Jump to content
North Side Baseball

CubColtPacer

Community Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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

  1. CubColtPacer
    Suddenly Fukudome is the starter in RF again. And Nady has started 6 out of the last 10.
  2. CubColtPacer
    It is a dumb thing to say, but no different then when Lou got kicked out of the game a few years ago and the Cubs went on a huge run. The media and all the fans were saying Lou getting upset light a fire under the Cubs, but it had more to do with the Cubs being more talented then any team in the Central Division that year. No, not all the fans. Really, not even close to all of them. The Cubs didn't really take off until Aramis's walk-off against Milwaukee almost four weeks later. I don't think that's really true either. Aramis's walkoff was the Cubs 7th win in a row and their 17th in the last 25 gmaes. And the June record could have even been better if not for the fights (Lilly getting kicked out in the first inning in Atlanta and Lee getting kicked out of the Padres game almost a week later). And after that Aramis homerun, they were only 5-4 in their next 9 before getting hot again. Lou's tirade didn't change the season but that timing did happen to be when the Cubs starting playing better. The rest of June and July were both excellent and Aramis's walkoff was right in the middle of that long good stretch of play.
  3. CubColtPacer
    Seattle's at #4 right now and the Cubs are 5.5 games in front of them. I think Seattle is 3. Arizona's 4 and they are 4.5 games behind the Cubs.
  4. CubColtPacer
    I'm still not a big fan of the move. If Castro develops as he is supposed to, the Cubs cost themselves 7-10 million dollars by bringing him up one month early. That's a tough pill to swallow especially when knowing the 1 month they sacrificed it for came in a meaningless season. I don't think Castro should have been held down for development reasons but the financial difference was too much to ignore.
  5. CubColtPacer
    If Aramis doesn't opt out, the Cubs have a club option on him after 2011 or a 2 million buyout if they decline. So 2 years at maximum or maybe only 1 year. It makes sense to keep Ramirez. He has easily the highest upside if they want to compete next year. He's not blocking anybody in the system at the moment. If he has a good year next year and the Cubs are not in contention, he could possibly provide useful pieces back. Unless the Cubs are going out to get somebody like Alex Gordon, Ramirez makes more sense than a veteran stopgap even if the other player is cheaper. If the Cubs are competing, then Ramirez is key. If the Cubs decide not to compete, then they should have easily enough financial flexibility to make other moves without needing the money from Ramirez (since the Cubs are not going to go on a free agent spree if they decide to make 2011 a transitional year).
  6. CubColtPacer
    I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;) Well, the only two teams that get a say before the Cubs are Pittsburgh and Arizona, and I can't really see either of them putting in a claim. Then again, I don't see the Cubs putting in a claim either. I do think the Giants should jump all over this if no one claims Dunn before them. My point really wasn't about waiver order. The Nats aren't just letting Dunn go...they're going to want something for him. Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season. I'm delusional in thinking the Cubs will make Dunn a priority to replace Lee, but it's a happy world in which I live. But in terms of prospects, the Cubs would be better off waiting. Right now the Nats are going to demand more compensation then they will receive after the season. So they'll want value that exceeds a first rounder and a sandwich pick. But if the Cubs sign him in the offseason, the only thing they'll lose is a second round pick. That's a lot less value then what the Nats will likely be demanding and then the Cubs also don't have the Lee problem to contend with.
  7. CubColtPacer
    I'm not sure I have it completely correct but I think it finished at .568. 22 singles seems like an absurd number.
  8. CubColtPacer
    It's very strange to see one team with 22 hits and the other one with 4 and yet both teams have the exact same number of extra base hits.
  9. CubColtPacer
    We already have too many outfielders. And I like Hermida. DFA Nady. Problem solved This. DFA Nady (31) and replace with Hermida (26) Hermida would probably have to be non-tendered at the end of the year anyway (I'm not sure about that when there's a release in the middle, but I still don't think he can get less than 2.68 million next year without being non-tendered first). And the Cubs don't have enough at-bats for Fukudome right now. Where are they going to find at-bats for another left-handed outfielder? Hermida probably wouldn't be any worse for the Cubs but there isn't really any realistic upside because he wouldn't have any chance to show anything. So it becomes a pretty pointless move.
