Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Sammy Sofa

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    98,221

  • 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

  1. Sammy Sofa
    *3 month rental August + September = TWO months. They haven't clinched anything and the Giants are .5 game back which could potentially leave them battling for the second Wild Card spot. they're currently 91% to make it, not factoring adding Alex Wood and Mat Latos and David Price to their rotation and subtracting [file not found] The Cubs dropped 30% in the last week from a percentage they held for almost the entire season. It's a 2 month rental with the possibility of pitching in the postseason. Unless you have a crystal ball there isn't another answer. :) So the flipside is that that percentage could go shooting right back up in short order if they started winning more, something trades could very much help them do.
  2. Sammy Sofa
    Or, you know, bring up a legit baseball player like Schwarber to do the same thing. There's actually a difference. Guys like Fox and LaHair were so good for a short time because they had the go-ahead to swing at every pitch until they get that straight fastball to knock all the way to Jupitor, at least until pitchers realized that they could just toss the ball wherever and they'd flail at it like a hyperactive 9 year old going after a Piñata. So Junior Lake?
  3. Sammy Sofa
    Then [expletive] trade Hamels in the offseason. Surely putting all of our offseason eggs into the top pitcher on the market basket (while competing against a team who clearly wants him with endless pockets) would never fail. That's too Billy Beane, man.
  4. Sammy Sofa
    Where am I spazzing out? All I want them to do is to improve their chances this season because they're a competitive team and it irks me when Cubs fans act like they shouldn't bother because the offense has struggled. The FO has assured us they'd make those type of moves when they were competitive, so it's hardly an unrealistic expectation. Last time I checked, the trade deadline doesn't end till tomorrow. I know, which is why I'm still hopeful they get something done. This was all in response to posters specifically saying they wouldn't mind or that they would even like if the FO didn't do anything.
  5. Sammy Sofa
    So we've had a guy acting like a faster Dunn with better defense is a bad thing, and now this.
  6. Sammy Sofa
    So what? So they rebuild it. We're looking at a team next year that is likely going to be anchored offensively by Rizzo, Bryant, Russell, Schwarber, Soler and Baez next year. Why is such a problem if the farm system slips in the rankings temporarily because they bolstered the team by trading for an impact player or two? I'm not complaining, I'm just saying that the Cubs don't really have the prospects to compete with a deal like the Rangers for Hamels without decimating our system. Again: so what? So the farm gets emptied some more temporarily for a fantastic pitcher to bolster a rotation that needs the help and who they have under control for years. Why is it critical they hold on to any of the players you listed? Again, this isn't a vacuum. Would you rather add Hamels at the cost of Baez, Edwards and McKinney, or add Price for nothing but payroll? Hamels, because he'd cost much less in terms of both years and money (I'd want a pitcher like that for multiple seasons, but at their ages not for what Price is going to command). I'm much more concerned about the money they have to work with than whether or not they can restock the farm yet again.
  7. Sammy Sofa
    what an awful post. as though he was somehow singularly responsible for their playoff fates (or lack thereof). and it was far from one of the worst contracts in the last 15 years unless your list is like a million guys (that's hyperbole) long Plus Soriano talk always spirals off into this kinda thing. They're never going to understand.
  8. Sammy Sofa
    So what? So they rebuild it. We're looking at a team next year that is likely going to be anchored offensively by Rizzo, Bryant, Russell, Schwarber, Soler and Baez next year. Why is such a problem if the farm system slips in the rankings temporarily because they bolstered the team by trading for an impact player or two? I'm not complaining, I'm just saying that the Cubs don't really have the prospects to compete with a deal like the Rangers for Hamels without decimating our system. Again: so what? So the farm gets emptied some more temporarily for a fantastic pitcher to bolster a rotation that needs the help and who they have under control for years. Why is it critical they hold on to any of the players you listed?
  9. Sammy Sofa
    What are some of those other splurges. Signing a 32 year old Alfonso Soriano to a 8 year/$136 million deal with 2 bad knees and no experience in the OF comes to mind as one. We're talking trades, but of course you can't help yourself. OK, you've already pretty much exhausted the main examples people flock two when they complain about Hendry dishing out monster contracts that crippled the team and ridiculous lopsided trades that decimated the farm. What's next, Fukudome? Pierre? Hendry was often a cruddy GM, but he's been propped up as something he actually wasn't most of the time. Their problems came from crappy drafting and player development and crippling injuries once he became the GM, not because he was handing out mega-deals and and heaving prospects out the door. how come you didn't pick apart the part where that post was like 80% factually false I'm very sleepy and figured toppling the Hendry strawman would be enough.
  10. Sammy Sofa
    What are some of those other splurges. Signing a 32 year old Alfonso Soriano to a 8 year/$136 million deal with 2 bad knees and no experience in the OF comes to mind as one. We're talking trades, but of course you can't help yourself. OK, you've already pretty much exhausted the main examples people flock two when they complain about Hendry dishing out monster contracts that crippled the team and ridiculous lopsided trades that decimated the farm. What's next, Fukudome? Pierre? Hendry was often a cruddy GM, but he's been propped up as something he actually wasn't most of the time. Their problems came from crappy drafting and player development and crippling injuries once he became the GM, not because he was handing out mega-deals and and heaving prospects out the door.
  11. Sammy Sofa
    We're talking the narrow sample size of the playoffs where you're usually just going up against a team's best, something the Cubs, yes, have shown they can do at times, just like anyone else. The key is to actually get in to have that shot.
  12. Sammy Sofa
    What are some of those other splurges.
  13. Sammy Sofa
