Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 292 of 314 FirstFirst ... 192242282290291292293294302 ... LastLast
Results 4,366 to 4,380 of 4701
  1. #4366
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,738
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    This a pretty horrible misunderstanding of both the return the Cubs have gotten (which, my god I've tried to explain 100 times now), but also a complete misunderstanding of trades.
    You can make your points without the frequent condescending remarks. Your knowledge consists of repeating stuff looked up on google and fangraphs just like everyone else, it doesn't make you God's gift to brilliant baseball analysis. You're a respectful guy otherwise and I like your posts so just consider this a friendly reminder to check yourself.

    Who would you rather have? A former all-star SP just a few months removed from a 3.4 fWAR season or some 18 year old prospect who's only played 50 games and has put up a 103 wRC+ ? Whoopsies, you just took James Shields instead of Fernando Tatis Jr! We can play this game for very MLB for MiLB talent trade.
    And for every Tatis Jr. there's a dozen or more flameouts. And Preciado is not Tatis Jr. at the same stage. It's not that i don't like young toolsy guys, it's that if you're going to trade one of the best pitchers in baseball you should get at least one that is more highly regarded or advanced. I do remember you being pretty cheesed at the trade when it went down.

  2. #4367
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,741
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratos View Post
    You can make your points without the frequent condescending remarks. Your knowledge consists of repeating stuff looked up on google and fangraphs just like everyone else, it doesn't make you God's gift to brilliant baseball analysis. You're a respectful guy otherwise and I like your posts so just consider this a friendly reminder to check yourself.
    It's equally as condescending to pretend to be the morality police. You can keep those comments to yourself. So we'll just leave it there. You can keep your comments in the future to baseball. That's it.

    I do more than just "look things up on google". Yes, I do my homework on fangraphs and know the system. I read articles pretty consistently. Yes, I do use Longenhagen, and Law, and Callis, and Badler, and Smtih, and etc to form opinions. But I also watch a good deal of video. I spend time getting to know prospects more than just "hey this guys said a thing". I don't consider myself a scout, and never have. That said, I do considering myself pretty knowledgeable on more than just "googling". I'm pretty good at understanding swing mechanics (and have broken down plenty of those on my own). I know the numbers and what correlates to positive outcomes. I'm not demanding you act like I'm a gift.

    And for every Tatis Jr. there's a dozen or more flameouts. And Preciado is not Tatis Jr. at the same stage. It's not that i don't like young toolsy guys, it's that if you're going to trade one of the best pitchers in baseball you should get at least one that is more highly regarded or advanced. I do remember you being pretty cheesed at the trade when it went down.
    Yeah, my initial reaction was a little upset. But here's the thing; initial reactions are emotional. We're 2 months past. Sometimes, you make an initial gut reaction and get your hopes up for X, Y, and Z and when you get 1, 2 and 3 instead, it can feel like a let down. Then, I went back, and did my homework. Some of them I knew pretty well (I followed Caissie through the draft process, spoke highly of him during the summer). But I did not have much knowledge on them. After thorough research, it's a package that should be considered in the realm of "fair value".

    Preciado may flame out. But you're not talking about the inherent risk, you're pissing that he's 17 years old, and then doubling down like he's the only prospect (you haven't spoken a word about Santana, or Caisie, or Mena). You say things like "If Patterson could fail any could". Yeah, prospects are risky. Notice how no one has said "Go buy your Preciado sheerseys guys, he's a commin!" It's that Preciado's value, as well as the value the Cubs got for Darvish is pretty much in line with what they gave up in surplus value. Maybe a little heavy on the risk, but I think we can explain these things away due to market, circumstance economics.