  10. CubColtPacer
    Isn't that the very definition of trolling? Making a point that you know others will disagree with = trolling? Not in my book. Saying something with the express purpose of "getting a rise out of some of you folks" = trolling. That wasn't the express purpose. I think he's saying that if you had used a softer phrase than hocus pocus you would have gotten your point across without making people upset. That choice of words wasn't needed to make your point that converting numbers like that is an inexact science. If you knew that specific phrase was going to cause problems, it might have been good to change it so people can focus on your argument.
  11. CubColtPacer
    He has much better power potential than Theriot. Between the minors and majors, Dewitt has hit a home run every 34.6 AB's. Theriot has hit a home run in the minors/majors every 206 AB's.
  12. CubColtPacer
    Dodgers' AA roster Aaron Miller, plz. They might have soured on Winthrow with his struggles this year. And it seems like somebody the Cubs would go after with good stuff, high strikeouts, and high walk totals.
  13. CubColtPacer
    Jesus, that's even worse. If they traded Z for just Perez, without throwing in any money? I think I'd take that. You would trade a pitcher with an era under 4 when starting for a guy who's era has been in the 6's most of his career starting at roughly the same age? One pitches in a hitters park (Wrigley), and the other pitches in a pitchers park (New York). I realize that people want to blow the team up, but blowing the team up and gaining less productive players at the same age is not going to end well. If that trade were to happen, it would be more about saving 43 mil then aquiring a crappy pitcher. The Cubs wouldn't really be saving 43 million. It would be probably somewhere between 20-30 million depending on how the deal shakes out. But that's still a nice chunk of money to have.
  14. CubColtPacer
    Indeed. We're talking about a guy that would fly through waivers unclaimed. Trading for Perez is worse than just Z going through waivers though. That's pretty close to even for both sides. The Mets take on Z for basically 2 1/2 years and 27 million (the difference between the salary of Perez and the one for Z). The Cubs get salary relief but probably would have to cut Perez at the beginning of the next year. Castillo being added on also makes some sense to give the Mets slightly more relief. They could probably meet in the middle and trade Castillo and Perez+3 million for Z. The Mets would have Z then for 2 1/2 years and around 22 million and the Cubs would have the salaries off the books a year early.
  15. CubColtPacer
    Isn't one position CF and the other 3B? Yes. The last couple years they haven't been too far apart on what is asked for offensively from the position. But after looking over it again 3B has always required slightly more offense so that's another point in Jackson's favor.
  16. CubColtPacer
    I just have a hard time seeing how to put Vitters above Jackson. Jackson has better numbers at the same level as Vitters. He is considered much better defensively than Vitters is and their positions are comparable. His patience also is much better than Vitters. The advantages for Vitters are that he is a year younger, doesn't have a problem with strikeouts like Jackson does, and has a little more power potential. Vitters probably has a little higher ceiling but that would require everything going perfectly. Jackson will be better if Vitters has to move from third or if the power for Vitters doesn't develop as it should or if the lack of walks hurts Vitters. I outlined my reasoning in more detail in one of the daily threads about a week or so ago, but it boils down to what I view as roughly equivalent performance at AA this year once luck is factored out, with Vitters being a year younger and with higher upside. Hmm..I remember you mentioning this but forget which thread it was in. I would agree that their performances in AA aren't that much different offensively. I just don't think their defensive differences can be that understated though. Jackson is going to provide value defensively in CF while Vitters is going to struggle to be passable at 3B. IMO, that's worth more than the little better upside Vitters has. Jackson has a much higher potential of being a ML regular.
