Jump to content
North Side Baseball

goonys evil twin

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,551

  • 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 goonys evil twin

  1. goonys evil twin
    Actually, he held LHH to a .318 OBA last season. The 5 HR (and 6 other EBH) in 99 AB is what killed him. That looks fluky. That's not loogy material. Loogies keep LH's OBP well under .300. This guy's best pitch is supposedly a changeup, and we've heard for quite a while how much trouble LH change up artists struggle against lefties (REMLINGER).
  2. goonys evil twin
    Or you just miss the obvious potential Eyre deal. I don't think Hendry would add a third LH arm for no reason. It doesn't make sense to me to trade for Cotts to be your LH set-up man. That's what I'm saying. If another team has a woody for Cotts, then it makes sense to trade 2 pitchers for him. I just don't see the point in acquiring Cotts as the guy you will fall back on once dealing Eyre (which I'm in favor of). What if Ohman becomes the LH set up man and Cotts is the LOOGY? Cotts couldn't loogy in 2004 or 2006. I'd rather a loogy be a LH who actually gets out lefties routinely.
  3. goonys evil twin
    I don't really care about giving up either guy. I'm all for thinning the herd of the so-so arms, I just don't see the point in getting back another so-so arm when doing it.
  4. goonys evil twin
    Or you just miss the obvious potential Eyre deal. I don't think Hendry would add a third LH arm for no reason. It doesn't make sense to me to trade for Cotts to be your LH set-up man. That's what I'm saying. If another team has a woody for Cotts, then it makes sense to trade 2 pitchers for him. I just don't see the point in acquiring Cotts as the guy you will fall back on once dealing Eyre (which I'm in favor of). I don't think he'll be a LH set up man. As is (assuming Eyre is dealt), your top three arms in the pen will all be RH. I think Cotts will be used to get out tough lefties along with Ohman. I don't know if there's a role on this team for a LH set up man given how much the three righties are making. He couldn't get out lefties last year to save his life, and they rocked him in 2004 as well. I think he might be a candidate for a starting job over a loogy.
  5. goonys evil twin
    How was he used the wrong way? He started 4 games with Manuel. He was in the minors the rest of the year.
  6. goonys evil twin
    I just looked up his stats and his only good year was in 2005. His other seasons were terrible, so who knows. Those other years wasn't he a starter? The past two years he's only been bad for half a season. He was a reliever in 2004, 2005 and 2006. I'm guessing he was primarily a starter before that.
  7. goonys evil twin
    Or you just miss the obvious potential Eyre deal. I don't think Hendry would add a third LH arm for no reason. It doesn't make sense to me to trade for Cotts to be your LH set-up man. That's what I'm saying. If another team has a woody for Cotts, then it makes sense to trade 2 pitchers for him. I just don't see the point in acquiring Cotts as the guy you will fall back on once dealing Eyre (which I'm in favor of).
  8. goonys evil twin
    The only thing that makes sense to me is that another team wants Cotts included in a deal. Cotts doesn't do anything for the Cubs. He's redundant, like Aardsma was.
  9. goonys evil twin
    Yes. Probably more than there were the last time Chicago played there. NYG fans commented on how many fans were there. But not as many as I remember always going to the Tampa games.
  10. goonys evil twin
    I would be willing to bet that any 2 year deal would be worth much more than that.
  11. goonys evil twin
    I'm not sure Hendry can get all those guys. There is a limit to how many A/B guys he can sign. DeRosa counts as 1 already. He does? That makes that move even worse.
  12. goonys evil twin
    Exactly! If he was a "head case", I'd take my chances. However, I think his lack of success is a result of being stubborn and/or stupid. Wouldn't be stubborn/stupid fall into the head case department?
  13. goonys evil twin
    For the love of God, please get it done. Theo took heat for letting Orlando go, and Izturis could be construed as a poor man's Orlando Cabrera. I guess they'd do this only if Alex G was asking for ridiculous money.
  14. goonys evil twin
    Ditto. I, too, live in Stl, and I don't want to take any chances with Marquis. If Duncan couldn't fix him, forget about it. He's stubborn, 100% unpredictable, and has a major problem keeping the ball down - which is the only way he succeeds. I don't know about the Duncan couldn't fix him tag. He was decent for two years under Duncan, better than he'd been in his career as a full-time starter. I think it's a matter of them losing him, rather than not being able to fix him.
  15. goonys evil twin
    Granny Smith and then Gala.
  16. goonys evil twin
