Jump to content
Marlins-Cubs game thread is live — talk the game with us! ×
North Side Baseball

Rcal10

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,806

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

 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
    Where did you find the price of the ticket for the Jays WS games? I have good seats at Wrigley, not the highest priced but definitely not the lowest. My WS ticket was $280. My section is called terrace reserve preferred. 8 rows up from the main walkway around the park, right behind home plate. Can’t imagine the average price of all seats at the Jays park was $1,000. But maybe it was🤷 Besides that, using your example it would be $180M brought in at your numbers.
  2. Rcal10
    I have Chase in FF and didn’t do so well, considering what Flacco did. Also played a 7 pick SGP and because Rome couldn’t get 50 yards in receiving, I lost. Had 6 of 7. 25-1 odds.
  3. Rcal10
    Or had a better lead off at 3rd. He really should have scored on that ball. He was a pinch runner, for christ sake! That title means he should be able to run well.
  4. Rcal10
    No interest in Gray. I don’t see a scenerio where I would want him. We need to aim higher.
  5. Rcal10
    This is mt POV as well. He messed up and I blame him for being short on pitching. But that should have been taken care of in the off season.
  6. Rcal10
    Why would we have to give up Busch or Shaw? Okamoto would fit in nicely. He could play 3rd or 1st, DH and even play the outfield. A right handed bat with power would be nice. I don’t want the lefty bat, but wouldn’t mind Okamoto or, as Bertz suggested, Bohm(especially if the Phillies decline his option). So many people complained the Cubs kept trotting out the same line up day after day and wore players out. With Okamoto or Bohm they have flexibility. Even if Ballesteros or Cassie makes the team as a main DH, they can still use those a right handed bench bat enough. And if they did get one of them that opens up all the young players as trade options to improve the pitching.
  7. Rcal10
    I’m not opposed to trading future for present. I liked the Tucker deal. I want them to do a future for present trade this off season. But I do think the ask for pitchers was too high this TDL. Without using hindsight, Bieber was a huge question mark. Sure, if he costed a mid level prospect, I would be all for getting him. But not at the expense of Wiggins (if that was the cost) Others had ridiculous price tags. I have said it before, I don’t blame Jed for not diving into the demands for a TOR/MOR starter at the deadline. I do blame hm for putting the Cubs in that spot. He misread the market for deadline pitchers in the off season. That was when he should have gotten another pitcher, even if it had to be giving up future for present. The future asset would have been less then.
  8. Rcal10
    Absolutely. But every year they have some kind of phantom excuse. For a few years it was the large losses they took due to Covid. Then it was we want to keep money for the trade deadline, so we can be aggressive. Now it is they are worried about the next CBA. Once the lockout ends they will go back to the large losses they incurred due to the lock out. Fact is, they will never spend what most here feel they should. But they will always have a reason why. This is a convenient reason why. All I am saying is no matter what the new agreement entails it will not have any real consequences to the Cubs and how they conduct business. And whether they signed a guy or two this off season to a multi year or even mega contract, it still wouldn’t hinder they once play resumes.
  9. Rcal10
    I get it. I totally understand what you are saying. I just don’t think that will happen. And besides that, I really don’t think the Cubs ownership believes that will happen. I see this as just an excuse for them not to spend. IMO there is no way salaries go down in the next CBA and no way penalties will be stricter and/or kick in at a lower payroll limit then they are now. There is also no way there is a salary cap. Which, to me, means it will have little consequences on how the Cubs run their team. Signing a mega deal or any multi year deal for any of the big name guys, or even the next tier of FA will not hurt the Cubs, no matter the outcome of the new CBA.
  10. Rcal10
    I have to be honest, rooting against him is easy for me.
  11. Rcal10
    This is where I have questions. If the new CBA is going to do this why the hell would the players ever agree to it? I don’t see any way a new deal will cut pay to players. They may say this is why they don’t want to tie anyone up long term. I agree they will say that. But I think it is complete BS. Players are not going to agree to this.
  12. Rcal10
    Agreed. But probably not for Wiggins. Cubs fans think they can get someone by giving up mid to low grade prospects. The pitcher given up for Bieber was maybe just below Wiggins. But he was a ranked 79th by one publication and generally regarded as a very solid prospect. So I am ok not losing what would have been needed for Bieber. Sure, I guess if Horton didn’t get hurt and they had Bieber MAYBE they beat the Dodgers after beating the Brewers, but probably not. And they lose Wiggins. Worked out for the Jays. So no one is going to complain about the pitcher they gave up. Doesn’t mean it would have worked here. I don’t think Stratos is suggesting it is hindsight by fans saying it would have been nice to get Bieber. I think it is hindsight to now suggest at the time of the deal the Jays made a good deal. Had they lost to the Mariners no one would have suggested they made a good move. That is where hindsight comes in. Looks great now, but wouldn’t have had they lost earlier.
