|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 12:20:12 GMT -5
<<But maybe the biggest talking point in all of this is one that isn’t being discussed at all, and that’s the Dodgers offense. They already built an incredible core group of offensive weapons. They have the luxury of prioritizing defense in their roster construction to help shore up their pitching weaknesses because their offense can already carry them>> BINGO !! They sure as hell didn't obtain Heyward for his offense . And that's why Vargas who was rated higher in their system got the 2b job to start the season , he was younger and a better defender and also another thing to consider when it comes to who to deal and who to keep is I'm sure Busch had a LOT more trade value as a prospect because of his bat than Vargas did. Dodgers got two pieces of their future for Busch. And I'm not saying Busch is a good fielder, my entire point is he was moved around more so because they were trying to find a path to the majors for him , had he been a better fielder they might have , but he also didn't hit in his brief time and they don't have the patience for that. I guess I started this all by saying he could be an option at 2b and Happy said he's not because he's brutal there , from everything I had read he was not brutal but nothing more than passable. Which was what they also thought about 1b and he showed great improvement there. Bat, please look at Heyward’s stats in LA for 2023 before commenting. I’m positive a World Series aspiring team like LA took into considering “trade value” when determining who to keep. It definitely seems logical (note sarcasm). I guess all his college teams have better “prospects” playing second base too which is why he logged all of 15 games there. I guess Busch would be fine at second base. Much like Morel was fine at third base and Schwarber is fine in left. They did not sign Heyward for his bat , yes he pulled a decent season out of his ass for them , but that's not why they signed and played him . <<I’m positive a World Series aspiring team like LA took into considering “trade value” when determining who to keep. It definitely seems logical (note sarcasm).>> A smart team like LA sure as hell does , they got a potential future ace and by making deals like this , this is how they also keep having a good farm system despite losing picks and pool money from all the luxury tax penalties ( note no sarcasm) just the way good organizations do things well. And I'm not saying he's a great 2b , all I said is he is a possible option there to try if they wanted to add more slug by getting a 1b , it's going to be Shaw's position eventually anyway. A lot of people didn't think he could handle 1b either . |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 12:21:49 GMT -5
Now, first, I will say it was inexcusable to continue to have Wisdom, Mastrobuoni on the roster period but you’re missing the bigger picture of 40 man construction. Canario was hurt which is why he was never called up later in the season. CC was also committed to PCA in center. I don’t know why the Cubs didn’t utilize Vazquez. The bench is emergency back up. We need a guy, like Shaw, you can fold in and get plenty of at bats. He can play multiple positions so it should be easy to get him regular at bats. Then, if Bellinger opts out, you have Tauchman as a 4th outfielder, you carry a catcher and a guy who is just a specialist. If someone gets hurt during the game you call on your Swiss Army knife or emergency back up. You tap the 40 man for Il replacements, get your high valued prospects regular playing time and a look in those situations. The Cubs didn’t have that 40 man option last season. The 40 man was primarily of guys who weren’t ready (Alcántara/Davis) and relievers because a lot of our relievers, especially early on, didn’t have option years left. You cannot have a pen that lacks multiple guys with options. I don't know what to think about the 2024 season anymore. I look back to 2023 and them being undecided and looking like they would sell at the deadline and the Swanson convincing Jed to add and not subtract because they thought they could make the playoffs.........I get that , you want to give a guy you just signed to your biggest contract some assurance you believe in him and his team in a season you were only really having an outside hope you'd be contending when 2024 was more their vision. 