Jump to content
North Side Baseball

davell

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,380

  • 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 davell

  1. davell
    You're talking about Archie, right? Do you like him more or less than Dylan Bundy? Part of me thinks Bundy and Sonny Gray too get penalized for their somewhat lack of typical ace projection size. What I've read about Bradley and Bundy tells me Bundy is more polished and probably the better pitcher right now. But, it seems like Bradley has the ability to move past him longterm evidently?
  2. davell
    As far as Dunn goes, personally I think that a 4 year deal for him would have been OK. But, I think he is better off in the AL, just in case the grind gets to be too much and he needs a day or two off from the field. And they can DH him and still go out and sign a better defensive 1B if they truly feel the need to do something like that. I didn't want to sign him for the most part due to what else was possibly available. In A-GON, Fielder, and Pujols. Of course, none may make it to FA and my gamble would have failed. I guess we'll see how things pan out. But, I can definitely see the people's point of views that would rather take what's available now instead of waiting for what may be available later.
  3. davell
    If it's 2 or under, I stand behind the 1st thing I said. Which was hold onto him, because you don't know what you're going to find with a late round pick or undrafted FA and you don't want to open up another hole to begin with, if it's not necessary. If Tommie Harris won't restructure, fine, cut him. But, that's 5 mill or so and at a position that's already considered an area of need, with or without him. We don't have a need at RB if we don't cut Taylor, if you ask me. Send him back out there next year and see if he does a little better.
  4. davell
    Is that true? If the Bears have already paid him 6 mill in year 1, is his cap number really 5 mill for 2011?
  5. davell
    Yeah, that's what I was thinking when I saw these numbers.
  6. davell
    Well, we all know this. :D
  7. davell
    To me, if you already paid Taylor half of his contract in year one, I'm not about to cut him. First, you may as well try to recoup SOME of this bad investment and secondly, it's entirely possible he could have a better season in 2011 anyway. If he had a big cap number for 2011, then cut him. But, he doesn't, so why create another hole when he's no where near the reason that we didn't win the Super Bowl this year? Especially if funds are going to be limited, which is definitely possible.
  8. davell
    In the past, the Bears have seemed pretty serious about resting on their past accomplishments. Yeah, I know. That's what I don't want to see happen again. Angelo has at least said he expects to do a few things in FA. That's a start anyway.
  9. davell
    So are the Cardinals just cheap? It seems that with their fanbase they should be making more than enough money to send their payroll to the $130+ million range if they wanted to. That's what I would think too. I think that they HAVE to keep him, whether they like it not and that's even if he wants 12/360, 10/350 or some other assinine number that we haven't even thought possible. They'll find a way to defer his contract for a very long time, in the end. I could see them settling on something like this: 10/300 as the contract, with a 20 million a year salary for the duration of the contract, then 5 mill a year for the next 10 years afterwards and 10 mill for the 5 years after that, with interest going to Albert as well. But, the bottom line to me is this: If it IS actually 10/300 that Albert wants, then the Cards had better ante up and do it in a way that they aren't turning their fans against him, kind of like what I thought the Yanks did to Jeter earlier this offseason.
  10. davell
    I agree with you. But the old player skills/young player skills argument doesn't. Doesn't Crawford have young player skills? Avg/contact, speed, defense. Now, I would think that speed and defense are the first to go in old age - so then why are they more valuable and projectable? Jim Edmonds had old player skills - OBP, power, lumbery. Yet, we was able to stick into his late 30s. Can someone please give me a run-down of this argument before I go cross-eyed? Beertown, I'm not sure what you're asking. We're in agreeance on Crawford having young player skills. That's why I brought him up: I think it's a risk to give him that type of contract at his age. Him and Cliff Lee were brought up to show that other teams spent bigtime money on players other than just the Nats. (granted, I also think the Red Sox have the luxury of this, because they develop enough cheap guys to put around their expenditures) But I do think his contract will be a hindrance the last couple of years of it. And I think someone like Pujols who's strengths are clearly not based on speed or even playing a premium defensive position. You're buying his OBP and his SLG. And those skills in a player his size should hold up better than what speed typically does in a guy hiting his mid 30's for instance.
  11. davell
    I wouldn't use the Nationals as an example of what 29 other teams will do. I have no doubt about the AAV approximating $30 million. But paying Pujols $30 million when he's 42 is going to be a tough pill for any team to swallow, especially with the plantar fasciitis. I have no problem using the Nationals at all. It shows that teams ante up when they see what they want. The Red Sox just gave Carl Crawford 7 years and 142 mill. He'll turn 30 this season and his skillset is NOT going to age well, in all likelihood. Cliff Lee will turn 33 this year and while he signed a 5 year 120 mill contract with the Phils, he was offered 6 years guaranteed with vesting options for 7th seasons by both the Yanks and Rangers. And no pitcher is a good investment when they're damn near 40 years old. So, it's not just the Nats that were wanting to spend big last offseason on risky investments. And it certainly won't be that way for the best player in the game. Not to mention, the other reasons I already listed as to why teams would ante up for a player like this.
  12. davell
