TIL: in 2010 Barret Loux was the 6th pick in the MLB draft.

[X]

You're over exaggerating some things here. Yes, I wanted Fielder. Also wanted CJ Wilson. Does his 5 year, 75 mil deal break the bank? How much better would Keith Law :fap: to our system if you replace Almora with Appel? A lot more. Pitching wouldn't be considered the cubs biggest and weakest link.

Why was Chris Volstad allowed to start? Would Swisher over Nate/Bugo/McDonald have been that bad? Brandon McCarthy (even after he took that dome shot) was stolen by the DBacks for 2 years, 7.5 mil. I wont say playoffs worthy but a shit ton more competitive.

I understand the rebuilding process. I understand the attempt of trying to build 'sustained success,' which is bullshit. Few teams do it with a farm, many teams have tried and failed. I hate the fact that the cubs will give a shit more about the A team instead of the ML team.

Even in the rebuilding process, at least try to fix problems. The cubs cant drive in runs, so explain how Corey Hart or Jason Kubel would be such a bad thing in the OF and some days at 1B to spell Rizzo, who will be streaky again?

Not every one will pan out, fine and dandy. The number that will will be less than half. I've stated before, my bets are on Baez, Bryant, and Pierce Johnson. CJ Edwards I feel falls short of 'starter' expectations and becomes a bullpen guy. I'll buy into Maples again if he gets his control down. I would hold onto Vogelbach for 2 reasons:

1--I don't buy Rizzo is the guy. He needs to show this year he can overcome streakyness.

2--More blasphemous talks about the NL adding a DH to reach out to younger generation who love scoring and cant stand low scoring, pitching battles. Some people want it by 2016.

Now where's the rhubarb pie, pumpkin?

When you sit down and think about posts before typing, you're a good poster. I agree w/ pretty much all of this post. :shrug:

And, if I'm making pie, it's butterscotch, buttercup.

 

[beckdawg]

Why was Chris Volstad allowed to start? Would Swisher over Nate/Bugo/McDonald have been that bad? Brandon McCarthy (even after he took that dome shot) was stolen by the DBacks for 2 years, 7.5 mil. I wont say playoffs worthy but a shit ton more competitive.

I'm not trying start a fight here but how was signing Brandon McCarthy any different than signing Feldman or Maholm which the cubs actually did? As for Swisher, was he even that much better than what they got out of Nate? Swisher had 22 HR, 63 RBI, 1 SB with a .246 avg and .341 OBP vs Nate's 21 HR, 68 RBI 6 SB .251 avg .301 OBP. Nate made like $2 mil vs $14 mil for Swisher.

The problem I have with cynics is they see a move like the Wesley Wright signing and make snide remarks about it just like I'm sure they did with the Feldman and Schierholtz signings. The cubs have been better than a lot of teams at finding these diamond in the rough types. I think everyone would prefer that the cubs had more money to spend and didn't have to rely on these types of players as much as they have. But, that's the reality of the situation.

 

[patg006]

And, if I'm making pie, it's butterscotch, buttercup.

Its like you want everybody to hate you......

 

[patg006]

I'm not trying start a fight here but how was signing Brandon McCarthy any different than signing Feldman or Maholm which the cubs actually did? As for Swisher, was he even that much better than what they got out of Nate? Swisher had 22 HR, 63 RBI, 1 SB with a .246 avg and .341 OBP vs Nate's 21 HR, 68 RBI 6 SB .251 avg .301 OBP. Nate made like $2 mil vs $14 mil for Swisher.

The problem I have with cynics is they see a move like the Wesley Wright signing and make snide remarks about it just like I'm sure they did with the Feldman and Schierholtz signings. The cubs have been better than a lot of teams at finding these diamond in the rough types. I think everyone would prefer that the cubs had more money to spend and didn't have to rely on these types of players as much as they have. But, that's the reality of the situation.

Because McCarthy is a superior pitcher than Feldman and Man-holem'd. And he costed a fraction more.

Swisher would have provided RBIs and power. Something Nate does not.

Wesley Wright is an okay reliever. He ain't great, and he ain't god awful. I think the cubs can and should do better with at least 1 more bullpen arm. I'd love to see them shell out 5 mil a year or more for Justin Frasor.

I called the Feldman signing.

