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
-
Next 3 picks: 28. Packers (Flames) 29. Ravens (WrigleyField22) 30. 49ers (Raisin) Again, if anybody isn't sure they'll be available to make the pick, shoot me a PM with your top 4 choices.
-
Next 3 picks: 27. Patriots (Splendid Splinter) 28. Packers (Flames) 29. Ravens (WrigleyField22) Again, if anybody isn't sure they'll be available to make the pick, shoot me a PM with your top 4 choices.
-
It's not really the dollars, it's the length. Votto's deal is much better if it ripped up his current deal, or if it was only 6-7 years on top of the next two years. Even if it was a higher AAV. Yeah, I liked it a lot better when I thought it began this season. I still think it's a reasonable price for a guy like Votto, but I do question whether it was a deal the Reds can afford. Basically, it'd be a great deal if a major market team like the Cubs signed him to it, but it's pretty questionable for a mid-market team like the Reds.
-
Next 3 picks: 26. Texans (sulley) 27. Patriots (Splendid Splinter) 28. Packers (Flames) Again, if anybody isn't sure they'll be available to make the pick, shoot me a PM with your top 4 choices.
-
Next 3 picks: 25. Broncos (gooney) 26. Texans (sulley) 27. Patriots (Splendid Splinter) Again, if anybody isn't sure they'll be available to make the pick, shoot me a PM with your top 4 choices.
-
Giving McCoy a much needed weapon on offense. I like it. sneaky and the Lions are on the clock now. Next 3 picks: 24. Steelers (Theo) 25. Broncos (gooney) 26. Texans (sulley) Again, if anybody isn't sure they'll be available to make the pick, shoot me a PM with your top 4 choices.
-
I just don't see how you can completely write off an abysmal K rate without even seemingly considering it. Porcello was good in the minors and average so far in the majors at a very young age, but I think it's a very relevant question to ask exactly how much better he can get when he can't strike anybody out - in the majors or minors. Then when you compare Turner to Porcello, you have Turner posting similar minor league numbers (higher ERA, better WHIP, similar BB rate) at a similar age (both were 19 at A ball), but Turner is able to strike guys out a pretty good clip. I agree that we need to be careful about favoring prospects simply because they're unproven, but Porcello has proven he can't strike guys out to this point and that's concerning for his outlook going forward. Doesn't mean he won't be good, but it very well may limit his potential.
-
Next 3 picks: 23. Lions (sneakypower) 24. Steelers (Theo) 25. Broncos (gooney) Again, if anybody isn't sure they'll be available to make the pick, shoot me a PM with your top 4 choices.
-
They usually make it work over there so it's a compliment. They need a DT over there and love upside or size speedy type guys. Chris Johnson, Kenny Britt, Akeem Ayers, Cortland Finnegan, Randy Starks, Michael Griffin, Jason Jones, Michael Roos....the guy he'll get compared to/be "replacing"...that team likes the freak ath-elte. They love size and definitely have a need inside for their type of D. If Brockers is any good hell be a stud there. Lots of superlatives due to mj. They have loved their super athletes over the years, so I get where you're coming from with Brockers being a Titans type pick. I'd disagree with calling Cortland a size/speed guy, though. He's kind of short and not fast enough to hang with the better receivers out there. He's more of a max effort guy - taken in the seventh round and excels because of really good technique and being extremely physical (sometimes dirty). That's the main reason I favored letting him go once his contract was up - he's fairly limited due to lack of ideal size and speed.
-
Has Porcello made that much of an impact so far? I'm not arguing that he's been bad by any means, but a 4.18 xFIP with that miserable K rate isn't great. The assumption would be that he would only improve on that xFIP as he gets into his prime (as you've noted, he's only 23), but is that a safe assumption? His K rate has never been very good (5.18 in his only full minor league season) and if he's simply incapable of striking guys out, how much upside does he have? As a contrast, Turner has had one full minor league season and his K/9 in that season was 7.13. He also had a 7.13 and 8.5 K/9 in a couple of partial seasons. He's been much better at striking guys out than Porcello was at the same ages and levels as Porcello.
-
Not sure if this is an endorsement of the pick or not. I guess it's a good thing that PCP and I are channeling the Titans since we're selecting for them.
-
Next 3 picks: 22. Browns (gorbs27) 23. Lions (sneakypower) 24. Steelers (Theo) Again, if anybody isn't sure they'll be available to make the pick, shoot me a PM with your top 4 choices.
-
Leverage if he posts another 7+ WAR season. I think they could have waited, though.
-
There are a ton of ways the Titans could go here. The DE position went a bit dry with Mercilus and Perry going off the board, but it's an option, as is DT, CB, C, and perhaps even LB. Konz is a nice interior lineman, but probably not a significantly better option than guys who will be there in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. I really, really like Janoris Jenkins, but character questions drop his stock a bit. Instead of those two, however, the Titans choose to strengthen the interior of the D-line with a raw talent who has a ton of upside as both a run stuffer and pass rusher. With the 20th pick in the draft, the Titans select Michael Brockers, DT, LSU. Great size, very athletic, strong run stuffer, and upside in rushing the passer. This gives the Titans the potential for a very strong D-line with Morgan, Wimbley, Brockers, and Casey/Klug across it. davell and the Bengals are now on the clock. I'll PM him.
