Hairyducked Idiot

As you guessed, I'd rather just let him play out the season and then talk extension. But as far as premature extensions go, this one is not that objectionable.

hmm. Theo has the choice of doing something or not doing it and thinking about how cool he's being by drawing a line in the sand and refusing to most past it. Wonder which one he will choose.

I'll take a medium-talented front office with passion and engagement over our current, can't-be-bothered-to-do-stuff geniuses.

Playoff odds have them right around 50/50 to make it. I guess I should start paying attention to more than just Kane highlights on instagram.

Who wouldn't want to visit the home of Jerky the Cornjerker

elite passing game >>> elite running game + elite defense + pretty good QB Mack trade was a mistake

Arenado is a more valuable player but I would always rather have a guy under a two-year commitment for his prime years rather than a guy you’re stuck with deep into his 30s, and that goes triply for if the latter guy has a player opt-out

Bryant will be a FA An expiring contract >>> a player opt-out

I feel like the NL DH has been two years away perpetually for about 15 years.

Haven't players historically hit between their coors/road splits when leaving, not strictly at their road splits? But your last point is where I'm at. 29 year olds with a billion years of commitment and an opt-out are not where I want to be.

Boras wasn't just like randomly assigned to Bryant. He was hired by Bryant to advocate for Bryant. Right, but Boras' work with Bryant doesn't really start until his rookie deal is nearing completion. Maybe he got an extra million or two in his rookie deal with Boras as his agent, but the real value will be his first year in free agency, which was delayed a year because of the service time loophole. That happens to many of Boras' other clients (and every other agent of a top tier prospect) and they are all losing out on an extra year of free agency commission. The player is losing it, too, but it's probably Boras that pushed to make this happen moreso than Bryant, IMO. Why don't you think Bryant pushed for this?

Boras wasn't just like randomly assigned to Bryant. He was hired by Bryant to advocate for Bryant.

Officially getting ugly. Trading Bryant might be more about the fact that its looking increasingly unlikely that he re-signs with the Cubs They did lie. They held him down to delay his service time and lied about it.

I think it's more likely that the Cubs seized on something they knew wouldn't be resolved until now as the "lynchpin" to an offseason in which they planned on doing nothing all along.

4/64 is fine but with opt-outs that makes it so, so bad.

Or any other season. Only the sort of move you make if you've basically given up. Not a good baseball player and has the same flaws our roster was already riddled with. He's basically Ian Stewart.

That's why ceiling questions are always dumb. Everyone's ceiling is becoming the GOAT and everyone's floor is dying in the next three seconds. Just give me the projection.

Sandberg can keep his 3 extra WAR or whatever, it comes attached to a sanctimonious douchenozzle, clubhouse cancer who jaked balls (hey-o) to protect his error-less streaks. He was the Ricketts ownership personified as a player.

Pro Trading Kris Bryant Because It's Dumb And We're Bored

No, they aren't considering that.

Players peak earlier than you're thinking. All those guys are pure decline age. Everyone declines forever. There are no peaks. I thought we had backed the peak age back from 31 years ago to 28 today. And just because you peaked in high school doesn’t mean we all did. Also, if peak is earlier than 28, why are we upset they want to trade Bryant? I mean, I am, but maybe I need to take a step back. Historically, people thought baseball peaks were 28-32 but they were more like 25-29. They've been trending younger in the last 15 years or so, to the point where they might be as early as 23-25 now. Probably because in the past, players learned on the job up through the majors and skill progression cancelled out aging, but now players tend to get intense training from an early age and to the majors with less to gain from experience. So all that's left is good old physical decline, which starts in the very early 20s. People being mad about trading Bryant? It seems pretty emotion-based to me.

From a talent perspective, I think we still have more projected production than any other team in the division. I don't really buy into the theory that the whole is less than the sum of the parts with this team. I just think we experienced negative variance last year and that if you played that season 100 times, we'd win the division most of those times. None of the teams has added much and both MIL and STL have had a major subtraction or two. For better or worse, we're basically exactly the same team minus Hamels and a few relievers. While there's not much in the pen you'd point to and write in for 70 appearances of great pitching, there are a fair amount of quality arms that simply lack the longer track record that makes you feel warm and fuzzy. But there's a lot of flexibility and I've got a fair bit of confidence that they can put together a pretty good performance with what they have. The bench was awful last year, but those are actually players that have a decent track record of not being complete garbage until last year. Bote and Caratini are fine to excellent depth. Descalso, Kemp and Almora may not set the world on fire, but they shouldn't sum to a -2.0 WAR, either. The last few guys on everyone's bench look much the same. The overall offense should be somewhere between good to excellent. The big factors there are Happ & Hoerner. If Happ can provide anything like what he did in the second half, he's a well above average CF and our outfield is suddenly looking a lot better. If Nico can reproduce his quality of contact from last year and raise his walk rate to what he did in the minors, he's a very solid piece of the puzzle, too. Them producing well is huge because then you limit the number of at bats you're giving to the end of the bench. Then you've still got Bryant, Rizzo, Schwarber, Contreras and Baez to anchor the offense. Darvish & Hendricks is a heck of a start to the rotation. There's interesting depth there with Mills, Rea, Cotton, Alzolay, etc. And, yeah, that's all I'm going to say here. Plus some of those core position players are theoretically moving into the peak of their prime. It’s hard to imagine improvement with some, but Contreras, Schwarber, Bryant and Baez are theoretically yet to/about to peak while Happ, Almora, Bote could/should also be improving. Rizzo and Heyward will turn 31 this year however and are in danger of precipitous decline. Players peak earlier than you're thinking. All those guys are pure decline age. Everyone declines forever. There are no peaks.

To be clear, are we saying this team has a plurality or majority of the division-winning chances?

Or alternatively Bryant 2015-2017: .389 Bryant 2018-2019: .371

This is going to end with them doing actual nothing and trying to get under the LT in 2021 instead.