    Precaido is a really good prospect. He's getting 50 FV love, he's on the radar of top evaluators, and he's not going to turn 18 until the minor league season would normally be in full swing. And he's only one of the four guys they got. Yeah, again, risk will always be something we need to accept in young-player trade packages. But there's also a lot of positives of young players; the Cubs control these players from ground up. They can help work with swings, put guys in with Justin Stone right away. And instead of perhaps, doing away with instruction they'd rather not have occurred, can start at the foundations. There's also the reward of getting more value than we would have if they were all producing at higher levels. No one is asking you to go bananas for the package. But the obtuse questions of "Who'd you rather have a guy who's in the MLB and good or some dumb 17 year old who probably likes Pokemon?" are...well...obtuse. They're disingenuous in nature. They're purposefully designed for one answer.

    Just be fair to package. If you want to say that you have an issue with the players, point it out. If you think it's risky...fine. You won't find me disagreeing. But if you're going to act like "hardly anything" as you have stated, than I don't think you have much of a ground to stand on.
    Last edited by 1908_Cubs; 02-17-2021 at 09:31 PM.

  3. #4368
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    188
    Bottom line is this... If a GM in baseball made it a habit to make deals like the Cubs just did with Darvish, that GM would soon find himself searching for a new career. Even if by some miracle one of these prospects does make good on his potential and become a valuable major league player that doesn't mean teams should be out there making these types of trades. That team would lose far more trades than they would win. They would be the Pirates.

    The argument earlier was that the assumption was Preciado was going to be in the top 100 and valued at around $19M by fangraphs, which remember is headed by one of the best baseball evaluators on the interwebs. Preciado at $19M was what tipped the scale for a roughly even evaluation for just Darvish, we are still ignoring the raw $3M in cash the Cubs threw in along with Darvish's personal catcher who has a ZiPS projection of 1.1 WAR and a $1.3M contract. So today the best baseball evaluators come out and put Preciado at #133, a full $10M valuation less than what the assumption was. So not only was fangraphs saying the Cubs were losing before they released their top prospects list, they just **** all over the value the Cubs got back.

    To say the Cubs hit a homerun when they broke even on the time Darvish was a Cub, if you use the absolute most favorable dollar/WAR ratio, and traded Darvish at a pretty steep net loss is just laughable.

    The Cubs made Darvish the 12th most highest paid pitcher in baseball at the time of his deal. He was on the Cubs for 3 seasons, 1 of which was shortened. He pitched a "full season" last year and made 12 starts. He pitched 31 starts in 2019, he was only good for 2nd half of the season which was 13 starts. He pitched 8 starts in 2018 and was bad then went down for the season. So assuming the Cubs were paying him to actually pitch, they were hoping to get 30+ starts out of him in 2018, conservatively. So in the entire time on the Cubs in which they were hoping he could have made 70+ starts, Yu Darvish was good for just 25 of those starts. To be fair, he was so good in those final 25 starts that he actually turned that contract from a complete disaster to a virtual wash in value. What did the Cubs do with the high Darvish was on? Traded him for a pitcher they probably hope to flip at the deadline and 4 lottery tickets. That's a homerun? Are we playing on a little league field?

  4. #4369
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    3,742
    Tatis just signed for 14/340. WOW

  5. #4370
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,741
    Quote Originally Posted by JD94 View Post
    Tatis just signed for 14/340. WOW
    Good for both parties. Tatis gets $340 and a lot of security. Padres lock Tatis in at $24m AAV. He stays healthy, the Padres will win that on surplus. Tatis, though, gets injury protection insurance with that. I get it.

  6. #4371
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    3,742
    https://twitter.com/feinsand/status/...056345088?s=21

    Again... what Ricketts is doing is a damn joke. The Padres are NOT a large market team and now have 2 different $300+ million players.

