vance_the_cubs_fan
-
Posts
35,766 -
Joined
-
Last visited
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 vance_the_cubs_fan
-
Way to dance away from the truth about performance. Baseball-Reference, certainly a non-biased source, lists similiar pitchers and players. Here are the top 3 'similiar pitchers' for those mentioned. Roger Clemens: Tom Seaver, Greg Maddux, Steve Carlton Randy Johnson:: Jim Palmer, Bob Gibson, Bob Feller Kerry Wood: Dave Boswell, Steve Busby, Jim Nash Standards never change. 20 wins in a year, .300 BA, 100 RBI, under 2.00 ERA, etc... You can project all the numbers you want and say 'what if?'..but you have to produce on the field. And Wood has performed to a tune of a 1.26 WHIP, a 212 BAA, and a career 3.67 ERA along with a 565 winning percentage all before the age of 28. When healthy, he's performed. You can dress up the ignorance of wins being the best way to measure a pitcher in any rhetoric you want and it's still pretty stupid whether you say it, Joe Morgan says it, or any other idiot says it.
-
I asked you a couple weeks ago how your performance is measured at your place of employment. You seemed unable to give me an answer. Why not begin by telling how performance is measured at your place of work before asking it of others, or will the SCORE not let you divulge that information?
-
Very true. To measure a pitcher with a stat that he has at best 50% control of the outcome is ludicrous, ridiculous, and assinine. I don't care if people have been doing it for years, its still a foolish way to look at things. I think a refresher course in Baseball 101 is needed. 20 wins in a season, 250+ wins for a career are the standards by which starting pitching is measured. You can't dress up that pig to look like a winner. Someone needs a refresher course, but it's not me. You might want to look in the mirror.
-
I think they'd want pitching too, but I think you'll have to do better than Williams, Mitre, and Nolasco or Pinto. I could see them wanting 2 of Mitre, Williams, and Hill + Guzman or Pinto and maybe one other prospcts. As steep as it is, I'd pay it and say, "Thanks, sir. Can I have another!"
-
My guess is Furcal gets the Renteria deal around 4/40. He may be brought in for 3/36. My guess is somewhere in that range.
-
Are we just bidding against ourselves for Furcal? Probably.
-
Why so down on Pierre?
vance_the_cubs_fan replied to Bruno7481's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
If someone starts a BandWGN for Pierre, I might have to run it off the road. :P -
May be a foolish question, but would the Cubs have the $ to take on Abreu's salary? If they give Furcal $9-10MM, possibly then take on Pierre @$6MM, would they have $15MM to give Abreu? (he's owed $31MM for the next two years correct?). Realizing that Hendry has @$30MM to spend, would that leave him with enough $ to shore up the other area's? I did't include Pierre. I downgraded to Lofton. Let me see on the cash. I think we would have to have a $110 million payroll for that team, in all liklihood.
-
I think Walker could have been the cause that we didn't re-sign Baker's girlfried, and maybe that hasn't ever sat very well with Dusty.
-
Cubs trade Jerome Williams and Pie for Abreu. Cubs trade Hill, Guzman, and Murton for Dunn. Sign Kenny Lofton and Furcal. SS Furcal CF Lofton 1b Lee LF Dunn RF Abreu 3b Ramirez 2b Cedeno C Barrett (Let a guy dream for once!)
-
I usually value the farm guys as well, but I'd rather be a World Series contender for the next two years and not have to worry about the development of someone who isn't among the top 25 prospects in baseball.
-
I think they would want some talent to go with Guzman considering his injury risk. Guzman and Hill might get it done, though.
-
Even without a long term deal, you have Dunn for two more seasons.
-
To get Dunn it's going to take a package that probably has one or two blue chip prospects and one or two young players the Reds believe will help them now. Depending on how valuable those prospects are, you may get by with fewer in number. The Reds also are going to want pitching in any deal. Hill will be a part of any deal for Dunn. We may can get away with Pie not being in the deal, but not without Hill in my opinion. What scares me is that if Dunn is on the market, I could see this three-way going down: Mets get Manny Ramirez Red Sox get Cameron and Dunn Reds get Milldege, Petit, and Arroyo. That's probably a better haul than they would get in any of our proposed deals and all of those teams would likely be happy over the deal.
