Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Beer Kaese

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    269

  • 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 Beer Kaese

  1. Beer Kaese
    I don't think that's true at all. Major changes off the top of my head Out or significantly lost talent: Soto, Castro, Garza, Dempster, Marshall In or significantly gained talent: Jackson, Rizzo, Schierholtz, Castillo, Samardzija Pretty close to a wash, imo. Could make a case either way. Ramirez? Soriano? Wells? This is the roster that finished 2011. You can't tell me in any universe that this current team is better than that one. Cheaper? Yes. Younger? Yes. Better? Hell no. . It's been a long 2 years. Four years. The Cubs should have been aggressive sellers beginning in June 2010. Instead, Hendry traded for Garza and signed Pena (deferred half his salary) and five games into the 2011 season the Cubs were toast.
  2. Beer Kaese
    That appears to be the most comprehensive list I've seen on any subject. Well done. The problem is that no one, not even AZPhil, does a list of rule 5 eligible 3 years out. The Cubs have added both top end and depth to the system in the last two years. Both AA and A+ were successful last year. That generally doesn't happen if you don't have a mix of high end and mid range talent with depth. Those guys are moving to AAA and AA next year. If you combine top end and mid range talent with cash available to spend you can see a lot of those names fly off the board in a hurry. Bard? There's a reason that no one does Rule 5 lists 3 years out, and it's not an oversight. Look at the rosters of those MiLB levels you're talking about, and find the players who will be Rule 5 eligible in the coming seasons. It's not a higher caliber than the players the team has exposed in the past, or that every team is forced to expose each year. Players are taken in rule 5 every year. There are rules that govern who is eligible. Is it not service time and players unprotected on the 40 man?
  3. Beer Kaese
    We've discussed the 40 man in quite a few threads. And unless everyone here is missing evaluations on quite a few players, we're no where near having a true crunch. Are we in danger every year of having the Matt Loosen 's of the world plucked from us? Sure. Is it likely to affect us in ANY matter? Hell no. Will we soon be making 3 for 1 trades where we're adding impact players? Hopefully, or else we're all likely to go crazy. But our 40 man is definitely manageable currently. It's not even close to being a real issue, nor is our ability to comprehend the daunting task of looking at it. Kyle summed up our current state pretty well, in my opinion. And with trades or without, we're no where near having an actual crunch. The mistake in Kyle's post is the assumption that all named are likely to be worthless. Most I can buy, all . . . not likely. My guess is that Bryant, Baez, Wilson and other top end prospects combined with mid range prospests and . . . yes . . . free agents and players acquired via trade will eat up a lot of that space.
  4. Beer Kaese
    That appears to be the most comprehensive list I've seen on any subject. Well done. The problem is that no one, not even AZPhil, does a list of rule 5 eligible 3 years out. The Cubs have added both top end and depth to the system in the last two years. Both AA and A+ were successful last year. That generally doesn't happen if you don't have a mix of high end and mid range talent with depth. Those guys are moving to AAA and AA next year. If you combine top end and mid range talent with cash available to spend you can see a lot of those names fly off the board in a hurry. Bard?
  5. Beer Kaese
    Something that none of you seem to see is that we are close to having too many players than a 40 man roster can protect. We are rapidly reaching the point where we MUST move prospects for players.
  6. Beer Kaese
    Sell . . . Hold . . . Buy I was reading a blog last night and post after post of what has been agitating me was made clear. There are some who just want something to happen now, to heck with the future. It is not possible to keep trading one player and get two or three in return while drafting high. Eventually, you have no way to protect them from loss via rule 5. As you approach that point you must reverse course.
  7. Beer Kaese
    I read a number of pieces written about the meeting with season ticket holders and the one thing that sticks out is Theo's comments about August and September. The past two seasons the Cubs went into a tailspin (the Cubs are like an airplane) after the trade deadline. While he did not say it, I take his comments to mean those days are behind us. That said, I do believe they took a half step back last year or maybe better stated as the major league team only took a half step forward. The two major issues were Shark's determination to force the Cubs to bid against the league to retain him (I'd trade him as soon as possible) and Castro . . . enough said.
  8. Beer Kaese
