fine, but they're still probably not ready to win in 2015 at that rate and also it means all of Theo's talk about payroll flexibility and what not is a bunch of bullshit, and Gordo would be closer to right than we all want to admit about them not being a real major market team.
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 02, 2014, 10:11:32 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 02, 2014, 10:02:25 AM
Even then, if there's somebody willing to spend stupid money on these guys, at least we'll know the Cubs are only willing to spend wisely.
They'll be heavy favorites for the 2015 Spend Wisely Championship.
This. If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015. If you're on the "winner in 2015" train then stop telling yourself it's fine if they don't land another top pitcher. It's not.
If you just view the Cubs as a savvier Royals who need to go bargain shopping and rely almost entirely on homegrown players for the major contributions, fine, but they're still probably not ready to win in 2015 at that rate and also it means all of Theo's talk about payroll flexibility and what not is a bunch of bullshit, and Gordo would be closer to right than we all want to admit about them not being a real major market team.
I also don't think they'll be consistently good in the next 5 years if they insist on only spending "wisely." If they really believe in their homegrown core, they're in a perfect position to overpay for difference-making talents.
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015.
Not only that, but looking at their payroll, they can afford some stupid contracts. Adding two $25mm/ year contracts only puts payroll in 2015 at about $110mm. That's lower than payroll was in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and only $1mm higher than 2012.
Going forward, they project to have young cheap guys the next 4 years or so, making high priced guys very affordable.
Lastly, it's not our money. And with the Ricketts supposedly seeing their Cusb valuation up over 50% already and their TDA stock up over $900mm last year, I don't want to hear about anything being too expensive. I mean, shit. They just bought Nebraska for their kid to play with.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 02, 2014, 10:55:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015.
Not only that, but looking at their payroll, they can afford some stupid contracts. Adding two $25mm/ year contracts only puts payroll in 2015 at about $110mm. That's lower than payroll was in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and only $1mm higher than 2012.
Going forward, they project to have young cheap guys the next 4 years or so, making high priced guys very affordable.
Lastly, it's not our money. And with the Ricketts supposedly seeing their Cusb valuation up over 50% already and their TDA stock up over $900mm last year, I don't want to hear about anything being too expensive. I mean, shit. They just bought Nebraska for their kid to play with.
*shudders* Yeah, Chuck is right. And I get not wanting to go on a Yankee-esque "buy all of the free agents" splooge so much that it does cripple their financial future when, god willing, Bryant and Co. merit long-term extensions, but we're talking One deal for a pitcher they really could use that would be the cherry on top of this long rebuild, not trying to build a core of aging shitheads.
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:57:42 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 02, 2014, 10:55:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015.
Not only that, but looking at their payroll, they can afford some stupid contracts. Adding two $25mm/ year contracts only puts payroll in 2015 at about $110mm. That's lower than payroll was in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and only $1mm higher than 2012.
Going forward, they project to have young cheap guys the next 4 years or so, making high priced guys very affordable.
Lastly, it's not our money. And with the Ricketts supposedly seeing their Cusb valuation up over 50% already and their TDA stock up over $900mm last year, I don't want to hear about anything being too expensive. I mean, shit. They just bought Nebraska for their kid to play with.
*shudders* Yeah, Chuck is right. And I get not wanting to go on a Yankee-esque "buy all of the free agents" splooge so much that it does cripple their financial future when, god willing, Bryant and Co. merit long-term extensions, but we're talking One deal for a pitcher they really could use that would be the cherry on top of this long rebuild, not trying to build a core of aging shitheads.
I still hope they sign Lester AND Scherzer.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 02, 2014, 11:04:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:57:42 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 02, 2014, 10:55:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015.
Not only that, but looking at their payroll, they can afford some stupid contracts. Adding two $25mm/ year contracts only puts payroll in 2015 at about $110mm. That's lower than payroll was in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and only $1mm higher than 2012.
Going forward, they project to have young cheap guys the next 4 years or so, making high priced guys very affordable.
Lastly, it's not our money. And with the Ricketts supposedly seeing their Cusb valuation up over 50% already and their TDA stock up over $900mm last year, I don't want to hear about anything being too expensive. I mean, shit. They just bought Nebraska for their kid to play with.
*shudders* Yeah, Chuck is right. And I get not wanting to go on a Yankee-esque "buy all of the free agents" splooge so much that it does cripple their financial future when, god willing, Bryant and Co. merit long-term extensions, but we're talking One deal for a pitcher they really could use that would be the cherry on top of this long rebuild, not trying to build a core of aging shitheads.
I still hope they sign Lester AND Scherzer.
THIS
Quote from: PenFoe on December 02, 2014, 11:04:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:57:42 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 02, 2014, 10:55:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015.
Not only that, but looking at their payroll, they can afford some stupid contracts. Adding two $25mm/ year contracts only puts payroll in 2015 at about $110mm. That's lower than payroll was in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and only $1mm higher than 2012.
Going forward, they project to have young cheap guys the next 4 years or so, making high priced guys very affordable.
Lastly, it's not our money. And with the Ricketts supposedly seeing their Cusb valuation up over 50% already and their TDA stock up over $900mm last year, I don't want to hear about anything being too expensive. I mean, shit. They just bought Nebraska for their kid to play with.
*shudders* Yeah, Chuck is right. And I get not wanting to go on a Yankee-esque "buy all of the free agents" splooge so much that it does cripple their financial future when, god willing, Bryant and Co. merit long-term extensions, but we're talking One deal for a pitcher they really could use that would be the cherry on top of this long rebuild, not trying to build a core of aging shitheads.
I still hope they sign Lester AND Scherzer.
If that happens I'll enjoy seeing how many Cub fans currently bracing themselves with the fiscal responsibility defense in case they don't get Lester suddenly think two massive contracts are absolutely wonderful.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 02, 2014, 11:04:42 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:57:42 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 02, 2014, 10:55:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015.
Not only that, but looking at their payroll, they can afford some stupid contracts. Adding two $25mm/ year contracts only puts payroll in 2015 at about $110mm. That's lower than payroll was in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and only $1mm higher than 2012.
Going forward, they project to have young cheap guys the next 4 years or so, making high priced guys very affordable.
Lastly, it's not our money. And with the Ricketts supposedly seeing their Cusb valuation up over 50% already and their TDA stock up over $900mm last year, I don't want to hear about anything being too expensive. I mean, shit. They just bought Nebraska for their kid to play with.
*shudders* Yeah, Chuck is right. And I get not wanting to go on a Yankee-esque "buy all of the free agents" splooge so much that it does cripple their financial future when, god willing, Bryant and Co. merit long-term extensions, but we're talking One deal for a pitcher they really could use that would be the cherry on top of this long rebuild, not trying to build a core of aging shitheads.
I still hope they sign Lester AND Scherzer.
Me too. Fuck spending wisely.
If you give Lester an extra year to make it happen so be it. Let's say he gets 7 years from the Cubs. If the Cubs honestly believe they will be WS contenders by 2016, 2017 at the very latest that means Lester will be a major part of those teams and most likely still very effective. If he gives you a better shot at winning in those years does it really matter if he's broken down for years 6 and 7? It would have been worth it.
Not willing to spend stupid money means no big time free agents. That's the bottom line. If they would rather wait to see if they're in contention and trade for the pitching they want mid-season that's still one way to do it. But then you're going three or four months with a lesser rotation than you could have had over an extra year? 10 million bucks?
Seems pretty dumb. They should be willing to blow Lester's best offer away.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 02, 2014, 10:55:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
If they want to fast-track the rebuild now that the core is coming up then they're going to have to give stupid money to somebody. You can't comfort yourself with "thank God Theo won't give out bad contracts" and truly expect them to contend on a rotation built around Arrieta and Hendricks and lord knows what else in 2015.
Not only that, but looking at their payroll, they can afford some stupid contracts. Adding two $25mm/ year contracts only puts payroll in 2015 at about $110mm. That's lower than payroll was in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and only $1mm higher than 2012.
Going forward, they project to have young cheap guys the next 4 years or so, making high priced guys very affordable.
Lastly, it's not our money. And with the Ricketts supposedly seeing their Cusb valuation up over 50% already and their TDA stock up over $900mm last year, I don't want to hear about anything being too expensive. I mean, shit. They just bought Nebraska for their kid to play with.
All of that, plus there's the future revenue from the mythical giant TV deal, Wrigley renovations, etc. Baseball is swimming in money. For the Cubs to lose out on a much-needed major FA pitcher this offseason over like $2 million AAV is kind of inexcusable.
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Medlen and Beachy were both non-tendered by The Braves. Those two seem like great buy-low options. I know they'll need a bit of 2015 to get their shit together after Tommy John Disease but they may be bargains for the 2016 WS Champion Cubs.
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
I'm starting to feel like very few of these guys will amount to much beyond "serviceable".
Trade almost anyone if you're getting a good, proven major leaguer in return who isn't past his prime.
Quote from: Slaky on December 03, 2014, 11:17:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
I'm starting to feel like very few of these guys will amount to much beyond "serviceable".
Trade almost anyone if you're getting a good, proven major leaguer in return who isn't past his prime.
I think Bryant should be a fairly above average offensive player. Same with Russell. It's not that they're untradeable but I just don't know what kind of compensation would be worth trading them. The rest of them? Sure. If you're not listening to offers on Kyle Schwarber you need help.
Quote from: Slaky on December 03, 2014, 11:17:04 AM
I'm starting to feel like very few of these guys will amount to much beyond "serviceable".
A few will, a few won't. Personally (which is worth nothing), I feel best about Soler and Russell, but maybe Bryant answers those contact questions and becomes the next Giancarlo Stanton. We really have no idea. But hopefully Theo and co. do, since they're the ones getting paid to be right about it.
Quote from: SKO on December 03, 2014, 11:19:06 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 03, 2014, 11:17:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
I'm starting to feel like very few of these guys will amount to much beyond "serviceable".
Trade almost anyone if you're getting a good, proven major leaguer in return who isn't past his prime.
I think Bryant should be a fairly above average offensive player. Same with Russell. It's not that they're untradeable but I just don't know what kind of compensation would be worth trading them. The rest of them? Sure. If you're not listening to offers on Kyle Schwarber you need help.
Wait, so the royal we waited around for them to collect all of these sploogtastic prospects that everybody gets gigantic erections over and claims are going to be the future, the truth, the shit, and before they even make the majors, you want them to be traded for 31 year olds that will be declining in the near future? That's how this works?
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on December 03, 2014, 11:31:23 AM
Wait, so the royal we waited around for them to collect all of these sploogtastic prospects that everybody gets gigantic erections over and claims are going to be the future, the truth, the shit, and before they even make the majors, you want them to be traded for 31 year olds that will be declining in the near future? That's how this works?
I think you're talking about different groups of people.
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on December 03, 2014, 11:31:23 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 03, 2014, 11:19:06 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 03, 2014, 11:17:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
I'm starting to feel like very few of these guys will amount to much beyond "serviceable".
Trade almost anyone if you're getting a good, proven major leaguer in return who isn't past his prime.
I think Bryant should be a fairly above average offensive player. Same with Russell. It's not that they're untradeable but I just don't know what kind of compensation would be worth trading them. The rest of them? Sure. If you're not listening to offers on Kyle Schwarber you need help.
Wait, so the royal we waited around for them to collect all of these sploogtastic prospects that everybody gets gigantic erections over and claims are going to be the future, the truth, the shit, and before they even make the majors, you want them to be traded for 31 year olds that will be declining in the near future? That's how this works?
Am I the Royal We? Do I use the Royal We that often? Either way I'm not saying trade them, just saying, like Eli said, that any organization should at least be willing to see what people will offer. There's a package out there worth Kyle Schwarber I'm pretty damn sure.
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:28:01 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 03, 2014, 11:17:04 AM
I'm starting to feel like very few of these guys will amount to much beyond "serviceable".
A few will, a few won't. Personally (which is worth nothing), I feel best about Soler and Russell, but maybe Bryant answers those contact questions and becomes the next Giancarlo Stanton. We really have no idea. But hopefully Theo and co. do, since they're the ones getting paid to be right about it.
Starting with a foundation of Rizzo and Castro, let's assume Russell and Soler and Bryant are all at a minimum above-average players. Even if Baez and Mendy and whoever else fail, that's 5 good to great offensive players at premium positions to build around. If you can't fill in the holes around them at places where people don't really even expect that much offense anyway (CF and Catcher) and find a serviceable corner outfielder you're not very good at this whole GM thing.
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:35:52 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on December 03, 2014, 11:31:23 AM
Wait, so the royal we waited around for them to collect all of these sploogtastic prospects that everybody gets gigantic erections over and claims are going to be the future, the truth, the shit, and before they even make the majors, you want them to be traded for 31 year olds that will be declining in the near future? That's how this works?
I think you're talking about different groups of people.
Nobody cares what he's talking about.
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
He still represents an investment that they should be expecting some return on sooner rather than later. This time next year, all the poindexters on this site will bust out their slide rules to figure out when the Cubs can call him up without losing a year of control. He also currently represents the only lefthanded power bat in the system with major league potential.
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 12:40:38 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
He still represents an investment that they should be expecting some return on sooner rather than later. This time next year, all the poindexters on this site will bust out their slide rules to figure out when the Cubs can call him up without losing a year of control. He also currently represents the only lefthanded power bat in the system with major league potential.
Really? Someone on this site owns a SLIDE RULE?
Quote from: CBStew on December 03, 2014, 08:32:21 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 12:40:38 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
He still represents an investment that they should be expecting some return on sooner rather than later. This time next year, all the poindexters on this site will bust out their slide rules to figure out when the Cubs can call him up without losing a year of control. He also currently represents the only lefthanded power bat in the system with major league potential.
Really? Someone on this site owns a SLIDE RULE?
I own a slide whistle. Is that different?
Quote from: InternetApex on December 03, 2014, 09:32:45 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 03, 2014, 08:32:21 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 12:40:38 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 11:00:47 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 10:35:29 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 03, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 03, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 02, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 02, 2014, 01:22:40 PM
Surely they must have known about all of those holes in Baez's swing. It was probably a mistake to give Baez all of those at bats, thus reducing his value during the off season. I can't think of any teams that have anything that the Cubs want who would be interested in anything that the Cubs are willing to trade.
I assume any star pitcher traded this winter will get a better package in return than Price and Lester did during the season, but still I think the Cubs could offer a pretty good package built around Baez/Edwards/Vogelbach/Almora or any number of the highly rated prospects they have that aren't necessarily the core. If the teams are willing to take guys not quite major league ready people seem really high on Gleyber Torres and it's not like the Cubs need another shortstop prospect. Heck, throw in a guy like Valbuena who at least seems like a reasonably average everyday 3rd or 2nd baseman. I'd bet they can match just about any package most other franchises are offering without having to part with Bryant or Russell or Soler. Everyone else I'd be willing to listen.
I'd toss Schwarber into the "off the table" group too.
He can't be traded until June anyway.
Even after that.
I don't know that a guy without a clear major league position should be "off the table." Then again, I don't think good teams really operate with that sort of philosophy for any player.
He still represents an investment that they should be expecting some return on sooner rather than later. This time next year, all the poindexters on this site will bust out their slide rules to figure out when the Cubs can call him up without losing a year of control. He also currently represents the only lefthanded power bat in the system with major league potential.
Really? Someone on this site owns a SLIDE RULE?
I own a slide whistle. Is that different?
I've got a skinflute for you.
O GREAT DEY KEEP SINING COACHES BUT NOT PLAYERS (http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/2014/12/reports-dave-martinez-joining-the-cubs-coaching-staff/)
EPSTINK IS TERRIBLE.
I want Lester even more now: https://twitter.com/MDGonzales/status/540915505268547584
QuoteDempster signs, retires with Cubs. Has spoken to Lester.
I know he's not the only Demp-hater, but that'd be such a great HueyTroll
Quote from: Yeti on December 05, 2014, 11:10:46 AM
I want Lester even more now: https://twitter.com/MDGonzales/status/540915505268547584
QuoteDempster signs, retires with Cubs. Has spoken to Lester.
I know he's not the only Demp-hater, but that'd be such a great HueyTroll
Friday trolls Huey by following Thursday.
Quote from: Fork on December 05, 2014, 01:29:21 PM
Quote from: Yeti on December 05, 2014, 11:10:46 AM
I want Lester even more now: https://twitter.com/MDGonzales/status/540915505268547584
QuoteDempster signs, retires with Cubs. Has spoken to Lester.
I know he's not the only Demp-hater, but that'd be such a great HueyTroll
Friday trolls Huey by following Thursday.
And Thursday trolls Huey by being Wednesday (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2010/8/11/p113958857#p113958857).
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 05, 2014, 02:05:24 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 05, 2014, 01:29:21 PM
Quote from: Yeti on December 05, 2014, 11:10:46 AM
I want Lester even more now: https://twitter.com/MDGonzales/status/540915505268547584
QuoteDempster signs, retires with Cubs. Has spoken to Lester.
I know he's not the only Demp-hater, but that'd be such a great HueyTroll
Friday trolls Huey by following Thursday.
And Thursday trolls Huey by being Wednesday (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2010/8/11/p113958857#p113958857).
Nicely played. Had forgotten all about that, too--quite a laugh.
Quote from: PANK! on December 05, 2014, 02:41:39 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 05, 2014, 02:05:24 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 05, 2014, 01:29:21 PM
Quote from: Yeti on December 05, 2014, 11:10:46 AM
I want Lester even more now: https://twitter.com/MDGonzales/status/540915505268547584
QuoteDempster signs, retires with Cubs. Has spoken to Lester.
I know he's not the only Demp-hater, but that'd be such a great HueyTroll
Friday trolls Huey by following Thursday.
And Thursday trolls Huey by being Wednesday (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2010/8/11/p113958857#p113958857).
Nicely played. Had forgotten all about that, too--quite a laugh.
We've got top people working on a potato-powered calendar.
JON LESTER WHO (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24873893/jason-hemmel-is-said-close-to-a-deal-to-eturn-to-the-chicago-cubs)
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 07, 2014, 11:34:44 PM
JON LESTER WHO (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24873893/jason-hemmel-is-said-close-to-a-deal-to-eturn-to-the-chicago-cubs)
Guess we'll find out just how brilliant Bosio is.
Advanced metrics? Hell no. It's batting average and counting stats all the way down for Carrie Muskat (http://m.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/103178810/cubs-seek-additions-to-young-talented-core). Luis Valbuena hit .249 last season, so he kinda sucks. I bet she felt icky even typing BABIP.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 08, 2014, 09:33:21 AM
Advanced metrics? Hell no. It's batting average and counting stats all the way down for Carrie Muskat (http://m.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/103178810/cubs-seek-additions-to-young-talented-core). Luis Valbuena hit .249 last season, so he kinda sucks. I bet she felt icky even typing BABIP.
I don't really see a big problem with that link.
She just mentioned him as someone they could trade, which seems reasonable.
Quote from: Fork on December 08, 2014, 08:54:26 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 07, 2014, 11:34:44 PM
JON LESTER WHO (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24873893/jason-hemmel-is-said-close-to-a-deal-to-eturn-to-the-chicago-cubs)
Guess we'll find out just how brilliant Bosio is.
As hard as it is to get excited about this deal (Jason Hamehl?) 2/18 seems totally reasonable.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 08, 2014, 10:38:39 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 08, 2014, 08:54:26 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 07, 2014, 11:34:44 PM
JON LESTER WHO (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24873893/jason-hemmel-is-said-close-to-a-deal-to-eturn-to-the-chicago-cubs)
Guess we'll find out just how brilliant Bosio is.
As hard as it is to get excited about this deal (Jason Hamehl?) 2/18 seems totally reasonable.
It's a perfect move to not be excited or butthurt about. A few more of those and one great big Bonertime move and we're all set to enjoy our summer.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 08, 2014, 10:38:39 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 08, 2014, 08:54:26 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 07, 2014, 11:34:44 PM
JON LESTER WHO (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24873893/jason-hemmel-is-said-close-to-a-deal-to-eturn-to-the-chicago-cubs)
Guess we'll find out just how brilliant Bosio is.
As hard as it is to get excited about this deal (Jason Hamehl?) 2/18 seems totally reasonable.
It's really good. Middle of the rotation guy and a fairly short commitment, years wise. Hard to not think this is a really good move.
Quote from: Slaky on December 08, 2014, 10:43:13 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 08, 2014, 10:38:39 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 08, 2014, 08:54:26 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 07, 2014, 11:34:44 PM
JON LESTER WHO (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24873893/jason-hemmel-is-said-close-to-a-deal-to-eturn-to-the-chicago-cubs)
Guess we'll find out just how brilliant Bosio is.
As hard as it is to get excited about this deal (Jason Hamehl?) 2/18 seems totally reasonable.
It's really good. Middle of the rotation guy and a fairly short commitment, years wise. Hard to not think this is a really good move.
He had his best numbers as a Cub last season. If Bosio can get it out of him again, it's a really nice signing. 9 million/per for 2 isn't too bad, especially since Arietta and Hendricks are cost-controlled over that time. Now if they could find a taker for Jackson, everything's jake.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/942/2705698146.jpg)
Quote from: PenFoe on December 08, 2014, 03:53:28 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/942/2705698146.jpg)
Mostly likely choosing between the more substantial cash offer and a pretty fucking good if smaller cash offer that comes with a "WE WIN ALL OF THE SERIESES" cherry on top.
Quote from: SKO on December 08, 2014, 04:14:28 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 08, 2014, 03:53:28 PM
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/942/2705698146.jpg)
Mostly likely choosing between the more substantial cash offer and a pretty fucking good if smaller cash offer that comes with a "WE WIN ALL OF THE SERIESES" cherry on top.
Mostly likely, indeed.
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2014, 11:45:49 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
But isn't the whole point of having a core of young, cost-controlled players that you have the flexibility to go further than you want to in years/money to get a veteran who you feel is a good fit and fills a need, understanding that the last year or two of the deal might be dead money? Martin fit that description perfectly.
I reserve the right to disengage my butthurt if they trade for Montero.
Butthurt: on the verge of disengaging, according to Borb Nightengale (https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/542361840869601282).
I like this move if they go with something close to a straight platoon - Montero has a career .797 OPS against RHP, and Beef has hit lefties well, albeit only in about a half-season's worth of plate appearances so far.
Hopefully the Cubs are absorbing most or all of Montero's salary, which would be a good sign that they are moving into actual spending mode after socking away funds (i.e. failing to sign players) for the last couple years.
Quote from: R-V on December 09, 2014, 11:06:48 AM
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2014, 11:45:49 AM
Quote from: Slaky on November 17, 2014, 11:38:21 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on November 17, 2014, 11:24:18 AM
Quote from: Eli on November 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: SKO on November 17, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
So Martin to the Blue Jays? Am I hearing this correctly?
What now, Theo? How many more tears?
I liked Martin well enough but I'm fine with not getting him for that contract. He can DH some for the Blue Jays in the later years of the deal, so it may be a bit easier to absorb for them.
Is anyone that upset about the Cubs "missing" out on Martin for 5/$82?
Probably not Martin specifically, but it was a position of semi-need and they had the money to spend. And it's another good player who ended up not on the Cubs, so it's probably just general angst more than anything else.
Stupid Garpax.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of people waiting on the edge of their seats for Theo and Jed to DO SOMETHING that will let them quiet the voice in their heads that says Ricketts will never spend. I don't even think those people care who it is at this point. Just throw a bunch of cash at someone to prove you can. Cub fans are smart.
It's weird - in this case it wasn't a case of not having the money. They clearly didn't want to go that many years and I'm not upset about it.
I do wonder if they had any conversations with Atlanta about Heyward before saying hey let's get that Italian guy instead.
But isn't the whole point of having a core of young, cost-controlled players that you have the flexibility to go further than you want to in years/money to get a veteran who you feel is a good fit and fills a need, understanding that the last year or two of the deal might be dead money? Martin fit that description perfectly.
I reserve the right to disengage my butthurt if they trade for Montero.
Butthurt: on the verge of disengaging, according to Borb Nightengale (https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/542361840869601282).
I like this move if they go with something close to a straight platoon - Montero has a career .797 OPS against RHP, and Beef has hit lefties well, albeit only in about a half-season's worth of plate appearances so far.
Hopefully the Cubs are absorbing most or all of Montero's salary, which would be a good sign that they are moving into actual spending mode after socking away funds (i.e. failing to sign players) for the last couple years.
I'll take a Beefcastle/Montero platoon. Should tie us over until one of the catching prospects hopefully emerges, and doesn't burden us with what-would've-been a questionable contract for Martin.
Quote from: PANK! on December 09, 2014, 11:12:29 AM
Should tie us over...
Something something Granville Red Line...
(http://i.imgur.com/0VBSjHY.gif)
(http://i.imgur.com/C9ra6YB.jpg)
Quote from: Slaky on December 09, 2014, 12:00:55 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/C9ra6YB.jpg)
Bleacher nation guy takes that tweet, puts it in blog post, posts his 18th update of the Jon Lester Watch for the day.
