seanimal

less impressed

explain yourself While he's doing well, he's still missed a ton of playing time. Also, this regime has put a huge focus on development so I'm more than happy to trust them on when to bring him up. i just realized you might not have meant "not come up to the MLB this season"... or did you?

True; it's been an impressive slide into the depths. i'd feel like a liar if i didn't admit that i'm somewhat impressed at how quickly you pounce on these things. do you have some sort of IFTTT utility to aid you in your diligence?

explain yourself

I hope people remember this every time they're mad at a player for holding out. What is an expensive injury? It's not like he was paying for his procedures? It's an injury that prevents you from earning in the future. If the NFL doesn't guarantee contracts, meaning you can be cut at any time and don't get anything more, then players should absolutely get the maximum they can in the present. yes. the non guarantee likely drives up salaries too. not necessarily. it's the reason for money upfront, but i doubt it actually drives the deal amounts up significantly

I was quite disappointed to see all the threads bumped by one sarcastic comment in each. Hope it was a good night! No one asked you what you think. SO [expletive] YOU ftfy

i think we'd meet the dollars but not the years. he'll be 28 next june, hard to see anyone willing lock him in until age 35

"... so I says to Coach K, 'BECAUSE 7 ATE 9'"

ok someone convince me this isn't drunk meph

yeah, he's not really anything close to an ideal piece in a castro trade

I would hope they just go BPA because this is hopefully their last chance to add a top 10 talent to the system for some time. It's an interesting thought that they might roll the dice on a college arm with the thought that they're nearly ready to compete and top pitchers are a weakness at the top levels. That said, I'm not sure organizational depth wasn't as big a factor with Schwarber since just about everyone thinks he can't stick at C. good point about schwarber; i'm going off of that hoyer quote where he mentioned their catching talent scarcity vis a vis picking schwarber, though he doesn't actually say that it was a deciding factor iirc i know that we'll never know if they would have taken appel or aiken were they available, but i can't imagine the strategy changes at this juncture, whether the strategy was pitcher averse or not

only if swear words were then inserted places were they weren't already used

SS Brendan Rogers is the top prep positional prospect, Daz Cameron is slipping and LHP Kolby Allard was the most impressive pitcher last weekend (he did win MVP). obviously this is all still very fluid, but what do we guess the draft strategy is next year? best positionals available in the first couple of rounds, need filling the rest of the way? or do we roll the dice on a top-flight arm? i suspect they're always in a best-available mindset, but their schwarber pick suggests they were at least considering org positional depth as a deciding factor

i voted for the obvious choice, but i feel like we would derive more joy if both were allowed to LIVE FREE http://s21.postimg.org/z2q98xlqf/fdb_windermere_medium.jpg

if it's not safe for you to inadvertently load a swear word on your browser, it's probably not safe for you to spend hours on a cubs message board using company resources FREE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!!!

advanced approach, power, defense, and athleticism go a long way. although now i see people disparaging a prospect they love in order to try to be right about something. for shame. Sorry to come back to this, but come on. Castro at age 20 at Tennessee: 121 PA, .376/.421/.569, 9/11 BB/K Russell at age 20 at Tennessee: 135 PA, .304/.356/.556, 8/26 BB/K People forget how badly Castro was incinerating AA when he was first promoted. jim hendry tho

bizarro rick ankiel

i disagree, but within context. we shouldn't pass up on a trade for a pitcher if it gives us someone with some amount of team and cost control. if that opportunity comes, you take it for obvious reasons that everyone understands. however, that's an opportunity that may not ever come. if you can acquire a guy for "just money" then you are silly not to because the value of surplus payroll dollars drops every year in this free agency environment

longer, really. i think you actually convinced me that i shouldn't expect much doubt - performance-wise - about his suitability at SS coming off of this season. but what if being the best defensive option is not a slam-dunk case for him to actually become the SS for the chicago cubs? explodinghead.gif

lol sometimes i do this

When we've got 8 awesome hitters in the lineup and lots of budget room, then we might as well go big on a pitcher because what else are we going to spend it on? But don't believe for a second that pitching matchup in the postseason is some big deal. Didn't we just see Kershaw get plonked around pretty hard last year? yeah, the pitching in the playoffs axiom is really a lot of your old friend, confirmation bias. you assemble the best team possible to win as many games as possible. playoff games are just like regular season games, so you shouldn't necessarily be thinking about "well sure we'll win 100 games but we better go out and get an ace cause what if kershaw?" i will say that the "there's limits to how many years i'll go" limit on a FA pitcher is not necessarily a realistic expectation. would you rather just not assemble the best team possible so you can revel in the satisfaction that you saved on that 5th or 6th year? that doesn't make sense. the market isn't set by principles, it's set by supply and demand. if you want to acquire some of the available supply, you need to do so within the bounds of the market. you're going to give more money and commit to more years than you would want to in a perfect situation

Here is your original statement: 1) The old scouting reports you mentioned had already been superceded by pretty much glowing reports about his defense that have been referenced here already 2) Literally nothing has come out bad about his defense since then 3) What reports have come out during the year (I've quoted some) have been even more glowing 4) What little data we do have points to success in at least one part of the job What additional scouting reports are you looking for? Ones that support your position while you ignore all others? You have ignored every piece of supporting evidence I've posted and keep repeating that I haven't put forward anything to support my position. It makes sense to follow these things. Many of us here follow extremely closely (including me). Russell is a plus defensive SS. The only reason Castro would play SS over Russell is if the team values not upsetting the veteran more than putting the best defensive alignment possible on the field. my comment about who would stick at SS was just a throwaway guess that i just tacked on to the end of a statement expressing my excitement at seeing what conclusions the experts draw from this year. i literally have no stake in this, no position to support. i wasn't looking for evidence to support some idea that i have about him being destined for 3rd base, nor was i disregarding evidence to the contrary. that's not the conversation i was trying to have. but let's not let that get in the way

this is officially the worst argument ever tim, i'm not arguing whether or not a significant/majority/overwhelming landslide dominating proportion of scouts are convinced of his ability to stick at SS. your fixation on this seems misplaced to me. furthermore, just because that is true does not also mean that the opinion a) is held by everyone and b) cannot change over time. hence, my statement about wanting to see what people say about his performance this year. it's a fluid thing. what exactly is objectionable about expressing a desire to pay attention to something?

does ARam count? or DLee? is a contraction a nickname?

your frenzied response to being questioned on this is really bizarre. well when you put it that way