dew1679666265
-
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
-
The reason I used only 2010 is primarily their age. Both Cabrera and Lugo are getting really old and the most recent year may be the most reliable gauge at this point. Also due to age, if we sign one of those three, I'd probably like Guzman the most. He's the youngest and has the best chance to rebound out of the group.
-
Is there that much certainty that a 37 year old SS will improve 11 points in wOBA without factoring in a decent amount of luck? Or that a 35 year old SS will improve 40 points of wOBA when his BABIP was at his career average last year? We're discussing a bunch of players who aren't going to hit much at all, I realize, but it seems that our choice is between hoping for decent improvement from a bad, old player or a bad, young player. I guess I wouldn't be against adding any of them at a 1 yr/1 mil deal, but we're looking at very, very incremental improvement at best, it seems.
-
I agree with this statement completely, but are one of Cabrera/Lugo/Guzman really an upgrade? Cabrera: 37 years old, .657 OPS in 2010 Lugo: 35 years old, .581 OPS in 2010 Guzman: 33 years old, .648 OPS Offensively I can see the argument for Guzman, but he's a pretty poor defender and had a negative WAR last year (though very slightly). You may have been talking more in the hypothetical sense than specifically advocating these three and, if that's the case, then I have no problem with what you were saying. I'm just not a big fan of adding any of those three guys specifically, since I can't say they'd be an upgrade over Barney.
-
Blast. However, my defense is that the Cubs actually did draft Kaepernick last year, so that's what I was thinking of . . .
-
Unless this is a smokescreen, the Panthers confuse me. Would a veteran QB be a need? Sure, but there's no way this is your #1 need. Especially if they do what Hurney said they're considering, and that's taking a QB with the first pick in the draft.
-
Kaepernick fascinates me. He's very much a developmental type QB, but he has really nice physical tools and I liked what I saw from him at Nevada. If the Titans were to pass on the first round QBs, Kaepernick would probably be my second choice behind Devlin in that second group. I'd want to see them go after an Orton, Palmer or another stopgap for a couple of years while they developed Kaerpernick, though.
-
Teams have been high on him since last year. With his skillset, he was going to be rated highly by teams whether the national media talked him up or not. As for analysis, that's one reason I like the NFP. I find out a lot about the really good prospects who the national media ignore. Though Mike Mayock on NFL Network is very good and I know he likes Devlin quite a bit as well. I think the basic similarities between Devlin and Flacco help as well. Both are big, strong armed QBs with all the tools and are pro-style type QBs who played in a spread, shotgun heavy offense. Some questioned Flacco's ability to adapt to a pro-style offense, but since he did quickly I think there will be fewer questions about Devlin.
-
I know Wes Bunting at the National Football Post is a fan of his. He struggled in adapting to the under-center snap during East/West Bowl practice, though. I tend to think he'll be the first of the second group of QBs to be taken (after the big names – Gabbert, Mallett, Newton, maybe Locker. Maybe early second round or so? I'm a fan of his and wouldn't mind if the Titans held off taking a QB in the first round to grab Devlin in the second. Here's Bunting's write up from the Shrine Bowl practice:
-
Rios has been worse with the White Sox than he was with the Blue Jays, actually.
-
Revenue generation would be a pretty big deal, I don't know how to account for it, though. If management has the room to go after one of the two, though, and it's close, I could see revenue generation swaying them to spend more for Pujols.
-
Yeah, 8/200 is definitely possible and if that's where it goes, I'd much rather find a few extra bucks to get Pujols. The 5/100 deal would give him a huge annual salary ($20 mil a year) while also being short enough that he might get a 3-5 year deal again after it's over (he'd be 32 at that point).
-
Pujols - 10/300 (possibly slimmed down) Fielder - 5/100 Average WAR: Pujols - 8.0 Fielder - 3.3 (4.7 avg over past 4 years) Age: Pujols - 31 this month Fielder - 27 in May Obviously Pujols is the better player, and by quite a bit, but which deal is better for the Cubs?
-
Sir Charles weighs in on the Cutler stuff: He comments on more than just that in the story, as well.
-
Locker's interesting. He has the tools to be a top 10 pick, but he's so raw that I could see him easily falling into the second round.
-
All TCU athletics are now in the Big East. I was just confused on who wanted to make the move.
-
Ah, I apparently got mixed up there. Either way, TCU is in the Big East in all sports.
-
Wallace is 6', Young is 5-11 (according to ESPN) and Jackson is 5-10. Wallace is thicker than either of the latter two, though (199 for Wallace, 170 for Young and 175 for Jackson).
-
TCU wanted to move in only football, but I think the MWC is making them move all sports.
-
Now I hope he quits on the team. That's being paid by the Dodgers, by the way.
-
He's making more than just the $2 mil this year, for what it's worth.
-
You may know this, but that viewpoint is not limited to just Wilbon. I keep hearing debates where someone will bring up a QBs stats to show how good he is and the other person will simply retort "yeah, but how many rings does he have" or "how many games did he win last year" or something silly like that. People view QBs like they do pitchers in baseball, somehow they are in complete control of whether or not their team wins the game. No one else plays a role in it apparently.
-
Really... Nationally? I don't remember that. I remember Jim Brown calling him out and some other stuff, but it was no one near like Cutler's though... Oh nowhere near Cutler. This is unprecedented. I remember him getting a ton of flak as well. Maybe not as much as Cutler, but it seemed like after every play they'd shoot over to LT hanging out on the sidelines. After the game he was pretty well ripped to shreds by everybody.
-
Practically no team does that though. I don't know why, but the Bears aren't out of the ordinary at all in labeling an in-game injury as "questionable" return. It happened with Pouncey earlier yesterday and it happens consistently with players with concussions.
-
Most teams do that. Like I said earlier in the thread, Maurkice Pouncey was carted off the field with a clear leg injury, remained in the locker room, came back out on crutches hobbling around and his return was "questionable." I don't know why teams do it, but most of the time I've seen them as questionable – even with concussions where it's obvious the player's done for the day.
-
LOL please tell me there are only like 7 votes. 33,217 votes And Cutler has 45% of the vote, 11% ahead of Vick.