If it's "deals" we know the Montero thing is happening any moment now. That seems all but done.
I get the idea that Loxas and others with sources are being told to expect multiple deals with the caveat that they aren't necessarily talking about Lester.
Quote from: Slaky on December 09, 2014, 12:17:52 PM
If it's "deals" we know the Montero thing is happening any moment now. That seems all but done.
I get the idea that Loxas and others with sources are being told to expect multiple deals with the caveat that they aren't necessarily talking about Lester.
Debatable.
Right in line with Randall Delgado's "They don't did a trade."
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/943/7493644024.jpg)
All the source guys that Eli hates are feeling like Lester is more possible than ever before. They're going to catch hell if he doesn't sign with the Cubs.
Quote from: Slaky on December 09, 2014, 02:07:21 PM
All the source guys that Eli hates are feeling like Lester is more possible than ever before. They're going to catch hell if he doesn't sign with the Cubs.
I don't
hate them. I just don't really buy it. Loxas, for example, puts out mostly vague information and it's always accompanied by "Look, guys, I just pass along what I hear" so he doesn't have to be accountable for anything.
If Lester ends up choosing the Cubs, he can say his "feeling" was based on all the buzz he was getting from his sources, rather than him hitting on what's basically a 50/50 shot at this point. And if Lester goes elsewhere, he'll just say, "Oh well, it was just a feeling based on some things I heard." Arguello tends to do some of the same stuff.
It's entirely possible they know someone somewhere who gets bits and pieces of things; I just don't think they're consistently reliable outlets.
Quote from: Eli on December 09, 2014, 03:00:35 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 09, 2014, 02:07:21 PM
All the source guys that Eli hates are feeling like Lester is more possible than ever before. They're going to catch hell if he doesn't sign with the Cubs.
I don't hate them. I just don't really buy it. Loxas, for example, puts out mostly vague information and it's always accompanied by "Look, guys, I just pass along what I hear" so he doesn't have to be accountable for anything.
If Lester ends up choosing the Cubs, he can say his "feeling" was based on all the buzz he was getting from his sources, rather than him hitting on what's basically a 50/50 shot at this point. And if Lester goes elsewhere, he'll just say, "Oh well, it was just a feeling based on some things I heard." Arguello tends to do some of the same stuff.
It's entirely possible they know someone somewhere who gets bits and pieces of things; I just don't think they're consistently reliable outlets.
http://www.overthemonster.com/2014/12/9/7362385/red-sox-jon-lester-free-agent-rumors-cubs
This seems to be a much more articulate explanation as to why people are getting optimistic.
Quote from: Slaky on December 09, 2014, 03:29:11 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 09, 2014, 03:00:35 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 09, 2014, 02:07:21 PM
All the source guys that Eli hates are feeling like Lester is more possible than ever before. They're going to catch hell if he doesn't sign with the Cubs.
I don't hate them. I just don't really buy it. Loxas, for example, puts out mostly vague information and it's always accompanied by "Look, guys, I just pass along what I hear" so he doesn't have to be accountable for anything.
If Lester ends up choosing the Cubs, he can say his "feeling" was based on all the buzz he was getting from his sources, rather than him hitting on what's basically a 50/50 shot at this point. And if Lester goes elsewhere, he'll just say, "Oh well, it was just a feeling based on some things I heard." Arguello tends to do some of the same stuff.
It's entirely possible they know someone somewhere who gets bits and pieces of things; I just don't think they're consistently reliable outlets.
http://www.overthemonster.com/2014/12/9/7362385/red-sox-jon-lester-free-agent-rumors-cubs
This seems to be a much more articulate explanation as to why people are getting optimistic.
How would anyone--including Lester's agent--know which he's way
leaning at this point? Seems like every option's already been weighed.
Annoying if true.
DPD
I heard "Joon Lee" is New English for "Tom Loxas"
This makes me feel somewhat better about the Montero thing: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/miguel-montero-the-next-piece-of-the-cubs-puzzle/
Quote from: SKO on December 09, 2014, 03:51:24 PM
This makes me feel somewhat better about the Montero thing: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/miguel-montero-the-next-piece-of-the-cubs-puzzle/
Good grief, those gifs of Castillo trying to catch.
Quote from: Eli on December 09, 2014, 04:07:19 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 09, 2014, 03:51:24 PM
This makes me feel somewhat better about the Montero thing: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/miguel-montero-the-next-piece-of-the-cubs-puzzle/
Good grief, those gifs of Castillo trying to catch.
He'll be quality controlled going forward.
Per Rosenthal, the Cubs and Jon Lester have agreed on a deal. Passan has it at 6/155. Red Sox offered 20 million less. He even took less money and one fewer guaranteed year than the Giants were offering to pitch for Chicago.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 12:40:03 AM
Per Rosenthal, the Cubs and Jon Lester have agreed on a deal. Passan has it as 6/155. He even took less money and one fewer guaranteed year than the Giants were offering to pitch for Chicago.
All the fucking boners belong to us.
Quote from: Yeti on December 05, 2014, 11:10:46 AM
I want Lester even more now: https://twitter.com/MDGonzales/status/540915505268547584
QuoteDempster signs, retires with Cubs. Has spoken to Lester.
I know he's not the only Demp-hater, but that'd be such a great HueyTroll
Now it's real. We don't have to go to plan B. They actually got the guy they wanted. Fuck this changes everything.
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2014, 01:05:14 AM
Now it's real. We don't have to go to plan B. They actually got the guy they wanted. Fuck this changes everything.
Can't wait to see what's next. Also, this passage from the Yahoo Sports story kindly invites all the people who love claiming Theo and his team are incompetent/idiots/not as smart as they think they are to go fuck themselves.
QuoteAll the while, Lester became a great ally of the pediatric cancer community with the NVRQT campaign. During meetings with teams, he stressed the importance of his charity work. The Cubs' emphasis on it during their mid-November meeting – while most of his other get-togethers included strictly ownership and baseball-operations people, Chicago brought in community-relations personnel – stuck with Lester, as did the straightforwardness of Epstein and Hoyer.
"The thing I liked about 'em is it wasn't forced and wasn't a sales pitch," Lester said after his meeting with the Cubs. "It was like, 'This is what we can do.' I don't want BS. I don't want show. I don't want glitz and glamour. I don't want to walk out to the field with your name and number on the JumboTron. I'm not 18 anymore. I want you to tell me what you can do for me and my family."
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2014, 01:05:14 AM
Now it's real. We don't have to go to plan B. They actually got the guy they wanted. Fuck this changes everything.
The Cubs won a bidding war? That can't be right.
Quote from: Bort on December 10, 2014, 01:23:39 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2014, 01:05:14 AM
Now it's real. We don't have to go to plan B. They actually got the guy they wanted. Fuck this changes everything.
The Cubs won a bidding war? That can't be right.
It turns out they were already more than 60% of the way toward signing Jon Lester all along. That is absolutely staggering.
Quote from: Bort on December 10, 2014, 01:23:39 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2014, 01:05:14 AM
Now it's real. We don't have to go to plan B. They actually got the guy they wanted. Fuck this changes everything.
The Cubs won a bidding war? That can't be right.
Until Bill Simmons weighs in I still think he's going to Boston.
If Arietta has the same type of year he did last year, he's the best #2 starter in the league.
Quote from: Fork on December 10, 2014, 04:52:37 AM
If Arietta has the same type of year he did last year, he's the best #2 starter in the league.
... East of Zack Greinke. And West of your choice between Zimmerman/Strasburg.
And that's a rather large if.
So awesome. Can't wait to see what they do next, given all the buzz that adding Lester means they'll want to add more talent.
I'm puzzled by the David Ross stuff though. They're not going to carry three catchers, so that would mean a Castillo trade (even though Theo denied that yesterday).
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 07:41:34 AM
So awesome. Can't wait to see what they do next, given all the buzz that adding Lester means they'll want to add more talent.
I'm puzzled by the David Ross stuff though. They're not going to carry three catchers, so that would mean a Castillo trade (even though Theo denied that yesterday).
I saw some chatter about Beef going to Colorado as part of a Carlos Gonzalez deal.
Quote from: R-V on December 10, 2014, 07:57:11 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 07:41:34 AM
So awesome. Can't wait to see what they do next, given all the buzz that adding Lester means they'll want to add more talent.
I'm puzzled by the David Ross stuff though. They're not going to carry three catchers, so that would mean a Castillo trade (even though Theo denied that yesterday).
I saw some chatter about Beef going to Colorado as part of a Carlos Gonzalez deal.
I think Ross was probably an option until they got Montero. Montero and Castillo make a lot of sense as a platoon, and I'm guessing that Lester will also be happy enough to throw to Montero instead of Ross. Defensively, he's pretty fucking good.
So this is actually happening?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 01:23:26 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2014, 01:05:14 AM
Now it's real. We don't have to go to plan B. They actually got the guy they wanted. Fuck this changes everything.
Can't wait to see what's next. Also, this passage from the Yahoo Sports story kindly invites all the people who love claiming Theo and his team are incompetent/idiots/not as smart as they think they are to go fuck themselves.
QuoteAll the while, Lester became a great ally of the pediatric cancer community with the NVRQT campaign. During meetings with teams, he stressed the importance of his charity work. The Cubs' emphasis on it during their mid-November meeting – while most of his other get-togethers included strictly ownership and baseball-operations people, Chicago brought in community-relations personnel – stuck with Lester, as did the straightforwardness of Epstein and Hoyer.
"The thing I liked about 'em is it wasn't forced and wasn't a sales pitch," Lester said after his meeting with the Cubs. "It was like, 'This is what we can do.' I don't want BS. I don't want show. I don't want glitz and glamour. I don't want to walk out to the field with your name and number on the JumboTron. I'm not 18 anymore. I want you to tell me what you can do for me and my family."
He's gonna be so pissed when he sees the new JumboTron. Too late, sucker.
Quote from: Tonker on December 10, 2014, 08:02:31 AM
Quote from: R-V on December 10, 2014, 07:57:11 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 07:41:34 AM
So awesome. Can't wait to see what they do next, given all the buzz that adding Lester means they'll want to add more talent.
I'm puzzled by the David Ross stuff though. They're not going to carry three catchers, so that would mean a Castillo trade (even though Theo denied that yesterday).
I saw some chatter about Beef going to Colorado as part of a Carlos Gonzalez deal.
I think Ross was probably an option until they got Montero. Montero and Castillo make a lot of sense as a platoon, and I'm guessing that Lester will also be happy enough to throw to Montero instead of Ross. Defensively, he's pretty fucking good.
A catcher who can hit AND play his position? Who knew these things existed?
This also buys the Cubs some time if they really want to push all their "Schwarber as a catcher" chips to the midle of the table.
Boston fans are taking this well.
Quote from: @BigGameShaneO
Quote from: @JLester31To Red Sox Nation, I understand the disappointment. Boston will always have a big place in my heart and we'll always consider y'all family!
@JLester31 I hope you enjoy taking Joe Maddon's hard dick up the ass.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 09:49:15 AM
Boston fans are taking this well.
Quote from: @BigGameShaneO
Quote from: @JLester31To Red Sox Nation, I understand the disappointment. Boston will always have a big place in my heart and we'll always consider y'all family!
@JLester31 I hope you enjoy taking Joe Maddon's hard dick up the ass.
Oh my, I haven't heard that about Maddon!
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 09:49:15 AM
Boston fans are taking this well.
Quote from: @BigGameShaneO
Quote from: @JLester31To Red Sox Nation, I understand the disappointment. Boston will always have a big place in my heart and we'll always consider y'all family!
@JLester31 I hope you enjoy taking Joe Maddon's hard dick up the ass.
That is the embodiment of a Masshole.
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
How about trading for Hamels and signing Price next year to put three frontline lefties in the same rotation? I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
How about trading for Hamels and signing Price next year to put three frontline lefties in the same rotation? I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
I thought signing Lester meant that giving up top prospects for Hamels was no longer necessary. Let the Red Sox do that. Sign Ervin Santana and let's go.
Quote from: InternetApex on December 10, 2014, 01:44:47 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
How about trading for Hamels and signing Price next year to put three frontline lefties in the same rotation? I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
I thought signing Lester meant that giving up top prospects for Hamels was no longer necessary. Let the Red Sox do that. Sign Ervin Santana and let's go.
Not necessary, but I'd be happy about it. With Lester getting 6/$155 million, 4/$96 million for Hamels almost looks like a bargain.
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 02:15:08 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 10, 2014, 01:44:47 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
How about trading for Hamels and signing Price next year to put three frontline lefties in the same rotation? I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
I thought signing Lester meant that giving up top prospects for Hamels was no longer necessary. Let the Red Sox do that. Sign Ervin Santana and let's go.
Not necessary, but I'd be happy about it. With Lester getting 6/$155 million, 4/$96 million for Hamels almost looks like a bargain.
I'd still be interested in taking a chance on Masterson as well.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 02:19:11 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 02:15:08 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 10, 2014, 01:44:47 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
How about trading for Hamels and signing Price next year to put three frontline lefties in the same rotation? I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
I thought signing Lester meant that giving up top prospects for Hamels was no longer necessary. Let the Red Sox do that. Sign Ervin Santana and let's go.
Not necessary, but I'd be happy about it. With Lester getting 6/$155 million, 4/$96 million for Hamels almost looks like a bargain.
I'd still be interested in taking a chance on Masterson as well.
Get them all.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 10, 2014, 03:15:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 02:19:11 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 02:15:08 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 10, 2014, 01:44:47 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
How about trading for Hamels and signing Price next year to put three frontline lefties in the same rotation? I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
I thought signing Lester meant that giving up top prospects for Hamels was no longer necessary. Let the Red Sox do that. Sign Ervin Santana and let's go.
Not necessary, but I'd be happy about it. With Lester getting 6/$155 million, 4/$96 million for Hamels almost looks like a bargain.
I'd still be interested in taking a chance on Masterson as well.
Get them all.
Okay. Out of the following options:
1) Sign Masterson, McCarthy, or Santana
2) Trade prospects for Hamels
3) Roll with the guys you've got
Which do you prefer and why?
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:21:28 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 10, 2014, 03:15:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 02:19:11 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 02:15:08 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 10, 2014, 01:44:47 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
So childish, and yet I laffed like a hyena.
How about trading for Hamels and signing Price next year to put three frontline lefties in the same rotation? I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
I thought signing Lester meant that giving up top prospects for Hamels was no longer necessary. Let the Red Sox do that. Sign Ervin Santana and let's go.
Not necessary, but I'd be happy about it. With Lester getting 6/$155 million, 4/$96 million for Hamels almost looks like a bargain.
I'd still be interested in taking a chance on Masterson as well.
Get them all.
Okay. Out of the following options:
1) Sign Masterson, McCarthy, or Santana
2) Trade prospects for Hamels
3) Roll with the guys you've got
Which do you prefer and why?
I'd do #2 if I could get away with not giving up any of my top ranking guys. I might give up Baez in a Hamels deal but that's about it. Otherwise I like McCarthy, Masterson, Santana in that order.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:21:28 PM
1) Sign Masterson, McCarthy, or Santana
2) Trade prospects for Hamels
3) Roll with the guys you've got
Which do you prefer and why?
#2. Something built around Baez, Almora/McKinney and Edwards/Johnson. That still leaves them a good amount prospect firepower in the system and a rotation of Hamels, Lester, Arrieta, Hammel and Hendricks is about as good as it gets in baseball.
Lineup after April looks something like:
1. Valbuena - 2B
2. Castro - SS
3. Rizzo - 1B
4. Bryant- 3B
5. Soler - RF
6. Montero - C
7. Alcantara - CF
8. Coghlan/Platoon guy - LF
They'd still have Russell, Schwarber, Almora/McKinney waiting in the wings, along with plenty of other mid-level options to fill in gaps.
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 03:46:28 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:21:28 PM
1) Sign Masterson, McCarthy, or Santana
2) Trade prospects for Hamels
3) Roll with the guys you've got
Which do you prefer and why?
#2. Something built around Baez, Almora/McKinney and Edwards/Johnson. That still leaves them a good amount prospect firepower in the system and a rotation of Hamels, Lester, Arrieta, Hammel and Hendricks is about as good as it gets in baseball.
Lineup after April looks something like:
1. Valbuena - 2B
2. Castro - SS
3. Rizzo - 1B
4. Bryant- 3B
5. Soler - RF
6. Montero - C
7. Alcantara - CF
8. Coghlan/Platoon guy - LF
They'd still have Russell, Schwarber, Almora/McKinney waiting in the wings, along with plenty of other mid-level options to fill in gaps.
Baez to Iowa?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 10, 2014, 03:47:36 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 03:46:28 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:21:28 PM
1) Sign Masterson, McCarthy, or Santana
2) Trade prospects for Hamels
3) Roll with the guys you've got
Which do you prefer and why?
#2. Something built around Baez, Almora/McKinney and Edwards/Johnson. That still leaves them a good amount prospect firepower in the system and a rotation of Hamels, Lester, Arrieta, Hammel and Hendricks is about as good as it gets in baseball.
Lineup after April looks something like:
1. Valbuena - 2B
2. Castro - SS
3. Rizzo - 1B
4. Bryant- 3B
5. Soler - RF
6. Montero - C
7. Alcantara - CF
8. Coghlan/Platoon guy - LF
They'd still have Russell, Schwarber, Almora/McKinney waiting in the wings, along with plenty of other mid-level options to fill in gaps.
Baez to Iowa?
Reading comprehension is critical. Baez is going to Philly for Hamels in this scenario, IDITO. A scenario I don't dislike.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:50:37 PM
Reading comprehension is critical. Baez is going to Philly for Hamels in this scenario, IDITO. A scenario I don't dislike.
Or if they really want to go nuts this offseason, they can do the theoretical Hamels trade and sign Headley, who just costs money.
1. Valbuena - 2B
2. Castro - SS
3. Rizzo - 1B
4. Bryant- LF
5. Soler - RF
6. Headley - 3B
7. Montero - C
8. Alcantara - CF
That lineup, plus that rotation, is boner something something.
I've probably gone a bit overboard though.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:50:37 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 10, 2014, 03:47:36 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 03:46:28 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:21:28 PM
1) Sign Masterson, McCarthy, or Santana
2) Trade prospects for Hamels
3) Roll with the guys you've got
Which do you prefer and why?
#2. Something built around Baez, Almora/McKinney and Edwards/Johnson. That still leaves them a good amount prospect firepower in the system and a rotation of Hamels, Lester, Arrieta, Hammel and Hendricks is about as good as it gets in baseball.
Lineup after April looks something like:
1. Valbuena - 2B
2. Castro - SS
3. Rizzo - 1B
4. Bryant- 3B
5. Soler - RF
6. Montero - C
7. Alcantara - CF
8. Coghlan/Platoon guy - LF
They'd still have Russell, Schwarber, Almora/McKinney waiting in the wings, along with plenty of other mid-level options to fill in gaps.
Baez to Iowa?
Reading comprehension is critical. Baez is going to Philly for Hamels in this scenario, IDITO. A scenario I don't dislike.
OK. Just looked at your lineup and skipped the rest. I'm not on the Headley wagon. Only 1 year did he hit over 13 HR. Much more interested in Bryant at 3rd and left held for Schwarber if he doesn't make it at C. Love to find a bat for CF. Alcantara doesn't strike me as a long term solution there.
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:51:43 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 11:42:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 10:27:41 AM
I know I need to get less mad at stupid people but the guys like Yellon and that Vlahos guy and that fucking Gieryna fellow who criticized every step of the rebuild because they were stupid, impatient twits and now want to say OKAY THEO YOU'VE WON ME OVER can rot. This was the plan all along and they spelled it out in clear terms at every stop. There was never any time where they didn't do exactly what they said they'd do, so fuck you. You don't get to act like they came around to your way of thinking or something.
Nicely played. That was so out of context that I read my own last name and my first thought was, "What a weird name."
I was proud of it. But really, fuck Yellon too. " I GET TO BE OPTIMISTIC NOW". DIE IN A FIRE.
Al is too busy having civil conversations:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2014/12/10/7369619/jon-lester-dh-national-league#276556100
Wait. That was satire. Wasn't it?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 10, 2014, 04:15:31 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:50:37 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 10, 2014, 03:47:36 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 03:46:28 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 03:21:28 PM
1) Sign Masterson, McCarthy, or Santana
2) Trade prospects for Hamels
3) Roll with the guys you've got
Which do you prefer and why?
#2. Something built around Baez, Almora/McKinney and Edwards/Johnson. That still leaves them a good amount prospect firepower in the system and a rotation of Hamels, Lester, Arrieta, Hammel and Hendricks is about as good as it gets in baseball.
Lineup after April looks something like:
1. Valbuena - 2B
2. Castro - SS
3. Rizzo - 1B
4. Bryant- 3B
5. Soler - RF
6. Montero - C
7. Alcantara - CF
8. Coghlan/Platoon guy - LF
They'd still have Russell, Schwarber, Almora/McKinney waiting in the wings, along with plenty of other mid-level options to fill in gaps.
Baez to Iowa?
Reading comprehension is critical. Baez is going to Philly for Hamels in this scenario, IDITO. A scenario I don't dislike.
OK. Just looked at your lineup and skipped the rest. I'm not on the Headley wagon. Only 1 year did he hit over 13 HR. Much more interested in Bryant at 3rd and left held for Schwarber if he doesn't make it at C. Love to find a bat for CF. Alcantara doesn't strike me as a long term solution there.
Headley's value is his defense but yeah I can't get behind that one either. I'd be more in favor of going for Kemp or Upton to hold down an OF spot this year than signing Headley, assuming Kemp's contract/Upton only being a one year rental to begin with would lower the prospect cost.
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
I can live with a Coghlan/Ruggiano platoon for a year.
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
I believe the Cubs are one of the teams on Upton's limited no-trade list, which could complicate matters a bit.
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2014, 04:45:33 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
I can live with a Coghlan/Ruggiano platoon for a year.
Or Coghlan/Gomes.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
I believe the Cubs are one of the teams on Upton's limited no-trade list, which could complicate matters a bit.
the scuttlebutt is he may be willing to change his mind on that now that Lester has ended rebuilding forever.
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 05:00:20 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
I believe the Cubs are one of the teams on Upton's limited no-trade list, which could complicate matters a bit.
the scuttlebutt is he may be willing to change his mind on that now that Lester has ended rebuilding forever.
The Cubs were on his no-trade clause way back when he signed his deal after the 2010 season. While the Cubs were bad that year (75-87) they were a pretty solid team the two years prior to that (180-142.) There are plenty of teams that were way worse that weren't on his no-trade.
So I don't think it's because he was worried about the rebuild or even the Cubs being crappy.
I think he just hates the Cubs for some reason.
Maybe the fans were mean to him once. Maybe someone he knows hated playing for the Cubs. Maybe he hates day games.
But pretty sure it's something.
Either way, give me Hamels for reasonable prospects (Baez and Almora feels like plenty by themselves) and then also one more decent bat. 4 years of Hamels will go by awfully fast and I think even with that rotation they won't have enough immediate firepower (prospects needing time to adjust and all that) to win the next couple of years with that current lineup.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 10, 2014, 05:23:06 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 05:00:20 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
I believe the Cubs are one of the teams on Upton's limited no-trade list, which could complicate matters a bit.
the scuttlebutt is he may be willing to change his mind on that now that Lester has ended rebuilding forever.
The Cubs were on his no-trade clause way back when he signed his deal after the 2010 season. While the Cubs were bad that year (75-87) they were a pretty solid team the two years prior to that (180-142.) There are plenty of teams that were way worse that weren't on his no-trade.
So I don't think it's because he was worried about the rebuild or even the Cubs being crappy.
I think he just hates the Cubs for some reason.
Maybe the fans were mean to him once. Maybe someone he knows hated playing for the Cubs. Maybe he hates day games.
But pretty sure it's something.
Either way, give me Hamels for reasonable prospects (Baez and Almora feels like plenty by themselves) and then also one more decent bat. 4 years of Hamels will go by awfully fast and I think even with that rotation they won't have enough immediate firepower (prospects needing time to adjust and all that) to win the next couple of years with that current lineup.
Stop trading Baez. Stop it. I don't want you to.
Also the day games thing might be a big deal to some. That and as a visiting player you could probably learn to loathe Wrigley pretty easily - renovations notwithstanding.
Quote from: InternetApex on December 10, 2014, 06:05:26 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 10, 2014, 05:23:06 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 05:00:20 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
I believe the Cubs are one of the teams on Upton's limited no-trade list, which could complicate matters a bit.
the scuttlebutt is he may be willing to change his mind on that now that Lester has ended rebuilding forever.
The Cubs were on his no-trade clause way back when he signed his deal after the 2010 season. While the Cubs were bad that year (75-87) they were a pretty solid team the two years prior to that (180-142.) There are plenty of teams that were way worse that weren't on his no-trade.
So I don't think it's because he was worried about the rebuild or even the Cubs being crappy.
