Northsider

Lucroy's cost would be too high to not take advantage and play him every day, so that'd be a definitive win now move at Contreras' expense. Next year too. Not necessarily wrong, but very opinionated to the short term. Outside of Lucroy I don't see a practical option for this year outside of hoping Contreras catches on quickly or Montero gets right. Maybe Derek Norris if you think his bat is easier to turn around than Montero's? I'm not sure it is a plan to supplant Contreras. They could easily use Lucroy and Contreras platooning Left and Catcher. Maybe they think framing is less valuable than they originally thought (so long as its positive)? Cause Statcorner is showing Montero as best (per-game), with Ross at 11, Lucroy 19, and Contreras at 24. Interest in replacing Montero suggests either they're conservative on framing value or think it can be taught (or that pitchers have something to do with it).

Poor orioles fans

DBacks have a completely traditional (or, as they call it, 'real') approach to baseball. They liked Castillo so much cause his fastballs are fast. Makes me kinda wish we had a Junior Lake in the org, a raw but athletic AAA guy is exactly what they'd want for Miller at this point. As it is I see them asking for one of Eloy, Cease, EJM, or De La Cruz (in suspected order of preference). One might be able to sell them on Underwood and a rookie-league type tho, since Underwood's pitches are generally well-respected. I may be ignoring a Theo tax - was it Towers or Stewart who was afraid to deal with Theo?

Choking doesn't have to leave marks or even redness. I took Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu for about a year, and I don't recall seeing any indications on choke-hold days though I admit I wasn't looking for them (and we were using arms, not hands). Not trying to criticize you though - your point, that we should be careful about snap judgements, I agree with completely. I do have to disagree that a feeling of unease isn't warranted though. In his favor, that one incident appears to be the only history of DV. On the other hand, we know for certain is that he fired a gun off after some sort of fight (physical or not) with his girlfriend. That's not ok. Whether intended or not a threat is implicit in that action, and the fact that his mind apparently went to guns (and not even a gun range) right after a fight with his gf is frankly flat-out frightening. The reaction I'd like to see from him now is 'I did this, I hate that I lost control like that, and I'm doing everything I can to become a better person, the sort of person that can handle this in a mature way.' Maybe even "I'd rather leave my mistakes in the past." Instead, he's getting defensive, proclaiming that 'nothing happened, so why should I care' (see here). We had ONE brief instance of an appropriate-ish reaction at the start of the suspension (here), but obviously he dropped the good parts of that on coming back, as in the WaPo article. He appears to have no understanding as to why people see this incident as problematic. I'll feel better about this as time passes IF nothing else happens, but ... I really, really wish I could be confident that he's learned anything from this.

You must be CEO of your PR company. Such a CEO (or PR employee) would be taking that idea to Chapman however possible, have him volunteer at women's shelters, and have him write about the harms of violence and his volunteer experiences at The Player's Tribune - ESPECIALLY since this is a contract year and domestic violence is a significant issue right now. And maybe get him a translator that turns 'I don't remember the specifics' into 'I don't want to discuss the specifics'. Also - I'm a little upset at your willingness to deride my reaction to the trade.

Maybe we should start a donations thing, send $x to a local women's shelter everytime he appears in a game ...

Oh man, I'll go even further and be okay with parting with Happ if necessary. I'd love acquiring two controlled pitchers Archer/Colome on top of Montgomery. On the other hand, Shelby Miller for Ian Happ feels like a massive overpay. I can't imagine the DBacks would want less for Miller. If they'd take Caratini or Cease or something like that I'd be thrilled. Miller IS still young and talented, but he's been affected by a short stay in an awful organization. What do you think the Cubs were offering the Braves for him? We know they weren't willing to go as high as Soler, but I suspect Happ+ (or Torres, or Eloy) was the approximate deal. Getting him off the new Orioles could be an easy coup, even with someone like Happ.

Oh I don't think Miller and Paxton are in the majors in this scenario. More like, get them now and they'll contribute long-term (particularly Miller, who should do better in a non-terrible organization), possibly as early as September. And Archer alone sans Baez has an asking price of pick-2 from Torres/Happ/Eloy, probably with extras. Colome (based on the Chapman asks) will command the third, again with extra. I don't like that deal at all; we'd have to save one by throwing in Soler, and (because Rays) we'd have to eat his contract for the asking.

