Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Rcal10

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,006

  • 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
    To be fair, Teoscar isn’t my first option. My only point was he isn’t redundant. I would rather have Bregman too. If the Dodgers are in the hook for the deferral money, Teoscar isn’t that much more costly than Goldy would be. And if Bertz is right, in trade assets he wouldn’t cost much. That said, I have no issue with you not wanting him. I am in the fence with that as well. But if they did get him he would be a good line up addition and not redundant. That is all I am saying.
  2. Rcal10
    You don’t want Hernández but want Goldschmidt? Why does that work any better? He is a DH that would mean Suzuki is in the outfield.
  3. Rcal10
    Suzuki would play right and Teoscar would DH. Mo can play another year at AAA, maybe sharpening his catching skills and Cassie be traded for pitching. I understand not wanting him if you want to play youth. I am just saying he isn’t redundant. The Cubs need a power hitting right handed bat. He would be a nice addition to the line up. I just doubt that happens.
  4. Rcal10
    Hernandez is not redundant. Cubs need a solid right handed bat in the line up WITH Suzuki. It makes no sense at all to trade for him and then just trade Seiya.
  5. Rcal10
    Like the idea but give it about a 1% chance of the Cubs making that sort of move. If they liked him they could have signed him last year without having to give something up for him. They didn’t. Instead they traded assets for Tucker, who they will now lose. But if they did somehow do this that would probably mean the pitcher added to the rotation would be via trade and his salary would be low. Sadly, the Cubs just don’t act big market so there isn’t room for Teoscar plus someone like King and also a pen arm that cost $10M+ a year.
  6. Rcal10
    I can see signing one of Finnegan/Rogers/Weaver/Keller/Fairbanks and then maybe spend a little on a lefty reliever. Or trade for one. Maybe if they trade for a staring pitcher they also get a lefty relief pitcher. And if that trade brings a lower cost starting pitcher I also can see them add another pen arm from that list above. If they traded for Cabrera, as an example, there would be plenty of money to add 2 pen arms. If they sign King they probably can only sign one pen arm.
  7. Rcal10
    He did say a 95% outcome. Which means Cassie plays to close to his absolute ceiling. I don’t think Cassie having a 4.5WAR year playing to his absolute highest ceiling is wildly optimistic. He didn’t say he would do that. Thinking he plays to his 95% ceiling is wildly optimistic. But if he did, which is Bertz point, he would be a guy with a 4.5WAR or better.
  8. Rcal10
    True. And I don’t get it. Why don’t the Cubs want to use deferrals? Makes no sense to me. And it hurts their chances on signing some guys.
  9. Rcal10
    I don’t think the report is malarkey, I think the FO has a limit and the limit is always too low to reel in a big fish. I also think the definition of “big fish” is a reliever they may give multi years to. So think Fairbanks, Keller, Finnegan, Rogers, Weaver. I am certain big fish does not include Suarez or Diaz.
  10. Rcal10
    I agree with this. He couldn’t be our main pitcher added. So this one doesn’t bother me in the least. I don’t think the Cubs were shopping here.
  11. Rcal10
    We know this isn’t happening, right?
  12. Rcal10
    Really like to see one of Keller, Fairbanks or Finnagan, one of Imai, King or Suarez and then at the very least a guy like Andujar who can play some third and first base. Actually someone brought up Bohm some time ago. If he can be traded for without giving much us (he shouldn’t cost much) he would be a good fit for the bench/DH/1B/3B option. I think there is enough money for this sort of thing. If not, then trade for Cabrera or Ryan so you get that pitcher cheaper so that you could make other moves. Maybe if the Cubs did trade with the Phillies they could add a pen arm like Tanner Banks and give up a prospect to get him with Bohm.
  13. Rcal10
    Let’s just hope there is some heavy lifting.
