Bryants Disco Ball
-
Posts
8,242 -
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 Bryants Disco Ball
-
I'm surprised the Cubs have only scored three runs in 21 innings. They can score that many without making an out sometimes.
-
This is weird.
-
Cubs win this inning. Took longer than expected but it's a win in the end.
-
There might not be as many, but there have to be some. The season is just too long for there not to be periods of slump and sadness.
-
horsefeathers yes. We just reduced our magic number by one.
-
Am I missing something? Didn't he throw 11 pitches that inning? I posted it after the 3rd person in 5 hitters he started 0-2 and went full on. Oh, gotcha. I got behind.
-
Am I missing something? Didn't he throw 11 pitches that inning?
-
Not surprising they are. They see a ton of pitches just like the Cubs. It will be interesting because Lackey mostly throws strikes. Or tries to, at least.
-
Technically that would mean it's hitting dongs.
-
Injury day off. Stiff back.
-
Lucroy is a free agent after next season.
-
That's the one. You might be right about 5-1. 99.99% certain the comeback in the 9th was against the Cards. Somebody posting a highlight of the geo bomb from that game would be just splendid. Geo bomb was for sure against the Brewers.
-
It was 5-1 wasn't it? I remember a Geo 3 run HR to tie it and a DLee single to win it in like the 12th That's the one. You might be right about 5-1. Wait. We also had the ARam homer against Cordero as well, of course.
-
The Cubs also once had a crazy comeback in the ninth that involved Mark Grace beating out a grounder and I believe injuring his hamstring while doing it. I could just be imagining this but I'm pretty sure I'm not.
-
good call This time last year I would've put higher odds on ARCubsfan making that post I learned that worrying about everything doesn't actually make it either happen or not happen. So just enjoying the ride is far more fun. Damn, didn't that ARCubs guy go on a racist rant?
-
Zobrist will break this horsefeathers up, guaranteed.
-
Thank God. Is this a new leaf for you Hahahaha. I think it might be.
-
Thank God.
-
Weird. Until this post right here (and checking to make sure you were actually right) I always thought Chase Anderson was a lefty.
-
Curious, would you be willing to do Russell, Schwarber, Happ, Torres and Contreras for him and his salary or too much? The only reason I say no to that particular package (and it's mainly Russell, Schwarber, and Contreras that I'm talking about here) is because of the whole diminishing returns thing. We're beyond good enough, so I think spreading out that many guys who can give that much value as individuals and the depth that provides (primarily in insurance against injury) is a better fit for a team that is already set up to be this good. I'd say no, too. I wouldn't do it because Russell is a great player at a premium spot himself, and then even if you don't like Happ and Torres, they'd be able to bring back another good player in a trade, and that still gives you Schwarber and Contreras and a hell of a lot of money to play with. I like the flexibility a lot more than one Trout, as awesome as he would be.
-
I totally suck at these things, so forgive me. In this scenario on the Russell and a single good prospect side, do you also have to add in a hypothetical free agent that we could sign for five years at about $100 million with the money saved, or not? I don't even know if what I asked makes sense. You're on the right track, but using surplus value does this for us. Or to illustrate another way, using round numbers for simplicity: You get 385 million dollars of value for 135 million with Trout You get 275 million dollars of value for 25 million with Russell plus a prospect So yes, you can add in the value you can get from spending that additional 110 million, but the easier thing to do is just to subtract the cost from the value to get to the surplus value. It tells the same story in a simpler way, so you can see that in this example Russell + prospect provide the same surplus as Trout despite not being as good. This type of analysis has limitations and shouldn't be thrown around like gospel truth, but it's good to ground discussions, especially in this case where the very idea is a bit abstract(trading for a pretty surefire HOFer that's not even 25 years old). Good stuff. Thanks.
-
I totally suck at these things, so forgive me. In this scenario on the Russell and a single good prospect side, do you also have to add in a hypothetical free agent that we could sign for five years at about $100 million with the money saved, or not? I don't even know if what I asked makes sense.
-
Curious, would you be willing to do Russell, Schwarber, Happ, Torres and Contreras for him and his salary or too much?
-
Totally this. If the front office views Addison Russell and Kris Bryant as franchise players, it's difficult to see them giving up either and other stuff to then pay Trout $122 million over the next four seasons when they have those guys under contract for five seasons and a lot less money. Now, if they don't view those guys as franchise pieces, then by all means. But I tend to think they do.
-
I randomly remember the Cubs walking off against this guy last season.