Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Backtobanks

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,298

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 Backtobanks

  1. Backtobanks
    But if we trade Reed Johnson, that means Tyler Colvin has to play more. :good:
  2. Backtobanks
    and how did that turn out for the cubs? certainly none of those big contracts have hurt the cubs in the past few years. but hey, we were pretty for 2 years in a row, so who cares. There's been a lot of discussion about Hendry, but if you're going to blame him for all the negatives that have happened during his tenure as GM, you ought to give him some credit for anything positive that happened too. Obviously the negatives outweigh the positives, but there were some positives.
  3. Backtobanks
    Rios' cold streak is approaching the Cubs' missing the World Series streak.
  4. Backtobanks
    From MLBTR: •Angels GM Tony Reagins tells Mike DiGiovanna of the LA Times that having lots of powerful bats at first base is a "good problem." Kendrys Morales, Mark Trumbo and C.J. Cron give the Angels an abundance of power at first base and Reagins says situations like this "have a way of working themselves out." If ARam decides to waive his no trade stance and the Cubs decide Pujols/Fielder are too expensive, I wouldn't mind Morales or Cron as part of a package in exchange for ARam.
  5. Backtobanks
    I could see Ricketts hiring Gillick as president with final say over all baseball issues and keeping Hendry as GM. Gillick has said he wouldn't want a "parallel move" (GM), but would consider a higher job and Ricketts continues to say nice things about Hendry. If he doesn't retain Hendry as GM, I could see him offering Hendry a job somewhere in the organization.
  6. Backtobanks
    I used to think this, but I find that harder to believe considering what the Padres got for Mike Adams. And if Hendry was indeed offering to eat salary and still getting offered nothing, that's fine. But reports seem to suggest that he was basically ignoring calls on his players in a quest to give himself hope for next season, and that's a bit more concerning. There were no reports that the Cubs were willing to eat Marmol's contract; simply that there teams interested in acquiring (no doubt hoping they smelled blood in the water and he could be had for garbage). Whatever team picked him up would be paying him approx. $17 million dollars. Mike Adams is probably going to end up costing around $4 million. Yeah, I don't doubt teams were trying to get him for nothing. My problem is that it seems Hendry just hung up on them, instead of gauging how much interest they really had by offering to pay part of the contract. Marmol at $5 million a year would have gotten a pretty nice return, I would think. Do you have any evidence that Hendry "just hung up on them"?
  7. Backtobanks
    Sounds like a decent plan assuming Colvin starts to show anything. Right now he's hopeless.
  8. Backtobanks
    He's also been around long enough to watch the Cubs chew up and spit out those same men. I believe Gillick can see what a challenge this organization is and would want no part of it. If I was Gillick, I would seriously consider the Cubs' job (as team president). First, I would make sure that Ricketts would guarantee that I make whatever moves are necessary to improve the team. Second, I would get a firm committment as to the money available for 2012 and 2013. Basically, he's got no place to go but up. As others have pointed out, money spent wisely and a few breaks could easily make Gillick look good.
  9. Backtobanks
    Adams' numbers are still phenomenal away from Petco, and he's been doing it for four years now. Don't get me wrong, I love what Marshall has become, but man, I hope he has a run like Adams'. You keep saying soft tossing LH as if that's a huge strike against him. I thought LH pitchers were at least if not more valuable than their RH counterparts. Am I reading something into your posts that isn't intended? It is a strike against him in terms of the idea that the Cubs missed out on an opportunity to trade him for a big return, so yes, you're reading into it incorrectly. I think Marshall is very, very valuable to the Cubs and very, very good...but he's not going to bring enough back to justify trading him. The last sentence sums up many of the Cub players (Pena, Baker, Byrd, Zambrano, Marshall, etc.). They have more value to the Cubs than they do on the trade market because of performance, salary, and/or lack of replacement in the farm system.
  10. Backtobanks
    The other GMs probably played hardball with Hendry now with the thought that most of the players that were available (Pena, Byrd, Johnson, Baker?, Grabow, Soriano, Zambrano, etc) will be available on waivers if they decide they need to pick someone up. No use overpaying now when you can still get the same player(s) for cheap in a few weeks.
  11. Backtobanks
    These tweets are ridiculous. These "experts" have to keep posting or tweeting something every 5 minutes to keep their reputation. None of them had a clue on the Jiminez or Rasmus trades. Most GMs are pretty quiet about what's going on so the "experts" have to speculate about everything (i.e. Team A needs an OF and these OFs are available, so Team A must be talking to the teams that might have an OF available)
  12. Backtobanks
    When you have one of the best trading chips on the market, however, you need to shoot higher than a couple of low ceiling, high floor guys who probably will be no better than league average their entire time with the Cubs. With a farm system as deep as ours, we're bound to get a handful or more players like Young and Slowey, so there's really very little benefit to acquiring them. Getting 1-2 of the top 5-10 prospects on another team is far more valuable since those guys have a much higher likelihood of becoming major leaguers than the vast majority of prospects and will also have much higher ceilings than Young and Slowey have. The only guarantee that Young and Slowey bring us is to not be terrible and you need more than that when you're trading one of the best third basemen in the game. I totally agree as long as we're going to get 2 of the other team's top 10 prospects and we're not paying 50%+ of ARam's contract. I'm worried about getting a few prospects with a ton of potential but become great AAAA players.
  13. Backtobanks
