Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Transmogrified Tiger

Community Moderator
  • Posts

    38,765
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

 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

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Transmogrified Tiger

  1. I am not a swing doctor, but my understanding is Heyward's primary issue is timing. There is some concern about his old wrist injury hurting him against velocity, but everyone does worse against velocity and he hasn't been feasting on junkballers. That means that whatever gets him on time is good, which could but doesn't have to involve his swing as a whole changing.
  2. Over Miller and Kellogg, absolutely. Robinson is actually kind of interesting though. Better frame than Rucker to handle a starter's workload. Much better breaking ball. Induces a lot of groundballs, and more than Rucker. Maybe they want to groom Rucker in a swingman type role right now, as they perceive that to be his most valuable spot in the bigs (assuming he makes it). I could see it. Robinson is older than Rucker(one of the most common issues folks have with him) and is materially worse at getting K's while no better at avoiding baserunners. If anything Robinson at his advanced age and lack of missed bats should be rushed to the pen to see if he sees an uptick in stuff.
  3. how in the wide wide world of sports is Rucker not clearly first in line for rotation innings among him, Duncan Robinson, Kyle Miller, and Ryan Kellogg I mean as resident Rucker superfan I could probably throw Clifton in that group too, but come on, Duncan Robinson?
  4. Tough to make that argument when they dropped 33 million AAV to fill out the rotation and 19 million on 3 relievers plus another 5 million for a rehabbing Smyly. Could they have gone higher and gotten a different reliever? Probably, although those appreciably higher than Cishek might have wanted the closer role. Diminishing returns are a very real thing and it's really hard for me to say that dollars kept the Cubs from being any better than they are(which is one of the 2-3 best teams in MLB on paper).
  5. - Montgomery makes more starts than 2 of the current rotation due to injury - Rizzo, Bryant, Contreras, and Schwarber all post wOBAs north of .370 - Edwards gets used in Andrew Miller like fashion down the stretch as the team's best reliever, Duensing is off the roster by August
  6. edit: nevermind it was already linked in this thread viewtopic.php?p=243166#p243166
  7. I can see that, in fairness you can really do this with any number of teams because pitching is so fickle. I wrote this elsewhere about a month ago and it still applies.
  8. I really can’t see that, their division is so bad and their offense is good enough and they at least have depth for pitching/pieces left to trade for it (if/when regression hits) that I just can’t see them missing the playoffs. It might only take 85-88 wins to win that division and even if they hit their low end upper projections of low 90s wins they will win that division going away. I could easily see the regression hit and then just being an okay team but still think they have a solid margin of error over the division even with their pitcher regression baked in. Yeah I don't think they'll lose the division, although LA and Seattle are decent enough that they could get breaks going their way a la Arizona/Colorado last year. I'm just really bearish on that rotation, I look at those depth chart projections and I'd take the under on every one of their SP. Toss in some hangover from the bats(or just BABIP regression in the case of Gonzalez/Correa/Altuve) and I think they'll be playing meaningful September games. It's not the most likely outcome, but you can see a world where Verlander tanks, Cole gets hurt, and Keuchel's ERA catches up to his FIP without too much trouble, and all of a sudden you're looking at a rotation full of league average types.
  9. I'm not gutsy enough to pick them to miss the playoffs, and in the medium term they're still very good, but the Astros hangover effect and pitching regression is gonna lead to a lot of hot takes.
  10. That's what opt-outs are for. Sign a 10/400 deal and have an opt out after a few years in case salaries rise dramatically.
  11. Correa will hit free agency a year older, and quite frankly, he doesn't have the ceiling that Harper does. It's much more likely that by free agency that Correa is basically a poor-man's Josh Donaldson. Plenty good, but not a an MVP caliber talent.
  12. I sincerely hope that Michael Porter Jr. is only 65% healthy like he's said because he looks terrible. Slow moving, shot is off, and worst of all his decision making is horrible.
  13. Contreras just murdered a ball to LF off Reynaldo Lopez
  14. Really? Anthony Bass is the guy they take? I think I'd prefer Eddie Butler for that last spot. It was the Athletic so I won't post it all here but the long and short of it is that Butler sucks despite his stuff because of his lack of deception or command, and Bass might be a guy who just needs to change his pitch mix (more sliders and more high fastballs) to be successful. The other thing that I found noteworthy from that column was the point that they had success doing this with Duensing last year. I don't have a particular fondness for Bass and didn't think Grimm was a big problem, but with Grimm gone and considering that I'm a pretty big Butler skeptic, I'm not opposed to giving the 8th bullpen spot to someone else the front office seems to like. I did kinda like the idea of Butler helping to give Montgomery's role more definition though.
  15. Just to put some numbers to it, NL Central teams averaged 26 extra innings(innings, not games) last year, with 7 of those innings coming in the 12th or later. Both of those numbers are rounded up. It's simply not a 'problem' worth changing the dynamics of the game to fix.
  16. Seattle has a 1-0 advantage heading into the away leg and are probably playing the worst team of the 3, so they have a decent shot. Although for reasons that aren't quite known, Lodeiro didn't travel with the team.
  17. Darvish's hesitation is a balk. The odds of it being called are very low, but he's not moving anything when he stops his leg.
  18. Unless Grimm's stuff looks degraded I'd need to see a lot more gap between his performance and Butler's before I start to prefer Butler. It doesn't look like anyone else is particularly covering themselves in glory to take that spot either. I don't think they really care about the less than 2 mil difference of keeping Grimm, not as a primary motivation at least.
  19. [tweet] [/tweet] [tweet] [/tweet] If we're going full on nostalgia of Pirates-lunacy, my favorite is this game(a Jake start too!): https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN201608290.shtml The game thread is entertaining to revisit as well: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=908&start=375
  20. 2-0 in the world series! Personally swatting down whatever that little thing was that the Pirates had going on for a couple of years. This will be the enduring Arrieta memory for me. First playoff appearance of the Theo era, franchise on a 9 game playoff losing streak, wild card winner-take-all game on the road. He crushed their souls so badly they threw at him just to try and get him off his rhythm. Arrieta responded by stealing second base, and then finishing the last 3 innings of the complete game shutout.
  21. FWIW, ZiPS has them on par or maybe even better than the Brewers, although admittedly even with my doubts, ZiPS undersells Milwaukee.
  22. You're right, when I saw that in double checking I thought Davis was under 50 million. The 50 million distinction is if you're a revenue sharing recipient, so Arrieta would be comp round B regardless. Dumb question but...where does round B fall then? That's the round Bobson is quoting above. If I'm reading the current draft order right(clearly not a guarantee!) the Cubs should have back to back picks, #76 and #77. Those will come after their regularly scheduled 1st round(#24) and 2nd round(#63) picks. The later picks referenced might shift slightly depending on the remaining FA like Cobb(and maybe Lynn).
  23. The amount determines the round. If it's over 50 million it's the comp round between round 1 and 2, less than that it's the comp round between rounds 2 and 3. It's the approximate difference in getting pick 33 or 73. Aren’t they receiving the 75th pick (or around that) for Davis, who signed for over $50 million? You're right, when I saw that in double checking I thought Davis was under 50 million. The 50 million distinction is if you're a revenue sharing recipient, so Arrieta would be comp round B regardless.
×
×
  • Create New...