Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Transmogrified Tiger

Community Moderator
  • Posts

    38,761
  • 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

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Transmogrified Tiger

  1. That is a fun quote, although the FA options are a bit less fun and I wonder if they'd be willing to pay the trade cost for a real good reliever, a la Doolittle.
  2. I just made it up, so I hope not
  3. Szczur/La Stella gonna have a Jersey thunderdome for that 4th bench spot
  4. To be honest I'll be outright furious if a healthy Edwards misses the opening day roster.
  5. But Duensing is nothing to hang your hat on and that 2nd LHP is a big question. So I see 5 solid spots, three of them being injury concerns that may need the occasional preventive 10 day DL stint, plus these guys are not afraid of an 8 man pen. Gonzales mentioned LHP specifically, which does make a lot of sense if they really are going to give Montgomery first crack at the 5 spot and get an optionable 6th starter. My point otherwise was less 'the pen is too good' and more that you don't really have the flexibility to truly realize the depth you're adding. Like if Duensing or Grimm could be optioned, that'd make a lot more sense because you can hold on to the depth if everyone is healthy to start the year. As it stands now, if you add anything besides a LHP and/or Montgomery gets bumped from the rotation, you're looking at cutting someone by opening day.
  6. At least we still have Strop's maniacal laughter.
  7. [tweet] [/tweet] Davis, Rondon, Strop, Edwards, Grimm, Duensing, and 2nd LHP(Zastryzny/Montgomery) makes a full pen. Edwards and Zastryzny are the only optionable players. Have a hard time seeing too much sense in adding a significant bullpen piece unless it's really a SP in disguise, or they do something more decisive like trade Grimm or Rondon.
  8. It's not so much that they gave Desmond that much money(although ZiPS is probably more optimistic than it should be), it's that you used that money(and a very valuable draft pick) for very little reason. The Rockies have too many OF already and their infield is set aside from 1B. So if the plan is to play Desmond at 1B, then that contract is an incredibly bad idea, as the Rockies especially could get any number of players to match that production for less. I mean, think about how close that money is to getting you say, Jansen. That would be a bold move that could really help them make the leap, all Desmond is going to do is provide enough depth so they don't lose 100 games if things go poorly without moving the needle in a positive direction.
  9. Forfeit the #11 pick too, right? Correct.
  10. It is apparently a 5/70 deal. wyd rockies
  11. Seems weird coming from you as you seem as willing as anyone to look at arbitrary endpoints/trends on guys and Gomez really only had a really bad 85 games in Houston this year, but otherwise was great in 2013, great in 2014, very good in 2015, and very good to great in his stint with the Rangers in 2016. 97 wRC+ in 2015, 83 in 2016, and his defense has also seen a precipitous decline to the point where it's fair to question whether he can play CF anymore. He's a late bloomer who always relied on extreme physical gifts to be successful, and since those gifts are starting to wane you could see things fall apart pretty quickly. Also he is a literal crazy person and that's not going to get better as he starts declining. I see his Texas performance as a death rattle more than a resurgence.
  12. Also Gomez is bad and crazy
  13. I didn't verify, but I saw a tweet yesterday that said their pool is 4.75 million and that they can't sign anyone over 300k.
  14. More than one google result tells me it's this: While I'm pleasantly surprised, that seems pretty low key for a closer. His nickname is the cyborg, maybe you can relate to him that way.
  15. More than one google result tells me it's this:
  16. That rule is going away, beginning next offseason. Will not apply to Davis. The QO will still exist, although the details are far less clear. Assuming the Cubs offer and Davis declines, the Cubs would get some type of pick compensation. The exact pick depends on the contract Davis signs and the Cubs standing re: the luxury tax. Maybe their spot in the revenue sharing pecking order too, it's all become a bit arcane. But what is clear is that the 'offer a QO, get a pick if they decline in sign elsewhere' mechanism has not gone away.
  17. I think there's some logic there, but to get to that point requires some pessimism about their current level of spending. 2016: 170 million payroll upped to 180 midseason 2017: By adding Davis and subtracting Soler, they're basically at 160 with a full roster only needing a SP to bump Zastryzny off and Montgomery to the bullpen. They also added 300k fans and won a world series 2018: 63 million in FA departures, including 2 SP, Strop, and a bunch of lesser parts(Jay, Duensing, Montero). Bryant and Russell hit arbitration. Otani maybe available but current news says no. 2019: Only Rondon leaves in FA, Schwarber, Baez, and Montgomery hit arbitration, Harper, Machado, maybe Otani available 2020: New TV Deal, Zobrist and Grimm FAs, Otani definitely available In other words, with the world series win and uptick in attendance, there should be some payroll growth that you can probably set aside to make sure the core's pre-FA increases are taken care of. That might get a little tricky in 2019 but that's also 3 years from now, who knows what the roster will look like. If you make that assumption, then you've got lots of cash and basically only 2 rotation spots to fill(and I guess CF if Almora fails), along with ensuring the bullpen is strong.
  18. This is really the most important thing. I don't particularly like Davis for Soler, but a lot of that is the number of potential SP moves I would like going way down. If they can do that without taking on too much risk or depleting the system, then it's fine.
  19. Unsure if Rosenthal is confirming or just parroting but we're in peak silly season so let's go [tweet] [/tweet]
  20. you can go sit in the corner then
×
×
  • Create New...