I think he just hates the Cubs for some reason.
Maybe the fans were mean to him once. Maybe someone he knows hated playing for the Cubs. Maybe he hates day games.
But pretty sure it's something.
Either way, give me Hamels for reasonable prospects (Baez and Almora feels like plenty by themselves) and then also one more decent bat. 4 years of Hamels will go by awfully fast and I think even with that rotation they won't have enough immediate firepower (prospects needing time to adjust and all that) to win the next couple of years with that current lineup.
Stop trading Baez. Stop it. I don't want you to.
Also the day games thing might be a big deal to some. That and as a visiting player you could probably learn to loathe Wrigley pretty easily - renovations notwithstanding.
Seriously. Baez is the one guy I almost don't give a fuck about selling high or however Chuck would phrase it. Let him burn bright or fade out with the Cubs. I don't want to see him hit it big somewhere else because his ceiling, as unlikely as he is to reach it, is stratospheric. I give him every chance in the world and even a few chances after that.
I want him to figure it out more than anyone the Cubs have.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/12/10/cubs-manager-joe-maddon-details-his-pitch-jon-lester/8fviX3gZkPTFLKWXJaqSqO/story.html
QuoteDuring the conversation, Maddon found out Lester likes to hunt and fish.
"At that time I didn't know that Davey Martinez (Maddon's bench coach in Tampa Bay) was going to be part of our staff. So now we can line up these hunting trips on the road. As part of the Rays, our guys liked to hunt and fish a lot, like to shoot things. We would set things up on different road trips. Like a couple of years ago Wade Davis shot a black bear in Toronto prior to the playoffs.
"I thought that was outstanding," Maddon added. "That gave me even more confidence putting him in a game, like in the seventh or eighth inning, facing a normal right-handed hitter, he shot a black bear, 300-pound black bear. I like when the guys do things like that. He relayed to me the fact that he likes to hunt and fish. I assured him that I don't, but I respect it."
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
I believe the Cubs are one of the teams on Upton's limited no-trade list, which could complicate matters a bit.
I may just be a stalker/lurker, but I thought that I read/heard somewhere that his no-trade list concerning the Cubs may be a negotiating tactic in getting an extension before a trade is agreed to.
Quote from: RW on December 11, 2014, 12:35:50 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 10, 2014, 04:59:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 10, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I'm not even really that sold on Headley either. I'd probably rather see them live with a bit of a LF black hole for a year and get a better idea what they have in Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, etc., then address that need either midseason or next winter. Just mentioned it as a way they could shore that up a bit going into 2015 if they were totally all-in.
That's why I'd really be interested in Upton if they could get him without giving up too much presumably due to him not being under contract past this year. You get a guy that can be a big part of contending in 2015, and then they could either try to extend him or let him go if they feel confident in the guys they've got coming up.
I believe the Cubs are one of the teams on Upton's limited no-trade list, which could complicate matters a bit.
I may just be a stalker/lurker, but I thought that I read/heard somewhere that his no-trade list concerning the Cubs may be a negotiating tactic in getting an extension before a trade is agreed to.
Wow. SUPYAD.
Can anyone explain to me why signing a 30 year-old 3 WAR pitcher, who is only going to get older (and hasn't been a +4 or better WAR pitcher since 2011), for gobs of money is a good idea?
Liriano at $13 million is a way better deal. This signing is Soriano part deux, but perhaps even dumber. Trading for Cole Hamels would've been far, far more clever. Signing Scherzer would've been the better investment.
Maybe they'll still do one of the latter, but Lester is getting way more money than he deserves, and unless the Cubs are the new Dodgers or Yankees where money is limitless, overpaying for players is probably not a dominant strategy. Especially for six years. I'm all for making a splash, but not if it's a cannonball gone awry into some sort of ugly belly flop.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on December 14, 2014, 03:20:02 PM
Liriano at $13 million is a way better deal. This signing is Soriano part deux, but perhaps even dumber. Trading for Cole Hamels would've been far, far more clever. Signing Scherzer would've been the better investment.
Sucks that those options are off the table now.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on December 14, 2014, 03:20:02 PM
Can anyone explain to me why signing a 30 year-old 3 WAR pitcher, who is only going to get older (and hasn't been a +4 or better WAR pitcher since 2011), for gobs of money is a good idea?
Who are you talking about? I'm guessing from context it's Jon Lester, but it can't be, since Lester was a SIX-WIN player in 2014 and hasn't been below 3 WAR since he got to the majors in 2007.
Also, even if you somehow believe Lester is just a "3 WAR pitcher," that's now worth about $22.5 million anyway. So even by CFiHP's standards, his contract should basically be fine.
Quote from: Eli on December 14, 2014, 03:59:26 PM
Also, even if you somehow believe Lester is just a "3 WAR pitcher," that's now worth about $22.5 million anyway. So even by CFiHP's standards, his contract should basically be fine.
We have established multiple times CFIHP has a special stat site that gives him numbers that make his point whether true or not. It's reduced Cutler's career TD:INT ratio when convenient, lowered Lester's WAR, and also fails to point out subtle differences between Lester and Liriano like Lester not spending most of the last five years cashing checks from a tub.
Quote from: SKO on December 14, 2014, 04:55:41 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 14, 2014, 03:59:26 PM
Also, even if you somehow believe Lester is just a "3 WAR pitcher," that's now worth about $22.5 million anyway. So even by CFiHP's standards, his contract should basically be fine.
We have established multiple times CFIHP has a special stat site that gives him numbers that make his point whether true or not. It's reduced Cutler's career TD:INT ratio when convenient, lowered Lester's WAR, and also fails to point out subtle differences between Lester and Liriano like Lester not spending most of the last five years cashing checks from a tub is a very good troll.
Paul'd.
Baseball reference has is WAR in 2012 as 0.7, 2013 as 3.0, and last year as 2.7/1.9 before and after the trade. The trend in his WAR has also been consistently down from his peak in 2009.
I hope he dominates, but the trends suggest that he'll probably be an above-average pitcher, not an ace, at best.
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on December 14, 2014, 05:42:35 PM
Baseball reference has is WAR in 2012 as 0.7, 2013 as 3.0, and last year as 2.7/1.9 before and after the trade. The trend in his WAR has also been consistently down from his peak in 2009.
I hope he dominates, but the trends suggest that he'll probably be an above-average pitcher, not an ace, at best.
Well, your first two sentences entirely contradict each other. Also, BR primarily bases its WAR on ERA, which is pretty flawed.
As for the trend of his career, his FIP has gone down three years in a row and his other peripherals are generally holding steady, if not improving. He's been adapting his arsenal as he's aged* a bit and broke out a new cutter last year that was really effective, which should be right up Bosio's alley.
* Speaking of age, Liriano is actually older than Lester and is just as likely to throw 50 innings as he is to throw 150.
In conclusion ... why am I bothering with this?
Quote from: Eli on December 14, 2014, 07:01:01 PM
Quote from: CubFaninHydePark on December 14, 2014, 05:42:35 PM
Baseball reference has is WAR in 2012 as 0.7, 2013 as 3.0, and last year as 2.7/1.9 before and after the trade. The trend in his WAR has also been consistently down from his peak in 2009.
I hope he dominates, but the trends suggest that he'll probably be an above-average pitcher, not an ace, at best.
Well, your first two sentences entirely contradict each other. Also, BR primarily bases its WAR on ERA, which is pretty flawed.
As for the trend of his career, his FIP has gone down three years in a row and his other peripherals are generally holding steady, if not improving. He's been adapting his arsenal as he's aged* a bit and broke out a new cutter last year that was really effective, which should be right up Bosio's alley.
* Speaking of age, Liriano is actually older than Lester and is just as likely to throw 50 innings as he is to throw 150.
In conclusion ... why am I bothering with this?
I don't know.
So if this Rasmus thing happens I think I'm okay with that. Should I be okay? Is everyone else okay?
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:18:42 AM
So if this Rasmus thing happens I think I'm okay with that. Should I be okay? Is everyone else okay?
I think it depends what his role is.
Ultimately, I'm hopefully that Alcantara is better, or at least going to be. And Rasmus shouldn't be taking tons of ABs from him. But, Rasmus really excels versus righties, so I don't know how this really allows Alcantara to still play a lot, unless Ramus is clearly a 4th OF from the get-go.
I don't have a problem with Rasmus, just curious to see what his role would be.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 15, 2014, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:18:42 AM
So if this Rasmus thing happens I think I'm okay with that. Should I be okay? Is everyone else okay?
I think it depends what his role is.
Ultimately, I'm hopefully that Alcantara is better, or at least going to be. And Rasmus shouldn't be taking tons of ABs from him. But, Rasmus really excels versus righties, so I don't know how this really allows Alcantara to still play a lot, unless Ramus is clearly a 4th OF from the get-go.
I don't have a problem with Rasmus, just curious to see what his role would be.
I'm really kinda hesitant to just hand Mendy the starting CF job. I obviously want him to pan out but I feel like one bona-fide center fielder on the roster would be a good thing to have.
I kind of view Baez and Mendy as similar boom/bust types and I am not so optimistic as to think both are going to pan out. I'm more bullish on Javy because of the upside, but I'd like a legit center fielder there to step in case Mendy keeps struggling, because I doubt his defense will be good enough in CF at this point to make him anything but a massive black hole if he can't contribute a lot with his bat right away.
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:18:42 AM
So if this Rasmus thing happens I think I'm okay with that. Should I be okay? Is everyone else okay?
I think it's worth a shot. He's still in his prime years and has tons of power. He's been a 4-win player a couple of times, so there's definitely upside there. A lot of the knocks on him are that he's kind of quiet/sensitive (the horror!), and I've seen it speculated that Maddon might be the perfect fit for him as a manager.
I also don't want to just assume Alcantara is the everyday CF, so Rasmus could work nicely in a platoon partner there, since Alcantara is better from the right side. That'd also let Alcantara move around the diamond in a supersub type of role, if needed.
Quote from: Eli on December 15, 2014, 11:40:37 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:18:42 AM
So if this Rasmus thing happens I think I'm okay with that. Should I be okay? Is everyone else okay?
I think it's worth a shot. He's still in his prime years and has tons of power. He's been a 4-win player a couple of times, so there's definitely upside there. A lot of the knocks on him are that he's kind of quiet/sensitive (the horror!), and I've seen it speculated that Maddon might be the perfect fit for him as a manager.
I also don't want to just assume Alcantara is the everyday CF, so Rasmus could work nicely in a platoon partner there, since Alcantara is better from the right side. That'd also let Alcantara move around the diamond in a supersub type of role, if needed.
So we're agreed Penis wrong?
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:42:38 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 15, 2014, 11:40:37 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:18:42 AM
So if this Rasmus thing happens I think I'm okay with that. Should I be okay? Is everyone else okay?
I think it's worth a shot. He's still in his prime years and has tons of power. He's been a 4-win player a couple of times, so there's definitely upside there. A lot of the knocks on him are that he's kind of quiet/sensitive (the horror!), and I've seen it speculated that Maddon might be the perfect fit for him as a manager.
I also don't want to just assume Alcantara is the everyday CF, so Rasmus could work nicely in a platoon partner there, since Alcantara is better from the right side. That'd also let Alcantara move around the diamond in a supersub type of role, if needed.
So we're agreed Penis wrong?
I'm wrong that I hope Alcantara is good?
Seams reasonable.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 15, 2014, 11:45:33 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:42:38 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 15, 2014, 11:40:37 AM
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 11:18:42 AM
So if this Rasmus thing happens I think I'm okay with that. Should I be okay? Is everyone else okay?
I think it's worth a shot. He's still in his prime years and has tons of power. He's been a 4-win player a couple of times, so there's definitely upside there. A lot of the knocks on him are that he's kind of quiet/sensitive (the horror!), and I've seen it speculated that Maddon might be the perfect fit for him as a manager.
I also don't want to just assume Alcantara is the everyday CF, so Rasmus could work nicely in a platoon partner there, since Alcantara is better from the right side. That'd also let Alcantara move around the diamond in a supersub type of role, if needed.
So we're agreed Penis wrong?
I'm wrong that I hope Alcantara is good?
Seams reasonable.
Just wrong in that you only want him signed if he's automatically consigned to being a 4th OF behind a guy who has played all of like 50 games in his entire professional career in CF and who might also be bad at baseball.
Hoping Alcantara is good is not bad, hoping to win a lot of games in 2015 while just handing a guaranteed spot to Mendy when you're also going to be breaking in Baez and Bryant and Soler seems ill-advised.
I don't think an outfield consisting of Coghlan/Ruggiano/Rasmus/Alcantara/Soler is very exciting, but it's at least more stable than one without Rasmus. The platoon splits all make sense:
Career Splits (BA/OBP/SLG)
Coghlan vs. RH: .282 .346 .425
Ruggiano vs. LH: .266 .329 .508
Rasmus vs. RH: .257 .323 .465
Alcantara vs. LH: .244 .344 .410
That's all very back of the napkin stuff, but it seems like you'd have a good shot of above-average offensive production from both of those positions. And it's not a big commitment to anyone, which makes it easy for them to add an actual big OF bat next winter.
Quote from: Eli on December 15, 2014, 12:06:06 PM
I don't think an outfield consisting of Coghlan/Ruggiano/Rasmus/Alcantara/Soler is very exciting, but it's at least more stable than one without Rasmus. The platoon splits all make sense:
Career Splits (BA/OBP/SLG)
Coghlan vs. RH: .282 .346 .425
Ruggiano vs. LH: .266 .329 .508
Rasmus vs. RH: .257 .323 .465
Alcantara vs. LH: .244 .344 .410
That's all very back of the napkin stuff, but it seems like you'd have a good shot of above-average offensive production from both of those positions. And it's not a big commitment to anyone, which makes it easy for them to add an actual big OF bat next winter.
I'm totally fine with this napkin.
I ran into my BEST FRIEND EVER, Sahadev Sharma, while I was in Chicago and I asked him about the Lester vs Scherzer thing. Basically, the front office was scared off by Scherzer's mechanics and didn't think he'd last the length of the contract. Also, Lester's one blip on his career stats is when he was pitching for Bobby Valentine. I think they sort of dismiss that year as the anomaly it seems to be. Take that for what it's worth.
Furthermore, and this is my thinking, I don't particularly care if Mendy is bad in 2015 but drawing any conclusions on anything less than a full season's worth of PAs seems silly. If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter? I would rather play the kids, let them succeed or fail or something in between and go for it all in 2016 when you can get even more pitching and have other guys (Russell and Schwarber) ready to add to the roster.
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
I ran into my BEST FRIEND EVER, Sahadev Sharma, while I was in Chicago and I asked him about the Lester vs Scherzer thing. Basically, the front office was scared off by Scherzer's mechanics and didn't think he'd last the length of the contract. Also, Lester's one blip on his career stats is when he was pitching for Bobby Valentine. I think they sort of dismiss that year as the anomaly it seems to be. Take that for what it's worth.
Furthermore, and this is my thinking, I don't particularly care if Mendy is bad in 2015 but drawing any conclusions on anything less than a full season's worth of PAs seems silly. If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter? I would rather play the kids, let them succeed or fail or something in between and go for it all in 2016 when you can get even more pitching and have other guys (Russell and Schwarber) ready to add to the roster.
I just splooged into this napkin.
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
I ran into my BEST FRIEND EVER, Sahadev Sharma, while I was in Chicago and I asked him about the Lester vs Scherzer thing. Basically, the front office was scared off by Scherzer's mechanics and didn't think he'd last the length of the contract. Also, Lester's one blip on his career stats is when he was pitching for Bobby Valentine. I think they sort of dismiss that year as the anomaly it seems to be. Take that for what it's worth.
Furthermore, and this is my thinking, I don't particularly care if Mendy is bad in 2015 but drawing any conclusions on anything less than a full season's worth of PAs seems silly. If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter? I would rather play the kids, let them succeed or fail or something in between and go for it all in 2016 when you can get even more pitching and have other guys (Russell and Schwarber) ready to add to the roster.
This is the thing, right here. Whatever they do this season, they are still very much a work in progress.
And Jepstink also know that this time next year they will get another opportunity to loosen up the purse strings. Especially if they're still lugging Jackson's deal around this season, then next year he's got a year to go on his deal, so he'll be easier to move, even if the Cubs have to eat a significant portion...hell, eating the whole last year is only $13 million, not a lot in baseball dollars. And even with Lester and Jackson on board, their payroll really isn't that bad. So there's room for them to go shopping.
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
I ran into my BEST FRIEND EVER, Sahadev Sharma, while I was in Chicago and I asked him about the Lester vs Scherzer thing. Basically, the front office was scared off by Scherzer's mechanics and didn't think he'd last the length of the contract. Also, Lester's one blip on his career stats is when he was pitching for Bobby Valentine. I think they sort of dismiss that year as the anomaly it seems to be. Take that for what it's worth.
Furthermore, and this is my thinking, I don't particularly care if Mendy is bad in 2015 but drawing any conclusions on anything less than a full season's worth of PAs seems silly. If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter? I would rather play the kids, let them succeed or fail or something in between and go for it all in 2016 when you can get even more pitching and have other guys (Russell and Schwarber) ready to add to the roster.
Yeah, I would say it matters. 2016 probably is THE year for the major push but I'd be very disappointed if they didn't have a winning season or at least hang around in wildcard contention. A 77 win season would be a disappointment that would bring all kinds of shit down on the heads of Epstoyer and it would honestly be a serious bit of under-achieving based on most of the projects I've seen (almost all of which include the variable of Mendy being terrible, at least Streamer does anyway), so I'd have to question what went wrong.
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter?
Hell, what does it matter if they don't have a winning record in 2016? Or 2017? Or 2018? The Sun is eventually going to burn out and life on Earth will cease to exist anyway, right?
But in a sports sense, sure it matters. We're all assuming that Lester probably only has 3-4 really good years left (hopefully not less) and you'd be wasting one of those. You'd also be wasting more cheap, prime years from Rizzo and Castro. And you'd be OK with the idea that it should take baseball's best and brightest collection of front-office minds FIVE FUCKING OFFSEASONS just to put together a major-league team with a winning record.
So yes, I think it matters.
Quote from: Eli on December 15, 2014, 01:19:26 PM
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter?
Hell, what does it matter if they don't have a winning record in 2016? Or 2017? Or 2018? The Sun is eventually going to burn out and life on Earth will cease to exist anyway, right?
But in a sports sense, sure it matters. We're all assuming that Lester probably only has 3-4 really good years left (hopefully not less) and you'd be wasting one of those. You'd also be wasting more cheap, prime years from Rizzo and Castro. And you'd be OK with the idea that it should take baseball's best and brightest collection of front-office minds FIVE FUCKING OFFSEASONS just to put together a major-league team with a winning record.
So yes, I think it matters.
what he said
I get not wanting the Cubs to cripple their financial future by chasing mediocre free agents this offseason but if we're talking a modest deal with Colby Rasmus to make sure there's a better chance this team has a productive outfield this season so they can win games in 2015 vs. just not signing anyone so that Mendy gets 500 chances to succeed or suck no matter what, that's not really a sacrifice I am willing to make anymore. Win games. If one of the kids has to sit the bench at this point (especially when it's Mendy, who wasn't even really considered part of the plan before a hot start at Iowa this year) to make that happen, I say let him.
Cue all the stupid Cubs fans freaking the fuck out that Lester is going to wear #34, WHICH IS KERRY WOOD'S NUMBER AND I DON'T THINK I LIKE THE IDEA OF ANYONE ELSE EVER WEARING IT EVER AGAIN FOREVER! We are the worst.
Quote from: SKO on December 15, 2014, 01:24:41 PM
I get not wanting the Cubs to cripple their financial future by chasing mediocre free agents this offseason but if we're talking a modest deal with Colby Rasmus to make sure there's a better chance this team has a productive outfield this season so they can win games in 2015 vs. just not signing anyone so that Mendy gets 500 chances to succeed or suck no matter what, that's not really a sacrifice I am willing to make anymore. Win games. If one of the kids has to sit the bench at this point (especially when it's Mendy, who wasn't even really considered part of the plan before a hot start at Iowa this year) to make that happen, I say let him.
Maybe I'm mis-remembering but Alcantra was always a top-100 prospect.
Quote from: Eli on December 15, 2014, 01:19:26 PM
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter?
Hell, what does it matter if they don't have a winning record in 2016? Or 2017? Or 2018? The Sun is eventually going to burn out and life on Earth will cease to exist anyway, right?
But in a sports sense, sure it matters. We're all assuming that Lester probably only has 3-4 really good years left (hopefully not less) and you'd be wasting one of those. You'd also be wasting more cheap, prime years from Rizzo and Castro. And you'd be OK with the idea that it should take baseball's best and brightest collection of front-office minds FIVE FUCKING OFFSEASONS just to put together a major-league team with a winning record.
So yes, I think it matters.
Fine. Point taken. I just think there was always a plan in place and we're looking at year 1 of the turnaround. In my mind, I was always expecting 2016 to be the year. But, hey, if they want to go out and win next year, I guess I could live with that. But you don't have to make me like it!
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter?
It depends. If they lose 85 because Baez K'd 300 times, Bryant couldn't hit, Soler OPS'd 700 and Lester went Dave Dravecky, then yes.
If they lose 85 because Bryant hit .200 through July then improved every month, same for Baez, Strop blew a bunch of saves early, then no.
I'm OK if the 2015 Cubs are more 1983 Bears (who won 5 of last 6) than 1984. I'm expecting 1984.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 15, 2014, 03:14:16 PM
Quote from: Oleg on December 15, 2014, 12:45:12 PM
If they lose 85 games in 2015, does it really matter?
It depends. If they lose 85 because Baez K'd 300 times, Bryant couldn't hit, Soler OPS'd 700 and Lester went Dave Dravecky, then yes.
Yeah, that's the other thing. If this team does end up below .500 it means quite a few things went wrong for guys that are a huge part of the future.
Jason Motte a Bosio reclamation project? Or, maybe, an injury reclamation project.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 15, 2014, 05:27:49 PM
Jason Motte a Bosio reclamation project? Or, maybe, an injury reclamation project.
Ramirez and Strop insurance.
They're not signing Rasmus, so SKO is once again an idiot.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 16, 2014, 10:55:09 AM
They're not signing Rasmus, so SKO is once again an idiot.
Did I say they were going to? I just said I'd be okay if they did.
Quote from: SKO on December 16, 2014, 10:56:57 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 16, 2014, 10:55:09 AM
They're not signing Rasmus, so SKO is once again an idiot.
Did I say they were going to? I just said I'd be okay if they did.
Dumb.
I heard they want Dexter Fowler or some kind of left handed hitting OF.
Probably won't be anyone that'll blow us away - something in line with the OF signings they made early in Theo's tenure. Which is fine.
Something I keep having to remind myself of is that Maddon has been known to use players creatively, at least that's what the narrative seems to be. I'm excited to see how he handles a pen, makes out a lineup, and uses the bench. It's going to be fun.
Quote from: Slaky on December 16, 2014, 11:50:44 AM
I heard they want Dexter Fowler or some kind of left handed hitting OF.
Probably won't be anyone that'll blow us away - something in line with the OF signings they made early in Theo's tenure. Which is fine.
Something I keep having to remind myself of is that Maddon has been known to use players creatively, at least that's what the narrative seems to be. I'm excited to see how he handles a pen, makes out a lineup, and uses the bench. It's going to be fun.
He's going to draw caricatures of all the players in the lineup directly onto the bench - with a pen - so they know exactly where to sit, when to hit etc.
At least that's the narrative.
Quote from: InternetApex on December 16, 2014, 12:12:16 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 16, 2014, 11:50:44 AM
I heard they want Dexter Fowler or some kind of left handed hitting OF.
Probably won't be anyone that'll blow us away - something in line with the OF signings they made early in Theo's tenure. Which is fine.
Something I keep having to remind myself of is that Maddon has been known to use players creatively, at least that's what the narrative seems to be. I'm excited to see how he handles a pen, makes out a lineup, and uses the bench. It's going to be fun.
He's going to draw caricatures of all the players in the lineup directly onto the bench - with a pen - so they know exactly where to sit, when to hit etc.
At least that's the narrative.
All the caricatures will show the players as their best selves and they will be very physically attractive with great smiles. It will be great for self-esteem and, subsequently, winning.
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
Finally. He is
showing some improvement
Quote from: CBStew on December 16, 2014, 03:30:21 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
Finally. He is
showing some improvement
I lol'd. Like really loudly.
