Close
Page 2 of 91 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast
Results 23 to 44 of 1989
  1. #23
    Senior Member BaBaBlacksheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,934
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Would Arrieta really bring that much in a trade with it being the last year of the contract? And I really don't want to make any moves that greatly jeopardize the present. With a couple of minor tweaks they're primed to compete for another one. I can't see how this team is better without Jake on the roster next year.

  2. A message from our sponsors.


    Please Register(it's free!) and Login to get rid of this advertisement.


  3. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,608

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BaBaBlacksheep View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Would Arrieta really bring that much in a trade with it being the last year of the contract? And I really don't want to make any moves that greatly jeopardize the present. With a couple of minor tweaks they're primed to compete for another one. I can't see how this team is better without Jake on the roster next year.
    In a year where Jeremy Hellickson is the premier FA pitcher Arrieta's 1 year of control would certainly net you something of value. Hammel as well. The only thing is that you have to have at least one power arm in your rotation and Arrieta is it. I've been convinced for months that Jake would be moved, and supported it, but now I'm not so sure. He'll be in a contract year so it behooves him to work hard to get back to form and he might be more valuable staying than going. With no FA to speak of trades are going to be crazy expensive.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to TC in Mississippi For This Useful Post:


  5. #25
    CCS Donator Omeletpants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    14,074

    Default

    If we want to win the WS again next year having Arrietta rather than trading him is the best scenario
    A welfare state like America can't survive with open borders.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Omeletpants For This Useful Post:


  7. #26
    Senior Member BaBaBlacksheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,934
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Omeletpants View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If we want to win the WS again next year having Arrietta rather than trading him is the best scenario

    Agree.

  8. #27
    Senior Member CSF77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    8,396
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Looks like Fowler is moving on.

    I'm thinking they keep it simple.

    Almora got a taste. So I'm seeing the OF as:

    Schwarber/Soler LF
    Almora CF
    Heyward RF

    They will value ground covered over anything else.

    Now due to Fowler leaving they need to keep Zobrist as the lead off.

    So Bryant, Russell, Zobrist, Rizzo with Baez rotating to give them days off.

    Catchers I see it as Contreras and Montero with Schwarber as emergency. But they may try to pair him up with a starter to ease him into a larger role. Eventually I see it as Contreras and Schwarber with the other in LF to swap with Soler traded.

    I really see it going that way. So they will hang onto Soler and Montero until Schwarber and Contreras don't need them any more.

    Pitching. I see them going with a 2nd lefty and letting Wood go. They have Rob Z in the pen and should get Rosscup off the 60. He is a legit LOOGY. Z can soak a inning. Montgomery moved to #4 and Lackey as #5. Now that means Hammel not offered or traded. I really dont see him as a Cub either way.

    Jake I believe will be a Cub in 17. There is a 33% chance that they flip him but I doubt it with a repeat being the primary goal for 17.

    Add to it I see Ian Happ added mid season to help with lead off. If he can Handel CF you may see Almora moved to 4th OF and Baez moved to starting 2B as the season progresses. That puts the aging Zobrist into moving around lessening his role as he gets older.

  9. #28
    Senior Member chibears55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    9,784
    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Omeletpants View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If we want to win the WS again next year having Arrietta rather than trading him is the best scenario
    What about having a chance in 2018,19 20
    Cubs have little in system as far as starting pitching goes
    They need to do something to net young arms for the future

    Teams are starting to tie up their solid young arms with long term deals, so besides draft or IFA, only other way to try and get a young arm is via trade..

    Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

  10. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SilenceS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I dont think the Cubs are QO Fowler. I remember it being part of the deal or something. Just looked it up and I am right. Part of the deal was the Cubs wouldnt put a QF on Fowler so he could be a FA clear. The QO is what hurt him last year.

    http://www.bleachernation.com/2016/0...one-year-deal/
    That was speculation. It might be true but brett wasn't saying with certainty that they wouldn't offer him a QO just that perhaps he signed with this expectation.

    To add to this... from mlbtraderumors
    Fowler, who will turn 31 next March, batted .276/.393/.447 with 13 homers and 13 steals in 125 games/551 plate appearances for the Cubs in the regular season before kicking in a trio of postseason home runs on during the Cubs’ curse-breaking World Series run. He’s a surefire candidate to receive a qualifying offer from Chicago, which would give him a one-year, $17.2MM offer to return to the team, but based on Fowler’s comments it seems safe to say he’ll be rejecting the QO to again test free agency.

