Bryants Disco Ball

I'd be pissed, though I'm sure it would please some people. I just have a feeling Merrifield is already declining and could collapse sooner than later. I really, really have to start researching Cubs prospects again. This deal sounds awesome to me, but that's because I've never even heard of these two guys.

Jon Singleton. ETA: Of course, that was only five years and $10 million so whatever.

I guess I'm conflicted on that. I'm not so sure Wheeler would have been given that contract at any point during the last few offseasons. Or the Moose getting those years, etc. But I guess we will see when contracts for guys like Bum are determined. Because if he really does get $100 million, well, that for sure wouldn't have happened. Especially with a draft pick involved. Darvish, Jake and Corbin all got paid the previous 3 offseasons. Maybe missing a guy or two. I think Wheeler gets in that ballpark the last two offseason coming off the season he had. If Bumgarner gets 100+ then yeah I think things may be swinging back a little to at least be a showing of good faith to players leading to the CBA talks. Moustakas is probably a bit of an outlier/indicator things may be changing but there seems to be more teams willing to buy this year and if I remember correctly his first FA year he turned down a decent offer from the Angels (who then signed Cozart) then he was left in the cold when nobody really wanted him/filled the spots in other ways and went back to the Royals. That's fair. Although I would argue Yu got way less than people anticipated, which is why the Cubs were able to land him in the first place. Corbin was considered the best pitcher on the market and actually got less AAV than Wheeler, although did get one more year. But I'm willing to go with you on this one at this point.

So is this just happening because the CBA is up going into 2021 and it has to look like teams aren't driving prices down on players, but then it will go back to what it was the last few seasons? Or are things legit returning to normal? I think it’s just Nightengale being an idiot. Other than signings happening faster I still don’t see this offseason being all that different as the past few ones so far. Guys are ending up with about the money they should, ultimately. It’s just happening sooner, so far. I guess I'm conflicted on that. I'm not so sure Wheeler would have been given that contract at any point during the last few offseasons. Or the Moose getting those years, etc. But I guess we will see when contracts for guys like Bum are determined. Because if he really does get $100 million, well, that for sure wouldn't have happened. Especially with a draft pick involved.

So is this just happening because the CBA is up going into 2021 and it has to look like teams aren't driving prices down on players, but then it will go back to what it was the last few seasons? Or are things legit returning to normal?

I think with him, I'd prefer signing him at $18 million for one year rather than the $30 million for two years some were projecting. It could be wrong of me to prefer that, though.

Yeah, I'm OK with them trading anybody on this team, but not..............for horsefeathering that.

Willson Contreras? 23! They even kinda sorta make Contreras' projected $4.5 million as some kind of incentive to move on or a negative, softly of course because it's all about the gentle nudge of guidance: They were ranking those in terms of trade value and trade likelihood. It's quite possible they don't think the Cubs are going to trade him, thus he's much lower on the list. Also, your obsession with people "clowning" the Cubs is interesting.

Ask a question, get some quality knowledge. Thanks everyone.

For someone like me who needs things explained, can anybody tell me why I'm supposed to like Margot? He doesn't seem to hit for average or power and doesn't get on base.

The only reason why I disagree is that if it didn't work very well or didn't help much at all, they wouldn't have kept doing it. How can you say this with a straight face about anything in baseball just solely based on the fact that Albert Almora exists. This.... is one of the best responses of all time.

if you had time to sit and prepare for the pitch, sure, but the video seemed to show the batter getting the info just before the pitcher goes into windup. There's not a whole lotta time to adjust to a pitch at the point, and thats where it can be detrimental to the batter rather then helpful. The only caveat is if the batter is sitting change up the ENTIRE AB and is told when one is coming, THEN he has a huge advantage. The only reason why I disagree is that if it didn't work very well or didn't help much at all, they wouldn't have kept doing it.

Nah. It's dumb for catchers and pitchers to still communicate that way 20 [expletive] years deep into the 21st Century. At worst it's motivation for the game to update something that should have been updated god knows how many years ago. It's such a ridiculous blind spot it basically deserves to be exploited (and visiting teams can exploit pretty damn easily, too). Hit like to subscribe and get my follow up theory: A [expletive] pitch clock would pretty much fix all of this. It's the asymmetry that matters to me, I don't particularly care that they're trying to get signs. Steal all the signs you want, but if you're using your home park to do it in a way your opponent physically can't, that crosses the line for me. Yup. Big-time. Anybody passing this off as just good old-fashioned cheating has it way wrong. This is a different territory all together.

One that I think your missing is trading Chatwood. He had a great season last year, but there are a lot of teams that need SP and wouldn't mind the $13 million salary. I don't see the Cubs in on Grandal (even with a a Willson trade) because of the cost. The Cubs don't have the money to blow it all on one player, especially when we already have strength at C. Trading Q doesn't make too much sense because it adds one more hole to fill. You're right about #4 - nobody is taking on that contract. As for #3 and #5, I don't think we can get equal value back. I disagree, although would hope you are right. That being, I think all teams would mind Chatwood's $13 million salary, even on just a one year deal.

I have been curious about this, just as a fun topic and interested to hear if others would scoff at this. Taking into account service time and arbitration contracts, etc., would you trade any two Cubs players for Juan Soto? Which I guess would mean would you trade KB and Javy for Soto? I'm thinking people are saying, 'Oh, hell no?' I would be intrigued. Of course, only if that means we weren't going to pocket the money and not use the savings.

I'm imagine this would make it difficult to trade him.

Didn't he interview with the Twins last year? Between his frenemy relationship with many of the players as well as his comments about good hitters hitting near the top I say F it, I'm on the Rossy train. Hopefully there's still some magic left in there. I do think it's funny that we are all inspired by somebody advocating for the best hitters to get the most at-bats. Yet, we know first-hand that not everybody does it, so point goes to Ross here.

I feel like I'm a good person. Sometimes I feel bad that I don't care at all about either the players or the owners, other than I wish good health for them.

I have to be 100 percent honest: I hope we have him for two more seasons and not one. Not one part of me hopes he wins this hearing. I will accept being called names.

I don't think it's really a competition between a handful of teams. I've written this before, but all pro sports organizations are poor on the moral scale. They all employ abusers, racists, etc. They all cover up things that never actually make it out to the public. It's just a bad industry. Winning and making money are the only things that matter.

It's the freaking headline and was spelled out completely in the story. My lord. And? A lot of people will probably see the headline and think it was some random dude and won’t bother to read the story. It’s not. Call it what it is. This isn’t very hard. Headlines matter. Not as much as the content of the actual story. But they matter. Nope. Wrong. And because the guy is nobody anybody knows and "Assistant GM" is a title nobody cares about, saying a staffer actually is probably better for clicks because people then want to find out who it was. ETA: Also, it would have been fine to say executive. Agreed. But let's not act like it was a shameful moment for the headline writer.

100 percent. It's scary how much it will work, too. Even if there is video of it, people who don't want to believe will come up with any reason to justify why it's not true.

Shame on Sports Illustrated? Really? 99% of people have never heard of this person, why would they put it in the headline? Yeah, you are correct. Headline was absolutely fine.

Wait a minute. What? Oh, God. Yes.

I'm not that angry. I figured the baseball Gods would never allow this to be that easy for me.