Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Rcal10

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,015

  • 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

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Rcal10

  1. Rcal10
    My biggest fear with Crochet is injury. For that reason I think I would rather have Kirby/Gilbert instead. Plus they have longer team control and all things equal I would rather have a righty in the rotation. I am just not sure the Mariners want prospects for either of those guys. I do think the Sox match up better.
  2. Rcal10
    Kind of reminds me of last year and Robert. So many posts of the Sox wanting super prospects for him. 3 top 50-75 prospects. See what happened then. Nothing. Sox didn’t get an offer they would even consider. So now he is still on the team and even less valuable than last year. As I said, the Sox can ask for whatever they want. Doesn’t mean they get it. If they choose to be unreasonable again this off season they will have Crochet again in 25’ and he will be less valuable next off season when the 55 win team tries to trade him again.
  3. Rcal10
    They are said to want younger talent anyway. Lower level. Maybe read some of the suggestions 1908 is giving in another thread. That makes more sense than what you are suggesting. Let’s see what the Sox get for Crochet before you lol. It will not be 3 top 60 prospects all with Mlb target dates of 2025 and a starting pitcher.
  4. Rcal10
    I know you are just balling. My point is give them the younger prospects. A couple of them, in fact. If yiu can add Crochet without giving up Shaw, Mo, Horton you figure it out.
  5. Rcal10
    For Crochet? Way too much. There is no way they get 3 top 60 prospects close to the majors and a starting pitcher for him. Maybe one of those guys and a younger prospect for him. Maybe add Wicks too. But they are not getting 3 top guys. They can be looking for a haul all they want. Doesn’t mean they get that sort of deal for him.
  6. Rcal10
    Deal! Make it happen Jed.
  7. Rcal10
    I am not advocating the Cubs start Shaw at 2nd or 3rd by the Cubs opening a spot for him in a trade. Others have penciled him in the line up suggesting that very thing. What I am suggesting is Seattle most likely would rather have a proven player so IF the Cubs FO really felt Shaw can take over at either second or third AND by trading one of those guys manning that position they can add quality elsewhere, they should consider moving one of those players and allowing Shaw the spot. On the flip side. if Seattle feels Shaw is ready to take over next year, I am fine with moving him for Gilbert/Kirby. I truly do not think that would be what that team would want to do. I think it is way more likely a team like the white sox, A’s, Marlins, Colorado and probably a few others would take a prospect for a proven major leaguer than the Mariners would. But yiu do have a point on them reducing payroll,’so who knows? The issue I had with your original response to me was suggesting I don’t want to make that sort of move due to prospect hugging. Which couldn’t be farther from the truth. I have referred to the prospects as assets many times. And suggested the Cubs use those assets along with some money they could spend to acquire major leaguer than talent. If Seattle really felt Shaw could be their everyday player and was willing to move one of those guys for him, I would do it.
  8. Rcal10
    Me suggesting Parades instead of Shaw is not prospect hugging Shaw. It is being realistic in what the mariners would want. They are competing this year. Prospects are probably not what they want. So adding prospects to Shaw is still not giving them a major leaguer they would want.
  9. Rcal10
    Maybe Lowe from TB in a trade? 🤷Seems like something small the Cubs would do.
  10. Rcal10
    Your…. Shinning…. (Whatever the hell that means) would be wrong. I wouldn’t have a problem trading Shaw for proven talent. But my guess is the team that took Shaw wouldn’t be planning on competing next year. If the Mariners would take Shaw for Kirby or Gilbert, I would not have an issue with it. I think a better example of a team who would take Shaw would be the White Sox. Maybe Shaw + for Crochet, as an example.
  11. Rcal10
    I dont think the Cubs should trade a prospect because they are getting inpatient with any of them. I think they should trade prospects because they may be at their highest value and can get a good player for them now. They can’t play all of them. A good FO figures out who to deal and who to keep. I am sure they are not right all the time, but more often than not.
  12. Rcal10
    I think they want to win now. I would think they would want a proven player. I would think they don’t want Shaw as a starter in their 25’ team for the same reason the Cubs probably don’t want to count on him being an everyday player next year.!Rhey want to win in 25’
  13. Rcal10