  11. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parade_Rain View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The issue with Kyle is his framing and game calling. If that improves, as it should, then we can discuss pop times being a problem, but I don't recall his arm being an issue that would stop him from being a backup catcher for Contreras.
    From the numbers I've seen Kyle's framing was fine. His issue was blocking pitches(because his body is huge) and his arm while strong was inaccurate. Least that was the scouting report on him this time last year. Also you're right about the gaming calling aspect.

  12. #31
    Senior Member CSF77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    8,396
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    From the numbers I've seen Kyle's framing was fine. His issue was blocking pitches(because his body is huge) and his arm while strong was inaccurate. Least that was the scouting report on him this time last year. Also you're right about the gaming calling aspect.
    I would match him up with Lester next year. Vet to teach him.

  13. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CSF77 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I would match him up with Lester next year. Vet to teach him.
    Eh... that's dicey. Lester doesn't field well if at all. Think Contreras will be with him as he's the most athletic guy they got.

  14. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    Is Montero gone now? He supposedly went on ESPN1000 and blasted Maddon for his horrible bullpen usage.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    gallagher has a sub-70 IQ and is in the "dull" range.

  15. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DJMoore_is_fat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Is Montero gone now? He supposedly went on ESPN1000 and blasted Maddon for his horrible bullpen usage.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rumor has it that Montero was very nearly DFA'd and released this year. He rebounded some in the second half, but his availability combined with his inability to control the running game makes me think the FO might prefer to move on. They might have to eat a portion of his salary next year to make it happen, but that would allow them to bring in a more defensively-capable and healthy veteran.

  16. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,061

    Default

    I think some of you are nuts.

    Replacing 40% of the rotation from a 103 win ws winner who will be the prohibitive favorites next season?

    No chance.

    I could see Montgomery in the rotation but he's best served next year as a 6th starter/swing man out of the pen.

    The two areas of work will be:

    figuring out cf.....internally with almora/heyward platoon (and hap in the wings) or go outside and try bringing back Fowler or another defensive minded leadoff Hitter type (span)

    Bullpen....closer is up in air as rondon looked awful last 2 months and is Edwards really closer material?
    Beyond that they need to figure out who fits where because maddon had no confidence in any of them come october.

    Personally....my thoughts:

    A pen with chapman/jansen at end really helps esp if we can have edwards/strop/montgomery/rondon in front of them with 1 lefty and 1 righty added

  17. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greg23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think some of you are nuts.

    Replacing 40% of the rotation from a 103 win ws winner who will be the prohibitive favorites next season?

    No chance.

    I could see Montgomery in the rotation but he's best served next year as a 6th starter/swing man out of the pen.

    The two areas of work will be:

    figuring out cf.....internally with almora/heyward platoon (and hap in the wings) or go outside and try bringing back Fowler or another defensive minded leadoff Hitter type (span)

    Bullpen....closer is up in air as rondon looked awful last 2 months and is Edwards really closer material?
    Beyond that they need to figure out who fits where because maddon had no confidence in any of them come october.

    Personally....my thoughts:

    A pen with chapman/jansen at end really helps esp if we can have edwards/strop/montgomery/rondon in front of them with 1 lefty and 1 righty added
    Lol is this serious? You want to sign Chapman AND Jansen? Oh sure we'll just pony up $35M per season for the two of them. It's not like Theo has a budget or anything.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    gallagher has a sub-70 IQ and is in the "dull" range.

  18. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greg23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Replacing 40% of the rotation from a 103 win ws winner who will be the prohibitive favorites next season?
    Hammel is 34 and while he pitched well in the first half of the past several seasons he's often faded. I see no reason people would be upset over him being dealt. Fact of the matter is if you want to give anyone else a shot at the rotation he's gotta go and the cubs obviously want some younger arms to have a shot. He's simply worth more in trade than what they need out of a 5th starter and they have other intriguing options such as Montgomery and Zastryzny.

    As for Arrieta, I'm not saying I would 100% deal him but I think it makes a lot of sense to listen. For one thing you have him under control for 1 more year. If they can't hammer out a contract you can't let him walk and get nothing. He's too valuable. We'll see what the market looks like at the winter meetings but if someone like LA would offer you Urias and parts for Arrieta you have to consider that. Urias is 19 and fits in far better with the cubs young hitters than Arrieta who'll be 31 to start next season. That might hurt the 2017 cubs' chances but you're playing for the next 5-10 years not singularly the 2017 season.