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Baez played a better shortstop than I expected. His hands, quickness...there was a fluid quality that I thought merited him to possibly rate higher than Castro defensively already, and I think Castro is greatly improved and is pretty good himself to be honest. Maybe my expectations were so low for Baez upon hearing that he made 40 errors in 2013, but I think I saw enough of him to think he might be really, really good at that position. And, if Baez
really can play shortstop...if he can just cut down on his K rate a
leetle, and drive up his ability to reach base somewhat, then I have to think he's a pretty valuable player if he's doing this while clobbering 30 home runs...for the Cubs or somebody else.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Baez played a better shortstop than I expected. His hands, quickness...there was a fluid quality that I thought merited him to possibly rate higher than Castro defensively already, and I think Castro is greatly improved and is pretty good himself to be honest. Maybe my expectations were so low for Baez upon hearing that he made 40 errors in 2013, but I think I saw enough of him to think he might be really, really good at that position. And, if Baez really can play shortstop...if he can just cut down on his K rate a leetle, and drive up his ability to reach base somewhat, then I have to think he's a pretty valuable player if he's doing this while clobbering 30 home runs...for the Cubs or somebody else.
Yes. He will hit 30 homeruns. But his batting average will be .133, all of his 30 hits In 400 at bats will be homeruns coming in the late innings of 30 games that the Cubs will lose by a score of 7 to 1.
Quote from: CBStew on December 16, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Baez played a better shortstop than I expected. His hands, quickness...there was a fluid quality that I thought merited him to possibly rate higher than Castro defensively already, and I think Castro is greatly improved and is pretty good himself to be honest. Maybe my expectations were so low for Baez upon hearing that he made 40 errors in 2013, but I think I saw enough of him to think he might be really, really good at that position. And, if Baez really can play shortstop...if he can just cut down on his K rate a leetle, and drive up his ability to reach base somewhat, then I have to think he's a pretty valuable player if he's doing this while clobbering 30 home runs...for the Cubs or somebody else.
Yes. He will hit 30 homeruns. But his batting average will be .133, all of his 30 hits In 400 at bats will be homeruns coming in the late innings of 30 games that the Cubs will lose by a score of 7 to 1.
Jesus
Quote from: Slaky on December 16, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 16, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Baez played a better shortstop than I expected. His hands, quickness...there was a fluid quality that I thought merited him to possibly rate higher than Castro defensively already, and I think Castro is greatly improved and is pretty good himself to be honest. Maybe my expectations were so low for Baez upon hearing that he made 40 errors in 2013, but I think I saw enough of him to think he might be really, really good at that position. And, if Baez really can play shortstop...if he can just cut down on his K rate a leetle, and drive up his ability to reach base somewhat, then I have to think he's a pretty valuable player if he's doing this while clobbering 30 home runs...for the Cubs or somebody else.
Yes. He will hit 30 homeruns. But his batting average will be .133, all of his 30 hits In 400 at bats will be homeruns coming in the late innings of 30 games that the Cubs will lose by a score of 7 to 1.
Jesus
You alright over there, Stew?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 16, 2014, 09:44:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 16, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 16, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Baez played a better shortstop than I expected. His hands, quickness...there was a fluid quality that I thought merited him to possibly rate higher than Castro defensively already, and I think Castro is greatly improved and is pretty good himself to be honest. Maybe my expectations were so low for Baez upon hearing that he made 40 errors in 2013, but I think I saw enough of him to think he might be really, really good at that position. And, if Baez really can play shortstop...if he can just cut down on his K rate a leetle, and drive up his ability to reach base somewhat, then I have to think he's a pretty valuable player if he's doing this while clobbering 30 home runs...for the Cubs or somebody else.
Yes. He will hit 30 homeruns. But his batting average will be .133, all of his 30 hits In 400 at bats will be homeruns coming in the late innings of 30 games that the Cubs will lose by a score of 7 to 1.
Jesus
You alright over there, Stew?
He's not even bothering to worry about the math in this hypothetical scenario.
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 16, 2014, 12:12:16 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 16, 2014, 11:50:44 AM
I heard they want Dexter Fowler or some kind of left handed hitting OF.
Probably won't be anyone that'll blow us away - something in line with the OF signings they made early in Theo's tenure. Which is fine.
Something I keep having to remind myself of is that Maddon has been known to use players creatively, at least that's what the narrative seems to be. I'm excited to see how he handles a pen, makes out a lineup, and uses the bench. It's going to be fun.
He's going to draw caricatures of all the players in the lineup directly onto the bench - with a pen - so they know exactly where to sit, when to hit etc.
At least that's the narrative.
All the caricatures will show the players as their best selves and they will be very physically attractive with great smiles. It will be great for self-esteem and, subsequently, winning.
That's a terrible plan, caricatures by definition make the subject look ridiculous.
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 08:46:00 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 16, 2014, 09:44:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 16, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 16, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Baez played a better shortstop than I expected. His hands, quickness...there was a fluid quality that I thought merited him to possibly rate higher than Castro defensively already, and I think Castro is greatly improved and is pretty good himself to be honest. Maybe my expectations were so low for Baez upon hearing that he made 40 errors in 2013, but I think I saw enough of him to think he might be really, really good at that position. And, if Baez really can play shortstop...if he can just cut down on his K rate a leetle, and drive up his ability to reach base somewhat, then I have to think he's a pretty valuable player if he's doing this while clobbering 30 home runs...for the Cubs or somebody else.
Yes. He will hit 30 homeruns. But his batting average will be .133, all of his 30 hits In 400 at bats will be homeruns coming in the late innings of 30 games that the Cubs will lose by a score of 7 to 1.
Jesus
You alright over there, Stew?
He's not even bothering to worry about the math in this hypothetical scenario.
Yeah, I *was* going to point out that 30-for-400 yields a .075 batting average but I was rendered too apathetic to follow through.
DPD.
The trope about "X Player only hitting homeruns when they're down needs" needs to be put down itself. It was so often uttered back in the day about Sosa and, though I have gone to great lengths to criticize Sosa on many fronts, will freely point out that not only do home run hitters hit meaningless home runs in addition to many other varieties, but that Sosa himself assuredly has the franchise record for walk off home runs for the Cubs--which wouldn't include shit like hitting one 700 feet off Ugeth Urbina in an NLCS game which merely tied the game.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 09:09:11 AM
DPD.
The trope about "X Player only hitting homeruns when they're down needs" needs to be put down itself. It was so often uttered back in the day about Sosa and, though I have gone to great lengths to criticize Sosa on many fronts, will freely point out that not only do home run hitters hit meaningless home runs in addition to many other varieties, but that Sosa himself assuredly has the franchise record for walk off home runs for the Cubs--which wouldn't include shit like hitting one 700 feet off Ugeth Urbina in an NLCS game which merely tied the game.
The whole both needs?
I was just reminiscing about that Sammy shot a few weeks ago. That was a dadgum laser beam.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 09:09:11 AM
DPD.
The trope about "X Player only hitting homeruns when they're down needs" needs to be put down itself. It was so often uttered back in the day about Sosa and, though I have gone to great lengths to criticize Sosa on many fronts, will freely point out that not only do home run hitters hit meaningless home runs in addition to many other varieties, but that Sosa himself assuredly has the franchise record for walk off home runs for the Cubs--which wouldn't include shit like hitting one 700 feet off Ugeth Urbina in an NLCS game which merely tied the game.
9, with the Cubs
As of 2010, was tied for 5th since 1950 in Walk-Offs: http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8972
More fun:
QuoteFinally, some players have a flair for the dramatic. Here are the players (since 1950) with multiple career walk-off home runs when trailing with 2 outs.
Frank Robinson: 3
Sammy Sosa: 2
Shawon Dunston: 2
a bunch of others: 2
Both of those Dunston Home Runs were with the Cubes..
Huey, name them
(http://i.imgur.com/czrlbQ9.gif)
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 08:46:00 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 16, 2014, 09:44:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 16, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: CBStew on December 16, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:56:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2014, 03:48:12 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
I keep hanging my hopes on Rizzo's disastrous first MLB stint showing that guys can bounce back (both were 21, similar mid-.500 OPS) to still become stars. But I don't feel very confident in it.
Baez played a better shortstop than I expected. His hands, quickness...there was a fluid quality that I thought merited him to possibly rate higher than Castro defensively already, and I think Castro is greatly improved and is pretty good himself to be honest. Maybe my expectations were so low for Baez upon hearing that he made 40 errors in 2013, but I think I saw enough of him to think he might be really, really good at that position. And, if Baez really can play shortstop...if he can just cut down on his K rate a leetle, and drive up his ability to reach base somewhat, then I have to think he's a pretty valuable player if he's doing this while clobbering 30 home runs...for the Cubs or somebody else.
Yes. He will hit 30 homeruns. But his batting average will be .133, all of his 30 hits In 400 at bats will be homeruns coming in the late innings of 30 games that the Cubs will lose by a score of 7 to 1.
Jesus
You alright over there, Stew?
He's not even bothering to worry about the math in this hypothetical scenario.
He's nostalgic for the halcyon days of Dave Kingman.
Quote from: Yeti on December 17, 2014, 10:02:40 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 09:09:11 AM
DPD.
The trope about "X Player only hitting homeruns when they're down needs" needs to be put down itself. It was so often uttered back in the day about Sosa and, though I have gone to great lengths to criticize Sosa on many fronts, will freely point out that not only do home run hitters hit meaningless home runs in addition to many other varieties, but that Sosa himself assuredly has the franchise record for walk off home runs for the Cubs--which wouldn't include shit like hitting one 700 feet off Ugeth Urbina in an NLCS game which merely tied the game.
9, with the Cubs
As of 2010, was tied for 5th since 1950 in Walk-Offs: http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8972
More fun:
QuoteFinally, some players have a flair for the dramatic. Here are the players (since 1950) with multiple career walk-off home runs when trailing with 2 outs.
Frank Robinson: 3
Sammy Sosa: 2
Shawon Dunston: 2
a bunch of others: 2
Both of those Dunston Home Runs were with the Cubes..
Huey, name them
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
Quote from: Yeti on December 17, 2014, 10:02:40 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 09:09:11 AM
DPD.
The trope about "X Player only hitting homeruns when they're down needs" needs to be put down itself. It was so often uttered back in the day about Sosa and, though I have gone to great lengths to criticize Sosa on many fronts, will freely point out that not only do home run hitters hit meaningless home runs in addition to many other varieties, but that Sosa himself assuredly has the franchise record for walk off home runs for the Cubs--which wouldn't include shit like hitting one 700 feet off Ugeth Urbina in an NLCS game which merely tied the game.
9, with the Cubs
As of 2010, was tied for 5th since 1950 in Walk-Offs: http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8972
More fun:
QuoteFinally, some players have a flair for the dramatic. Here are the players (since 1950) with multiple career walk-off home runs when trailing with 2 outs.
Frank Robinson: 3
Sammy Sosa: 2
Shawon Dunston: 2
a bunch of others: 2
Both of those Dunston Home Runs were with the Cubes..
Huey, name them
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
The Paul Wilson one was 5/3/96. Impressive. Todd Worrell one is correct, too
Dunston: 7/29/95 and Slocumb is right.
He did the other on the first game of a double header in 1990 against Craig Lefferts and SD
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
Quote from: Yeti on December 17, 2014, 10:02:40 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 09:09:11 AM
DPD.
The trope about "X Player only hitting homeruns when they're down needs" needs to be put down itself. It was so often uttered back in the day about Sosa and, though I have gone to great lengths to criticize Sosa on many fronts, will freely point out that not only do home run hitters hit meaningless home runs in addition to many other varieties, but that Sosa himself assuredly has the franchise record for walk off home runs for the Cubs--which wouldn't include shit like hitting one 700 feet off Ugeth Urbina in an NLCS game which merely tied the game.
9, with the Cubs
As of 2010, was tied for 5th since 1950 in Walk-Offs: http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/8972
More fun:
QuoteFinally, some players have a flair for the dramatic. Here are the players (since 1950) with multiple career walk-off home runs when trailing with 2 outs.
Frank Robinson: 3
Sammy Sosa: 2
Shawon Dunston: 2
a bunch of others: 2
Both of those Dunston Home Runs were with the Cubes..
Huey, name them
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Rackytack'd.
(http://i.imgur.com/X6Hwtgu.gif)
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer
not to remember.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
Obscure memories inside of obscure memories.
HUECEPTION.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia.
Intrepid Reader: Huey"You know what Royko once said about nostalgia..."
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
I just want to take this opportunity to point out that Huey is definitely NOT a meatball.
Quote from: CT III on December 17, 2014, 11:25:40 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
I just want to take this opportunity to point out that Huey is definitely NOT a meatball.
Definitely not while I was in my 20's.
These are the greatest two pages in Desipio history. I'll be talking about these comments 20 years from now.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
Is there any way you can monetize this skill? Your recall ability is fucking amazing and freaks me out.
Quote from: R-V on December 17, 2014, 12:31:43 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
Is there any way you can monetize this skill? Your recall ability is fucking amazing and freaks me out.
I guess I should add that Sosa hit another walk off homer two days after his bomb off Paul Wilson. So he bookended a victorious weekend series win over the Mets with walkoff home runs in the first and third games. I want to say the Sunday walkoff which won the series broke a window in the first-floor unit of the building on Waveland as Sammy's shot went through it on a fly.
And I do remember Dunston's *other* walkoff in 1990 now. I had no recollection that it was against San Diego and Craig Lefferts but recall watching it at my cousin's kid's baptism in Franklin Park. Pretty sure the Cubs lost the nightcap that day.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 12:40:48 PM
Quote from: R-V on December 17, 2014, 12:31:43 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
Is there any way you can monetize this skill? Your recall ability is fucking amazing and freaks me out.
I guess I should add that Sosa hit another walk off homer two days after his bomb off Paul Wilson. So he bookended a victorious weekend series win over the Mets with walkoff home runs in the first and third games. I want to say the Sunday walkoff which won the series broke a window in the first-floor unit of the building on Waveland as Sammy's shot went through it on a fly.
And I do remember Dunston's *other* walkoff in 1990 now. I had no recollection that it was against San Diego and Craig Lefferts but recall watching it at my cousin's kid's baptism in Franklin Park. Pretty sure the Cubs lost the nightcap that day.
If you were anyone else, I'd be certain you were fucking with us.
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 12:40:48 PM
Quote from: R-V on December 17, 2014, 12:31:43 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
Is there any way you can monetize this skill? Your recall ability is fucking amazing and freaks me out.
I guess I should add that Sosa hit another walk off homer two days after his bomb off Paul Wilson. So he bookended a victorious weekend series win over the Mets with walkoff home runs in the first and third games. I want to say the Sunday walkoff which won the series broke a window in the first-floor unit of the building on Waveland as Sammy's shot went through it on a fly.
And I do remember Dunston's *other* walkoff in 1990 now. I had no recollection that it was against San Diego and Craig Lefferts but recall watching it at my cousin's kid's baptism in Franklin Park. Pretty sure the Cubs lost the nightcap that day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6byFOtAOLNM
Quote from: CT III on December 17, 2014, 12:58:09 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 12:40:48 PM
Quote from: R-V on December 17, 2014, 12:31:43 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
Is there any way you can monetize this skill? Your recall ability is fucking amazing and freaks me out.
I guess I should add that Sosa hit another walk off homer two days after his bomb off Paul Wilson. So he bookended a victorious weekend series win over the Mets with walkoff home runs in the first and third games. I want to say the Sunday walkoff which won the series broke a window in the first-floor unit of the building on Waveland as Sammy's shot went through it on a fly.
And I do remember Dunston's *other* walkoff in 1990 now. I had no recollection that it was against San Diego and Craig Lefferts but recall watching it at my cousin's kid's baptism in Franklin Park. Pretty sure the Cubs lost the nightcap that day.
If you were anyone else, I'd be certain you were fucking with us.
If he were anyone else I would be convinced he just had really fast Google skills. But because it's Huey I know better.
I was also at the 1995 game in which Dunston homered off of Slocumb. I was in a section 114 or so (just on the 3rd base side of home plate) with a college friend from Dallas who was making his first trip to Wrigley Field.
Want to relive it? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in1crw68SCM)
Quote from: Brownie on December 17, 2014, 02:27:04 PM
I was also at the 1995 game in which Dunston homered off of Slocumb. I was in a section 114 or so (just on the 3rd base side of home plate) with a college friend from Dallas who was making his first trip to Wrigley Field.
Want to relive it? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in1crw68SCM)
"The Cubs have turned victory into defeat into victory"
I miss Harry.
Quote from: flannj on December 17, 2014, 01:14:41 PM
Quote from: CT III on December 17, 2014, 12:58:09 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 12:40:48 PM
Quote from: R-V on December 17, 2014, 12:31:43 PM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 17, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:52:27 AM
I'm going to guess that I was in attendance for both of Sosa's--except I don't know if either of these were with 2 outs: He ended an 0-19 streak by going yard off Paul Wilson in late April 1996 (after Dallas Green chose to intentionally walk Mark Grace in front of him) and went yard off of Tim or Todd Worrell of LAD in extra innings of a Sunday night in an otherwise miserable 1997 campaign. The funny thing was I nearly got into a fight with a group of people in the RF bleachers precisely because I had been ripping Sosa all game and they didn't like it. Joke was on those asshats, though, because they left the park before Sosa would've given them a grand FYC chance at me.
I also would've been in attendance for one of Dunston's--off of ex-Cub Heath Slocumb in the Summer 1995--I remember this because it was the first time I had ever seen a lead-changing walk-off home run. I was with my 2 older brothers and my dad and we were just a little behind home plate. I had commented to my brother, before the 9th inning began, of a funny fact I had heard on the broadcast of the day before--that Phillies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes had apparently not yet made a fielding error all year. Sure enough, after Brian McRae (I think) got on base with an HBP in 9th, the next hitter hit a roller that Hayes fumbled. My brother and I just looked at each other. Then Dunston took Slocumb deep (on the first pitch, if I remember correctly) in left field and a raucous celebration was had by all.
I do not recall the *other* time Dunston did this though.
Quote from: PANK! on December 16, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
Nah, I think maybe I just have an unhealthy aversion to nostalgia.
My unconscious ability to connect many events (many sports-related) to particular dates in time is not the same as nostalgia. Trust me, as a Cubs fan, there is much I would prefer not to remember.
Is there any way you can monetize this skill? Your recall ability is fucking amazing and freaks me out.
I guess I should add that Sosa hit another walk off homer two days after his bomb off Paul Wilson. So he bookended a victorious weekend series win over the Mets with walkoff home runs in the first and third games. I want to say the Sunday walkoff which won the series broke a window in the first-floor unit of the building on Waveland as Sammy's shot went through it on a fly.
And I do remember Dunston's *other* walkoff in 1990 now. I had no recollection that it was against San Diego and Craig Lefferts but recall watching it at my cousin's kid's baptism in Franklin Park. Pretty sure the Cubs lost the nightcap that day.
If you were anyone else, I'd be certain you were fucking with us.
If he were anyone else I would be convinced he just had really fast Google skills. But because it's Huey I know better.
I used think I was really good at this sort of thing. And I even had a reputation for it back in Buttpuddle. Since I met Huey, I've realized I aint about shit.
I'm not even sure what I had for lunch yesterday.
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 04:31:09 PM
I'm not even sure what I had for lunch yesterday.
Jackson's uneaten mac and cheese?
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 05:07:38 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 17, 2014, 05:02:22 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 04:31:09 PM
I'm not even sure what I had for lunch yesterday.
Jackson's uneaten mac and cheese?
That was my dinner.
No shit: for about the first four years after HTonk was born, a good 30-40% of my diet was scraps and leftovers.
Quote from: Tonker on December 17, 2014, 05:38:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 05:07:38 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 17, 2014, 05:02:22 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 04:31:09 PM
I'm not even sure what I had for lunch yesterday.
Jackson's uneaten mac and cheese?
That was my dinner.
No shit: for about the first four years after HTonk was born, a good 30-40% of my diet was scraps and leftovers.
I'm still Hoovering my kid's leftovers
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:09:42 PM
Quote from: Tonker on December 17, 2014, 05:38:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 05:07:38 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 17, 2014, 05:02:22 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 04:31:09 PM
I'm not even sure what I had for lunch yesterday.
Jackson's uneaten mac and cheese?
That was my dinner.
No shit: for about the first four years after HTonk was born, a good 30-40% of my diet was scraps and leftovers.
I'm still Hoovering my kid's leftovers
Only because you can't go up to people on the Metra and ask, "are you gonna finish that?" any more.
Quote from: Fork on December 18, 2014, 09:51:31 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:09:42 PM
Quote from: Tonker on December 17, 2014, 05:38:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 05:07:38 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 17, 2014, 05:02:22 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 04:31:09 PM
I'm not even sure what I had for lunch yesterday.
Jackson's uneaten mac and cheese?
That was my dinner.
No shit: for about the first four years after HTonk was born, a good 30-40% of my diet was scraps and leftovers.
I'm still Hoovering my kid's leftovers
Only because you can't go up to people on the Metra and ask, "are you gonna finish that?" any more.
My kids don't drink beer.
Quote from: PANK! on December 18, 2014, 10:04:46 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 18, 2014, 09:51:31 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 17, 2014, 10:09:42 PM
Quote from: Tonker on December 17, 2014, 05:38:21 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 05:07:38 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 17, 2014, 05:02:22 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 17, 2014, 04:31:09 PM
I'm not even sure what I had for lunch yesterday.
Jackson's uneaten mac and cheese?
That was my dinner.
No shit: for about the first four years after HTonk was born, a good 30-40% of my diet was scraps and leftovers.
I'm still Hoovering my kid's leftovers
Only because you can't go up to people on the Metra and ask, "are you gonna finish that?" any more.
My kids don't drink beer.
I call bullshit.
The Padres trading everything that isn't nailed down and even some things that are is pretty fun to watch. Wonder if that's what the Cubs might be doing had they not spent all this time collecting bats.
So, David Ross on a 2-year deal?
Other than the Lester signing, I do not understand anything they're doing this offseason.
Quote from: Eli on December 19, 2014, 05:19:12 PM
So, David Ross on a 2-year deal?
Other than the Lester signing, I do not understand anything they're doing this offseason.
Hoping Ross means Castillo is going to be a part of a somewhat significant trade acquisition but who knows.
Quote from: SKO on December 20, 2014, 07:22:20 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 19, 2014, 05:19:12 PM
So, David Ross on a 2-year deal?
Other than the Lester signing, I do not understand anything they're doing this offseason.
Hoping Ross means Castillo is going to be a part of a somewhat significant trade acquisition but who knows.
I'm sure something will happen, since they have as many catchers (5!) on their 40-man as outfielders right now. We'll have to see the return on Castillo, but I'm skeptical it'll make up for the downgrade from Castillo to Ross. The front office must be really, really into pitch-framing for this to make any sense.
Quote from: Eli on December 19, 2014, 05:19:12 PM
So, David Ross on a 2-year deal?
Other than the Lester signing, I do not understand anything they're doing this offseason.
Really? You don't understand the Montero, Hammel and Motte acquisitions?
Quote from: R-V on December 20, 2014, 04:20:40 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 19, 2014, 05:19:12 PM
So, David Ross on a 2-year deal?
Other than the Lester signing, I do not understand anything they're doing this offseason.
Really? You don't understand the Montero, Hammel and Motte acquisitions?
Those all make sense to me. With the Ross signing it almost seems like they're placating Lester a little (which is a little strange) but also putting a lot of chips in the Natural Leader pot. Ross seems like a guy they want to have around.
I'm with Eli in that I don't get the 2 years and I certainly would have been happy to see Castillo stick around. I feel the Ross thing has the high potential to bite them in the ass as soon as spring training. He's so old.
And when Gomes signs it'll be basically the same thing. He sucks and Ruggiano is a better hitter. But you know...leadership or something.
Quote from: R-V on December 20, 2014, 04:20:40 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 19, 2014, 05:19:12 PM
So, David Ross on a 2-year deal?
Other than the Lester signing, I do not understand anything they're doing this offseason.
Really? You don't understand the Montero, Hammel and Motte acquisitions?
I did overlook Hammel. Fair point. And I probably could have phrased things with a little more nuance. Anyway.
I'm torn on Montero. How you feel about it is dependent on how you feel about pitch framing. If you don't buy into it very much, they've basically spent $50 million to not really upgrade the catcher position. Then again, the framing stuff might just be an area where we're stuck in the dark as fans. I've been trying to read about it and there are reasonable people who say it's totally overrated and reasonable people who have formulated that Yadier Molina is about as valuable as 2001 Barry Bonds.
And no, I don't understand the Motte signing. He's nothing without his fastball, which is gone after TJS. They seem to be stockpiling bullpen arms for some reason, even though the bullpen was a big strength last year. But then they let Wright, their only good lefty, go for nothing.
Swapping Ruggiano for Inevitable Jonny Gomes shouldn't make sense to anyone.
That said, it's still December and I think it's entirely possible there's some big move(s) coming that brings all of this into focus.
Quote from: Eli on December 21, 2014, 07:42:57 AM
Quote from: R-V on December 20, 2014, 04:20:40 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 19, 2014, 05:19:12 PM
So, David Ross on a 2-year deal?
Other than the Lester signing, I do not understand anything they're doing this offseason.
Really? You don't understand the Montero, Hammel and Motte acquisitions?
I did overlook Hammel. Fair point. And I probably could have phrased things with a little more nuance. Anyway.
