Jump to content
Can the Cubs push their win streak to 11? Come join our game thread! ×
North Side Baseball

dew1679666265

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,547

  • 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 dew1679666265

  1. dew1679666265
    A D is high for a guy who posted a 4.82 ERA and 4.34 xFIP and an .848 OPS? Combining offense and defense for Z he was a 1.9 WAR player after missing the last month or so of the season. I'd grade him as a C if his blowup didn't lead (rightly or wrongly) to him being suspended for as long as he was.
  2. dew1679666265
    This is a good point. If Ricketts doesn't expect the new GM to have much interest in Quade then I'll buy into it that Ricketts should go ahead and let Quade go to pursue other opportunities.
  3. dew1679666265
    And that risk is that a manager will pass up a certain job opportunity for the possibility that maybe sometime this offseason a new Cubs GM might possibly show enough interest in him to interview him and then maybe he might get a job offer from the Cubs. If the other job offer is the Royals the manager might consider passing it up in the hopes that the new Cubs GM will hire him, but otherwise I see no way that scenario plays out. And if it does that manager made a really dumb decision. Let me rephrase what I said earlier - there's no realistic risk to keeping Quade until the new GM is brought in and there's no realistic benefit to it.
  4. dew1679666265
    Barney's another difference I had from bukie's list, didn't notice that the first time. I had Barney with a C - the defense was really nice, but the offense was pretty putrid. I considered a B, but just couldn't justify it with the offense as bad as it ended up being.
  5. dew1679666265
    I've expressed this opinion once or twice, but I'd much rather pursue two cornerstone type players in their primes rather than bring back an injury prone, 34 year old (albeit still productive) player. Thus, I'd rate the offseason targets as Pujols/Fielder, CJ Wilson, and then Aramis. If we can get the money for all three then that would be ideal, but I just don't see much less risk in bringing back Aramis than there is in pursuing Pujols/Fielder and Wilson. Primarily because even though we wouldn't have any competition in bringing Aramis back, the likelihood of him missing significant time is pretty high - meaning even if we bring him back we very likely wouldn't have his production for anywhere from 40-80+ games. Then you add to that that Aramis would be a 1-2 year fix, while Pujols/Fielder and Wilson would each be long term solutions.
  6. dew1679666265
    I was almost right in line with that. The only differences were Russell an A, Cashner a C (due to the injury concerns), Reed a B (while luck the production was excellent), and Dempster a B. I probably should have gone lower with Demp, but I don't know that I'd go as low as a D.
  7. dew1679666265
    I don't care either way whether they fire him now or after the new GM is hired so long as he isn't around next season. If it's a month from now that Ricketts settles on a GM (very realistic), no GM who has a job offer now or within the next few days is going to wait around to see who the Cubs hire as GM and then wait around some more to see if that new GM settles on him. In the meantime, the job offer he's received is filled and possibly numerous more. Then if the manager doesn't get the Cubs job, he's potentially out of luck, or at least certainly has his options narrowed significantly. It's a completely neutral situation with Quade right now - there's no benefit/negative to keeping him, there's no benefit/negative to firing him. Because of that, I have no problem with Ricketts canning him now or waiting to let the new GM do it.
  8. dew1679666265
    There's really no benefit to firing him immediately either. He's not hurting the team by remaining as manager right now since the season is over and there's not going to be a managerial search until the new GM is hired so his being around isn't impeding that. I agree with CCP that Ricketts is probably waiting for the new GM to fire Quade and hire someone else to give that new GM a chance to evaluate Quade along with other candidates.
  9. dew1679666265
    I like the move well enough. Nobody available right now is a starter anyway, and Avery has the potential to be pretty good if he can stay healthy. If not, then he provides a bit of depth until he gets hurt and then we cut him for Mardy Gilyard or somebody.
  10. dew1679666265
    The past few years have really soured me on Beane. I wouldn't oppose hiring him by any means, but of the big names (Beane, Friedman, Cashman, Epstein) he's probably at the bottom of my list. I realize Beane hasn't had much in the way of resources to work with, but his teams haven't had a winning season since 2006. Never being below 73 wins in that time period is worth noting and is why I'd be fine with hiring him, but there's a really noticeable dropoff that I'd want some reasons for before anointing him as "the" answer for the Cubs going forward. He went 8 years winning between 88 and 103 games a year, and then has been between 73-81 a year for the past five years. Why? I'd rank them Epstein, Friedman, Cashman, Beane with the first two being pretty close and the latter two being pretty close.
  11. dew1679666265
    It'll be interesting to see what the Titans come up with to replace Kenny Britt. CJ really needs to start playing soon, but I think we can beat the Browns without him.
  12. dew1679666265
    For as stupid as the Titans played today, I'm really happy with the win. Denver isn't a very good team, but it was nice to see the Titans still be able to win even with a bunch of dumb penalties. All that is dampened by the report that the Titans fear Britt tore his ACL and MCL, however. First Hunter, now Britt. Amazing.
  13. dew1679666265