    The problem here is you are saying he's a pitcher with a 6+ ERA, when in fact he's coming off a 6+ ERA season, but has had sub 4 ERAs on two occasions and is 4.55 for his career. Baseball writers are also doing this when talking about players. You can't just say a guy is a .300/30/100 player when he's only just done it this year and has never done it before. It's deceitful to say a pitcher is a 15-game winner when he was 15-15 and had never previously won 10 games. Baseball people tend to define players with their best, or their worst numbers, or just their most recent numbers. Marquis is an inconsistent pitcher who has been both good and awful. He's coming off three straight full seasons, averaging 200 innings. Prior to that he was a young guy averaging under 100 major league innings per year, with mixed results. He had a 6+ ERA last year. He was awful. But it's hard to justify defining him as a 6+ ERA guy. I, for one, am concerned that it's not just a case of a guy losing his mechanics. Duncan tends to get the most out of guys, not the least. But somebody will take into account his body of work. If you told major league GM's that his next three seasons would exactly match his last 3 seasons, I'd bet he'd get 3/33 or more.
  17. goonys evil twin
    doubtful, he'll get big time guaranteed money. Define "big time." I would be shocked if he got anything less than $6-8 million guaranteed on a one year deal. And I wouldn't be surprised with a 3/27 type contract (and maybe more). It's not like he's coming off a 20 inning season. He "won" 14 games, and threw 190 innings. He's coming off 3 seasons where he's average 200 innings and 14 wins. A minor league deal is out of the question. A low base isn't going to get him, unless the incentives are obscenely high and easy to achieve.
  18. goonys evil twin
    doubtful, he'll get big time guaranteed money.
  19. goonys evil twin
    Well, my wishes to hear Drew mentioned in connection with the Cubs got answered just one day later in another Phil Rogers article. Without a doubt, I want J.D. Drew over Alfonso Soriano. Drew is a better hitter, a better fielder, bats lefty, has experience in both CF and RF and, if the above quote is at all accurate, is a lot less expensive in both millions per year and length of contract. The only thing that he lacks is a history of being healthy. I can live with that. This should, hands down, be Hendry's main focus right now. If he can somehow pull off signing Drew, talking about getting back into the good graces... I'd give him all the graces he wanted.
  20. goonys evil twin
    It's funny because normally the majority of our posters are fiscally conservative about what the Cubs are spending for big names, but now a lot of people don't care...just sign a bunch of people and worry about the negatives later. I've always said I'm much more willing to overspend on players that are actually really good. I think a team with a payroll such as the Cubs should spend big on impact players and look for bargains with the filler.
  21. goonys evil twin
    If the Cubs are substantially increasing payroll, the ability to take risks with high reward players becomes greater.
  22. goonys evil twin
    It is. But the fact that Drew is routinely better than Soriano is also a positive for JD. The more injury prone guys you have, the higher the odds you'll miss multiple guys at once. But the more really good guys you'll have, the higher the odds you can withstand setbacks.
  23. goonys evil twin
    does "and" mean hendry would want both? there's no way they could afford drew and soriano... I wouldn't be so sure about that. Trade Jones, one of the expensive relievers and move Izturis anywhere and you have enough to just about cover Drew's money. I don't think they'd have to move much to afford both.
  24. goonys evil twin
    Changed the URLs. Let me know if they're still not visible. Ahhh, brings back nice memories..... of 4 days ago. I expect to see many of the same people this weekend.
  25. goonys evil twin
    All those numbers does us no good if he can't stay healthy. We don't need him to stay healthy, we need him to be healthy most of the time. I think in a 5 year deal, you'd get at least 3 semi-full to full seasons out of him. And then 2 of the seasons he's going to miss some games. But that's probably why you can get him for around $14m, when Soriano might get $17-18m. Look at how the Mets handled the Pedro situation. They signed him for 4 years, and pretty much acknowledged they weren't going to get 4 strong years out of him. If the Cubs were a $65 million team, Drew isn't worth the risk. If they were a very good offensive ballclub, there probably isn't much reason to sign such a player. But the Cubs are desperate for a hitter that does exactly the things JD does. They need an impact bat. Their offense could be awesome with him, and all they'd need to do was try and tread water when he misses games. For all the issues he's had, JD has never crippled a team with his problems. Give JD the same profile, but make him 34 or 35 right now, and my story would probably change. But the Cubs need this type of player, and from age 31 through age 34 or 35, they should be able to get a ton of production out of him.
×
×
  • Create New...