Sammy Sofa
-
Posts
98,222 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
208
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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Sammy Sofa
-
I'd say "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!" except that has been the obvious move all along. It's a PR dream.
-
OK, now you're just getting creepy. -
I think what makes it stick out to people is that at full strength pre-trade the Bulls has just enough middling talent to go along with their core to make it look like they were serviceable team, when in actuality they were clinging to that by their fingernails.
-
Maybe not difference makers, but they're a lot better than the guys who replaced them. Warrick might be the worst defensive forward in the NBA and Flip Murray shoots like a drunk Kirk Hinrich. They downgraded at two positions and are worse because of it. But I do still agree with you that the big difference has been health in this recent stretch. Combine that with a downgrade in talent and you'll get some ugly results. Exactly. Health has been the biggest issue. A downgrade in the talent of the team given the nature of the trades shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. I mean, really, who thought the Bulls were going to get back players of equal or greater value when they were trying to just dump salary and a malcontent? That downgrade has just been compounded by health issues, specifically losing their second most critical player indefinitely.
-
Aramis Fan also kicks puppies and spits at babies.
-
I highly doubt anyone was "hounding" you. What several have pointed out is that the dip from the trade has been compounded by the health of the team. It's still a huge overstatement to act like Tyrus and Salmons were difference makers. I know that I said, and still do, that the difference in the team before and after the trade would be marginal if the Bulls were fully healthy. Though given that you're apparently just going to ignore the injury/health issue, well, I guess that says a lot. Not having Noah at all and a banged up, sick Deng has had much more of an impact than losing Tyrus and Salmons.
-
Well I'm sure they care to come degree. But when you have a team where over half the players will be FAs after the season, and most of them are highly unlikely to be back, what motivation is there to play team ball? I don't see a lot of selfish play offensively but defensively whose gonna call them out if they aren't trying their hardest. It's doubtful slacking off on defense is going to change how much you will make next year. It might not even be intentional, but it's probably there. Oh, and also it has to do with the fact that Noah, Thomas and even Salmons were 3 of the Bulls better defensive players. On RealGM, someone pointed out that the Bulls only gave up 100 points only 9 times in 29 games this season with Tyrus in the lineup. Since the trades, the Bulls have given up 100 points in 7 of their last 9 games, including the last 7 in a row. Yes, but ideally Salmons and Tyrus will be replaced with much better players, so phooey on this year.
-
[expletive] no.
-
I still think keeping Kirk was more an issue of what Rose wanted as opposed to not being able to move him. Based on the rumors it sounds like it actually would have been easier to move Kirk instead of Salmons.
-
Though this season doesn't really matter. It just wasn't realistic to have it both ways. Either they hold on to the middling support talent they have and maybe they contend but end up stuck with the salaries or they move what they can to free up cash. And sure, swapping picks with the Bucks would be mildly annoying, but they also have the pick they got for Tyrus.
-
Meh, semantics. It's not like "ass-y" or "crappy" are quantifiable terms. It means different things to different people. To me, his numbers are more crappy than not to make me think he's worth a trade. It would be a different issue if it was a question of signing him, but such is life. If you think a career 1.28 WHIP and 3.78 ERA are crappy for a reliever, your expectations are extremely unrealistic. Granted I wouldn't give up the farm for the guy, but he his stats show him to be a respectable if not above average bullpen arm. He'd be great to sign and terrible to trade for. I'm just not a fan of trading for any reliever unless they're the rare sure thing because it's going to cost way too much regardless. I'm also not a fan of using career numbers as the end-all-be-all of judging a player. Even just using the 5-year block like dexter did is propping up 3 straight unimpressive years (unimpressive meaning certainly not worth what the Cubs would likely have to give up to get him) with 2 good years on either end. He's the typical reliever gamble.
-
Meh, semantics. It's not like "ass-y" or "crappy" are quantifiable terms. It means different things to different people. To me, his numbers are more crappy than not to make me think he's worth a trade. It would be a different issue if it was a question of signing him, but such is life.
-
Whoops, completely forgot to check the game totals with the Brewers.
-
Seems pretty telling with Adams that he was terrible until he got to SD. Granted, his numbers were phenomenal last year, even for Petco, and he's not that old, but he was pretty horrendous the three years he was pitching in the NL Central.
-
Last 5 years 1.24 WHIP 3.70 ERA 286.2 IP 240 H 116 BB 270 K ...while pitching in the AL East. How is that crappy? I don't know why you only went for his "last 5 years" when all he's got is a 6 year career. In all outside of last year he seems to alternate being maybe average and just not very good. If he was out there to be signed, hey, great. Since it's a trade, eh, that's pretty underwhelming. Yeah, he was great last year, and was pretty decent his second year, but those seasons are sandwiching three seasons with an ERA+ of 101, a WHIP just above 1.3 and an ERA of 4.37. I mean, he had his worst and his best season back to back the last two seasons. Therein lies the essence of the reliever. Is that really worth overpaying for at this point?
-
Huh, I didn't know Weathers was out there. That's actually a guy I wouldn't mind seeing them take a chance on if he could be had for cheap.
-
Ugh, I just don't think I'm ever comfortable trading for relievers. Frasor's numbers are great last year...but he was pretty ass-y most of the other years he's been with Toronto. Seems like he be more likely to go back to his crappy, high-WHIP/ERA ways. http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/frasoja01.shtml
-
Hey, 400k might as well be 400 billion in Cleveland.
-
Or his [expletive] ACL. I love how HCCF lives in this world where someone like Longoria would be instantly forgotten if he was catastrophically injured and never able to play again.
-
Or they'll say, "that kickass 3rd baseman for the Rays who blew out his [expletive] knee."
-
Everything about it was perfect.
-
What kind of monster chooses NBA Live '98 over '95? Madness.
-
It would take like two minutes to figure out why the Bulls fell off of a cliff. It's not like Noah's injury is some well-hidden secret. If they completely suck from here on out it's because of injuries. Besides, you're basically defeating your own argument by trying to present players as largely being oblivious. If that's the case, then why will they even notice or care if the Bulls stink the rest of the season? They only pay attention all of a sudden if a team is bad?
-
And with Rose. His influence on who the end up drawing in cannot be understated. Look, it would be one thing if the Bulls just flat out sucked and had nothing going for them. Yes, then their record is going to be much more of a factor. Am I saying that the Bulls are a good team? Of course not, but they clearly have some good young players and their record this year is clearly going to be hinged on injuries and, more obviously, how they're setting up to improve their team in free agency. Again, FA's aren't blind, deaf and stupid. It's a simple matter for them to realize the main factors as to why the Bulls will potentially end up with a crappy record this season. But hey, Rose is still there. The money is still there. If they really stink it up, boom, nice draft pick. Noah is still there. To a lesser degree, Deng and Gibson are still there. And it's still Chicago. That's all what matters most.
-
I've never once said they had a money advantage. I've just said that they have money, and that's far more important than how the team does after they're hobbled by injuries and clearly setting up to be able to spend all of that delicious, sexy money. Your idea of FA's focusing on a team's record requires them to completely ignore or be unaware of the bolded. It's having the money plus being able to play with Rose that is by far the biggest selling points to bringing FA's here. How they do with key guys injured in a season that's clearly just a setup to being able to sign FA's is waaaaaaaaaaaay down that list.
