Jump to content
North Side Baseball

squally1313

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,304

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

 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 squally1313

  1. squally1313
    Because he’s saying anyone who threw 28 games was 1st, anyone who threw 27 games was 2nd, etc. Which isn’t correct. 4 guys threw 28 games, 6 guys threw 27, 7 guys threw 26, 12 guys threw 25
  2. squally1313
    So are we done with the Kevin Alcantara experiment? I’d like to open up this spot to give the kids some opportunities to give us a spark here.
  3. squally1313
    A 3 fWAR third baseman with three years of team control? Yes, he has value. I’m open to trading him, by the way. But ‘if he has any value whatsoever’ is very over the top.
  4. squally1313
    Small point: calling it tied for 2nd and tied for 4th is disingenuous because you’re leaving out how many other pitchers also did the same thing. also, at the risk of sounding callous, leiter was a 32 year old lightning in a bottle guy who you ride until he loses the one pitch he has. And he was also fine this year, so whatever wrongs for this year you’re trying to pin on Ross don’t apply here.
  5. squally1313
    Also I know his nickname is actually the Jaguar but my old brain turned it into Panther, and then very quickly Sex Panther in the Paul Rudd from Anchorman. Therefore....welcome to Chicago, Sex Panther!
  6. squally1313
    Laughing at the idea of Mastrobuoni reporting for duty at the Arizona Complex League in late September.
  7. squally1313
    The 14 innings that Alzolay and Merryweather both threw in August puts them tied for 23rd in baseball for that month. Now, obviously there are some Rays-type shenanigans in there. But one pitcher threw 15 games, 12 pitchers threw 14 games (including Alzolay), and 23 pitchers threw 13 games (including Merryweather). None of this screams some unique managing crime, especially for a team in the thick of a playoff race.
  8. squally1313
    Are there good metrics for a bullpen pitcher?
  9. squally1313
    Yeah, you can either 'failure model' your way through league minimum dudes and AAAA guys or you can pay guys $8-$12m a year and also 'failure model' through them but more expensively or you could spend $75m/year on your bullpen.
  10. squally1313
    Sure, I don't disagree with this. I think we use 'luck' as a high level term to describe non-sustainable events or pieces of events that have been largely proven to be non-sustainable. Wins are wins, however you got them, they are banked and credited to your team, and the Cubs haven't gotten enough of them one way or another. The simplest way I can describe it is if you declared tomorrow that the MLB season would go another 100 games starting Monday, you could make a strong argument that relying on pythag over W/L records YTD would be a better indicator of what your record would be for those 100 games. Obviously we're coming to a significant cut off point and rosters will churn and guys will grow 6 months older and pick up and lose skills and injuries and I think we're all aware of that. I think CubinNY would disagree with the statement that the job of an offensive player is to produce runs. He would say it's to win games, I think. Apologies if not. And, honestly, it's not an incorrect argument. But all of our individual statistic tracking (that drives 'player value') is based on a players ability to produce runs (or avoid outs). And vice versa for pitching and defense. And so a statistic that looks, at a macro level, of how many runs an offense were produced vs how many runs were allowed, with no regard to how those lined up in 9 inning chunks, is beneficial in predicting future performance.
  11. squally1313
    Yeah makes sense. I think part of my issue is that I'm less enamored with Castillo/Keller/Eovaldi than I am with the other names thrown out there who I think are better but also happen to be cheaper. Agreed that one of the big trade bats most likely adds a big salary, and Kelly isn't insignificant.
  12. squally1313
    Is this just an argument against the concept of luck, or I guess using the term 'luck'?
  13. squally1313
    I'm sure you have this broken out elsewhere so apologies, but is there a way to do that and also somewhat effectively allocate the $55m or so (before Cody) coming off the books? I generally agree with your statement, just...want to fill out the budget and keep the money out of Tom's pockets and haven't been able to square the two.
  14. squally1313
    Cody Bellinger has made more money than Dansby over the last two years, the decision was made to sign him twice, and he has been significantly less productive (8.8 fWAR to 6.4) since the beginning of last year. His defense and offensive metrics both took turns in the wrong direction from last year. He can be pretty easily replaced if not upgraded next year if not for this player option that we gave him, which would guarantee him all of $500k less than Swanson (and he can do it again a year from now!), vs the gaping hole at shortstop we would have if not for Swanson, who you could extremely pessimistically pencil in for 3 fWAR next year. And yet we've spent, roughly, 10x the amount of message board and column space bemoaning this consensus top 35ish player who plays a key position where we have no other options. Bizarre.
  15. squally1313
    Just to try and get ahead of this being a thing, Hoyer has been very aggressive is churning through relievers, has found a couple potentially reliable guys in Miller and Lopez for next year and has otherwise pretty quickly dumped them as soon as they proved they weren't effective, and ultimately like at least 6 of your 8 relievers should be 'cheap' and so these are totally harmless, potentially helpful moves.