Who would you like to see the Cubs obtain, and for whom? I'd like to see, with fillers going both ways: Cubs acquire: Reddick, Colome, (Shelby) Miller, Paxton For Reddick: Zagunis For Colome: Torres, Clifton For Miller: Happ For Paxton: Soler Sent down/DFA'd: Richard Rationale: Reddick's plate discipline should help give the lineup some consistency, but will require the DFA of Szczur or LaStella, or the trade of Soler. Soler and Paxton match up well - both have flaws, both have ridiculous potential, and the Soler injury history should balance out the fact that Paxton is a pitcher. Colome I like better than Chapman. In part of course this is due to Chapman's legal history and the potential for ill-timed legal problems; but Colome's K/9 and BB/9 aren't THAT far off Chapman's, and his GB% is in the low 50's compared to Chapman's high 30's which plays to our strengths. Someone suggested the DBacks would be willing to sell low on Miller, now that he's been sent to AAA. I say we get it done.

I'd add Machado and Kershaw, with maybes for Corey Seager and Francisco Lindor.

Challenger was a tragedy, Diaz is clearly a comedy. I propose "Jeb Busch" instead.

Given their recent spate of injuries, that may be depressingly optimistic for the Pirates ...

Is Hendricks using a new pitch or something?

You may be right. My concern was the Marmol-esque walk rate at AAA so far, and I'd certainly want assurance from scouts that Marmol is a poor comparison. IIRC, control is one of the hardest things for coaches to help a player with. That said, looking at major league starters since 95 with a K/9 of at least 10 and BB/9 at least 4 gives Nomo, Colon, Pomeranz, Archer, Salazar, and Wood (Wood appears 3 times). That's 8 seasons with those stats, and only Archer (projected) and Nomo will have had seasons with a WAR below 4. Salazar and Pomeranz are projected to reach 5 WAR (and will be the only ones to do so). So Glasnow is in very good company from that perspective. So ... maybe. I'd still worry that the control would screw him up against the better hitting teams, which has playoff implications. As for Taillon, I wasn't aware of the velocity drop. If that's deliberate to improve his control, it's working and I'd still do it - Hendricks with better stuff or Corey Kluber would be viable comparisons. If the velocity drop isn't explained by some deliberate change, then Taillon's just an injury risk (and not worth Contreras).

Taillon and Bregman for me. I'd love to get Bosio a top-tier young talent for once, and Taillon is that right now. (Arrieta was older, and hadn't been thought of as a top talent for several years at the time). Bregman looks like what would happen if Rogers Hornsby possessed a younger Baez (BB%/K%, Hornsby career, 11.0%/7.2%; Bregman 2016, 12.0%/7.8%. Bregman's ISO is .326, Baez was .344 at AAA). Especially since right now the weakest hitting league in AA is the Texas league, with .320 wOBA above average (~.324 is average for the other two leagues).

Point taken. And I'm more into getting Matusz because of the disastrous development system he came out of than anything. Buchholz ... I'm looking at his pitch values and I'm seeing a good cutter and split-finger. Curve and Change have been good in the past though. Bullpen target for this year maybe? Almora + prospect swap seems potentially reasonable, as Castillo/Young seem to be struggling. Another possibility might be Montero + prospect swap, if the Red Sox believe in framing (statcorner says Swihart needs to learn). Contreras hasn't learned framing yet though, so a Montero trade would either see Ross playing a lot more or a trade for Lucroy.

Hopefully. I love the idea of grabbing ex-Oriole pitchers, Arrieta and Strop are too much fun.

I disagree a little with d. Torres is more highly thought of on *every* top-prospect board I've looked at, by at least 10 spots, and this year is playing much better than Guerra while a year younger at the same level. And I never said Allen was a bad prospect - just that he's at A ball and that Edwards/Allen is a floor/upside tradeoff. In favor of a Kimbrel-package comparison, a) Kimbrel and Giles both have more control on their contracts b) Kimbrel and Giles both are younger than Betances and may have more upside remaining c) IIRC, there was a lot of discussion about the Kimbrel and Giles deals being part of the pitching overpays this offseason If we do have to consider a Giles-like package, then Velasquez and Appel are the key pieces. Appel appears to be somewhere between Margot or Guerra and Allen in value so providing that value will actually be rather easy, but Velasquez is in the majors with high expected future value. The problem is that Velasquez really doesn't have a comparable on the Cubs. La Stella, Hendricks, Szczur all have less value; Baez and Soler are probably valued slightly less but have greater actual value. Since Giles and Betances are relief pitchers, the relatively low added extra value between them is more than offset by the lesser control, so Hendricks or Baez with McKinney or Zagunis would be the most comparable package centerpieces. I can't see either team doing that; the Cubs like Baez too much, and Hendricks, McKinney, Zagunis wouldn't be valued highly enough by the Yankees. Even if a Giles-esque value is desired, I think the Kimbrel package has to guide the deal; and the Torres/Happ/Edwards/Vogelbach deal would still give a lot of talent. Do you think a fifth player is demanded on that basis, or one of the current Cubs?