    He would be a great fit for the Yankees, who are said to like him with or without Soto. Cubs would need to add prospects to a trade but I would want Schmidt back. I think Bellinger would do very well in Yankee stadium. Not interested in trading him for Stroman. I would rather give a prospect or two to the Yankees along with Bellinger to get a good pitcher to have for several years.
  14. Rcal10
    I doubt they take Shaw. But maybe Parades and Assad get the Cubs one of those pitchers. I wouldn’t also add Horton, however. And it would probably take someone like him added. Still like the idea of a 3 team trade where Seattle gets Bohm, Cubs get Castillo and the Phillies get Bellinger + (maybe Ford) from Seattle.
  15. Rcal10
    Manfred suggested it. But I agree it is really stupid.
  16. Rcal10
    But you are ok at 2/$24M. I guess that is what I don’t get. Does the $2.5M a year difference make that big a difference beteeen liking the Cubs getting a guy or not? How is one a fine contract and the other an overpay to the level of you disliking it so much. Also, what if the Cubs traded for a cheaper controlled pitcher to pitch in the top/middle of the rotation? Would that then make the extra $2.5M they are spending on him ok with you?
  17. Rcal10
    Got it. Makes more sense. Because Killian has another option, IMO, if the Cubs sign one more pen arm, his chances are better than at least one of Thompson or Merryweather. I don’t see them both making the 26 man roster if another arm is added. There is a decent chance both won’t make it even with what they have. Adding one more makes it less likely. That said, I won’t be too upset if Killian get dfa as well.
  18. Rcal10
    Isn’t that how America works now? 🤷
  19. Rcal10
    Agreed. I do understand thawv’s point on Killian versus Thompson and Merryweather. Because Killian has an extra option he might make the 40 man over either of them. This is especially so if the Cubs do add another pen arm. With one less spot on the 26 man roster Thompson and Merryweather get squeezed even more. But, Miller needs to be in the team unless they use him as a 3rd piece in a bigger trade. He should not be dfa so that Killian gets a spot on the 40 man.
  20. Rcal10
    But league average offensively but elite defensively should raise his value. I am not interested in moving Nico so that Shaw can play second just because Shaw might hit 10 more homers than Nico. His overall offense very well could end up league average, if he is pretty good year one. So regardless of how he does it there is a real chance he isn’t any better offensively than Nico in 25’, just doing it a little differently. However, when you then add defense, Shaw becomes less valuable than Nico. He does less to make the team win. To me, that is why you don’t trade Nico for a prospect just to open up a space for Shaw. If you can get good value for Nico in a trade that gives you a major league player in a position of need for the Cubs (even if you have to add to him to get a real good player) I can see them trading him and giving Shaw the spot. Shaw+ solid major league player added in a Nico trade is better than Nico alone. I am not opposed to dealing Nico, but now is not the time. And not just to replace him in the line up. He is still very good and unless you get very good back for him, I am fine with him here.
  21. Rcal10
    I don’t agree with this. Hoerner is close to a 4WAR second baseman. Why should they trade him to open up a roster spot for someone who most likely will not be as good? If they get something of value for Hoerner that proves the team elsewhere, sure they can trade him and give second ro a prospect in the system. But he shouldn’t be moved strictly to open up a space if they want to win in 25’. And right now they won’t get the value they should get for Hoerner, so I don’t see him being traded.
  22. Rcal10
    MLBTR had him listed as the 23rd best FA and getting 2/$25M. So not far off at all.
  23. Rcal10
    Shaw is not going to be an everyday player this year. He is especially not going to be that guy if they have Nico and Parades on the roster. And right now they can’t get enough for either of those guys in a trade. Shaw may start the season for Nico. And if he hits maybe he sticks and plays 3 to 4 games a week. But him starting over either Nico or Parades.does not make the Cubs better next year. If Shaw proves he can hit early and then the Cubs can get proper value for either Parades or Hoerner in a deal, maybe at that time Shaw takes over. And because the Cubs get proper value for Nico or Parades, they are better with Shaw+.
  24. Rcal10
    I don’t think they are going to reconstruct the bench. But one decent right handed bat wouldn’t hurt. What would Grichek cost. Him, a back up catcher Canario and a utility infielder would be it. I don’t expect them to spend much. I can see them adding one pen arm, a staring pitcher via trade, a catcher and let’s say Grichek. If the staring pitcher is young with control left his salary isn’t going to be so bad. Between minor league assets and money they should be able to do all of this.
  25. Rcal10
    Nor should this happen. Why would Busch be in the bench for Cassie to play? Plus right now they aren’t getting anything for Hoerner.
×
×
  • Create New...