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
-
First off, I don't think it's a bad move to trade a backup catcher for a 24 year old slugger who has crushed minor league pitching. Second, we can discuss all the great moves we'd like to, but until members of NSBB are named general managers of the Chicago Cubs, those moves probably won't happen. Like it or not, Jim Hendry is the GM of the Cubs and he is the one who makes the moves for the team, so I weigh the options he gives himself. I've already told you what I'd ideally like to see happen, but it appears that's simply not going to happen. Is acquiring Davis a great move? No, but of the moves I've heard about, it's probably the best I've heard – especially if it means we keep Kosuke.
-
Those are our options if the GM says those are our options. He's the guy making the moves and we have to choose from the options he gives himself. I'm not talking about what I'd do in a perfect world, I'm talking about what I think this team realistically will do. If it were me as GM, I'd go after Dunn and not acquire any pitching at all this offseason. Keep Kosuke, add Dunn, call it an offseason basically. But I'm not the GM, so what I'd do doesn't matter. So, of the options the Cubs seem to be considering, trading Chirinos for Davis and keeping Kosuke is the best one I've heard yet.
-
If he stays crappy hitting as he hits his prime years, yes it's horrible. However, he's only 24 and has crushed minor league pitching. There's still reason to believe he can learn to hit in the majors. I don't support him over Dunn, but I don't see Dunn as an option. So, is Kosuke + Chris Davis better than Colvin + Nick Johnson? Or even Colvin + Carlos Pena (plus a multi year deal)? Those may be our options if I'm right that going cheaper at first allows us (in Hendry's plan) to keep Kosuke.
-
Ryan Howard maybe off the top of my head. Mark Reynolds perhaps as well. I can't find BB/K numbers on either of them, but their raw walk and K numbers in the minors were bad. He may not develop, but he's too young to completely give up on and if he doesn't develop, then we gave up a backup catcher for him.
-
As good as Rivers is, my concern is that Gates puts up huge points because he's that good, not because Rivers simply wants to throw to the TE position. Heap is the better player than McMichael, I think.
-
I'm serious when I say I think it means we don't have money to spend on a 1st baseman because we're focusing on the bullpen and an innings eater. With the report out that Hendry is "less inclined" to trade Fukudome, adding Davis at no cost might make it more likely we keep Kosuke – and that's a very good thing.
-
He was the #65 prospect entering the 2008 year. For what it's worth, he's been very good in the minors and had a horrid BABIP (.275) in the majors last year, with a strong LD% (22.2). It's a pretty limited sample size, obviously, but it's something to consider. I'm with TT on this one. If all we're giving up is Castillo or Chirinos, with Soto already here, I don't see a good reason not to do this. I don't see going after Davis as a hindrance to getting Dunn, because if Hendry wants Dunn, he'll go after him either way. The more likely situation is that we'd get Davis instead of Nick Johnson or Carlos Pena, and, while I wouldn't hate either of them, I think I'd prefer Davis due to cost and upside.
-
Hoffpauir is a Ham Fighter
dew1679666265 replied to davell's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
They sell ham. Or more specifically, they pack ham before it's sold. I'm sure the ham doesn't go into the packing without a fight. Thus . . . Ham Fighters. -
Really happy with the first part. Not as happy about the second part.
-
Will McMichael get targeted like Gates does?
-
The thinking would be that Soto would be likely to decline in the next 2-4 years, while Upton is only getting better over that timespan. However, it's too difficult to find even a capable offensive catcher – much less a stud like Soto – to trade him for a right fielder – even a potential stud like Upton.
-
Yeah, he could have a ton of value to a team like Arizona. Would Wells/B Jackson come close to matching the Marlins' theorized Nolasco/Morrison? Morrison has more value than Jackson, I'm guessing, but Wells should be more valuable than Nolasco since he's younger and will be cheaper longer.
-
Wait till Saturday, then make a decision. If he's not practicing, then it's a gamble. I have Gates too, but lucky enough to have Whitten as backup (well not last week) Yeah, guess I'll have to do that. I'd love to know earlier, but at least I have a capable backup in Heap.
-
I am convinced. And I believe Gates is healthy now – or at least mostly. I take that back, he didn't practice today and sounds pretty iffy for Monday. I may take the chance anyway, but I'd much rather start Heap than San Diego's backup TE.
-
If they're convinced they need a starter, I actually wish they had gotten Westbrook. He's the best of the names thrown around. I wouldn't mind if they didn't get a starter at all, though.
-
True, and that's the main reason I asked the question. I'm leaning heavily toward Gates (in fact, I may just cut Heap since I just picked him up to fill in for Gates' bye week), but Heap against a bad team is tempting since he's finally healthy.
-
I'd include Wells, Soto, Marmol and Marshall in that as well.
-
I like the Dunn/Westbrook portion of that. Not the rest, though.
-
Get this started early: Non-PPR: Todd Heap @ Carolina Antonio Gates v Denver Gates has significantly more points this year (160 to 93) but it's awful tempting to start anybody against Carolina. Am I right to start the better player, or is there enough difference in the matchup to start Heap?
-
Vince will start Sunday – that's a very good thing considering he's apparently mostly over his ankle injury. Hopefully we'll be able to get Moss more involved this week, though as long as teams keep double covering him over the top it'll just open up stuff underneath to Gage, CJ and Scaife. We really need a win Sunday after dropping our last two. We've gone from sitting pretty in the AFC race to fighting for a playoff spot.
-
And where did they do gameday? Columbus.
-
I haven't seen a rash of bad PI calls on deep passes either. And if the calls are that bad and that frequent, then shouldn't we make the refs better rather than change the rule to accommodate poor reffing?
-
Of course if the DB thinks he's in good position to make a play, he won't interfere. But if a defender is not in position to play the ball, but is in position to interfere, then it'll be a much more attractive option for him to simply interfere with a receiver on a well thrown ball for a 15-yard penalty rather than allow him to catch it for a, say, 40 yard gain.
-
He probably can't differentiate between a perfectly thrown ball and a non-perfectly thrown ball, but a professional DB is going to have a pretty good idea whether or not he has a shot at defending a pass or not.
-
If the pass is more than 15 yards, then yes it is worth it to throw a receiver to the ground on a perfectly thrown ball. If a defender thinks he can make a play on the ball then he's going to make the play, I agree, but changing this rule will increase the times that defenders interfere intentionally when they know they have no shot at the ball. So instead of pushing for the scaling back on the preference for offense (which I agree exists and should be toned down), we should change a perfectly fine defensive rule that won't make the play on the field better, but instead will reward poor defense more often than not? Let's fix the stuff that's broken, not the stuff that works fine.