Jump to content
North Side Baseball

CubsWin

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,883

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 CubsWin

  1. CubsWin
    But you're still not trading a proven #2 starter. You're trading a prospect (i.e. a player that may or may not pan out and become a good/great player) and not a proven player. Crawford is a proven player. I agree. I'm willing to trade a prospect with a ceiling of being a #2, but I'm not willing to trade Rich Hill right now.
  2. CubsWin
    True, no one knows if Pie will make it or not. But given his age (21), his level (AAA) and his production .283/.341/.451 on the year, .323/.373/.538 post All-Star break, he is a pretty darn safe bet to come close to Crawford-type production in the bigs and certainly has the ability to surpass it.
  3. CubsWin
    once the lineup is set, you put the players in the best defensive alignment possible. the players value doesn't change. Of course, it doesn't. That's not how I'm using value in that sentence. I'm simply responding to some posters who earlier in the thread were saying that Pie's value (as in trade value or ability to be worth his contract or ability to produce runs) is best served by him playing CF largely due to his bat and current lack of SLG. And I agree, at least for the next few seasons. His power has a chance to develop to where he could post a near .900 OPS. But, yes, clearly once the line-up is set...
  4. CubsWin
    How is this comparable to that? Hill is showing us he is for real. Since August 1st, he has gone 6-3 with a 2.58 ERA. In 69.2 IP, he has struckout 71 while walking only 19 and allowing just 48 hits for a WHIP of 0.96. Pie and Crawford are very similar. Pie is just 4 years behind him and likely will be ready sometime next season to join the Cubs. Hill would be rather difficult to replace. Pie is almost a Crawford clone. I agree that he hasn't done what Crawford has done yet. But I disagree with anyone who claims that he isn't a safe bet to come close. No way I trade Hill for Crawford.
  5. CubsWin
    Now that I think about it, if you are going to go with an outfield of Murton, Pie and Crawford, it probably would be best to put Pie in RF even though value-wise you would want him CF. His arm is much better suited for RF and Crawford doesn't have much of a throwing arm. Man, a lot of ground could be covered between those two. After checking the numbers, Pie's power could certainly still develop the way Crawford's has. Pie's power numbers equal or surpass Crawford's in the minors and their ages and levels are pretty comparable. Food for thought.
  6. CubsWin
    I don't move Hill for Crawford. Just because they say they want a "top of the rotation guy" for Carl doesn't mean that they should or will get one, certainly not one that is currently in the big leagues. I would trade a prospect or two that has that kind of ceiling, but not a pitcher that is currently a fixture in my rotation. Gallagher get the job done? Would you rather trade Pawelek? Would you be willing to throw in Guzman or Marmol along with one of the previously named pitchers? I'd hold onto Veal right now. I agree that Crawford's power potential should be good enough for RF in the coming years and he can easily hold down CF until Pie is ready. A future outfield of Murton, Pie and Crawford sounds inviting. Mix in Ramirez, Lee and Barrett and you can score some runs even with Cedeno and Patterson up the middle. A future rotation of Z, Hill, Veal and possibly Prior doesn't look to bad either.
  7. CubsWin
    As a prediction, I agree with you. But it is far more accurate and fair to say that it could. I mean who expected Rusch to be so good in '04 and then again for much of '05? I know I didn't.
  8. CubsWin
    What kind of question? He's going to be worthless regardless of health. Agreed. All kidding aside, if Rusch is able to regain his form from '04 and most of '05, he'll have trade value. Not a tremendous amount, but he'll have some.
  9. CubsWin
    Is the Oakland stadium a hitter's park? Zito's away splits are really good.
  10. CubsWin
    Another reason for Hendry to sign someone like Zito or Schmidt is that Zambrano will be a FA after '07. Z's competitiveness is painted on his face. He wants to win. If the Cubs count on Hill and Prior to follow Z in the rotation and it doesn't work out, the Cubs will be out of the playoffs again next year and Zambrano will have good reason to want to go elsewhere to win. Also, if Z secretly desires to get out of Chicago and bolts after the '07 season whether the Cubs win or not, then they would already have a top of the rotation type guy under contract. Plus, having such a pitcher under contract will give the Cubs more leverage in negotiations with Zambrano or another FA pitcher replacing him. Come on, Jim. Bite the bullet. Over pay and give the Cubs a good chance to win next season.