    My point is that there isn't any guarantee with getting some team's prospects (unless they're someone like Harper or Trout - which isn't going to happen) for a "decent bargaining chip". I agree that it's possible one (or 2) of the prospects might become stars, but there's also a chance that the prospects might never reach the ML. Also the fact that Slowey and Young are making ML money certainly would reduce any money we might have to send with ARam. I'm not a big fan of paying 50%-80% of a player's salary to another team, especially if a player is reasonably productive.
  14. Backtobanks
    I'd want a whole lot more than Young and Slowey for Aramis. Young is 26 this year, his best season is an .826 OPS and he has a .634 OPS this year. Slowey is 27 and has consistently been a mid 4.00s ERA and xFIP pitcher. The deal could be expanded, but those guys would be be the big names. I'm not saying these guys are fantastic, but they are young guys with some success at the ML level rather than prospects. Maybe Jaramillo could help Young. Slowey at mid 4.00s ERA might translate into a decent middle of the rotation pitcher with a switch to the NL.
  15. Backtobanks
    From MLBTR: •The Twins are open to trading Delmon Young and Kevin Slowey, but interest in Young has been “tepid.” Slowey has drawn interest from the Rockies and others. How about a deal centered around ARam for Young and Slowey.
  16. Backtobanks
    ARam to the WS for Morel and Danks.
  17. Backtobanks
    I do see your point, and I'm willing to concede that I am foolish to think nobody would just take Z. Fair enough. I think the main thing in this is we don't know how much of his contract the Cubs are offering to absorb. It's likely not much if they're getting refusals. Or they've just made him available and they targeting the Yankees because of someone they wanted in return and we've yet to hear who else might be willing to offer what. yeah, its hard to say without knowing for sure. I wouldn't be surprised if the yankees rejected it based on money or prospects or both. However I would be equally less surprised if it was a combination of those factors and their perception Z as a mediocre pitcher in a mediocre division. Its probably not just one or the other as multiple factors go into making a trade. That's been one point that I've made all along in any Hendry discussion - none of us know exactly what's being discussed. All of us (myself included) discuss deals and trade proposals without any "real" information. The part we can all agree on is that we're getting a lot of "inside nformation" from 2 of the biggest hacks around (Phil Rogers and Paul Sullivan).
  18. Backtobanks
    So you don't think any team would want him to be their closer if he continues his current production through next season? Marshall is as good as any of them, but there's a reason most teams don't have soft-tossing lefties as their closers.
  19. Backtobanks
    From MLBTR: Cardinals, White Sox Talking Colby Rasmus By Luke Adams [July 24 at 10:56am CST] Despite publicly insisting they don't intend to trade Colby Rasmus, the Cardinals have engaged in discussions with the White Sox about the outfielder, reports Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Strauss says talks between the two teams have "accelerated" within the last few days. According to Strauss, Edwin Jackson and Matt Thornton are among the players who could interest the Cardinals. The Cards would also be looking for minor league talent from the White Sox, and a third team "may be sought to facilitate a deal." The Nationals and Rays also remain interested in Rasmus, who has seen a recent decline in his playing time as Jon Jay has taken over as St. Louis's primary center fielder.
  20. Backtobanks
    As others have stated, you aren't going to "sell high" on Marshall. Nobody is going to give you much for a set-up man.
  21. Backtobanks
    That's the bigger issue to me. I think Go Cubs Go is pointless but harmless (especially since I usually turn the TV off once the game ends anyway). But the guest conductors (especially the interviews following the stretch) need to go. What do you have against Barry Weiss of Storage Wars? The follow up interview with him was riveting and very informative.
  22. Backtobanks
    No idea how that moron keeps his job. Assuming the plan was to let Aramis walk at the end of the year, Id definitely take Morel in a trade for him despite his offensive struggles in the bigs, but I dont see why we want broken down Jake Peavy over Matt Garza. Morel plus a lot more for ARam. We would want Peavy to take over the #1 spot in the rotation.
  23. Backtobanks
    Phil Rogers suggests trading ARam to the White Sox so he will not have to move his family. The ridiculous suggestion included ideas like getting Morel in return and possibly finding a way to make the money work so that they could include Peavy allowing Hendry to trade Garza. :-k What an idiot.
  24. Backtobanks
    To be useful next year, Baker wouldn't have to be an everyday starter. He'd just have to be the right handed side of a platoon at either 2nd or 3rd (isn't Flaherty a lefty?). That's his best role and one he could thrive in. Also, I'm not sold that Baker would garner that much interest in trade. A team with a pressing need for right handed power might overpay, but it was just a couple of years ago that we got Baker for Al Albuqerque, a nice reliever now but a lightly regarded prospect at the time. Baker's done more since the Cubs acquired him, but he's still the same basic player he was then - a power bat against lefties, bad against righties and a couple years older. Right, WSR is again vastly overrating a Cubs player when it comes to what they're likely get in return for a trade. Obviously, if there's a good offer out there, go for it, but Baker has relatively limited use that arguably is more valuable for the Cubs next year than shipping him off. Re-signing Aramis is a big if, and just assuming that it'll get done is foolish. Baker certainly wouldn't get us much especially since Kepppinger is being actively shopped.
  25. Backtobanks
    Developing our own players is going to take a long time with the improvements in scouting and the minor leagues. It's a lot like the economy, everybody expects an immediate answer to a problem that took decades to develop. I think the balance has to come by making trades for younger players with some experience (Garza, Chris Davis?, Upton?, etc.), developing our own prospects (Castro, Flaherty/LeMahieu, Cashner, Jackson, McNutt,etc.), and mixing in an overpaid FA (Fielder) when necessary. This team can contend next year and be in contention for the foreseeable future with a decent trade or two, a wise FA signing or two, and a little luck with some of our prospects.
×
×
  • Create New...