    LOL WUT In other words, who knows what will happen. Just do whatever. http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2008/09/30/loss-aversion-and-the-stock-ma/ Much of people's reluctance to trade Castro comes from this phenomenon. Nope. I think Kyle's correct. If we use his example and say we owned shares of Industrial Widgets and Tech Phone we would have found that IW declined in value by a greater % than TP. If we found ourselves in need of cash, we would be more inclined to sell shares of TP assuming IW has a greater amount of value to recover. A real life example is, after the dust settled on 9-11, I called my broker and asked how much Airline shares were down. I decided to put some idol cash to work for 9 days and put some money in my pocket. As Nathan Rothschild said, the best time to buy is when blood is running in the streets. The only fear one can legitimately have is that Theo and Jed panic and sell. I have a higher opinion of them than that. They may sell but not because they are in a panic.
  9. Beer Kaese
    Obstructed had a post about the 2002 BP top 100 prospects. The Cubs were loaded with Prior #2 and Big Z #80. The 2002 team had Sosa, Alou, Kid K, A-Gonz and the Farns. They went all in and got A-Ram for Hill #48 and Lee for Choi #40. The difference is we are not in a position to go all in. ah . . . how many of those Boston beards . . . 2014 is a bust, 2015 is when you'll see . . . these monkey cluckers know what they're doing.
  10. Beer Kaese
    23000+ posts and you don't know Vitters can't play Third Base?
  11. Beer Kaese
    This. I think this winter is too soon for the Cubs to move and I would not be surprised to see the Tigers keep Scherzer for a run next year and settle for the comp. They went all in when they signed Fielder.
  12. Beer Kaese
    I think it's a good signing. He's a transition player. He's good enough to prevent junk from floating up from the farm.
  13. Beer Kaese
    I changed my mind. This is why my post count is low. I'd see a post like this and leave for a few months.
  14. Beer Kaese
    Your pessimism is going to look stupid a year from now.
  15. Beer Kaese
    I love the discussion over the last week. There is one more issue that needs to be in the mix. Payroll. Young players (when they offer value) have escalating costs. If you anticipate that you may have a lot of them, you better have a low payroll when they reach the majors. Keeping more than a hand full a year can easily cost . . .5, 7, 10 million a year! in extra payroll. I have to back away from something I posted. I assumed Baez would start in AA and would be a September call up.
  16. Beer Kaese
    I only posted because I wanted something interesting to read. I do understand how message boards work.
  17. Beer Kaese
    Most prospects flame out so you need a lot of them. We have a lot of them. We have more than just about any team in baseball. I do no accept this. You need to go back and answer the Tiger.
  18. Beer Kaese
    Most prospects flame out so you need a lot of them. We have a lot of them. We have more than just about any team in baseball. I do no accept this. You need to go back and answer the Tiger.
  19. Beer Kaese
    Most prospects flame out so you need a lot of them.
  20. Beer Kaese
    Baseball teams aren't houses. There are real, physical reasons why you have to tear down a building with a bad foundation (I assume. I am not a contractor) before you rebuild on the site. If you add good baseball players before you remove all the bad ones, all that happens is you win more baseball games. Which is kind of a good thing. I go to ProSports from time to time. I don't post there because they are a bunch of idiots.
  21. Beer Kaese
    Why would you be proud of wanting what has happened to the Cubs in the last three years? In case you haven't noticed, things are not going well. I'm sorry you can't see it.
  22. Beer Kaese
    The foundation was caving in and the structure was rotten.
  23. Beer Kaese
    I mean these were the bold moves that needed to be made before competing? Yes, I agree if we kept a pitching staff of 18 terrible interchangable bullpen arms, it would've been difficult to win many games. I told my sister in 2010 the best thing the Cubs could do was blow it up. I got what I wanted, how about you?
  24. Beer Kaese
    72 percent of 2012's cubs roster is no longer on the 40-man. if that doesn't count as a purge to you, well, i dont know what to say. The original point was tear down this team from everyone who's ever played under Jim Hendry and THEN build it up. How do Edwin Jackson, Baker, Gregg, Navarro, Schierholtz, and Villanueva fit into that? Why do I care that JC Boscan, Murphy, Bogusevic, McDonald are on the 40 man? Is this a serious post or are you just adding to your post totals and being cheeky with the cult?
  25. Beer Kaese
    The entirety of our offseason discussions the past two years have been nothing but this. Some wanted a tear down, others wanted to add on to what we had. At this point, everyone appears to know Ricketts hasn't exactly allowed money to be spent, so we're where we're at and have to hope Theo knows what he's doing.(which I certainly do) We had nothing. And Ricketts is a foil.
×
×
  • Create New...