Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 237 of 314 FirstFirst ... 137187227235236237238239247287 ... LastLast
Results 3,541 to 3,555 of 4701
  1. #3541
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,217
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    That literally has nothing to do with it. I even explained that in the post you quoted. Teams don't trade Nate Pearsons.

    Teams do not rob Peter to pay Paul. Go look at all of the recent trades of prospects for MLB talent. One of the rarer trades was Patino, but I don't think Snell is a 1:1 for Hendricks in value. The Jays are trying to add pitching, not steal their best SP prospect to get a SP. Fans do this all the time where they think their team is going to get the young, MLB ready talent already on the other team back and it almost never works like that.

    I'm saying the Cubs are not getting an MLB ready SP from a team who wants to get better in their rotation. I didnt say anything about what the Cubs would ask for. I said the Cubs would get players further from the MLB than Pearson. Because they will simply by principal. They would get a good return for Hendricks. Never said they wouldn't. I said they wouldn't get Nate Pearson and he wouldn't be in play.

    Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
    Look I see what you are saying here but 18innings pitched in the majors is hardly etched in stone. I get it. Pearson is a stud and I donít believe they will trade him BUT for an established game 7 World Series frontline starter with 3 years of control thatís should be the ask and work back from there.

  2. #3542
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,659
    Quote Originally Posted by huff View Post
    Look I see what you are saying here but 18innings pitched in the majors is hardly etched in stone. I get it. Pearson is a stud and I donít believe they will trade him BUT for an established game 7 World Series frontline starter with 3 years of control thatís should be the ask and work back from there.
    You can start there but he's not on the table and you need to walk that back if a trade were to occur. It's not happening.

    I love Hendricks. I think the Cubs should consider moving him (if they do they really aren't winning for 3+ years though and we all need to understand that). But they aren't getting Nate Pearson. Pearson only pitched 18 innings last year, but he's going to be an important part of the Jays rotation. They won't take away their highest upside arm to get another. The goal would be to upgrade the other spots, not shuffle papers around.

    In the end there's probably little traction there and I doubt we need to worry about the situation right now. But the return won't be Nate Pearson. We are probably talking players who will start in high A or AA and not MLB ready players. It's just the reality of trades that we all need to accept.

    Being realistic is the first step to all of this. We can't be fans and look at pie in the sky situations or just look at the #1 prospect from a team. Thats just setting you up for unnecessary disappointment. I'd love Nate Pearson too. But the Cubs aren't acquiring Nate Pearson right now.

    Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

  3. #3543
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    7,487
    Quote Originally Posted by huff View Post
    So I guess the guy who started all this brewhaha about Hendricks walked it back today. I guess the cub fans swarmed lol
    Why i never cared for rumors, just about every writer is going to come up with scenarios for trades and possible signing interests for free agents just so they can say heard it here first [emoji2369][emoji849]


    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

  4. #3544
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    810
    With Hand getting ~11MM (though probably less in terms of PV), I have to imagine the Cubs could dump at least half of Kimbrel's salary if they really wanted to. If they have to drop payroll, he is probably the guy I'd want to see moved next.

    All probably a moot point because the Cubs are probably going to be a middling team anyway and it will probably not matter who they get rid of but just a thought.

  5. #3545
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    7,487
    Quote Originally Posted by cubs1423 View Post
    With Hand getting ~11MM (though probably less in terms of PV), I have to imagine the Cubs could dump at least half of Kimbrel's salary if they really wanted to. If they have to drop payroll, he is probably the guy I'd want to see moved next.

    All probably a moot point because the Cubs are probably going to be a middling team anyway and it will probably not matter who they get rid of but just a thought.
    My guess is that they're going to wait and hope Kimbrel has a solid couple of months because he could actually net them a decent return at the deadline with being under control through next season. If not , they'll just decline his option for 22 and buy him out for a million

    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

  6. #3546
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,948
    Quote Originally Posted by chibears55 View Post
    Cubs had to decide between Eloy and Schwarber in 2017, they chose Schwarber, I doubt anyone really complained much then about keeping Schwarber. Yes it stunk to lose Eloy but Schwarber was the guy then.

    Torres in 2016 wasn't even a top 30 cubs prospect at the time, and they were able to trade him in 2016 because they had Russell Baez and their no.1 prospect Happ blocking him in the middle infield.

