Twins (Lopez) vs Cubs (Imanaga): 8/6/24, 7:05pm

[JD94]

1 hour ago, TomtheBombadil said:

1) In the sense that it hasn't happened yet, sure.  In the sense that these are young-er players with strong baseball backgrounds who aren't getting overwhelmed, are even improving, by the MLs? This is an ascending group

2) I mean this really nicely but if you're just going to keep pretending Neto, on his way to a 3+ fWAR/4+ rWAR season, is bad then this isn't a conversation worth having right? Like you have an agenda, you want something from them as cheap as possible from every angle, and that's clearly fueling these takes

When you can't get specific beyond " almost ready prospects and big leaguers" for a team you see as nowhere close to being competitive, you're looking for a convenient price

How does having prospects make Cubs ready? You just shat on Moore like a post ago over having "lofty" expectations to come up and help them compete! Is he not a Legit Prospect? (Edit) Shanuel (11th overall) and Neto (13th) were drafted a year and two years ago respectively, have held their own in the MLs since, and these aren't Legit Prospects? Is Caden Dana, a 20 YO in AA  posting one of the better MiLB SP seasons, not a Legit Prospect? (/Edit) Like come on...You've got a bias, you've got an agenda, and I'm not being crazy to say that a 24 YO pre-arb impact starter becoming available is a longshot at best (edit: esp for what it seems you’re willing to move?)

Nothing I said is wrong. Those guys (minus LOH) are average or a little below compared to others at their position based on fWAR. That’s…. fine. Those are the stats. Not some weird agenda you claim I have against these guys. They are average major league players. It’s fine. If that’s strong to you, then okay. We have different definitions of strong players.
 

 And what does “When you can't get specific beyond " almost ready prospects and big leaguers” even mean? You want me to give you some made up trade package? I don’t know. Almost any of our prospects would be on the table for LOH. 
 

& come on man. You know exactly what I’m saying when I say we have prospects ready. We have like 6 top 100 prospects in AAA. Do I have to spell the words out? It means we have enough good prospects to make that deal if the Angels were willing. 
 

Also I never shat on Moore. I simply said he was playing college baseball two months ago and you are the one that inserted him into the Los Angeles Angels starting lineup less than a year after being drafted and labeled him as a strong player. I mean… that’s something. Especially considering Matt Shaw has hardly struggled at any level and he still hasn’t made it to Chicago yet. 
 

I know you would continue this conversation for days, so I’ll bounce. We won’t agree. I’m not hating on Neto and Schanuel. They are fine. I’m not asking the Angels to give LOH away. I said basically any of our top prospects would be on the table to headline that deal. I have no idea if the Angels would do it or not. I said I personally see benefit from both sides. They are impatient and we are loaded with near ready top prospects that I imagine would interest them quite a bit. That’s all. There’s nothing to argue. Most of this is my opinion. If you disagree with my opinion, fine. The other part is backed by stats stating their infielders are average compared to the rest of the league. Will they get better? Sure. I guess. But so will other players. Will they pass them? I don’t know. All I have to go by is the stats they’ve put up so far in their careers. 
 

 

[CubUgly]

16 hours ago, Stratos said:

I like Boog but he's a know-it-all and Girardi is from the old school era, obviously not the same intensity of analytics guy Boog is.  I think Boog just needs to chill a bit and stop fighting with the guy on every point, even if he's right most of the time.  He doesn't need to always be right for his own ego.

I heard Boog do a college basketball game last year and he was not near as condescending and domineering with opinions.  I think he feels much more the expert in baseball and tends to want to be both color analyst and play-by-play guy.   Someone like JD who seems to have almost no ego in that regard, it can be o.k.  But with a former manager who thinks he knows better it leads to the awkward, cringeworthy broadcasts we get when those two are together. 

[Derwood]

It’s only awkward because Boog has a mountain of actual statistics in front of him while Girardi spouts out his opinions as “facts”. 
 

Boog tries to set him up with questions about his managerial days, and then Girardi says something dumb.

“Joe, who was a player that you managed who was a really great base runner?” 

*Girardi names someone who is a statistically terrible base runner *

*Boog facepalms for the seventeenth time*

[CubUgly]

22 hours ago, Derwood said:

It’s only awkward because Boog has a mountain of actual statistics in front of him while Girardi spouts out his opinions as “facts”. 
 

Boog tries to set him up 

I think more of the awkwardness comes from Boog setting him up and the fact that he doesn't like him is the reason he's setting him up.   No reason to do that other than spite and to me that's awkward for two guys who have to work together side-by-side for 3 hours.  It's unfathomable to me Marquee keeps putting them together.  They only have about 15 other options to choose from.