CubColtPacer
-
Posts
13,875 -
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
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by CubColtPacer
-
I don't think Love even can sign an extension right now. He's only two years into his deal, and I think you have to be three years in to even have a chance of an extension. What he can do for security though is essentially opt in to his 4th year of his deal, which would give the team who trades for him at least two years.
-
Between 70 and 75 is usually what I've seen quoted lately. Of course, those are mostly based on average run scoring tables. Teams that run the majority of time in smart situations (with poor hitters due up, when they need 1 run, with runners on 1st and 2nd, etc.) can lower that break even percentage by another decent bit.
-
Not exactly what I was saying, but the Cavs have a lot to work from that has value if not a huge headliner(Waiters, Thompson, Bennett, a bunch of future firsts). In the worst case scenario you can certainly take your shot without Love this year and have him join in the fun next year, my point is that the Minnesota isn't going to get a player as valuable as Wiggins from anyone else, so having him be the sticking point doesn't mean as much(especially if there's smoke to the rumor that Love would be interested in an extension w/ LeBron in Cleveland). Minnesota thinks they can get Klay Thompson and Barnes out of a deal (and they may ultimately be right). The problem for Cleveland if even if Wiggins today is more valuable than Klay, if you don't include him the rest of their assets don't come anywhere close. Wiggins becomes the sticking point even if he's the most valuable player Minnesota could get because the dropoff is pretty big after that.
-
The next first round pick Brooklyn could have offered would have been the 2020 one because of the picks Boston has already.
-
Breaking news: Core Four now Future Five
CubColtPacer replied to jersey cubs fan's topic in Cubs Minor League Talk
This post of mine from last year details when top 5 hitters over the last several drafts (2005-2012) have made it to the majors: viewtopic.php?p=2964509#p2964509 The only players to make it up the year after they were drafted for more than 20 PA were Zimmerman and Zunino. The only other player to not spend at least some time in the minors two years after they drafted was Gordon. The normal timetable for somebody like Bryant would be somewhere between a September callup this year and a June callup next year. Gordon, Longoria, and Wieters are good examples of hitters who hit very well in the minors and yet none of them were up before the end of their first full professional season. -
The fact that they signed McRoberts for the exact amount of money as the MLE and Granger for what looks like the BAE suggests that the Heat are not planning to go under the cap at all. That's the end of the Heat's free agency money except for minimum salary guys or of course trades.
-
I can wait an extra three weeks to keep him an extra year. Or we could pay to have him that extra year rather than potentially cost us games in a year where we can't afford to throw away our slim margin for competition. If he's any good at all, you just paid like $20m for 15 games of him. Nobody does that. If you think there's any chance of doing that, just bring him up now to get extra time to adjust. If they only keep him down until late April, he'll be a Super 2. The Cubs will have that extra year of team control, but they're just creating a 4th year of arbitration by delaying free agency a year. Is 4th year of arbitration money and 1st year of free agency money that big of difference? The money really changes if they kept him down close to half the season next year, but I doubt they'll do that.
-
Force Houston to match and spend the money; consolation prize if they don't. That would force the Bulls to amnesty Boozer and then tie up more than half of their cap space for three days while Houston decides. That might be worth it for a chance to get Parsons, but it's not without risk for the Bulls as well.
-
From a team perspective, that's too bad if they wouldn't be considered. That team is absolutely stacked in that scenario. They would be better than any of the Miami versions we've seen over the last four years. They would be extremely talented, fit very well, and be incredibly deep as well. Of course, I could see them passing because of ownership concerns. That team might end up being one of the more expensive ones in basketball history to keep together, and their owner sold draft picks in the past to save cash.
-
Potentially, we have a road of Belgium, Argentina, Netherlands, Germany/Brazil. That's as bad as it gets. Couldn't it be argued that Belgium would be the 2nd weakest group winner though? It seems like the four favorites have been separated nicely into each quadrant of the bracket. And the teams who are on the edge of that (France, Chile, Columbia) are all on the other side of the bracket. I'd put Belgium right behind those seven. Everybody who isn't one of those eight teams is going to have a really hard road if seeds hold since they're spread out so nicely.
-
Any offense the US can bring in? Germany scoring means little right now for the tiebreakers (unless they score multiple times). The US scoring once gets them way out of the danger zone even if Germany scores.
-
It's a weird loop hole that's entirely related to the fact that we only signed him to a 2 year deal on his first contract, so we didn't get full bird rights. And the provision allows you to match anyways even though you wouldn't technically have the cap space or exceptions to do so. I think there would probably be better solutions though, like allow a QO system on the third year of any rookie deal, allowing a team to get that third year and bird rights. Then again, perhaps the Bulls should have pushed harder for that third year on the first contract. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I'm talking specifically about how the cap hit counts one way for the signing team and another for the matching team. There's absolutely no reason to allow it to work like that. But agree, Bulls should have fought harder for a 3rd year. But all indications are that Asik really only wanted a 2 year deal so he could cash in on a larger payday sooner. How else would you structure it though? It's not fair to the Rockets to be forced to have 5/5/15 structure when they have cap space to sign him to a normal contract. The Bulls couldn't have a 8/8/8 structure without Bird rights. It's a strange rule, but it's one the league specifically put in to help the team potentially losing the player. It was designed to help players stay with teams, while before they had no chance of staying.