  13. Rcal10
    I was going to say the same thing. But I think he meant baseball wise nothing significant happens until December. Doesn’t mean it will have Cubs significance. As you said, hope something significant, Cubs related move(s), will happen.
  14. Rcal10
    I don’t see that happening. Not even sure what “better terms” would be. I also don’t see how it affects guys they already signed. I seriously doubt contracts will go down.I honestly see it as one big excuse. Of course, then after the lock out it will be years of complaining of lost revenue, so they can’t spend money. Then, once they ride that excuse a few years a new CBA will be coming. Rinse and repeat!!!! Different BS every year, but same result. Won’t spend like a large market.
  15. Rcal10
    Most likely you are absolutely correct. I just don’t understand why the lock out plays a part in any Cubs plans. It isn’t like the new deal will hurt them for spending too much money. We all know that isn’t going to happen. The new deal isn’t going to increase penalties for spending at a lower spending amount. And besides that, next year they have so many guys potentially leaving, they can get to whatever number they need, regardless if they sign 2 guys to high priced high year contracts this off season. And we all know that isn’t happening even without a looming lock out. This lock out scare is 100% an excuse to not spend big this off season. And it honestly has no merit at all.
  16. Rcal10
    Not worth discussing this. Just going to agree to disagree.
  17. Rcal10
    Two things can be true. Your Ricketts statement is true. They won’t spend that money. But it is also true those two players were at all times going to the Dodgers. Ohtani agreeing to that large deferral allowed the Dodgers to add whatever they wanted. He was ALWAYS only going to the Dodgers. Same with Yamamoto. Unless the Dodgers didn’t want him, that was where he was going.
  18. Rcal10
    Why does signing King not come with losing a pick? And Cubs have given up a pick before. When they signed Swanson, I believe they lost a pick. But they got one back from Contreras. Which they will do when Tucker gets signed. I don’t think THIS YEAR losing a pick will matter.
  19. Rcal10
    I agree. Just don’t see even a narrow path they can walk to make it work. Players would need earlier free agency, more money early in a contract and the ceiling and floor would have to not be so far apart that small market teams wouldn’t spend. Of course, if that happens the small market teams won’t go for that deal. Really it is two sets of negotiations going on. Owners with owners (and then if that does actually happen, which I highly doubt) owners with players. Don’t see it happening. TBH I don’t see owners even agreeing to it. As soon as the small market owners put a ceiling in I am sure the higher spending teams will put a floor in. That is where the idea will stop.
  20. Rcal10
    I saw that. Happy to be wrong. 😬
  21. Rcal10
    I think the scenerio that will play out here is Cuzi’s. I don’t see a salary cap coming. And I also agree that if it did come the teams over would be grandfathered in. I doubt they have to get to that number. Maybe they can’t add anyone until they get under, or maybe they lose draft picks too. But they won’t be forced to get rid of guys to get under, even if it did happen(which I doubt it does). Players will hate it. So what do they get to agree to it? Free agency after 4 years? And even if that is the case, who is spending if the cap is too low. With a cap has to be a floor. Which means some owners won’t like it for the cap and some for the floor. Just see way too many obstacles for a cap. Personally I think Ricketts knows there won’t be a cap. He is just using this as a reason not to spend money or sign long term contracts.
  22. Rcal10
    Lamar is going to play.
  23. Rcal10
    Again, I think you are overstating what the Phillies would want for Bohm. He just isn’t that good to get much. And IMO they know that. But, if you are right and they do expect a solid return, I agree with you that the Cubs won’t give it to them. But I will also go one step farther. They won’t trade him. He just won’t bring much back.
  24. Rcal10
    Bohm isn’t getting Brown on his own, let alone having to take Castellanos, let alone adding another prospect. Come on! I think you are grossly overvaluing Bohm. He has one year left on his contract too. Think about this from the Cubs POV. Do they want Bohm and Castellanos plus their salaries and losing Brown and a prospect, or would they be better off with something like Andujar and Hays as free agents for less salary and not lose any players. I wouldn’t even do Bohm for Brown straight up. Again, rather have Andujar and keep Brown. If Bohm is cheap, fine. If not, hard pass.
  25. Rcal10
    Makes sense, but really hard to get too excited about Bohm. Have to be a trade where the Cubs basically trade a guy they have no intention of even having on their major league roster. Bohm is just not very good. I know threading the needle it could work with Bohm. Just had/have higher hopes.
×
×
  • Create New...