    I don't know anybody who would disagree with that, including myself. However, I believe the backup options are good enough that we're a better overall team with Baker/Flaherty at third and Wilson starting than with Aramis at third and the multi-headed combo of McNutt/Whitenack/Cashner/Shark/Struck/Lopez/Bush/whoever in the rotation. We both seem to agree that Fielder/Pujols should be targeted either way. If that's the case, great. However, I can't assume that will happen and if we end up only being able to afford 2 of the 3, I think the best decision is to let Aramis walk and pursue Fielder/Wilson. This is exactly what I've been arguing should we let Aramis walk and pursue Fielder/Wilson. If we miss on one, it doesn't ensure our inability to compete. We can still pursue trade options that may include Kemp and Ethier.
  14. dew1679666265
    It's not all on CJ. The offensive line isn't getting any sort of push at all on most running plays. CJ also had a couple 10+ yard runs called back by holding penalties and was wide open for huge pass plays that Hasselbeck couldn't get him the ball on. He's looked better today, even if the statline doesn't show it.
  15. dew1679666265
    If the Titans could just cut out the stupid mistakes and penalties, they'd be a pretty good team. They just can't seem to quit doing stupid things though.
  16. dew1679666265
    First Justin Hunter, now Kenny Britt. This is ridiculous.
  17. dew1679666265
    It's not PPR. My other WRs are Knox, Roy Williams, Crabtree, Santana Moss and Steve Johnson. My RBs are Best, Hardesty, McCluster, Delone Carter, and Ryan Torain. Hester, Mossaquai, and Jerome Simpson are probably the best free agent receivers, Deji Karim is by far the best free agent RB.
  18. dew1679666265
    In the same league I talked about earlier where my RB situation is awful (I'm starting Best and Montario Hardesty today), I was just offered this: He gets Kenny Britt Larry Fitzgerald I get Adrian Peterson I feel like I'm giving up two potentially elite talents to get one, but neither guy I'm giving up is a sure thing to be an elite talent this year. Peterson is. Thoughts?
  19. dew1679666265
    From my perspective, it's not that I'm assuming he won't bump up payroll, it's that I don't want to assume he will. I've said before if payroll increases enough to make it work, I'd be thrilled to bring back Aramis and then pursue Fielder and Wilson. However, that's very unlikely given our current payroll and would almost certainly require a bump of some degree. Ricketts may be willing to make that bump, but I don't want to assume he will.
  20. dew1679666265
    And if we bring Aramis back, we have to sign one of Fielder/Wilson and have to hope that Aramis - at 34 years old - can stay healthy for at least as many games as he did this year and hope he doesn't decline any more than he did from 2008 to 2011 (30 point OPS drop) just to be better than we were this year. If Aramis goes down for 40-80 games like he has two of the past three years, then even if we do sign one of Fielder/Wilson, we have little to no shot to compete. You're portraying keeping Aramis as the safe route, however it simply isn't that safe a route. It's very likely that Aramis will miss significant time next year and/or that his OPS drop from 2008 to 2011 will continue even if he is healthy next year. And if that happens then we have $12-16 million tied up in an aging, injured player for each of the next two years. If we let Aramis walk and miss on one of Fielder/Wilson, we still have money to go out on the trade market and see what we can get without having to look only at longshot missed prospects.
  21. dew1679666265
    I've mentioned LeMaheieu's name several times in the past few pages of this thread as an option as well. I'm focusing mainly on Flaherty, though, as my hope is that LeMaheieu will work his way into playing time at second base next year.
  22. dew1679666265
    And all it takes is the nearly inevitable moment that Pujols hits FA and for CC to opt out (less inevitable) to increase the odds of landing both Fielder and Wilson significantly. And what if you bring back Aramis and pass on Wilson and then Aramis plays 82 games again next year like he did last year? Then you're really got a pitiful team because you weren't even planning on not having a third baseman. You keep talking like bringing Aramis back does not involve a huge amount of risk in and of itself - it does. Aramis has not been healthy for 2 of the past 3 years and there's a very strong likelihood that he'll be hurt for a substantial portion of next year.
  23. dew1679666265
    You said it better in one post than I did in about 3 pages.
  24. dew1679666265
    While not quite as bad as this year, third base offense has been pretty poor for a while now. The 2010 team midline OPS was .718 and .736 in 2009. There were 10 teams each of the past two years with 3B OPS' over .800, while there are only 7 this season, however. I don't know that 3B offense being quite this putrid is a trend, but it's still very easy (relative to offensive positions like 1B and the corner OFs) to put together a platoon that is above league average at third. Unless we see a huge spike that we haven't in the past three years or so. As for Flaherty, I'm in no way certain he'd be a capable starter stepping in right away. However, facing only right handed batters should help him as opposed to starting against everybody. And if he isn't good, then you try LeMaheieu or go grab somebody off the FA market. The key point is that I'm far more confident we can get league average production from a Flaherty/Baker platoon than that we can get much of anything out of whatever the fifth starter situation would be if we pass on Wilson and go with one of McNutt/Whitenack/Cashner/Struck/Lopez/Bush/JJackson/etc.
  25. dew1679666265
    And none of them are as young or healthy as Jeff Baker. Yes, but there's a solid chance they'd be better, and for a 1 year deal, I'd be willing to take the chance. They could be, though there's also a very good chance that if you bring Aramis back and deal Byrd, you have Baker in your lineup for 40+ games anyway (at third) as well as the Colvin/whoever platoon. Because of the very high injury risk surrounding Aramis, I don't think you make other areas of the team worse in order to keep him. If Ricketts bumps up payroll, then I have no problem bringing Aramis back. But the high risk associated with bringing back a 34 year old, injury prone third baseman makes me hesitate downgrading other areas in an effort to keep him, because if he goes down for an extended period then the team is weak in multiple areas.
×
×
  • Create New...