Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Rcal10

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,405

  • 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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Rcal10

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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)
  7. Rcal10
    Cant he still be DFA’ed and sign a minor league contract? I don’t know exactly how this works.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. Rcal10
    Agreed. Actually if Brown didn’t unseat Hodges or anyone they may bring in to close, that is probably a better outcome for the Cubs. Because if Brown did become the closer, most likely, that would mean the closer to start the year was failing. I do think Brown can be very good. Love if he didn’t have to close, however.
  13. Rcal10
    I doubt this very much. For one thing, the also got Neely in that trade. The Cubs are not putting Cowles on the 40 man to make sure they save face. I agree about being surprised they would worry about someone grabbing Cowles. Just not because they worry about a horrible look. They may actually like him and know he could be a utility man next year for some teams. Also they traded Mark Lieter Jr. it isn’t like they traded Chapman of 2016. Lieter wasn’t even on the playoff roster until someone got hurt. Losing 1 guy you got in a Leiter trade in the rule 5 draft wouldn’t exactly be this huge embarrassment. Especially since they still have Neely.
  14. Rcal10
    Yep, I feel bad for Davis. Never could stay healthy. I would have liked to see what he could have done in the majors. At one point he was as high as 14 on the top prospect list. Too bad for him, and the Cubs.
  15. Rcal10
    Your last paragraph answers the question you had when you said if Jed and Ricketts are interchangeable why not extend Jed? It doesn’t matter if Jed shares Tom’s philosophy. You are right, we all just assume Jed feels the same way. But really that doesn’t matter anyway. He agreed to build the team based on Ricketts plan. But as I said and now you just said, if Jed doesn’t win within the parameters of the plan Tom will probably let him go. So that would be the reason to not extend him,
  16. Rcal10
    I am not sure I follow. What evidence is needed? All that is being said is TR and Jed appear to agree with a plan on team building. Hasn't the last several years kind of shown what that plan is? Just because Jed agrees with Ricketts way to run a team doesn’t mean Ricketts will be happy with his work if they don’t make the playoffs again next year. I believe that TR does set the budget and does have a certain philosophy of how he wants his team built. I would think he would believe his plan is good enough to actually win. So just because Jed also believes this philosophy, that does not give him free reign to continually underperform what TR expects. So that is why he didn’t just extend him. I am sure there are many potential GM’s that would be fine taking the job with the Cubs, even if it meant they need to follow certain philosophies. And I would think TR would sign one who does believe in his plan.
  17. Rcal10
    That is what I thought. That said, IMO Fried is highly unlikely.
  18. Rcal10
    I know he did with Burnes. I am not sure about Fried. But I doubt he signs him.
  19. Rcal10
    Agreed. Now if they wanted to sign Adames and then trade Parades for a young starting pitcher and then not sign Fried, that might make some sense. Considering you have to add Taillon to this plan, they cannot sign both Adames and Fried. Personally k am fine with Parades. But if they signed Adames, Parades would need to be traded, not benched. And they need to get someone decent for him.
  20. Rcal10
    Agreed. It really is hard to separate the two of them. On one hand Tom is setting the budget and is clearly not interested in giving a guy a 10-12 year deal. But on the other end, I think Jed agrees with that philosophy. I also agree with what you said earlier. If/when Tom replaces Jed it will be with the same sort of guy.
  21. Rcal10
    I think he will get $10M for one year. Maybe with a team option for year 2, or mutual option. I might do the 2/$20M, no more than that. And I would do the 1!for $10M prove it deal. But with another good pitcher picked up this off season as well.
  22. Rcal10
    If they did this and traded for a front of the rotation pitcher is signed a front of the rotation starter, I would hate Buehler for a 1 year or at most a 2 year deal. But can’t just go with him.
  23. Rcal10
    I think if they like him enough to go 5 years they won’t worry about the QO penalty. But to sign him for 2 or 3 years they might not want to part with a second round pick. I don’t believe they have ever lost a second round pick for a guy they signed for 3 years. I realize you never said 3 years. I am saying it as a time line that, IMO, they would have to exceed in signing someone if they are losing a pick. So if it is Pivetta my guess is he would get a 4 or 5 year deal.
  24. Rcal10
    I think the Phillies wouldn’t consider this for even a minute.
  25. Rcal10
    Let me clarify my statement. Stratos said Pivetta wasn’t good enough but Kikuchi was. I happen to like Pivetta a bit. So I added to his comment that he was not good enough, because I thought the only way he would say that is because of the draft pick compensation. I don’t see how Kikuchi could be someone they should sign but not Pivetta if it wasn’t for that reason. That said, I am not certain the Cubs will sign a mid level starter on a 3 year deal if it means losing a second and fifth would pick. Maybe they would do it on a 5 year or more deal. But do you want then to sign Pivetta for 5 or more years? I’m not sure I would want that. That is why I will stay with my belief that they won’t do it. I would be more than happy if they proved me wrong. As I said, I do like Pivetta a bit more than Kikuchi. But, I think, more than likely, they will either trade for a starter or sign a mid level guy not attached to a QO to a 3 year or less deal.
×
×
  • Create New...