Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Rcal10

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,640

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

 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 Rcal10

  1. Rcal10
    Except Bellinger is still a useful player for any team in their everyday line up. Stoman is not even a #3 starter. I really don’t think the Cubs feel they need to dump Bellinger. There is enough money to put together a good team and they have some prospects to trade to add talent as well. If they traded Bellinger as a dump, they would then need to find someone else. I am fine if the Yankees aren’t interested in that sort of deal. But I see no reason the Cubs need to trade for Stroman.
  2. Rcal10
    A true rumor or not, I don’t see the Cubs doing that. Maybe Bellinger for Schmidt with the Cubs eating half of Bellinger’s money. If the Yannees want him they can’t have him for a guy they are basically trying to dump. I do not think the Cubs NEED to trade Bellinger. I feel they would and maybe even should, if they get something of use back. Otherwise just keep him.
  3. Rcal10
    So basically a minor league deal and not on the 26 man roster. Which is perfectly fine. Is that correct?
  4. Rcal10
    I said it was greatest fear. I did not say that is what I would expect them to do. I would expect more like what squally suggested. Depending on when they did trade Bellinger that might be the only way they can spend his money they save. The other FA bats to replace him might be gone. And, TBH, aside from Soto, none of the other FA is a certainty to be better than Bellinger, all around, next season. That is why I like squally’s idea of them trading for the big bat.
  5. Rcal10
    Agreed. Stroman is done. PERIOD. Bellinger is a good player who makes a little too much money. But he is still a valuable player to any teams everyday line up. If they trade him it has to be for player in a similar situation, most likely a pitcher who is still GOOD but makes too much money, or for a mid grade prospect or young relief pitcher who doesn’t make a lot of money. If they do the latter of the two, they can then use the money they saved to add a bat to replace him. Stoman does not qualify as still being good.
  6. Rcal10
    If you say so. Not sure who they spend it on. No real upgrade except the guy they won’t talk to. Do they sign Kikuchi and Flaherry or maybe Scott and a starter?
  7. Rcal10
    Pocket the cash is my concern. I assume you mean to spend elsewhere. My fear is pocket the cash means exactly that. They cubs come in $20M to $30M short of the LT.
  8. Rcal10
    I agree those teams may be interested. But who comes back from the Red Sox or the Nationals. I like Seattle because they have something of interest that could come back.
  9. Rcal10
    I agree on Mariners and Cubs matching well. Didn’t feel like arguing with the poster. I mean, it’s not like Seattle to make big unexpected moves with their current GM, right? Personally I am with you. I think it is pretty fair. And as I said, if you add the Phillies in something like this Seattle can get Bohm while Phillies get Bellinger and Cubs get Castillo. Maybe a few more pieces or money has to be moved. But either Cubs/Seattle 2 team deal or one adding the Phillies is definitely something that can make sense.
  10. Rcal10
    Thank you.
  11. Rcal10
    Fine, then the Cubs keep him. He is certainly not going to be traded for Stroman. IMO the Cubs don’t have to trade Bellinger. I’d be isn’t bringing value back I am fine keeping him.
  12. Rcal10
    Royals are said to be interested in Bohm. So goes back to another 3 team deal. Bohm to KC, Singer to Cubs and Bellinger to Phillies. Again, not perfect. Maybe some additions need to be made. But Cubs do get a MOR pitcher.
  13. Rcal10
    Well said. That is why I think if they did trade him if would be for a similar type of contract on a guy who is good, not great. Maybe Castillo, as an example. He becomes the Cubs MOR starting pitcher. Seattle adds a bat to the line up. Maybe that sort of deal needs a 3rd team in the event Seattle doesn’t want an outfielder. Maybe Bohm to Seattle, Bellinger to Phillies and Castillo to the Cubs. Figure out the add on that may need to be included. This is just an example of what I would expect if the Cubs dealt Bellinger. I know Stratos posted Bellinger for Schwarber earlier, which I thought was not possible. But maybe that isn’t so impossible. Yet another example.
  14. Rcal10
    I think CubinNY said it earlier. The move creates nothing more than a shrug. That is all this move should have created. Basically a NBD move that doesn’t change anything about the off season, IMO.
  15. Rcal10