Scheirholtz is a nice player. But someone needs to explain to me why the **** he bats 4th. That's a problem

 

[Boobaby1]

Because McCarthy is a superior pitcher than Feldman and Man-holem'd. And he costed a fraction more.

Swisher would have provided RBIs and power. Something Nate does not.

Wesley Wright is an okay reliever. He ain't great, and he ain't god awful. I think the cubs can and should do better with at least 1 more bullpen arm. I'd love to see them shell out 5 mil a year or more for Justin Frasor.

I called the Feldman signing.

Scheirholtz is a nice player. But someone needs to explain to me why the **** he bats 4th. That's a problem

I guess because the FO wanted to stockpile more arms in the system by trading Soriano away. In the end, you have to realize that Corey Black cost the Cubs 19 million.

I would think that Nate Schierholz would net Corey Black or someone like him. It sure doesn't seem logical to me. But hey! Who am I?

 

[brett05]

Swisher would have provided RBIs and power. Something Nate does not.

Scheirholtz is a nice player. But someone needs to explain to me why ... he bats 4th. That's a problem

He's a power hitter my friend. I mean look, he hit 21 homers last year homering one out of every 25 at bats. Nevermind he never hit ten homers before this nor that his career home run pace is about 1 per 45 abs (and that includes his "sudden" surge last year). He's a power hitter my friend. Plain and simple.

 

[CSF77]

He's a power hitter my friend. I mean look, he hit 21 homers last year homering one out of every 25 at bats. Nevermind he never hit ten homers before this nor that his career home run pace is about 1 per 45 abs (and that includes his "sudden" surge last year). He's a power hitter my friend. Plain and simple.

The should trade Nate while his value is high.

 

[brett05]

The should trade Nate while his value is high.

Why trade "Babe Ruth" my friend...

 

[beckdawg]

Because McCarthy is a superior pitcher than Feldman and Man-holem'd. And he costed a fraction more.

Swisher would have provided RBIs and power. Something Nate does not.

The number last year say different on both McCarthy vs Feldman/Maholm and Swisher vs Nate. I already posted the Schierholtz/Swisher comparison. Here's the McCarthy one. Last year he was 5-11 with 24 starts, 5.07 k/9, 1.40 BB/9, 4.53 ERA, 3.75 FIP, 3.77 xFIP vs Feldman who had 12-12 with 30 starts, 6.54 k/9, 2.77 bb/9, 3.86 ERA, 4.03 FIP, 3.96 xFIP. Now I'll concede that Swisher and McCarthy could have better seasons next year but in this 1 season sample the cubs got better performance out of players by signing cheaper players.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

Because McCarthy is a superior pitcher than Feldman and Man-holem'd. And he costed a fraction more.

Swisher would have provided RBIs and power. Something Nate does not.

Wesley Wright is an okay reliever. He ain't great, and he ain't god awful. I think the cubs can and should do better with at least 1 more bullpen arm. I'd love to see them shell out 5 mil a year or more for Justin Frasor.

I called the Feldman signing.

Scheirholtz is a nice player. But someone needs to explain to me why the **** he bats 4th. That's a problem

Haha, wow.

 

[CSF77]

Why trade "Babe Ruth" my friend...

Not into Chocolate and Peanut bars.

 

[patg006]

Haha, wow.

I'm sorry, you think one of the most effective and consistent (when healthy) relievers in baseball will come cheap?

Hurrican DJ logic at its fucking finest.

Good god you're a dumbass

 

[HurricaneDij39]

I'm sorry, you think one of the most effective and consistent (when healthy) relievers in baseball will come cheap?

Hurrican DJ logic at its fucking finest.

Good god you're a dumbass

I get it, he grew up a Cubs fan and had a big year last year, but can we prove that 2013 was the rule for him and not the exception? And even if we pay him on last year's performance alone, 35-year-old setup men aren't worth $5 million a year. Sorry.

I'd take my chances on Parker, Strop, and even Carlos Villanueva instead.

 

[patg006]

I get it, he grew up a Cubs fan and had a big year last year, but can we prove that 2013 was the rule for him and not the exception? And even if we pay him on last year's performance alone, 35-year-old setup men aren't worth $5 million a year. Sorry.

I'd take my chances on Parker, Strop, and even Carlos Villanueva instead.

Just so you know, he's not a 1 year wonder.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/frasoja01.shtml

Sorry.