2024 they were a Jekyl and Hyde team and again bordering on contention for the playoffs and have the we just gotta get in anybody can win if you are vision. What should have been the vision is well everything would have to go right for this team to win in the playoffs so lets look more at 2025 and maybe get a look at two guys who are supposed to be major parts of the core Caissie and Shaw and that could have been done by letting go of Wisdom and not trading for Paredes. There were multiple injuries to OF's that could have warranted Caissie coming up and getting playing time and they could have put Shaw at 3b . It's not ideal throwing rookies into the fire, but it sure would probably give them a better idea about what they might be able to do for them in 2025 than it would having them stay in Iowa. Instead they clung to the hope of making a 3rd wild card spot and trotted out the same line up day after day and these kids could have gotten some valuable experience seeing major league pitching. I believe Counsell did the right thing by playing the rookies. I also believe the only reason the Cubs didn’t give Shaw a look was because he wasn’t on the 40 man. Similar with Caissie and why Alcántara did get a look. What I find inexcusable by Hoyer was not moving Smyly (I hated the extension to begin with) and Wisdom before the season. That was money that should have been spent elsewhere. I was for attaching Mervis to facilitate a money moving transaction. During the season, not addressing third sooner obviously was a mistake. The Snakes looked pretty willing to move Saurez for nothing early on and the Cubs should have made that deal along with not addressing the bullpen once we lost Alzolay and Merryweather. It was obvious they need to add a high leverage closer. I agree that trading for Paredes when we traded for him was confusing. GMs immediately called Chicago asking about his availability and it could have been a great way to add even more prospect depth and opening up third for Shaw. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 12:41:56 GMT -5
I don't know what to think about the 2024 season anymore. I look back to 2023 and them being undecided and looking like they would sell at the deadline and the Swanson convincing Jed to add and not subtract because they thought they could make the playoffs.........I get that , you want to give a guy you just signed to your biggest contract some assurance you believe in him and his team in a season you were only really having an outside hope you'd be contending when 2024 was more their vision. 2024 they were a Jekyl and Hyde team and again bordering on contention for the playoffs and have the we just gotta get in anybody can win if you are vision. What should have been the vision is well everything would have to go right for this team to win in the playoffs so lets look more at 2025 and maybe get a look at two guys who are supposed to be major parts of the core Caissie and Shaw and that could have been done by letting go of Wisdom and not trading for Paredes. There were multiple injuries to OF's that could have warranted Caissie coming up and getting playing time and they could have put Shaw at 3b . It's not ideal throwing rookies into the fire, but it sure would probably give them a better idea about what they might be able to do for them in 2025 than it would having them stay in Iowa. Instead they clung to the hope of making a 3rd wild card spot and trotted out the same line up day after day and these kids could have gotten some valuable experience seeing major league pitching. I believe Counsell did the right thing by playing the rookies. I also believe the only reason the Cubs didn’t give Shaw a look was because he wasn’t on the 40 man. Similar with Caissie and why Alcántara did get a look. What I find inexcusable by Hoyer was not moving Smyly (I hated the extension to begin with) and Wisdom before the season. That was money that should have been spent elsewhere. I was for attaching Mervis to facilitate a money moving transaction. During the season, not addressing third sooner obviously was a mistake. The Snakes looked pretty willing to move Saurez for nothing early on and the Cubs should have made that deal along with not addressing the bullpen once we lost Alzolay and Merryweather. It was obvious they need to add a high leverage closer. I agree that trading for Paredes when we traded for him was confusing. GMs immediately called Chicago asking about his availability and it could have been a great way to add even more prospect depth and opening up third for Shaw. I know, but they could have easily been placed on the 40 man so it has to be about another year of control because I can't think of anything else. It's not that hard to open up 40 man spots. it would not have been the end of the world to DFA Patrick Wisdom who better be non tendered anyway. They had multiple fringe bullpen pitchers they were shuttling on and off the 40 man thats a spot could have gone to one of Caissie or Shaw. They could have easily gotten rid of guys like Wisdom, Mastrobouni etc who are not part of the future. Not trading Smyly , I want to believe he tried and tried hard and he should have taken anything he could get , even the old ptbnl/caash considerations but no team probably wanted to pay any of his remaining salary. Parades trade at the time I liked and I'm still ok with since he was looking towards the future and not just 2024, but with Shaw on the horizon I didn't see the real need because I felt he could play there fairly soon and then what changed my mind on it was the play of Cam Smith , so not only could they have put Shaw at 3b , they have Smith who doesn't look like he will need 2-3 seasons in the minors , so I don't think they need Parades . |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 12:48:28 GMT -5