    So what? So they rebuild it. We're looking at a team next year that is likely going to be anchored offensively by Rizzo, Bryant, Russell, Schwarber, Soler and Baez next year. Why is such a problem if the farm system slips in the rankings temporarily because they bolstered the team by trading for an impact player or two?
  14. Sammy Sofa
    It's an indication of what is possible. There's not point in puting down a blanket "This is what they would/won't do." There are only probabilties. That's not actually true. There are only probabilities? So, what are the probabilities that this team that has struggled at the plate all year begins to hit against the likes of Kershaw/Greinke/Latos or Scherzer/Zimmermann/Gozalez or Wacha/Martinez/Lynn? No, nothing is a guarantee. I guess I just don't get where all the optimism is coming from, and have a hard time using the 2014 Kansas City Royals as a beacon of hope. If the Cubs had, say, traded for Hamels, why would teams like the Dodgers or the Cardinals be so likely to be able to handle Hamels/Arrietta/Lester any easier? You just want to be in the playoffs because things can wildly sway in either direction.
  15. Sammy Sofa
    The bolded sentence is where I disagree with you. The farm system is not what we thought it was back in March. Graduating Bryant, Russell and Schwarber has really hurt what was a terribly top-heavy system. That doesn't mean we don't have pieces to trade, but trading for impact would significantly hurt the system, and would do so in a year where you likely don't feel as good about your chances as you may in 2016. So "hurt" the system; this is supposed to be the FO that can replenish it with smart drafting and signings. Everyone knew Bryant and Russell were definitely coming up this year, so Schwarber being a regular in the lineup at this point is the only real surprise. Why would it be worse if the farm is momentarily depleted this year because of trades as opposed to the next? Are they "hurting" the farm system if they make a big trade in this coming offseason? Honestly, this comes across as being more worried as to how the system will be ranked for 2016 moreso than the Cubs doing what they can to compete this year.
  16. Sammy Sofa
    The well isn't dry at all; that's nonsense. And there's always the risk of ultimately regretting giving up a prospect. That's not a definitive reason in and of itself to not make moves to help the team right way. The Rangers gave up their 4th, 5th, 6th, 17th, 29th prospects and Matt Harrison for Cole Hamels. That's like the Cubs giving up Carl Edwards Jr, Duane Underwood, Albert Almora, Jen Ho Tseng, Jeremy Null, and Clayton Richard on a bigger salary for Hamels. No thanks. So when is it acceptable for them to make moves like that? When they're actually in a WC spot? Just a game behind? Just 3 games behind in the division? Tied for the division? Leading? How much better does the offense have to be? When would you actually be OK with that?
  17. Sammy Sofa
    Where am I spazzing out? All I want them to do is to improve their chances this season because they're a competitive team and it irks me when Cubs fans act like they shouldn't bother because the offense has struggled. The FO has assured us they'd make those type of moves when they were competitive, so it's hardly an unrealistic expectation. Quit deflecting, damnit and name 10 [expletive] players Dracula, Blacula and Son of Kong.
  18. Sammy Sofa
    The well isn't dry at all; that's nonsense. And there's always the risk of ultimately regretting giving up a prospect. That's not a definitive reason in and of itself to not make moves to help the team right way.
  19. Sammy Sofa
    In a vacuum, yes. I don't know what this is supposed to mean. It means that there are other factors that the FO has to consider, obviously. Are they in a position to take on payroll right now? Is there a reasonable package that brings back the arm and the bat necessary to compete with teams like the Dodgers, who have what appears to be infinite resources right now? It also means that teams make moves to rent players in the regular season that they wouldn't always target the following offseason. So, if you can save prospects required to rent guys like Leake or Kennedy, maybe this FO prefers that? Honestly, I don't know what they're thinking at this point. If the budget really is that tight then all of this is moot and basically all we can do is hope and dumpster dive. It would be really unfortunate that after everything they've done to improve the farm system they can't actually use it to go out and get impact players at critical times because they cost too much. And it's going to be years until the Cubs theoretically have the money to compete with the Dodgers and company when it comes to spending, so again, you're just perpetuating another self-fulfilling prophecy to excuse not trying to bolster a competitive Cubs team.
  20. Sammy Sofa
    The value of those pieces slightly goes down because you lose a half year of them. Could be the difference between keeping a prospect you like and giving up one you're not so sure on. They're not "losing half a year" if they make a push to improve the team now for a run and they don't win a World Series. And again, one of the main points of rebuilding the farm system was to have assets to move, not to hoard them and only move them when the team has a clear and easy path to winning the division. You try to have those assets in part to help you when the team is struggling to hit its potential, whether because they can come up and produce or because you can use some of them to upgrade.
  21. Sammy Sofa
    In a vacuum, yes. I don't know what this is supposed to mean.
  22. Sammy Sofa
    Where am I spazzing out? All I want them to do is to improve their chances this season because they're a competitive team and it irks me when Cubs fans act like they shouldn't bother because the offense has struggled. The FO has assured us they'd make those type of moves when they were competitive, so it's hardly an unrealistic expectation.
  23. Sammy Sofa
    The pieces they'll need in the offseason are the same pieces they need right now.
  24. Sammy Sofa
    Yeah, too bad they're not world-beaters like the 2006 Cardinals or anything. They of the 8 and 7-game losing streaks and going 35-39 in the second half and going 83-78 overall and who went 9-11 in their final 20 games. We're not the Cardinals. They have voodoo magic, we haven't won a World Series in 107 years. You're a child. These are the things a child believes.
  25. Sammy Sofa
    Yeah, too bad they're not world-beaters like the 2006 Cardinals or anything. They of the 8 and 7-game losing streaks and going 35-39 in the second half and going 83-78 overall and who went 9-11 in their final 20 games.
×
×
  • Create New...