I'd kindof rather target Drew Pomeranz; basically the same pitcher as Rich Hill, but younger and has extra team control. Really pitching well this year, but fangraphs noted that he wasn't able to add a cutter this offseason (Bosio's specialty). We can drop him in the pen at the deadline, he's a lefty, and since he has starter potential he could become our backup plan if Arrieta eventually leaves.

As long as we're looking at dominant relief pitchers, why not target the younger, (contractually) cheaper Betances? I'd start negotiating by trying to make Torres/Vogelbach the centerpieces; value is similar to Margot/Guerra for Kimbrel, with Torres more valuable and Vogelbach less, but I suspect Jimenez or Happ will eventually be required. Final valuation likely centered around whether Kimbrel deal was an overpay and the contract differences between Kimbrel and Betances. I suspect final package will look something like Torres, Happ, Edwards, Vogelbach; overall better per-player value except maybe for Edwards/Logan Allen, where Edward's better floor and Allen's starting potential balance out. Vogelbach and Edwards in particular may be able to help the Yankees this year, too - their first base has been a gaping hole, and Edwards has high-end (not quite Betances- or Miller-size) potential still. At the very least, those discussions could help us in a potential deal for Andrew Miller; and in best case we get a younger player who has been a little better than Andrew Miller in the recent past.

I don't have a tattoo of any kind, but if I did it would not be a a Cubs tattoo. I only have one tattoo. Never regretted it. What would your (horrendous) non-Cubs choice be? My brother and I have made a sort of pact about that. Neither of us will get a tattoo unless struck by lightning, we survive, and the lightning leaves Lichtenberg figures (fancy non-permanent 'scars'), in which case we get a tattoo of the pattern left by the lightning strike. Something like that ought be memorialized.

Wait you think he will be better than Keith, Seabrook and Hjalmarsson? That's a bold statement Better than a definite HOF, a fringe HOF, and a really good player...yeah, a bold statement is probably an understatement there. I'm just hoping he can be a quality second pairing defenseman. Bold maybe; but there are plenty of guys out there who falter once they hit the NHL because they can't play at the speed of the NHL (or MLB, or NFL, &c). I may be wrong, but it looks to me like he's playing 'faster' in that sense than anyone else on the ice - like his whole body is moving to the play before anyone else has even noticed something is going on. That pass last night against the Red Wings was a shining example of how seamless, for lack of a better word, he can be. As with any player there's no guarantee, but I *love* the upside.

It's funny, a friend of mine who's a Rangers fan and I were talking about the game Sunday. He was really impressed with the Hawks. Same story with the Pens fans around here too. Perhaps were suffering from a proximity bias. I don't see any meaningful help coming from Rock Vegas this season. Svedberg is too slow. Polkka is interesting but too young/ inexperienced. Seabrook usually plays better in the playoffs. The 3rd pair is better than it was last year with the three headed beast that is Roszy, TVR and Ehrhoff. The X factor will be Gustafson. At times, he's looked really good. Maybe he hit a little bit of a rookie wall there and his play fell off a bit. TCI did an article about the contenders in the west and everyone has their issues, especially on the blue line. Agreed on Gustafsson. That article about Theo et. al. testing the reaction times of draftees to find guys who can dominate at the upper levels? You can SEE Gusty reacting faster than everyone else on the ice. Give him some development time and I think he'll be better than the big three.

We're also tops in Rule 5

It got me thinking as to what percentage of players actually think like this? I have no idea, but I'd think it'd be a very small amount honestly. But, I also feel extremely confident that our guys preach this stuff to the kids coming up and also feel like these are the types we'd acquire as FA or through trade as well. (duh, with Heyward and Zobrist). I'd certainly think we've got much more of this type of attitude on our roster than most do. Probably. But hearing the same stuff from a player (or former player), someone who's 'been there' as it were, can sometimes be easier to relate to. It's not just that, though. He's *totally* bought in. Actually excited over the new Statcast data, recognizing the effects of Maddon's work ... I'm kinda hearing him take that next step as a fan of the game. Maybe I'm overreacting, but I get the feeling that this is what a future coach might sound like. If I'm right (again, a big if), it'd be kinda cool to start subtly developing Coghlan now under Maddon - give him little hints and tastes and see if he takes to it.