Everyone said he was a butcher at first base as well yet he was quite excellent there this season. The truth is that very few people ever saw Busch field a position in the minors and that includes every Dodger buddy of yours who reads the same publications and news feeds as we all do. Busch proven himself a capable and athletic fielder this season. As far as his time in LA? The Dodgers don’t fuck around like the Cubs do. If they have a chance to grab Freeman and Ohtani? They are going to do it. Lux was hyped beyond words at one point as their next tremendous hitting talent and was going to get everyday opportunity to exceed at second base. Vargas was a more well regarded prospect than Busch was and deserving of opportunities too. Muncy averaged 32 home runs annually from 2018-2023 and was always going to have a home somewhere. And Betts made it known he is versatile and capable and that gave the Dodgers huge flexibility in optimizing their roster. But maybe the biggest talking point in all of this is one that isn’t being discussed at all, and that’s the Dodgers offense. They already built an incredible core group of offensive weapons. They have the luxury of prioritizing defense in their roster construction to help shore up their pitching weaknesses because their offense can already carry them. That’s why the rumors of their interest in Hoerner were everywhere at the last deadline. The Cubs don’t have that luxury to prioritize defense so heavily right now because their offense has been so lacking at times. When a Hoerner is barely scraping by as a 100 wRC+ player and posting a .710 OPS we need to consider other options. <<But maybe the biggest talking point in all of this is one that isn’t being discussed at all, and that’s the Dodgers offense. They already built an incredible core group of offensive weapons. They have the luxury of prioritizing defense in their roster construction to help shore up their pitching weaknesses because their offense can already carry them>> BINGO !! They sure as hell didn't obtain Heyward for his offense . And that's why Vargas who was rated higher in their system got the 2b job to start the season , he was younger and a better defender and also another thing to consider when it comes to who to deal and who to keep is I'm sure Busch had a LOT more trade value as a prospect because of his bat than Vargas did. Dodgers got two pieces of their future for Busch. And I'm not saying Busch is a good fielder, my entire point is he was moved around more so because they were trying to find a path to the majors for him , had he been a better fielder they might have , but he also didn't hit in his brief time and they don't have the patience for that. I guess I started this all by saying he could be an option at 2b and Happy said he's not because he's brutal there , from everything I had read he was not brutal but nothing more than passable. Which was what they also thought about 1b and he showed great improvement there. Hang on, hang on, hang on… so the dodgers were so concerned about defense they went with Vargas over Busch and moved a MVP multiple gold glover out of right field and put him at shortstop? Yeah I guess that makes sense. Put the best corner outfielder in the game at shortstop and risk injury and poor defensive play (both happened) because you value defense so much. So me, just thinking, if defense was such a concern that they re-signed Heyward to play right, why didn’t they just leave Betts there? Or if defense was such a concern at second they didn’t give Busch a chance, why would you play Betts at short or second? I’m just curious since there are the examples you are using to strengthen your argument. Why would the Dodgers weaken their infield defense and corner outfield? |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 13:07:45 GMT -5
