Jump to content
North Side Baseball

KingCubsFan

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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

  1. KingCubsFan
    My original comment was meant to address both this year and in the future, and was made in the context of keeping Hendry because we'll have a lot of money to spend this offseason and the rest of the division will get worse. As I originally stated, we always have a financial advantage. And all that's gotten us is one 90 win team and another fluke division title in the recent past. Hendry has shown time and time again that he can't effectively utilize our large financial advantage, so why are people potentially using that as a reason to keep him another year? The Cardinals could potentially have the same amount of money this offseason, and they have better pieces for the future (and the present). Sure we'll have more money in 2012 too, but that's because we'll have lost several pieces that we'll have to replace through free agency because we'll likely have no cheap young players to fill those roles. The Cardinals won't have to do that as much. Hendry's mismanagement has left this team in shambles, and the fact that he may be able to buy us an 85 win team (and I think the 2006 team was MUCH better equipped for a rebound than this team) because we have so much money coming off the books is not a good reason to keep him. In fact, there's no good reason to keep him. He should be gone.
  2. KingCubsFan
    They'll also have lost Pujols. Right, but they'll still have Holliday and Wainwright, along with productive cheap players like Jaime Garcia, Jay and Frese and elite prospects in Shelby Miller and that other guy whose name I can't remember offhand. We have Starlin Castro and Brett Jackson. That's pretty much it. And Garza, Dempster and Zambrano. Soto and Ramirez possibly. Forgot about Garza and Soto (although I also forgot Molina). Dempster, Zambrano and Ramirez aren't part of any core going forward, as they could all be gone this year or next year.
  3. KingCubsFan
    They'll also have lost Pujols. Right, but they'll still have Holliday and Wainwright, along with productive cheap players like Jaime Garcia, Jay and Frese and elite prospects in Shelby Miller and that other guy whose name I can't remember offhand. We have Starlin Castro and Brett Jackson. That's pretty much it.
  4. KingCubsFan
    While it isn't fair and I don't necessarily agree with it all, every columnist/talking head (even the ones I think a lot of people around here respect) has bashed the Cubs since the deadline. This team is the laughing stock of the league right now. Someone has to be held accountable. By your logic we should never make a move. Too much acceptance of loser culture in this fanbase. That's not my logic at all, and while this year sucks that doesn't mean they're bound to suck next year. All these little things...people laughing, calling for heads, and being a league wide joke (which I guess is new to the Cubs)...are a product of not winning. But any team can say that. Can any team say they have a massive financial advantage over their crappy division which stands to get much worse this offseason due to free agent departures? We have a massive financial advantage over our division every year. Look where it's gotten us. And if the Cardinals lose Pujols, they'll have more money to spend with a better core.
  5. KingCubsFan
    Various articles, probably linked from this site. I think Olney or Stark quoted an executive saying he had no idea what the Cubs were doing. Even some of the quotes from Hendry himself suggested he wasn't really interested in listening to what people had to offer for his players.
  6. KingCubsFan
    I used to think this, but I find that harder to believe considering what the Padres got for Mike Adams. And if Hendry was indeed offering to eat salary and still getting offered nothing, that's fine. But reports seem to suggest that he was basically ignoring calls on his players in a quest to give himself hope for next season, and that's a bit more concerning. There were no reports that the Cubs were willing to eat Marmol's contract; simply that there teams interested in acquiring (no doubt hoping they smelled blood in the water and he could be had for garbage). Whatever team picked him up would be paying him approx. $17 million dollars. Mike Adams is probably going to end up costing around $4 million. Yeah, I don't doubt teams were trying to get him for nothing. My problem is that it seems Hendry just hung up on them, instead of gauging how much interest they really had by offering to pay part of the contract. Marmol at $5 million a year would have gotten a pretty nice return, I would think.
  7. KingCubsFan
    I used to think this, but I find that harder to believe considering what the Padres got for Mike Adams. And if Hendry was indeed offering to eat salary and still getting offered nothing, that's fine. But reports seem to suggest that he was basically ignoring calls on his players in a quest to give himself hope for next season, and that's a bit more concerning.
  8. KingCubsFan
    The huge drop in walks is pretty concerning.
  9. KingCubsFan