-
ARod did get two decade long deals, and he's unquestionably elite. Jeter and Tulowitzki have also received 10 year deals. Helton and Griffey Jr. have gotten 9 year deals. Mauer, Teixeira, Manny, Kemp, Cabrera, Soriano, Hampton, and Rolen have signed 8 year deals. It's certainly not a rarity to see an elite player get 8+ years and it's becoming more common (3 guys have signed a 9-10 year deal this offseason) recently. Pujols signed for 10/254 and Prince signed for 9/214. Votto got 6 million more than Prince and one extra year while getting $29 million less than Pujols, who he'll be 2 years younger than when the contract begins. Whether Prince should have gotten that deal or not (he shouldn't have), the fact is he got it and it still sets the bar for future compensation. Votto got a better deal than Prince and less than Pujols and ARod. It may be more than the Reds could afford, but it's not excessive by market rates.
-
The Reds are in a tough spot here. If they retained Votto on a fairly reasonable contract relative to market value, it likely cripples them in the second half of his deal. If they let him walk, it becomes that much harder to contend at a high level in the short term. I think this was a pretty reasonable deal considering Votto's talent level and production, but I can certainly see the argument that the Reds were the wrong team to give out that contract. They better win over the next 5-8 years, that's for sure.
-
You're right, he's not Pujols but if he continues being a 7+ WAR player for the next couple of years, he exceeds Prince's 9/214 deal (23 AAV) and probably by a lot. My guess is bidding pushes him into the 25-27 range at 10 years and definitely on the northern end of that if a team gets desperate. Also, if he continues this 7 WAR pace, he becomes a much more marketable player as well. He'll never be Pujols, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't get overpaid - and very possibly significantly - on the open market.
-
Who got decade long deals other than Pujols, Prince, Braun, and Votto? Two of those players are clearly elite (Pujols and Braun), another has posted two elite seasons and has 2-4 years left of his prime (Votto), and Prince is not elite but he does have an elite skill (offensive production). I could be forgetting one or two, but with 4 decade long contracts given out and 3 of them having a really good case for being elite, I don't see the problem.
-
Mercilus went off the board to the Chargers.
-
Votto will be in his 30/31 season when this kicks in, and he's no Albert Pujols, in terms of performance or stature. I don't think he'd get anywhere near 10/300 on the open market. I think he'd get less than Pujols ultimately got, but Prince got 9/214 after being a massively lesser player and much more likely to decline quickly. Somewhere between $25-27 million AAV over 10 years wouldn't be outside reasonable expectations at all, I wouldn't think. And that's without a team getting desperate and putting too much stock into 4 elite years.
-
Then it's a bad deal outright, imo. That's 10 years at 20MM+ tacked on to the tail end of his prime. Votto's great, but not that great. Over the past two seasons, Votto has averaged a 7.1 fWAR. Pujols was right around an 8 WAR player. If Votto continues what he's done the past couple years, then he's one of the top 2-3 players in the game today and up there with some of the greatest players ever. If Votto and Pujols aren't worth this type of contract, then I really have no idea who is. And if nobody is ever worth this type of contract, then you're simply not going to have elite players.
-
That makes it less desirable, but still a pretty reasonable deal relatively speaking. Assuming it's a backloaded deal, it has the potential to really hurt Cincy down the line, but even the mid-markets at some point have to lock in their elite talent or they remain stuck in the mire of mediocrity.
-
I'm not arguing it's not a risk, it's a big risk for a team with the payroll of Cincy. It's still reasonable considering he'd have gotten far more in AAV and the same amount of years on the open market. It'd be a very easy argument that Votto isn't in the 99% of players. If the past two seasons are indicative of things to come, he's one of the best players in the game. This is something you have to do to keep a player like Votto (and, thus, compete at a high level consistently) and to keep the dollars as relatively low as they are is fairly reasonable. Like I said earlier, I have little doubt Votto could have hit FA and commanded a deal much closer to 10/300 than this was. Reasonable is relative to market value and that's what makes this reasonable, I think.
-
Depends on when the contract kicks in. If it's an extension added on to the end of the current deal, then it would take him through his age 40 season. If it begins in 2012, then it carries through his age 38 season (he'd turn 39 in September of the final contract year). If you want elite players, you have to make these kinds of deals. It's an incredible rarity that you see a 24 or 25 year old signing a 10 year deal (mainly because you don't have enough history to ensure that it's a smart signing). It's reasonable in that if they had gone out onto the FA market to sign Votto, he'd have easily gotten close to $30 million AAV.
-
I don't think I'd characterize any 10 year, 200MM+ deal with a full NTC as being reasonable, especially for a mid-market team. He'll turn 29 in September and has been worth 7.3 and 6.9 WAR the past two years. Relatively speaking, paying $22 million AAV for that production is reasonable.