<<But maybe the biggest talking point in all of this is one that isn’t being discussed at all, and that’s the Dodgers offense. They already built an incredible core group of offensive weapons. They have the luxury of prioritizing defense in their roster construction to help shore up their pitching weaknesses because their offense can already carry them>> BINGO !! They sure as hell didn't obtain Heyward for his offense . And that's why Vargas who was rated higher in their system got the 2b job to start the season , he was younger and a better defender and also another thing to consider when it comes to who to deal and who to keep is I'm sure Busch had a LOT more trade value as a prospect because of his bat than Vargas did. Dodgers got two pieces of their future for Busch. And I'm not saying Busch is a good fielder, my entire point is he was moved around more so because they were trying to find a path to the majors for him , had he been a better fielder they might have , but he also didn't hit in his brief time and they don't have the patience for that. I guess I started this all by saying he could be an option at 2b and Happy said he's not because he's brutal there , from everything I had read he was not brutal but nothing more than passable. Which was what they also thought about 1b and he showed great improvement there. Hang on, hang on, hang on… so the dodgers were so concerned about defense they went with Vargas over Busch and moved a MVP multiple gold glover out of right field and put him at shortstop? Yeah I guess that makes sense. Put the best corner outfielder in the game at shortstop and risk injury and poor defensive play (both happened) because you value defense so much. So me, just thinking, if defense was such a concern that they re-signed Heyward to play right, why didn’t they just leave Betts there? Or if defense was such a concern at second they didn’t give Busch a chance, why would you play Betts at short or second? I’m just curious since there are the examples you are using to strengthen your argument. Why would the Dodgers weaken their infield defense and corner outfield? I have no idea why they ever moved Betts to the infield , so I can't answer that . and again Vargas had been rated over Busch as a prospect so for him to win out over Busch , not a surprise. I wasn't in spring training with them in 2023 , can't answer these questions as to how they ended up doing what they did and why. I can't even start to try to think of why Robert's plays who he does where , my brain hurts enough now as it is. I don't even understand the Heyward move for them when they made it , I get he's a great team chemistry guy and well respected in the clubhouse , but they had better options and his defense although still solid had declined. Again all , I know is I read a lot of Dodgers stuff and mostly all said Busch was moved more so to find a path to the majors than it was him being "brutal" as you said at playing positions. Everything I read after the trade including what I posted from the MLB page said he was passable at 2b, never said he was good at any , but maybe he can become good like he did at 1b And again all I said is he might be a possible option there if they sign Alonso or decide to get more slug at 1b . |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 13:23:54 GMT -5
Hang on, hang on, hang on… so the dodgers were so concerned about defense they went with Vargas over Busch and moved a MVP multiple gold glover out of right field and put him at shortstop? Yeah I guess that makes sense. Put the best corner outfielder in the game at shortstop and risk injury and poor defensive play (both happened) because you value defense so much. So me, just thinking, if defense was such a concern that they re-signed Heyward to play right, why didn’t they just leave Betts there? Or if defense was such a concern at second they didn’t give Busch a chance, why would you play Betts at short or second? I’m just curious since there are the examples you are using to strengthen your argument. Why would the Dodgers weaken their infield defense and corner outfield? I have no idea why they ever moved Betts to the infield , so I can't answer that . and again Vargas had been rated over Busch as a prospect so for him to win out over Busch , not a surprise. I wasn't in spring training with them in 2023 , can't answer these questions as to how they ended up doing what they did and why. I can't even start to try to think of why Robert's plays who he does where , my brain hurts enough now as it is. I don't even understand the Heyward move for them when they made it , I get he's a great team chemistry guy and well respected in the clubhouse , but they had better options and his defense although still solid had declined. Again all , I know is I read a lot of Dodgers stuff and mostly all said Busch was moved more so to find a path to the majors than it was him being "brutal" as you said at playing positions. Everything I read after the trade including what I posted from the MLB page said he was passable at 2b, never said he was good at any , but maybe he can become good like he did at 1b And again all I said is he might be a possible option there if they sign Alonso or decide to get more slug at 1b . I’m 100% out on Alonso. I get the desire for more power but I think that contract goes bad quick. Just about every contract ages poorly but I think Alonso would immediately cause buyers remorse. Walker on the other hand I think I could get behind if Bellinger opts out, allow Busch to DH and Suzuki stays in right. For me, and it’s just me and my personal opinion, I’m tired of the Cubs wasting money on good players when they need great players. We have more good, well rounded players than we can shake a stick at but we don’t have any great players. 20 million here, 18 million there is the MLB equivalent of nickel and diming. The Cubs now are a perfect example, went over the luxury tax but didn’t have a single great player to show for it or make the playoffs. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 13:48:03 GMT -5
