Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Backtobanks

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    7,353
  • 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

  1. Sell the [expletive] team Ricketts, you piece of [expletive]. :banghead: As for "there's no plan B", we've known that all along. Our prospects have to make it to the ML level or show enough at the ml level to become trade bait. As for Ricketts selling the team, lets put a call out to V. Siviano and see what she could do.
  2. And also we're terrible at it, and they're good at it, and we're hoping and praying on a generation of elite top-round picks to save us. We're also like a decade behind them in the process, and I don't think we're hoping and praying for a generation of top round picks to save us. I think we're planning on trading some of them away (aka "savvy trades") to supplement our needs at the MLB level, and then use mid-tier and maybe a high profile free agent or two to fill in some other holes. Then all of the lower round picks that actually turn into something decent fill any remaining holes. That's exactly the same thing. We need the top round prospects to show enough to be attractive to other teams in order to make "savvy trades". Also, more teams are locking up their younger players which takes them off the market. Finally signing a high-profile FA (or 2) is difficult when you have a reputation as a losing team and the big market teams (with winning reputations) willing to pay anything to acquire the player they want.
  3. Maybe that team looked like a contender in Hendry's mind. Anyone else could see they were going to be bad. It wasn't just "a contender in Hendry's mind" and apparently not "anyone else could see they were going to be bad" because they were picked to be a solid team by most experts. After the trade deadline, it could be many years before we have "solid bullpen, and 3 good starters" in addition to a potentially solid offense.
  4. Looks like Veras was cool with the fake injury after all. I'm honestly curious if he ever makes it back on the 25 man roster at this point. Bigger waste, Veras or Scott Baker? Oh god, Baker by a mile. I really do think Veras is injured - he's never been anywhere close to this ineffective during his career. Also unlike Baker, he still has some value when he returns. We should all hope he does in fact come back and have some success, so we can possibly trade him. I think we should change the Cubs' motto from "Wait until next year" to "We should all hope he does in fact come back and have some success, so we can possibly trade him." It certainly seems to fit the 2012-2014 Cubs.
  5. Does it really matter if they're "throwing out" huge offers to FAs if they know they're ultimately gonna get outbid. They can offer a FA eleventy-billion dollars if they know the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers will offer eleventy-billion and one dollars. Unfortunately that's probably what's going to happen when Theo decides it's time to sign some FAs. All those teams will still have a ton of money plus the reputation of being a winning team.
  6. I continue to be amazed that so many of you refuse to put any blame of Theo. While we can all agree that Ricketts sucks, it's Theo and Hoyer that have put together this mess of a "ML" team. While everything financially hasn't gone the way he's planned, he was still throwing out offers (Tanaka, Cespedes, Sanchez, Jackson, etc.) which proves there's some money available to spend. The bottom line is that Theo has stated that he has complete autonomy over baseball operations and certainly some of the blame for this team has to fall on him.
  7. By zooming in, it looks like about 98% of the city and adjacent suburbs are White Sox fans, while the Cubs have most of the midwest. I have trouble believing the Sox have that many fans in the city and nearby suburbs.
  8. The sentiment is right, but the description is exaggerated.
  9. We would have to get one top pitching prospect ready to step right into the rotation by next year plus other prospects for Shark. It's looking more and more like we're going to have to trade some offensive prospects to get another top pitcher (Price?), assuming our prospects continue to impress offensively.
  10. It will be interesting to see if they keep Renteria once they get to a point of serious contending.
  11. You wonder why people give you a hard time when you post stuff like this? Come on, Jackson is a good player, the entire pen outside of Wright and Russell have pretty high upsides, and Lake and Olt have solid potential. It's just moronic to make posts like this that have zero basis in reality. Jackson is a guy that nobody wanted for more than one year at a time. He is what he is - an inning-eating BOR starter. Lake and Olt are still big question marks. I think Lake has a future as a solid reserve player. As for the bullpen, there are a few guys (Rondon, Grimm, Strop) that are decent and will be part of the team going forward. How many of these guys would be filling important, starting roles on a good team? If we are a good team (2016?), how many players currently on our roster will playing important roles (outside of Rizzo, Castro, Wood, Castillo, and Shark/players obtained for Shark)?