    So, noone could predict what would happen over the next 3-4 seasons with these players , but the cubs netted a WS with one and was hopeful to have a 28 yo TOR type SP under control for 3+ years but that didn't work out too well

    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
    Torres was the overall #17 prospect in baseball at the time of the trade. He slotted in at #2, behind Frazier in the Yanks system. Both clubs knew that a 19 year old star was on the move. Along with the rest of the league.

  7. #3547
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,948
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    Pearson is already in the MLB. Hes not in play. The Jays wouldn't take away from their MLB to buy players.

    It'll be guys further away.

    Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
    If we're looking at young pitchers, I'm looking at

    Woods Richardson
    Kloffenstein
    Pardinho
    Van Eyk

  8. #3548
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,659
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    If we're looking at young pitchers, I'm looking at

    Woods Richardson
    Kloffenstein
    Pardinho
    Van Eyk
    If we're talking Blue Jays trade, I have little interest in almost all of those names. Kloffenstein has no breaking pitch of mention, showing poor spin rate; he's BORP. Pardinho has elbow issues, he's a hand grenade. Van Eyk looks like a back end guy. All three are nothing burgers.

    The Cubs should have interest in Woods Richardson for sure, he's got a good frame, I like his stuff, but I think he's probably more a high-end #3 type of SP down the road. So I'm going to need someone like Kirk or Groshans. Groshans, I think, is probably off the table. But I think Alejandro Kirk is underrated and would be a great get. I'd skip Manoah, too, who is significantly more interesting than any of the three pitchers I previously mentioned, because he's iffy to stick in the rotation, and probably tops out as a low-3/high-4.

  9. #3549
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    45,495
    I've always been curious what our cost would have been to have grabbed Chapman before the Yankees did. They got him for freaking nothing and in turn got Gleyber for essentially nothing.

  10. #3550
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    7,487
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    Torres was the overall #17 prospect in baseball at the time of the trade. He slotted in at #2, behind Frazier in the Yanks system. Both clubs knew that a 19 year old star was on the move. Along with the rest of the league.
    This is what I looked at and Torres not on the list, not saying your wrong

    http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016?list=chc

    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

  11. #3551
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,659
    Quote Originally Posted by chibears55 View Post
    This is what I looked at and Torres not on the list, not saying your wrong

    http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016?list=chc

    Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
    Thats a post-2016 prospect list. Torres was already on the Yankees when that list was created.

    Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

  12. #3552
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    57,659
    https://twitter.com/brahmresnik/stat...917079041?s=19

    ST start news.

    Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

  13. #3553
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Addison, IL
    Posts
    24,664

    2020 Chicago Cubs Offseason Thread

    1908 beat me to it.

    Yeah, I donít think theyíre going to start on time

    2016 World Series Champions!!!


  14. #3554
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    7,312
    Man, i just moved to Arizona and was hoping I would get to check out Spring training this year. Makes sense though. Absolutely none of the retiree population in Phoenix and the surrounding areas are taking Covid seriously. The amount of people who refuse to wear a piece of cloth over their face for the 2 minutes they are in the gas station or the 20 minutes they are at the store is astounding.

    I wouldnt be surprised if ST is cancelled and they just move it to simulated games at team facilities so they can quarentine players effectively.

    Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

  15. #3555
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Champaign, IL
    Posts
    7,312
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    If we're talking Blue Jays trade, I have little interest in almost all of those names. Kloffenstein has no breaking pitch of mention, showing poor spin rate; he's BORP. Pardinho has elbow issues, he's a hand grenade. Van Eyk looks like a back end guy. All three are nothing burgers.

    The Cubs should have interest in Woods Richardson for sure, he's got a good frame, I like his stuff, but I think he's probably more a high-end #3 type of SP down the road. So I'm going to need someone like Kirk or Groshans. Groshans, I think, is probably off the table. But I think Alejandro Kirk is underrated and would be a great get. I'd skip Manoah, too, who is significantly more interesting than any of the three pitchers I previously mentioned, because he's iffy to stick in the rotation, and probably tops out as a low-3/high-4.
    Id have interest in Orelvis Martinez too. A lot of potential in his bat. Hes an interesting prospect to me.

    Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

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