Jump to content
North Side Baseball

jersey cubs fan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    67,893
  • 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. I can't include Drew. He was done in NE when they let him go. I'm talking about a marquee QB coming off a great year on a team that wants to keep him. It just doesn't happen.
  2. Oh yeah, he's definitely an unusual case. All those injury seasons lost, and then the up and down 2006, means he's a big question mark for 2007. Part of the reason why a lot of marquee QB's don't go the route of Barry Zito is they don't play through a walk year. But QBs in general are more valuable to the team they are on than their own team. There's a learning curve involved with going to a new team that's not a part of baseball, so that a guy in his first year at a new place isn't likely to see the success he could have staying at his present destination. I think any big contract for Rex will partially be taken out of the d line, where 2 guys are getting paid more than they are worth. Plus there is Moose, whose 6 year contract always looked like a 3-4 year deal anyway. He's still a valuable receiver, but his cost probably outweighs his contribution by 2008. If they do sign Grossman longterm, I'm guessing Griese gets cut and they go with a Orton/Somebody backup tandem that saves a couple bucks. Briggs' $7+m cap hit in 2007 will be gone. Plus, the cap will be higher. There's going to be room.
  3. Prior deserves every dig he gets. Somebody tell me how this guy is just a role player and not a hall of famer, or maybe greatest of all time?
  4. I believe they will resign Grossman if he has a good season. And I believe there will be money to sign him if he has a great season. A great season by Grossman virtually assures them of at least an NFC Championship appearance, and probably the Super Bowl. They have always been good about maintaing a smart cap. There will be space, or they will make the space. Besides, when was the last time a marque QB (and under this scenario RG would be marquee) actually signed as a free agent with a new team? If he fails to improve from last season, I think they will either try and get him back on the cheap or let him walk. Drew Brees was probably the last "marquee" QB (under your definition) to be signed by another team just 1 season ago. His team had a different guy that they wanted to promote, and he was coming off injury. Plus, he took a bit of a step back. I'm talking about a QB coming off a great season whose team wants to keep him. It's not like baseball, where stud pitchers routinely do to free agency and leave. If a team finds a QB, they typically keep him, unless they already have his replacement on board.
  5. I believe they will resign Grossman if he has a good season. And I believe there will be money to sign him if he has a great season. A great season by Grossman virtually assures them of at least an NFC Championship appearance, and probably the Super Bowl. They have always been good about maintaing a smart cap. There will be space, or they will make the space. Besides, when was the last time a marque QB (and under this scenario RG would be marquee) actually signed as a free agent with a new team? If he fails to improve from last season, I think they will either try and get him back on the cheap or let him walk.
  6. Before Tillman got his chunk of change, I thought maybe the Bears might revisit a long term deal with Briggs after the season...but now I'm not so sure about that. Especially with Harris's extension coming up soon, and if for some reason Grossman does good next year his extension. I highly doubt they can keep Briggs past this year. That's what happens in football though, its really hard to keep a dominating unit in tact. Well as long as you keep Urlacher, you can change the outside backers...they've certainly done that before successfully. How soon before that's no longer true though? Urlacher is great, and a rock, but within the next 2-4 years, they may no longer be able to just throw out any old LB combo and make it look good.
  7. Was at the game so didn't hear their comments. It's okay to do that once, but twice? Especially for a catcher, that's bad. On a somewhat separate note, they had Al on 1380 this morning here. Man was he ever cranky. He basically said this year is over, sell off whatever you can get value for and look a few years ahead. Also expressed doubt that TLR would be back next season. Both pitches were right down the middle. I think it's okay to do it once on a borderline, but neither was borderline. And then he tried calling timeout while Zambrano was in his motion.
  8. one word -- VETERAN. Hendry thinks we need another vet for the playoff push -- even if that veteran is on the downside of his career. But that is the difference between us and Hendry....Hendry doesn't see him on the downside...and that ladies and gentlemen, is very sad AND the main reason the Cubs haven't won a World Series since 1908. Ken Hendry's inability to see Kendall's downside is the main reason the Cubs haven't won a World Series in almost 100 years? :shock: Geez...don't people know how to read?? I didn't say Hendry's inability...I said HIS PHILOSOPHY.....adhered to by Cubs management since the dawn of time. Hendry simply grabbed the baton handed to him. If you're going to use silly hyperbole, you should expect to be called on it. Why are people pretending he thinks Hendry is to blame for all 100 years?
  9. I shouldn't have said, "of late", but yes, he has been used all that heavily. In June he threw 15.6 innings, a pace of 93.6 innings over a full season. That's a hell of a lot for a reliever. In July he only needs 2.6 more innings to match that rate, and with 7 games remaining, it's hard to imagine him not reaching that pace again. He may be getting some rest between appearances, but he has thrown over an inning in 14 games so far. Hopefully the return of Dempster will slow it down a bit. But the way he was used from June 10 to July 19 was really risky, 40 days, 17 outings, 24 innings. And that was with the ASB. That's a pace of 77 appearances and 110 innings pitched over a full season. A young guy with relatively little pitching history may be at greater risk during a stretch like that.
  10. Is this the bacon cheeseburger served with krispy kreme donuts as the bun? Yes... what do you think, thumbs up or down? I might try one once in my life.
