kevinorie

Lance Dickson is the answer.

No...no it's not. But I ran it out there on a message board anyway. I'm ok with that.

Barring the Cubs winning the last game played, no. Regardless of how high a stock may go, if it drops back down below the purchase price and you sell, it's a net loss.

Paredes is a playable corner. Wesneski is a back-end of the rotation guy. Cam Smith carries as much prospective currency as PCA did, and made a big league roster for a competitive team almost immediately. And I don't mean to diminish PCA in any way, I love that dude. But that's alot to give up and I do agree that, Kyle Tucker is a stud and worthy of that haul. But you gotta re-sign him and my HOPE is, that has been the plan all along, regardless of the public persona.

I'm not with you on all of that, just yet.

I hope you're right with the ONKC scenario. If not, that was a bad deal...not in the sense that when dealing for prospects you KNOW who is going to work out and who isn't, rather you HAVE to get something playable for Darvish. My hope is, ONKC is that "playable".

Sorry, should've quoted Brock in my last post.

I agree. I suppose that was my point...that if they KNOW they are not willing to go however far it may be to retain him, I hate to see our return on investment end up as a compensatory pick. Understandably, that comes with a couple of extra months of fun baseball to watch as a fan if you don't trade him. Probably just thinking too much but it's a conversation I thought worth having.

A World Series is hard to win, even with the most talented roster in MLB. Making that deal and parting with those involved, it would be unacceptable for 2026 to roll around and the only thing the Cubs have to show for their deal was a pick. I want to watch Tucker in uniform for the Cubs all season, heck I want to pay him 500 mill. Letting him walk after this season though is irresponsible. Maybe a better framing of this conversation...what does everyone think a reasonable/competitive offer from the Cubs will look like for Kyle Tucker?

The fan in me sees it the same way. The adult in me sees us moving Paredes, Wesneski and Smith for a pick. And that's an upper management problem, if they allow that to be the end result.

I'd love to extend him. That should be everyone's preference. But if upper management KNOWS it's not gonna happen, the discussion has to be had.

After seeing what Vladdy Jr. got, there's little to no chance Ricketts pays for Tucker beyond this season. What package of players does he bring back at the deadline? Barring a team that appears 99% destined to play in the World Series, there's little reason to hold on to Tuck beyond that point. Knowing he's headed to free agency, I can't imagine the return matches up very well with the initial investment.