Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Bluescale

Verified Member
  • Posts

    480
  • 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 Bluescale

  1. Didn't Gary Carter and Mazeroski play defense? A defensive 1B with little power will never make the HOF. Unfortunately, certain positions (2B, SS, etc.) are considered defensive positions whereas other positions (1B, OF, etc.) are not only considered offensive positions, but offensive with power positions. Unless you are someone like Tony Gwynn with 3000+ hits, you need to show some muscle. So if 3,000 hits is the absolute mandate for automatic introduction then why is Mazeroski of 2,016 hits, a good 300 its fewer then Grace, and Mark played 1 few yr then Maz? Or Gary Carter of 2092 hits same reason with Maz? So what I am saying is Mark Grace was as great of a defensive 1B, as Maz was as a 2B, and Gary Carter as a C, and Grace was a significantly better offensive player then both, and yet Maz/Carter are considered HOFers, and yet Grace isn't considered a HOF? My guess is both Maz and Carter and Joe Morgan............you fill in the blank. Because position makes a difference. And no, I don't think Maz should be in the HOF either...
  2. I think this is why I'm uncomfortable with siging Floyd. Murton doesn't need a platoon partner. Jones needs a right handed platoon partner. That's what our target should be. If we trade Jones for a right handed hitter with severe splits, Jones would be a good signing. jynx. pinch poke your owe me a coke. Next time you're in the Eugene/Springfield area, let me know. I'll hook you up! :)
  3. I think this is why I'm uncomfortable with siging Floyd. Murton doesn't need a platoon partner. Jones needs a right handed platoon partner. That's what our target should be. If we trade Jones for a right handed hitter with severe splits, Jones would be a good signing.
  4. Let me start this off by saying that I like Floyd statistically, and I fell he could be a very solid signing for Hendry. That said, Floyd has played 150 games in 2 season. He's been in 140 two other seasons. Counting on Floyd to put up numers is like counting on Wood or Prior. If his contract is at lest 50% incentives, the signing is decent.
  5. I work closely with a number of people who have political views significantly different than mine. That doesn't preclude their right to have the job. You shouldn't discriminate in baseball any more than in any other job.
  6. Even 6M is more than you pay a part time player. Even in this silly market looking at contacts for guys like Blanco gives you an idea of what a backup makes.
  7. Good lord! What in the world has Floyd done recently to earn that sort of a raise? I think I'm going to try missing work 40% of the time next year and then demand a 26% raise. If my boss has a problem with that, I'll tell her to take it up with Cliff Floyd.
  8. This would be a classic buy low scenario based on last season's regression. I don't see the Tribe doing it or Hendry being too interested.
  9. It's the Yankee theory of GM'ing. The more money you have at your disposal, the smarter you become. This year, Hendry's got the cash to drop. But we've already seen when he doesn't he falls flat on his face. Billy Beane he is not (or substitute other GM who has been successful on a limited budget). Say what you will about the Yankees, but I think Cashman is one of the smartest GMs in baseball. Sure he overpays, but he does so in the context of what he has to spend. I have never seen him spend so much on marginal players that he couldn't afford someone who actually makes a difference. And yes...the Yankees do have a limited budget - the limit is just high.
  10. I don't know if I'd call Hendry dumb - at least in relation to other GMs. In baseball terms, I'd put him at a 100 IQ. Nothing special, nothing too horrifying.
  11. So what happens at the end of year 5, when the rolling budget has resulted in a $220M payroll? On average the team is getting $120M a year in your system. To keep things realistic, the GM would have to sitll operate right around that amount, or it would force a rebuild every 5 years. That might makes sense if you're a small or mid-market team, but not if you've got a top 5 payroll.
  12. 1B: .266/.337/.437/.774 SS: .246/.275/.324/.598 LF: .280/.346/.428/.774 Looking at the SS numbers makes me want to go into mourning...
  13. I'm sure it was posted and reported elsewhere and I just missed it, but I didn't realize that the new contract gives Aramis an opt-out after the 4th year. Interesting...
  14. So does that mean Aramis does count against our type A/B free agent alottment?
  15. I honestly don't think anyone knows. It's all speculation right now. Just a wild guess, but I have a feeling Jim Hendry and Jason Schmidt know. :wink:
  16. How about: 1) Aramis eats himself off third base, but we can't move him to 1B because Derrek is already there 2) The pitching doesn't come through 3) We don't win the WS even though Soriano breaks through to a 1.00+ level of OPS What I was really saying is if we win the WS it is a good signing if not it is going to be a bad signing. I really think it boils down to that. The money is too much for the talent. The only justification is we win the World Series. If we win the World Series, it won't be because we signed Soriano. He's not a good enough player to take a 66 win team and turn them into WS champions. He might contribute, though, and I guess that's what you're saying. To be fair there isn't ONE PLAYER IN BASEBALL that can help win a World Series by himself---and that includes Albert Pujols. That was more or less my point, even if I didn't word it well. Let's put it this way. Soriano could play well below the value of his contract all 8 years, yet the Cubs could win the world series multiple times. Or, Soriano could averge a .900 OPS for 8 years and the Cubs could stink the entire time. Whether or not the Cubs win the WS won't determine whether the contract is good or bad.
  17. How about: 1) Aramis eats himself off third base, but we can't move him to 1B because Derrek is already there 2) The pitching doesn't come through 3) We don't win the WS even though Soriano breaks through to a 1.00+ level of OPS What I was really saying is if we win the WS it is a good signing if not it is going to be a bad signing. I really think it boils down to that. The money is too much for the talent. The only justification is we win the World Series. If we win the World Series, it won't be because we signed Soriano. He's not a good enough player to take a 66 win team and turn them into WS champions. He might contribute, though, and I guess that's what you're saying.
  18. Well, we can put this thread to rest...
  19. In my mind, Alou epitomized the bad attitude we saw from Baker's teams. Selfish playing, blaming everyone else, and taking aggression out on the media. The Cubs don't need the back in the form of a 40 year old glorified DH.
  20. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that Hendry is tired of Barrett and his hot head antics these past two seasons. If he's decided he's done with Barrett, you know Jimbo will unload him for a package of saltines. That said, so far there hasn't been a serious smear campaign, so that's a good sign.
  21. What about Murton and Hill at the center of a deal to get Manny? I would be all for it as long as we somehow solidify our starting pitching. If we put Manny and Soriano on our roster, I'm not sure we can afford to solidfy our staff. I guess we could hope and pray Prior and Wood all of a sudden find the 2003 magic...
  22. What about Murton and Hill at the center of a deal to get Manny?
  23. I have read that the Sox may only want prospects for Manny. They want to dump his salary, not get equal value. I suspect Izturis and a combo of our top young pitchers could get it done. Perhaps if one of those pitchers is Hill.
  24. I don't have a problem including Dempster in a deal. Would it really be that hard to replace him as closer? We got Dempster off the trash heap and made him a closer. Not all that hard to do something similar again. Certainly if it means acquiring an innings-eating SP----I'd trade him. Wood.
×
×
  • Create New...