Jump to content
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
    It'd probably just be wild speculation at this point, but I wonder if the Cubs spending 7 figures on Acosta and (reportedly) Malave is a sign that they don't feel encouraged about their prospects of signing some of the overslot guys (Maples, Dunston, etc) from the draft? Basically, I wonder if these signings are connected to the draft or not? And for those more in the know than I, if it came down to it, would you prefer signing Acosta/Malave or two of the overslots?
  2. dew1679666265
    That's exactly why I don't think we'd end up getting a deal worth it for Geo. As good as he's been, I think the general impression of him is what a lot of people on here complain about - gets hurt too much, too inconsistent and not good enough defensively. Two of those three aren't true and the inconsistency isn't a problem since he's never terrible, but I think that's the perception of him. I wouldn't openly shop him, but if a team understood how valuable a player he is and paid us accordingly, I'd definitely consider moving him. I'd want quite a bit, though.
  3. dew1679666265
    At least on this site there were very few people who thought he signed for too much. There might have been a handful of people saying he signed for too much, while most of the complaints were over the deal being too long (wanted 2 not 3 years) and him not being an impact player (true). There were very, very few complaints about the money in the deal.
  4. dew1679666265
    Where are you seeing that Baker is our most wanted player? I'd think Marshall, Marmol and Soto would all be more wanted if they're available and Pena and Kosuke would almost certainly be more valued. That said, Baker does provide something of value - a middle infielder with a power bat against lefties. He can be a pretty valuable trade chip at the deadline. This team can eventually win by building from the bottom up, but it's not necessary for a team with the means the Cubs have to completely break apart their major league team. Teams only do that when they have small payrolls and can't afford to fill holes. Teams like the Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, Phillies, etc. never rebuild from the ground up because they don't have to. The Marlins, Royals, Rockies, Pirates, etc. do rebuild from the ground up because they have to. At the same time, if you try to deal all the vets we have so that you can go on a major spending spree in the offseason, then you go from having a lot of guys whose contracts are about to end to having a bunch of long term contracts - much like we had in the mid-2000s. The best idea is to move out guys who won't contribute next year, others who are highly overvalued (Marmol for instance) and plug the holes through FA and the minors.
  5. dew1679666265
    Not likely, but significantly more realistic than a Castro trade. Even though he's still very valuable, Geo is a 28 year old catcher. There's far more incentive to deal a 28 year old catcher than a 21 year old SS, even with the lack of quality depth the Cubs have at catcher in the minors.
  6. dew1679666265
    I'm not sure you can ever sell high on Marshall. I doubt his value around the league will ever approach his actual value. Marmol would be a different story and there are definitely reasonable arguments for trading him and for keeping him. About the only way you could sell high on Marshall would be if you dealt Marmol this year, installed Marshall as the closer, the team got off to a hot start next year and Marshall racked up a bunch of saves. Thing is, there's no way he'd be dealt if the Cubs were winning and he were closing, so that's probably a moot point.
  7. dew1679666265
    So if a Castro trade was worthwhile you wouldn't make it? I get what you're saying in theory, but a worthwhile Castro trade isn't realistic.
  8. dew1679666265
    I didn't mean to imply that it was the only reason Ricketts used, simply a reason and maybe a large one. I do think his status increased certainly in Hendry's mind because of the winning record and maybe Ricketts as well, though he wasn't the guy making the hiring - he just approved it.
  9. dew1679666265
    That may be too micro-managerial for what Ricketts' style appears to be. My guess is he'd be more likely to throw out a cautionary warning (like Scotti mentioned) if he were going to dissuade an interim GM from trying a desperation effort to win now.
  10. dew1679666265
    I'd hope he'd do that and that may fix the problem, but he also may be enough of a hands-off executive that he may just put Bush in charge and let him do his thing without comments like that.
  11. dew1679666265
    That's definitely a concern too, but if the Cubs are kind of on the fringe of being competitive around July is my concern. If we're 15-20 games out by the deadline, he probably won't buy. But if we're 8-12 games out like we are now, Bush might buy in the hopes that we can get hot and get back in it. It may not be extremely likely, but it's a needless risk to take on with a move that has no real benefits.
  12. dew1679666265
    My concern isn't that the Ricketts would be impressed by a meaningless W/L record nor that they would bring him back because of it. My concern is that Bush (or any interim GM) might believe that to be the case and make poor, short-sighted deals in an attempt to win himself the job. Even if he doesn't do that - which he may not - the concern is greater that he would do it than that Hendry would, thus making firing Hendry midseason without a longterm replacement ready to take over a more risky move than simply keeping Hendry until the day after game 162 is played and then firing him. When the benefits are extremely minimal (at best) to a move, it doesn't take a massive risk to make the move not worth it, it takes a minimal risk - and that's what promoting an interim GM is.
  13. dew1679666265
    That's the key, though, is his BABIP has been through the roof good to this point. I'm no good at neutralizing a guy's numbers to eliminate BABIP influence, but if you drop his BABIP the 65 or so points back to his career average, I think you'll find far more modest numbers. Not terrible, but not the kind of numbers that would lead to a thread wondering if he should be the everyday CF.
