The Cubs were never serious about Darvish, in my opinion. That would be a horrible trade. If we are serious, they will wait and go after him hard in the offseason.
what would be a horrible trade?
The Cubs were never serious about Darvish, in my opinion. That would be a horrible trade. If we are serious, they will wait and go after him hard in the offseason.
If 2nd half Jake is going to be regular Jake going forward for a couple years, bring him back.
If 1st half Jake will be the regular Jake, I'm not sure what they should do. I hear that some metrics still showed him as one of MLBs best (like top 30 or something), but he seemed awful.
Signing Jake and Darvish would just be fun. That seems like something the Cubs could afford, since I'm "spending" other people's money.
Got to save some money for Harper, since we are spending other peoples money.
I don't want to break the bank for Harper if we can keep what we have signed. Neither seems likely in the long run though. Harper's tantrum last night was a bit off putting.Got to save some money for Harper, since we are spending other peoples money.
I was not advocating a trade for Darvish - I'm saying I'd rather we trade for a pitcher now instead of sign for a pitcher in the offseason.
Yes, trading for Gray would lead to lose us a few prospects, but with a guaranteed rotation of Lester, Quintana, Gray, and Hendricks for at least 2 years, it would allow us to start focusing our money on extensions with Rizzo, Bryant, Contreras, Russell, Baez, Happ, etc...and extending just 1 or 2 of those guys, those prospects won't matter to us too much in the long run.
A trade for a Gray type SP would cost the Cubs talent already on the big league roster at this point.
I may be OK with that, depending on who it is.
Gray and Vogt for Schwarber, Candelario, Caratini
Douche alert...
Douche alert...
Douche alert...
Gray and Vogt for Schwarber, Candelario, Caratini