It is currently Sat Nov 16, 2024 1:25 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82153
'77Cubs wrote:
Interesting move as he had value at 12M but Theo knows what he's doing.

And him and Maddon clearly did not get along.

Montgomery becomes a starter with the potential to be a front end guy if he can master his command.


Seems strange that they wouldn't invoke the option and then trade him

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82153
leashyourkids wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
badrogue17 wrote:
HawaiiYou wrote:
What FA starting pitchers are the Cubs rumored to sign or go after this off season?

In Theo we trust my tropical friend.


May want to review his history of fa acquisitions over the past seven years


2016


Yep, he gave out a horrible contract in that year also

That one is particularly egregious as he had spent years waiting to give out that contract

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Last edited by good dolphin on Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:59 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
good dolphin wrote:
'77Cubs wrote:
Interesting move as he had value at 12M but Theo knows what he's doing.

And him and Maddon clearly did not get along.

Montgomery becomes a starter with the potential to be a front end guy if he can master his command.


Seems strange that they wouldn't invoke the option and then trade him


Yeah that is a tradable deal.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
good dolphin wrote:
'77Cubs wrote:
Interesting move as he had value at 12M but Theo knows what he's doing.

And him and Maddon clearly did not get along.

Montgomery becomes a starter with the potential to be a front end guy if he can master his command.


Seems strange that they wouldn't invoke the option and then trade him


Sounds like they had a verbal agreement to let him enter free agency when the contract was signed if his option was not exercised.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82153
leashyourkids wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
'77Cubs wrote:
Interesting move as he had value at 12M but Theo knows what he's doing.

And him and Maddon clearly did not get along.

Montgomery becomes a starter with the potential to be a front end guy if he can master his command.


Seems strange that they wouldn't invoke the option and then trade him


Sounds like they had a verbal agreement to let him enter free agency when the contract was signed if his option was not exercised.


Aren't these verbal agreements in violation of the cba?

Theo has a history of less than ethical dealing

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
good dolphin wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
'77Cubs wrote:
Interesting move as he had value at 12M but Theo knows what he's doing.

And him and Maddon clearly did not get along.

Montgomery becomes a starter with the potential to be a front end guy if he can master his command.


Seems strange that they wouldn't invoke the option and then trade him


Sounds like they had a verbal agreement to let him enter free agency when the contract was signed if his option was not exercised.


Aren't these verbal agreements in violation of the cba?

Theo has a history of less than ethical dealing


:lol: Stop it, man.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82153
leashyourkids wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
'77Cubs wrote:
Interesting move as he had value at 12M but Theo knows what he's doing.

And him and Maddon clearly did not get along.

Montgomery becomes a starter with the potential to be a front end guy if he can master his command.


Seems strange that they wouldn't invoke the option and then trade him


Sounds like they had a verbal agreement to let him enter free agency when the contract was signed if his option was not exercised.


Aren't these verbal agreements in violation of the cba?

Theo has a history of less than ethical dealing


:lol: Stop it, man.


Just planting seeds for a spring harvest

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 11:33 am
Posts: 6189
Location: Limbo
pizza_Place: Positanos on 55th Street
good dolphin wrote:
badrogue17 wrote:
HawaiiYou wrote:
What FA starting pitchers are the Cubs rumored to sign or go after this off season?

In Theo we trust my tropical friend.


May want to review his history of fa acquisitions over the past seven years

Jason Heyward and his rain delay speech are worth whatever their paying Zobrist. And Zobrist is worth every penny of the Heyward deal.

It all balances out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:18 pm
Posts: 27517
Location: Rizzo fo Shizzo
pizza_Place: Pizza Villa in DeKalb.
rogers park bryan wrote:
I expect they'll add 1 veteran starter at least probably via trade

Also, they'll get Jansen

They'll be good


I think they will make a strong play for Archer. They scouted him all season looking to get him. If that doesn't work out I could see them looking at Cashner.....with an eventual move to the pen.

_________________
That's my purse! I don't know you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:01 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57201
If they go after an expensive closer it has to be Jansen. Although it would be fun to resign Chapman to drive big red crazy some more.

I could see Cashner being on their radar as well.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 11735
pizza_Place: Angelo's Pizza in Downers Grove
Highly doubt they sign a closer. Probably give a whirl to Carl Jr. If that doesn't work, they will trade for someone at the deadline again. Can't invest $80M to a reliever would not make sense.

