Jump to content
North Side Baseball

JudasIscariotTheBird

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,442

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 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 JudasIscariotTheBird

  1. JudasIscariotTheBird
    If he gets the ABs, he gets to 5 WAR.
  2. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Oh. You are realistic and no one else is. But to get serious, why do you take it as a given that trading Bryant is the best/only way to keep the pitching from being bad? And also, why not just let the pitching suck and keep Bryant? Why is keeping that pitching at an arbitrary level of current performance needed, and at the expense of trading away our (probably) best position player? This can all be avoided by not doing any of it.
  3. JudasIscariotTheBird
  4. JudasIscariotTheBird
    [bbvideo=560,315] [/bbvideo]
  5. JudasIscariotTheBird
    I'm definitely rooting for the home team in this one. I don't like Tiger. I don't like Kuchar. I don't like Reed. I don't like JT. I don't like Bryson. If Fowler and Finau weren't on the team, it would be really easy to root for them to fail.
  6. JudasIscariotTheBird
    For me the comparison is more general: two depreciating assets at 3B with salaries preventing their respective orgs from getting better. Bryant's salary alone is projected to be just under 10% of the cap and could break that number next year. Cozart will cost $5+ million to roster than Bryant will in 2020, a big factor in what made him easier to move Yeah, that's the reason why he was "easier to move." http://www.flowjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/judge-judy-eye-roll.gif
  7. JudasIscariotTheBird
    It's just a rough comparison. Bryant's actually projected to make like $40 million through arb or so over the next two years to Cozart's 1 year and ~$13 million so arguably the Cubs have even more to gain than the Angels did. The cap space offers flexibility over that time frame so the Cubs can reset, maybe even help them recoup some of the money they lost between renovations and launching the network I still don't understand how you compare Cozart (.247/.300/.399/.699 with avg. of 17 HR and 59 RBI) with Bryant (.284/.385/.516/.901 with 32 HR and 92RBI). Well, you can compare them. You can compare how much better a team is with one of them on it, as opposed to the other...
  8. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Correct, don't trade Bryant. Not what the post I originally replied to considers an option. I'm assuming Regular was being a touch hyperbolic there.
  9. JudasIscariotTheBird
    What? The way I see it...right now there is a market for 3B. Buyers and sellers. We don't HAVE to trade Kris. When the Merry-Go-Round ends, there is either going to be a team missing a 3B, or there are going to be some 3B looking for jobs. In one case, Kris's value has decreased. In the other, his value increased. I don't understand why January is some magically horsefeathers month for trading him. It will either be better, worse, or the same as now. Why not stand pat and see if we can get an actual haul if someone gets desperate? Because teams don't really get more desparate and up offers in practice, they find another way before then. Do you see more blockbuster trades in November/December or January/February? Do Free Agents tend to get more than expected by waiting until January/February, or less? Maybe you can talk yourself into it if we were in a 2018 world where no one has done anything at this point, but it's clear this is a pretty normal moving market. I don't especially care about the frequency that trades occur in January, party because I don't especially want to trade Bryant. The point is that, on average, Bryant's value shouldn't be expected to be lower in January than it is now. If that is indeed how it works, that the market for 3B demand dries up by then...then you just don't trade him. No biggie.
  10. JudasIscariotTheBird
    ...why? Waiting to trade Bryant hurts your ability to get maximum value for him. Since the only logical reason to trade Bryant is predicated on thinking his value is at an artificial high, you're punting that benefit by waiting. What? The way I see it...right now there is a market for 3B. Buyers and sellers. We don't HAVE to trade Kris. When the Merry-Go-Round ends, there is either going to be a team missing a 3B, or there are going to be some 3B looking for jobs. In one case, Kris's value has decreased. In the other, his value increased. I don't understand why January is some magically shitty month for trading him. It will either be better, worse, or the same as now. Why not stand pat and see if we can get an actual haul if someone gets desperate?
  11. JudasIscariotTheBird
    ...why?
  12. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Man, I still don't follow your logic. A 10-6 Bears would still be more likely to make the PO. He isn't saying that. Obviously, if the Bears win all their games, their chances of making the playoffs increases. He is saying that if you simulated the season, say, 100 times, and then would looked at all of the instances where the Bears were in the playoffs, there would be more instances of the Bears being 9-7 and in than 10-6 and in, merely because going 3-0 is very unlikely.
