Jump to content
North Side Baseball

minnesotacubsfan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    25,105

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 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 minnesotacubsfan

  1. minnesotacubsfan
    I guess this is what confuses me. Why not trade Betts and Price for all the A-AA darlings you can get instead of Verdugo. Graterol makes some sense since he is still young and cost controlled for some future time. I also assume they could get someone to bite with prospects. Maybe they couldn't Price has negative value. Including him keeps you from getting all the “A-AAA darlings.” I think your view on his value is skewed. It would be like if we traded Heyward with Bryant and wondered why we only got Jean Segura and Nick Pivetta back. No, I'm saying I wouldn't make that trade in the first place. If I'm trading my MVP I'm not doing it to get rid of a bad contract in Price/Heyward, especially if I'm already staring down the barrel of losing picks because I cheated. I need more prospects....period.
  2. minnesotacubsfan
    I guess this is what confuses me. Why not trade Betts and Price for all the A-AA darlings you can get instead of Verdugo. Graterol makes some sense since he is still young and cost controlled for some future time. I also assume they could get someone to bite with prospects. Maybe they couldn't
  3. minnesotacubsfan
    It must be nice to absolutely fail at coaching in the Chicago market, think of all the on-air interview opportunities you get afterwards
  4. minnesotacubsfan
    yea. how do you do that anyway?
  5. minnesotacubsfan
    yes, but cant they get better prospects? I mean, its MOOKIE BETTS for crying out loud. AND David Price. David Price is 34 years old and due almost $100m over the next 3 seasons. He's averaged about 2 fWAR over the last three years. Even if you bump him to 3 and he gets an NL boost... that's not prime prospect stuff. Betts is great, and you have him for 1 season: will he be the 10+ fWAR guy from 2018, the 8+fWAR guy from 2016, the 5+ fWAR guy from 2017, or the 6+ fWAR guy from 2019? you make a good point about Price, but even at 5+ fWAR for Mookie I feel like they traded down.
  6. minnesotacubsfan
    Really? They, IMO, very clearly are valuing staying under the LT over all else. yes, but cant they get better prospects? I mean, its MOOKIE BETTS for crying out loud. AND David Price.
  7. minnesotacubsfan
    I'm struggling to understand what the Red Sox are doing/have done.
  8. minnesotacubsfan
    I hate all the teams involved and yet find this 100000's of times more interesting then the SOTU
  9. minnesotacubsfan
    I think its more like “Thank you for leaving”....
  10. minnesotacubsfan
    10lb brisket. Ribs later Clam chowder in sourdough, ghirardelli brownies and much more Tsk playing both sides
  11. minnesotacubsfan
    Good job KC
  12. minnesotacubsfan
    Those look like KC ribs, not SF teriyaki I see which way you’re leaning
  13. minnesotacubsfan
    More relievers!!
  14. minnesotacubsfan
    Almora & Happ, duh. You know what, no one else has the balls to say it, so I'll be the one to step up: in this scenario, I would also make Bote AND Hoerner available. Fuuuuck. Talk about wrecking the nucleus
  15. minnesotacubsfan
    Just pitch low in the zone as much as you can
  16. minnesotacubsfan
    At age 35? If hes cheap, I guess
  17. minnesotacubsfan
    looks like tree got himself a side-gig!
  18. minnesotacubsfan
    he gives me such a strong impression of being a "Better Call Saul" of the sports media world.
  19. minnesotacubsfan
    no, that doesn't make much sense either. 30 years w/o a 1st rd QB pick is crazy all by itself
  20. minnesotacubsfan
    I get that, and like I said earlier I hadn't thought that our second second rounder by itself could be traded for a later 2nd rounder AND a 3rd. I'm more commenting on how tight teams would follow that chart, of if they would. I suppose if Baltimore REALLY wanted someone we could draft with#2 2nd rounder, that trade would benefit us. I guess that's a valid argument splendid is making.
  21. minnesotacubsfan
    I hadn't considered trading the 2nd 2nd for a later 2nd and 3rd. clearly, I'd prefer the second option but I question why the ravens would give up their only 3rd w/o gaining more then 10 spots. is that an accurate value/value proposition? eta: no its not. The trade would make more sense between Atlanta and Baltimore according to the link above
  22. minnesotacubsfan
    Ok. I guess thats a move I wouldn’t make. I would rather have both 2nds considering we have no 1st round picks, with the idea that the first 2nd rounder is my 1st (Im likely picking a pos of need for an athlete who fell out of the first who fits that need). Since we have multiple needs, there should be someone who fits that mold. The 2nd 2nd rounder would, in effect, be my 2nd rd talent pick - or if I got lucky another 1st rd level talent who fell. You’re stuck with 4-7’s after that, but they have 6 picks in those rounds. Id go quantity at that point If you stay in the 2nd you have to go BPA, regardless of position. The bulk of the value in the higher picks is the opportunity to take BPA, not guys you think can fill a certain need, like Adam Shaheen. Even so, it doesn’t make a ton of sense to draft yourself out of the best picks by trading away a 2nd. And if you desperately need a TE and there are 3 TEs sitting there when your pick comes up, any of which grade out around your pick (some better some worse), you’d rather draft a position you’re strong in who grades a tick better? I’m assuming that by the time the Bears picks come into play, the athletes who truly are better are off the board and the talent level is much closer across positions in the 2nd. Shaheen was a reach, and I’m certainly not advocating Pace do that.
  23. minnesotacubsfan
    Yea, if there's something getting them back in the first it's both 2nds. Would it be just the 2nds or 2nds +? I don’t know pick values too well.
  24. minnesotacubsfan
    Because they have a need at multiple positions, but limited picks, including only 3 in the top four rounds. So if you theoretically trade down from the 2nd into the 3rd and pick up a 4th and now instead of 3 picks in the first four rounds you have 4 picks in the first four rounds. Ok. I guess thats a move I wouldn’t make. I would rather have both 2nds considering we have no 1st round picks, with the idea that the first 2nd rounder is my 1st (Im likely picking a pos of need for an athlete who fell out of the first who fits that need). Since we have multiple needs, there should be someone who fits that mold. The 2nd 2nd rounder would, in effect, be my 2nd rd talent pick - or if I got lucky another 1st rd level talent who fell. You’re stuck with 4-7’s after that, but they have 6 picks in those rounds. Id go quantity at that point
  25. minnesotacubsfan
    2, 6, and 7 isn't getting a 1sr rounder, even a late one. If anything I could see Pace trading down with one of the seconds, but of course it will all depend how the board falls. If he trades up this year, its probably done with futur year assets, yet again. That doesnt make sense, if we cant trade up why trade even further down (leaving only 1 2nd rd pick)? You’re probably right about not getting back into the 1st rd, but maybe a team like Miami who has 3 1st rd picks could use depth players if they don’t see someone they like late in the 1st. Probably not since Miami is a team that needs all the talent they can get...but
×
×
  • Create New...