Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Backtobanks

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,315

  • 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 Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Backtobanks

  1. Backtobanks
    It's pretty incredible. My DBacks fan friends are just beyond exasperated at this point. This might be the reason (MLBTR) -The Diamondbacks placed now-Yankees pitcher Brandon McCarthy on waivers six to eight weeks ago, Joel Sherman of the New York Post tweets. That means anyone could have claimed him and assumed the remainder of his $9MM salary for 2014. No one bit.
  2. Backtobanks
    Quite a few posters got pretty excited when the Cubs started playing better and winning some games. Good thing you kept a level head. Somebody has to do it.
  3. Backtobanks
    Quite a few posters got pretty excited when the Cubs started playing better and winning some games.
  4. Backtobanks
    I understand how good Russell is and I've not said a bad thing about that portion of the deal. But Shark is a legit TOR pitcher and he has fewer innings on his arm than pretty much any 29 year old stud you're going to find. We got a great talent, but we gave up a great talent too and the 2nd and 3rd pieces are intriguing, but questionable. Not a bad deal by any stretch, but I'm not sure it's exciting either. It's certainly not a bad deal, but just 1-2 days ago we were hearing that the asking price for Samardzija alone was 3 top prospects plus one other. It will be interesting to see what kind of deal the FO makes for pitching by using the surplus offensive prospects. Vogelbach, Soler, Almora, and Alcantara could all be expendable depending on how prospects develop and take to playing new positions.
  5. Backtobanks
    That would be okay if we had seven other above average position players and a great pitching staff.
  6. Backtobanks
    I didn't say that he's not a "damn good talent judge". The Padres might want him because they hired him before and obviously thought he had talent.
  7. Backtobanks
    It could also have something to do with the fact that McLeod came from the Padres.
  8. Backtobanks
    I think that's a good thing for the Cubs. It sets the price and takes Price off the market. Yeah, but how many teams are willing to pay 3-4 good prospects for a top pitcher? Whatever that number might be will be reduced by one if Price is traded first. Also, whatever the Rays get for Price might have been the guys we were going to get for Shark.
  9. Backtobanks
    Hope the Cubs don't wait too long or the market might be reduced. From MLBTR: While no deal is imminent at the moment, rival officials tell ESPN’s Buster Olney that the Rays are prepared to move David Price “right now” if the right offer presents itself
  10. Backtobanks
    Ken Rosenthal mentioned that trading Cashner would speed up rebuilding for the Padres. After loading up on prospects from trading Hammel, Shark, and whoever else, it might be interesting to check on what the Padres might want for Cashner.
  11. Backtobanks
    I don't think they want or need Barney.
  12. Backtobanks
    I have read some of the posts that other members have posted, but I do have a little trouble understanding how a player with a negative WAR (Ruggiano this year) has better numbers than someone (Schierholtz) who had a positive WAR last year. Am I wrong in assuming a positive WAR is better statistically than a negative WAR? Well, let's go super simple then. One guy made an out 69.9% of the time and the other made an out 64.6% of the time. Which one was more successful? Which is one problem with all of the statistics thrown around - often one stat contradicts another.
  13. Backtobanks
    Maybe if you followed the discussion, you would see that I'm not the one who posted "cherry-picked" statistics on Ruggiano this season. When someone posted about his trade value, I posted that if someone offered something decent that we ought to trade him before he turns into Nate Schierholtz (meaning he'll lose his trade value). His "advantage" this year (OBP) over Schierholtz last year will most likely disappear as the season wears on and he reverts closer to his norm (.318).
  14. Backtobanks
    Honest question: you have nearly 6 THOUSAND posts on this board since 2003. In that span, have you read anything about stats from other members? The assertions you're making are shocking for someone who has been part of this community for that long. I have read some of the posts that other members have posted, but I do have a little trouble understanding how a player with a negative WAR (Ruggiano this year) has better numbers than someone (Schierholtz) who had a positive WAR last year. Am I wrong in assuming a positive WAR is better statistically than a negative WAR?
  15. Backtobanks
    False. They're close, but false. Ruggiano: .247/.354/.395/.749 OPS+=104 with 2 HR and 8 RBI Schierholtz: .251/.301/.470/.770 OPS+ =107 with 21 HR and 68 RBI I'm not sure what obscure stats you're looking at, but Nate certainly had better numbers last year. hahahahahaha WOW Apparently that is your response when stats show you're wrong.
  16. Backtobanks
    False. They're close, but false. Ruggiano: .247/.354/.395/.749 OPS+=104 with 2 HR and 8 RBI Schierholtz: .251/.301/.470/.770 OPS+ =107 with 21 HR and 68 RBI I'm not sure what obscure stats you're looking at, but Nate certainly had better numbers last year. Nate has the SLG but Ruggiano has the much more important 53 point lead in OBP. I'm sure the "obscure" non-RBI stats also have something to say. Ruggiano's WAR for the season is -0.3. Nate's 2013 WAR 1.4. get the hell out of here with those obscure stats
  17. Backtobanks
    False. They're close, but false. Ruggiano: .247/.354/.395/.749 OPS+=104 with 2 HR and 8 RBI Schierholtz: .251/.301/.470/.770 OPS+ =107 with 21 HR and 68 RBI I'm not sure what obscure stats you're looking at, but Nate certainly had better numbers last year.
  18. Backtobanks
    If you ignore Valbuena and Castro's existence, sure. Being the 4th best position player on a last place team over a two week span isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. Okay... After April 6th, he has a .915 OPS At this point he may have as much trade value as anyone outside of Shark and Valbuena. Team control until 2017, gets on base a ton, has some power, plays CF. If he has any trade value, they ought to trade him before he turns into Nate Schierholtz. Nate (at 29 years old) had better numbers for the whole season last year than Ruggiano (age 32) has this year.
  19. Backtobanks
    The question is when will these "other baseball players" be ready to pitch at the ML level.
  20. Backtobanks
    If you ignore Valbuena and Castro's existence, sure. Being the 4th best position player on a last place team over a two week span isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.
  21. Backtobanks
    The pitching staff has been competitive. The pitching staff has been fine, but you're talking about the 2015 lineup and I'm assuming Hammel and Samardzija will be traded.
  22. Backtobanks
    Yeah, if Alcantara can come up after the deadline and establish himself at 2B/CF, then it would help out for next year a lot. The key is adding a FA outfielder. Get a solid guy, even for the short term like Cruz or Markakis, and the Cubs have very few black holes in the lineup for the near future. Start the year with: 2B- Alcantara 3B- Valbuena 1B- Rizzo SS- Castro RF- Cruz/Markakis LF- Lake CF- Sweeney/Ruggiano C- Castillo By June, you could have: CF- Alcantara 2B- Valbuena 1B- Rizzo LF- Bryant RF- Markakis/Cruz SS- Castro 3B- Baez (still think he ends up at 3B rather than 2B) C- Castillo The latter is a lineup you don't dread anyone coming up, except when they are in a cold streak which Castro, Alcantara, Baez, and Castillo have all been prone to. The lineup looks good, now to find some starters to help us compete.
  23. Backtobanks
    I wouldn't count Bonifacio or Ruggiano to be contributors next season. Bonifacio is a prime trade candidate and Ruggiano is his year's Schierholtz.
  24. Backtobanks
    The FO ought to be able to get the package they want with that much competition for him.
  25. Backtobanks
    Finally we'll get some offense out of the catcher's position. :lol: (.240/.295/.285)
×
×
  • Create New...