Jump to content
North Side Baseball

jersey cubs fan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    68,033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    64

 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 jersey cubs fan

  1. They shouldn't sign him for next year because they aren't going to be good until next year? This is why I don't listen to sports radio. They shouldn't sign him for next year because they aren't going to be good until at least 3 years from now, according to that quote.
  2. I was thinking of Upton, but he doesn't fit the OP's criteria of only having two more years. Not many do, though. Given that, here's what I come up with that have a rough contract fit: Andre Ethier (2017 + Option, $18M/18/17.5) Curtis Granderson (2017, $16M/16/15) Matt Holiday (2016 + Option, all at $17M) Nick Swisher (2016 + option, $15M/15/14) Michael Bourn (2016 + option, $13.5M/14/12) I'd trade Jackson for any of those, no cash exchanged. The Mets aren't trading a hitter for substandard pitching, and nobody is taking Jackson without actual relief.
  3. Josh Hamilton Not even close to equivalent deals. Hamilton is at $23M/30/30 through 2017. taking on money is the only way to go. (it was just the first name that popped into my head)
  4. Josh Hamilton
  5. This is not at all true, they feel targeted because they are one of the teams using these different angles to exploit the rules and the loopholes keep getting closed on them. They feel targeted because they have invested millions in the Dominican academy and next year was their next turn to blow their load on the international market. It's not like they just joined the game and it got shut on them, they were one of the teams that started the trend and were among the most heavily invested. Uhhhhh, no peg. Many other teams have been doing this stuff long before the Cubs started. Ricketts was relatively quick to see the problems and invest, and Theo was aggressive going after these things once he was hired, but the Cubs were very much behind other teams.
  6. Mark Gonzales ‏@MDGonzales · 11s Watkins, Rosscup up, Jackson DL, Castro bereavement list
  7. Mark Gonzales ‏@MDGonzales · 11s Watkins, Rosscup up, Jackson DL, Castro bereavement list
  8. They're attempting to tank for a higher draft pick while maintaining the appearance of being nice guys. If you think the Cubs would have gone to these lengths on behalf of the Giants if the Cubs were 2 games out of the Wild Card, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not sure why that is your interpretation of what I was saying. What the hell? My point is I don't get why they are so openly supportive of the decision. Why say anything at all?
  9. dentist
  10. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-defend-wrigley-grounds-crew-20140821-story.html Hoyer says the problem "was caused by our organization", but Julian Green blames it on a freak occurrence of a sudden rainstorm that wasn't in anybody's forecast. I don't get why Hoyer is so willing to talk favorably about the ruling and place the blame on the organization. Seems like a pretty obvious time for a "we'll respect the decision" non-response. You are either calling out your facilities people (while trying to pretend you are not) or welcoming an opportunity to give back a win.
  11. Isn't that Ryan Sweeney? I don't see much value in this type of thing. I'd love to have a good veteran on this team, not for the veteraness but for the goodness.
  12. lolllllllllll Sorry, guys the very purpose of the article was horribly flawed, let me get right on that. But the point stands?
  13. Seems like a pretty ineffective way to hold down costs. No one is required to build foreign academies. The academies themselves aren't a huge expense, and without them teams that want to have involvement in the region need people down there, maybe more than there are now. Seems like a more likely outcome is that the teams that don't want to spend are wanting to have competitive parity with those that do, so the rules are changing to accommodate that minority. They are a pretty big expense with no way of generating revenue on their own. If the handful of teams with those academies are going to monopolize all the talent the other teams will be forced to spend money on all the second and third rate prospects, or abandon the market. It isn't a perfectly efficient way to hold down costs, but they can't just do the real obvious ones without running into trouble with the law and/or the players' association.
  14. Cubs management was oddly sympathetic to the Giants cause on this one. I wonder how much that pisses off the players.
  15. Their interest is in maximizing profits and they are doing that by holding down costs. They aren't targeting the Cubs, they are helping teams like the White Sox that don't want to have to invest. It is a disincentive to spend.
  16. Castro just doesn't want to see Jackson pitch. and he don't get WCIU
  17. http://www.threematchban.com/images/1631.jpg
  18. http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02966/PSG1_2966527k.jpg
×
×
  • Create New...