Jump to content
North Side Baseball

squally1313

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,309

  • 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
    Sure why not. I like at least three TV shows, so should be some good options left for me.
  2. squally1313
    First Mad Men gif to pop up, couldn't be more perfect
  3. squally1313
    "Mercy" "What in the world" Will have those words bouncing around in my head for the rest of time.
  4. squally1313
    Another request for formalizing the distinction of having spent way too much of my life here.
  5. squally1313
    If anyone can figure out how to just show the threads/topics that were updated since the last time I visited, let me know. (Also checking to see if I have all the numbers at the end. Which, whatever, my name is incredibly dumb anyways.)
  6. squally1313
    Anyone figured out how to duplicate the old Active Topics? Don't really want to see the most recent individual posts in reverse chronological order. Also asking to see if I got the numbers issue at the end, which I assume I do. No rush on updating/fixing this, as my user name is dumb anyways.
  7. squally1313
    Yeah 2 and 7 might disqualify the bottom half of the league, maybe even two thirds, but they were never going to consider throwing this kind of money around anyways. The teams you are actually competing with are all going to be able to offer those things, and we're probably trailing most of them in the rest of your list.
  8. squally1313
    The obvious shirts guys will make a fun slogan referencing you on a t shirt We will try to limit the amount of people in the bleachers reusing their old Fukudome tshirts and bandanas to a reasonable number.
  9. squally1313
    Trout has 6,174 career PAs. Has three swinging strikes in 24 of them. Only modification is that they should move this to the all star break every four years, even if you have to slightly shorten the season. Do it now while the momentum is there and everyone wants to be involved in this.
  10. squally1313
    So horsefeathering cool. Anyways, can't wait for....Jameson Taillon!
  11. squally1313
    This whole approach is so self-fulfilling. Don't slightly overpay for good players unless you are rich and also in contention already. Probably won't be in contention because you don't have any of those good players. The idea that teams at or below the spending habits of the Cubs (15th, 10th, 6th, 2nd, 4th the last 5 years in opening day salary based on some sketchy website) shouldn't pay market value for the dude who hit 50 home runs last year is absurd. You're basically just hoping for some perfect storm of prospects arriving collectively at the same time and then hopefully having the right players available to supplement. I don’t mean to be a broken record but Schwarber is the very best example of the biggest problem not even being stinginess, but rather, inconsistency in hitting instruction and player development that left you unable to value him properly or feel comfortable committing to him after 2020. There was room for an extension at well under $20MM per year for him; they just didn’t ever get to the point where they (let alone he) could justify signing one. Outside of him turning into a GB hitter for 60 games in 2020 and getting overly punished BABIP-wise for it (.219), his career trajectory isn't all that strange. Not giving him $8m or whatever it was is pretty unforgiveable, especially when they turned around and signed Schwarber-lite for 75% of it later that offseason.
  12. squally1313
    Everything is relative. The Cubs don't have a lot of stars, or any for that matter now that Willson is gone. This year they have a lot of complementary players and a lot of hope for some breakout performances. I think they will be close to .500, maybe better if they get some breakouts and everyone stays relatively healthy. This whole approach is so self-fulfilling. Don't slightly overpay for good players unless you are rich and also in contention already. Probably won't be in contention because you don't have any of those good players. The idea that teams at or below the spending habits of the Cubs (15th, 10th, 6th, 2nd, 4th the last 5 years in opening day salary based on some sketchy website) shouldn't pay market value for the dude who hit 50 home runs last year is absurd. You're basically just hoping for some perfect storm of prospects arriving collectively at the same time and then hopefully having the right players available to supplement.
  13. squally1313
    $20m is absolutely what you should be paying a guy who is going to give you 2.5ish wins on the year (what he gave last year and is projected to give you this year). Aren't we basically in a $10m/win environment?
  14. squally1313
    Is this really the baseline now? We have all of two hitters projected to give us more than 3 WAR and one of them we had to pay $160m for. Go pay for dudes that can hit, bonus points if they're exceedingly easy to cheer for. Basically just be the 2022 Phillies (one hitter over 3 WAR, incidentally). Baseline of what? I'm just saying he's not worth sweating, even in hindsight. And, incidentally, the only reason Harper wasn't over 3 WAR last year was because he only played 99 games. And I'm saying it would have been much more enjoyable to have him on our team than to not have him on our team, even if he's never going to be some sort of cost efficiency star. Given that we're paying basically no one, we ended up with the most boring shortstop available, and next years FA class is Shohei and the Infinite Sadness, give me dudes who hit dongs. (I'm aware that this is a semi dumb take, but man I'm already tired of the Mancini/Hosmer/Rioses of the world. The whole 'why pay $15m for 2.5 WAR when you can pay $5m for 1.5 WAR. Who cares)
  15. squally1313
