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
    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_K60Z1eMb6jQ/SShPjxcBqhI/AAAAAAAAAWM/vdCAwag0-60/s400/simpsons+flying+pig.JPG It's just one move! It's still good! It's still good!
  2. Hairyducked Idiot
    No. Jackson is clearly starting the season in AAA. Reed Johnson is our fourth outfielder, and he's bad in that role. It's annoying that we signed a player to fill a role that he's bad at. The annoyance goes to anger in that he's symbolic of everything we hoped the new regime would do differently from the old one.
  3. Hairyducked Idiot
    He has an adequate ability to miss bats.
  4. Hairyducked Idiot
    He's not a good fourth outfielder. Epsten/Hoyer should be able to come up with a better fourth outfielder with very minimal effort.
  5. Hairyducked Idiot
    It's like Epstein/Hoyer are determined to ruin our faith in them and intend to just keep escalating the damage until we crack. "We've passed on the major free agents, but it's not quite time to trade Castro to the Cardinals. What's something in between that will *really* make them doubt us?"
  6. Hairyducked Idiot
    Alright, we're closing in on Christmas and there's still tons of time left. But so far, what have you liked the most?
  7. Hairyducked Idiot
    1. Cheaper Fukudome 2. Theo's House 3. Guy who couldn't hit enough to stick in Colorado 4. McDonald's 5. Reed Johnson Best offseason *evah*.
  8. Hairyducked Idiot
    It's over. At least we're going to waste it with guys like this. If we aren't trying to win, might as well let Brett Jackson get some work in AAA and not use up his service time.
  9. Hairyducked Idiot
    He's a Boras client and the last worthwhile free agent. They've set some ridiculous total value like 8/225 and are just (to borrow from the Epstein thread) faxing pictures of middle fingers to anyone who offers less.
  10. Hairyducked Idiot
    lolwut?
  11. Hairyducked Idiot
    I had no interest in Crisp whatsoever before that rumor, it just made me want him even less. I guess I'm just confused about what's going on. Do we want young players and prospects or do we want Crisp, Varitek, and Wakefield? Both. "Parallel fronts" and all that.
  12. Hairyducked Idiot
    There's a pretty decent chance that this deal doesn't make us any worse for next year(Wood returning to 2010 form at age 25, and Cashner playing up in the pen). Maybe if they deal a SP and/or outfielder for prospects, but as it stands, Marshall is going to give some team one year of awesome and then get paid. Getting 4 years of a decent SP and two other guys is a pretty good value for both now and later. Filling a major hole for a divisional rival seems like a pretty good sign they are waving the white flag on 2012. If they are going to do that, fine I guess, I like Wood for Marshall quite a bit. I don't quite get the Maholm/Wells comparisons. He strikes out a lot more batters than either. Five years of cost-controlled starting pitching is something this team desperately needs.
  13. Hairyducked Idiot
    "Going cheap" implies that they are not spending the money they have; it is entirely possible that they're not spending money because they don't have much to spend. That's not better. Yes it is. Eventually there will be added revenue...lots of it...and if they aren't spending now I'd much rather it be because they can't than because they don't want to. We just got done wasting a couple of decades where we should have been bludgeoning the division. Every year, Selig squeezes through new rules and revenues improve, meaning the gap becomes smaller and smaller. Yeah, "in a decade we'll be filthy rich" isn't really good. At least "we've decided not to spend" means we might change our minds.
  14. Hairyducked Idiot
    "Going cheap" implies that they are not spending the money they have; it is entirely possible that they're not spending money because they don't have much to spend. That's not better.
  15. Hairyducked Idiot
    If you consider each decision they've made in isolation like this, then there's nothing wrong with it. But the whole picture is getting a little less impressive. Two months of a single offseason is only a slightly larger sample size than an individual offseason--especially considering that there are probably, at most, four to five players that they have considered spending money on. Right now, the difference between a single player and the "whole picture" is 3-4 players maximum. I think you are downplaying how many players are gone that could have helped this team, but regardless, you are right. That's why I said "A little less impressive" and not "Everything is terrible."
  16. Hairyducked Idiot
    Theo's a [expletive] genius and I think it's odd that he's being questioned already as though he's a moron the likes of Jim Hendry, but whatever. It is Dec. 20. All but a small portion of the players who can help the team have been signed by other teams, and the few who remain are going to be pursued by several other teams with money to burn. Meanwhile, the Cubs' offseason has gone as follows: 1) We got a player who is pretty much the same as our old LFer, but cheaper 2) Theo got a new house 3) We got a starting 3b who couldn't even stay on Colorado's roster last year 4) We bought a McDonald's. That's it. I think a little concern about the direction of the team is warranted.
  17. Hairyducked Idiot
    If you consider each decision they've made in isolation like this, then there's nothing wrong with it. But the whole picture is getting a little less impressive.
  18. Hairyducked Idiot
    I dunno. Why offer Pujols a five-year deal?
  19. Hairyducked Idiot
    No, they aren't. This is a myth that pretends that the value of all players is the generic market value the player has to the average team.
  20. Hairyducked Idiot
    Seeing as how the best we could do for Ramirez is Ian Stewart, I'm going to go with "yes." Way to cherry pick the single most barren position this off season. Also, Ramirez is not currently with the team, so he's not part of the discussion anyway. Have you looked around at the league lately? Teams are getting super-hoardy about their young talent. More of it is getting locked up on long-term deals than ever before. Talent is becoming pretty scarce and the price is inflating quickly on the rare occasions that you can find it.
  21. Hairyducked Idiot
    The last regime would have made some trades. We should probably never, ever make a trade either. Also, the last regime would have sent scouts out to look at young players. Better stop that, too. The Cubs are bad almost entirely for this: http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?query_type=franch_round&team_ID=CHC&draft_round=1&draft_type=junreg& Since 2002, they have gotten a combined -1.1 bWAR from their first-round picks. -0.8 bWAR from their second-round picks. Later rounds aren't much better. If the Cubs had anything resembling a decent amateur scouting and development staff, they'd have been fine despite the "bad" contracts which weren't really that bad.
  22. Hairyducked Idiot
    Seeing as how the best we could do for Ramirez is Ian Stewart, I'm going to go with "yes."
  23. Hairyducked Idiot
    He absolutely is suggesting punting longterm. If you trade off all your actually productive players, and let the rest walk, without acquiring any impact players in return, it will take an extremely long time to get back to being competitive. You would effectively be starting from scratch and that takes time. The Cubs will suck for multiple years if they do that. No he's not. Read it again. He's setting them up for a major reload, be it from FA signings or trades, next off season. That's not a 4-5 year rebuild. The sheer volume of good prospects you'd have from trading all those guys would be huge or you'd get some very useful major league pieces that you can fill in around. He's saying "Let's get rid of all our good players, and then acquire every single worthwhile player available for several offseasons." It's not realistic. If you do the first part, you will be bad for a long time.
  24. Hairyducked Idiot
    Because that's not really one of the main reasons. It's a fairly minor reason, actually.
  25. Hairyducked Idiot
    Put the baseline at 40 wins, and put LaHair or a generic in for 1.5 wins (generous), and that puts our current roster at 75 wins. I think someone ran a Cairo estimate the other day and had us at 74 (third worst in the NL), so that's right about on track. It's really hard to come up with offseason scenarios at this point that get us to even an 85-win projection, and I'm losing confidence that the NL Central can be taken by a simple 90 wins.
×
×
  • Create New...