Jump to content
North Side Baseball

squally1313

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,349

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

 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 squally1313

  1. squally1313
    I'm selectively quoting because I wanted to highlight the actual problem I had with your post. I don't really care if you think or have an opinion that teams are colluding to drive the price down or if you think or have an opinion that Boyd's future health is less trustworthy than Flaherty's. That's totally, people have all sorts of opinions and ideas around here, good and bad. It's the definitive language you constantly use when you believe something, like it's an accepted fact, and then your tendency to get just incredibly pedantic in terms of facts, opinions, burdens of proof, etc etc when someone says something you don't agree with. Make your argument and support it with the underlying information and then respect other peoples' arguments when they're made in good faith (as the people here clearly are). Everything else is moving the goalposts at best.
  2. squally1313
  3. squally1313
    I find it hard to believe there's a team out there who would give up a cost controlled mid rotation starter and $12m (x 2 years) for Nico Hoerner instead of just....signing Alex Bregman themselves.
  4. squally1313
    Really more Paredes for me. I don't know if I put Shaw on a different level than like, Owen Caissie. 144 wRC in 35 games as a 22 year old vs 121 wRC in 127 games as a 21 year old. There's a gap there, position-wise, K rate wise, etc. But it's really just their respective fits on the roster/in the organization. Losing Caissie doesn't really hurt the 2025 Chicago Cubs, losing Shaw does to a pretty significant degree.
  5. squally1313
    Age 21 seasons: Cam Smith: 32 games (15 in single A, 12 in high A, 5 in AA), 134 PAs, 7 HRs, .313/.396/.609, 179 wRC Matt Shaw: 38 games (20 in high A, 15 in AA), 170 PAs, 8 HRs, .357/.400/.618, 170 wRC Seems pretty close to me!
  6. squally1313
    Would you guys consider Amaya as the main major league piece?
  7. squally1313
    Eh....they're the ones that need to cut payroll. The Cubs (and everyone else) know it. If the Yankees or whoever want to beat our offer, more power to them. Won't adversely affect us. See if they want to punt the year and then take King, or go sign Bregman, or go sign Robertson and Moncada and a 1B. It's all going to wash out to about the same (as long as they do something).
  8. squally1313
    Why? If anything, Suarez has negative value.
  9. squally1313
    The Shaw for Cease deal isn't happening in my opinion because...it would have already happened if Jed was willing to go that route? It's almost February, Padres need to start cutting checks in a month, Cubs wouldn't leave a gaping hole at third a couple weeks before spring training, etc. In the hypothetical, it's interesting in that Shaw for Cease leaves 3B wide open, which would obviously imply Bregman, but unless we're blowing through every budget number thrown out there, you need to cut salary, which likely means Hoerner, who no longer has a Matt Shaw-sized replacement. I think people are a little too pessimistic on our ability to sign Tucker/Padres pitcher long term. We have a lot of 2026 money tied up but it clears up fast after that, and a lot of the 2026 money is moveable. We were able to dump Bellinger, we should hypothetically be able to get rid of guys like Happ/Hoerner (better players making less money) if we wanted to reallocate resources.
  10. squally1313
    Also pass. Offense gets worse, defense marginally better? If you buy into Bergman’s 2024 defense, then you have to buy into his much worse than Suzuki’s 2024 offense. moving a 3-4 win guy to bring back Bregman does nothing for me. For me, It’s either him filling out the budget, a king/cease-type pitcher and minor bench/pen improvements, or significant bullpen and bench improvements. We don’t need to move money to sign him, we would just have to pass on filling out the outskirts of the roster. Positives and negatives all around.
  11. squally1313
    Why would the padres want Nico when they have Machado, Bogaerts, and croenenworth all locked up through 2030 and are trying to cut costs
  12. squally1313
    -1.2 per the 2025 zips projections, 0.2 in 2024
  13. squally1313
    Want absolutely no part of swapping Nico for Bregman.
  14. squally1313
    Clearly there's a push here to attempt to create new discussions when there are news articles that come out about the Cubs and their offseason plans. I'm not going to pretend to understand the intricacies there but it's clearly designed to drive traffic to the site. 'How many times and ways can (the same thing) be said?'? Great question!
  15. squally1313
    (done with memes after this, sorry)