Was surprised they didn't pick up the option on Hammel. Figured they would trade him for something. Theo makes it sound like they were doing him a solid and keeping their word from negotiations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:10 pm
Posts: 6774
Glad to see Hammel go, never really trusted him. The team is in desperate need of young arms. With Lackey and Jake gone after this season, it's time to start planning moves. Hopefully Hendricks isn't just a one year thing. Not sure how Lester does without his buddy at catcher. Damn farm system really needs to produce a starting arm or 2.

_________________
Fuck Edwards and Zobrist


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 7:43 pm
Posts: 2609
pizza_Place: Lucio's
Closer is the big position. Ask SF about not having a lock down closer.

Why not give Chapman or Jansen 80M??

Edwards isn't ready to save 40+ games and pitch through a post season and Rondon even before his injury wasn't to be trusted. As to getting a closer at the deadline, that is way to risky plus will cost valuable prospects.

They now know what kind of teammate Chapman is so with E Jax, Wood, now Hammel plus Fowler's salary off the books plus with all the cash they rolled in this year, pay Chapman or Jansen and there's your closer for 3+ years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:49 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57201
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Can't invest $80M to a reliever would not make sense.


Sure you could. If you are trying to win another World Series then you are going to need a lock down guy. The playoffs this year showed how important that is.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:54 pm
Posts: 17128
Location: in the vents of life for joey belle
pizza_Place: how many planets have a chicago?
Peoria Matt wrote:
Montgomery will take his place. Hammel will get a good chunk of change from someone.

Nas wrote:
Hammel > Lackey


Agreed. Lackey is a joke.


seriously, if some local haircut place (or even our local region of a chain like great clips or supercuts) doesn't sign john lackey up for a commercial about haircuts ASAP then i swear to god they're not even trying.

Senor Dan 'SOX FAN' Bernstein wrote:

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?


Last edited by sinicalypse on Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:18 pm
Posts: 27517
Location: Rizzo fo Shizzo
pizza_Place: Pizza Villa in DeKalb.
RFDC wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Can't invest $80M to a reliever would not make sense.


Sure you could. If you are trying to win another World Series then you are going to need a lock down guy. The playoffs this year showed how important that is.


Absolutely. You just spent 184 million on a guy who gave a fucking motivational speech and played some defense. .....and it was worth it.

_________________
That's my purse! I don't know you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:58 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
RFDC wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Can't invest $80M to a reliever would not make sense.


Sure you could. If you are trying to win another World Series then you are going to need a lock down guy. The playoffs this year showed how important that is.


Chapman isn't that guy.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:18 pm
Posts: 27517
Location: Rizzo fo Shizzo
pizza_Place: Pizza Villa in DeKalb.
Nas wrote:
RFDC wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Can't invest $80M to a reliever would not make sense.


Sure you could. If you are trying to win another World Series then you are going to need a lock down guy. The playoffs this year showed how important that is.


Chapman isn't that guy.

Jansen might be. He was filthy. You could not touch that cutter. I don't think he gets 4 yrs 80 but 2 yrs 40 would be fine. Chappy scares me. He isn't a good pitcher. He just has ridiculous heat. You can eventually time that and lay off the slider as we saw all too well.

_________________
That's my purse! I don't know you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:03 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57201
Nas wrote:
RFDC wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Can't invest $80M to a reliever would not make sense.


Sure you could. If you are trying to win another World Series then you are going to need a lock down guy. The playoffs this year showed how important that is.


Chapman isn't that guy.

I agree with you which is why I posted

RFDC wrote:
If they go after an expensive closer it has to be Jansen.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:54 pm
Posts: 17128
Location: in the vents of life for joey belle
pizza_Place: how many planets have a chicago?
Nas wrote:
Chapman isn't that guy.


yeah seriously dude, it was flagrantly obvious that joe maddon was going out of his way to try and turn aroldis chapman into his own andrew miller during the world series. even tho chapman's MO is that he likes to come into save situations 100% clean (read: at the beginning of an inning with nobody on base) and generally only for 1IP, MAYBE 1+ IP, maddon still seemed 100% hellbent on damn near blowing the world series by proving #WeAreGood > any stupid fucking decision that uncle binny *hiccup* could possibly make.

put it this way: my dad is FAR from a "baseball guy" and definitely isn't specifically a "cubs fan" as he'll just roll with any team/s in chicago that are good and entertaining (read: contending) at the moment. more teams = more chances to win, you know? yeah, well THAT casual dude called me up during the bottom of the 7th in game 6 like "i think that this joe maddon guy is trying to outsmart himself here... what the hell is he doing?" --- THAT is how egregious it was.

i'm sure if i paid attention to my more "ethereal" surroundings i woulda noticed the ghost of my grandma popping down from heaven to tell me + grandpa the quintessentially important timeless message of "maddon, dude, what in the actual fuck are you doing?!" =D

so uhhhh yeah, you know, man... TLDR = MADDON: WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING?!?!

