Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Hairyducked Idiot

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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. Hairyducked Idiot
    Don't call them that, even ironically.
  2. Hairyducked Idiot
    Petition to change my username to Hairydicked Idiot
  3. Hairyducked Idiot
    And I admitted I was wrong on the timeline. But the reason "Vizcaino was a top-5 prospect at some point when we had him" was important was because David was being weird and insisting that Vizcaino hadn't really depreciated in value since we got him. Tommy La Stella might be a top 5 prospect on that list. *dismissive gif of some kind*
  4. Hairyducked Idiot
    And I admitted I was wrong on the timeline. But the reason "Vizcaino was a top-5 prospect at some point when we had him" was important was because David was being weird and insisting that Vizcaino hadn't really depreciated in value since we got him.
  5. Hairyducked Idiot
    He was? Baez, Bryant, Soler, Almora, Alcantara Someone had him above any of those names? I'm not so much questioning as expressing disbelief. I could easily be wrong. In their Feb. 2013 top-101, Baseball Prospectus put Vizcaino at No. 54, fourth in the Cubs' system. I guess it was more like 20 months than a year, but Vizcaino did lose significant value. Hahahahhahhahahahah this is one of the most kyle posts ever. Yeah the important part of my post was wrong, but i was still right because the really super obvious point was correct. Your definition of the important part is odd.
  6. Hairyducked Idiot
    He was? Baez, Bryant, Soler, Almora, Alcantara Someone had him above any of those names? I'm not so much questioning as expressing disbelief. I could easily be wrong. In their Feb. 2013 top-101, Baseball Prospectus put Vizcaino at No. 54, fourth in the Cubs' system. I guess it was more like 20 months than a year, but Vizcaino did lose significant value.
  7. Hairyducked Idiot
    Whelp, they can have him at that price. Tired of this refrain. Kyle is going to have a field day with this Meh. I don't really like Martin all that much. I just don't want to get nothing. If this happens and we miss on Lester, then I'll go into meltdown mode. For now, I'll put it on standby.
  8. Hairyducked Idiot
    Wow. My first reaction is that sucks. I don't want the Cardinals converting pitcher assets into position player assets.
  9. Hairyducked Idiot
    You seriously don't remember Jim Hendry trying to collect an entire roster full of 2b being a thing we joked about?
  10. Hairyducked Idiot
    Oh come on. A year ago Vizcaino was in our top 5 in some publications. He just got traded for a negative-WAR 25-year-old former 8th round pick. I'm not saying they did anything wrong. He's a pitcher. They depreciate all the time and there's nothing you can do about it. But this one *did* depreciate considerably.
  11. Hairyducked Idiot
    based on what? Trading a former top prospect at a fraction of their peak value (not saying they screwed up, it happens) and trading for a fringy second baseman. Trading for fringy second basemen was always Hendry's go-to.
  12. Hairyducked Idiot
    I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing, but this feels like a Jim Hendry trade.
  13. Hairyducked Idiot
    http://d3k2oh6evki4b7.cloudfront.net/images-009/headshots/9/9ff584c8_mlbam.jpg That's a whole lotta neck.
  14. Hairyducked Idiot
    So we traded bonus money from 2014? Is that from the international signing period? Just trying to get a handle on this since I don't follow international stuff that closely. Yes, they traded bonus pool chunks from the current signing period, which started July 2 and runs through next June. They are forbidden from signing anyone over $250k because of how they blew their caps in the previous signing period, so the pools weren't doing them much good.
  15. Hairyducked Idiot
    At the moment, we have zero quality infield subs. Valbuena and Alcantara would both be in our starting 8 with what we have now. Important part in bold. It's still pretty early in the offseason and Watkins could be a decent bench bat. I'll hold judgement but I think I would like to have seen more of Vizcaino with some time removed from the injuries. I do wonder the Braves' motive for the trade though. Isn't their middle infield depth pretty bad? Watkins sucks and doesn't belong on an MLB roster that hasn't had a big run of injuries.
  16. Hairyducked Idiot
    At the moment, we have zero quality infield subs. Valbuena and Alcantara would both be in our starting 8 with what we have now.
  17. Hairyducked Idiot
    Logan Watkins with less defense and better OBP, I think?
  18. Hairyducked Idiot
    It really did seem like Vizcaino was beginning to lose the stuff after repeated injuries.
  19. Hairyducked Idiot
    For a split second, I thought they'd left someone that wide open in the end zone.
  20. Hairyducked Idiot
    Great call to go for it there.
  21. Hairyducked Idiot
    Only sulley's teams
  22. Hairyducked Idiot
    Cutlergasm!
  23. Hairyducked Idiot
    Yeah that was just awful.
  24. Hairyducked Idiot
    Holy crap that throw!
  25. Hairyducked Idiot
    It was a bad throw. A really bad throw.
×
×
  • Create New...