Jump to content
North Side Baseball

bukie

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,427

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

 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 bukie

  1. bukie
    Young, major-league-ready, cost-controlled pitchers just don't get put on waivers. This is bonkers.
  2. bukie
    I'm sure someone corrected his error...no, the 3 replies are all sure the Cubs trade Castro and move Baez to SS afterwards or call up Russell.
  3. bukie
    Well and outright waivers are different than trade waivers. If they're trying to outright him off the 40 man those are irrevocable right? Right.
  4. bukie
    Here are their options: 1) MLB team claims him on waivers - Either the Marlins let them have him, work out a trade with that team for him, or pull him back and he can't be waived again. In reverse order of the standings starting with the team's own league (NL in this case) and then the other league, right? And multiple teams can put in a claim but the highest priority either gets a deal done or nothing happens. Correct. So it goes Rockies, Cubs, irrelevant.
  5. bukie
    Here are their options: 1) MLB team claims him on waivers - Either the Marlins let them have him, work out a trade with that team for him, or pull him back and he can't be waived again. 2) He clears waivers - Marlins can work out a trade with any team for him, send him to the minors, or release him. Ok. That's what I thought. But, from the part that I bolded, that means that he would have to stay on the 25-man roster, since he has no options left. Which, it seems like they don't want him on the 25-man. Right, but it's August. Teams will occasionally put the whole team on waivers just to see if nobody notices and they slip through. Most get pulled back right away with little to no fanfare, and players nobody care about will get traded afterwards. Someone put out the Jacob Turner signal, though, and I can't imagine him slipping through.
  6. bukie
    So basically, the only leverage the Marlins have would be the hope that nobody wants to take on Turner's salary, which is really a non issue for a player like Turner. It's a baffling move, really. They must really hate his ERA.
  7. bukie
    Here are their options: 1) MLB team claims him on waivers - Either the Marlins let them have him, work out a trade with that team for him, or pull him back and he can't be waived again. 2) He clears waivers - Marlins can work out a trade with any team for him, send him to the minors, or release him.
  8. bukie
    The more I think about it, the more I think we don't even have to give that up. If the Marlins were to not come to agreement with the claiming team, then they either have to give him up for nothing or keep him on the 25-man roster the rest of the year, since he has no options remaining. They clearly don't want to keep him on the 25-man roster. So I am not sure what negotiating power they will have. Mainly I am not sure why they waited until August to do this. Today I learned that you can add a player back to the 25 man after DFA'ing him. This is the exact reason I get annoyed whenever people assume DFA = release.
  9. bukie
    Why does that suck? Think the Rockies will take a shot at him first? The Cubs are second in the waiver order.
  10. bukie
    Yes, he's been designated for assignment, meaning he has to pass through waivers before the Marlins can freely trade him or release him. If someone claims him on waivers, the Marlins can either let the team have him, work out a trade with that team, or pull him back for the rest of the year.
  11. bukie
    You take it as sandbagging 2015, I take it as eyeing a specific acquisition that isn't a FA until the 2015 offseason. Oh good; they're laser-sighted in on the one guy they want and if they don't get him then they have this awesome track record of backup plans that worked out (or even existed at all). You are either having some serious reading comprehension issues tonight, or you just feel the need to intentionally misread things in an effort to complain because it just makes you feel better about things.
  12. bukie
    You take it as sandbagging 2015, I take it as eyeing a specific acquisition that isn't a FA until the 2015 offseason.
  13. bukie
    Agreed. They very likely could be holes. But, that's what makes next year exciting and terrifying at the same time. But that's not what Tim said. There may be holes, but there's no reason to spend heavily on them this off-season because of all the young talent available. Nobody said to spend heavily on position talent. Which would leave a good 40 million a year to spend on starting pitching.
  14. bukie
    Agreed. They very likely could be holes. But, that's what makes next year exciting and terrifying at the same time. But that's not what Tim said. There may be holes, but there's no reason to spend heavily on them this off-season because of all the young talent available.
  15. bukie
    No, it's not like that at all. It's more like asking a group of people what they'd rather have, 1000 dollars or 20.
  16. bukie
    Can you elaborate further for those of us who do not have time to hunt for this wonderful news? The fact that 1.3 years of David Price just got acquired for Austin Jackson and Drew Smyly Ahh, gotcha. Yeah, I'm really enjoying these moves the Cubs are making. I'm curious how difficult it will be for the Cubs to protect all of these prospects this offseason on the 40 man roster. Not difficult, considering they just opened up a couple more spots.
  17. bukie
    I am a fan of trading a light hitting utility infielder and a LOOGY that has trouble getting outs for an actual prospect.
  18. bukie
    seems like an odd take to me Looks like it was such a hot sports take he forgot to finish it.
  19. bukie
    He must have really been in a hurry to get out of Boston. Should've stretched first.
  20. bukie
    That's more than a little sad.
  21. bukie
    And none on hits.
  22. bukie
    The funniest thing about the A's trading Milone for Fuld was that the A's already had Fuld and released him for nothing.
  23. bukie
    Who is a more likely option to be a productive major leaguer over the next 5 years? The 3 time all-star under 25 that is already in the majors, or one of the 2 highly rated prospects that are still in the minors? If you answer the prospects, there's a lack of perspective evident. I don't understand why anyone would be in a hurry to get rid of the young productive major leaguers the Cubs already have. What is the end goal here?
  24. bukie
    I think voting happens before the playoffs.
  25. bukie
    Not a bad deal for St Louis either since Ramsey wasn't going to get much of a chance their with their depth. If Masterson isn't hurt and just has mechanical issues, the Cardinals should be able to diagnose and fix. Sure, if you replace "diagnose and fix" with "inject steroids".
×
×
  • Create New...