I have no idea why they ever moved Betts to the infield , so I can't answer that . and again Vargas had been rated over Busch as a prospect so for him to win out over Busch , not a surprise. I wasn't in spring training with them in 2023 , can't answer these questions as to how they ended up doing what they did and why. I can't even start to try to think of why Robert's plays who he does where , my brain hurts enough now as it is. I don't even understand the Heyward move for them when they made it , I get he's a great team chemistry guy and well respected in the clubhouse , but they had better options and his defense although still solid had declined. Again all , I know is I read a lot of Dodgers stuff and mostly all said Busch was moved more so to find a path to the majors than it was him being "brutal" as you said at playing positions. Everything I read after the trade including what I posted from the MLB page said he was passable at 2b, never said he was good at any , but maybe he can become good like he did at 1b And again all I said is he might be a possible option there if they sign Alonso or decide to get more slug at 1b . I’m 100% out on Alonso. I get the desire for more power but I think that contract goes bad quick. Just about every contract ages poorly but I think Alonso would immediately cause buyers remorse. Walker on the other hand I think I could get behind if Bellinger opts out, allow Busch to DH and Suzuki stays in right. For me, and it’s just me and my personal opinion, I’m tired of the Cubs wasting money on good players when they need great players. We have more good, well rounded players than we can shake a stick at but we don’t have any great players. 20 million here, 18 million there is the MLB equivalent of nickel and diming. The Cubs now are a perfect example, went over the luxury tax but didn’t have a single great player to show for it or make the playoffs. <<For me, and it’s just me and my personal opinion, I’m tired of the Cubs wasting money on good players when they need great players. We have more good, well rounded players than we can shake a stick at but we don’t have any great players. 20 million here, 18 million there is the MLB equivalent of nickel and diming. The Cubs now are a perfect example, went over the luxury tax but didn’t have a single great player to show for it or make the playoffs.>> I'm right with you on ALL of that. On Alonso I keep changing my mind , not sure how they get a "great player" other than signing Soto who I think they have no chance at or trading for Vlad but they would need to somehow not make that move be a rental. So that's why I keep looking back to Alonso , I wouldn not label him great because of the age he's at now , but they need a guy in the middle of the order who a team does not want to face. I think a change of scenery and playing in Wrigley might bring his numbers back up to be a 40+ homer guy. He's that type of player that teams fear and his power plays anywhere unlike Parades. Walker, depends on the cost , but he will be 34 to start next season so he'd be just another semi costly older "good" player. he's not going to be a big contract , but I'm not sure he adds enough over Busch to make it worth it, he's another 20ish 30 with a real good season guy. It would be going the safe and cheaper route all over again. |
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Oct 24, 2024 14:59:30 GMT -5
This is the first time I get to kick my feet up on the desk, fold my arms, sip my water and watch you guys argue about the shit I have been complaining about for 5 years  |
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on Oct 24, 2024 15:20:22 GMT -5
This is the first time I get to kick my feet up on the desk, fold my arms, sip my water and watch you guys argue about the shit I have been complaining about for 5 years Right now, I'm more interested in who's leaving. Hoyer's MO is to overpay a guy only to DFA him during the season. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 17:00:25 GMT -5
This is the first time I get to kick my feet up on the desk, fold my arms, sip my water and watch you guys argue about the shit I have been complaining about for 5 years You might have the 5 year time frame off a bit Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm via mobile QuotelikePost Options Post by Returnofstevefitz on Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm I’m going 2027, maybe 2026. Now that they’re about to shed the team of the last of the remaining players (Happ & Willy), 2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent and signing established vets to help. This is going to be a long 4 years 😬 cubbiesfever.proboards.com/thread/4723/next-cubs-contending-team |
