Jump to content
North Side Baseball

wilk

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    366

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by wilk

  1. wilk
    It's to gain a playoff roster eligibility slot. Because Hill was recalled and placed on the DL, he's eligible to make the active playoff roster. Before the first series begins, he could be replaced by someone not yet eligible like Hoffpauir or Wuertz if they decide to do so.
  2. wilk
    And cutting the strikeouts so dramatically will obviously dramatically decrease his walks. And a walk is a heck of a lot better than an out, no matter how "sharply hit." Dunn is a "three true outcomes" (strikeout, walk or home run) player and decreasing any of them will decrease all of them. If Dunn were forced to strikeout 100 times less, he becomes a much less productive player. There's no way around that. In a hypothetical where every PA has the exact same outcome except 100 strikeouts become 100 in-play outs (again, not possible) the difference in run production would be rather insignificant and it'd take more than a season before it really results in any additional win.
  3. wilk
    Yes, the player(s) the Rays trade in return would have to clear waivers if on the 40-man roster. Or, you can call it a PTBNL until after this waiver period is over and they wouldn't have to be exposed to trade waivers. Baltimore wouldn't get anyone this season, but as you said that's not the concern.
  4. wilk
    They waived him to trade him. In part because they can get something good for him now and in part because they'd rather his salary (and $3.5+M next year) off the books. If they weren't intending on trading with the Rays, they could just pull him back. Remember, players from both teams have to clear waivers. So anyone attractive and cheap on the 40-man from the Rays doesn't have much of a chance making it through.
  5. wilk
    I was talking about the Cubs so what exactly is "just not true?" And Pie, Hill, Vitters, Samardzija is pretty much the "everybody" I mentioned. But, Samardzija has a full no-trade clause and the Cubs value him much higher than anyone else does right now. And for the best prospect to be a PTBNL for 2-3 weeks is still messy and frowned upon even if it's not the couple months that's been suggested in the past. Does he just sit until he moves? What do they name as an alternative otherwise? Even looking past all of this, they can get a much better and sure prospect elsewhere and so they'd do so.
  6. wilk
    That's just not true. I don't understand why people always think teams are going to get these ridiculous packages when they deal stars at the deadline when they usually don't. They'd probably get a package of one or two A level prospects and a throw-in B or C prospect or two. It's absolutely true. I don't understand why people always think any player they want is practical to trade for if there's a rumor they're being shopped at all. To put it simply: teams with better prospects than us want him too. Toronto would rather have 2 great prospects than 5 so-so ones. Who are our "A level prospects?" Yeah. And our best trade prospect is someone who technically can't be traded -- but now the primary piece is going to be a PTBNL? And he'll just sit for 2-3 weeks, right? The truth is, we have no chance of Halladay unless we're giving them everyone and then at that point, they'd rather have the quality from others that is DEFINITELY available if they trade Roy...
  7. wilk
    Um, I think he's saying we couldn't possibly make a practical offer for Halladay. None of the 4-9 player packages suggested in the thread would work whatsoever. Lilly or Marquis? Give me a break. We could maybe, possibly, move Marquis in a deal for Burnett but certainly not Halladay...
  8. wilk
    Toronto is actually interested in Cedeno. I know, shocking, right? The thing is, they're going to trade him for nothing if nothing is the best offer. There's no chance he stays in Toronto next year and he's a Type B at best.
  9. wilk
    Cedeno is out of options, Murton has one option left after this year regardless of how many times he's sent down this season, Fontenot has one option left and would use it if sent down this year. Fontenot and now Murton would need optional assignment waivers though before being optioned. That's the revocable kind that's often treated as a formality, but you never know.
  10. wilk
    This thread will be even more fun in October. I can't wait.
  11. wilk
    Not that it's overly important, but I agree that the Jays would want Cedeno. Who does that leave us as our bench shortstop/infielder for the rest of the year? I can't imagine they'd go with Figueroa so what makes the most sense? I also think they'd have more interest in Eric Patterson than Murton next.
  12. wilk
    What do you feel the Cubs feel their needs are? Are they looking to go all-in on a front line starter? Or will they look to upgrade elsewhere (also)?
  13. wilk
    Methinks it's really nice that got somewhere...
  14. wilk
    http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060306&content_id=1336732&vkey=news_tex&fext=.jsp&c_id=tex Well there's one. It's Jamey Newberg of TheNewbergReport too. Now... can we trust Jamey if not me? Or should we go on to another... ;)
  15. wilk
    show me that part of rule 5 I don't know how to "show" you. The official procedure book is technically private so I obviously can't gain access to it and the scan a page. I don't know where there is a comprehensive and accurate account of it online. If I just search Google to find something, I'm sure you'll question the credibility of everything. Maybe you should "show" me the part where you can trade for the guy you draft before he's exposed to waivers... I didn't mention it to have THIS argument. I was sure there are plenty others here who know the rules.
  16. wilk
    After he clears waivers because teams like Cincinnati decided they changed their mind? Sure, seems greatly reasonable... if they work out a trade with the Rays, he's not exposed to waivers by being sent down. he's only put on waivers if they offer him back to the Rays No... He'd have to first clear waivers and make it back to the Rays before you can work out a trade with them. The other teams get a shot at keeping the player with Rule 5 restrictions first. methinks you don't understand the process Sigh. Methinks you don't. I'm not going to have an argument over something you misunderstood. You cannot trade for a Rule 5 pick, removing the restrictions, unless the player clears waivers first. That is how it works. Research it or e-mail someone "in the know" whom you trust.
  17. wilk
    After he clears waivers because teams like Cincinnati decided they changed their mind? Sure, seems greatly reasonable... if they work out a trade with the Rays, he's not exposed to waivers by being sent down. he's only put on waivers if they offer him back to the Rays No... He'd have to first clear waivers and make it back to the Rays before you can work out a trade with them. The other teams get a shot at keeping the player with Rule 5 restrictions first.
  18. wilk
    After he clears waivers because teams like Cincinnati decided they changed their mind? Sure, seems greatly reasonable...
  19. wilk
    Who are you counting out? Hart? I don't see a reason to carry Murton as a 5th OF and he hasn't been a very good pinch hitter. If you can't get a good deal for him now, play him every day at Iowa and let him put up some monster numbers in the PCL. Unfortunate for him maybe, but certainly better for his trade value than hitting .225 through 30 at-bats a month.
  20. wilk
    And if the Cubs sign Johnson (or acquire DaVanon/Byrd/etc.) what do you do with Murton? Iowa? Traded? (For what?) Squeezed on over a 12th pitcher or an extra infielder?
  21. wilk
    No, they can't do that. If he's been placed on outright waivers, he has to clear.
  22. wilk
    But the question is what he'd do against lefties, isn't it? Career vs LHP away: .308 / .353 / .513 2007 vs LHP: .356 / .426 / .586 (Away: .380 / .429 / .680) As for his defense in center, it's probably not "Murton in center," but it's not very good.
  23. wilk
    this is totally fabricated but what ev...
  24. wilk
    I hope everyone ignores him. If there's anything more annoying than his posts it's the 30 posts that follow.
  25. wilk
    Were you the only one who stopped looking after batting average? Or was it the 27 points of OBP that outweighed the 137 isolated power points? Oh, I got it... it must be Chone's .400 BABIP.
×
×
  • Create New...