I'm torn on Montero. How you feel about it is dependent on how you feel about pitch framing. If you don't buy into it very much, they've basically spent $50 million to not really upgrade the catcher position. Then again, the framing stuff might just be an area where we're stuck in the dark as fans. I've been trying to read about it and there are reasonable people who say it's totally overrated and reasonable people who have formulated that Yadier Molina is about as valuable as 2001 Barry Bonds.
And no, I don't understand the Motte signing. He's nothing without his fastball, which is gone after TJS. They seem to be stockpiling bullpen arms for some reason, even though the bullpen was a big strength last year. But then they let Wright, their only good lefty, go for nothing.
Swapping Ruggiano for Inevitable Jonny Gomes shouldn't make sense to anyone.
That said, it's still December and I think it's entirely possible there's some big move(s) coming that brings all of this into focus.
Those are all reasonable concerns. I lean more towards the "pitch framing does have significant value" argument, at least until we have robot umpires, but I still have doubts about the Montero acquisition because the Cubs were 6th in pitching WAR last year - pitching (and pitch framing) weren't a weakness for them, even after trading Samardzija and Hammel midseason. If you assume that some regression from Arrieta and Hendricks will be offset by (a) bringing in Lester and Hammel and (b) actually keeping them for a full season, then it's reasonable to expect them to have pretty damn good run prevention again. So why use finite financial/prospect resources on run prevention, when offense was the primary weakness last year? I worry about counting on progression from prospects to get the offense to at least a league-average level, especially in today's pitcher-friendly version of MLB.
As for Motte, he pitched all of 25 innings post-TJS last year. It's probably too early to declare that his fastball is gone. I'm fine with a one-year flier on someone like that.
But yeah the Gomes-Ruggiano swap makes absolutely no sense.
I can't wait to find out of pitch-framing is a thing or not.
Quote from: InternetApex on December 22, 2014, 09:37:04 AM
I can't wait to find out of pitch-framing is a thing or not.
I'd also be interested to hear what Theo and Jed have to say about it, if anyone from the local media would bother doing their jobs and asking them. I know Maddon said a few years ago that Jose Molina saved like 50 runs (~5 wins) a year with his pitch framing, so he's clearly into it, but most people actually in baseball haven't publicly said a whole lot. I'm sure that's because they're trying to protect their competitive advantages, but what about
us?
When you've got catchers at the major league level, they all keep their gloves really steady, and occasionally are able to snatch a ball out of the strike zone into it. While maybe Montero and Ross are really good at it, I don't think the gap between the best and worst in the majors can be all that substantial from an analytic standpoint.
That being said, if the umpires give catchers with reputations as good framers the benefit of the doubt on close pitches, the Cubs have got something.
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
Baez currently at .409/.462/.773 through 22 ABs.
2 homers.
Oh and yeah...9 Ks.
So, the good news is that he's
only struck out 3 times in the last 11 ABs.
And that he's hitting the shit out of the ball.
Against crappy pitching, but still. Better than struggling.
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
How do they earn this reputation? If it's just a reputational thing I suggest we start saying it about every catcher in the system.
I heard Kyle Schwarber is so well known for his beautiful framing that he's been contacted by the Louvre.
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I am a picky hitter myself in slowpitch softball.
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
(http://i.imgur.com/Ai1rjEr.jpg)
Edit: A FACE that only TEC could love.
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
So, did Ted Williams or Wade Boggs or Tony Gwynn, by taking pitches, "cheat" too, as not even Doug Harvey would call three straight pitches strikes on a guy like Gwynn.
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
Why did you just make me read that?!?!?!?
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
Didn't know what this "pitch framing" was. So I looked it up. Apparently it means blaming the pitch for your inability to hit it. As in, "It wasn't my fault. The pitcher must be loading the ball up with something."
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I am a picky hitter myself in slowpitch softball.
I don't know who that is. His name never appeared when I opened the link. But he admits that he's the type of slow pitch softball player who stands there with his bat on his shoulder and tries to draw walks, which means he is on a level below drunk drivers and child rapists in my mind.
Quote from: InternetApex on December 23, 2014, 08:57:27 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I am a picky hitter myself in slowpitch softball.
I don't know who that is. His name never appeared when I opened the link. But he admits that he's the type of slow pitch softball player who stands there with his bat on his shoulder and tries to draw walks, which means he is on a level below drunk drivers and child rapists in my mind.
Matt Trowbridge. He's Rockford's Nick Vlahos
Quote from: Yeti on December 23, 2014, 08:59:52 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 23, 2014, 08:57:27 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I am a picky hitter myself in slowpitch softball.
I don't know who that is. His name never appeared when I opened the link. But he admits that he's the type of slow pitch softball player who stands there with his bat on his shoulder and tries to draw walks, which means he is on a level below drunk drivers and child rapists in my mind.
Matt Trowbridge. He's Rockford's Nick Vlahos
I was hoping it was Nick Vlahos. Either way minor city Illinois sportswriters are amazingly horrible.
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I suppose Babe Ruth shouldn't be in the HOF either. Once he started hitting the ball out of the park, it made it impossible for defenders to have an honest chance at catching the ball. That's just as bad as throwing games.
Quote from: Slaky on December 23, 2014, 09:32:34 AM
Quote from: Yeti on December 23, 2014, 08:59:52 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 23, 2014, 08:57:27 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I am a picky hitter myself in slowpitch softball.
I don't know who that is. His name never appeared when I opened the link. But he admits that he's the type of slow pitch softball player who stands there with his bat on his shoulder and tries to draw walks, which means he is on a level below drunk drivers and child rapists in my mind.
Matt Trowbridge. He's Rockford's Nick Vlahos
I was hoping it was Nick Vlahos. Either way minor city Illinois sportswriters are amazingly horrible.
I have found this to be true, influenced as they are, by all the amazingly horrible big city Illinois sportswriters.
Quote from: Slaky on December 23, 2014, 09:32:34 AM
Quote from: Yeti on December 23, 2014, 08:59:52 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 23, 2014, 08:57:27 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I am a picky hitter myself in slowpitch softball.
I don't know who that is. His name never appeared when I opened the link. But he admits that he's the type of slow pitch softball player who stands there with his bat on his shoulder and tries to draw walks, which means he is on a level below drunk drivers and child rapists in my mind.
Matt Trowbridge. He's Rockford's Nick Vlahos
I was hoping it was Nick Vlahos. Either way minor city Illinois sportswriters are amazingly horrible.
yeah but minor city Illinois sports fans are worse. They're just catering to their base. My friends father reads this kind of crap and just nods his head affirmatively while telling me and my friend he refuses to watch the NFL or NBA because "they score too much".
Quote from: SKO on December 23, 2014, 10:13:32 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 23, 2014, 09:32:34 AM
Quote from: Yeti on December 23, 2014, 08:59:52 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 23, 2014, 08:57:27 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 22, 2014, 02:12:53 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 22, 2014, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 22, 2014, 10:25:42 AM
I'm with Fork. I don't think pitch framing means anything, but if these guys are really good at pitch framing, then maybe it means something.
I think it's more a matter of reputation than actual function, Cutler-boy.
Pitcher reputation or catcher reputation?
Pitchers for sure. Remember the Atlanta strike zone in the 90s?
I do, which reminds me of this hottest of takes (http://www.rrstar.com/article/20140107/BLOGS/140109680/10464/SPORTS?template=printart).
I am a picky hitter myself in slowpitch softball.
I don't know who that is. His name never appeared when I opened the link. But he admits that he's the type of slow pitch softball player who stands there with his bat on his shoulder and tries to draw walks, which means he is on a level below drunk drivers and child rapists in my mind.
Matt Trowbridge. He's Rockford's Nick Vlahos
I was hoping it was Nick Vlahos. Either way minor city Illinois sportswriters are amazingly horrible.
yeah but minor city Illinois sports fans are worse. They're just catering to their base. My friends father reads this kind of crap and just nods his head affirmatively while telling me and my friend he refuses to watch the NFL or NBA because "they score too much".
Must be a soccer fan.
There's a whole lot of words here (http://www.fangraphs.com/community/the-cubs-the-red-sox-and-a-blank-check/) and I don't understand a lot of them, but the point seems to be that if they're so inclined, the Cubs (and the Red Sox) can basically spend anything they want on draft picks next year.
Starlin got himself arrested (http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2014-12-27/starlin-castro-arrested-cubs-shooting-dominican-republic) this morning after a nightclub shooting his entourage allegedly participated in. Was already questioned by cops for a different nightclub incident earlier this month (one rumor was someone spilled a drink on him so his pals opened fire, as reasonable men do) and he was accused of sexual assault by a girl he took home from a nightclub two years ago. Definitely keep going to clubs, that's going well.
Update: Sources confirm ESPN was wrong (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-starlin-castros-agent-denies-arrest-report-in-club-shooting-20141227-story.html). His agent says he was not arrested and that DR police told him the video surveillance tape clears him of involvement. Despite all that his agent still thinks he should stop going to clubs.
Chris Denorfia. A Cub (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/31/cubs-sign-chris-denorfia/).
Looks like the LF platoon is squared away.
Quote from: Fork on December 31, 2014, 12:58:34 PM
Chris Denorfia. A Cub (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/31/cubs-sign-chris-denorfia/).
Looks like the LF platoon is squared away.
We dodged an Elibullet.
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Yes, please.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
Zobrist could also mean a competent backup for Rizzo.
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 08:39:07 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
Zobrist could also mean a competent backup for Rizzo.
True, but I wouldn't be willing to trade much for one year of Zobrist. There are contending teams who need him to start at one spot that ought to easily outbid the Cubs for his services now. Maybe next year.
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
I have a feeling that no one is ever going to trade for Vogelbach.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
I have a feeling that no one is ever going to trade for Vogelbach.
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10. The Cubs can go out and get whomever they want without touching the prospect core.
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
I have a feeling that no one is ever going to trade for Vogelbach.
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10. The Cubs can go out and get whomever they want without touching the prospect core.
I'm fine with trading something that looks like Vogelbach for one year of Ben Zobrist.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:40:21 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
I have a feeling that no one is ever going to trade for Vogelbach.
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10. The Cubs can go out and get whomever they want without touching the prospect core.
I'm fine with trading something that looks like Vogelbach for one year of Ben Zobrist.
On the other hand, he hasn't reached AA yet. It would probably take a bit more.
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
I have a feeling that no one is ever going to trade for Vogelbach.
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10. The Cubs can go out and get whomever they want without touching the prospect core.
I just get the feeling that Vogelbach is due to be the guy who we talk about forever. No hate there.
Also - any chance that they can *just* flip Castillo for Zobrist? Seems like Tampa doesn't have much at catcher, unless I'm misremembering.
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:44:44 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
I have a feeling that no one is ever going to trade for Vogelbach.
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10. The Cubs can go out and get whomever they want without touching the prospect core.
I just get the feeling that Vogelbach is due to be the guy who we talk about forever. No hate there.
Also - any chance that they can *just* flip Castillo for Zobrist? Seems like Tampa doesn't have much at catcher, unless I'm misremembering.
I think they have one of the Molinas, who's is only slightly younger than Pujol's grandson. I'm sure that's not nearly enough.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I don't think a 429 SLG in the FSL is anything to sneeze at. He'll be at AA this year, so let's see how it plays out? BP seems to like him a lot (they give him a realistic role of a major league regular as The Cubs #9 prospect).
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:50:15 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:44:44 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 05, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 11:20:16 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 11:08:40 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 09:21:45 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 05, 2015, 08:28:51 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 08:20:23 AM
Nick Cafardo, who is generally a legitimate reporter, has the Cubs interested in Zobrist and Shields (http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/04/top-possible-baseball-story-lines-for/Gw2BdFt1HSCliLtHC2rY9N/story.html).
Quote3. Ben Zobrist, 2B/RF, Rays — Zobrist, 33, has one of the biggest trade markets out there. The super utilityman is being pursued seriously by the Giants, Nationals, Angels, and Cubs. The Rays recently acquired Asdrubal Cabrera on a one-year deal, sparking further speculation that Zobrist might be on the move. The Rays are said to be asking for at least one top prospect and a mid-level one.
QuoteJames Shields, RHP, free agent — It hasn't been easy to determine Shields's market. Jon Lester's negotiations were so public, yet Shields's have been private. Still, the teams who have had discussions or shown interest, according to a major league source, are the Red Sox, Cubs, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, and Giants.
I don't really see Shields happening, but Zobrist would be awesome.
Zobrist would be a great move. More than capable of being a quality OF if things work out in the IF with Javy and Bryant, but able to take over at 2nd or 3rd if needed.
I'd want Shields mostly for the fact that the Cubs would have one of the best rotations in the NL for sure with him on board, but also because I'd love to see Gordo try to spin how the Ricketts are still broke as shit since he went with "the Lester contract was every dime they had saved for three years and now they're tapped angle."
The whole tapped angle?
The Whole Tapped Angle had a few hits back in my day.
CHINESE FOOD MAKES ME SICK
AND I WANNA TRADE ALL MY PROSPECTS TO TAMPA FOR ZOBRIST
HE'S THE DOPEST!
What is fair compensation for Zobrist? I don't think anyone's going to be giving up an A prospect for him given the one year deal/age, but I think the Cubs probably have better B level prospects to offer for him than just about anybody. Would depend on what Tampa is looking for but definitely wouldn't mind a guy like Vogelbach or something for Zobrist.
I have a feeling that no one is ever going to trade for Vogelbach.
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10. The Cubs can go out and get whomever they want without touching the prospect core.
I just get the feeling that Vogelbach is due to be the guy who we talk about forever. No hate there.
Also - any chance that they can *just* flip Castillo for Zobrist? Seems like Tampa doesn't have much at catcher, unless I'm misremembering.
I think they have one of the Molina's, who's is only slightly younger than Pujol's grandson. I'm sure that's not nearly enough.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I don't think a 429 SLG in the FSL is anything to sneeze at. He'll be at AA this year, so let's see how it plays out? BP seems to like him a lot (they give him a realistic role of a major league regular as The Cubs #9 prospect).
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/705/2785560684.png)
Make it happen, Theo.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:17:00 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
But, could he have some bearing on Ruben Amaro's or Matthew Silverman's plans?
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 01:45:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:17:00 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
But, could he have some bearing on Ruben Amaro's or Matthew Silverman's plans?
I don't think he'd have any significant bearing on them, no.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:55:52 PM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 01:45:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:17:00 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
But, could he have some bearing on Ruben Amaro's or Matthew Silverman's plans?
I don't think he'd have any significant bearing on them, no.
You are the destroyer of fat guys' dreams everywhere.
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 01:45:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:17:00 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
But, could he have some bearing on Ruben Amaro's or Matthew Silverman's plans?
It's like a damn Jew factory down there.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:55:52 PM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 01:45:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:17:00 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
But, could he have some bearing on Ruben Amaro's or Matthew Silverman's plans?
I don't think he'd have any significant bearing on them, no.
I'd certainly co-sign trading something that looks like Vogelbach for Cole Hamels.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 05, 2015, 02:18:42 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:55:52 PM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 01:45:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:17:00 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
But, could he have some bearing on Ruben Amaro's or Matthew Silverman's plans?
I don't think he'd have any significant bearing on them, no.
I'd certainly co-sign trading something that looks like Vogelbach for Cole Hamels.
Everyone in the universe would except for Ruben Amaro.
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 01:45:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 01:17:00 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 05, 2015, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 11:45:19 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Why? He has raw power coming out of his big, fat ass and has a really good to great hitting tool. And, he's 22 years old.
I think people just assume he has power because he's fat. None of that has really translated to in-game power. And he absolutely has to be a DH since his defense is so bad, so he will have to hit a TON, which he hasn't done in two years.
Having to repeat high-A ball at 21 and losing 100 OPS points from your first go-round isn't a good sign. I think there's a decent chance he doesn't ever get more than a few hundred at-bats in the majors, if he ever even gets there.
I had the same thought, but then I noticed that his first go round was, like, four ABs, so I stopped hyperventilating and remembered that he's only just turned 22.
No one is hyperventilating. I just think he's a chunky pile of meh who doesn't have any bearing on the Cubs' plans.
But, could he have some bearing on Ruben Amaro's or Matthew Silverman's plans?
Trading for an AL-only player like Vogelbach strikes me as a very Ruben Amaro move.
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10.
You were busy (http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2015-chicago-cubs-top-10-prospects-chat/) today, Oleg!
QuoteOleg (Denver): Are The Cubs' 11-20 prospects as good or better than just about any other team's top 10?
John Manuel: Oleg, the answer is no, but this is a good BA Grade question. We have an expanded explainer in this year's book about the BA Grades that I'm excited about; I'm not sure why we never explained them with the detail we did this year. Looking at the Cubs' 11-20 BA Grades, every single 11-20 player has at least a 50 Grade, and just two of those guys are Extremes. That's the best 11-20 I can see on the spreadsheet of all 900 players with their grades. Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rockies and Twins come close in terms of similar depth of high-ceiling talent, but not quite there with the Cubs. The BA Grades lets you glance quickly to see just how much high-ceiling talent a team has; I like the grades. I would look forward to feedback from those of you who get the handbook, you know where to find me.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 07:23:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10.
You were busy (http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2015-chicago-cubs-top-10-prospects-chat/) today, Oleg!
QuoteOleg (Denver): Are The Cubs' 11-20 prospects as good or better than just about any other team's top 10?
John Manuel: Oleg, the answer is no, but this is a good BA Grade question. We have an expanded explainer in this year's book about the BA Grades that I'm excited about; I'm not sure why we never explained them with the detail we did this year. Looking at the Cubs' 11-20 BA Grades, every single 11-20 player has at least a 50 Grade, and just two of those guys are Extremes. That's the best 11-20 I can see on the spreadsheet of all 900 players with their grades. Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rockies and Twins come close in terms of similar depth of high-ceiling talent, but not quite there with the Cubs. The BA Grades lets you glance quickly to see just how much high-ceiling talent a team has; I like the grades. I would look forward to feedback from those of you who get the handbook, you know where to find me.
Was every answer a plug for the book?
Quote from: Fork on January 05, 2015, 09:49:11 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 07:23:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10.
You were busy (http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2015-chicago-cubs-top-10-prospects-chat/) today, Oleg!
QuoteOleg (Denver): Are The Cubs' 11-20 prospects as good or better than just about any other team's top 10?
John Manuel: Oleg, the answer is no, but this is a good BA Grade question. We have an expanded explainer in this year's book about the BA Grades that I'm excited about; I'm not sure why we never explained them with the detail we did this year. Looking at the Cubs' 11-20 BA Grades, every single 11-20 player has at least a 50 Grade, and just two of those guys are Extremes. That's the best 11-20 I can see on the spreadsheet of all 900 players with their grades. Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rockies and Twins come close in terms of similar depth of high-ceiling talent, but not quite there with the Cubs. The BA Grades lets you glance quickly to see just how much high-ceiling talent a team has; I like the grades. I would look forward to feedback from those of you who get the handbook, you know where to find me.
Was every answer a plug for the book?
Buy it to find out.
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 07:23:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10.
You were busy (http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2015-chicago-cubs-top-10-prospects-chat/) today, Oleg!
QuoteOleg (Denver): Are The Cubs' 11-20 prospects as good or better than just about any other team's top 10?
John Manuel: Oleg, the answer is no, but this is a good BA Grade question. We have an expanded explainer in this year's book about the BA Grades that I'm excited about; I'm not sure why we never explained them with the detail we did this year. Looking at the Cubs' 11-20 BA Grades, every single 11-20 player has at least a 50 Grade, and just two of those guys are Extremes. That's the best 11-20 I can see on the spreadsheet of all 900 players with their grades. Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rockies and Twins come close in terms of similar depth of high-ceiling talent, but not quite there with the Cubs. The BA Grades lets you glance quickly to see just how much high-ceiling talent a team has; I like the grades. I would look forward to feedback from those of you who get the handbook, you know where to find me.
*Menver
Quote from: Eli on January 05, 2015, 07:23:37 PM
Quote from: Oleg on January 05, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
Also, The Cubs' 11-20 ranked prospects would probably end up on many teams' top 10.
You were busy (http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2015-chicago-cubs-top-10-prospects-chat/) today, Oleg!
QuoteOleg (Denver): Are The Cubs' 11-20 prospects as good or better than just about any other team's top 10?
John Manuel: Oleg, the answer is no, but this is a good BA Grade question. We have an expanded explainer in this year's book about the BA Grades that I'm excited about; I'm not sure why we never explained them with the detail we did this year. Looking at the Cubs' 11-20 BA Grades, every single 11-20 player has at least a 50 Grade, and just two of those guys are Extremes. That's the best 11-20 I can see on the spreadsheet of all 900 players with their grades. Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rockies and Twins come close in terms of similar depth of high-ceiling talent, but not quite there with the Cubs. The BA Grades lets you glance quickly to see just how much high-ceiling talent a team has; I like the grades. I would look forward to feedback from those of you who get the handbook, you know where to find me.
That was my first of three questions I posted and was totally facetious. I also posted one about where Yoan Moncada will rank once The Cubs sign him on July 2. Manual chose to answer someone else's question about him. He said he'd rank just above Soler. Soler will be a top 15 prospect, if not top 10 in the book.
Quote from: Tonker on January 06, 2015, 02:26:48 AM
*Menver
This ain't Facebook. There's like 3 people here who get this.
Also, 44 days till pitchers and catcher report? I can't fucking wait.
Quote from: Oleg on January 06, 2015, 09:35:15 AM
I also posted one about where Yoan Moncada will rank once The Cubs sign him on July 2.
And I bet you got his name right in your question.
Quote from: Eli on January 06, 2015, 09:42:50 AM
Quote from: Oleg on January 06, 2015, 09:35:15 AM
I also posted one about where Yoan Moncada will rank once The Cubs sign him on July 2.
And I bet you got his name right in your question.
I did but I Googled it just to make sure.
This is too good not to share.
http://www.sportingnews.com/photos/4572908-100-years-of-classic-photos-of-wrigley-field/slide/218736
Quote from: CBStew on January 09, 2015, 09:49:34 AM
This is too good not to share.
http://www.sportingnews.com/photos/4572908-100-years-of-classic-photos-of-wrigley-field/slide/218736
That picture of Robinson and Pafko was just a couple weeks before they became teammates in Brooklyn.
Not sure if saying the first All-Star game was in Wrigley Field instead of Sox Park was a fuckup or a solid trolling. I prefer to believe the latter.
Jake Johnson, the former Julius Pepperwood, asks Cubs fans to relax and be rational (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/chicago-cubs-jake-johnson-curse-new-girl/). Oh Jake. Classic mistake.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 09, 2015, 01:32:34 PM
Jake Johnson, the former Julius Pepperwood, asks Cubs fans to relax and be rational (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/chicago-cubs-jake-johnson-curse-new-girl/). Oh Jake. Classic mistake.
I vaguely remember him writing something else for Grantland a while back about the Cubs.
And I remember hating it as much as I hate this steaming pile of shit.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 09, 2015, 01:32:34 PM
Jake Johnson, the former Julius Pepperwood, asks Cubs fans to relax and be rational (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/chicago-cubs-jake-johnson-curse-new-girl/). Oh Jake. Classic mistake.
you would have been better off bobbing for french fries instead of reading that tripe.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 09, 2015, 01:53:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 09, 2015, 01:32:34 PM
Jake Johnson, the former Julius Pepperwood, asks Cubs fans to relax and be rational (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/chicago-cubs-jake-johnson-curse-new-girl/). Oh Jake. Classic mistake.
I vaguely remember him writing something else for Grantland a while back about the Cubs.
And I remember hating it as much as I hate this steaming pile of shit.
http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=8471.msg267251#msg267251
Quote from: Eli on January 09, 2015, 03:07:21 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 09, 2015, 01:53:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 09, 2015, 01:32:34 PM
Jake Johnson, the former Julius Pepperwood, asks Cubs fans to relax and be rational (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/chicago-cubs-jake-johnson-curse-new-girl/). Oh Jake. Classic mistake.
I vaguely remember him writing something else for Grantland a while back about the Cubs.
And I remember hating it as much as I hate this steaming pile of shit.
http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=8471.msg267251#msg267251
Seems like more work than just typing "That dude sucks" again. That's dedication.
Quote from: PenFoe on December 22, 2014, 12:31:57 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
Baez currently at .409/.462/.773 through 22 ABs.
2 homers.
Oh and yeah...9 Ks.
So, the good news is that he's only struck out 3 times in the last 11 ABs.
And that he's hitting the shit out of the ball.
Against crappy pitching, but still. Better than struggling.
Bump for a Baez update in PR Winter Ball:
10-43, 2 homers, 5 BB, 21 K.
.233/.306/.442
Blech.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 12, 2015, 10:52:11 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on December 22, 2014, 12:31:57 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2014, 03:27:41 PM
It's early yet, but in Winter Ball in PR, Baez has 6 Ks in 11 ABs.