-
That's especially true if you aren't willing to take Milton's contract. But if it meant getting Dunn, I'd take Milton's contract and the mortgage of Great American Ballpark. Get me Adam Dunn, please!!! And see if you can get Kent Mercker thrown into the deal as well.
-
Very true. To measure a pitcher with a stat that he has at best 50% control of the outcome is ludicrous, ridiculous, and assinine. I don't care if people have been doing it for years, its still a foolish way to look at things.
-
In our trade proposals for Dunn, we have to be wary of all the other teams that would have interest and what they would be willing to offer. I'm sure the Cardinals and Astros both would jump into the fray for a talent like Dunn. The Dodgers and Red Sox likely want in on the sweepstakes as well. I could also see Toronto and Seatle having interest. With all those teams involved, we have to realize that we won't get him without giving away our best prospects. To say anyone but Pie and Hill and Prior and Zambrano bascially kills any chance for a deal. Who does that leave that would truly interest the Reds more than what they could get elsewhere? My guess is that any deal for Dunn will include at least Hill or Pie or there won't be a deal.
-
I'd even go with this line-up: SS Furcal CF Lofton 1b Lee LF Dunn 3b Ramirez RF Bradley 2b Cedeno C Barrett =P~
-
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/880/1280/1600/muppets-animal.jpg Me Want Dunn! Dunn! Dunn! Dunn! Dunn! Dunn!
-
So, you are willing to have the highest paid pitcher on your team and one of the highest paid pitchers in all of MLB, be unable to win more than 14 games in a year. That's fine-you are getting what you want. I expect and demand more from the bum. He should be leading the team not sitting on the DL. Hendry was foolish to sign him to such a $$$$ contract for what he thought Wood was going to do. I heard concerns that Wood would walk if he didn't get such a contract, Hendry blinked and caved in. The good pitchers have enough sense to make changes in their mechanics if they are getting pounded, can't locate their pitches..or even when they are consistently injured and on the DL. To say Wood can't change his mechanics is even more reason to dump him. Look at Chris Carpenter(2005 Cy Young winner), he was hurt and changed his mechanics. Say what you will about wins, but there is no better single measurement for a starting pitcher. It's been that way forever in baseball and always will be. Wood can't get win when you have 100 pitches in 5 innings or when your pitching coach makes 4 trips in the 1st 5 innings. My students are staring at me because I'm laughing so hard right now. Tell me another joke, please!
-
I really wouldn't be shocked if that happens.
-
Dunn... =P~ That's about all I have to add right now.
-
My guess is that you'd deal Murton or Patterson for a RF bat or sign Juan Encarnacion or someone of that ilk.
-
Depends on what talent I'd have to give up, but in the short form, yes.
-
That's too much, IMO. You're basically letting them rebuild their crappy rotation. There a scenario there where the Reds end up with: Williams Hill Novoa Guzman You're giving them 3 rotation ready arms and a setup guy. I don't think Dunn is worth allowing Cinci to go from abysmal to mediocre pitching. I'd take Guzman and Novoa off that list. Assume they choose those guys, Williams is a number 4-5 guy, Hill could be Barry Zito but he could be a bust, Novoa is a good, but not great bullpen guy, and Guzman is the risky injury pick who could be an ace or could be a bust. You're right in that if everything worked out for them, the Reds would have one helluva haul from the deal...on the other hand they could end up with Williams, an injured prospect who never pans out, and two bullpen arms for a great hitter. None of the players could we not do without. Williams has become superfluous for the team. Hill and Guzman might fit into the plans down the road, but who really knows? Novoa is a useful arm in the pen, but we could probably sign a FA who could do just as well or trade Walker for an arm that would do just as well. Pencil Dunn in between Lee and Ramirez with Furcal at the top of the order and we'd have one of the most feared line-ups in the NL.