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
    I can think of worse things than to be stuck with Matt Garza. And if he is out for any period of time, I'm even more glad Theo held out for Zach Lee, because there's a good chance we get him or someone of that quality (i.e. Teheran from Atlanta) for Dempster.
  2. dew1679666265
    Rizzo was also a much more developed player than Vitters. He was rushed, but it was feasible that he could handle ML pitching. I like Vitters a lot, but I don't think there's an argument to be made that he's possibly ML-ready right now as there was with Rizzo. By calling him up in September, you give him the opportunity to see what he needs to work on over the offseason and then hopefully he's ready to compete for a job in 2013.
  3. dew1679666265
    Not sure how serious you were being, but I wouldn't compare the Hendry regime's evaluation abilities to the current one. Hendry was decent at it (at times), these guys are really good at it.
  4. dew1679666265
    Yeah, I'm trying to figure out why he feels the years left are a negative. If we pay 95+% of his contract, the years might actually be a bonus for the acquiring team since they'd have a super cheap bat for 2 years instead of 1. I can't imagine how prospect-cost isn't the factor holding up a Soriano trade.
  5. dew1679666265
    I'm not sure how you're coming to your conclusion. I agree with your reasoning that teams are probably balking at giving up prospects of any value for Soriano. But I don't see how that has anything to do with 2 years being left on his deal. He has $46 million left on his deal, so let's say the Cubs pay $44 million of that. That leaves the acquiring team on the hook for $1 million each year over those two years. I don't care which team ends up getting him, $1 million per year is a minimal commitment and no team would hesitate to cut him if he doesn't perform. Do you think a team would feel forced to keep him instead of cutting him because they're paying him $1 million a year?
  6. dew1679666265
    Yeah, I have to believe the holdup is that teams don't want to give prospects of any significance for him even if we pay most of the contract. If they're balking at taking on a contract that they could cut without a second thought and without any sort of hindrance to their overall payroll, that's just dumb.
  7. dew1679666265
    That's a good question. I mainly just plugged a number in there that got us into the range of when he was actually a plus UZR/150 guy. I probably wouldn't argue with you if you said he never was great defensively.
  8. dew1679666265
    I doubt it's being unaware of his performance, I think it's not buying it. Everything we've heard about Soriano the past 2-3 years has been that his contract is one of the worst in baseball (maybe the worst), he's old, he doesn't hustle defensively, and he's awful offensively. Not all of that was untrue (the hustling part wasn't, but the rest probably was), but he's shown considerable improvements in his game this year. However, we've seen time and again that many GMs rely more on reputation than on actual production to determine their moves. If they didn't, then Neifi Perez and Ryan Theriot would barely have ever hit at the top of the order and guys like Jose Macias, Koyie Hill, and others would not have had major league jobs for long. Reputations mean a ton in baseball and Soriano's rep isn't good for various reasons. I think that may be playing a big part in us not getting much interest in him.
  9. dew1679666265
    2011: .244/.289/.469/.758; 1.3 WAR; very poor defender 2012: .275/.330/.498/.828; 2.5 WAR; considered to be much improved defensively (Len called him the most improved player defensively in the majors over the weekend) He's been better in just about every aspect of the game this season. No, he's probably not going to get better from here, but those are still very solid numbers for a contending team to acquire - especially if they're only paying $2 mil or so per year. And when I said a "different" player, I was referring to this improvement potentially being sustainable. He's dropped to a lighter bat this year and is showing a bit more patience this year than last year. If the heavy bat was what was holding him back last year offensively, then moving to a lighter bat may mean he's an .800+ OPS guy for a while - that's fairly valuable. That's certainly a different player than what his reputation has become.
  10. dew1679666265
    I think it's entirely feasible that GMs and other "baseball people" are still hung up on Soriano's reputation (albatross contract, old, bad) and simply won't accept that he's apparently a different player now. It's the same idea as people still assuming that Jeter is a great defensive SS now because he was 5 years ago, whether he really is now or not. When you get a reputation, either good or bad, it's really hard to get rid of it and I think you're probably right that that's having a negative impact on getting interest in Soriano.