    I was specifically thinking of Bryant, Rizzo, Baez & Contreras. But essentially swapping Schwarber for Joc was indeed dumb. Meh. Schwarber was a career 113 OPS+ guy with no defensive value when the Cubs let him go. What the hell were they going to get for him? He has hit better the past two seasons, but still has yet to exceed 3 WAR in his career. Not sweating him or that decision whatsoever. The hindsight angst some people have over it is overblown. Hell, Joc was a better hitter last year. Is this really the baseline now? We have all of two hitters projected to give us more than 3 WAR and one of them we had to pay $160m for. Go pay for dudes that can hit, bonus points if they're exceedingly easy to cheer for. Basically just be the 2022 Phillies (one hitter over 3 WAR, incidentally).
  16. squally1313
    If I were in charge of the world and had no timing constraints to schedule games, I could maybe get creative and 1. Make the 8 third place teams play a knockout round to get down to 4 teams 2. Add those 4 teams into the group of 12 second place teams, and make them go through 2 knockout rounds to get down to 4 teams 3. Add those 4 teams to the group of 12 group winners and go pure knockout from there. But that's another week or so of time that you just aren't going to be able to fit in to the schedule. Honestly, I like the idea of just having a blind draw among the 12 third place teams. Let them know it's out of their control if they can't finish top 2.
  17. squally1313
    2026 World Cup going back to 12 four team groups, will need to iron out the details on the final 8 teams (out of the 12 3rd place teams) to make the bracket. A shockingly good decision from FIFA, but one that will come with it's own issues (now going to be a total of 104 games vs 64 in 2022, which means they are taking 9 days out of the warm-up/practice time period).
  18. squally1313
    The live experience is my biggest concern. TV broadcasts are going to be fine, and likely more palatable for most people. But when I have to travel over an hour both ways to get to a game, then find parking, walk/shuttle to the ballpark, etc, I don't want my actual game experience to be over in 2 hours. On the other hand, if games are wrapping up by 9:00, maybe that's more opportunities to take my school-aged kids to weeknight games... so consider me still undecided. We will just have to wait and see how it plays out when we get to playing regular season games. While I have definite gripes with the area around Wrigley (which now looks way more similar to Ballpark Village in St Louis, the area around Padres park, etc), I'm totally fine with cutting an hour out of sitting in the bleachers and giving myself more time before/after games to grab a drink, catch some other games on TV, go play catch with my kids, etc. It puts it right around the same timing for an NBA/NHL game, and for weekday games it's nice having a better sense of when you're going to get out there.
  19. squally1313
    He's the luckiest guy to ever manage in baseball. Last year he didn't want Willson because...checks notes...he might play too hard for his next contract. If I wanted to criticize Dusty, there's a lot of other places I'd start besides the year he won the World Series.
  20. squally1313
    Bellinger! Please god be a thing.
  21. squally1313
    I mean, it's kinda hard to take this argument seriously when you're looking at some of the proposed packages for the Bears pick. It's fine that you personally believe that, but it's pretty obvious that actual NFL teams place an enormous amount of importance on picking a QB at the top of the first round. That's true but doesn't go against what I said plus NFL teams are bad at it. All losing those firsts for an actual QB means to me is the Jets can block out the noise and avoid taking the next Sanchez, Darnold, Wilson, Trubisky, etc etc because conventional wisdom says they should/have to take a QB high And also avoid taking the next Allen, Burrow, Lawrence, Mahomes, Herbert, Matt Ryan, Tua, Stafford, etc!
  22. squally1313
    Even this isn’t so scary. Nearly half the playoff QBs were taken outside the first and half the SB starters. I don’t believe guys like Wilson, Cousins, Prescott, Jimmy G, and Hurts - all prolific college QBs - are NFL starters by coincidence, the league really is just kinda dumb and racist about QBs. The position’s largely demystified, I even take prospects like Jarrett Stidham, Kyle Lauletta, and Bailey Zappe seriously. The Jets have got in on that action already too: Mike White was probably the most productive QB in the org since (another non-~first) Fitzpatrick in 2015 Heck, I want Lamar Jackson *and* one of Aidan O’Connell, Tanner McKee, Max Duggan, or Clayton Tune this year I mean, it's kinda hard to take this argument seriously when you're looking at some of the proposed packages for the Bears pick. It's fine that you personally believe that, but it's pretty obvious that actual NFL teams place an enormous amount of importance on picking a QB at the top of the first round.
  23. squally1313
    This is absolute nonsense thinking from a fan perspective. The fan has nothing but upside in this scenario. If he doesn’t live up to the contract the owner eats it and you start looking for a qb again, something you’ve already been desperately doing for decades. 90% agreed, besides that the part of 'if he doesn't live up to the contract...and you start looking for a qb again', that search gets a lot harder when you don't have those (assumedly good) first round picks to pick a new qb.
  24. squally1313
    Given the amount they trusted him in CF last year and his 40 man spot, I would think that Velazquez has to be under consideration. Similarly, Mastrobuoni doesn't require a 40 man move. This might be more of a conceptual question, but do we look at decisions like 'playing Velazquez in center' last year a little different going into this year given the pretty clear lack of importance place on actually winning games last year? I treat the second half of last year (and really probably the whole year) as more of an audition for the younger guys than some sort of tacit approval of skill sets.
  25. squally1313
    Also, worst overall record can't drop below #3 in the lottery Unfortunately it's a two deep draft, at least in terms of franchise altering picks. But does also give them a slightly better shot at the second pick too.
×
×
  • Create New...