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Oct 24, 2024 17:03:20 GMT -5
This is the first time I get to kick my feet up on the desk, fold my arms, sip my water and watch you guys argue about the shit I have been complaining about for 5 years You might have the 5 year time frame off a bit Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm via mobile QuotelikePost Options Post by Returnofstevefitz on Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm I’m going 2027, maybe 2026. Now that they’re about to shed the team of the last of the remaining players (Happ & Willy), 2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent and signing established vets to help. This is going to be a long 4 years 😬 cubbiesfever.proboards.com/thread/4723/next-cubs-contending-team"2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent" I was right about 2023, unfortunately the "focus" is barely happening.... Jed moved the goal post. Don't blame me |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 17:10:32 GMT -5
You might have the 5 year time frame off a bit Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm via mobile QuotelikePost Options Post by Returnofstevefitz on Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm I’m going 2027, maybe 2026. Now that they’re about to shed the team of the last of the remaining players (Happ & Willy), 2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent and signing established vets to help. This is going to be a long 4 years 😬 cubbiesfever.proboards.com/thread/4723/next-cubs-contending-team"2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent" I was right about 2023, unfortunately the "focus" is barely happening.... Jed moved the goal post. Don't blame me I'm still saying 2023 they were there as a contending team , when you miss a playoff spot by 1 game on the last day that's in contention for a playoff spot , they were in it all year and choked down the stretch. 2024 was not a contending team, they were close , but a long shot to get into the playoffs and were never really ahead for a WC spot. I was WRONG ......yeah I said it , in having more faith in Jed making them a serious playoff contender, not a pretender contender. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 17:14:07 GMT -5
You might have the 5 year time frame off a bit Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm via mobile QuotelikePost Options Post by Returnofstevefitz on Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm I’m going 2027, maybe 2026. Now that they’re about to shed the team of the last of the remaining players (Happ & Willy), 2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent and signing established vets to help. This is going to be a long 4 years 😬 cubbiesfever.proboards.com/thread/4723/next-cubs-contending-team"2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent" I was right about 2023, unfortunately the "focus" is barely happening.... Jed moved the goal post. Don't blame me 2023 they did make the climb, almost to the top and missed stepping off the ladder onto the playoff stage by 1 game 2024 , his foot slipped on that ladder and progress was made in some areas, others not so much and they took a step backwards in my opinion even though they had the same record. |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 17:36:51 GMT -5
"2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent" I was right about 2023, unfortunately the "focus" is barely happening.... Jed moved the goal post. Don't blame me 2023 they did make the climb, almost to the top and missed stepping off the ladder onto the playoff stage by 1 game 2024 , his foot slipped on that ladder and progress was made in some areas, others not so much and they took a step backwards in my opinion even though they had the same record. I disagree that the Cubs took a step backwards End of 2023: 1st base ? Cf ? 3rd base ? Top prospects PCA, Horton, Alcántara, Davis (according to MLB 2023 rankings. I know Caissie and Shaw made the list and a couple others) End of 2024 1st Busch CF PCA 3rd Paredes Top prospects: Shaw, Smith, Horton, Caissie, Alcántara, Roth Rojas, Moises, Triantos. Plus: Hodges and Imanaga That’s a step forward no matter what the record was last season, would you not agree? To promote PCA, Wicks, Brown, Busch, have them all lose their prospect status and still have 8 in MLBs top 100 list and apparently knocking your first round pick out of the park is not taking a step back, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 17:42:40 GMT -5
