Cubs' Prospects FUTUREBONER thread

[CBStew]

Wait.  What?

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

A hilarious reappearance of teh Pual notwithstanding, I'll actually agree that it's a pretty goddamn stupid take to insist that "someone in the middle infield has to go" the implication being that they have to go NOW.  Fuck that--nobody needs to be traded yet.  Russel's not even on the big-league roster right noe.  What the fuck is that shit?  They've got canyons of payroll room to sign pitchers this offseason.

[Chuck to Chuck]

The 140 character limit doesn't allow for nuance. While I agree that someone from th MI doesn't "have to go," it is the most likely place for a trade to come from due to the surplus of talent. Futher, this front office has a history of trading from the MI (Nomar, Ramirez).

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

The 140 character limit doesn't allow for nuance. While I agree that someone from th MI doesn't "have to go," it is the most likely place for a trade to come from due to the surplus of talent. Futher, this front office has a history of trading from the MI (Nomar, Ramirez).

I don't think that anyone's going to argue that one of the MI's will be dealt eventually...but there's no reason to do it this offseason.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

The 140 character limit doesn't allow for nuance. While I agree that someone from th MI doesn't "have to go," it is the most likely place for a trade to come from due to the surplus of talent. Futher, this front office has a history of trading from the MI (Nomar, Ramirez).

I don't think that anyone's going to argue that one of the MI's will be dealt eventually...but there's no reason to do it this offseason.

And to do it for Jordan Zimmerman is even dumber and more needlessly impulsive.  Zimmerman's a fine pitcher but the only guy for whom they should consider dealing their studs would be Hamels and I'm not 100% sold on the wisdom of doing that.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Why is trading for a 30 year old better than trading for a 25 year old?

[Eli]

Why is trading for a 30 year old better than trading for a 25 year old?

Well, first of all, Zimmermann is 28, not 25. Also, Hamels has 4 reasonable years left on his contract and Zimmermann hits FA after next season.

[Tonker]

Why is trading for a 30 year old better than trading for a 25 year old?

Well, first of all, Zimmermann is 28, not 25. Also, Hamels has 4 reasonable years left on his contract and Zimmermann hits FA after next season. Because Chuck is wrong.

Could have saved yourself some keystrokes.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Why is trading for a 30 year old better than trading for a 25 year old?

Well, first of all, Zimmermann is 28, not 25. Also, Hamels has 4 reasonable years left on his contract and Zimmermann hits FA after next season.

So you'd get 2 more years of a player's prime in exchange for more of Ricketts' money? Sign me up.

[InternetApex]

Why is trading for a 30 year old better than trading for a 25 year old?

Well, first of all, Zimmermann is 28, not 25. Also, Hamels has 4 reasonable years left on his contract and Zimmermann hits FA after next season.

So you'd get 2 more years of a player's prime in exchange for more of Ricketts' money? Sign me up.

Ok. What am I signing you up for?

[Saul Goodman]

Why is trading for a 30 year old better than trading for a 25 year old?

Well, first of all, Zimmermann is 28, not 25. Also, Hamels has 4 reasonable years left on his contract and Zimmermann hits FA after next season.

So you'd get 2 more years of a player's prime in exchange for more of Ricketts' money? Sign me up.

Ok. What am I signing you up for?

Something about ... being forced to stare at Christina Hendricks' ass until he dies of starvation

[Eli]

Why is trading for a 30 year old better than trading for a 25 year old?

Well, first of all, Zimmermann is 28, not 25. Also, Hamels has 4 reasonable years left on his contract and Zimmermann hits FA after next season.

So you'd get 2 more years of a player's prime in exchange for more of Ricketts' money? Sign me up.

I know you work in banking so this may be hard to understand, but just because it's someone else's money doesn't mean it doesn't matter.

(I'm kidding, of course, but it's not like Ricketts' money is unlimited.)