  14. dew1679666265
    Reed: fielding percentage - 1.000 in 35 games; UZR - -5.4 Soriano: fielding percentage - .961 games; UZR - 2.3 Fielding percentage prefers Reed, but Sori has been a much better defender this year according to UZR. That's judging Soriano as a LF vs. Johnson primarily as a CF. I'm relatively certain Reed is a better defensive LF than Soriano. Good point and I should have pointed that out. The primary point was that Soriano's not a horrid defender holding Reed back, though.
  15. dew1679666265
    There's the potential risk that the interim GM makes short-sighted moves in an effort to impress his bosses with a meaningless W/L record. It may not make a difference to the Ricketts, but it might and that may be enough for an interim to buy instead of sell at the deadline.
  16. dew1679666265
    The earliest I'd consider firing Hendry would be August. That way, the risk of a desperate interim GM making short-sighted moves is gone and it makes the minimal benefits (if any) stand out more. I don't think it makes much difference whether you fire him August 1 or the day after game 162, though.
  17. dew1679666265
    That is not a given. Then prove me wrong. I've asked both you and CubInNY to prove me wrong and neither of you have given any tangible benefits to firing Hendry midseason and promoting Randy Bush.
  18. dew1679666265
    I think part of the reason (and perhaps a large part of the reason) that Mike Quade is the manager of the Cubs today is because the Cubs went on a tear at the end of the season last year under his leadership. A manager and GM's duties are obviously different, but the most tangible way of measuring success for a manager or GM is wins and losses and if the Cubs win, say, 65% of their games under Bush's leadership, it could be a factor. I'm not arguing that Bush would immediately take over and begin the process of dismantling the Cubs' farm system, but if anybody is going to make desperation moves to try to win the owners' favor (whether it actually does or not) it'd be an interim GM. Given that there's very little to no benefit in firing Hendry midseason, any added risk at all you gain by promoting an interim GM makes the move not worth it.
  19. dew1679666265
    Two reasons: 1: It's not Bush specifically, but most any guy trying to win his job is going to try to impress his boss by performing as well as he possibly can. The best performance a GM can have? Wins. By trading minor leaguers for marginal upgrades, the team gets better right now and, thus, the team wins more games. The Ricketts certainly could step in and stop lopsided trades, however.... 2: The Ricketts don't appear to be real "hands-on" owners. From the looks of things, they'll put baseball guys in place and let them do their thing. Would they step in and nix a deal Bush was putting together or let him do his thing and trust the baseball guy? I'd like to think a Brett Jackson for Aubrey Huff deal would be nix right from the start, but what about a deal sending intriguing guys like Junior Lake, Dallas Beeler, etc. for guys having career years they won't repeat? Would the Ricketts jump in and nix other deals that are just as bad, but not as obvious?
  20. dew1679666265
    Reed: fielding percentage - 1.000 in 35 games; UZR - -5.4 Soriano: fielding percentage - .961 games; UZR - 2.3 Fielding percentage prefers Reed, but Sori has been a much better defender this year according to UZR. UZR does take into account Soriano's arm... which adds a lot more value to Soriano's D out there than people seem to give him credit for. I think a lot of people are swayed by Soriano's boneheaded plays. He'll play decent defense most of the time - no flashy plays, but solid defense - but it's the occassional awful play that really sticks in people's minds (mine as well).
  21. dew1679666265
    Reed: fielding percentage - 1.000 in 35 games; UZR - -5.4 Soriano: fielding percentage - .961 games; UZR - 2.3 Fielding percentage prefers Reed, but Sori has been a much better defender this year according to UZR.
  22. dew1679666265
    The odds against him being a late developer are even more significant when you consider the 19.3 LD% (lower than career average) and .394 BABIP (64 points higher than career average). It looks like he's getting wildly lucky. I'd be ok with him coming back in a bench role, but no more.
  23. dew1679666265
    Going forward, Dunn is likely to be more valuable to other teams than Soriano. So even if nobody else has interest in Dunn now, if he can hit a hot streak and get his numbers back into a reasonable area, there could be interest from teams offering real prospects and real money for him - as opposed to simply hoping to give Soriano away for minimal savings.
  24. dew1679666265
    Swapping contracts of Soriano and Dunn? I'd do that in a heartbeat. There's not a chance in the world the Sox would even consider it, though. Dunn is significantly more likely to be highly productive over the next 3 years and his poor defense would have much less negative effect at first base as opposed to Soriano's decreasing defense in left. And even if/when both fall off a cliff, Dunn at least has patience to fall back on, while Soriano has nothing. Factor in that Dunn is 3 years younger and cheaper and there's no reason for the Cubs not to do that deal, while there's no reason for the Sox to do it.
  25. dew1679666265
    Do they not? I know colleges use them (Tennessee used one to find Kiffin, Pearl and Dooley and has hired one to find a new AD), but it may just be a college thing.
×
×
  • Create New...