Backtobanks
-
Posts
7,375 -
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
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Backtobanks
-
Of course that's assuming Harper accepts our offer over the 4 or 5 other $400 million offers on the table. But then nothing would preclude the Cubs from signing Machado instead and trading Russell then. Or just keep Russel and Machado and move KB to left. That's true, but I think there would be a better chance of extending Machado (after being on the team) than bidding on him as a FA.
-
Of course that's assuming Harper accepts our offer over the 4 or 5 other $400 million offers on the table.
-
I posted a while ago that I thought Russell should be the 2nd name on the list of tradeable assets (behind Schwarber) simply because we have in-house replacements for both of them without missing a beat. Schwarber obviously belongs in the A.L., while Russell would certainly be a centerpiece in a major deal. Baez played flawlessly while sliding back to SS when Russell was out for an extended period and the Cubs went on a roll. Also the Cubs won 103 games during the season while Scwarber was injured. I'm not saying they aren't valuable or have a high potential, it's just that they can be easily replaced while bringing back a TOR starter. Happ doesn't even have a starting job. We don't need an in house replacement for him. Happ didn't have a starting job last year because Maddon kept waiting for Schwarber, Zobrist, and Heyward to regain their offensive capabilities.
-
I posted a while ago that I thought Russell should be the 2nd name on the list of tradeable assets (behind Schwarber) simply because we have in-house replacements for both of them without missing a beat. Schwarber obviously belongs in the A.L., while Russell would certainly be a centerpiece in a major deal. Baez played flawlessly while sliding back to SS when Russell was out for an extended period and the Cubs went on a roll. Also the Cubs won 103 games during the season while Scwarber was injured. I'm not saying they aren't valuable or have a high potential, it's just that they can be easily replaced while bringing back a TOR starter. I think a lot of people, not just on here but Cubs fans in general, don't get or understand how much better of a defensive shortstop Russell is than Baez on top of having superior offensive abilities/projection. I'll accept Russell's defensive capabilities, but I disagree with the offensive abilities/projection. The bottom line is that making a deal for a young, controlled starter is going to involve one of the young ML players on the roster and all of them have the potential to be top notch players. My point is that Russell's name should be among the others as a tradeable asset.
-
"Time makes fools of us all" - The Kyle Schwarber Thread
Backtobanks replied to Sammy Sofa's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
That's a big "IF". Of course "if he's hitting like he can", he would look good in the middle of the lineup too. -
I posted a while ago that I thought Russell should be the 2nd name on the list of tradeable assets (behind Schwarber) simply because we have in-house replacements for both of them without missing a beat. Schwarber obviously belongs in the A.L., while Russell would certainly be a centerpiece in a major deal. Baez played flawlessly while sliding back to SS when Russell was out for an extended period and the Cubs went on a roll. Also the Cubs won 103 games during the season while Scwarber was injured. I'm not saying they aren't valuable or have a high potential, it's just that they can be easily replaced while bringing back a TOR starter.
-
No thank you Not sure that he's available and what the price might be, but being 24 with a phenominal track record and under control for until 2023 looks pretty desirable to me.
-
A lot of rumors about teams checking in on Fullmer. He certainly would look nice in our rotation. All of our rumors center around Schwarber, Happ, Baez, Caratini, etc. I would imagine a package centered around 1-2 of those and a few more prospects should whet their appetite.
-
If you're going to dream, dream big. =D>
-
Let's hope so. Chatwood is a decent #5. I wish there was a recent example of us getting a pitcher who was reputed to have awesome stuff that he just hadn't harnessed yet. Maybe someone that was really good at generating soft contact. Hmm... Arrieta (2013): 7.17 k/9 4.90 bb/9 4.78 era 4.84 fip 4.61 xfip Chatwood (2017): 7.31 k/9 4.69 bb/9 4.69 era 4.94 fip 4.27 xfip Not saying it's a guarantee by any means. But I wouldn't be too quick to jump to saying Chatwood can't be anything more than a fifth starter. I never said that "Chatwood can't be anything more than a fifth starter", but I would think that the FO isn't going into the season without planning on a starter with a better/more consistent track record on a team trying to get to the WS.