"2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent" I was right about 2023, unfortunately the "focus" is barely happening.... Jed moved the goal post. Don't blame me 2023 they did make the climb, almost to the top and missed stepping off the ladder onto the playoff stage by 1 game 2024 , his foot slipped on that ladder and progress was made in some areas, others not so much and they took a step backwards in my opinion even though they had the same record. What likely cost Ross was that after 2023, we were in no better position as an organization than we were in 2022. We had the same question marks because Ross was afraid to use rookies. I didn’t expect this team to be much better than .500 but had I known Imanaga would pitch so well as well as Taillon, plus Busch’s success, I would have had them around 86-90 wins. I also think the centrals mediocrity robbed a couple wins. The division was not good but it also was not bad. Every team was okay, had a lot of young talent (except the cards) but we didn’t have mop up teams like the Marlins, Nationals and Rockies which helped the east and west pad some extra wins Edit: it didn’t cost the Cubs wins but it didn’t help pad any wins. |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 17:51:57 GMT -5
You might have the 5 year time frame off a bit Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm via mobile QuotelikePost Options Post by Returnofstevefitz on Jul 26, 2022 at 6:39pm I’m going 2027, maybe 2026. Now that they’re about to shed the team of the last of the remaining players (Happ & Willy), 2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent and signing established vets to help. This is going to be a long 4 years 😬 cubbiesfever.proboards.com/thread/4723/next-cubs-contending-team"2023 will be the start of the climb. The focus will be on bringing up young talent" I was right about 2023, unfortunately the "focus" is barely happening.... Jed moved the goal post. Don't blame me You were off a year. In 2023, Ross was NOT focused on developing young talent. He barely played PCA, he never used a kid in a high leverage situation, he didnt give Morel a chance to be an adequate defender, didn’t use any kids really in the rotation. I think that’s why I’m a lot higher on the 24 team than most despite the record and missing the playoffs. CC gave kids a chance to develop and they succeeded. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 18:07:48 GMT -5
2023 they did make the climb, almost to the top and missed stepping off the ladder onto the playoff stage by 1 game 2024 , his foot slipped on that ladder and progress was made in some areas, others not so much and they took a step backwards in my opinion even though they had the same record. I disagree that the Cubs took a step backwards End of 2023: 1st base ? Cf ? 3rd base ? Top prospects PCA, Horton, Alcántara, Davis (according to MLB 2023 rankings. I know Caissie and Shaw made the list and a couple others) End of 2024 1st Busch CF PCA 3rd Paredes Top prospects: Shaw, Smith, Horton, Caissie, Alcántara, Roth Rojas, Moises, Triantos. Plus: Hodges and Imanaga That’s a step forward no matter what the record was last season, would you not agree? To promote PCA, Wicks, Brown, Busch, have them all lose their prospect status and still have 8 in MLBs top 100 list and apparently knocking your first round pick out of the park is not taking a step back, in my opinion. I did say progress was made in some areas, and I totally get your points about graduating players and still having the most top 100's in baseball and I think Cam Smith has the potential to be that face of the franchise type player they lack ,but with all that happening I expected a playoff team . |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 18:14:15 GMT -5
I disagree that the Cubs took a step backwards End of 2023: 1st base ? Cf ? 3rd base ? Top prospects PCA, Horton, Alcántara, Davis (according to MLB 2023 rankings. I know Caissie and Shaw made the list and a couple others) End of 2024 1st Busch CF PCA 3rd Paredes Top prospects: Shaw, Smith, Horton, Caissie, Alcántara, Roth Rojas, Moises, Triantos. Plus: Hodges and Imanaga That’s a step forward no matter what the record was last season, would you not agree? To promote PCA, Wicks, Brown, Busch, have them all lose their prospect status and still have 8 in MLBs top 100 list and apparently knocking your first round pick out of the park is not taking a step back, in my opinion. I did say progress was made in some areas, and I totally get your points about graduating players and still having the most top 100's in baseball and I think Cam Smith has the potential to be that face of the franchise type player they lack ,but with all that happening I expected a playoff team . I get that but I don’t think it was a step backwards. I think Counsell did the right thing by allowing players to develop vs playing exclusively for a playoff spot. I definitely think there were mistakes but overall the Cubs took a step forward. The only flaw was the record but honestly, I cannot get that mad at that because everything really had to go right for the Cubs to be a playoff team. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Oct 24, 2024 18:17:14 GMT -5
