Jump to content
North Side Baseball

champaignchris

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,671

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 champaignchris

  1. champaignchris
    Barney IS Ryan Theriot, six years younger.
  2. champaignchris
    How do you write an article on the Cubs' free agent targets next year and not even mention Albert Pujols? One sentence... "Albert Pujols is not an option for the Cubs because... ."
  3. champaignchris
    The Sox indeed are the tallest midget. Their one World Series win in the last 90 years is so much better than the Cubs' zero. There is the irrefutable proof the Sox fan has always been looking for. Wear your crown with pride, Sox fan!
  4. champaignchris
    Pena is younger, cheaper, and better than Derrek Lee was last year, and left-handed, too. The Cubs should be able to get a better package for Pena than they did for Lee. ETA - Pena also doesn't have a no-trade clause, meaning the Cubs don't have to negotiate any trade through him and more teams can be involved in the bidding.
  5. champaignchris
    I don't know about 3,000 hits. But, barring injury, he's a virtual lock for 500 hits before his 23rd birthday, which gives him a pretty good head start.
  6. champaignchris
    He hit 0.098 in May. What was his injury? He only has 3 xbh since May 1. Apparently he went to Camp Colvin too Is that the camp where they puncture your lung with a shard of wood.
  7. champaignchris
    Doesn't Ramirez have a buyout ($2M) if the mutual option isn't picked up by the Cubs? The Cubs will pay the $2M instead of bringing him back for $16M. The $16M option becomes guaranteed if he gets traded. So, the Cubs simply will not trade him unless they can negotiate a deal where they're only on the hook for less than the remainder of this season plus $2M or get significant player value back that justifies the additional expenditure. I don't see either scenario as being likely. I think Ramirez is on the Cubs for the remainder of the season and then becomes a free agent. EDIT - "unless" > "if" Big difference.
  8. champaignchris
    There's only one untouchable guy - Castro - but there are other guys that you'd only really trade if you were getting something that would immediately contribute to your team next year. You don't trade guys like Barney, Soto, Garza, Marmol, Marshall, Byrd, or Wells for salary relief or for prospects who are a long way from making it to the Bigs. If there's a baseball trade to be made - major league player for major league player, that improves the team, great. Your trade targets are guys who won't be back next year and can net you some future prospects - Pena, Fukudome, and Baker. Or you try to trade a bad contract for salary relief - Soriano. I'm assuming that Ramirez simply can't be moved and the Cubs will just let him walk after this season. Zambrano and Dempster both sort of straddle the fence. Their contracts are bad, but not horrible, and they can be productive members of the team in 2012. Both contracts come off the books after 2012. I think you only trade them if you get immediate help. For all the doom and gloom the media spreads about the Cubs' contract situation, Ramirez' 14.6M, Fukudome's 13.5M, Pena's ~5M, Grabow's 4.8M, and Samardjiza's 3M are all off the books after this season if the Cubs do nothing.
  9. champaignchris
    Right. If someone offers you someone who can be a starter for a few years at a position of need that would be harder to fill than the catcher spot, then you'd consider the deal. I can't off the top of my head think what that position would be or who you'd get, but it would have to be part of a major deal that would significantly alter the makeup of the team. Something like: Soto plus other MLB players plus prospects for all-star and another player.
  10. champaignchris
    At the end of last year, I was among the "move him to 2nd base" camp. But after watching him more this year, I take it back. He's got a great arm and is very athletic. I think he's at SS for a long, long time.
  11. champaignchris
    You can plow over the other players. Happens all the time to 2B/SS covering second, particularly when the runner is trying to bust up a potential double play. I'd guess far more middle infielders are hurt from collisions from runners than catchers, which makes sense given that they have far less protection. If runners aren't allowed to have contact with the fielder covering the base, you have to make it illegal for the fielder to block the runner's path to the base.
  12. champaignchris
    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/odds/ If the Indians do have a .460 winning percentage the rest of the way as predicted by BP, I'd feel comfortable labeling it as an "absolutely epic collapse."
  13. champaignchris
    Who's going to catch them? At this point, it would take an absolutely epic collapse for anyone other than the Tigers to catch them (and, no, the Royals don't count as "anyone" - Call me back in about a year and a half), and the Tigers would have to significantly pick up their play to catch the Indians playing .500 the rest of the year. It's not so much how well the Indians have been playing, as much as how horrible the two teams which were supposed to compete for the division title have been playing. If either were playing just a little worse than expected and were hovering 5 or 6 games behind the Indians, I wouldn't be saying the Indians had it in the bag. But, as it is, "the Indians have it in the bag."
