Jump to content
North Side Baseball

jersey cubs fan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    67,901
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    63

 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 jersey cubs fan

  1. But that's kind of the problem with guys getting older anyway. He's not technically old, but physically he probably is. A step or two slower than his heyday and injury prone is the heart of the problem with the defense.
  2. He was a rookie, but an older one. And he's just a goalie. It's not like he's some forward adjusting to the NHL and his teammates. I'm not sure he can get better just with time.
  3. Defense and o-line another year older? I don't know, I don't really believe it, I'm just playing Devil's advocate. Yeah, the defense doesn't have to be better. Peppers should make the line better, but not necessarily given the other departures. The LB have been deep, but Briggs and Urlacher have taken turns getting injured, and the secondary remains a question. I could see a decline. But I wouldn't predict 11 losses.
  4. I'm satisfied with the situation but I can't say thrilled. I'm going to stick by the 5 year rule with these guys though and can't complain about what they've done.
  5. They wanted 4 million at the hearing while the Hawks just signed a goalie with comparable (in some cases) better numbers for 1.3 million. How is that overvalue? If I had to bet, he's going to sign for less per year than 2.75 otherwise I think the Hawks would have signed and traded him at that number. Whatever teams that are interested in him have to believe they can do better than that number. The market on goalie's contracts is down. You are assuming a team would rather trade for him and paying him 2.75m than not trade for him and sign for 2.76m. He could get more simply by that team not having to trade anymore. Plus, as long as it's more than 2m it's more than the Blackhawks wanted him at.
  6. i don't know. i think they played themselves out of a sure thing. It's doubtful he has to settle for a garbage contract now. They said from day one Niemi may be more comfortable not being in Chicago anyway.
  7. I wonder if they'd try and play him more frequently though. Turco is old, and if they are thinking beyond next year they probably want to see if Crawford is worth bringing back.
  8. so how much are they counting on crawford?
  9. It probably will be by today or tomorrow. My interpretation of Bowman's comments is they want to let Niemi walk.
  10. If trading Zambrano is priority number 1 this offseason, resigning Lilly will be priority 1.1.
  11. Not being worth the contract is not the same as not contributing. Carlos hasn't been at his best, but prior to the Cubs screwing around with him in the bullpen this year he was still an effective member of the rotation.
  12. If they are insisting on trading Zambrano, I would not be surprised at all if they felt they had to resign Lilly.
  13. Thanks for the lesson teacher. That has nothing to do with the discussion.
  14. Does Carlos have to apologize about this as well?
  15. I have no idea what the Yankees have been like this year, I guess he'd DH?
  16. Making it all that much dumber to be actively selling him, at a low. I'm not arguing that point, I agree. I just don't think is at all surprising to anyone. The fact that it isn't a surprise doesn't mean somebody can't be pissed at the situation.
  17. Making it all that much dumber to be actively selling him, at a low.
  18. Do you really think it was a secret around MLB that the Cubs would like to trade him if possible? Like I said, its is far from an ideal situation, but I don't think a Twitter post blew the secret that Cubs might want to move him. It's not the twitter post that informed the league, it's the Cubs informing the league that led to the twitter post. This team can't keep going into offseasons intent on trading away assets. It's horrible business.
  19. We've known for a few days that they're actively trying to shop him. It's the reason I started this thread. All that quote adds to what we already knew is that they won't get the deal done by Saturday and, thus, will wait until the winter. It adds that they will continue to shop him, which is meaningful.
  20. [expletive] YOU [expletive] MORONS ?? All that says is they will not be able to deal him in the next two days. Not that they have to trade him over the winter. It strongly indicates that they are actively trying to move him and given the Cubs tendancies quite likely means they will aggressively shop him this offseason.
  21. The guy who couldn't even come up with a team to guess is far more embarrassing. True. I didn't know the answer but guessed right.
  22. 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. 3B has been similar to 2B in recent years, but you still need to hit more at 3B than CF to be considered a positive. And if Vitters does have to move to 1B some day, he needs to hit a hell of a lot more. That and the difference in patience is fairly significant. Jackson's going to win out on OBP, and he actually has the better IsOP despite Vitters being considered a greater power threat.
  23. Isn't one position CF and the other 3B?
  24. Have they just given up on Fontenot? Do they hate his defense? Has Lou determined the organization's opinion about him?
×
×
  • Create New...