2014 Chicago Cubs In-Season Discussion Thread

[patg006]

losers always have excuses for losing more. losers are always talking about some bullshit "plan". champions are always trying to be champions.

Quite possibly the smartest thing ever said on this message board

 

[patg006]

No, its a cost cutting mentality that comes from ownership.

Yeah. It is called a loser mentality.

The last 3 owners have fucked the Cubs.

Losers blame the previous owners for the current problems.

Kinda like Obama continuing to place all the blame on Bush.

Loser mentality.

 

[SilenceS]

Yeah. It is called a loser mentality.



Losers blame the previous owners for the current problems.

Kinda like Obama continuing to place all the blame on Bush.

Loser mentality.

I said the last 3 owners which includes Ricketts. Keep trying there KB. One day someone will love you.

 

[Capt. Serious]

I thought the Sox relievers are awful but Veras with an ERA over 15..:rofl:

 

[SilenceS]

I thought the Sox relievers are awful but Veras with an ERA over 15..:rofl:

He is horrendous. Theo and them need to stop signing closers. They have 13.5 million dollars invested in whiffs.

 

[SilenceS]

Yep, still would of liked Nelson Cruz on this team. Would look a whole lot better then Nate in the 4 hole.

 

[diavolos]

currently on mark for 53 wins. just pointing that fact out since it's the in-season thread and all.

 

[Boobaby1]

Yep, still would of liked Nelson Cruz on this team. Would look a whole lot better then Nate in the 4 hole.

Yeap! He would have been an improvement in RF, and would not have had to platoon. Nate is a joke, and it's an embarrassment to have him in the line-up every day.

He is a one hit winder. They should just call him "Hanson" for short.

For a team that states that they would like to be buyers at the deadline rather than sellers, they sure are going about it in an odd way. :thinking:

 

[Boobaby1]

currently on mark for 53 wins. just pointing that fact out since it's the in-season thread and all.

That might be high. They still have the massive sell-of coming in just a couple more months.

 

[beckdawg]

That might be high. They still have the massive sell-of coming in just a couple more months.

They had the exact same record last year.... just sayin'. Their run differential is -12 right now which isn't huge. For example, most would consider boston still relevant and they are -17. I think the super 2 cut offs should end around the start of June. You also have Arrieta and Hendricks as possible call ups soon. So, there's reason to believe they can get better.

I'm not entirely sure the sell off is coming to the extent you do. For example, yes Bonifacio has some trade value now but the 2015 position players looks pretty grim to replace him with. I could see them dealing Schierholtz if anyone gave them something which looks unlikely at this point. I could see them potentially dealing Hammel because Bosio magically finds some $5 mil starter every year and turns them into a mid rotation starter. As for Shark, we already know the asking price was high. What's it going to be when his ERA is sitting at 1.53 and more importantly who's willing to pay it?

 

[Boobaby1]

They had the exact same record last year.... just sayin'. Their run differential is -12 right now which isn't huge. For example, most would consider boston still relevant and they are -17. I think the super 2 cut offs should end around the start of June. You also have Arrieta and Hendricks as possible call ups soon. So, there's reason to believe they can get better.

I'm not entirely sure the sell off is coming to the extent you do. For example, yes Bonifacio has some trade value now but the 2015 position players looks pretty grim to replace him with. I could see them dealing Schierholtz if anyone gave them something which looks unlikely at this point. I could see them potentially dealing Hammel because Bosio magically finds some $5 mil starter every year and turns them into a mid rotation starter. As for Shark, we already know the asking price was high. What's it going to be when his ERA is sitting at 1.53 and more importantly who's willing to pay it?

The sell off is coming because that is their history. Regardless if Arrieta and Hendricks come up, and even Baez and Alcantara, they will still sell off all parts which includes Barney and Schierholtz (oh boy!), Russell, possibly Hammel, some bullpen, and maybe even Shark.

It is simply going back to square one AGAIN! When does it end?

 

[beckdawg]

The sell off is coming because that is their history. Regardless if Arrieta and Hendricks come up, and even Baez and Alcantara, they will still sell off all parts which includes
Barney, Schierholtz, Russell, possibly Hammel, some bullpen, and maybe even Shark.

It is simply going back to square one AGAIN! When does it end?