    This may or may not be true now. But IMO if they start next season poorly or are a few games under 500 nearing the break, the fire Jed watch might begin. And if it doesn’t happen during the year, if he doesn’t make the playoffs this season, I think it will happen at that time.
  16. Rcal10
    Agreed. I think more people who are worried Thaiss is going to be his last move at catcher need to read this. It was just a small move for depth. Doesn’t change anything about the off season.
  17. Rcal10
    Even true, 1908 said it best. Not the greatest move Jed made. But not a fireable offense. He is still a good ball player. Cubs need good ball players. And if they trade him it better be for a useful, good ballplayer. Or just keep him.
  18. Rcal10
    First, we don’t know how true it is the Cubs want to trade Bellinger. Maybe they do, but that doesn’t mean they want to dump him. It isn’t like the Az GM who signed Montgomery and now has him for a second year. Which, btw, he isn’t getting fired for that move. Asking around the league about what can be had for Bellinger is not a bad thing to do. Honestly, he is the most obvious trade candidate in the Cubs everyday line up. Doesn’t mean it was those huge unforgivable offense to sign him to the contract they signed him for. He is still a good player who can play outfield or first base, albeit at a salary higher than what he should be making.
  19. Rcal10
    Isn’t what a good reason not to keep Jed? Bellinger opting in for year two? I don’t think that is enough reason. I think if he doesn’t make the playoffs this year he is done. Again, I don’t see Bellinger and his contract as this major detriment to building this team. If he doesn’t get traded, he is a good player in the everyday line up. Sure, he is overpaid some. But if ownership acted like the Cubs were a major market, the overpay wouldn’t be that big a deal. Personally I don’t think it is anyway. Every team in baseball has several guys not earning their contract. Doesn’t make them bad players. Just overpaid.
  20. Rcal10
    I just don’t see trading Bellinger as this impossible thing to do. Or in a trade that the Cubs have to take far less back for him or pay his contract down. It has been established that Wrigley hurt all offensive numbers last year. So if you look at Bellinger’s road numbers you will see .282/.247/.451. A respectable offensive year. That coupled with his versatility to play center, corner outfield or first makes him a solid trade chip. Not every team is worried salary. Some want good players on the field. Bellinger is a good player. They are not going to get top prospects or anything like that. But as Stratos said, maybe for a better bat with less versatility. Maybe for a veteran MOR starting pitcher. Maybe a bounce back starting pitcher. Most likely all those options would be guys getting a decent to high end salary. I just don’t see him as some sort of dead weight on the team. Dream scenario would be trade for a prospect and use his money plus what they already have and sign Soto. But I think we all know Soto was never going to happen, with or without Bellinger.(WHICH IS RIDICULOUS)
  21. Rcal10
    Cant he still be DFA’ed and sign a minor league contract? I don’t know exactly how this works.
  22. Rcal10
    Agreed. But if he is in AAA as insurance if/when a catcher goes down to injury, that would be fine with me. Until that time, I am going to believe they will do better at the catcher position.
  23. Rcal10
    Not meeting with Soto is a level of incompetence all to itself. It is ridiculous that the Cubs don’t even make him a serious offer. But that is what this teams ownership/Front office does. Not getting a solid back up or even starting catcher is a totally different level of incompetence. And trading for Thaiss does not strike me as the catcher move they are going to make to fill the second catcher spot. I think people are overrating to tbis. Let’s wait and see. If we are into spring games and Thaiss is still the top back up, then I will criticize the tram.
  24. Rcal10
    I would like a clear starter above Amaya too. But the fact is he really doesn’t have to get that much better to be a league average bat. He only has about 800 AB in the majors. Is it really inconceivable he can improve 10% above his current level. That would make him a league average bat and an above average bat for a catcher. Again, I am not advocating Amaya should be the clear starter or that the Cubs should get better at catcher. But I do think he will be better next year than last year. No, he won’t be what he was after changing his stance. But I do think he will be closer to that player than the one who was barely hitting .200 before the stance change.
  25. Rcal10
    That is exactly what I think he is. AAA depth. I think many are making way too big a deal about this move. It cost the Cubs nothing but a few $. It doesn’t change any off season plans, IMO.
×
×
  • Create New...