  14. Rcal10
    👍
  15. Rcal10
    I agree that they should spend on one more and maybe even 2 more solid pen arms. But I don’t think it is just luck, what they do. And as for a pen taking time to gel, the issues with the pen last year were not guys they signed in the off season. They were guys they depended on because they were pretty good the year before. Same thing with the ‘24 season. If I remember correctly Alzolay blew 5 games early. He was someone they depended on. In ‘25 the worst pen guys early were Pressley, who they traded for, Merryweather, Pearson and Hodge. Might as well add Morgan too. The cheap FA pickups were fine. That said, sure they miss on some. And sometimes it does take a little time to gel. But that happens with “proven” arms too. Last year Williams and Scott were supposed to be great pen arms. The year before Hader was terrible the fist month of the season. Bednar sucked in ‘24 as well. It happens to good relievers too. I am fine with Jed and the FO evaluating cheap pen talent. However , this year since they aren’t spending much elsewhere they should look to the pen to spend on a few. And then find cheap talent. We all know they have a lot is spots to fill.
  16. Rcal10
    Padres are a perfect example. They had a great pen and still traded a top 5 prospect in the game to get Miller. You are right, all teams look to pen help, no matter what they have in the pen.
  17. Rcal10
    Going one step further, fans will remember and comment forever when the pen comes in the 6th inning with the cubs having a one run lead and they end up blowing it, then they will about a pen who goes 2 weeks without allowing a run. The pen is just something all fans love to complain about. I guarantee that no matter where the Cubs pen ends up this year, it will be complained about all year. It was last year.
  18. Rcal10
    Right. So last year they went into the season with guys like Pressley, Merryweather, Hodges, and Pearson. All of them sucked. The ‘24 team also had Tyson Miller and Jorge Lopez, who were very good for them in ‘24. Yet, all those guys sucked last year. And they still put together a very good pen. The best starting in May. Which is why I don’t consider what the Cubs do in the pen and dumpster dive. I think they seek out specific qualities in guys and that is who they bring in. And they are pretty good at it. That said, they do need to find a proven guy or two this off season. They can fill in the pen how they have previous. But they need someone (maybe 2 guys) who has experience in high leverage situations. And spending on that guy(s) would be fine.
  19. Rcal10
    When does it shift from a dumpster dive to a FO who is good at finding value by evaluating talent? They did an amazing job last year and actually did well the year before. Does the FO ever get credit for finding guys who are more valuable than other FO think they are? I do want a proven guy, but I don’t think the FO should be criticized for finding cheap valuable talent.
  20. Rcal10
    Yep, hard to argue with that analysis. Take all your facts and toss them aside. Brown is just ass.
  21. Rcal10
    Like to see one of Keller, Fairbanks or Williams. Not saying they are all equal, but all decent options. And depending on who they get for the rotation, maybe they can get two of those guys.
  22. Rcal10
    He did. But I would rather not count on that. I would like to get a good one and pay some money for him instead of dumpster diving and hoping. Don’t get me wrong, he does a pretty good job of that. But I would like at least one higher end reliever. Then dive on a few if he sees a value guy.
  23. Rcal10
    Agree with you on the second and 1 call by the bears.. i also thought about the Bears going for 2 when they went up 16-9. I believe the Packers did that to the Bears last year. I get your logic and thought if it too. But I am on the fence on that one. It basically comes down to what the coach is more confident in. If he thinks he has a better chance of getting a 2 pt conversion then stopping the other teams 2 pt conversion, he should go for 2. The issue is, if he goes for 2 a d doesn’t get it, he gives the Eagles a chance to score and possibly go for 2 and win the game. Teams don’t do that often, but the Eagles might have.
  24. Rcal10
    It was not a bad call. Not even close to a bad call. It made perfect sense. Defense expecting a run because, as you said, they were running right through them. More often then not teams will try to go downfield in that exact situation. It is being called a terrible play because it didn’t work. I am sure that had Kmet not caught a TD pass on the throw from Caleb, people would have been calling that a terrible call too. I get your point of “just run”. It was working. And there is definitely an argument to be made there. But suggesting this was one of the worst calls this season is definitely a result of what happened on the play. Had the throw just been incomplete that play wouldn’t have even made the discussion.
  25. Rcal10
    I agree. It is a concern.
×
×
  • Create New...