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:28 am
Posts: 11792
Location: Winnetka, Illinois
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:54 pm
Posts: 17128
Location: in the vents of life for joey belle
pizza_Place: how many planets have a chicago?
also, do you bother resigning chapman if you're the cubs?

personally i'd say no and i'd take my chances trying to find the next andrew miller (who remember was a failed "Star" SP prospect taht was traded from florida to boston and floundered for years b4 the light went on one year in the boston pen and then next thing you know he's ANDREW FUCKING MILLER thanks for listening next caller!)

AHEM. so yeah, having seen chapman pretty much get pushed to his limit and show his nerves cracking at literally just about the most important juncture/moment that's possible in baseball/history, indeed, if i was gonna pony up $$$ for a big-ticket reliever like that i'd honestly go for kenley > chapman, cuz as we saw in game 7.... when that fastball ain't 103 and on point and he's gotta go to the slider.... WHOO BABY

[quote="Dan Patrick on Rajai Davis"]You can only hope to contain him[/url]

we've seen the aroldis chapman money shot. we literally and figuratively cleaned up the mess. hell, we even noticed that i'm saying "we" about the cubs [insert smug/derisive IMU here] so like.... yeah, i'm sure there's some chauvenist idiom/saying like "what good is a chick once you've already fucked her? you got what you wanted!" so if i knew what it was i'd use it here as it totally applies to how i think the cubs are with aroldis chapman.

plus you never pay, what, 50-100mil aka ~10-15mil/yr+ for ANYONE with neck-tats! that's right, even felix damn fernandez from a few years ago.... have you ever seen that tattoo on his neck that looks like a fucking uterus? huh? welp that right there disqualifies you from being on my team. sorry... but hey thanks for listening! next caller! </kapman>

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:54 pm
Posts: 17128
Location: in the vents of life for joey belle
pizza_Place: how many planets have a chicago?
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.


you know steve, for once in my C/S/FMB posting history i actually agree with you. in terms of a #4/#5 starter you can do MUCH WORSE than hammel.... and after all the WOO CUBBIES #CubpacalypseNOW stuff going on right now if you don't think the coffers are overflowing with extra $$$DOUGH$$$ from arguably the biggest and most important and obviously bestest world series championship in the history of world series championships (just ask self-avowed "SUX" Fan Dan Beerstain!) then simply LOL dude cuz it don't get any bigger/better than this!

Seriously, don't break up ANY part of the band after it went platinum over a few shekels! Yeah I know hammel is just a drummer in this metaphor, but seriously, the dude has his dave grohl moments when he's "on" i tell you what and it's not like he's holding back any ascending/rising talent in the cubs' farm system from laying claim to the #4/5 slot! THEO PLEASE!

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:18 pm
Posts: 27517
Location: Rizzo fo Shizzo
pizza_Place: Pizza Villa in DeKalb.
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.

It was a proactive decision. Look at the ages if he remained. 34,33 38,31,27. Probably a good call to get younger. If they wait another year to do it then you have 34,28,?,?,?

_________________
That's my purse! I don't know you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:28 am
Posts: 11792
Location: Winnetka, Illinois
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Urlacher's missing neck wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.

It was a proactive decision. Look at the ages if he remained. 34,33 38,31,27. Probably a good call to get younger. If they wait another year to do it then you have 34,28,?,?,?


He was healthy and has been outstanding in the first half of 2015 & 2016 and it's not like they had to sign him to an extension. It was just picking up the club option for 2017, bringing him into camp and allowing him to compete for a spot in the rotation. If every pitcher stayed healthy and he was seen as not amongst the top 5 starters, you deal him away for a good prospect towards the end of spring training.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:18 pm
Posts: 27517
Location: Rizzo fo Shizzo
pizza_Place: Pizza Villa in DeKalb.
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
Urlacher's missing neck wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.

It was a proactive decision. Look at the ages if he remained. 34,33 38,31,27. Probably a good call to get younger. If they wait another year to do it then you have 34,28,?,?,?