-
Portugal could get to 4 points with a win just like Ghana could, and so the goal differential tiebreaker has to be figured out with a Portugal win as well. It's just that most are focused on Ghana right now because Ghana's goal differential is only two behind the US while Portugal's is five behind.
-
From someone who is fairly inexperienced with soccer, I was wondering how much stoppage time would have been appropriate for the events of that 2nd half? IIRC, there were at least two injuries, two goals, four substitutions, and a card. Is that something that normally would get only 3-4 minutes?
-
538 has the US's chances moving up from 64 percent to 76 percent after the draw.
-
I would argue that 2004-2005 Detroit was legitimately good. Defending champions who took six or less games to win each of their playoff series before playing San Antonio. They only had 54 wins that regular season, but they had the effects of the Brawl to deal with as well, and of course that's the exact same number of games that Miami won this year. Miami was still probably better, but it's closer than it appears on first glance.
-
2014 Cubs Pick Discussion
CubColtPacer replied to Tim's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
So he raves about The Cubs picks after the first 3 rounds, hates the Schwarber pick, but doesn't acknowledge that the two are related? My thoughts exactly. I don't think it's the fact that they went under slot that bothered him. It's that he didn't even have Schwarber rated as a good underslot player at 4. He had him as the 26th best player which would have been a slot value of 1.87 million, and Scwarber ended up signing for a slot value between the 8th and 9th selection. -
Memphis's draft pick only comes to Cleveland next year if it's between 6-14. It could easily not be Cleveland's until 2017. Miami's pick isn't that valuable unless they break the team up this year, and Cleveland's own pick would get a lot worse if they acquired Love (plus Chicago can swap picks with Cleveland next year if Cleveland gets out of the lottery). Waiters and Thompson are assets with quite a bit of baggage. I don't think that package would interest Minnesota. There's no great asset there for them to hang their hat on. I could see a Cleveland deal with Love, but only involving the #1.
-
I don't see how the logistics work out for a Carmelo/Love pairing. Rose at 18.86 million Noah at 12.2 million Love at 15.72 milllion If you put Carmelo at 20 million (which would already be a small discount) that is already 66.78 million for the four of them, which is over the cap. Even if Carmelo signs for a little less than that, even roster charges for minimum salary players will knock that up about 4 million more so you would need Carmelo to sign for around 12-13 million to make it work (and that's assuming you completely gut the rest of the team). So it doesn't look like you can do the Love trade first and then sign Carmelo. If the Bulls do it the other way by signing Carmelo first, the Bulls have to somehow open enough room for Carmelo while leaving salaries that can match with Love. The combination of cap holds and players the Bulls already signed seem to make that scenario impossible. I don't see any way to make the numbers work out (once again dependent on what Carmelo wants, but he would have to sign for a pretty low salary to make it work out).
-
and there he goes Wayne, Hilton, Rogers, Moncrief - good mix of veterans, speed and upside. And Hakeem Nicks. Surprised that the Colts took a reveiver with their other needs, although they probably will need one after next year. It makes me wonder how high they had Moncrief on their board and if they decided they just couldn't pass on him anymore.
-
Minor League Discussion & Boxes 5-8-14
CubColtPacer replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Cubs Minor League Talk
Hendricks is going to be an interesting case. Most people like him fall apart in the higher levels, but he hasn't at all. He has a 3.07 ERA or better at every level His K/BB ratio is 3.68 or better at every level His HR rate at 3 of the 4 levels is 0.2 or lower (0.7 at high A) His highest H/9 at any level is 8.5 Are there really many good comps for this? Not very good stuff, dominates statistically at every level he's at. The Cubs should give him a long look IMO. -
Yup. When you combine his struggles recently with the Hawks tactics (pack the paint on defense, spread the floor wildly on offense) there's no reason for him to be on the floor. Many Pacer fans just want him benched entirely for game 7. If (a big if) the Pacers make it past the Hawks, Hibbert becomes much more important in the next series, but in this series he's a detriment.
-
From an outsider's perspective: The jump ball call was absolutely awful (although slightly predictable, refs seem to equate sitting on top of someone with having the ball). Should have been a timeout, and a better chance of a foul then the jump ball. Also should have been a violation on the tip. The Bulls if they got that timeout only had I believe 3 left on the shot clock, so it would have been a tough possession and they couldn't take the last shot. But they should have had a chance. The foul with two seconds left in overtime was also really bad. As somebody astutely mentioned, Chicago and Washington (Washington especially) had very small home/road splits, so losing the first two at home isn't as disastrous as it is normally. The Bulls could very well still win at least one and possibly two in Washimgton.
-
Minor League Discussion and Box 4-10-14
CubColtPacer replied to ctcf's topic in Cubs Minor League Talk
Nice to see Hendricks have a nice bounceback start. 7 IP, 5 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 5 K. The stat that is somewhat overlooked with Hendricks is his HR rate. If he can maintain a low HR rate in the PCL that's a great sign for his ability to pitch in the majors IMO. -
A random stat extrapolated from Fred's random stats: The Cubs have made the playoffs all three years that they have played on March 31st.