  11. CubsWin
    i would much rather see mateo starting for the cubs in 2007 than eaton. If Mateo can continued to perform like he has, I would as well. However I'm afraid he may be pitching over his head right now. he might well be but i like his approach. he throws strikes, moves the ball around and changes speeds. i also like the fact that he doesnt try to overthrow. he works around 88-91 but can get up to 94 when he needs to. i think between him and marshall, the cubs should be able to get a solid starter in 2007. Wade Miller just boosted his FA leverage with 5 shutout innings today. He'll have one more start, the last game of the season I believe, to keep GMs thinking that he is ready to win games for them in '07. Given Miller's past success, when healthy, and Eaton's past mediocrity (he's never had an ERA below 4), when healthy, I would much rather resign Miller. If the Cubs are somehow able to sign either Zito or Schmidt, 1-3 would be very nicely set. I just don't see the Cubs being able to pull that off. There will be so much competition for those guys and the Cubs have so much depth at the position (guys like Veal and Gallagher could be just a year away), that I see them not being willing to pay the price for a top flight FA starter. But if they do and if Miller is resigned, Prior and Miller can fill out the bottom of the rotation. Neither of those guys have a reassuring injury history, but when they are on, they are on. If one or both should go down or falter, the Cubs have capable young arms in the wings like Mateo and several others. If the Cubs fail to sign a top shelf FA starter, then they are left counting on Prior to regain his form and his health. Has Hendry learned his lesson?
  12. CubsWin
    I'm still of the mind of signing two FA pitchers this off season, but today's performance, along with many others since being brought up, is yet more evidence to suggest that Juan Mateo would make a very competitve 5th starter. If the Cubs can get someone like Schmidt or Zito to go with Zambrano, Hill and Prior, and then sign Wade Miller as the 2nd FA, with Mateo putting up a 4.09 ERA even with his rookie growing pains, that might be enough depending on how the offense is improved to contend.
  13. CubsWin
    Agree. We should have gotten Lofton, LAST year. And I think alot of us agree with this. I agree. I was one of those guys who wanted Lofton...last year. But the problem now is the Cubs ideally need another big bat in the line-up and what position should that big bat fill? To me, the obvious choice is CF and Lofton is not a big bat. He is purely a lead-off guy, and the Cubs already have a pretty good one under contract in Theriot. You could try to upgrade offensively at SS or 2B, but the options there are either less realistic (ARod) or not a big OPS type hitter (Giles, Loretta, Durham, etc.) which is what the Cubs line-up really needs. I don't know how realistic trading for Andruw Jones is at this point, but it has to be more attainable than trading for ARod. Getting high OPS out of the CF position is the Cubs best option and should be plan A going into the off season.
  14. CubsWin
    I agree that Pie would be a better option than Pierre at this point, but ideally, I don't want Pie in a Cubs uniform at the start of next season. It would be rushing him. The ideal move would be to have the Cubs get a CFer that can put up a good OPS, play solid defense and can move over to RF when Pie is ready and have Theriot lead-off next season. Someone like Andruw Jones, Vernon Wells or possibly Soriano would fit that bill. I'm just not sure Soriano can play center defensively, or right, for that matter. Is there anyway to adequately predict his ability in those fields without him having played there before? Or is he simply a LFer and a really bad 2B?
  15. CubsWin
    As am I. There's that word again...hope. I certainly don't want Pierre back. The only reason to have him on your team is because he can supposedly fill the lead-off hitter role of getting on base and stealing 2nd. But he can't even do it that well anymore. I believe the Cubs already have a guy on the roster that can lead-off better than Pierre can, Ryan Theriot. I don't know if Soriano can play CF well enough to justify his bat, but if he can, I would go strong after him. But trading for Jones is still my first choice. With an high-OPS type bat in CF (and one that can move over to right when Pie is ready), the Cubs can easily afford the weak OPS bat of Theriot at the top of the line-up. His numbers since being called up are clearly unsustainable and flukish, but he has the sufficient history to realistically put up a .350 OBP with 20-30 SBs and solid defense at 2B for the league minimum. I don't know if any of the FA secondbasemen can beat that, especially when the Cubs are looking at acquiring an expensive bat and an expensive arm this off season. Throw in the likelihood of having to resign Aramis and the need to find a cheap but effective lead-off hitter gets even greater. Isn't it nice for once to already have that guy on the roster? Of course, if the Cubs do resign Pierre, then they can't afford the low-OPS of Theriot's bat and would have to spend more money to get one of the FA 2B. It simply doesn't make any sense. Let Pierre go, Jim.
  16. CubsWin
    So if the game is called, does Hill get credited with his 2nd consecutive complete game? :wink: I wish...