He was healthy and has been outstanding in the first half of 2015 & 2016 and it's not like they had to sign him to an extension. It was just picking up the club option for 2017, bringing him into camp and allowing him to compete for a spot in the rotation. If every pitcher stayed healthy and he was seen as not amongst the top 5 starters, you deal him away for a good prospect towards the end of spring training.

I really think they are going to trade for Archer. They don't want to replace 3/5 of the rotation after next year....just 2/5. They have the money and then some to keep him. They did this because they wanted to.

_________________
That's my purse! I don't know you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 7:43 pm
Posts: 2609
pizza_Place: Lucio's
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
Urlacher's missing neck wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.

It was a proactive decision. Look at the ages if he remained. 34,33 38,31,27. Probably a good call to get younger. If they wait another year to do it then you have 34,28,?,?,?


He was healthy and has been outstanding in the first half of 2015 & 2016 and it's not like they had to sign him to an extension. It was just picking up the club option for 2017, bringing him into camp and allowing him to compete for a spot in the rotation. If every pitcher stayed healthy and he was seen as not amongst the top 5 starters, you deal him away for a good prospect towards the end of spring training.


The talk is they did him a favor to allow him to cash in as a free agent and get more than 1 guaranteed year. Evidently they said after year 2 of the deal that they would accommodate him if the Cubs didn't see him in their plans for beyond 2017.

I was also surprised they didn't pick up the option or deal him, but if they did have this wink wink understanding, then they keep their player relations good with future free agents or with players in general.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:28 am
Posts: 11792
Location: Winnetka, Illinois
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
'77Cubs wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
Urlacher's missing neck wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.

It was a proactive decision. Look at the ages if he remained. 34,33 38,31,27. Probably a good call to get younger. If they wait another year to do it then you have 34,28,?,?,?


He was healthy and has been outstanding in the first half of 2015 & 2016 and it's not like they had to sign him to an extension. It was just picking up the club option for 2017, bringing him into camp and allowing him to compete for a spot in the rotation. If every pitcher stayed healthy and he was seen as not amongst the top 5 starters, you deal him away for a good prospect towards the end of spring training.


The talk is they did him a favor to allow him to cash in as a free agent and get more than 1 guaranteed year. Evidently they said after year 2 of the deal that they would accommodate him if the Cubs didn't see him in their plans for beyond 2017.

I was also surprised they didn't pick up the option or deal him, but if they did have this wink wink understanding, then they keep their player relations good with future free agents or with players in general.


I would do what is best for the team, not the individual player. No reason to believe his value would decrease should he start for the team in 2017. If he were kept in the rotation, he might have another 15 win season. If he were not needed, he gets traded at the end of spring training. I'm sure he wasn't in their plans for beyond 2017, but you need to have enough pitching depth in spring training to be able to withstand an injury to a starter. Not sure they have that now and not a lot of good starters available.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 7:43 pm
Posts: 2609
pizza_Place: Lucio's
I agree. Quality starters are hard to come by indeed.

Maybe he has an elbow issue we don't know about??

Over and above that, I'm sure they have a plan to add more SP depth with Soler being the most likely trade chip.

And this does free up 12M of payroll...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 7:43 pm
Posts: 2609
pizza_Place: Lucio's
Urlacher's missing neck wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
Urlacher's missing neck wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
I believe this is a mistake. There is not much starting pitching available and while Montgomery may fill Hammel's spot in the rotation, what if there is an injury to a starter even before the season begins? had they picked up his option and kept him till the end of spring training and there were no injuries to any starter and Montgomery looked good, then they could have traded him to another club and gotten a decent prospect in return. Instead they will be lacking depth in starting pitching. A mistake in my opinion.

It was a proactive decision. Look at the ages if he remained. 34,33 38,31,27. Probably a good call to get younger. If they wait another year to do it then you have 34,28,?,?,?


He was healthy and has been outstanding in the first half of 2015 & 2016 and it's not like they had to sign him to an extension. It was just picking up the club option for 2017, bringing him into camp and allowing him to compete for a spot in the rotation. If every pitcher stayed healthy and he was seen as not amongst the top 5 starters, you deal him away for a good prospect towards the end of spring training.

I really think they are going to trade for Archer. They don't want to replace 3/5 of the rotation after next year....just 2/5. They have the money and then some to keep him. They did this because they wanted to.


Not sure they are willing to pay the price for Archer. TB will want a lot for him.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group