  13. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Well, someone came up with a potential reason earlier. If the Cubs feel that he is past peak and will begin to decline, there could be a strong argument to trade him now. You have to be *really* sure that the shoulder or whatever is going to create a steeper decline phase than normal (or something like that), but there can be scenarios where it makes sense to trade him. I personally don't feel it is likely that scenario is playing out in real life, but logical hypotheticals do exist. This isn't a rebuttal as much as it is a genuine question, but do you think situations like that actually occur, where the Cubs would have pretty definitive insight into a presumably injury driven decline, but other teams wouldn't be aware of it? I don't think it would be a question as to if other teams were AWARE of it or not. Of course they are aware of the fact Bryant has had shoulder injuries and there is risk involved with that, and of course a physical would be a part of the deal. Its more a question of teams appraising value differently, be it due to different regression curves assigned to Bryant, competative windows, owners that are suddenly miserly, whatever.
  14. JudasIscariotTheBird
    He's not wrong. The Cubs are a big market team so, the only reason to trade the best player who is in his prime and still two years from free agency is... I don't really know the reason. Well, someone came up with a potential reason earlier. If the Cubs feel that he is past peak and will begin to decline, there could be a strong argument to trade him now. You have to be *really* sure that the shoulder or whatever is going to create a steeper decline phase than normal (or something like that), but there can be scenarios where it makes sense to trade him. I personally don't feel it is likely that scenario is playing out in real life, but logical hypotheticals do exist.
  15. JudasIscariotTheBird
    I think a 9-7 Bears playoff team is more likely than a 10-6 one. The Eagles don't matter, they and the Cowboys are both 6-7 and they play each other. Neither one can win the wild card. What? Well, let's say the Bears go 2-1. In order for the Eagles to catch the Bears, they would then need to go 3-0. In order for that to happen, they would have to beat the Cowboys, which means they win their division, which means they don't matter, as far as the Bears' playoff chances go. (The same situation applies to the Cowboys). Only the Rams and Vikings effect the Bears hopes of getting a wild card spot.
  16. JudasIscariotTheBird
  17. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Yeah for his RBIs! RBIs! ...he had 5 WAR
  18. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Trading Kris Bryant to extend Javier Baez is not giving a damn about the long term health of the roster (at least as far as being WS tier competitive is concerned). Extending Baez after multiple slaps in the face is just pandering to whatever fanbase is left, he's a great player and Cub but when a .330 OBP would be career high for the team MVP that team is screwed Team MVP?! He was runner up in the NL for the MVP vote with a .326 OBP. Take your stat cherry-picking and gtfo. You talk bad about my boy again and I'll cut you.
  19. JudasIscariotTheBird
  20. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Yeah, no way in hell Quintana and Yu are "salary neutral."
  21. JudasIscariotTheBird
    https://media.giphy.com/media/J4ODmDUTc3zWmPdcLl/giphy.gif This isn't the epic ownage you think it is. If you think the not-even-a-technicality that you consume your media by following BCB or whatever on facebook instead of visiting the actual url absolves you from the absurd, fantastic ownage you just got handed, then you would be Derwood.
  22. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Lol, I’ve never visited either of those sites, but sure. Uhhhh lol viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3195&p=383940&hilit=Derwood#p383933
  23. JudasIscariotTheBird
    Ohio State is in unless they get absolutely crushed and even then maybe they are. The discussion that's interesting if Wisconsin wins, especially by a decent margin, is Wisconsin vs Oklahoma. I don’t think Wisconsin would get in over OSU. After all OSU did beat them earlier this year, has played a harder schedule (I think), lost one less game, didn’t lose to Illinois, and overall has played significantly better with both metrics and the eye test. I do think they’d have a shot to finish over Oklahoma although that would cause quite the drama to have a 2 loss conference champion over a 1 loss. But Oklahoma has not looked all that impressive from what I’ve seen this season and I don’t think they are one of the 4 best teams this year Yeah, all clearly true, which is why I was puzzled by the 538 odds.
  24. JudasIscariotTheBird
    So, if Wisconsin manages to win this game, do they get in over OSU? 538 has the Badgers as a slight favorite to do that, which seems mildly weird to me.
  25. JudasIscariotTheBird
    So if Wisconsin manages to win this game, do they get in? Over Ohio St.? Five thirty eight has it as essentially a coin flip (assuming a Badger win, which is obviously a lot). Edit: whoops.
×
×
  • Create New...