    At the end of the day, the cubs need younger pitching. Lackey is 38. Arrieta will be 31. Hammel is 34. Lester will be 33. Age peaks usually range in the 27-31 range. Arms like Dylan Cease, Trevor Clifton and Oscar De La Cruz are interesting but they really aren't super close to the majors and pitching is a crap shoot in general. As seen with the Chapman trade, pitching prices are insane and the only way teams are trading young arms these days is to acquire an established player.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  20. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,061

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DJMoore_is_fat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Lol is this serious? You want to sign Chapman AND Jansen? Oh sure we'll just pony up $35M per season for the two of them. It's not like Theo has a budget or anything.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    No

    Chapman or Jansen

    1 dominant closer to go with a few power setup arms

    Dont think we can rely on rondon/Edwards as our closers...we're built to win next year as well.

  21. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,061

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hammel is 34 and while he pitched well in the first half of the past several seasons he's often faded. I see no reason people would be upset over him being dealt. Fact of the matter is if you want to give anyone else a shot at the rotation he's gotta go and the cubs obviously want some younger arms to have a shot. He's simply worth more in trade than what they need out of a 5th starter and they have other intriguing options such as Montgomery and Zastryzny.

    As for Arrieta, I'm not saying I would 100% deal him but I think it makes a lot of sense to listen. For one thing you have him under control for 1 more year. If they can't hammer out a contract you can't let him walk and get nothing. He's too valuable. We'll see what the market looks like at the winter meetings but if someone like LA would offer you Urias and parts for Arrieta you have to consider that. Urias is 19 and fits in far better with the cubs young hitters than Arrieta who'll be 31 to start next season. That might hurt the 2017 cubs' chances but you're playing for the next 5-10 years not singularly the 2017 season.

    At the end of the day, the cubs need younger pitching. Lackey is 38. Arrieta will be 31. Hammel is 34. Lester will be 33. Age peaks usually range in the 27-31 range. Arms like Dylan Cease, Trevor Clifton and Oscar De La Cruz are interesting but they really aren't super close to the majors and pitching is a crap shoot in general. As seen with the Chapman trade, pitching prices are insane and the only way teams are trading young arms these days is to acquire an established player.
    All great in theory but get rid or Hammel and arrieta and replace with what? Montgomery and Urias (who I don't care for nor do I think the dodgers would give up for 1 year of arrieta)

    The initial proposal was to trade him for prospect arms.....the WS contender shouldn't be thinking that way unless there is a stud fa starter they're signing at the same time....but there are none in f/a

    How about they just keep him, try to resign him and go for it again in 2017?

  22. #40
    Senior Member chibears55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    9,784
    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greg23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think some of you are nuts.

    Replacing 40% of the rotation from a 103 win ws winner who will be the prohibitive favorites next season?

    No chance.
    Lester and Hendricks will be 1 and 2

    they probably keep Lackey who will be 38, but he has to be their 4th or 5th starter. Be lucky to get 170 to 180 IP out of him..
    Most likely won't get much for him anyways..

    Hammel gone...

    Arrieta goes if they are able to trade for a younger major league ready arm that can slot in the 3 hole with TOR expectations..
    Arrieta could net them a prospect or two


    Yes, they want to defend their title but they also need to get future arms...
    Epstein gotta find a way to do both this off season with the 2017 rotation and future rotation






    Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

  23. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    6,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hammel is 34 and while he pitched well in the first half of the past several seasons he's often faded. I see no reason people would be upset over him being dealt. Fact of the matter is if you want to give anyone else a shot at the rotation he's gotta go and the cubs obviously want some younger arms to have a shot. He's simply worth more in trade than what they need out of a 5th starter and they have other intriguing options such as Montgomery and Zastryzny.

    As for Arrieta, I'm not saying I would 100% deal him but I think it makes a lot of sense to listen. For one thing you have him under control for 1 more year. If they can't hammer out a contract you can't let him walk and get nothing. He's too valuable. We'll see what the market looks like at the winter meetings but if someone like LA would offer you Urias and parts for Arrieta you have to consider that. Urias is 19 and fits in far better with the cubs young hitters than Arrieta who'll be 31 to start next season. That might hurt the 2017 cubs' chances but you're playing for the next 5-10 years not singularly the 2017 season.