    I'm not sure what to think about the Rotoworld comments. I wouldn't expect the Bears to go out and spend THAT much again. But, if they're serious about winning, instead of resting on their past accomplishments, then they'll spend some cash. This team has holes that the draft won't fix on it's own and if the Bears management says otherwise, it's just going to prove that they think most fans are stupid and think they'll be happy with periodic playoff appearances. Unfortunately, I think that they're right in this regard too. This being said, I do think that they'll address some holes through FA, just probably not with big name players.
  13. davell
    Jayson Werth just got a 7 year deal and he'll be 32 in May. Contracts are getting larger again and this would be for the best player on the planet, not a part time All Star type. There's not a doubt in my mind that IF Pujols wants 10/300, there'd be more than one team willing to do it. It's not going to shock me if he WANTS more than that even. Because it's very likely that he feels he was underpaid(even though he signed the contract) from his last deal and wants to make up for that. Pujols will be 31 all season in 2011(assuming his age is correct and I have always had my doubts personally) but he also plays one of the easier positions in baseball to age gracefully into. Teams will certainly factor that in as well, along with the fact that his skillset usually ages well too. With the merchandising, extra tickets sold, bigger TV numbers possibly generated due to excitement of him being there, and the fact that he'll make your team much better, he's going to pay back quite a bit to the owners in these ways as it is. And I'm quite sure his camp knows this as well.
  14. davell
    Assuming there's a tag, the Jets are going to franchise David Harris, not Holmes or Edwards.
  15. davell
    I like Moss, but I don't want him on the Bears.
  16. davell
    Its all just posturing right now. Unless the Cardinals are complete idiots and do not understand the value of Pujols, they'll pay. They wouldnt have signed Holliday last offseason if they were just going to turn around and be unable to pay Pujols this season. I think this is all just posturing to get the just deal to appease both sides. I think at the end of everything we'll find out that there was almost no chance Albert was going to leave STL. We can always hope though. Yeah, in the end, I think this too. I can't see them not getting this done, no matter what he wants.
  17. davell
    Very happy for Dent. Good class altogether really.
  18. davell
    He should have transferred at the end of last season as the rumors suggested. I'm guessing he ends up at USC or UCLA. And don't kid yourself into thinking Stepheson had a more legitimate reason for transferring than the Wears did; he was just as homesick and uncomfortable at Chapel Hill. I agree that he probably was uncomfortable, because he probably didn't see when he was going to ever wind up getting consistent PT. But, I think his dad being sick at least contributed to his decision some. In the end, he would have helped us out quite a bit, in my opinion. As for going after another PG, I haven't heard anything and think it'd be really tough for UNC to entice anyone else to come in. Marshall is just a freshman and they have the 5th rated PG in the country committed already for 2012 in Marcus Paige. Kendall's a 4 year guy too, he's not an NBA type player, so he'll be starting for another 3 years after this. Only way I can see us adding another PG is if we find someone else in Drew's shoes(like we did with Knox this year) that's a senior and has one year of eligibility left.
  19. davell
    Gaither is a possible huge upgrade for anyone. I doubt he gets a big deal from anyone either, so a shortterm incentive laden deal would(could) benefit us or most teams in the NFL.
  20. davell
    Harrison's going to be interesting in the fact that he could be considered a 3B, OF, or a 1B right now. With his body type, I figure he'll wind up at 1B, but it's so early in his career that it's possible his body tightens up some.
  21. davell
    With where we are in this stage, before the season even begins, I would probably give us a 50/50 shot right now of having one of Rendon, Cole, or Purke fall to us at 9, with what all can and probably will happen over the course of the season. I see what you guys are saying about BPA too, but I guess I'd look at it like this: If Jackie Bradley is one player ahead of Daniel Norris on Wilken's big board, but they are extremely close, personally I'd take Norris, because we have a guy who's close to Bradley, but not anyone like Norris(power lefty) in the system, even knowing that Jackson is certainly not a sure bet at this point.
  22. davell
    http://baseballbeginnings.com/2010/11/02/charles-tilson-report#more-9820 Here's a kid that's going to Illinois next year and is evidently going to be a tough sign, according to Callis most likely. If he drops past the 2nd round, he's a guy I wouldn't mind going overslot for.
  23. davell
    As a UNC fan, I'm not sure what to think of Drew 11 transferring. He's not nearly as good as Marshall and I think that the team responds to Marshall better as well. But, with UNC finally gaining some momentum, something like this happening in the middle of the season, probably isn't going to help things. Glad to see Marshall will get more minutes, probably Bullock and McDonald too actually. But, this is just a very odd time for something like this to happen. Roy needs to stay the hell out of California from now on too. Between Drew, the Wear twins, and Stepheson(legit reason for leaving at least) we don't exactly have a good track record as of late out there.
  24. davell
    No way the Rangers throw Murphy into a deal like that. If it's basically just Fukudome for Young: If I'm Hendry, I'm not doing it. Those 2 extra years of Young's deal could be the money that keeps us from getting a Fielder or a Pujols possibly. If Ricketts commits himself to spending big on a 1B next year no matter what, then go for it. Otherwise, the extra money next year is more valuable than Young is.
  25. davell
    I don't want to hate him again. I hope he doesn't make the team, so I don't have to.
×
×
  • Create New...