Baez currently at .409/.462/.773 through 22 ABs.
2 homers.
Oh and yeah...9 Ks.
So, the good news is that he's only struck out 3 times in the last 11 ABs.
And that he's hitting the shit out of the ball.
Against crappy pitching, but still. Better than struggling.
Bump for a Baez update in PR Winter Ball:
10-43, 2 homers, 5 BB, 21 K.
.233/.306/.442
Blech.
I think it's time we start to re-calibrate our expectations for Baez.
If he's a .230/.310/.450 guy with 200 K but with, say, 28 HR and really solid 2nd base play, I think I can make myself live with that. At least for now.
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 10:56:59 AM
I think it's time we start to re-calibrate our expectations for Baez.
If he's a .230/.310/.450 guy with 200 K but with, say, 28 HR and really solid 2nd base play, I think I can make myself live with that. At least for now.
That's like a 4-5 win player, if you're assuming average defense. You'll probably want to re-calibrate a bit further.
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:02:25 AM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 10:56:59 AM
I think it's time we start to re-calibrate our expectations for Baez.
If he's a .230/.310/.450 guy with 200 K but with, say, 28 HR and really solid 2nd base play, I think I can make myself live with that. At least for now.
That's like a 4-5 win player, if you're assuming average defense. You'll probably want to re-calibrate a bit further.
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B. If it's worse than that I'll go poke out my eyes right now.
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
The plus side to this is Baez has a very low bar for being valuable because he can play middle infield. The league average OPS for 2B last year was like .680 or something. There just isn't much offense to be found there, so even a .220/.260./.410 line is going to make him not be a total black hole. Which is kind of sad.
I miss the steroid era.
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
Yeah but that's mostly a product of him playing 2B. I feel like hoping he can hit .217 with 25+ homers isn't unrealistic, and people seem to think he can stick defensively at 2B. I don't think expecting a shitty average/OBP, a decent amount of homers, and acceptable defense at 2B is woefully unrealistic for Baez. Probably just pretty unrealistic.
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:25:31 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
Yeah but that's mostly a product of him playing 2B. I feel like hoping he can hit .217 with 25+ homers isn't unrealistic, and people seem to think he can stick defensively at 2B. I don't think expecting a shitty average/OBP, a decent amount of homers, and acceptable defense at 2B is woefully unrealistic for Baez. Probably just pretty unrealistic.
I read that Mallee is down there working with him in Winter League, so I don't think we should read too much into his numbers there since he's no doubt trying some new things. He's barely 22 and there's plenty of time for him to figure things out. It's fine that people have tempered expectations (which was probably needed; all those 50-homer dream projections were unrealistic), but I think it's swung a bit too far in the other direction.
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:33:52 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:25:31 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
Yeah but that's mostly a product of him playing 2B. I feel like hoping he can hit .217 with 25+ homers isn't unrealistic, and people seem to think he can stick defensively at 2B. I don't think expecting a shitty average/OBP, a decent amount of homers, and acceptable defense at 2B is woefully unrealistic for Baez. Probably just pretty unrealistic.
I read that Mallee is down there working with him in Winter League, so I don't think we should read too much into his numbers there since he's no doubt trying some new things. He's barely 22 and there's plenty of time for him to figure things out. It's fine that people have tempered expectations (which was probably needed; all those 50-homer dream projections were unrealistic), but I think it's swung a bit too far in the other direction.
Let's just trade him for Dexter Fowler before he bottoms out.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 12, 2015, 11:35:28 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:33:52 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:25:31 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
Yeah but that's mostly a product of him playing 2B. I feel like hoping he can hit .217 with 25+ homers isn't unrealistic, and people seem to think he can stick defensively at 2B. I don't think expecting a shitty average/OBP, a decent amount of homers, and acceptable defense at 2B is woefully unrealistic for Baez. Probably just pretty unrealistic.
I read that Mallee is down there working with him in Winter League, so I don't think we should read too much into his numbers there since he's no doubt trying some new things. He's barely 22 and there's plenty of time for him to figure things out. It's fine that people have tempered expectations (which was probably needed; all those 50-homer dream projections were unrealistic), but I think it's swung a bit too far in the other direction.
Let's just trade him for Dexter Fowler before he bottoms out.
Then the cubs can just release Almora, he's awful.
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:33:52 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:25:31 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
Yeah but that's mostly a product of him playing 2B. I feel like hoping he can hit .217 with 25+ homers isn't unrealistic, and people seem to think he can stick defensively at 2B. I don't think expecting a shitty average/OBP, a decent amount of homers, and acceptable defense at 2B is woefully unrealistic for Baez. Probably just pretty unrealistic.
I read that Mallee is down there working with him in Winter League, so I don't think we should read too much into his numbers there since he's no doubt trying some new things. He's barely 22 and there's plenty of time for him to figure things out. It's fine that people have tempered expectations (which was probably needed; all those 50-homer dream projections were unrealistic), but I think it's swung a bit too far in the other direction.
I think if Bryant lives up to his projections, and Soler does what he did in the last 5 weeks of '14, then along with the established presence of Rizzo and Castro I'm fine with the numbers I threw out there for Baez. I'm sorry you have a difficult time with the expectations pendulum swinging so far the other way, but like I said, in this context, I'd be more than happy with those numbers at this point in time. More importantly, I feel that the team can live with it. Call me crazy.
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 12:02:14 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:33:52 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:25:31 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
Yeah but that's mostly a product of him playing 2B. I feel like hoping he can hit .217 with 25+ homers isn't unrealistic, and people seem to think he can stick defensively at 2B. I don't think expecting a shitty average/OBP, a decent amount of homers, and acceptable defense at 2B is woefully unrealistic for Baez. Probably just pretty unrealistic.
I read that Mallee is down there working with him in Winter League, so I don't think we should read too much into his numbers there since he's no doubt trying some new things. He's barely 22 and there's plenty of time for him to figure things out. It's fine that people have tempered expectations (which was probably needed; all those 50-homer dream projections were unrealistic), but I think it's swung a bit too far in the other direction.
I think if Bryant lives up to his projections, and Soler does what he did in the last 5 weeks of '14, then along with the established presence of Rizzo and Castro I'm fine with the numbers I threw out there for Baez. I'm sorry you have a difficult time with the expectations pendulum swinging so far the other way, but like I said, in this context, I'd be more than happy with those numbers at this point in time. More importantly, I feel that the team can live with it. Call me crazy.
YOUR CRAZY
Quote from: InternetApex on January 12, 2015, 12:24:04 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 12:02:14 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:33:52 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:25:31 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 11:06:28 AM
I'm kind of settling right now for a Mark Trumbo who plays a decent 2B.
Same thing -- that'd be like a 5-win player.
Yeah but that's mostly a product of him playing 2B. I feel like hoping he can hit .217 with 25+ homers isn't unrealistic, and people seem to think he can stick defensively at 2B. I don't think expecting a shitty average/OBP, a decent amount of homers, and acceptable defense at 2B is woefully unrealistic for Baez. Probably just pretty unrealistic.
I read that Mallee is down there working with him in Winter League, so I don't think we should read too much into his numbers there since he's no doubt trying some new things. He's barely 22 and there's plenty of time for him to figure things out. It's fine that people have tempered expectations (which was probably needed; all those 50-homer dream projections were unrealistic), but I think it's swung a bit too far in the other direction.
I think if Bryant lives up to his projections, and Soler does what he did in the last 5 weeks of '14, then along with the established presence of Rizzo and Castro I'm fine with the numbers I threw out there for Baez. I'm sorry you have a difficult time with the expectations pendulum swinging so far the other way, but like I said, in this context, I'd be more than happy with those numbers at this point in time. More importantly, I feel that the team can live with it. Call me crazy.
YOUR CRAZY
THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 12:02:14 PM
I think if Bryant lives up to his projections, and Soler does what he did in the last 5 weeks of '14, then along with the established presence of Rizzo and Castro I'm fine with the numbers I threw out there for Baez. I'm sorry you have a difficult time with the expectations pendulum swinging so far the other way, but like I said, in this context, I'd be more than happy with those numbers at this point in time. More importantly, I feel that the team can live with it. Call me crazy.
You're not crazy. My point was that the numbers you threw out would still be a really good outcome for Baez.
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 01:25:39 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 12:02:14 PM
I think if Bryant lives up to his projections, and Soler does what he did in the last 5 weeks of '14, then along with the established presence of Rizzo and Castro I'm fine with the numbers I threw out there for Baez. I'm sorry you have a difficult time with the expectations pendulum swinging so far the other way, but like I said, in this context, I'd be more than happy with those numbers at this point in time. More importantly, I feel that the team can live with it. Call me crazy.
You're not crazy. My point was that the numbers you threw out would still be a really good outcome for Baez.
I'm saying .220/.278/.440 with 24 homers and 203 strikeouts.
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 01:35:27 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 01:25:39 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 12:02:14 PM
I think if Bryant lives up to his projections, and Soler does what he did in the last 5 weeks of '14, then along with the established presence of Rizzo and Castro I'm fine with the numbers I threw out there for Baez. I'm sorry you have a difficult time with the expectations pendulum swinging so far the other way, but like I said, in this context, I'd be more than happy with those numbers at this point in time. More importantly, I feel that the team can live with it. Call me crazy.
You're not crazy. My point was that the numbers you threw out would still be a really good outcome for Baez.
I'm saying .220/.278/.440 with 24 homers and 203 strikeouts.
I'd rather a .279 OBP
Quote from: Yeti on January 12, 2015, 02:06:09 PM
Quote from: SKO on January 12, 2015, 01:35:27 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 12, 2015, 01:25:39 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 12:02:14 PM
I think if Bryant lives up to his projections, and Soler does what he did in the last 5 weeks of '14, then along with the established presence of Rizzo and Castro I'm fine with the numbers I threw out there for Baez. I'm sorry you have a difficult time with the expectations pendulum swinging so far the other way, but like I said, in this context, I'd be more than happy with those numbers at this point in time. More importantly, I feel that the team can live with it. Call me crazy.
You're not crazy. My point was that the numbers you threw out would still be a really good outcome for Baez.
I'm saying .220/.278/.440 with 24 homers and 203 strikeouts.
I'd rather a .279 OBP
I'd settle for a .441 slugging.
Screw all you guys. Baez is going to hit .270/.320/.500 with 30 HRs and excellent defense at 2nd and send handwritten thank-you letters to everyone who believed in him all along (e.g. me) and lunch bags full of buttpuddle drippings to the rest of you.
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:13:53 PM
Screw all you guys. Baez is going to hit .270/.320/.500 with 30 HRs and excellent defense at 2nd and send handwritten thank-you letters to everyone who believed in him all along (e.g. me) and lunch bags full of buttpuddle drippings to the rest of you.
Hey I was the guy who said he may already be a better shortstop than Castro. Hell, put Javy at SS and Starlin at 2B and I like my otherwise suspect projected numbers even
more.
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 03:25:46 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:13:53 PM
Screw all you guys. Baez is going to hit .270/.320/.500 with 30 HRs and excellent defense at 2nd and send handwritten thank-you letters to everyone who believed in him all along (e.g. me) and lunch bags full of buttpuddle drippings to the rest of you.
Hey I was the guy who said he may already be a better shortstop than Castro. Hell, put Javy at SS and Starlin at 2B and I like my otherwise suspect projected numbers even more.
Don't worry I've made note. Javy will probably take you and I out for an anchouive pizza to celebrate his season!
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:27:52 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 03:25:46 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:13:53 PM
Screw all you guys. Baez is going to hit .270/.320/.500 with 30 HRs and excellent defense at 2nd and send handwritten thank-you letters to everyone who believed in him all along (e.g. me) and lunch bags full of buttpuddle drippings to the rest of you.
Hey I was the guy who said he may already be a better shortstop than Castro. Hell, put Javy at SS and Starlin at 2B and I like my otherwise suspect projected numbers even more.
Don't worry I've made note. Javy will probably take you and I out for an anchouive pizza to celebrate his season!
Hooray!
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:27:52 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 03:25:46 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:13:53 PM
Screw all you guys. Baez is going to hit .270/.320/.500 with 30 HRs and excellent defense at 2nd and send handwritten thank-you letters to everyone who believed in him all along (e.g. me) and lunch bags full of buttpuddle drippings to the rest of you.
Hey I was the guy who said he may already be a better shortstop than Castro. Hell, put Javy at SS and Starlin at 2B and I like my otherwise suspect projected numbers even more.
Don't worry I've made note. Javy will probably take you and I out for an anchouive pizza to celebrate his season!
French sausage on a pizza? No thanks.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 12, 2015, 03:52:05 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:27:52 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 03:25:46 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:13:53 PM
Screw all you guys. Baez is going to hit .270/.320/.500 with 30 HRs and excellent defense at 2nd and send handwritten thank-you letters to everyone who believed in him all along (e.g. me) and lunch bags full of buttpuddle drippings to the rest of you.
Hey I was the guy who said he may already be a better shortstop than Castro. Hell, put Javy at SS and Starlin at 2B and I like my otherwise suspect projected numbers even more.
Don't worry I've made note. Javy will probably take you and I out for an anchouive pizza to celebrate his season!
French sausage on a pizza? No thanks.
I was about to make a Chuck is wrong post but suddenly remembered and turned this into Chuck is Jewish.
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 03:32:57 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:27:52 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 12, 2015, 03:25:46 PM
Quote from: R-V on January 12, 2015, 03:13:53 PM
Screw all you guys. Baez is going to hit .270/.320/.500 with 30 HRs and excellent defense at 2nd and send handwritten thank-you letters to everyone who believed in him all along (e.g. me) and lunch bags full of buttpuddle drippings to the rest of you.
Hey I was the guy who said he may already be a better shortstop than Castro. Hell, put Javy at SS and Starlin at 2B and I like my otherwise suspect projected numbers even more.
Don't worry I've made note. Javy will probably take you and I out for an anchouive pizza to celebrate his season!
Hooray!
Cut into strips, natch.
Dexter Fowler (https://twitter.com/MLBBruceLevine/status/557201003876216833) and his .366 career OBP. Love it - no longer have to rely on Soler hitting well AND Alcantara providing league average offense AND Coghlan not exploding into pieces in order for the outfield to not be an offensive black hole.
Quote from: R-V on January 19, 2015, 09:56:18 AM
Dexter Fowler (https://twitter.com/MLBBruceLevine/status/557201003876216833) and his .366 career OBP. Love it - no longer have to rely on Soler hitting well AND Alcantara providing league average offense AND Coghlan not exploding into pieces in order for the outfield to not be an offensive black hole.
A) "close to" not the same as it being official.
B) It's Bruce Levine who makes my my typing look like I'm editing the OED by comparison. He well may have been trying to type "Breaking Bad is a better show than Dexter"
Quote from: PANK! on January 19, 2015, 10:07:39 AM
Quote from: R-V on January 19, 2015, 09:56:18 AM
Dexter Fowler (https://twitter.com/MLBBruceLevine/status/557201003876216833) and his .366 career OBP. Love it - no longer have to rely on Soler hitting well AND Alcantara providing league average offense AND Coghlan not exploding into pieces in order for the outfield to not be an offensive black hole.
A) "close to" not the same as it being official.
B) It's Bruce Levine who makes my my typing look like I'm editing the OED by comparison. He well may have been trying to type "Breaking Bad is a better show than Dexter"
Hearing Straily (https://twitter.com/susanslusser/status/557205143242813441)+ ____.
Considering the glut of AAAA-type pitchers competing for the 5th spot...so far, so good.
Edit: _____ = Valbuena. (https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/557208065145978881)
Looks like Andy's gotta get a new crush.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 19, 2015, 10:10:50 AM
Hearing Straily (https://twitter.com/susanslusser/status/557205143242813441)+ Valbuena.
Sorry, Dolan.
This is pretty incredible if true and demonstrates the strength of their farm system moreso than simply the cream that's at the top. To get a bona fide CF with a high OBP without even scratching the surface of their blue-chip prospects has gotten me all tingly inside.
Quote from: PANK! on January 19, 2015, 10:07:39 AM
Quote from: R-V on January 19, 2015, 09:56:18 AM
Dexter Fowler (https://twitter.com/MLBBruceLevine/status/557201003876216833) and his .366 career OBP. Love it - no longer have to rely on Soler hitting well AND Alcantara providing league average offense AND Coghlan not exploding into pieces in order for the outfield to not be an offensive black hole.
A) "close to" not the same as it being official.
B) It's Bruce Levine who makes my my typing look like I'm editing the OED by comparison. He well may have been trying to type "Breaking Bad is a better show than Dexter"
This post will henceforth be known as the My My Massacare.
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
Oh, so all black guys look alike to you.
So trading Valbuena now means the Cubs see Bryant as a MLB 3B? Maybe? And who might go in a (gasp) Strasburg deal?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 19, 2015, 12:06:13 PM
So trading Valbuena now means the Cubs see Bryant as a MLB 3B? Maybe? And who might go in a (gasp) Strasburg deal?
Like Russell, Baez and Edwards.
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2015, 12:11:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 19, 2015, 12:06:13 PM
So trading Valbuena now means the Cubs see Bryant as a MLB 3B? Maybe? And who might go in a (gasp) Strasburg deal?
Like Russell, Baez and Edwards.
Is there a link to any semi-credible source connecting the Cubs with the Nationals on this? Or are we just jerking off?
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2015, 12:04:13 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
Oh, so all black guys look alike to you.
"Pierre would arrive early at the Rockies' Spring Training complex every day to work on bunting or coming out of the batter's box after a swing. Coaches couldn't get in early enough to satisfy his desire to work. Teammates couldn't keep up with him.
"Fowler still smiles when reminded of Pierre's story. "That's how I am," Fowler said." (http://m.mlb.com/news/article/4471416/)
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 12:19:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2015, 12:11:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 19, 2015, 12:06:13 PM
So trading Valbuena now means the Cubs see Bryant as a MLB 3B? Maybe? And who might go in a (gasp) Strasburg deal?
Like Russell, Baez and Edwards.
Is there a link to any semi-credible source connecting the Cubs with the Nationals on this? Or are we just jerking off?
No Cubs connection, just this kind of talk.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/719/8598911536.png)
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 12:19:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2015, 12:11:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 19, 2015, 12:06:13 PM
So trading Valbuena now means the Cubs see Bryant as a MLB 3B? Maybe? And who might go in a (gasp) Strasburg deal?
Like Russell, Baez and Edwards.
Is there a link to any semi-credible source connecting the Cubs with the Nationals on this? Or are we just jerking off?
Nothing linking the Cubs and Nats, but the Cubs are one of the few teams that would (theoretically) have enough to make a deal.
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
As terrifying as the comparison looks through the lens above, Fowler has a career OBP of .366. So, let's just end this now.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
As terrifying as the comparison looks through the lens above, Fowler has a career OBP of .366. So, let's just end this now.
By the time he steps to the plate, he's more than 36% of the way toward being on first base already.
That is absolutely staggering.
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2015, 12:11:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 19, 2015, 12:06:13 PM
So trading Valbuena now means the Cubs see Bryant as a MLB 3B? Maybe? And who might go in a (gasp) Strasburg deal?
Like Russell, Baez and Edwards.
Not to immediately trade all their remaining IF depth away, but Castro would be a nice, long-term and cost-controlled upgrade over Espinosa at 2B. And Castro's defense would probably be a plus there. If the Nats eventually move on from Desmond they could just shift Castro over. I don't think the Cubs are shopping Starlin but Strasburg is probably at the top of the short list of guys for whom they'd include Castro in a package. Or maybe they don't like Strasburg's medicals and would never go near him. I don't know anything.
This is all academic since obviously the Cardinals will acquire him tomorrow.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 19, 2015, 01:55:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2015, 12:11:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 19, 2015, 12:06:13 PM
So trading Valbuena now means the Cubs see Bryant as a MLB 3B? Maybe? And who might go in a (gasp) Strasburg deal?
Like Russell, Baez and Edwards.
Not to immediately trade all their remaining IF depth away, but Castro would be a nice, long-term and cost-controlled upgrade over Espinosa at 2B. And Castro's defense would probably be a plus there. If the Nats eventually move on from Desmond they could just shift Castro over. I don't think the Cubs are shopping Starlin but Strasburg is probably at the top of the short list of guys for whom they'd include Castro in a package. Or maybe they don't like Strasburg's medicals and would never go near him. I don't know anything.
This is all academic since obviously the Cardinals will acquire him tomorrow.
Stop trying to trade Starlin Castro, you human centipede of wrong.
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say
listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Maybe he plans to honor Derek Jeter forever by tethering fielders to a spike. Nice going, Rob. A commissioner who doesn't say stupid baseball things out loud would have been a nice change.
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Yeah. Where do you draw the line between a shift and someone just shading over a few steps from their normal spot, as has always happened in baseball?
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 08:46:13 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Yeah. Where do you draw the line between a shift and someone just shading over a few steps from their normal spot, as has always happened in baseball?
I'm just impressed that they seem to have found a commissioner who is even more of reckless moron than Selig.
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 08:46:13 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Yeah. Where do you draw the line between a shift and someone just shading over a few steps from their normal spot, as has always happened in baseball?
Yea, and it's not like it takes extra time. It can easily happen while the player walks up... And if we're at the point where shifts are a competitive advantage, I think teams are being willingly stupid
Quote from: PANK! on January 26, 2015, 08:47:28 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 08:46:13 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Yeah. Where do you draw the line between a shift and someone just shading over a few steps from their normal spot, as has always happened in baseball? And what will the penalty for using a shift be?
I'm just impressed that they seem to have found a commissioner who is even more of reckless moron than Selig.
Now I'm morbidly curious as to how they'd propose to do this. Will each position have its own designated box that said player must be in when a pitch is thrown?
Quote from: CT III on January 26, 2015, 08:56:09 AM
Quote from: PANK! on January 26, 2015, 08:47:28 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 08:46:13 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Yeah. Where do you draw the line between a shift and someone just shading over a few steps from their normal spot, as has always happened in baseball? And what will the penalty for using a shift be?
I'm just impressed that they seem to have found a commissioner who is even more of reckless moron than Selig.
Now I'm morbidly curious as to how they'd propose to do this. Will each position have its own designated box that said player must be in when a pitch is thrown?
Fred McGriff came before his time, I guess.
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
READ BETWEEN THE LINES PEOPLE!!!! HAPPY DONGS ARE HERE AGAIN!!!!!
(https://pintsinthepaint.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/sosa_mcgwire4713.jpg)
Quote from: SKO on January 26, 2015, 09:19:03 AM
Quote from: CT III on January 26, 2015, 08:56:09 AM
Quote from: PANK! on January 26, 2015, 08:47:28 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 08:46:13 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Yeah. Where do you draw the line between a shift and someone just shading over a few steps from their normal spot, as has always happened in baseball? And what will the penalty for using a shift be?
I'm just impressed that they seem to have found a commissioner who is even more of reckless moron than Selig.
Now I'm morbidly curious as to how they'd propose to do this. Will each position have its own designated box that said player must be in when a pitch is thrown?
Fred McGriff came before his time, I guess.
McStiff eats ass.
Quote from: CT III on January 26, 2015, 08:56:09 AM
Quote from: PANK! on January 26, 2015, 08:47:28 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 08:46:13 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 25, 2015, 04:26:56 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
Never going to happen.
Yeah. Where do you draw the line between a shift and someone just shading over a few steps from their normal spot, as has always happened in baseball? And what will the penalty for using a shift be?
I'm just impressed that they seem to have found a commissioner who is even more of reckless moron than Selig.
Now I'm morbidly curious as to how they'd propose to do this. Will each position have its own designated box that said player must be in when a pitch is thrown?
That's the only way to do it that I can think of. And to do
that, they'd need to chalk up all the different zones on the field?
If they go for the "2 infielders must be on each half of the field" approach, it seems like a team could flip their LF and SS (for a Williams shift) and get a similar benefit.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
He will also give Ted Williams 400 hits retroactively.
Quote from: Fork on January 26, 2015, 10:36:25 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 25, 2015, 04:20:59 PM
Meet the new boss (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/rob-manfred-new-major-league-baseball-commissioner-suggests-ban-on-defensive-shifts/), same as the old boss.
Quote from: Rob ManfredI would be aggressive about using the clock over the long haul, I think it's a helpful thing in terms of moving the game along. I think the second set of changes I would look at is related, and that relates to injecting additional offense into the game. For example, things like eliminating shifts, I would be open to those sorts of ideas. [Interviewer: The forward-thinking, sabermetric defensive shifts?] That's what I'm talking about, yes. [Let's eliminate that?] Mm-hmm. [So all the work that the Cubs and/or Angels or whoever has done, you're willing to say I appreciate that, good idea, but it's killing the game in a sense.] Yeah, I mean I think that you can-, look, we have really smart people working in the game. And they're going to figure out ways to get a competitive advantage. I think it's incumbent on us in the commissioner's office to look at these changes and say, is this what we want to happen in the game.
What a dumb thought. Hearing Manfred say listen up, you damn nerds, I'm on to you must send a chill up Theo's spine.