    At the end of the day, the cubs need younger pitching. Lackey is 38. Arrieta will be 31. Hammel is 34. Lester will be 33. Age peaks usually range in the 27-31 range. Arms like Dylan Cease, Trevor Clifton and Oscar De La Cruz are interesting but they really aren't super close to the majors and pitching is a crap shoot in general. As seen with the Chapman trade, pitching prices are insane and the only way teams are trading young arms these days is to acquire an established player.
    There is absolutely no way the Dodgers are trading Urias and parts for one year of control of a 31 year old Jake Arrieta.That's just insane. Like R.A. Dickey/Shelby Miller trade insane.

  24. #42
    Senior Member chibears55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    9,784
    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beckdawg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    From the numbers I've seen Kyle's framing was fine. His issue was blocking pitches(because his body is huge) and his arm while strong was inaccurate. Least that was the scouting report on him this time last year. Also you're right about the gaming calling aspect.
    Sorry, but there is no way I see Schwarber being considered as a starter in any games or even back up catcher...

    I see him only used as an emergency or in extra innings if they have to use up both catchers..

    Contreras will be the no.1 guy
    Montero if he stays or another vet will be the back up

    Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

  25. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greg23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    All great in theory but get rid or Hammel and arrieta and replace with what? Montgomery and Urias (who I don't care for nor do I think the dodgers would give up for 1 year of arrieta)

    The initial proposal was to trade him for prospect arms.....the WS contender shouldn't be thinking that way unless there is a stud fa starter they're signing at the same time....but there are none in f/a

    How about they just keep him, try to resign him and go for it again in 2017?
    In terms of Hammel... he's not really a loss. His first half ERA was decent at 3.46 but his second half was pretty bad at 4.35. Zastryzny had a 1.13 ERA over 16 innings and looked quite good. His 2.15 FIP supports that. Montgomery had a 2.52/3.79 ERA/FIP over 100 innings last season. Worst case, I think that's a wash but both have more upside than a 34 year old.

    As for Arrieta, he simply wasn't the same pitcher he was in 2015. He was decent but he wasn't other worldly dominant. He was worth 3.8 fWAR last season over nearly 200 IP. Urias was worth 1.8 over 77 IP. Given similar time you'd expect similar production. Arrieta's 2015 shows he perhaps has more upside for 2017 but Uriase is a far better long term play. Now whether or not the dodgers would deal Urias is another story. If I were them I wouldn't however given the age of their better players, think they are more a win today team rather than a win in 3-4 years when Urias is at his peak team. If we use David Price as a recent template who was dealt mid season rather than between seasons, he netted Jairo Labourt (minors), Matt Boyd and Daniel Norris. Norris is 23 and over 69 innings last year put up 3.38/3.93 ERA/FIP. Boyd is 25 and didn't have an amazing year with detroit but there is some upside there. Think you can argue Arrieta is worth more than Price was given another half year of use.

    So, the argument basically comes down to this. Arrieta might be worth more than whomever the cubs get in return in 2017 but you get that player for 4-5 years vs the one year of Arrieta. Simply put, I'd easily take a Norris level player plus some additional parts for Arrieta because Norris wasn't far off Arrieta's production.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to beckdawg For This Useful Post:


  27. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    8,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fatbeard View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is absolutely no way the Dodgers are trading Urias and parts for one year of control of a 31 year old Jake Arrieta.That's just insane. Like R.A. Dickey/Shelby Miller trade insane.
    Agree that I wouldn't do it but was sort of using Urias as a place holder for a top 25ish pitching prospect. The major places have yet to do their rerannks and the dodgers were just the first team that came to mind as needing pitching and Urias obviously was their best prospect in that regard. If you'd rather sub in De Leon then fine but like I said wasn't specifically saying the cubs would get Urias just something near that quality.

  28. A message from our sponsors.
    Please Register(it's free!) and Login to get rid of this advertisement.



    Do you want to advertise with ChiCitySports?
    Ranked #1 Chicagoland sports news and message board online.
    A great opportunity for advertising and exposure, with an active base of fresh consumers always looking for sports-related items and miscellaneous "guy stuff".
    Please go here if you are interested in a multitude of placements on this site.
Page 2 of 91 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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