 

[CubbyBear2290]

Because McCarthy is a superior pitcher than Feldman and Man-holem'd. And he costed a fraction more.

Swisher would have provided RBIs and power. Something Nate does not.

Wesley Wright is an okay reliever. He ain't great, and he ain't god awful. I think the cubs can and should do better with at least 1 more bullpen arm. I'd love to see them shell out 5 mil a year or more for Justin Frasor.

I called the Feldman signing.

Scheirholtz is a nice player. But someone needs to explain to me why the **** he bats 4th. That's a problem

Power can be argued, but the RBI one is kind of stupid. As RBIs are a product of people being on base, something, the cubs didn't do a whole lot of this past season, doesn't look like they'll being doing this year too well either.

 

[patg006]

Power can be argued, but the RBI one is kind of stupid. As RBIs are a product of people being on base, something, the cubs didn't do a whole lot of this past season, doesn't look like they'll being doing this year too well either.

How are RBIs a stupid stat?

What are your 3-4-5 hitters' jobs if a man is on 2nd? What did Rizzo-Nate-Lake struggle to do post Soriano trade?

Cubs struggled to get people on, they also struggled to bring a man from 2nd home. Buy a bat already, Boy Blunder

 

[brett05]

Not into Chocolate and Peanut bars.

Unfortunately many of your cohorts here are :shrug:

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[TL1961]

Ah yes. The board's resident genius has come down from his high horse to grace me with his wisdom.

You think I'm talking about lottery tickets like they all are busts and its all negative.

I talk about prospects being lottery tickets based on reality, you idiot.

Some make it nice, that rare one you hit the jackpot with, some you break ahead, some you break even. A lot bust. A lot are like the 1$ scratch off where you win 1$, so you wash.

Some look so god damn promising like your first 4 numbers of the big powerball then the ball busting 5th ball and you still lose. That's my point.

You have yet to show any evidence to the contrary. You're just baiting. Which is sad, because you're the mod, and you're the guy who's seen us say "hey, try this BOTH thing, all the winners are doing it." It usually gets met with masterful, ambushing responses like "no, build the farm, thats how teams win with a foundation of only farm players. 2017 projected line up is:"

And a busted, overpaid Pujols is still better than Anthony Rizzo.

Thanks for playing, cupcake.

I don't know why you have to be belligerent and call people idiots.

Fact is, you responded about one player specifically with a comment that seemed to put down prospects in general. It appears to be a dig at the Cubs and anyone believing in any prospects. He interpreted it that way, and you felt the need to call names and hurl insults - the sure sign of the immature.

I also feel it was negative. Want to call me some choice words, too? Big deal.

Slam away. There are a few here who can't write a sentence without dissing any move the Cubs make, and they also imply that those who don't criticize every single move, therefore think every single move is perfect, as if there is no middle ground. That's ridiculous.

 

[patg006]

I don't know why you have to be belligerent and call people idiots.

Fact is, you responded about one player specifically with a comment that seemed to put down prospects in general. It appears to be a dig at the Cubs and anyone believing in any prospects. He interpreted it that way, and you felt the need to call names and hurl insults - the sure sign of the immature.

I also feel it was negative. Want to call me some choice words, too? Big deal.

Slam away. There are a few here who can't write a sentence without dissing any move the Cubs make, and they also imply that those who don't criticize every single move, therefore think every single move is perfect, as if there is no middle ground. That's ridiculous.

And here we have our resident crackerjack psychologist telling me "I'm being too mean to the schoolyard kids."

Who also once again misconstrues my desire of what I want the cubs to do. Just outright assumes (though I've said it a million times) I hate everything and I complain just to complain.

I'll hold off calling you an idiot. You're obviously delicate.

 

[Jntg4]

How are RBIs a stupid stat?

What are your 3-4-5 hitters' jobs if a man is on 2nd? What did Rizzo-Nate-Lake struggle to do post Soriano trade?

Cubs struggled to get people on, they also struggled to bring a man from 2nd home. Buy a bat already, Boy Blunder

Well if there is nobody on base, you can only knock in yourself, it is completely situational and dependant on the team as a whole, so players on a bad team naturally have less RBI's with less people on base.

RBI% would be more appropriate, perhaps weighted for runners on 3B, 2B and 1B?