Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Bertz

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    13,436
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

 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 Bertz

  1. Very nonplussed by this. He wasn't my guy but isn't someone I will complain about a bit. I'm used to either being thrilled or pissed when the Cubs pick.
  2. Nah, there was some weirdness at the top of the draft, arguably the top guy went 5th, but at this point the board looks about how it was supposed to.
  3. I don't like any of the catchers, so glad the Giants are taking Bailey One of Abel, Bitsko, or Mitchell is now guaranteed to make it to the Cubs, so already preparing myself for the idea they won't take any of them.
  4. The Cubs used to be super predictable. I think Jim Callis in particular was super chummy with Wilkin and is super chummy with McLeod. But the last few years I don't think they've been that accurate. I think there was a little bit of smoke for Nico Hoerner, but I don't think there's been a pick we were pretty sure about beforehand since Schwarber.
  5. I uhhhh hope he's wrong Two weeks ago, he said in a chat there was no chance the Cubs take a prep arm. :roll: Yeah, I think it's pretty clear that people don't have a peg on the Cubs. The local guys said Mitchell and 5 High Schoolers. The national guys are primarily saying college with a few high schoolers mixed in. And there appear to be different opinions on how willing they are to do an arm. I do hope if we go for a less fun college guy like a Foscue or a Loftin, that it's to let us get a HS player who falls. I'd prefer where we pick to just play the draft straight, but I could understand thinking something like Foscue at 70% of slot is better than the other options.
  6. Keith Law's last mock: I uhhhh hope he's wrong
  7. He lists Mitchell, Ed Howard, Austin Hendrick, Pete Crow-Armstrong, Nick Bitsko, and Mick Abel as the names to watch. I'm a little weary of Hendrick's age but could get behind any of these
  8. I've put a lot less research into this draft than I typically do when we're picking this high, but I think Garret Mitchell is my guy. Mitchell seems pretty likely to net out as a Brett Gardner type, but it sounds like there's enough raw power in there for something a little more Granderson-ian. And for anything you can say about our FO, they tend to get the most out of college bats. If they take Mitchell I'll be less worried about any mechanical messiness than I rightfully should be. Otherwise I think I want a HS arm, Bitsko slightly over Abel. I'm really wondering if all the new technology for measuring pitches makes it more viable to nab a HS arm this high. Get a guy with high end velo and spin, refine his efficiency in the lab, and basically once you've built up his innings he's ready to go. And since the technology makes grips and pitch types less of a trial and error deal, if they have clean mechanics whether they'll develop decent command should be less of a wildcard than it has been traditionally. If by some fortune Hancock or Meyer are available for us they would be my picks, but over the last few weeks that possibility has seemingly gone from unlikely to impossible.
  9. Nothing groundbreaking, but good overview of how the FO is adjusting to the current state of things wrt the draft.
  10. I guess this goes here? Who would have had Stone Cold being a voice of reason and so many more mild mannered athletes just totally stepping in it.
  11. Guy who got an NFL coaching job at 25 because of his daddy can't figure out why his peer group isn't more diverse
  12. Keith Law's latest mock Interesting on the HS front, given that a number of other places have had them going that route. I wonder if the Cubs' intentions are just a big old shrug emoji for everyone right now given the FO changes.
  13. Thought this was a good detailed breakdown, but the long story short looks is this:
  14. This is a fun read. It also makes me wonder if all of the new technology from the last few years might re-value HS arms a bit more.
  15. JJ Cooper with a little additional context:
  16. 2016 Cubs make the list
  17. Jeff Passan as usual put it really well in his article today: tl;dr Is that there's two issues. First, revenue sharing is a slippery slope to a salary cap. Second is that if everything goes right, players likely stand to make a little bit more than in the current setup. But if the playoffs get altered by a second wave they're losing A LOT of additional money.
  18. In a world where the owners had been acting in good faith the last few years, I think just settling for a 50/50 split this year due to all the uncertainty makes plenty of sense. But, we don't live in that world. You can't nickel and dime the players for years when things are good and then play the "we're in this together" card as soon as they get bad.
  19. Even if true, I'm sure this won't be confirmed for weeks. It does sound in line with the reporting from Passan and Rosenthal the past week or so though.
  20. MLB's ability to cut its nose to spite its face knows no bounds
  21. I'm at 4840 now, so given everything I'm guessing I'll come up this winter.
×
×
  • Create New...