He will also give Ted Williams 400 hits retroactively.
This is just complete dipshittery. The more I think about it the more dumbfounded I am. Hooray for another 20 years of numbnutted commissioning!
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 01:17:59 PM
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
This. A casual fan baseball fan with no rooting interest tuning in, say 1998, would have lot more interest in a crisply played 1-0 Maddux shutout than a 5-hour 10-0 Trachsel one.
Quote from: Bort on January 26, 2015, 01:35:51 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 01:17:59 PM
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
This. A casual fan baseball fan with no rooting interest tuning in, say 1998, would have lot more interest in a crisply played 1-0 Maddux shutout than a 5-hour 10-0 Trachsel one.
I've seen some backlash the pace-of-play idea recently, with people basically saying "I'm fine with the slow pace because longer games mean more baseball" and I just can't agree. Dead air in between actual baseball events isn't more baseball; it's just dead air.
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 02:23:38 PM
Quote from: Bort on January 26, 2015, 01:35:51 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 01:17:59 PM
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
This. A casual fan baseball fan with no rooting interest tuning in, say 1998, would have lot more interest in a crisply played 1-0 Maddux shutout than a 5-hour 10-0 Trachsel one.
I've seen some backlash the pace-of-play idea recently, with people basically saying "I'm fine with the slow pace because longer games mean more baseball" and I just can't agree. Dead air in between actual baseball events isn't more baseball; it's just dead air.
Agreed. I always enjoy it whenever some hitter takes a timeout for granted and just steps out of the box and the ump calls a strike on them. GET IT MOVIN, PALLY. I PAY YER CELERY.
But seriously, speeding up the Trachsels of the world would not mean less baseball and I'm all for it.
Quote from: SKO on January 26, 2015, 02:35:59 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 26, 2015, 02:23:38 PM
Quote from: Bort on January 26, 2015, 01:35:51 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 01:17:59 PM
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
This. A casual fan baseball fan with no rooting interest tuning in, say 1998, would have lot more interest in a crisply played 1-0 Maddux shutout than a 5-hour 10-0 Trachsel one.
I've seen some backlash the pace-of-play idea recently, with people basically saying "I'm fine with the slow pace because longer games mean more baseball" and I just can't agree. Dead air in between actual baseball events isn't more baseball; it's just dead air.
Agreed. I always enjoy it whenever some hitter takes a timeout for granted and just steps out of the box and the ump calls a strike on them. GET IT MOVIN, PALLY. I PAY YER CELERY.
But seriously, speeding up the Trachsels of the world would not mean less baseball and I'm all for it.
I believe that speeding up pitchers too much would lead to more arm injuries. I say this with absolutely no data to back up my belief. I mean none. Don't ask me for any, I don't have it. Fuck you. But it's logical to me because I remember certain days in high school when I took longer on the mound because I was waiting for my arm to stop hurting. Rick Sutcliffe has spoken on this before as well.
What a terrible post this is.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 26, 2015, 02:51:47 PM
I believe that speeding up pitchers too much would lead to more arm injuries. I say this with absolutely no data to back up my belief. I mean none. Don't ask me for any, I don't have it. Fuck you. But it's logical to me because I remember certain days in high school when I took longer on the mound because I was waiting for my arm to stop hurting. Rick Sutcliffe has spoken on this before as well.
Source?
Quote from: Bort on January 26, 2015, 01:35:51 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 01:17:59 PM
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
This. A casual fan baseball fan with no rooting interest tuning in, say 1998, would have lot more interest in a crisply played 1-0 Maddux shutout than a 5-hour 10-0 Trachsel one.
You're welcome then. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brizsPnZUe8)
Yes, it's a 2 1/2 hour kick in the balls.
Quote from: Bort on January 26, 2015, 01:35:51 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 01:17:59 PM
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
This. A casual fan baseball fan with no rooting interest tuning in, say 1998, would have lot more interest in a crisply played 1-0 Maddux shutout than a 5-hour 10-0 Trachsel one.
How many 1-0 games were there in 1998, when batboys were hitting 25 home runs?
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 03:28:14 PM
Quote from: Bort on January 26, 2015, 01:35:51 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 26, 2015, 01:17:59 PM
It won't happen. Baseball's pace of play is hurting it, not lack of offense. Rob Manfred I suppose could do something citing "the best interests of baseball," but unlike the Seligcard where people complained about the 91-71 team that missed the playoffs, no one's really bitching about shifts.
Fay Vincent tried to move the Cubs and Cardinals to the NL West, and were immediately sued by the Tribune and A-B. That (along with the imminent expiration of the CBA in which the owners wanted war) helped hasten his exit.
Selig's additions? Interleague play and expanded playoffs (owners were very much in favor of both as were some fans), All-Star Game (owners were not against it; do most fans really care as much as we here don't care for it?), replay (huge groundswell from owners and fans). Selig was bulletproof. Manfred is not.
This. A casual fan baseball fan with no rooting interest tuning in, say 1998, would have lot more interest in a crisply played 1-0 Maddux shutout than a 5-hour 10-0 Trachsel one.
You're welcome then. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brizsPnZUe8)
Yes, it's a 2 1/2 hour kick in the balls.
I said with no rooting interest... Now I'm sad.
(http://i.imgur.com/4iVE6SF.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/lfI94Zz.png)
Quote from: Yeti on January 28, 2015, 12:53:59 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/4iVE6SF.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/lfI94Zz.png)
168 PA's for Denorfia? Seems low.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 28, 2015, 02:23:24 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 28, 2015, 02:18:13 PM
Quote from: Yeti on January 28, 2015, 12:53:59 PM
168 PA's for Denorfia? Seems low.
199 for Bryant seems to be off by about 300.
Isn't PECOTA usually regarded as the most conservative of the big projection systems? If so this isn't surprising, and fairly comforting that they still think the Cubs are apparently a playoff team in the NL.
Quote from: Yeti on January 28, 2015, 12:53:59 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/4iVE6SF.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/lfI94Zz.png)
Someone should tell PECOTA that Edwin Jackson will not be in the rotation.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 28, 2015, 02:23:24 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 28, 2015, 02:18:13 PM
Quote from: Yeti on January 28, 2015, 12:53:59 PM
168 PA's for Denorfia? Seems low.
199 for Bryant seems to be off by about 300.
195 for Olt seems about right, except almost all of them will be somewhere other than Chicago.
I HATE THE OFFSEASON. PLAY BALL ALREADY!
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 28, 2015, 02:48:40 PM
Someone should tell PECOTA that Edwin Jackson will not be in the rotation.
If Edwin Jackson starts 33 games for the Cubs this season then I'll just assume at least 3 other guys died.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 28, 2015, 02:58:19 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 28, 2015, 02:48:40 PM
Someone should tell PECOTA that Edwin Jackson will not be in the rotation.
If Edwin Jackson starts 33 games for the Cubs this season then I'll just assume at least 3 other guys died.
So, trade him to the Cardinals.
Quote from: CBStew on January 28, 2015, 02:55:15 PM
I HATE THE OFFSEASON. PLAY BALL ALREADY!
SO MUCH THI
Quote from: SKO on January 28, 2015, 02:33:05 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 28, 2015, 02:23:24 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 28, 2015, 02:18:13 PM
Quote from: Yeti on January 28, 2015, 12:53:59 PM
168 PA's for Denorfia? Seems low.
199 for Bryant seems to be off by about 300.
Isn't PECOTA usually regarded as the most conservative of the big projection systems? If so this isn't surprising, and fairly comforting that they still think the Cubs are apparently a playoff team in the NL.
Even with leaning on Coghlan a little too much, EJax' 50 Starts, and not having Bryant contribute much they have them with a winning record, so yay?
Where the fuck's Eli to tell me how to feel about this?
Quote from: PANK! on January 29, 2015, 08:47:26 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 28, 2015, 02:33:05 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 28, 2015, 02:23:24 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 28, 2015, 02:18:13 PM
Quote from: Yeti on January 28, 2015, 12:53:59 PM
168 PA's for Denorfia? Seems low.
199 for Bryant seems to be off by about 300.
Isn't PECOTA usually regarded as the most conservative of the big projection systems? If so this isn't surprising, and fairly comforting that they still think the Cubs are apparently a playoff team in the NL.
Even with leaning on Coghlan a little too much, EJax' 50 Starts, and not having Bryant contribute much they have them with a winning record, so yay?
Where the fuck's Eli to tell me how to feel about this?
Hi. I'm here. Feel good about this.
Goodbye.
Quote from: Eli on January 29, 2015, 11:46:05 AM
Quote from: PANK! on January 29, 2015, 08:47:26 AM
Quote from: SKO on January 28, 2015, 02:33:05 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 28, 2015, 02:23:24 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 28, 2015, 02:18:13 PM
Quote from: Yeti on January 28, 2015, 12:53:59 PM
168 PA's for Denorfia? Seems low.
199 for Bryant seems to be off by about 300.
Isn't PECOTA usually regarded as the most conservative of the big projection systems? If so this isn't surprising, and fairly comforting that they still think the Cubs are apparently a playoff team in the NL.
Even with leaning on Coghlan a little too much, EJax' 50 Starts, and not having Bryant contribute much they have them with a winning record, so yay?
Where the fuck's Eli to tell me how to feel about this?
Hi. I'm here. Feel good about this.
Goodbye.
(http://www.yourplaceinvermont.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/shane-film-showing-ludlow-vermont.jpg)
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Quote from: Fork on February 03, 2015, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Their NBA coverage is quite adequate.
Quote from: InternetApex on February 03, 2015, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: Fork on February 03, 2015, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Their NBA coverage is quite adequate.
They've actually added a lot of good writers recently. Just hard to know going in if you're getting one of them or a slideshow on the ten most elitest QBs evar.
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 03, 2015, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: Fork on February 03, 2015, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Their NBA coverage is quite adequate.
They've actually added a lot of good writers recently. Just hard to know going in if you're getting one of them or a slideshow on the ten most elitest QBs evar.
My New Year's resolution is to ignore the Internet's insistence that I click on its list of "The 10 Best" anything. Even if it is "The Ten Best Nude Scenes in Movies Since Day One."
Quote from: CBStew on February 03, 2015, 12:22:39 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 03, 2015, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: Fork on February 03, 2015, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Their NBA coverage is quite adequate.
They've actually added a lot of good writers recently. Just hard to know going in if you're getting one of them or a slideshow on the ten most elitest QBs evar.
My New Year's resolution is to ignore the Internet's insistence that I click on its list of "The 10 Best" anything. Even if it is "The Ten Best Nude Scenes in Movies Since Day One."
Intrepid Reader Stew: Damn it, where's Hedy Lamarr? She sure got ol' Will Hays' dander up, wearing nothing but an onion on her belt, which was the style at the time.
Quote from: Bort on February 03, 2015, 01:00:50 PM
Quote from: CBStew on February 03, 2015, 12:22:39 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 03, 2015, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: Fork on February 03, 2015, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Their NBA coverage is quite adequate.
They've actually added a lot of good writers recently. Just hard to know going in if you're getting one of them or a slideshow on the ten most elitest QBs evar.
My New Year's resolution is to ignore the Internet's insistence that I click on its list of "The 10 Best" anything. Even if it is "The Ten Best Nude Scenes in Movies Since Day One."
Intrepid Reader Stew: Damn it, where's Hedy Lamarr? She sure got ol' Will Hays' dander up, wearing nothing but an onion on her belt, which was the style at the time.
As a kid, I fucking loved Will Hay movies. True story.
Quote from: Tonker on February 03, 2015, 02:37:59 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 03, 2015, 01:00:50 PM
Quote from: CBStew on February 03, 2015, 12:22:39 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 03, 2015, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: Fork on February 03, 2015, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Their NBA coverage is quite adequate.
They've actually added a lot of good writers recently. Just hard to know going in if you're getting one of them or a slideshow on the ten most elitest QBs evar.
My New Year's resolution is to ignore the Internet's insistence that I click on its list of "The 10 Best" anything. Even if it is "The Ten Best Nude Scenes in Movies Since Day One."
Intrepid Reader Stew: Damn it, where's Hedy Lamarr? She sure got ol' Will Hays' dander up, wearing nothing but an onion on her belt, which was the style at the time.
As a kid, I fucking loved Will Hay movies. True story.
And a Google search confirmed that there was an actor named Will Hay, and Tonker wasn't making a willfully odd post about Willian Harrison Hays, and his Code.
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Maybe. But I don't think the Cubs would let it be a bargain. Short but expensive (say 3 x $20mm), they'd allow, but cheap? They've got the money to compete for him.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 03, 2015, 04:24:07 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Maybe. But I don't think the Cubs would let it be a bargain. Short but expensive (say 3 x $20mm), they'd allow, but cheap? They've got the money to compete for him.
Gotta keep rotation spots open for David Price and Cole Hamels, so how would James feel about pitching out of the bullpen?
Quote from: Bort on February 03, 2015, 03:34:22 PM
Quote from: Tonker on February 03, 2015, 02:37:59 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 03, 2015, 01:00:50 PM
Quote from: CBStew on February 03, 2015, 12:22:39 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 03, 2015, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: Fork on February 03, 2015, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 03, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
Bleacher Report predicts Opening Day rosters for all teams.
Link directly to the Cubs. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2348278-predicting-final-opening-day-25-man-rosters-for-all-30-mlb-teams/page/6)
No huge surprises. Bryant not on the Opening Day roster, as widely discussed.
Also no Welington Castillo, with the assumption that he'll still get traded.
Baez is predicted to make the Opening Day roster here.
Bleacher Report is what would happen if Yellon knew how to make slideshows.
Their NBA coverage is quite adequate.
They've actually added a lot of good writers recently. Just hard to know going in if you're getting one of them or a slideshow on the ten most elitest QBs evar.
My New Year's resolution is to ignore the Internet's insistence that I click on its list of "The 10 Best" anything. Even if it is "The Ten Best Nude Scenes in Movies Since Day One."
Intrepid Reader Stew: Damn it, where's Hedy Lamarr? She sure got ol' Will Hays' dander up, wearing nothing but an onion on her belt, which was the style at the time.
As a kid, I fucking loved Will Hay movies. True story.
And a Google search confirmed that there was an actor named Will Hay, and Tonker wasn't making a willfully odd post about Willian Harrison Hays, and his Code.
...and his movies weren't 'alf bad.
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Suuurrrrrrrre you do.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron HeilmanJust try saying that to your RA.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 03, 2015, 04:24:07 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Maybe. But I don't think the Cubs would let it be a bargain. Short but expensive (say 3 x $20mm), they'd allow, but cheap? They've got the money to compete for him.
Phil agrees with you about the money.
And look, he also wants to trade Castro.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/735/8738119384.jpg)
Quote from: PenFoe on February 04, 2015, 01:46:24 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 03, 2015, 04:24:07 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Maybe. But I don't think the Cubs would let it be a bargain. Short but expensive (say 3 x $20mm), they'd allow, but cheap? They've got the money to compete for him.
Phil agrees with you about the money.
And look, he also wants to trade Castro.
(http://easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/735/8738119384.jpg)
As we know, Phil has a long history of blatantly getting nebulous things like "facts" and "names" wrong (hi Pablo Escobar!)....but it's doubly hilarious here because he confused Castillo with Castro. What a ridiculous excuse for a baseball writer.
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
This sounds like a really awesome environment to bring a baby into.
Quote from: PenFoe on February 04, 2015, 03:19:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
This sounds like a really awesome environment to bring a baby into.
We can't all raise kids on organic diets in a solar powered eco-friendly hut in Arizona.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 03:22:26 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 04, 2015, 03:19:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
This sounds like a really awesome environment to bring a baby into.
We can't all raise kids on organic diets in a solar powered eco-friendly hut in Arizona.
Didn't know that and a dorm room were the only 2 options.
Quote from: PANK! on February 04, 2015, 03:31:15 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 03:22:26 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 04, 2015, 03:19:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
This sounds like a really awesome environment to bring a baby into.
We can't all raise kids on organic diets in a solar powered eco-friendly hut in Arizona.
Didn't know that and a dorm room were the only 2 options.
Thanks a lot, Obama.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: PANK! on February 04, 2015, 03:31:15 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 03:22:26 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 04, 2015, 03:19:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
This sounds like a really awesome environment to bring a baby into.
We can't all raise kids on organic diets in a solar powered eco-friendly hut in Arizona.
Didn't know that and a dorm room were the only 2 options.
Thanks a lot, Obama.
The kid is going to be fantastic at video games and beer pong.
Quote from: PANK! on February 04, 2015, 03:31:15 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 03:22:26 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 04, 2015, 03:19:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
This sounds like a really awesome environment to bring a baby into.
We can't all raise kids on organic diets in a solar powered eco-friendly hut in Arizona.
Didn't know that and a dorm room were the only 2 options.
But seriously we get a three bedroom place with two garages and don't pay a damn thing for it so if we can do this for a couple of years we can save up enough to actually buy a house and paydown enough of our student loans that we're not fucked with debt for all eternity. If that means I yell at a bunch of no good college kids every weekend, so be it.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 03:35:46 PM
Quote from: PANK! on February 04, 2015, 03:31:15 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 03:22:26 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 04, 2015, 03:19:47 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
This sounds like a really awesome environment to bring a baby into.
We can't all raise kids on organic diets in a solar powered eco-friendly hut in Arizona.
Didn't know that and a dorm room were the only 2 options.
But seriously we get a three bedroom place with two garages and don't pay a damn thing for it so if we can do this for a couple of years we can save up enough to actually buy a house and paydown enough of our student loans that we're not fucked with debt for all eternity. If that means I yell at a bunch of no good college kids every weekend, so be it.
At your age, fuck it, why not. At my age, I would jump out of the window.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates who at least stopped constantly talking about Jay Cutler. And I'm happy with that.
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
You call that cantankerous? Listen son, until you escalate the situation to the point that the cops are being called on YOU then you're not cantanking hard enough.
Goddamn rookies.
Quote from: flannj on February 04, 2015, 04:27:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
You call that cantankerous? Listen son, until you escalate the situation to the point that the cops are being called on YOU then you're not cantanking hard enough.
Goddamn rookies.
..."and get off my lawn!"
Quote from: CBStew on February 04, 2015, 06:26:24 PM
Quote from: flannj on February 04, 2015, 04:27:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
You call that cantankerous? Listen son, until you escalate the situation to the point that the cops are being called on YOU then you're not cantanking hard enough.
Goddamn rookies.
..."and get off my lawn!"
rabble rabble
Quote from: flannj on February 04, 2015, 04:27:33 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: BH on February 04, 2015, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 04, 2015, 11:42:56 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 10:37:32 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on February 04, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on February 04, 2015, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 04, 2015, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Tonker on February 04, 2015, 02:03:38 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 03, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
I had the same feeling with Scherzer and it turned out to be unfounded, so I'll verbalize it here so that it also does not come to pass:
Every day James Shields doesn't sign I fear he ends up in St. Louis on a bargain contract.
Keeping quiet about Scherzer worked perfectly, so you decide you're going to change tack for Shields? Nice work, Jinx Boy. When he signs for the Tards, it's on you.
I told several people I thought Scherzer would sign with the Cardinals. Just not on this messageboard. I have human friends, too, you know.
Your RA isn't your friend
Intrepid Reader: Aaron Heilman
Just try saying that to your RA.
My RA is my wife. Well, she's the boss of the RAs.
So you can sneak beer into your dorm? Awesome.
Not sure who is actually familiar with my non-meme living arrangements, but the wife is the area coordinator for her alma mater now, so we live in an apartment on the top floor of a student apartment complex (rent free, natch). The other night I heard some scuffling from three floors down, which woke up the (nigh six months pregnant and battling the flu at the time) wife, so in my ANGER I stormed downstairs wearing my pajama pants and an old Derrek Lee shirsey. I find a bunch of kids with open bottles and cans everywhere having a wrestling match in the lobby. They tell me "go to bed old man!"
So naturally I played the "MY WIFE IS THE AC AND YOU ARE ALL IN SOO MUCH TROUBLE" card and laughed as they scattered while security and the cops showed up to ticket them. Then I went back and had a glass of legal booze, like the adult I am.
This story has no point other than I thought y'all might find it amusing and a worthy addition to my list of memes.
That you are a snitch?
Damn right. And I've slept like a baby every night since.
Actually I didn't snitch. I had every intention to but apparently someone else had already informed security and they had already called the cops. But they sure think I did so now I'm just the cantankerous old asshole everyone hates. And I'm happy with that.
You call that cantankerous? Listen son, until you escalate the situation to the point that the cops are being called on YOU then you're not cantanking hard enough.
Goddamn rookies.
I positive this post. I, too, am a thoroughly miserable, antisocial old cunt.
So...James Shields anyone?
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 10:52:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
Why are you the way you are? I hate so much about the things you choose to be.
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 11:01:03 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 10:52:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
Why are you the way you are? I hate so much about the things you choose to be.
Maybe you could call security on me.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:20:09 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 11:01:03 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 10:52:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
Why are you the way you are? I hate so much about the things you choose to be.
Maybe you could call security on me.
YA BURNT
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:20:09 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 11:01:03 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 10:52:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
Why are you the way you are? I hate so much about the things you choose to be.
Maybe you could call security on me.
Well this would be your first warning. I'll have to just tell on you to my wife and she'll tell you to settle down. Then you'll rue the day you crossed me.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 10:52:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
Maybe it's not 100%, but it's not a 0% change either.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 10:52:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
Maybe it's not 100%, but it's not a 0% change either.
Well and the rumor for quite some time has been that the Red Sox and Dodgers aren't in, St Louis rarely goes after a big free agent pitcher and it sounds like they're out right now, the Yankees are supposedly adamant about not signing a big ticket FA this offseason...so if the Cubs are one of the four or so teams with offers in I doubt they can't outbid the ones they're dealing with.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
So you don't believe the reports that if Moncada was available after July the Cubs would make a push to sign him? He's going to cost a fortune, and now the Cubs are out on him.
Quote from: BH on February 05, 2015, 12:03:10 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
So you don't believe the reports that if Moncada was available after July the Cubs would make a push to sign him? He's going to cost a fortune, and now the Cubs are out on him.
What's your point?
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 12:53:25 PM
Quote from: BH on February 05, 2015, 12:03:10 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
So you don't believe the reports that if Moncada was available after July the Cubs would make a push to sign him? He's going to cost a fortune, and now the Cubs are out on him.
What's your point?
That the Cubs have money for payroll.
Seemed pretty clear.
Quote from: PenFoe on February 05, 2015, 01:07:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 12:53:25 PM
Quote from: BH on February 05, 2015, 12:03:10 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
So you don't believe the reports that if Moncada was available after July the Cubs would make a push to sign him? He's going to cost a fortune, and now the Cubs are out on him.
What's your point?
That the Cubs have money for payroll.
Seemed pretty clear.
I think they have money to spend on a 19-year-old who's projected as a superstar. I don't think you can assume they'd now just automatically take that same money and spend it on a 33-year-old pitcher.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:12:53 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 05, 2015, 01:07:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 12:53:25 PM
Quote from: BH on February 05, 2015, 12:03:10 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
So you don't believe the reports that if Moncada was available after July the Cubs would make a push to sign him? He's going to cost a fortune, and now the Cubs are out on him.
What's your point?
That the Cubs have money for payroll.
Seemed pretty clear.
I think they have money to spend on a 19-year-old who's projected as a superstar. I don't think you can assume they'd now just automatically take that same money and spend it on a 33-year-old pitcher.
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tt7HjIernphaSrv4wMWdUYg&output=html
There are quite a few reasons not to sign Shields. Affordability is not one of them.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
Quote from: PenFoe on February 05, 2015, 01:07:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 12:53:25 PM
Quote from: BH on February 05, 2015, 12:03:10 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
So you don't believe the reports that if Moncada was available after July the Cubs would make a push to sign him? He's going to cost a fortune, and now the Cubs are out on him.
What's your point?
That the Cubs have money for payroll.
Seemed pretty clear.
When he said the price was high on Moncada and the Cubs were out on him, that seemed clear they have money for payroll? I don't know that I follow you or him or Slezak on that.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
"They can afford it" may also not be true. The Rickettseseses took on a lot of debt to buy the team - some might even say it was a LOAD of debt - and they're also paying for a small renovation project at Wrigley. The 2009-2011 teams didn't have those cash outflows to worry about.
Quote from: InternetApex on February 05, 2015, 02:08:38 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on February 05, 2015, 01:07:32 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 12:53:25 PM
Quote from: BH on February 05, 2015, 12:03:10 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
You can't see a team with plenty of cash, low payroll (even with another $20mm per year guy), no more than 18 months away from clearing another $13mm in annual payroll (Jackson), and with a manager who brought the guy up signing Shields?
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
So you don't believe the reports that if Moncada was available after July the Cubs would make a push to sign him? He's going to cost a fortune, and now the Cubs are out on him.
What's your point?
That the Cubs have money for payroll.