  14. champaignchris
    Bizarre. More bizarre... The Cubs have now gone 2 for 11 with RISP in each of 3 straight games, May 16-17-18.
  15. champaignchris
    So what you're saying is that a center fielder, who for his career has given you slightly better than average production for a center fielder, probably shouldn't be your #3 hitter? This is quite the radical concept.
  16. champaignchris
    In the three games since the offensive outburst last Friday, they're 4 for their last 28 (.143) with RISP. That's .231 for the year w/ RISP. They hit .292 in all other at bats. Not sure why the lack of power matters when discussing the discrepancy between the batting average with runners in scoring position versus other situations. A guy will generally score from second or third on a single (hence "scoring position") and even if he doesn't it won't effect the batting average. The issue isn't the Cubs' lack of power. The Cubs lead the league with a BABIP of .324 overall. It's .351 with nobody on and .336 with a runner on first. Their BAPIP with runners in scoring position is .262. So, the issue seems to be that when runners aren't on, the balls they hit find holes, and when runners are on, the balls they hit don't. So, I think the answer to my original question might be, "luck."
  17. champaignchris
    So the game after I start this thread griping about the inability to hit with runners in scoring position, the Cubs go 7 for 14. The next day, I neglect to comment on the subject, and they go 0 for 6. Noticing the obvious causality, I am here again prior to tonight's game wondering why we can't hit with runners in scoring position. It may be just a coincidence, but without adequate scientific testing, I'm not sure we can rule it out yet.
  18. champaignchris
    I know, I know, I know. There's no such thing as clutch. It's early in the season. Etc., etc. But how do we explain the Cubs through 36 games 70 H in 309 AB, .227 w/ RISP 277 H in 950 AB, .292 w/o RISP ? That's just bizarre.
  19. champaignchris
    I want to see Doug Davis throw an eephus pitch. I don't think he's ever thrown an eephus before, but he just seems like the type of pitcher that should.
  20. champaignchris
    Is Hendry whispering the proverbial offer you can't refuse in Albert's ear? "Don Ricketts requests the honor of your presence at his training camp in Arizona next February." Is he begging him to sign with the Cubs? "I'll do anything to get you to play for us next year... ANY-THING."
  21. champaignchris
    The Cubs have one gigantic goal this next offseason, and we all know what it is. Whatever is to be done with the GM position should be made with signing Albert Pujols in mind, and it needs to be done before the offseason begins. I don't want the press conference announcing our new GM on the same day the Angels are introducing their new super-star first baseman. I'm not a big fan of Hendry and would have liked to see him go last year. However, as things seem to be playing out right now, unless Ricketts' choice to replace him is out of baseball or already in the organization, it might be best to extend Hendry a couple years and then open the vaults for Albert.
  22. champaignchris
    Lance Berkman is 35 (two years older than Pena), nowhere near the defensive first baseman Pena is, and has not been that much of a better hitter than Pena has been over the last 3 years (140 OPS+ vs. 122 OPS+). Berkman might end up being a much better player than Pena all year. He also might breakdown mid-season and be a non-factor during the last stretch of the season. It's just way too early to judge this now, but at the time of the signing I thought Pena was a better bet than Berkman.
  23. champaignchris
    or the Saberhagen one I presume they were large deals that Bonilla and Saberhagen elected to spread out over the long haul after the fact...but still. Even better. Bonilla had 5.9m and 1 year left on his deal that Steve Phillips didn't want to pay, so of course he agreed to this beaut of an arrangement.. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703426004575339013108198050.html "After Florida traded Mr. Bonilla to the Los Angeles Dodgers in May 1998, the Mets then re-acquired him that following off-season, sending relief pitcher Mel Rojas to the Dodgers for Mr. Bonilla on Nov. 11, 1998." ...and the Mets originally got Mel Rojas from the Cubs in a trade that also sent Brian McRae and Turk Wendell to the Mets, with the Cubs getting Lance Johnson, Mark Clark, and Manny Alexander. So, in the end, it's all the Cubs fault. Revenge is sweet. :D
  24. champaignchris
    Montreal Expos type of situation = being owned by Satan A good owner could have made Montreal work. A bad owner, well... we know the end of that story. It shouldn't matter whether the Dodgers have a good or bad owner. They should be making money hand over fist regardless. It's the freakin' Dodgers! An iconic team in the second biggest market in the country.
  25. champaignchris
    It's really amazing that it's come to this. It's not a Montreal Expos type of situation. There's no reason why the Dodgers shouldn't be a highly successful major league baseball organization.
×
×
  • Create New...