  17. CubColtPacer
    I just have a hard time seeing how to put Vitters above Jackson. Jackson has better numbers at the same level as Vitters. He is considered much better defensively than Vitters is and their positions are comparable. His patience also is much better than Vitters. The advantages for Vitters are that he is a year younger, doesn't have a problem with strikeouts like Jackson does, and has a little more power potential. Vitters probably has a little higher ceiling but that would require everything going perfectly. Jackson will be better if Vitters has to move from third or if the power for Vitters doesn't develop as it should or if the lack of walks hurts Vitters.
  18. CubColtPacer
    The most disappointing part of a DeWitt acquisition would be that he is not that much different from somebody like Fontenot. While it would be helpful to have another backup 3B/2nd base option on the roster and DeWitt isn't a bad player to have, Fontenot's presence makes him a lot less valuable to the Cubs. It would be an ok trade but not a very exciting one unless the minor league pitcher ending up being good.
  19. CubColtPacer
    One of them could probably put up numbers that are ok at the catcher spot. The problem becomes that you've just taken a spot that is a major strength and turned it into something that is only ok. Having Colvin at first (which is not something I'm advocating) would allow the Cubs to put an extra OF in the lineup who is likely going to be a better hitter than having an extra catcher in the lineup.
  20. CubColtPacer
    Anyone else joining me on the Lake in the top 5 bandwagon yet? I hope there's more than 4 better than him. It really depends on how you view production vs tools in the low minors. Lake almost certainly has the highest ceiling in the Cubs system. He just hasn't put the production together for a long enough time to trust yet on either side of the ball. But he has every tool in the book and as Tim mentioned he seems to start to be figuring it out. And he still has plenty of time to refine his game. I have him somewhere in the 6-8 range myself, but I can see somebody ranking him in the top 5.
  21. CubColtPacer
    And? Just because he was closer to Russell doesn't mean "downright putrid". It's like you have 2 classifications: good and downright putrid. It's really semantics. Cutler was a below average quarterback last season. If you take his 5 best games and 3rd worst game out of the sample (leaving the 10 games that Sponge is talking about) it has to be a pretty bad stretch in order to get him to be below average overall. Of course, QB rating isn't everything. The fact that Cutler only lost 1 fumble should help his numbers and the fact that a much greater percentage than normal of his INT's were in the red zone should hurt his numbers.
  22. CubColtPacer
    Offering arbitration wouldn't work if Lee wants to stay in Chicago this bad. So probably the only way they get something for Lee is if they tell him immediately they're going another direction and he signs in November with another team. Then the Cubs could offer him arbitration with no risk and get a pick back (Lee would be a type B). But I doubt Lee will lower his demands that quickly to get somebody to sign him.
  23. CubColtPacer
    Was he really the most likely candidate for the job? I wouldn't have thought they had him at the head of the line even before this outing. I have no idea who they'll pick. They seem to be following their plan to put Z back in the bullpen. Cashner probably would be determined to not be stretched out either. Marshall's certainly not going to move. It will probably come down to one of Diamond, Jackson, Samardzija, or Atkins.
  24. CubColtPacer
    I never realized it until you asked...but the answer as it relates to pocketing draft picks appears to be no. :-s Oh dear. I was being facetious but yikes. It's not like the Cubs have let a lot of good players go over the years. I was trying to find out who was potentially type A in the past earlier and found that maybe Alou and Wood were the two most high profile that the Cubs declined on? Was there anybody else besides random middle relievers? Weren't Slappy and Harden Type A? Pierre was a type B and the Cubs did get a compensation pick for him. Harden was a type B that the Cubs chose not to offer.
  25. CubColtPacer
    I never realized it until you asked...but the answer as it relates to pocketing draft picks appears to be no. :-s Oh dear. I was being facetious but yikes. It's not like the Cubs have let a lot of good players go over the years. I was trying to find out who was potentially type A in the past earlier and found that maybe Alou and Wood were the two most high profile that the Cubs declined on? Was there anybody else besides random middle relievers?
×
×
  • Create New...