  7. #4372
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    7,643
    https://twitter.com/feinsand/status/...056345088?s=21

    When this deal ends, the Mets will still have another year of paying Bobby Bonilla left
    [emoji28]

    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

  8. #4373
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,102
    Quote Originally Posted by JD94 View Post
    https://twitter.com/feinsand/status/...056345088?s=21

    Again... what Ricketts is doing is a damn joke. The Padres are NOT a large market team and now have 2 different $300+ million players.
    Machado and Tatis signed their deals at age 26 and age 22, respectively. Those are the types of guys you sign to $300M+ deals, especially when your team is just opening up a championship window. They also aren't set to hit the luxury tax in any year and spent several years rebuilding with bottom 10 payrolls, helping them amass a ton of cheap young talent. When the Cubs were in that spot they also ran high payrolls. Then their players didn't develop optimally, they drained the farm system, and a new CBA made penalties for exceeding the luxury tax multiple years straight more onerous (it's not limited to the direct tax payment). It's been a frustrating few years, I get it. I don't particularly like the Ricketts family either. But there's a lot of willful ignorance in responses like this. This is a team that was running payrolls commensurate with market until literally just this year, when the roster kinda fell to crap, their good players are in their late 20s or early 30s with one year left on their deals, and a pandemic ruined a big chunk of the additional revenue they thought they'd be getting by now.

    And if you're angry about no extensions like this for any of the current players, allow me to ask: how happy would you be with any of the core players on the team being set to make, say, $25-30M per year into their mid-30s?
    Last edited by NoChiInChamp; 02-18-2021 at 05:46 AM.

  9. #4374
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    3,742
    Quote Originally Posted by NoChiInChamp View Post
    Machado and Tatis signed their deals at age 26 and age 22, respectively. Those are the types of guys you sign to $300M+ deals, especially when your team is just opening up a championship window. They also aren't set to hit the luxury tax in any year and spent several years rebuilding with bottom 10 payrolls, helping them amass a ton of cheap young talent. When the Cubs were in that spot they also ran high payrolls. Then their players didn't develop optimally, they drained the farm system, and a new CBA made penalties for exceeding the luxury tax multiple years straight more onerous (it's not limited to the direct tax payment). It's been a frustrating few years, I get it. I don't particularly like the Ricketts family either. But there's a lot of willful ignorance in responses like this. This is a team that was running payrolls commensurate with market until literally just this year, when the roster kinda fell to crap, their good players are in their late 20s or early 30s with one year left on their deals, and a pandemic ruined a big chunk of the additional revenue they thought they'd be getting by now.

    And if you're angry about no extensions like this for any of the current players, allow me to ask: how happy would you be with any of the core players on the team being set to make, say, $25-30M per year into their mid-30s?
    This same conversation has been discussed ad nauseam over the last day or 2. Iíve made posts on how I feel about it. Iím not typing the same thing out Iíve been saying. If you want to know my thoughts on it, scroll back up and read it.

    And as far as extensions, the only person Iíve wanted to extend is Kris Bryant. Iím a hard pass on Javy, always have been. I donít think extending Contreras is necessary, but I wouldnít necessarily be mad if they did.

    Also, this isnít even about extensions. We could have spent that money in free agency. We could have gotten Lindor and Carrasco like the Mets did. We could have traded for Arenado. We could have traded for Betts.

    What the Padres have done and are doing still (even after the Pandemic year that some people want to point to as if the owners lost all this money) just proves that every team can and should be spending money. There were ways to significantly improve this team, even outside of just free agency, but we havenít done anything since we signed Darvish in 2017. If youíre okay with that, then fine... but Iím not. Thereís no excuse.

    And why do people keep saying ďI donít necessarily like Ricketts, butĒ and then proceed to defend him? I donít get that. What makes you not like him if you donít care that he wonít spend any money? He really has some of you right where he wants you.

  10. #4375
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    9,597
    Ricketts bought into the Chicago ownership handbook, win or not the fans will be there (unless you are the Sox).. The hangover from the 16 championship is still there, this combined with day baseball and a covid hangover will assure fans will return in droves once allowed. Bulls and Hawks also benefit from winning previous championships. Every damn owner of Chicago sports teams has followed this philosophy. It would be nice if one time one of our teams gets an owner who just wants to win, who is so loaded they donít concern themselves with the bottom line as the top priority. Unfortunately the owners we have now are going nowhere, they will pass the franchises on generations along with the same attitude.

