Jump to content
North Side Baseball

squally1313

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,561

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

 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 Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by squally1313

  1. squally1313
    Between December and February last year the Cubs claimed/signed/whatever Joe Hudson, Jorge Alfaro, Brian Serven, and Pablo Aliendo just as catchers and they collectively received zero PAs for the 2024 Cubs. Who. Cares.
  2. squally1313
  3. squally1313
    Ok sure whatever but do you understand how tiring it is to have that be a comment you felt was worth making on November 21st in a thread about the Cubs paying cash for a AAAA catcher
  4. squally1313
  5. squally1313
    Jed's been in charge for 4 years. If we're going to give him 'a decade', then we also have to give him a World Series, 3 NLCS appearances, etc. The team broke in 2021 and there were approximately zero reinforcements coming through the pipeline. Probably at least partly his fault, sure! Writing off this entire offseason in late November not because of inaction but because of....insufficient action? when approximately all of the top 50 free agents are unsigned?...is exhausting. It's a nothing trade, this and every other roster churning move he does doesn't have to turn into some Referendum of Jed.
  6. squally1313
    Your guys confidence in your diagnosis of Hoyer based on a sample size of essentially 2 offseasons of contention is either really impressive or really tiring. It's November 21st and he's made two trades of like the 6 that have been made league wide, so we can't lean on the whole 'oh man he must be hibernating, lol', so instead we just criticize literally paying PTRs cash for a semi-functional catcher and getting a reliever with a sub 2 ERA for our 14th best prospect as 'well it's not Soto, so my priors are confirmed'. No one has signed or traded for anything good. There's 4 more months of this.
  7. squally1313
    (five seconds later)
  8. squally1313
    This was pretty much assumed of Pulisic before this particular event, wasn't it?
  9. squally1313
    Just wanted to know what the rules are here. We're taking general statements, not direct quotes from management, and collectively deciding amongst ourselves who the front office is ruling out and then requiring 'quotes' to consider a certain player an option again? Bertz included a blurb from one of the Athletic articles speaking specifically about Fried checking 'several boxes' and how a nine figure deal 'would not be unreasonable'.
  10. squally1313
    Were there quotes explicitly ruling out Fried?
  11. squally1313
    That's all good and I certainly respect the work you put into analyzing the players involved. Ultimately it still seems like the hypotheticals are based on some level of...I have a unique valuation of Player X and therefore Options A, B, C, etc are open if you accept these assumptions. Like, is it just the Cubs that would have these very optimistic views of Matt Shaw? A 'really good' Matt Shaw with 6 years of control is significantly more valuable than 2 years of Hoerner. Can he headline a Skubal deal? Does your thought process change then? I think ultimately where we diverge here is that you're much more willing to question the baseline understood valuations of discussed players and maybe even end up in positions where you think the rest of baseball is over/under valuing certain players, and I'm more interested in taking the numbers at somewhat face value (since the FGs and BBTVs and whatever of the world put way more time into this than I do) and figure out how to maximize overall production based on those. Not saying you're wrong! Just think that we are thinking about it differently.
  12. squally1313
    Sorry, I wasn't trying to reduce/minimize the point of the article, that was more a (flippant) response to the conversation that had been going on in the responses. I certainly think it's important to dig into what the Cubs could get, but I also think you have to look at it in terms of the overall roster construction, where we are in terms of the win curve/goals for the near and long term future/etc. Ultimately for me, where it falls out is that I look at Hoerner, Paredes, and Shaw, and I look at a team that seemingly should be trying whatever they can to win immediately (2025), and I see Hoerner as the most reliable option to produce value for the team in the near term future and also the one who would bring back the least amount in a trade (due to the contract length, mostly, but also this weird thought process he's slightly upscale Ryan Theriot). So fine to talk about what he can bring to the table in a trade, but also should have the conversation of 'should we do it?' (similar to your point #2) and I think the answer to that question is 'No".
  13. squally1313
    But why can't we just trade Shaw?
  14. squally1313
    The Cubs especially don't have infinite money when you commit $26m a year to the guy who has a Steamer projection of 3.4 fWAR to replace our league minimum guy who has a Steamer projection of 3.3 fWAR.
  15. squally1313
    Wait until you hear about the 2B worth 12.8 fWAR over the last 3 years
  16. squally1313
    Fair point on the offense thing, they made some moves at the deadline that definitely helped them pick it up. In terms of stages/relevance/etc, I think it's more likely the Cubs make the playoffs in 2025 than the Mariners do.
  17. squally1313
    I'm probably oversimplifying but this obsession with losing non-first round picks is seeming maybe a little disingenuous? Like the conversation has evolved to the point where it's a bad look to be like 'this player isn't worth the money', and so now we're just being like 'oh no, not a draft pick!'. Aware that the Fangraphs of the world have assigned a rough value to those picks, but like....can anyone name our fifth round picks from the last 5 years?
  18. squally1313
    $10m (or more) a year for a guy with a 58% GB rate (would be highest in MLB!) and an unsustainable BABIP to take a starting spot away from our 4.3 fWAR shortstop, 3.9 fWAR second baseman, or our 3.4 fWAR third baseman "almost every day"? Pass. Just....buy pitching. I would love to get an actual, proven elite bat. But realistically, two starters, a high end pen guy, pick a 30 year old catcher out of a hat.
  19. squally1313
    I feel like every time I see Reichel's name he's either like, getting sent down to Rockford/healthy scratched or proclaimed as a future first liner of the next contending Hawks team. Is it still somehow both?
  20. squally1313
    I mean, it's the -2.3 fWAR that they got from second base last year and the fact that teams in playoff contention will be more willing to overpay in a mid-season acquisition. They probably address the issue in the next couple months, but they also have Trevor Story locked up for a 'gazillion cap dollars' for a gazillion years and their top prospect is a shortstop (with only half a year of AA under his belt). Is 1.5 years of Hoerner enough for a AAA-performing Teel? Probably not. But if we aren't going to compete in 2025 Hoerner becomes pretty in the way, big picture, if we have to package some relievers or whatever, why not. This all started with the caveat that it required us performing at like the 10th percentile outcome as a team for three months anyways.
  21. squally1313
    Yeah, for me it's a worst case scenario silver lining. No interest in the 'let's rearrange all the deck chairs just to get Hoerner out of the lineup for some reason' for a team with aspirations to win. But if things go wrong and you're looking at a lost season, then yes, clear the spot, use your attractive trade asset for more future reinforcements, etc.
  22. squally1313
    Nico Hoerner (and then some, probably) for Kyle Teel is something to keep in the back pocket if we're 35-50 at the ASB.
  23. squally1313
    Can definitely see the math there. I just think that the 4 fWAR SP you're picking up is either coming from A. a rebuilding team (Miami, Crochet, etc) who would have no interest in only two years of Hoerner, or B. a Mariners esque team (said another way: the Mariners), who just rode their all-pitching/no-offense roster to another non-playoff year, and I can't see them being too intrigued by Hoerner. Really, in both those situations, unless the other teams projections of Shaw is significantly off, Shaw is the guy who is going to get you the biggest return pitching wise. Yeah, you're losing probably the biggest piece of your system, but you're keeping maximum value at second base and probably optimizing the pitching you're getting back.
  24. squally1313
    That's where it kinda gets to be a dealbreaker for me. I don't see any obvious 'Hoerner for offense' ideas out there where the guy coming in clearly outpaces the overall value Hoerner brings to the table. And then any Hoerner for pitching idea kinda falls apart because when you think about what the other side wants in a deal where they give pitching away, it's probably not 'league average bat/elite defender'. If it's a non-contending team, his contract doesn't offer much appeal. If it's a contender, they're probably trying to rebalance some strength to the offensive side and Hoerner doesn't seem like an obvious solution. Overall reaction to all this is a big shrug, for what it's worth. Maybe it's just me coping, but it's early November, and one of the few positive review comments Hoyer seems to get is how the organization usually plays things close to the vest, minimizes leaks, etc. So if there's a spectrum between 'Baseball writers need to fill article space in the slowest point of the year' and 'Someone/someones high up in the front office has outlined the entire offseason plan and categorically ruled out multiple players', I'm going to lean pretty heavy to the first one.
  25. squally1313
    Suzuki graded out as a better rightfielder, defensively, than Soto and Santander, among others. He's not good, but his gaffes are more memorable than frequent. It's not Chris Morel at third bad. EDIT: Alright you can mostly ignore this point when I look on a per inning basis. I still don't think he's downright unplayable, but withdraw the comparison. As for whether he minds it, it probably just depends on how the bat performs. He seemed to take another step forward offensively when he moved to more of a DH role, and a 140 wRC will always have a home in the line up. If that starts to slip down to 115-120, then his DH-only status is going to start to have an impact.
×
×
  • Create New...