  11. dew1679666265
    Yeah, while I don't want to pretend that I know it's still a problem for him, I don't really want to say it's definitely not a problem either. I don't think it's all that far-fetched to think he plays it safe and avoids the major media markets.
  12. dew1679666265
    There's also the possibility that the deals are on the table pending him proving again that he's healthy. They may want to see him make it through one more start healthy before they feel comfortable enough to do the deal.
  13. dew1679666265
    This is the optimal plan.
  14. dew1679666265
    There's no doubt we could get outbid if a few teams really want him, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't at least try to make a competitive offer. A Garza/Vitters+ package wouldn't beat the offers you mentioned, but would a team like the Pirates offer Taillon and Cole for a moderately expensive player with an injury concern? Would the Red Sox start with one of their best players when they really need pitching? If they do, then yeah we don't stand much of a chance. But if the shoulder issue and the fact that he's not super cheap (though he is cheap relative to his ability) keeps teams from going all-in for him, then I think a Garza/Vitters+ package could keep us competitive and might be enough.
  15. dew1679666265
    I'm 90% sure the Reed re-signing was the first move made during the offseason and was done very early on. DeJesus, Stewart, Mather, and the Marshall trade all came before Johnson's signing, or at least simultaneous to the agreement. Should've known I was wrong since I was so sure of myself.
  16. dew1679666265
    I think Kyle was the only one trumpeting Sappelt as a potential starter in the majors. If you view Sappelt's upside as a 4th OF, then it would have made perfect sense to just put him in that role now instead of spending the money on Reed. As noted, though, the Reed signing was completed before the Marshall trade.
  17. dew1679666265
    I'm 90% sure the Reed re-signing was the first move made during the offseason and was done very early on.
  18. dew1679666265
    It's definitely a concern, but I'd trust the Theo regime's evaluation of his health. If they feel strongly enough in his ability to stay healthy to make the deal it would take, I'd trust them.
  19. dew1679666265
    I wouldn't be surprised if they have interest in Garza, but that doesn't mean they'll be willing to give Wil Meyers for him. As you said, they're loaded with young hitters and could probably (minor league gurus correct me if I'm wrong) easily put together a suitable deal for Garza without including Meyers.
  20. dew1679666265
    Like SSR said, they can ask all they want but there's no chance they get a Castro talent for Upton. There's very, very few talents like Castro anyway (Harper and Trout and that's about it) and Castro is more valuable than Upton anyway (cheaper, more team control, no injury concerns). If they demand Castro, I'm asking for Upton and probably at least one of their elite pitching prospects (Bauer/Skaggs/etc).
  21. dew1679666265
    They probably could, but I think a Garza/Vitters combo might at least keep us competitive with most teams.
  22. dew1679666265
    That's where their opinion of Vitters comes in. If they feel like he's a long way away, we probably don't have a chance. But if they think he can be in the majors by the start of 2013 and stick, then him still being a prospect may not be a negative since they'd also be getting an established TOR pitcher with 1.5 years of team control left.
  23. dew1679666265
    Given what RammyFanny just posted, I tend to think our chances of acquiring Upton would depend heavily on their view of Vitters. We don't have a SS anywhere close (unless you count Lake as one and Vitters is a better prospect anyway) and obviously don't have a TOR type pitcher in the system. Thus, the deal would have to be build around Vitters. There would obviously be much more than just Vitters as the centerpiece, but if they're looking specifically for those three things, I think they'd have to really like Vitters. On the other hand, any chance they'd have any interest in some variation of a Garza for Upton deal? There would have to be more parts included on both sides (much more by the Cubs I'd guess), but maybe something built around Garza and Vitters from the Cubs for Upton and something from the Diamondbacks? Random idea and might be a bad one, but it gives them a TOR pitcher and a near-MLB ready third baseman.
  24. dew1679666265
    I might lose some love for him if I listened to him all the time.
  25. dew1679666265
    that is interesting. It is, I had no idea... very interesting. Vin Scully is awesome. I love Scully. Generally I don't think announcers do well at all as the lone voice in the booth, but I think Scully does a good job of it.
×
×
  • Create New...