  11. #4376
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    5,352
    Tatis deserves every dollar of that contract. Prolly will be the best shortstop in baseball this season. Also I respect the Padres for not holding him down in the minors for extra control. Not that I care about retaining Bryant because I think he isn't worth what he's asking for (reportedly), but holding him down those extra days def made him salty and less likely to accept an extension. Hope Hoyer doesn't do that crap if we ever have another great player that's mlb ready.

  12. #4377
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,102
    Quote Originally Posted by JD94 View Post
    This same conversation has been discussed ad nauseam over the last day or 2. Iíve made posts on how I feel about it. Iím not typing the same thing out Iíve been saying. If you want to know my thoughts on it, scroll back up and read it.

    And as far as extensions, the only person Iíve wanted to extend is Kris Bryant. Iím a hard pass on Javy, always have been. I donít think extending Contreras is necessary, but I wouldnít necessarily be mad if they did.

    Also, this isnít even about extensions. We could have spent that money in free agency. We could have gotten Lindor and Carrasco like the Mets did. We could have traded for Arenado. We could have traded for Betts.

    What the Padres have done and are doing still (even after the Pandemic year that some people want to point to as if the owners lost all this money) just proves that every team can and should be spending money. There were ways to significantly improve this team, even outside of just free agency, but we havenít done anything since we signed Darvish in 2017. If youíre okay with that, then fine... but Iím not. Thereís no excuse.

    And why do people keep saying ďI donít necessarily like Ricketts, butĒ and then proceed to defend him? I donít get that. What makes you not like him if you donít care that he wonít spend any money? He really has some of you right where he wants you.
    I don't like not spending more this year (plus I think Ricketts overplayed his hand on the TV deal stuff and that, combined with CBA stuff, probably led to the painful reluctance to spend additional money post-Darvish signing). My point is more about how owners in general behave, which involves a lot of fretting over paying luxury tax bills and incurring penalties that keep additional tens of millions of dollars out of their pockets via losing out on things like refunds on revenue sharing. The Padres making investments in their roster right now should be what every team is doing, but they're also in prime position to do it and not incur penalties above and beyond salary commitments in a given deal they make. Considering all of this, I don't think Ricketts has been shown to be worse than the typical owner, which makes me not incensed as much as some of you are because, relative to the rest of baseball, this behavior doesn't put the Cubs at much of a disadvantage. The institutionalized behavior itself is a problem, but the consequences don't involve me worrying about the state of the franchise going forward. Rather, just frustrated by the circumstances of the past few years, which I've accepted and have sorta gotten over.

  13. #4378
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Posts
    14,604
    https://twitter.com/mlbastian/status...533855749?s=21

    I thought Alzolay was out of options .


    Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

  14. #4379
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    12,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Dfan25 View Post
    https://twitter.com/mlbastian/status...533855749?s=21

    I thought Alzolay was out of options .


    Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk
    Me too. Sounds like they changed the rules because of 2020.

    https://twitter.com/cubprospects/sta...428793348?s=21

    Regardless he should be in mlb when heís pitching, but itíll make it easier to manage his workload without having to carry him on the mlb roster.

  15. #4380
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,738
    Quote Originally Posted by NoChiInChamp View Post
    And if you're angry about no extensions like this for any of the current players, allow me to ask: how happy would you be with any of the core players on the team being set to make, say, $25-30M per year into their mid-30s?
    We've opened the wallet longterm before on some guys like Heyward and Lester, I guess even Darvish. Putting all our eggs in one basket in one of these mega-deals might not be the smartest move since there's lots of examples of big long-term deals doing sour especially after age 30+. A guy like Tatis might be different I dunno.

    If you're gonna spend huge on a FA they should be franchise players and guys who win that you'd be happy to base a team around. Trout is amazing I'd spend on him, or Mookie Betts, or Juan Soto, not so much Baez or Bryant since those guys have major holes in their game and have been in the middle of an offense that's been broken for years.

    On the other hand, had we extended these guys years ago at least they'd be assets under our control and we could trade them instead of letting them walk in FA for nothing. But then you always end up eating tons of money.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •