KingCubsFan
-
Posts
3,588 -
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 KingCubsFan
-
Wrigley Renovations and Related Wrigleyville Stuff
KingCubsFan replied to David's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
If Ricketts successfully put Moe's Cantina and Barleycorn out of business, that would be his best move since hiring Theo. -
I don't think you need any sort of information to know that's how they feel. They've both said many times that they prefer drafting pitching in bulk, and that college position players tend to have a better hit rate in the first round compared to others.
-
Already have 9 picks (granted 3 will be in the 200 range) and I'm not sure he drops much past 11 if at all. If you like him, take him there. Fine with me. Getting a top 5 talent at #11 sounds like a plan.
-
Trade down in the first, pick up an extra few picks, and take Jaylon Smith.
-
Sooo no McDonald's next season A hotel infested with the stench of McDonald's? Yeeeesh. Seriously, that hotel is going to be a dump. You can't have a freaking fast food restaurant in your lobby. Unfortunately, I think it was part of the agreement when they bought the land from whoever owned the McDonald's.
-
Yeah, it seems like they're pretty content to start the season with what they have, which isn't a terrible strategy given how much young pitching costs in a trade and the fact that Hammel was good in the first half. Truly a "[expletive] pitchers" offseason by Theo if that's the case.
-
Actually they've been competitive in just about every game this year, and have shown enough that they can be pretty good next year with a few key moves. I've been pleasantly surprised. Last year was so much worse.
-
Cubs Sign Zobrist - 4/$56M
KingCubsFan replied to David's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Welcome to free agency. -
is odorizzi's upside really any higher? No. I think he's mixing up the two.
-
Sale would probably take Kris Bryant, so you can forget about that one.
-
Rays have offered Odorizzi an extension. Timing is interesting.
-
Trevor Cahill returns to Cubs
KingCubsFan replied to UMFan83's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Ehhhhh, fine. Joakim Soria just got 3 years at $8 million. -
Trevor Cahill returns to Cubs
KingCubsFan replied to UMFan83's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Like it -
I don't disagree with you. But it seems like most teams still get hung up on it.
-
yeah if they didn't even have to part with Jose DeLeon, i'm prepared to be a little bit rankled about this trade I'm sure the Reds had no interest in trading him within the division, so there's no use in getting upset.
-
It doesn't seem like this front office would want to give away all their assets for a young pitcher. It would be more likely if somebody like Stanton was available.
-
Guess I'm in the minority, but I would have done that for Samardzija. They're both getting signed in large part for their durability, and I'd prefer Samardzija's pure stuff over Lackey's "grit", "mentality" and "toughness" every day.
-
Carrasco is the only pitcher reportedly available via trade that I'd trade Soler for. If we were trading Baez too, I'd prefer something a bit more useful than Chisenhall.
-
Jeimer may be pretty close to a Top 100 prospect at this point.
-
The 2016 Bullpen
KingCubsFan replied to Transmogrified Tiger's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
My guess is he's going to wait as long as possible to try and get a rotation spot somewhere, and we'll have already filled up our bullpen by then. -
You don't sign free agents in the pursuit of surplus value. Nor do you sign them to make sure they are on your team in 5-6 years. You sign them because you want a really good player to play for your team today. Well, I agree somewhat with that. But I also think you sign a guy hoping that he's not absolutely killing you by the end of the contract but knowing he won't be nearly as good. Basically Soriano. With Price, if he's still on the team in 5-6 years, it's because he's terrible or injured.
-
They are a negotiating tactic that teams can and should offer to players to get them to sign with them and not another team without spending significantly more money Yes. But in practice it never seems to work that way. The Red Sox didn't seem to get any appreciable discount for Price in exchange for that opt-out. That's ... just *so* wrong. You don't do it for the discount. You do it to get a guy without having to pay substantially more. Boston paid what everybody assumed, and not the $30m more than the market that was mentioned before. And they got him relatively early in the process. If the Red Sox were giving Price a straight 7/217 deal, I doubt he'd get $90 million the first three years. It would probably be more backloaded. Instead, the Red Sox are essentially paying market rate for three years with little ability to gain any surplus value in the process. I don't blame them for doing it, and I wouldn't have opposed the Cubs doing the same thing, but it's a structure providing nothing but downside to the team.
-
That would make a lot of sense. And the $100 million figure could be the result of a team giving him a sixth year.
-
In this market? I don't think that's unreasonable. I'd do 5/$100 for him. I would agree, give him an opt out clause and I'd be in on that deal. Have a feeling we are going to end up with Kazmir and Span/Jackson and we will hear the "we got these guys on such cheap deals, look at what everyone else went for!" narrative. Why would you include an opt out? Opt outs are always going to be something that goes in favor the player, not the team. it was talked about yesterday with price. some posters liked it because if he's good, you get out of 2 expensive years in his mid-late 30's at the end of the contract. if he's bad or just ok, you would have had him for 5 years anyway. But if he's good, those two years theoretically wouldn't be expensive, they'd be a bargain.
-
In this market? I don't think that's unreasonable. I'd do 5/$100 for him. If you could get Leake for cheaper, I'd rather do that but at this point that seems unlikely.