Well honestly other than Hammel and Shark the rest of that isn't much to be lost. If they do sell of Shark and don't get some absurd deal I will be disappointed. I want to make this clear because when I said something sort of similar about Bonifacio people misunderstood what I meant. I don't know that anyone will willingly pay an absurd price for Shark. What I'm saying is if it were me I wouldn't trade Shark unless they got something similar to the Shields trade to KC. Put another way, that was basically a MLB ready top 10 prospect and then a semi-similar deal to what they got for Garza.

I can understand the front office's willingness to restock by selling off but the farm system can only get so much better. Shark at this point seems to be proving his demands contract wise are warranted. I had a problem with them when he was a 4+ ERA but when he plays like this he's clearly worth it.

 

[zack54attack]

John Baker hitting a scorching 0-18...

 

[Boobaby1]

Well honestly other than Hammel and Shark the rest of that isn't much to be lost. If they do sell of Shark and don't get some absurd deal I will be disappointed. I want to make this clear because when I said something sort of similar about Bonifacio people misunderstood what I meant. I don't know that anyone will willingly pay an absurd price for Shark. What I'm saying is if it were me I wouldn't trade Shark unless they got something similar to the Shields trade to KC. Put another way, that was basically a MLB ready top 10 prospect and then a semi-similar deal to what they got for Garza.

I can understand the front office's willingness to restock by selling off but the farm system can only get so much better. Shark at this point seems to be proving his demands contract wise are warranted. I had a problem with them when he was a 4+ ERA but when he plays like this he's clearly worth it.

I get a little leary when a player suddenly performs above expectations, especially when they are playing for a contract or an extension. I liken it to chasing money in the stock market. Just be patient, and they usually come back down to earth.

That said, if he continues to pitch well, then maybe the Cubs could hit it big as far as a trade with someone. In my book, Travis Wood appears to be the better candidate to extend. Not that he is ACE potential, but he also isn't going to demand a TOR contract like Shark will.

 

[SilenceS]

[/B]

I get a little leary when a player suddenly performs above expectations, especially when they are playing for a contract or an extension. I liken it to chasing money in the stock market. Just be patient, and they usually come back down to earth.

That said, if he continues to pitch well, then maybe the Cubs could hit it big as far as a trade with someone. In my book, Travis Wood appears to be the better candidate to extend. Not that he is ACE potential, but he also isn't going to demand a TOR contract like Shark will.

Shark has pitched like this in stretches before. The problem was when he had a bad month. He would have a real bad month. We will see if the trend continues. I think Shark would be awesome on a competitor. He still has a football mentality and is uber competitive. Its just hard to keep that intensity when your team sucks balls.

 

[SilenceS]

Yeap! He would have been an improvement in RF, and would not have had to platoon. Nate is a joke, and it's an embarrassment to have him in the line-up every day.

He is a one hit winder. They should just call him "Hanson" for short.

For a team that states that they would like to be buyers at the deadline rather than sellers, they sure are going about it in an odd way. :thinking:

I am not saying Nelson Cruz would have came here because maybe he wanted to pay for a competitive team. What bothered me was they werent linked to him at all. They planned on coming into the season with Nate as the 4 hitter. Shit, last night Castro batted 4th which is ridiculous.

 

[brett05]

Do when do the Cubs win their first series?

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[CSF77]

Do when do the Cubs win their first series?

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

July

 

[dabynsky]

That might be high. They still have the massive sell-of coming in just a couple more months.

Seriously? 53 wins would be the lowest win total in the expansion era. I mean you want to be objective and all. But I suppose hyperbole is okay when it makes your point.

 

[beckdawg]

[/B]

I get a little leary when a player suddenly performs above expectations, especially when they are playing for a contract or an extension. I liken it to chasing money in the stock market. Just be patient, and they usually come back down to earth.

That said, if he continues to pitch well, then maybe the Cubs could hit it big as far as a trade with someone. In my book, Travis Wood appears to be the better candidate to extend. Not that he is ACE potential, but he also isn't going to demand a TOR contract like Shark will.

I understand where you're coming from with this. However, as Silence said, it's not like shark hasn't gotten off to this sort of start before. That said why they haven't found a way to extend Wood yet seemingly is beyond me.