Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Rcal10

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,639

  • 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
    You left Wesneski off your list. While I understand what you are saying, I think Leiter is closer to a sure pen spot than you have him. I am basically suggesting what 1908 said better than I can. A deal that included Wesneski and/or Assad that also had Mervis and/or Canario could make some sense if the Cubs wanted to either clear space on the 40 man roster by taking a young prospect(s) back or wanted to bring in an established major league bat. Then they can add an established pen arm and still have some options in the minors. Also, as you pointed out, Counsell might it want 2 long relief options. All the more reason to deal Assad or Weeneski.
  2. Rcal10
    That is great to hear. That said, isn’t the pen very crowded? Alzolay, Wesneski, Smyly, Assad, Merryweather, Cuas, Almonte, Little, Palancia, Leiter are 10 names. That doesn’t even include guys like Brown, Horn, Rucker, the lefty they signed from Japan, or any others in the minors that are close to making the majors. Some don’t have options left. Points to a trade for me. Either for a guy not on the 40 man roster or a bigger deal for a major league bat. I would say a starting pitcher, but Jed seemed to indicate they aren’t looking for that. Add a solid guy as Jed is suggesting and guys like Assad and/or Wesneski can definitely be in some sort of a deal.
  3. Rcal10
    Actually my comment was more because what many are suggesting. Not necessarily my POV. If people don’t feel Busch has a position why it trade him for Naylor. I, on the other hand, feel Busch and Morel can both be tried at 1st and 3rd.
  4. Rcal10
    If they are going to go with no power decent glove at 3rd might as well keep Madrigal. Not suggesting he is equal to Triolo, because I have no idea. But if he is not that would mean the Cubs would have to add to Madrigal for a trade. Don’t see giving up assets for a slap hitting third baseman. I don’t want Madrigal there either.
  5. Rcal10
    Agreed. I think Busch is probably an easier fix than Morel if his issue is really arm strength. They have taken a guy with a poor arm and made him a good third baseman already. I don’t expect Chapman unless he is willing to do a short term deal. Maybe even a deal similar to Correa’s first twins deal. Less yearly, of course.
  6. Rcal10
    I don’t think so. I think you lose the DH once you put him at a position. But I am not positive.
  7. Rcal10
    This is true. But I want them to keep Morel. And besides that Morel doesn’t have near the value of Luzardo. So what else would be needed becomes an issue. As an example, if it is Morel AND PCA that hurts a bit. But it could be both. I do like the thought of Morel being on the team and the Cubs adding Bellinger and Hoskins. They just need to figure out who can at least adequately handle third between Morel and Busch. I would think it would be Busch since his biggest issue there is arm strength. Sound similar to Madrigal, who the Cubs turned into a decent 3rd baseman. Maybe the Cubs can do the same with Busch. But, IMO, another trade is coming. I think at least one of Assad, Wesneski or Wicks will be moved. Probably with a prospect or two. If you look at the Cubs team now they would probably have Wicks as a 5 and then a one that would have Alzolay, Lieter, Merryweather. Almonte, Wesneski, Assad, Smyly and maybe Little. They still have several others to consider. And they claim to want to add a pen arm. They can only have 8. Seems something has to happen. They also are at 40 on the 40 man roster. So adding Bellinger and Hoskins or whoever they do add, means someone has to go. I can easily see a 3 for 1 sort of deal.
  8. Rcal10
    How about if the Cubs turn Busch into Naylor. Pretty equal value. Guardians play him at 2nd and cut some salary. Cubs get a ML first baseman. I like Busch, but he doesn’t have a position. Why not get a proven player for him? I know they won’t do this, but would this make them better? And why wouldn’t the Guardians do it?
  9. Rcal10
    Tough getting old and typing with thumbs. Then not being able to see what you typed without reading glasses. If you are lucky you will be here some day.
  10. Rcal10
    I think so too. But do 2 of 3 have him top 100? I would think so.
  11. Rcal10
    Fixed!
  12. Rcal10
    If Busch opens the season with the Cubs and is in the top 3 of ROY do the Cubs get rewarded with an extra draft pick. I have seen him ranked 44th best last time I looked. Has to be consensus top 100, right?
  13. Rcal10
    So now they have 2 guys that are better at DH than 3rd base. Maybe 3rd goes to either Bush or Morel and the Cubs hope one can nail it down, at least adequately. The other is DH. Then when Hoskins leaves one of them moves to first. Assuming your scenerio. I don’t hate it.
  14. Rcal10
    That is one game. They still tie Az and lose tiebreaker. If they beat Az one time with that one play they gain 2 games on Az. That is why that play mattered more.
  15. Rcal10
    I don’t agree that the QO is that big a deal. But I think the owners are holding down salaries while they make record profits. The owners are playing based on self made rules to police themselves and keep spending down.
  16. Rcal10
    Ok, so year 3 plays at $11.5? Then we repeat in the last year. Or they can go to 5 and add $38.5M for these 2 years. (Difference between what he earned first 3 and the $80m option.) So the Cubs get that option again after year 3 or does he only get the option to opt out of the last year?
  17. Rcal10
    So it is a 4 year deal at $53M, but his first 2 are a total of $30M. If the Cubs don’t up the ante to 5/$80 he can opt out. If he doesn’t the Cubs are on the hook for the last 2 an additional $23M for those last 2 years. Do I have that right? .
  18. Rcal10
    Simplest route to the playoffs was Swanson catching the deflection of Wesneski’s backside in Arizona. He does that and the Cubs are in and Az is out, even with all the bad decisions to that point.
  19. Rcal10
    Not arguing the merits of a dominating closer, Just saying the Cubs aren’t going to spend that kind of money for one. And even with being a pen arms short at the start of the season, had they traded for one (better than Clus or at least in addition to Clus), at the deadline, they would have made the playoffs. That is exactly what the d’backs did.
  20. Rcal10
    I don’t sense that at all. I especially don’t see a problem signing Bellinger and not getting a pick for losing him. They just keep all their picks. I do see this as a problem if they also added Hader, Chapman or Snell. Which I doubt they do.
  21. Rcal10
    Agreed. I have no idea why anyone would expect this FO to be in on Hader or any pen arm looking for $16-$20M a year for 4 or 5 years. Not arguing if it is warranted or not. Just saying they wouldn’t do it.
  22. Rcal10
    Even if they got Montgomery, which I doubt they would, it would not be 4/1 L/R rotation. Montgomery would replace Wicks.
  23. Rcal10
    Probably is Boras noise.
  24. Rcal10
    The only way 2 of them is Bellinger and Chapman is if one of them took a contract like the first Correa deal. 3 year with opt out each year. As you and nyc pointed out, most likely it is either or with Chapman and Bellinger. But with a short deal with high AAV for one of them, they can get both, assuming they are okay going over the first LT line.
  25. Rcal10
    He did slug .489. Not home runs, so much. But that is a very solid slugging percentage. I wouldn’t complain if they did trade for him. Not a 30+ home run guy. But in 600AB he could hit 25.
×
×
  • Create New...