Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Rob

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    15,265

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

 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

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Rob

  1. Rob
    That is ridiculous. Why are people so freaking afraid? Did Soriano scare you that much? We're just past the midpoint of that bad contract and the team already has plenty of flexibility. Big contracts to big time players will not cripple a big market team. I did learn a lesson about paying superstar money to a player who isn't quite a superstar, yes. Is the Cubs payroll high enough to hide some mistakes? Sure... but that doesn't mean making mistakes is a good idea. There's a price point at which acquiring Fielder is a mistake. What does it take for you to feel that point has been reached?
  2. Rob
    I had 2 targets, Pujols and Fielder, with moderate interest in Wilson. The truth of the matter is that two potential targets that will be hard to replace are gone. Pujols and Wilson. That's it. And we never had a shot if Wilson was that intent on going home. We were never in on Reyes, Papelbon, Bell, etc... (nor should we have been). And lamenting the loss of a player like Buehrle would be silly considering how many comparable or better pitchers there are on the market. If you want to go crazy because we didn't get Pujols, fine. That's well within your rights. But don't pretend our entire offseason is over. Most of the guys we were in on are still out there. Hence, early.
  3. Rob
    Yeah, there's no reason to go ballistic, but it's not early. We are between 25% to 33% of the way through the offseason. The vast majority of moves that will be made this offseason have not been made yet. That makes it early. It's not a linear timeline. We're past the GM and winter meetings. All but one of the top 6 or 7 free agents are gone. It's not early. Just out of sheer morbid curiosity, who were your top 6-7 free agent targets? Because I only count 2 of mine as being gone.
  4. Rob
    This. .. is completely wrong. We're past the GM meetings and past the winter meeting. We are well into the offseason. Stop pretending it's early. I agree, but a few, perhaps some people do need to calm down. The mass media (mostly radio) and meatheads are going to be whipping it up. Theo took control of a mediocre organization that was trending in the wrong direction. Also, we don't know what's going on with the renovations. I think the Ricketts are in investment mode right now and I don't blame them for not giving out too much money (I don't think you do either). It's not just the mass media and the meatheads, look at the number of posts on NSBB about the new FO and expectations. If the Cubs are going to be contenders in 2013, Theo is going to have to start doing something pretty soon or he will have a ton of holes to fill next offseason. Well then it's a good thing we still have 90% of the possibilities we had a month ago. Also, I hope you mean 2012, because it's waaaay too early to be giving up on 2013.
  5. Rob
    It might be nice to have an actual backup SS on the roster instead of just shifting Barney back over on days we need to give Castro off.
  6. Rob
    Yeah, there's no reason to go ballistic, but it's not early. We are between 25% to 33% of the way through the offseason. The vast majority of moves that will be made this offseason have not been made yet. That makes it early.
  7. Rob
    Seriously. It feels like everyone in the league got rich all of a sudden and now our $135 million payroll makes us mid-market. I'd go up to 6/150 for Fielder, and I don't understand why that makes me a cheapskate, but apparently it does. 6/130 for me, and I'd hate myself for going that high. 5/100 is the last number I feel comfortable at.
  8. Rob
    What "big market" moves have been made so far? CJ Wilson gave the Angels a huge discount, so we didn't really have a chance. Pujols, Reyes, and Buehrle will all have to stay perfectly healthy and perform on the very optimistic ends of their projections to have a chance of justifying their contracts -- in other words, they received bad contracts. Are we really mad that the Cubs didn't outbid 3 bad contracts? There are still plenty of places to spend money this offseason that represent real upgrades. Fielder and Darvish are obvious. Cespedes may be worth the gamble. Soler is certainly very interesting. Kuroda is the perfect short term investment. Edwin Jackson is nearly as good as Buehrle and should cost a good deal less. There's also quite a few interesting names who may or may not be available on the trade market: King Felix, BJ Upton, Cole Hamels, John Danks, etc... It's December 9th. We're barely into the offseason at all. People need to calm down.
  9. Rob
    I know we're all busy fighting with Kyle right now, but I thought it might be okay if I gave the short version of my opinion? I don't like Ian Stewart... but this was a good move.
  10. Rob
    The Marlins will probably get him. Their fans are so lucky.
  11. Rob
    Pretty sure you are.
  12. Rob