  16. squally1313
    Not to sound snarky, but do you have a better explanation for that last sentence besides 'bad luck/randomness'? And to split hairs a little bit, the (rough) theory behind pythag is that hitters and pitchers can't really control ordering of events, clutch isn't actually a thing, etc. And so if you took the cumulative performances from everyone on the team last year and then had them spray out in a random order 10,000 times, the theory is that our average record would be better than what it currently is. No one is necessarily claiming that this is going to translate into next year, we have age regression, changes in roster, BABIP gods, etc. Just that the overall production of our offense and defense/pitching (measured in terms of runs scored for the offense and runs allowed for the defense/pitching) implies a higher level of talent than the record currently shows.
  17. squally1313
    I'm not outright dismissing your point here because it's becoming a bit of a pattern, but another way of looking at this is that individual hitters, by nature, are going to have good and bad stretches over the course of the year and for the last two years we've had all our hitters essentially get hot at once. I don't know how you gameplan in the offseason to fix that problem, there doesn't seem to be any way to correct it/predict it. I don't really buy into like, one player's success rubbing off on another's.....they're all individual players going through individual events. There's maybe some marginal benefit to the rest of your team putting up an 8 run lead and letting you face their center fielder on the mound, but that's minimal at best. So maybe it is a bit of unluckiness that gets reflected in the pythag numbers?
  18. squally1313
    Is he saying that in terms of production this year they are on 'equal footing'? Yes, that's what that statistic measures. Am I saying that I would take Swanson's rest of career production over Freeman's rest of career production? Also yes.
  19. squally1313
    The Rockies are 26 games out of a playoff spot. They are certainly not in a position to give up resources for a late 20s outfielder essentially making $60m over the next two years.
  20. squally1313
    Fair. Also agreed that Nico and Busch aren't likely targets for the Mariners and Jays. Think I'd rather pay the extra for one of the cost controlled starters in Seattle.
  21. squally1313
    This is in a Bellinger-opt out world, right? Castillo is 20, Vlad is low 20s, Lowe is another 10.
  22. squally1313
    Couple things on the above: What's the story on Lowe's options? Basically has team options for $10m the next two years per Cots. Was worth 2.9 fWAR last year, 2.2 this year. That seems like an easy decision to pick that up but I know the Rays operate a little differently. That roster above is significantly more offensive, but you're basically netting 1.7 fWAR on current year production with the Vlad/Busch (5.6 v 2.6) and Nico/Lowe swaps (3.5 v 2.2). Kelly is an upgrade but a separate conversation, as is Castillo Do we have enough cash for this? Castillo comes in at $22m, Vlad is at $19m this year and will get a raise, let's call those two $45m. Lowe with that player option is $10m, Kelly is probably around there as well. So there's $65m less Nico's $10m and we've picked up one starter and no bullpen help. Offensive is....4ish wins better, starters are marginally better (2.3 fWAR for Castillo this year), but you're basically capped out, needing to extend Vlad and down whatever prospects you need to throw in addition to Nico and Busch.
  23. squally1313
    Yeah the easier way to say it is that Bellinger is the default starter if any of Happ, PCA, new elite bat, Suzuki, or Busch went down with an injury. Having said that, if you told him that was his role going forward, he might rethink his option decision. But if he's going to be here, might as well lean on his versatility.
  24. squally1313
    In a hypothetical world where everyone has perfect health (which would be worst case scenario for Cody and his playing time), you could still give him 15 starts in left, 15 starts in center, 15 starts in right, 15 starts to give Busch a day off, 15 starts to give Nico a day off (Busch at second), 15 starts at DH. That's 90 starts, can make it 120 by bumping those all up to 20. Nico moving to short to give Dansby time off (and Busch to second, Bellinger to first) is another option. Of course, this is a world where guys like Caissie, Shaw, etc don't exist. But those guys become that much more tradable with a Bellinger opt in and a big offensive signing.
  25. squally1313
    Yeah makes sense, I just think that, unfortunately, 'integrate' means writing their name in ink in the lineup for three months. I'm less excited about a Brandon Lowe situation, especially on a competing team, because then there's added pressure for Shaw and there's added pressure for Counsell to lean on the reliable 2 fWAR dude. Injuries happen, that's what got PCA his shot. But I think I'm more willing to work around a potential Matt Shaw sized black hole at the bottom of the order for a couple months, especially in a world where Nico is traded for a significant upgrade and he's not following a .440 OPS catcher. That said, this was probably an unnecessary devil's advocate on my part because ultimately just give me Nico Hoerner and his 3-4 wins for the next two years.
×
×
  • Create New...