Seemed pretty clear.
When he said the price was high on Moncada and the Cubs were out on him, that seemed clear they have money for payroll? I don't know that I follow you or him or Slezak on that.
They are out on Moncada because of a stupid rule the MLB has, not because they don't have the money for him.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
Basically.
Quote from: BH on February 05, 2015, 02:34:46 PM
They are out on Moncada because of a stupid rule the MLB has the international bonus pool limit that the Cubs made a willful and calculated decision to exceed, not because they don't have the money for him.
Oopstink'd?
Quote from: R-V on February 05, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
"They can afford it" may also not be true. The Rickettseseses took on a lot of debt to buy the team - some might even say it was a LOAD of debt - and they're also paying for a small renovation project at Wrigley. The 2009-2011 teams didn't have those cash outflows to worry about.
Over 50% of those outflows are right back to their pockets. The Ricketts Family Trust was the primary debt provider. $249 million of the $425mm in initial debt was owed to the family.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 03:24:32 PM
Quote from: R-V on February 05, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
"They can afford it" may also not be true. The Rickettseseses took on a lot of debt to buy the team - some might even say it was a LOAD of debt - and they're also paying for a small renovation project at Wrigley. The 2009-2011 teams didn't have those cash outflows to worry about.
Over 50% of those outflows are right back to their pockets. The Ricketts Family Trust was the primary debt provider. $249 million of the $425mm in initial debt was owed to the family.
I can't tell if you're saying the Ricketts should have been spending more money all along, or just that they should be spending more money going forward, or what. I think the primary point is that regardless of how much money they have available, it hasn't been going into payroll the past few years.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 03:27:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 03:24:32 PM
Quote from: R-V on February 05, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
"They can afford it" may also not be true. The Rickettseseses took on a lot of debt to buy the team - some might even say it was a LOAD of debt - and they're also paying for a small renovation project at Wrigley. The 2009-2011 teams didn't have those cash outflows to worry about.
Over 50% of those outflows are right back to their pockets. The Ricketts Family Trust was the primary debt provider. $249 million of the $425mm in initial debt was owed to the family.
I can't tell if you're saying the Ricketts should have been spending more money all along, or just that they should be spending more money going forward, or what. I think the primary point is that regardless of how much money they have available, it hasn't been going into payroll the past few years.
True but I think this always comes back to "who were they going to spend it on." They pursued Anibal and then settled for Edwin because they felt those guys could still be effective middle rotation starters by the time they were competitive again, but otherwise they weren't going to try to spend their way into competitiveness. But now that they appear ready to compete, they will spend to put themselves over the top. Lester was part one of that, if Shields has dropped down into the 4/70 range, it's entirely conceivable the Cubs think they can fit that into their picture over the next couple of years before they have to re-sign their young hitters.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 03:27:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 03:24:32 PM
Quote from: R-V on February 05, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
"They can afford it" may also not be true. The Rickettseseses took on a lot of debt to buy the team - some might even say it was a LOAD of debt - and they're also paying for a small renovation project at Wrigley. The 2009-2011 teams didn't have those cash outflows to worry about.
Over 50% of those outflows are right back to their pockets. The Ricketts Family Trust was the primary debt provider. $249 million of the $425mm in initial debt was owed to the family.
I can't tell if you're saying the Ricketts should have been spending more money all along, or just that they should be spending more money going forward, or what. I think the primary point is that regardless of how much money they have available, it hasn't been going into payroll the past few years.
My point is that their debt problems are nowhere near as high as believed because they owe themselves a lot of money. That they "took on a lot of debt to buy the team" is overstated and misunderstood.
The baseball financial and baseball operations have been done exactly as I would have done it since the day Theo got here. Cut payroll drastically, draft well. Sign big free agents when talent was ready.
Quotean Albert Pujols level contract is certainly affordable if payroll is kept flat.
But if evil bankers tell the Ricketts that they need to see more earnings before interest and taxes, payroll could easily be cut. If payroll goes down, minor league development is paramount to keep the team competitive on the field. Unfortunately, Jim Hendry's track record in player development is spotty at best. (http://ivychat.blogspot.com/2011/04/cutting-spending.html)
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 03:24:32 PM
Quote from: R-V on February 05, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
"They can afford it" may also not be true. The Rickettseseses took on a lot of debt to buy the team - some might even say it was a LOAD of debt - and they're also paying for a small renovation project at Wrigley. The 2009-2011 teams didn't have those cash outflows to worry about.
Over 50% of those outflows are right back to their pockets. The Ricketts Family Trust was the primary debt provider. $249 million of the $425mm in initial debt was owed to the family.
By my rough estimate, that means they still owe $176 M to the banks. I'm not a banker but I'm sure the annual payments on that are significant. Add in what they are spending on the ballpark renovations and the point stands that they have more spending obligations to worry about than just player salaries and Tom's Land's End bills.
Quote from: R-V on February 05, 2015, 05:03:22 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 03:24:32 PM
Quote from: R-V on February 05, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 01:41:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 05, 2015, 01:39:15 PM
Cubs payroll averaged $137.7mm from 2009-2011. Their revenues will be higher from 2015-2018 than they were from 2009-2011. 2015 Payroll is at $111,454,524 right now. That's missing a few million for Baez, Olt, and Bryant. Even if it's short $5mm and they add Shields at $20mm per, that brings payroll up to about $127 million. That's $10mm BELOW what it was 5+ years ago. And $13mm of that falls off in 2 years.
They can afford it.
*I* know they can afford it. But that and Ricketts choosing to actually spend money are totally different.
Quote
I still don't think they have "plenty" of cash that they're willing to spend on payroll.
If that's what you meant, fine. But it didn't sound like that's what you meant. I suppose the operative was "willing to spend" vs. "don't think they have".
"They can afford it" may also not be true. The Rickettseseses took on a lot of debt to buy the team - some might even say it was a LOAD of debt - and they're also paying for a small renovation project at Wrigley. The 2009-2011 teams didn't have those cash outflows to worry about.
Over 50% of those outflows are right back to their pockets. The Ricketts Family Trust was the primary debt provider. $249 million of the $425mm in initial debt was owed to the family.
By my rough estimate, that means they still owe $176 M to the banks. I'm not a banker but I'm sure the annual payments on that are significant. Add in what they are spending on the ballpark renovations and the point stands that they have more spending obligations to worry about than just player salaries and Tom's Land's End bills.
IANAB either, but my guess is that the interest rate 5% or less. If so, its about 8.5 million per year, which is half a starting pitcher, so nothing too excessive. Meanwhile the bulk of the renovations will be paying big dollars back quickly (particularly those scoreboards, but the hotel, and triangle concert venue will be money makers as well ). Add in probably about $400 million of asset appreciation, and I wouldn't worry about the Ricketts writing checks anytime soon.
Quote from: Eli on February 05, 2015, 10:52:20 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 05, 2015, 08:10:52 AM
So...James Shields anyone?
I just can't see it happening. If his price tag has dropped enough for the Cubs to be interested, presumably a ton of other teams are interested, too. Someone's going to offer more.
Dammit, Eli.
Still, a little encouraging to the "Cubs can't/won't spend crowd that the team was willing to commit almost a quarter of a billion dollars to two pitchers in one offseason, no?
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
*plays slide whistle*
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/facepalm1.gif?w=650)
Quote from: Eli on February 09, 2015, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/facepalm1.gif?w=650)
I bet this all ends in the triumphant return of the Hot Diarrhea Geyser.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price zimmerman.
Instead, Theo will just get Price Zimmerman.
Sorry. Better?
Quote from: SKO on February 09, 2015, 10:55:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 09, 2015, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/facepalm1.gif?w=650)
I bet this all ends in the triumphant return of the Hot Diarrhea Geyser.
Bort would have to start another podcast.
Quote from: Fork on February 09, 2015, 11:35:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 09, 2015, 10:55:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 09, 2015, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/facepalm1.gif?w=650)
I bet this all ends in the triumphant return of the Hot Diarrhea Geyser.
Bort would have to start another podcast.
I'm already playing fast and loose by not tagging this one as explicit. The Snorkcast would just be 2 hours a week of me swearing nonstop.
Quote from: Bort on February 09, 2015, 12:18:59 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 09, 2015, 11:35:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 09, 2015, 10:55:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 09, 2015, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/facepalm1.gif?w=650)
I bet this all ends in the triumphant return of the Hot Diarrhea Geyser.
Bort would have to start another podcast.
I'm already playing fast and loose by not tagging this one as explicit. The Snorkcast would just be 2 hours a week of me swearing nonstop.
I'd be happy to come on as a guest if only to give you a breather and swear constantly while you take sips of whatever you're drinking.
Quote from: Bort on February 09, 2015, 12:18:59 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 09, 2015, 11:35:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 09, 2015, 10:55:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 09, 2015, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/facepalm1.gif?w=650)
I bet this all ends in the triumphant return of the Hot Diarrhea Geyser.
Bort would have to start another podcast.
I'm already playing fast and loose by not tagging this one as explicit. The Snorkcast would just be 2 hours a week of me swearing nonstop.
He'd probably just abandon the podcast midway through the first episode
Quote from: Yeti on February 09, 2015, 12:55:00 PM
Quote from: Bort on February 09, 2015, 12:18:59 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 09, 2015, 11:35:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 09, 2015, 10:55:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 09, 2015, 09:49:12 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 09, 2015, 08:34:59 AM
Rumors are that the Cubs offered 3 years with an option for a 4th while SD locked in year four. Basically, Theo held out for his price.
Instead, Theo will just get Price.
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/facepalm1.gif?w=650)
I bet this all ends in the triumphant return of the Hot Diarrhea Geyser.
Bort would have to start another podcast.
I'm already playing fast and loose by not tagging this one as explicit. The Snorkcast would just be 2 hours a week of me swearing nonstop.
He'd probably just abandon the podcast midway through the first episode
That does sound like something I would do.
Chuck's awkward poem thing got me thinking and then yammering on Twitter to the point of confusing Slaky -- but anyway, which scenario sounds better?
- Cole Hamels for 2015-2019 (through his age 35 season) for $109 million, but you're trading Addison Russell to get him.
- David Price for 2016-2023 (through age 38) for roughly $225 million, minus the draft pick it will cost to sign him.
Price is the superior pitcher by some margin, but he'll also be vastly more expensive and require being signed for several extra non-prime years. And trading for Hamels would also mean you're opening the window to compete a bit earlier since you'd have him now.
That sounds like I'd prefer a Hamels scenario, but I don't actually know.
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Chuck's awkward poem thing got me thinking and then yammering on Twitter to the point of confusing Slaky -- but anyway, which scenario sounds better?
- Cole Hamels for 2015-2019 (through his age 35 season) for $109 million, but you're trading Addison Russell to get him.
- David Price for 2016-2023 (through age 38) for roughly $225 million, minus the draft pick it will cost to sign him.
Price is the superior pitcher by some margin, but he'll also be vastly more expensive and require being signed for several extra non-prime years. And trading for Hamels would also mean you're opening the window to compete a bit earlier since you'd have him now.
That sounds like I'd prefer a Hamels scenario, but I don't actually know.
Does the deal have to be made before the season?
I'd kind like to see how things play out a little before dealing a top prospect.
Quote from: PANK! on February 10, 2015, 08:48:55 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 08:44:38 AM
Chuck's awkward poem thing got me thinking and then yammering on Twitter to the point of confusing Slaky -- but anyway, which scenario sounds better?
- Cole Hamels for 2015-2019 (through his age 35 season) for $109 million, but you're trading Addison Russell to get him.
- David Price for 2016-2023 (through age 38) for roughly $225 million, minus the draft pick it will cost to sign him.
Price is the superior pitcher by some margin, but he'll also be vastly more expensive and require being signed for several extra non-prime years. And trading for Hamels would also mean you're opening the window to compete a bit earlier since you'd have him now.
That sounds like I'd prefer a Hamels scenario, but I don't actually know.
Does the deal have to be made before the season?
I'd kind like to see how things play out a little before dealing a top prospect.
For the sake of discussion, let's say yes. Then you get the value of a full season of Hamels in 2015.
I'm not ready to trade for Hamels now. I'd like to see 3 months of Soler, Bryant, Baez and even MiLB Russell. I want to know the offense is what we expect before I'd commit to a trade of a top prospect for pitching. If those 4 guys don't pan out, Hamels won't get you there.
That said, if the market for Hamels pops now (i.e. the Cards are going to get him in May), I go get him.
I wait if I can set the timetable. If I can't, I made a deal. I don't really think the need for Hamels in 2015 is as great as it will be in 2016.
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on February 10, 2015, 09:46:26 AM
I'm not ready to trade for Hamels now. I'd like to see 3 months of Soler, Bryant, Baez and even MiLB Russell. I want to know the offense is what we expect before I'd commit to a trade of a top prospect for pitching. If those 4 guys don't pan out, Hamels won't get you there.
That said, if the market for Hamels pops now (i.e. the Cards are going to get him in May), I go get him.
I wait if I can set the timetable. If I can't, I made a deal. I don't really think the need for Hamels in 2015 is as great as it will be in 2016.
But I think you might want to make your move while Ruben Amaro's still answering the phones there.
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
I think that's why the best case scenario right now is for Hamels to start the season with the Phillies. By July the Cubs will have some things clarified. If Baez still looks like the guy he did after his callup last year, they should probably hang onto Addison regardless. If Baez is hitting well, then the Phillies may take him and some others in a trade, or it makes the decision to get rid of Russell easier.
There's always the possibility of both Russell and Baez scuffling to start the season but I think even with a half-season of minor league struggles Russell wouldn't lose much of his standing as a top trade piece.
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:47:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
I think that's why the best case scenario right now is for Hamels to start the season with the Phillies. By July the Cubs will have some things clarified. If Baez still looks like the guy he did after his callup last year, they should probably hang onto Addison regardless. If Baez is hitting well, then the Phillies may take him and some others in a trade, or it makes the decision to get rid of Russell easier.
There's always the possibility of both Russell and Baez scuffling to start the season but I think even with a half-season of minor league struggles Russell wouldn't lose much of his standing as a top trade piece.
If there is a team out there that wants Baez and has anything at all to offer I can't see a reason for not jumping at it. Baez Is like the Cub players whom I watched while growing up and marching into old age. Great power when there is no one on base, low BA, high K rate, rally killer.
Quote from: CBStew on February 10, 2015, 12:41:27 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:47:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
I think that's why the best case scenario right now is for Hamels to start the season with the Phillies. By July the Cubs will have some things clarified. If Baez still looks like the guy he did after his callup last year, they should probably hang onto Addison regardless. If Baez is hitting well, then the Phillies may take him and some others in a trade, or it makes the decision to get rid of Russell easier.
There's always the possibility of both Russell and Baez scuffling to start the season but I think even with a half-season of minor league struggles Russell wouldn't lose much of his standing as a top trade piece.
If there is a team out there that wants Baez and has anything at all to offer I can't see a reason for not jumping at it. Baez Is like the Cub players whom I watched while growing up and marching into old age. Great power when there is no one on base, low BA, high K rate, rally killer.
I can understand why you'd devalue Baez. When you say, "anything at all" how low an asking price are we talking? Midling pitching prospects? Bad contracts? Backup infielders? Back of the rotation starter? Alex Rodriguez?
I'm more than a little stunned that this discussion hasn't included Chuck trading Castro at least 5 times.
Quote from: Fork on February 10, 2015, 01:19:05 PM
I'm more than a little stunned that this discussion hasn't included Chuck trading Castro at least 5 times.
It's increasingly likely I will do that.
Quote from: InternetApex on February 10, 2015, 01:06:50 PM
Quote from: CBStew on February 10, 2015, 12:41:27 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:47:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
I think that's why the best case scenario right now is for Hamels to start the season with the Phillies. By July the Cubs will have some things clarified. If Baez still looks like the guy he did after his callup last year, they should probably hang onto Addison regardless. If Baez is hitting well, then the Phillies may take him and some others in a trade, or it makes the decision to get rid of Russell easier.
There's always the possibility of both Russell and Baez scuffling to start the season but I think even with a half-season of minor league struggles Russell wouldn't lose much of his standing as a top trade piece.
If there is a team out there that wants Baez and has anything at all to offer I can't see a reason for not jumping at it. Baez Is like the Cub players whom I watched while growing up and marching into old age. Great power when there is no one on base, low BA, high K rate, rally killer.
I can understand why you'd devalue Baez. When you say, "anything at all" how low an asking price are we talking? Midling pitching prospects? Bad contracts? Backup infielders? Back of the rotation starter? Alex Rodriguez?
Quite simply put, Baez, even if he is "successful" is going to be a player a lot of people are going to hate. You're not going to be able to convince a lot of older fans especially that a guy who might hit .242 and strike out 180 times in a "good" year is a good player. So I suggest maybe just letting Stew be old and cranky.
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 01:51:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 10, 2015, 01:06:50 PM
Quote from: CBStew on February 10, 2015, 12:41:27 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:47:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
I think that's why the best case scenario right now is for Hamels to start the season with the Phillies. By July the Cubs will have some things clarified. If Baez still looks like the guy he did after his callup last year, they should probably hang onto Addison regardless. If Baez is hitting well, then the Phillies may take him and some others in a trade, or it makes the decision to get rid of Russell easier.
There's always the possibility of both Russell and Baez scuffling to start the season but I think even with a half-season of minor league struggles Russell wouldn't lose much of his standing as a top trade piece.
If there is a team out there that wants Baez and has anything at all to offer I can't see a reason for not jumping at it. Baez Is like the Cub players whom I watched while growing up and marching into old age. Great power when there is no one on base, low BA, high K rate, rally killer.
I can understand why you'd devalue Baez. When you say, "anything at all" how low an asking price are we talking? Midling pitching prospects? Bad contracts? Backup infielders? Back of the rotation starter? Alex Rodriguez?
Quite simply put, Baez, even if he is "successful" is going to be a player a lot of people are going to hate. You're not going to be able to convince a lot of older fans especially that a guy who might hit .242 and strike out 180 times in a "good" year is a good player. So I suggest maybe just letting Stew be old and cranky.
Probably the same people who always wanted the Cubs to get Adam Dunn.
Quote from: Fork on February 10, 2015, 02:08:23 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 01:51:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 10, 2015, 01:06:50 PM
Quote from: CBStew on February 10, 2015, 12:41:27 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:47:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
I think that's why the best case scenario right now is for Hamels to start the season with the Phillies. By July the Cubs will have some things clarified. If Baez still looks like the guy he did after his callup last year, they should probably hang onto Addison regardless. If Baez is hitting well, then the Phillies may take him and some others in a trade, or it makes the decision to get rid of Russell easier.
There's always the possibility of both Russell and Baez scuffling to start the season but I think even with a half-season of minor league struggles Russell wouldn't lose much of his standing as a top trade piece.
If there is a team out there that wants Baez and has anything at all to offer I can't see a reason for not jumping at it. Baez Is like the Cub players whom I watched while growing up and marching into old age. Great power when there is no one on base, low BA, high K rate, rally killer.
I can understand why you'd devalue Baez. When you say, "anything at all" how low an asking price are we talking? Midling pitching prospects? Bad contracts? Backup infielders? Back of the rotation starter? Alex Rodriguez?
Quite simply put, Baez, even if he is "successful" is going to be a player a lot of people are going to hate. You're not going to be able to convince a lot of older fans especially that a guy who might hit .242 and strike out 180 times in a "good" year is a good player. So I suggest maybe just letting Stew be old and cranky.
Probably the same people who always wanted the Cubs to get Adam Dunn.
Adam Dunn was also a big, ugly, smelly minus on defense so those people are still wrong.
Quote from: InternetApex on February 10, 2015, 02:10:44 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 10, 2015, 02:08:23 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 01:51:33 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 10, 2015, 01:06:50 PM
Quote from: CBStew on February 10, 2015, 12:41:27 PM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:47:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Quote from: Eli on February 10, 2015, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: SKO on February 10, 2015, 11:07:01 AM
How much do people think Zimmerman will cost? I might want to go that route
I'd guess he'd cost less than Price, partially just based on name recognition and his more checkered injury history (TJS). I'd imagine his value is heavily dependent on if he can repeat 2014.
Yeah. His 2013 didn't look bad, either. He's intriguing. Also as much as we joke about it I'm not really sure that bringing back Snork (if he's amenable to it) is a bad idea. He'd be younger than Hamels, and despite being older than Zimmerman and Price, I believe, he's also got fewer than 800 innings of wear and tear on his arm.
Suffice it to say there are enough options that I'd hesitate to give up a player of Addison's caliber just yet, but, like Chuck said, it could be worth going after Hamels if a team like the Cardinals were close to acquiring him instead, especially since they generally lack the cash to go after a guy like Price on the open market.
I'm sure it's possible to get Hamels without giving up Russell, but I just put him in there because it was more clear in terms of picturing the cost. Maybe they'd take a Baez-Edwards-McKinney-Castillo (note: I spent 4 seconds thinking about that, so don't get too hung up on who's named) quantity package eventually, but that's tougher to break down value-wise.
I think that's why the best case scenario right now is for Hamels to start the season with the Phillies. By July the Cubs will have some things clarified. If Baez still looks like the guy he did after his callup last year, they should probably hang onto Addison regardless. If Baez is hitting well, then the Phillies may take him and some others in a trade, or it makes the decision to get rid of Russell easier.
There's always the possibility of both Russell and Baez scuffling to start the season but I think even with a half-season of minor league struggles Russell wouldn't lose much of his standing as a top trade piece.
If there is a team out there that wants Baez and has anything at all to offer I can't see a reason for not jumping at it. Baez Is like the Cub players whom I watched while growing up and marching into old age. Great power when there is no one on base, low BA, high K rate, rally killer.
I can understand why you'd devalue Baez. When you say, "anything at all" how low an asking price are we talking? Midling pitching prospects? Bad contracts? Backup infielders? Back of the rotation starter? Alex Rodriguez?
Quite simply put, Baez, even if he is "successful" is going to be a player a lot of people are going to hate. You're not going to be able to convince a lot of older fans especially that a guy who might hit .242 and strike out 180 times in a "good" year is a good player. So I suggest maybe just letting Stew be old and cranky.
Probably the same people who always wanted the Cubs to get Adam Dunn.
Adam Dunn was also a big, ugly, smelly minus on defense so those people are still wrong.
He also walked a lot, which isn't really Javy's thing
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 12:23:09 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2015, 12:04:13 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
Oh, so all black guys look alike to you.
"Pierre would arrive early at the Rockies' Spring Training complex every day to work on bunting or coming out of the batter's box after a swing. Coaches couldn't get in early enough to satisfy his desire to work. Teammates couldn't keep up with him.
"Fowler still smiles when reminded of Pierre's story. "That's how I am," Fowler said." (http://m.mlb.com/news/article/4471416/)
With a career OPB 23 points higher than Pierre's.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
As terrifying as the comparison looks through the lens above, Fowler has a career OBP of .366. So, let's just end this now.
Shoutlag?
Quote from: InternetApex on February 20, 2015, 02:01:45 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
As terrifying as the comparison looks through the lens above, Fowler has a career OBP of .366. So, let's just end this now.
Shoutlag?
I just like the Fowler pickup so much that I wanted to bump it. This guy's already 36% of the way to first base on Opening Day.
Quote from: Fork on February 20, 2015, 02:32:22 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 20, 2015, 02:01:45 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
As terrifying as the comparison looks through the lens above, Fowler has a career OBP of .366. So, let's just end this now.
Shoutlag?
I just like the Fowler pickup so much that I wanted to bump it. This guy's already 36% of the way to first base on Opening Day.
He respects all 90 but 32.94 of those feet are already his.
Quote from: InternetApex on February 20, 2015, 02:44:10 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 20, 2015, 02:32:22 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 20, 2015, 02:01:45 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
As terrifying as the comparison looks through the lens above, Fowler has a career OBP of .366. So, let's just end this now.
Shoutlag?
I just like the Fowler pickup so much that I wanted to bump it. This guy's already 36% of the way to first base on Opening Day.
He respects all 90 but 32.94 of those feet are already his.
You can't own first base, man.
Quote from: Oleg on February 20, 2015, 02:58:16 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 20, 2015, 02:44:10 PM
Quote from: Fork on February 20, 2015, 02:32:22 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on February 20, 2015, 02:01:45 PM
Quote from: InternetApex on January 19, 2015, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2015, 11:27:22 AM
(http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/juan-pierre-21.jpg) (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-26cxyMsY3DI/T2T866l4KAI/AAAAAAAAFy8/pi0fKReAIcI/s1600/Dexter+Fowler+color+swap+2012+Topps+Heritage.png)
As terrifying as the comparison looks through the lens above, Fowler has a career OBP of .366. So, let's just end this now.
Shoutlag?
I just like the Fowler pickup so much that I wanted to bump it. This guy's already 36% of the way to first base on Opening Day.
He respects all 90 but 32.94 of those feet are already his.
You can't own first base, man.
Well, I can, because I'm not a
penniless hippie.