  12. Once you get past Rizzo, Castro, Shark, Wood, and possibly Castillo and Hammel, the whole roster is basically filler until we can afford better players or the kids come up.
  13. I can't understand how he was a finalist for the Ford Frick Award last year. He has to be one of the worst announcers around and I mute the sound if I happen to accidently flip on a Sox game.
  14. What's the rush? It's not like he Trout or Harper, plus once he comes back to earth, he will go back to being the useful utility player he has been for his whole career.
  15. You know that person isn't Clark the Cub and isn't affiliated with the Cubs right? Yeah, people affiliated with the Cubs can't hit. :lol:
  16. It's not a problem because we have a spanish speaking manager.
  17. I think it may come down to SD and the Cubs. However, I would not be surprised to the Sox and Twins in the running. The only thing helping them is they play each other a lot. Arizona,LA and Cincy will be better. Houston + Miami maybe I kind think they have taken a step up(baby step) but I think they both win 70. They will benefit a little from their division's teams dealing with big injuries (A's,Rangers, Braves, Mets)- Not to say they catch them, just a bit easier to get a few wins. Of course they still have to be in the discussion. One of our problems is that we play in a good division, we actually should be better than both but our record could be worse, same with the Padres. The Giants, Dodgers should be very good, Diamondbacks pretty good also, with the Rockies similar to the Brewers were they are decent, but just not up to the level of the rest of the division. One reason the teams in our division are good is because they get to play the Cubs so often.
  18. You have to use Veras in some role to get his trade value up before the trade deadline.
  19. Why bring up the advantage Cashner has pitching in San Diego and not Rizzo hitting in Wrigley? As for who "won" the deal, I think it still is yet to be determined. Many "experts" are predicting Cashner in the Cy Young race this year, while Rizzo has youth as his advantage. Will Cashner remain healthy and consistently put up high inning counts every year? Will Rizzo become the franchise player that we saw glimpses of or be a decent hitter/great fielder for the rest of his career? All this is yet TBD. Wrigley is practically neutral, isn't it? It does favor lefties (over righties) a bit, though. I don't think it's near the advantage PetCo gives pitchers. Which leads to the question - Who would have been the better player (Rizzo in Petco or Cashner in Wrigley) if the trade didn't happen?
  20. Why bring up the advantage Cashner has pitching in San Diego and not Rizzo hitting in Wrigley? As for who "won" the deal, I think it still is yet to be determined. Many "experts" are predicting Cashner in the Cy Young race this year, while Rizzo has youth as his advantage. Will Cashner remain healthy and consistently put up high inning counts every year? Will Rizzo become the franchise player that we saw glimpses of or be a decent hitter/great fielder for the rest of his career? All this is yet TBD.
  21. Maybe it's just drafting the best player(s) available at the time. If all of your best prospects are hitters (Cubs), obviously you have to go in the direction of developing hitters and sign (or trade for) pitchers. I think the theory of developing pitchers is preferable because the pitcher (with few exceptions) is the player that most affects the outcome of the game. Obviously the time is near for the Cubs to think about trading hitting for pitching because the offense potentially looks to be very good within a year or two while the pitching looks to be below average. As for the Cardinals, they look to be at the top of the NL Central for awhile because of their pitching prospects in addition the balance of youth and experience on the ML roster.
  22. Either one would look good on the Cubs.
  23. For the Cubs to win 89 games, the Cubs would have to get Cano and King Felix while keeping Shark and Castro. It has been about 2 1/2 years since the last one, but I guess some posters like to live in the past.
×
×
  • Create New...