CubinNY

He's not likely to be near the player he once was before the injury. He's only signed for one year. I suppose if someone wants to give the Cubs a haul for Davis, that would be great too, but if I had to choose, I'd choose Davis. With PCA coming up in a few years, Davis can slide over to LF/RF.

He could be a difference-maker this year. Best case he destroys AAA for two months. Bellinger holds his own at the plate and brings back a good MLB-ready pitching prospect in July.

I think he's the Cubs' best prospect by a wide margin. I don't pretend to be an expert, though.

Back of the napkin you'd probably say something like 83. Coming into the offseason they were at 74 https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-absurdly-preliminary-2023-zips-projected-standings/ They've added this offseason 13ish WAR. That's not going to equate to 13 wins though because it was spread so much through the roster, rather than being concentrated in a few spots. So I think depending on how you evaluate some of the particulars you'd probably say they added 7-10 wins. I hate these analogies, but it's a high-floor, low-ceiling team. If things break well for the Cubs and they are in contention, they can use some of their vaunted depth in the minors to maybe get them to 90 or so wins.

I hope he goes in as a Philly.

?

Manny Rodriguez and the other dude, Kay? who got DFA cleared waivers. I’m not sure if they are free to become FA, but would assume so. Have no clue if they will.

You know Thom (stupidest way to spell Tom) Brennaman has already reached out to the Braves. 80% of the fan base loves off-color jokes about marginalized people.

Not really a transaction although I suppose a 60-day IL will be happening for Kyle Hendricks.

uhh isn't the top of this draft supposed to be really heavy on defensive talent Johnson, the WR from TCU is a top 10 candidate and there are several others projected to go in the first round, but it is supposedly a very weak draft. Maybe they want to target the position through FA. OL is weak too, but there is one in the top 10.

Back to the MacPhail/Hendry days of wanting to "compete within the division". The Cubs are going to compete within the division, but they are not a great team unless the pitching really improves. They should hit more HR and have an improved offense and improved defense, at least up the middle.

Yes, I thought about adding it to the post, but the discussion needs to die, for now. I hope the board is around in 3-5 years (and I'm around too, lol). Farris appears to have more upside as a starting pitcher to me than Horton who is likely a closer or set-up guy.

Horton - TJS Frisch - TJS Ferris - was compared to Tim Lincicum in his delivery. Clearly, they can work on his mechanics, but still. Birdsell - Rotator cuff, TJS in high school Mule - Great heater, but wants to be Ohtani They definitely laid all their chips on the pitching development team and that is the strength of the organization, so maybe it will work out. The chances are not good.

What kind of psyops can they run?

If no one from the 2022 class makes it to the bigs, it will outperform the 2005 MLB Draft class that had a -0.1 bWAR. The 2010 class had a -0.8 bWAR! (admittedly did have a whopping +0.5 fWAR). The difference is that year the Cubs were drafting 20th.

Cubs DFA Anthony Kay (who?) after making it official with Mancini.

Amorality is the new baseball inefficiency. It's not that new.

Last year's draft is going to be among the worst in Cubs history. It's really inexplicable. lol We shall see. I said it then and I stand by it now.

Last year's draft is going to be among the worst in Cubs history. It's really inexplicable.

.260/.360/.420 slash, High 20s HRs/year, lots of Ks, good to great defense. He's not a difference maker, but he raises the win total floor.

I mean if there was a consensus prospect on the level of Lawrence we probably would be having a real trade Fields conversation. But if we presume something a little less generational, but still consensus, like a Stafford? I think I'd rather have a clear consensus #1. Without benefit of hindsight is this the 2018-lite draft class? That one didn't have a clear consensus #1. Had a couple of college studs (two former Heisman winners), but valuations were all over the place on guys. 5 ended up in the first round with 4 in the first 10, and 4 of the 5 involved trades. Of course the first pick wasn't traded being it was the QB needy Browns. Or even 2017 with three non-consensus QBs, and all 3 were traded up for. Soo you don't need consensus to get lots of trade activity, but do you need it to drive trade activity all the way up to 1? Edit maybe it's like 2016-heavy which also lacked a clear consensus, but was shallower with only 2 FR QBs but both were traded up 1-2. Did lack of supply help there? Is 3 (maybe 4?) too much supply? The biggest factor is the Texans being at #2, and the Bears being obvious sellers. I think the Bears clearly selling in general lowers the value of the #1 pick. It should still be a decent haul though, because it's still the #1 pick. Maybe more if there is a consensus, but I think that would actually mean fewer candidates because the cost would be more prohibitive. My hope is that the Bears don't trade down too far regardless of the draft pick enticements.

Boy, I really wanted the Cubs to draft Collier.

Where was Brooks Lee? Cam Collier?

Why was he available on waivers? What are the warts?

It's more subjective than not, so there is little reason to argue about it. One could say that there were three quarterbacks drafted ahead of him and he dropped to 11 is a pretty good indication that he's not as good a prospect as Young, but as Bertz pointed out the context of each draft is different.