  17. CubsWin
    Good work, WF22... :lol: :lol: :lol:
  18. CubsWin
    Really? Best time for us? Please explain to me how the point at which a team that is 62-89 is the best time. Are you sure the best time wouldn't have been in April and May when we still had a shot at the playoffs and ARam hit .197? Are you sure its good for "us" that Aramis is getting hot just before he has a chance to void out of his contract and resign for lots more? Well it is good for one person....Dusty Baker. Just the right time to keep a 100 loss season off the old resume. BTW, for the people planning on ripping on me for yet another Dusty quote, save your time. I'm half kidding/nitpicking here. More or less it was an interesting comment that I wanted to share and comment on. I'm sure it was completely innocent and was not meant to be taken the way that I have. I'm the guy that is usually saying that Dusty's words are being unfairly twisted, but this one just makes me scratch my head. And then shake my head. What was he thinking?
  19. CubsWin
    But I think we've gotten away from the original statement of this thread that Theriot is clearly a back-up infielder only. That would mean that there are 30 2B that are clearly and without a doubt better than Theriot. Given that Theriot has demonstrated a proven ability to get on base at around 35-36% of the time over the last three seasons, has base stealing ability and plays a solid defensive 2B. The question remains, are there 30 2B clearly better than him? I don't know, I'm asking. Who are they? If there are, that should settle this debate once and for all.
  20. CubsWin
    Now, now. Let's keep in mind that for many Cubs fans hope is a four-letter word. :wink: Clearly, if the Cubs can acquire a better 2B than Theriot, they should. But if the choice was between Cedeno starting with Theriot on the bench or the other way around, I choose Theriot to start next season. Cedeno clearly has the greater upside. Also, Pierre leading off in '07 = expensive and less money for a power hitter or FA starter. Theriot leading off in '07 = inexpensive, more money for a power hitter or FA starter and likely better OBP in that role. It is also easier to add power in CF than it is to add it at 2B.
  21. CubsWin
    My feelings exactly. I will be really disappointed if Hendry trades him. He is simply too inexpensive and, at 24 years old, able to improve too much to get a lot better by trading him. He is already above league average for LFers in a lot of catagories. When you throw in his age as a factor, it gets even tougher.
  22. CubsWin
    No. Hendry wasn't smart enough to include a club option in the contract. They may have basically paid him to rehabilitate for a year only to see him walk away.Did it occur to you that maybe Miller didn't want it? Wow. you do know that a contract is a two way deal, right? Yes, I do. That's my point. Just because the Cubs don't hold a team option on Miller next season doesn't automatically mean that Hendry didn't think to try to get it. Contracts are a "two way deal", as you put it. What was your point, exactly? that nobody held a gun to hendry's head and forced him to sign miller w/o an option. hendry could have said no option, no contract. you make it sound as though hendry had no choice. No, I make it sound like it takes two to tango and what they could mutually agree upon was one year, one mill plus a mill in incentives and no 2nd year option. Let's be honest, if Miller didn't want a 2nd year, he had other suitors willing to give him that. Hendry couldn't force him to accept one. But certainly, you're right, Hendry could've walked away and not signed Miller. Are you saying that's what you wish he would have done? I think Hendry thought it was worth the gamble to have Miller on the books for a mill and have the possibility of him be ready to go in the 2nd half rather than have nothing at all and be a million dollars richer. This way, the Cubs would also have an established year long relationship with him and would have had a year to evaluate whether Miller was worth investing in. Sounds well worth the money to me. Do you think it was a poor use of the Trib's resources? Because we clearly can't criticize Hendry for not forcing Miller into accepting an option year which is what I was originally responding to.
  23. CubsWin
    Agreed. Very well put. Four solid arms and Prior. Now the debate becomes what is a solid arm and which of the Cubs "rookie" arms fit that description, if any. I'm in the camp that wants one really good FA starter and one veteran 5th starter type, maybe along the lines of Wade Miller, if he shows he is ready. I think hoping for Zito/Schmidt and someone like Padilla is very unrealistic. Heck, the teams that sign Zito and Schmidt should consider themselves lucky because there will be 28 other GMs who will have lost out. So really just getting one of those top of the rotation guys is unrealistic. Still, I'm hoping for one of those and another veteran arm to compete with Guzman, Marshall and Mateo for the 5th spot and give the Cubs another experienced and moderately successful pitcher should Prior (or anyone else) go down with injury.
  24. CubsWin
    No. Hendry wasn't smart enough to include a club option in the contract. They may have basically paid him to rehabilitate for a year only to see him walk away.Did it occur to you that maybe Miller didn't want it? Wow. you do know that a contract is a two way deal, right? Yes, I do. That's my point. Just because the Cubs don't hold a team option on Miller next season doesn't automatically mean that Hendry didn't think to try to get it. Contracts are a "two way deal", as you put it. What was your point, exactly?
  25. CubsWin
    No. Hendry wasn't smart enough to include a club option in the contract. They may have basically paid him to rehabilitate for a year only to see him walk away.Did it occur to you that maybe Miller didn't want it? Wow.
×
×
  • Create New...