    I don't know. The very idea is a little irrational because it's based on the Marlins hating Morrison and liking(or at least Ozzie talking up) Z. Brett mentioned it in one of his roundups, so it's a touch more than random speculation at this point at least. Yeah... I'm very intrigued by the idea, but for the life of me I can't get my head wrapped around it.
  13. Rob
    I'm disappointed about losing Flaherty to a team that should be able to keep him. I couldn't care much less about Marwin Gonzalez. I am very excited about keeping Rhee. New guy? Meh. We'll see what he looks like in ST.
  14. Rob
    Do you really?
  15. Rob
    If by immediately you mean 2-4 years, then yes Pick up Morales Sign Darvish Keep Garza Trade for Headley Deal Z (and others/cash) for Morrison Sell Soriano for prospects Trade Byrd for prospects Use prospects to trade for Upton You can have contingencies that involve people like Smoak or Sanchez or any number of people if you want. Just because they're not as simple to see, doesn't mean that trades are not going to happen. What exactly do you envision as a realistic Z (and cash/others) for Morrison trade? I'm curious.
  16. Rob
    imb! will be really hurt by this I thought he was a copy editor. i have moved my way up to the crime beat son I could never do that job. I'd try to talk my friends into doing really stupid stuff just so I'd have something hilarious to write about.
  17. Rob
    I feel like you're stuck in the old Jim Hendry mindset... where we've got x amount of money and we must spend every single penny of it. Theo and Hoyer are good at what they do in large part because they realize when it's a good idea not to spend that money. If the contracts Pujols and Fielder are getting would hamper the Cubs more than they're worth, I imagine we're exploring other options to fill that hole.
  18. Rob
    Last I remember, the CBA wouldn't allow for arbitration awards to cut salaries by more than 20%. I don't know if that's still in effect or not, but K-Rod got paid 11.5 mil last season. So they'd be looking at paying at least 9.2 mil if K-Rod can't argue that even higher. Let's hope the old CBA is still in effect a while longer.
  19. Rob
    Because I look at Ike Davis and see a marginally better James Loney or Casey Kotchman? I'm not saying that isn't valuable... but I just don't buy into Davis ever having the power production necessary to be a difference maker. With the stakes that low, I don't mind giving up a couple years of service time to go after I guy I see as having a real bat.
  20. Rob
    If we're going for injury reclamation projects, I'm trying to acquire Kendrys Morales.
  21. Rob
    No worries, I made the same assumption until the weird numbers on the y axis caught my eye.
  22. Rob
    That's the way I read it. Don't you see a flaw in the fact that the fat players have a lower baseline to start from? If there was no information on the weights of players it'd make sense to say worse players decline quicker and at an earlier age than better players. I think you're reading the graph wrong. The only baseline is the individuals own performance. The top of the graph is 0, or the player's peak season. Each data point below that is simply how far off from their peak they were. It only establishes the aging curve. There's no direct comparison as to which group is having the overall better seasons though.
  23. Rob
    It really varies too much between different types of players to be useful to generalize, but player peaks are much younger than most people realize. 27-32 is far too old. This.
  24. Rob
    Good or bad doesn't matter all that much when the only thing you're being compared against is your own production. You have a valid point about whether a heavy player is in shape or not could affect the results, but that only undercuts the argument that Fielder isn't likely to age poorly... unless your contention is that all the heavy guys who are actually in shape are the ones who drag down the overall aging curve for the unabashed fatties like Fielder. And that one doesn't pass the sniff test. If anything it would make sense to expect Fielder to age worse than even the standard heavy player, given he over-qualifies for that designation by a good 40 pounds. I'm not saying anything is written in stone. But make no mistake about it... Fielder carries more risk than most are willing to admit. It needs to be a serious consideration before offering him that 6th or 7th year.
  25. Rob
    The author's conclusion was that he proved it was "clear that [Fielder's] best days are behind him" (emphasis supplied). Not that his analysis showed that, historically, players shaped similar to Fielder generally aged poorly; but that comparisions to other players proved, clearly, that Fielder's immediate decline was already written. Such hubris, such complete misunderstanding of what proof entails, should alone call into question the entirety of his analysis. Of course, the writer who wrote the bulk of the article was not the same as the one who did the research on how heavier players age. True, he did not do the research for the chart; he did the graphs and all the writing you quoted. Regardless, the link between the charted players and Fielder seems so thinly related to warrant little persuasive merit. I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say... because it sounds like you're saying Prince Fielder isn't heavy.
×
×
  • Create New...