Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Hairyducked Idiot

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    39,504
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

 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 Hairyducked Idiot

  1. Listed in order of scariness. Discuss.
  2. 6-2 in playoff rounds in last three seasons. I wonder what being built for the playoffs could have done
  3. They don’t deserve their own thread, but we could move the Brewers talk to a combined also-ran thread with the Reds and Pirates rather than make me think there is Darvish news
  4. They like to claim the 1957 Milwaukee Braves World Series. I was "burned" by a Brewers fan before the Cubs won with that piece of information. That's...not how this works.
  5. To be fair, all this making fun of them is probably giving the impression that they're a lot more relevant to us than they are. It's just been a very long and very boring offseason.
  6. Yeah, without a robust farm system right now, how will we fill all the holes we might have in 2022? It really sucks when farm system is "barren" because all of your top prospects are in your MLB starting lineup. Your LCS starting lineup for the third year in a row.
  7. Remember how mad everyone was about Ross and how awful he was? OK, maybe "mad" is overstating it, but it wasn't a popular move.
  8. Damn. I knew it's been bad but I didn't expect to check the standings and see them in last place.
  9. We're doing that thing again where we really underestimate how bad opt-outs are for the team and how good they are for the player.
  10. It's going to be nice when we sign Bryce Harper next offseason and it helps Darvish decide on us.
  11. I'm not actually mad that they went with him. I don't have a shred of background required to evaluate coaching hires. I just think it's funny.
  12. So we hired the guy people were saying embarrassed himself to a degree that made him unhireable a few days ago? Sounds about right.
  13. Rizzo is also in the graph, but he's completely covered up by Kris Bryant so no one can notice him.
  14. McDonald's alignment chart is a meme going around. I just lazily copied in the five or six Cubs I still remember where they seemed appropriate.
  15. My point in asking is the best candidates may not love mitch, or want to be tied to him. Which brings me back to: If you feel that way, why do you want the Bears job out of the 15 jobs that are open this offseason?
  16. The Bears have a lot of problems, as you'd expect from a last-place team, but they feel like solvable problems. I'm bought in on Trubisky, so having that settled probably fuels my optimism. And surely they are due for a good head coach post-Lovie. I think it's because they at least have some top-end talents to build around. Hicks, Howard/Cohen, the safeties, these are positions where you can not just say "that's filled" but actually put out better players than your opponents. And god help me, I think Trubisky can become one of those guys soon. And the receivers were so bad that there's a lot of ground to be gained just by fielding players who belong on an NFL roster. Besides that, they need a ton of depth. Places like LB and OL and non-Hicks DL aren't the glaring needs like WR was, but they were filled with meh guys and bad backups to fill in for the meh guys when they got hurt.
  17. It'd be weird to want the Bears job if you don't want Trubisky. And also they'll want Trubisky because he is pretty good.
  18. It feels like the standards have subtly gone up for Trubisky, which is a great thing. He's earned it. This would have been a great game for him when he first got the starting job. Now him looking competent is just an everyweek thing.
  19. This might be the worst case of fake thread explosion we have ever had.
  20. Re-upping Arrieta would be boring. Signing Darvish would not. This offseason needs less boring. QED
  21. If it's a righty, he's wearing his glove backwards.
  22. Is this a "The Bears shouldn't have fired Lovie" take? Because that's not a good take. Not at all. Just pointing out that the Bears have been bad for 25 years, and that even includes a 9-year stint of decent football. Also, the Bears shouldn't have fired Lovie.
  23. The first A-Rod megadeal, with Texas, was good value for what he produced.
  24. Yeah this is my thinking too, you also potentially lose Q and Hendricks after 2020 (maybe 2021 with Hendricks?). That's a lot of money coming off, obviously you need to replace a lot of that pitching (hopefully some can be developed from within for cheap and not all needing to be bought) but they could hit the LT reset button in 2021. Also by some divine intervention there is a possibility of a Heyward opt out the next 2 offseasons or trade (obviously would have to eat some money but could reduce the overall obligation). Q has an option for 2020 so he'd have to be dead to have it declined. And at that point if you've signed Darvish you've got all 5 rotation spots handled with Darvish/Q/Hendricks/Chatwood/Lester. The bullpen looks thinner, but every bullpen is gonna look shaky 2 years out and there's a high volume of pitching in the farm system that can help there. It might end up with some sub-optimal outcomes, but I don't think Darvish hurts your ability to put together the quality of team you want. These are pitchers. By 2020, the over/under on attached and functional arms among any five of them is like 6.5.
×
×
  • Create New...