  11. What if Dye is the extra bat we need to make the playoffs? Would E-Pat be worth it? The correct answer is: yes. With the emergence of Fontenot and the signing of DeRosa, I will gladly move him if Dye is the final piece of the puzzle. The problem is there's no telling if Dye can make much of a difference. In his career, he's been barely above average, fantastic, and pretty bad. Right now he's terrible. If he finishes up bad or barely above average, I don't see him as an improvement over what we have. Of course if he somehow turns fantastic, that would help. But how can anybody be confident he will do that. We're not talking about a Miguel Cabrera here. This isn't a consistently productive bat that's clearly better than what the Cubs already have.
  12. The decision making process by Cubs' personel people is the main reason the Cubs have won. It's highlighted in this instance by a GM who ignores issues like age and how it can negatively affect a player, especially a catcher who is already showing signs of nearing the end.
  13. What? Wasn't he a catcher until the middle of the 2005 season? According to the cube he threw 64 innings in 2003 and 154 in 2004. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/M/Carlos-Marmol.shtml Yes, I was going on memory, which is falable obviously. Anyway, I like him and his big ears when he pitches. I like him a lot as well. Especially when they flashed up that K/BB ratio on the screen last night. I'm a little concerned with the heavy usage of late. Not sure if his late intro to pitching is a good thing or bad thing as far as health is concerned.
  14. I don't understand the first part and can't figure out how you can defend the second part.
  15. I would be happy making a push with Soto as the primary catcher. What sort of stretch run experience does Kendall have? He's been on terrible teams most of his career. This team doesn't need experience. It needs productivity.
  16. What? Wasn't he a catcher until the middle of the 2005 season? According to the cube he threw 64 innings in 2003 and 154 in 2004. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/M/Carlos-Marmol.shtml
  17. I don't know why you would think that. Jason Kendall is done. He had a nice career. But he's a catcher, and catchers age fast and become useless rather quickly. He had one terribly gruesome injury that took a major toll on his abilities and probably accelerated his decline. And that's in addition to the normal wear and tear catchers take. He's 33 with over 13,000 innings logged behind the plate. The fact that he's got a nice career AVG and OBP means very little at this stage. But Gary Hughes saw him do reasonably well in a couple games so Hendry is convinced he'd got plenty left.
  18. I didn't turn it on until relatively late, and most of what I heard were them commenting, in the negative, about how the Cardinals were reacting to calls. They did a really bad job with the whole 3 or 4 balls thing. And they obviously had a few Zambrano comments, but they didn't come close to the outright disdain the Milwaukee announcers have for Z. I was impressed with them calling out Molina for his actions during the at bat that started 3-0 before he K'd.
  19. Is this the bacon cheeseburger served with krispy kreme donuts as the bun?
  20. Wow. That sounds a little excessive. Deal is probably backloaded, and I don't think he will see the last 2-3 years of it. The Bears typically don't do stuff like that though. At the most, I could see it being structured so that year 6 is more or less not going to happen, but that's even a stretch.
  21. No, I don't believe they are. Everybody talks about every small deal as an in to the same 2 teams making larger deals, and I just don't see it. I guess it comes from the tendency of some GMs to deal with the same group of GMs on a regular basis. But I wouldn't characterize any recent Cubs trade, with SD, OAK or PITT, as a precursor to something larger.
  22. I hate all that "one position" talk. QB is one position. MLB is one position. LB and CB are not. If guys are on the field at the same time, they aren't playing the same position. You should pay your best guys the most money. If you have great LBers, you can't just let one go because you are paying them more than your safeties. I think this just indicates how little they want to keep Briggs here long term. They think he's replacable, and don't think the CBs are. At this point I'd have to give mgmt the benefit of the doubt, given their impressive track record.
  23. The Reds are out of it. By trading Dunn, they are waving the white flag anyways. What do they care? What if Dunn gets hurt in those few games he is playing against the Cubs and the Reds lose out on a package of prospects because they didn't want him to hurt them right away. Just out of curiousity, what do you think the odds are that if they trade Dunn they wait until the last minute to see how good of an offer they can get? If they truly are shopping him and fielding offers, they may wait till the 13th hour to see who makes the best pitch. Probably pretty good odds. But every trading deadline has a couple deals go down in the days leading up to it. It depends on what others are offering, and what else they think the Cubs are after. If, for instance, they thought Chicago was either going to trade for Dunn or Tejada, they'd think twice about waiting out a Cubs offer if they got one they liked, because there's always the possibility they pull the offer and go for the other guy. That being said, Dunn coming to the Cubs is a huge long shot.
  24. Why? Serious why or sarcastic why? They wouldn't trade him to a team they are about to play and have him turn around and hurt them right away would they? In the division no less? I mean, I know its happened before and probably will again, and I know Krivsky isn't bright, but it just doesn't ring true to me. It would be incredibly stupid to hold up a trade for that reason. It would also be incredibly stupid to trade a player if you don't have to yet, i.e the deadline isn't till after the series. But excuse me for suggesting it, just seemed a bit off to me. Don't have to yet? Then why don't all trades wait until the deadline? You never have to trade a player. You trade players when a deal is reached. I would be incredibly pissed at the Cubs if they intentionally waited a few games to trade a guy because they didn't want that guy to hurt them for 3 days. The risks are far greater than the rewards. The Reds are done. They suck. I highly doubt they think their season will be affected one way or another by waiting a couple days to trade Dunn. If I come to an agreement to make a trade, and the other team says, ok, but now we have to wait until after our series, I end the discussions right there. Dunn could get hurt, the guys you are trading could get hurt. Another team could come in with a better offer.
×
×
  • Create New...