2023 they did make the climb, almost to the top and missed stepping off the ladder onto the playoff stage by 1 game 2024 , his foot slipped on that ladder and progress was made in some areas, others not so much and they took a step backwards in my opinion even though they had the same record. What likely cost Ross was that after 2023, we were in no better position as an organization than we were in 2022. We had the same question marks because Ross was afraid to use rookies. I didn’t expect this team to be much better than .500 but had I known Imanaga would pitch so well as well as Taillon, plus Busch’s success, I would have had them around 86-90 wins. I also think the centrals mediocrity robbed a couple wins. The division was not good but it also was not bad. Every team was okay, had a lot of young talent (except the cards) but we didn’t have mop up teams like the Marlins, Nationals and Rockies which helped the east and west pad some extra wins Edit: it didn’t cost the Cubs wins but it didn’t help pad any wins. I can see why he was afraid to use rookies though , they were in contention and trying to stay there after they turned things around and found out a lot of the baggage Jed had signed was useless. Mancini, Barnhart, Hosmer , etc. who were supposed to be bridges to the youth but weren't even good enough to be that and were played into the ground hoping they'd turn things around and be what was expected of them. It points again, to bargain hunting and Jed shopping at the thrift store instead of Macy's. Where I get confused with all this is the future is supposed to be about the young core he assembled in large part from trading off the old one. But he has to pick a lane , if they are the future than GO with them , don't make moves that make little sense like extending Happ when you have a shit ton of good OF prospects. Don't extend Nico when you have a shit ton of infield prospects. I think he fell into the trap he needed to get guys extended because the media and fans complain it was something he can't and won't do. Granted he did not give them the 10 year deals other teams are handing out , they were shorter term but still probably were not needed if he was going to go with the youth and now he has kids that could be here, but there is no room to play them. He is running out of time to sort this out. |
|
|
|
Post by happy on Oct 24, 2024 18:32:02 GMT -5
What likely cost Ross was that after 2023, we were in no better position as an organization than we were in 2022. We had the same question marks because Ross was afraid to use rookies. I didn’t expect this team to be much better than .500 but had I known Imanaga would pitch so well as well as Taillon, plus Busch’s success, I would have had them around 86-90 wins. I also think the centrals mediocrity robbed a couple wins. The division was not good but it also was not bad. Every team was okay, had a lot of young talent (except the cards) but we didn’t have mop up teams like the Marlins, Nationals and Rockies which helped the east and west pad some extra wins Edit: it didn’t cost the Cubs wins but it didn’t help pad any wins. I can see why he was afraid to use rookies though , they were in contention and trying to stay there after they turned things around and found out a lot of the baggage Jed had signed was useless. Mancini, Barnhart, Hosmer , etc. who were supposed to be bridges to the youth but weren't even good enough to be that and were played into the ground hoping they'd turn things around and be what was expected of them. It points again, to bargain hunting and Jed shopping at the thrift store instead of Macy's. Where I get confused with all this is the future is supposed to be about the young core he assembled in large part from trading off the old one. But he has to pick a lane , if they are the future than GO with them , don't make moves that make little sense like extending Happ when you have a shit ton of good OF prospects. Don't extend Nico when you have a shit ton of infield prospects. I think he fell into the trap he needed to get guys extended because the media and fans complain it was something he can't and won't do. Granted he did not give them the 10 year deals other teams are handing out , they were shorter term but still probably were not needed if he was going to go with the youth and now he has kids that could be here, but there is no room to play them. He is running out of time to sort this out. Using a little hindsight are we not? When the Cubs extended Happ and Nico, they had Alcántara in the top 100 and PCA. Neither had played above A ball. Shaw was not even drafted yet, Triantos was just an interesting player, having not played above A ball also. Caissie, yep, you guessed it, A ball. Their “best” infield prospect was Christian Hernandez and didn’t play above rookie ball. |
|