-
Shohei Ohtani Signs with the Angels
Backtobanks replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
I would think that an Asian millennial probably wouldn't be overwhelmed by a virtual reality presentation. -
Let's hope so. Chatwood is a decent #5.
-
Shohei Ohtani Signs with the Angels
Backtobanks replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
I'm sure your opinion is completely unbiased. :lol: -
You're right, but signing all of those players probably wouldn't put as many fans in the seats as getting Stanton. I don’t think the Giants have any issues with attendance (3rd in MLB in 2017). I’d imagine a competitive team puts more people in the stands than Stanton on a bad team. Signing all of those players might make them win more games. but still wouldn't be competitive with the Dodgers.
-
Yeah, I think Almora is going to be our CF for quite a few years.
-
The Sox will get JBJr. + a whole lot more for Abreu. I wouldn't mind the deal, but I think Almora is just as good or better as a CF, so unless this is tied to another deal I don't see it happening.
-
You're right, but signing all of those players probably wouldn't put as many fans in the seats as getting Stanton.
-
Shohei Ohtani Signs with the Angels
Backtobanks replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
One of the leading candidates for the Yankee job is Hensley Meulens: "Meulens played with the Yankees from 1989-93 and has served as the Giants’ hitting coach dating back to 2010 (including in each of San Francisco’s three World Series-winning seasons). The Curacao native speaks five languages, including Spanish, Dutch and Japanese, which would serve him well as he communicates with a diverse group of players on the Yankees’ roster." That's not a good sign. -
Don't know anything about him, but his brother Stan came to the U.S., changed the spelling of his last name, and became a great hockey player.
-
Shohei Ohtani Signs with the Angels
Backtobanks replied to CaliforniaRaisin's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
That's a tough moral decision: Theo lying to him and we sign him or Theo telling the truth and we have no chance of signing him. I go with Theo lying to him. -
I never said he wouldn't get a lot if offered in a trade. I just mean that I don't think most GMs think of him as an option if they're hoping for Archer/Stroman. Obviously, every team would love to have him. Most fans probably wouldn't think much of him, but most of the MLB GM class is largely beyond the Jim Hendry era of thinking. Meanwhile Hendry still has a top job in baseball and all of us "smart guys" are still posting here on NSBB. LOL
-
I don't think so simply because he's not looked at as an ace. He's a great #3 and pitches like a #1 or #2 much of the time, but still doesn't have that "name" factor. He's 19th in pitching fWAR over the last 2 seasons despite missing 6 weeks this year, won the ERA title and finished 2nd in the Cy Young voting in 2016 and is just hitting his 1st year of arbitration meaning he has 3 years of control. His career ERA is 2.94 over 600 innings and his career postseason ERA is 2.88 over 10 starts, including giving up 1 ER combined in pennant and world series clinching games in 2016. GMs don't care about his name value, he gets tons of praise for his ability to locate and inducing weak contact not to mention comparisons to Maddux for his cerebral approach to pitching. He would get a lot if offered for a trade. I never said he wouldn't get a lot if offered in a trade. I just mean that I don't think most GMs think of him as an option if they're hoping for Archer/Stroman. Obviously, every team would love to have him.
-
I don't think so simply because he's not looked at as an ace. He's a great #3 and pitches like a #1 or #2 much of the time, but still doesn't have that "name" factor.
-
Probably wouldn't happen, but it does make some sense to all involved. I would imagine Heyward's NTC might get in the way. It would look nice with Price in our rotation.
-
I don't know where you get Schwarber being near 4 WAR because baseball reference has him at 0 for 2017 and 1.1 for his career. I agree that Almora can be a 3+ CF. You might be right about Happ being a 2-3 player and being as good as it gets. I just don't understand posters willing to be patient with the youth offensive flaws of Russell, Schwarber, etc., but aren't willing to see what Happ can do. The potential of a 30+ HR, switch-hitting, fast, versatile 23year old is not something to quickly dismiss.