    Sounds like a decent plan assuming Colvin starts to show anything. Right now he's hopeless. Yeah, part of that plan is assuming the Colvin we've seen this year isn't anywhere close to the Colvin we can expect going forward. Long term I think he could potentially give us close to the .810 OPS he posted against righties in 2010. If he doesn't show anything the rest of the year, however, we'd probably have to start looking at other options. The key is to get Soriano into a platoon to maximize his value. I'd rather give him away to someone and pay all but a $1 million per year on his contract. Use Jeff Baker or Reed Johnson in a platoon if you have to, and use the $1 million saved every year to sign a good draft pick.
  10. KingCubsFan
    That's not happening. It would almost be impossible to fall out of the top 15
  11. KingCubsFan
    Exactly. There was no good reason to keep Pena, unless you somehow think you'll get a better return at the waiver deadline. ESPN is reporting that the Cubs motivation was that none of the offers for Pena were better than the compensation draft pick the Cubs would get should Pena sign elsewhere in the off-season. That's way too much of a risk for a team that needs to spend every available dollar this offseason on actual improvements. I can't see Pena getting 10 million in the offseason as a 34 year old with two straight disappointing years. If you go that route, you have to be sure that the player will in fact leave or, at the very least, won't kill your budget if he does come back.
  12. KingCubsFan
    Exactly. There was no good reason to keep Pena, unless you somehow think you'll get a better return at the waiver deadline.
  13. KingCubsFan
    That would leave us with an outfield that could potentially have nobody with an OPS over .800. We're not competing with a team like that because the rest of the team probably won't be good enough to overcome that. Either Byrd stays in center while Jackson improves in AAA, or you trade Byrd because he's our most marketable trade piece right now, unless Hendry is getting offered garbage for him. And that could be a real possibility right now. Teams obviously know that Hendry's job is on the chopping block, and they could be trying to take advantage of a potentially desperate GM.
  14. KingCubsFan
    He somehow finds a way to be even more awful with each opportunity the Rockies give him. If he could be acquired cheaply, then I would be all for giving him a shot. But there's no way he can be your plan A at this point. A lot of people advocate having Flaherty as the primary third baseman if we don't re-sign Aramis. I'd rather take a chance on a guy like Stewart. A lot of people are advocating a platoon at 3B and Flaherty gets mentioned as one of the possibilities to fill half of the platoon. I've seen at least 6 different names mentioned as possibilities. And the most common one is Baker, not Flaherty. I'd have absolutely no problem with a Baker/whoever platoon for a year if it meant getting Prince/Pujols and Wilson. You want Baker as your primary third baseman when he's proven he can't hit righties? As the left handed portion of the platoon, Flaherty would get the most at bats and be the primary third baseman. Getting Stewart doesn't preclude hitting Baker against lefties.
  15. KingCubsFan
    He somehow finds a way to be even more awful with each opportunity the Rockies give him. If he could be acquired cheaply, then I would be all for giving him a shot. But there's no way he can be your plan A at this point. A lot of people advocate having Flaherty as the primary third baseman if we don't re-sign Aramis. I'd rather take a chance on a guy like Stewart.
  16. KingCubsFan
    Trade for Ian Stewart
  17. KingCubsFan
    $750K seems more in the range of getting Zych or Scott done
  18. KingCubsFan
    His line against righties is insane
  19. KingCubsFan
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-report-indians-pursuing-cubs-fukudome-20110728,0,471140.story
  20. KingCubsFan
    What's Kosuke going to do for us? Move us from the #2 to #3 pick next year?
  21. KingCubsFan
    Seems plausible given Hendry's preferences. A toolsy outfielder with a terrible eye and a reliever with K potential but bad control. Can't see the outfielder ever developing in our system.
  22. KingCubsFan
    You dread getting 2 top 20 prospects for Kosuke? That would be fantastic. I'm expecting two raw projects with poor stats.
  23. KingCubsFan
    Considering Larry Rothschild is their pitching coach, the Yankee's lack of interest may have to do with more than just money.
  24. KingCubsFan
    You wouldn't trade Soriano even if we ate 60%? That would save over $20 million over the next few years. The problem is, we'd have around $7 million extra over each of the next 3 years, but most (or all) of that would go into replacing him. There's not much in the minors or free agency that's going to be better than Soriano for the money we'd free up. That said, I wouldn't flat out oppose trading him at 60% value but I'd hesitate a lot. Given Soriano's year and likely continued regression, it will take a LOT less than $7 million to replace him.
  25. KingCubsFan
    You wouldn't trade Soriano even if we ate 60%? That would save over $20 million over the next few years.
×
×
  • Create New...