  16. squally1313
  17. squally1313
    Sure, but Horton and Birdsell could be. At that level you get a lot more fungible. I forgot Shaw too. And then just make more prospects.
  18. squally1313
    Yeah I don't think you should obsess over the timing of the Waves (c), but the team is clearly in its competitive window with the major league roster, which includes4 very good outfielders, hopefully all signed for at least two years, and two of its top 5 prospects are outfielders with very little to prove in the minors. Not ideal timing, but it's what we've got. And it seems a little rash to empty the chamber on a one/two year window, but the window is slowly getting stretched out (a Tucker extension would greatly help there). Dansby, Shota, Busch, PCA, Hodge are all here for four plus years, Steele for three, hopefully Brown/Wicks/Amaya proves worth of joining that group this year.
  19. squally1313
    I'm going to push back on the distinction of 'rental' just a little bit. This isn't mid July, we'd get a full year of starts out of him. This is a guy who, minimum 200 innings the last two years, is 6th in ERA, 12th in FIP, and 14th in xFIP. You can rely on that production for a team that has serious playoff aspirations immediately. Trading for a hypothetical Michael King with 2-3 years remaining on his contract basically starts with Shaw and/or PCA. Losing a Caissie or Alcantara hurts, but not going to lose sleep over them not sitting behind a fully blocked outfield for what is in all likelihood another 2 years. Or whatever concerns I have will be assuaged by having the 9th, 15th, 18th, and 27th best 2024 starters ERAs (minimum 30 innings, yes I know I'm cherrypicking).
  20. squally1313
    I think this general argument/thought process falls apart if you play it out. Like yeah, it's easy to make Boras the villain here. But ultimately both guys are going to (correctly) want to maximize their future wealth. Getting into some weird theoretical discussion about markets or weather or agents or whatever else is pretty futile when you can just pare it down to 'these guys want the most money they can get'. Now, there's maybe some merit to 'the market values Cease higher due to track record/throwing really hard/has a cool mustache, but I think King will perform/age better based on proprietary models'. But that would drive the first decision (the trade) more so than the subsequent extension conversation.
  21. squally1313
    Trading for one year of a players production and then trying to sign them at theoretical market rates are two different transactions and should be treated as such. The cost of a Tucker or King type player with multiple years of control would be significantly higher than what we gave up (slash what we're discussing giving up). Putting that kind of weight on a future extension when judging the merits of a potential trade is a good way to never make these kind of trades.
  22. squally1313
    Padres just posted on Zips at 40.2, with Cease coming in at 3.8 and King at 3.8.
  23. squally1313
    It's Sasaki and Teoscar and Scott and Yates and Kim, but yeah, stacking up this kind of talent diminishes the return a little bit. It's also fine, I was under no delusions we were going to put together a roster that was going to compete on paper with them. We can certainly compete in a 7 game series, even if that's more so just the nature of baseball than any sort of roster construction result. You shouldn't give Hoyer any credit for the Brewers and Cardinals essentially sitting out the offseason, but it certainly helps. The Michael King article this morning touches on it, but if he sticks the landing on one of those pitchers because we're the non-Dodgers contender with money left and we can solve other teams financial problems, there's maybe a little credit there.
  24. squally1313
    ZIPs is done with everyone besides the Padres, so thought it'd be good to see where we stack up compared to the NL. This is me typing numbers from the graphic into excel and trying to note key pickups that weren't considered, almost definitely missing players and fat fingered numbers here and there, but.... Cubs: 48.6 (less Pressly) Reds: 32.6 Brewers: 42.8 Pirates: 36.1 Cardinals: 35.2 Braves: 53.1 (less Profar) Mets: 43.4 (less Minter) Phillies: 42.2 DBacks: 43.7 (less Burnes) Dodgers: 56.5 (less like 6 awesome players) It's basically Dodgers (huge gap), Braves (pretty good gap), and then us, with the Brewers/Mets/Dbacks/(small gap) Phillies a few wins behind. King or Cease would give us a couple more (4ish over Assad's 1.5ish). Ultimately not an elite team but certainly expectations should be to make the playoffs, realistically as the division winner.
  25. squally1313
    Yeah, that's why he's available and we're talking about guys not on the opening day roster and not like, PCA.
×
×
  • Create New...