[SKO]

I'm not cool with trading anyone from the MI because I don't think when you look at what the return for Price or Lester was that any of these pitchers really merit a player of Starlin or Russell's caliber. Also Baez is an interesting case that I wouldn't trade because his upside is so ridiculously high, but I also wouldn't trade Castro or Russell yet because there's a very distinct possibility that Baez might just suck and we would need said MI surplus to cover that possibility.


On a different note I realize she's cloaked herself in lots of really eloquent and intelligent statements about how hard it is to be a woman in sports media to the point that you can't help but feel like a sexist prick when talking negatively about her, but Julie says a lot of terribly stupid shit.

[PenFoe]

Comedy is hard.  Believe me I know.

Perhaps this should go into the "I Admit It" thread but like 95% of the guys who do Cubs Twitter grate on me for some indefinable reason.  I know that's a really shocking admission coming from a perpetually angry, drunken potato head but I thought I'd put it out there nonetheless.

I really like Arguello, and Sahadev is fine but the rest of those guys annoy me for some reason.

I get Arguello and Loxas mixed up, but I just think of them both as guys who pretend to have sources and probably don't.

And if anyone ever reeked of effort, it's Brett from Bleacher Nation.

I think this is commonly referred to as "the Dan Bernstein."

I sincerely admire and appreciate the work ethic that has to go into Bleacher Nation - it's hands down the best source for keeping up to date on all things Cub - but yeah it's too bad that product couldn't be churned out by someone who also has a good sense of humor.

None of them have a sense of humor.  They all talk about the same thing-- the Cubs, their children/babies, and whatever craft beer they're drinking at the time.

It's like being trapped in a room with an even more insufferable PenFoe.

For what it's worth, I'm cool with both Brett and Arguello.  They're fine sources of information and that's really what I "use" them for.  I have other places to go for humor and I don't care if they're trying too hard or whatever the current bitch session is.   I don't stop reading CNN because I don't like their sense of humor, I stop reading because the news is old or irrelevant. 

As long as those guys are churning out news and perspective on the Cubs without getting butthurt every article, they're fine by me. 

Also, I don't give two shits whether they follow me on Twitter or not.  It's not like my Twitter (or any of ours) are vital sources of information, outside of maybe Slak's soccer one that I don't understand. 

They're just guys working hard to put out news and information about the Cubs and doing so in a way that is decidedly not Al-like. 

They're good by me. 

[SKO]

Comedy is hard.  Believe me I know.

Perhaps this should go into the "I Admit It" thread but like 95% of the guys who do Cubs Twitter grate on me for some indefinable reason.  I know that's a really shocking admission coming from a perpetually angry, drunken potato head but I thought I'd put it out there nonetheless.

I really like Arguello, and Sahadev is fine but the rest of those guys annoy me for some reason.

I get Arguello and Loxas mixed up, but I just think of them both as guys who pretend to have sources and probably don't.

And if anyone ever reeked of effort, it's Brett from Bleacher Nation.

I think this is commonly referred to as "the Dan Bernstein."

I sincerely admire and appreciate the work ethic that has to go into Bleacher Nation - it's hands down the best source for keeping up to date on all things Cub - but yeah it's too bad that product couldn't be churned out by someone who also has a good sense of humor.

None of them have a sense of humor.  They all talk about the same thing-- the Cubs, their children/babies, and whatever craft beer they're drinking at the time.

It's like being trapped in a room with an even more insufferable PenFoe.

For what it's worth, I'm cool with both Brett and Arguello.  They're fine sources of information and that's really what I "use" them for.  I have other places to go for humor and I don't care if they're trying too hard or whatever the current bitch session is.   I don't stop reading CNN because I don't like their sense of humor, I stop reading because the news is old or irrelevant. 

As long as those guys are churning out news and perspective on the Cubs without getting butthurt every article, they're fine by me. 

Also, I don't give two shits whether they follow me on Twitter or not.  It's not like my Twitter (or any of ours) are vital sources of information, outside of maybe Slak's soccer one that I don't understand. 

They're just guys working hard to put out news and information about the Cubs and doing so in a way that is decidedly not Al-like. 

They're good by me. 

Great. You're a real fucking humanitarian.