Le Journal

Netflix confirme son virage vers la distribution en salles avec Warner Bros Netflix s’appuie sur le réseau de Warner Bros. pour intégrer durablement le marché du cinéma mondial et maintenir une présence dans les salles. Le leader du streaming ne limite plus ses ambitions au seul visionnage à domicile. À travers l’acquisition des studios de Warner Bros, l’entreprise récupère un outil de distribution cinématographique complet. Ted Sarandos, […] Eklecty-City - L'actualité Pop Culture : Analyse et décryptage Cinéma, Séries et Jeux Vidéo

I don’t think anyone really expected another outcome for Cody Bellinger. Did you? Here’s the deal that returns Bellinger to the Bronx: Cody Bellinger's deal with the Yankees is for five years and $162.5 million, sources tell ESPN. There are opt-outs after the second and third season, a $20M signing bonus and a full no-trade clause.— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) January 21, 2026 Bellinger’s swing seems well-suited for Yankee Stadium, and that shows in his splits from 2025. Home: .302/.365/.544 with 18 home runs in 298 at-batsAway: .241/.301/.414 with 11 home runs in 290 at-bats So yeah. Outside of Yankee Stadium, that’s not a hitter who would rate such a contract. You likely recall that Bellinger had a three-homer game against the Cubs last year, and would have had a fourth if not for this great catch by Kyle Tucker [VIDEO]. Your browser does not support the video tag. (NOTE: This does not suggest I wish the Cubs had re-signed Tucker. It’s just a great play worth noting.) Anyway, while Bellinger has some opt-outs in this deal, my feeling is that he’ll stay with the Yankees for the five-year term. As noted, he’s a good fit there and the Yankees do, generally, contend every year. If you’re interested in seeing him play at Wrigley, the Yankees will visit the Cubs for a three-game series July 31-Aug. 1-2. Should be a hot ticket — and not just to see Bellinger.

Last year: After averaging everything according to various projections, the Cubs’ season record came out to approximately 87-75 after a little consideration of our trusty napkins and some minor mental gymnastics. Reality was kinder to our Cubs and their final record was 92-70, good enough to get the Cubs into the postseason, where they dismissed the San Diego Padres and were outshined by the Milwaukee Brewers in the NLDS. Gone are Kyle Tucker and many others. The Cubs signed Alex Bregman to a spendy deal and traded for Edward Cabrera, steps toward assembling a deeper and higher-floor squad. This particular edition of the annual profiles isn’t results-driven, as last year’s was. I just wanted to see if the predictive ‘data’ would hold up. Some people’s stats were ‘in the ballpark’ but most of them weren’t even in the neighborhood. I will provide predicted stats for everyone if you want to compile for your own reasons. The Chicago Cubs are a team that is built around ‘chemistry’, more so than most squads. A lo of them have bonded over their religion and have been quite open about that. A good few have their own social media presences. Ian Happ has a popular podcast — we feature it here often, as it’s very good. Dansby Swanson and Justin Steele have YouTube channels. PCA is seen about town — he and Caleb Williams were seen to be having a great time at the Blackhawks game Monday night. Alex Bregman looks to be an up-front kind of leader, which should aid in that chemical experiment. Something didn’t click with Tucker. I never had the feeling he wanted to be back. I suspect he told the Cubs early that he wanted to test the market, and I also think that his personality didn’t mesh, for whatever reason. The 26-man roster hasn’t been set yet, so there’s considerable liquidity, and so we’ll present players by position rather than batting order, as presented in Al’s last article on the subject, just to make things tidy (with the same restrictions/qualifications). This list will be updated with links when those pages are published, as we did last year, and we’ll add the players from the 40-man roster after the 26-man roster has solidified. Profiles are planned to be daily, but that is of course subject to change. Catchers (2) Miguel Amaya, Carson Kelly Infielders (6) Tyler Austin, Alex Bregman, Michael Busch, Nico Hoerner, Matt Shaw, Dansby Swanson Outfielders (4) Kevin Alcántara, Pete Crow-Armstrong, Ian Happ, Seiya Suzuki Designated hitter (1) Moisés Ballesteros Starting pitchers (5) Matthew Boyd, Edward Cabrera, Cade Horton, Shōta Imanaga, Jameson Taillon Relief pitchers (8) Ben Brown, Hunter Harvey, Phil Maton, Hoby Milner, Daniel Palencia, Colin Rea, Caleb Thielbar, Jacob Webb

Earlier this week I posted this article saying that MLB players should propose a salary cap/floor system to owners. In the poll attached to the article, 78 percent of you agreed with that idea, though with some caveats that owners would never open their books to players. Late Tuesday, Evan Drellich posted this article at The Athletic that had a word you rarely see in headlines: MLB owners enraged by Kyle Tucker-Dodgers deal, will push for salary cap ‘no matter what’ “Enraged.” That’s not something you usually hear publicly regarding MLB team owners, even if they might be thinking that privately. Drellich wrote: Major League Baseball owners are “raging” in the wake of Kyle Tucker’s free agency agreement with the Los Angeles Dodgers and it is now “a 100 percent certainty” that the owners will push for a salary cap, one person briefed on ownership conversations who was not authorized to speak publicly told The Athletic. “These guys are going to go for a cap no matter what it takes,” the source said. Well. I think we all knew that owners were going to propose some sort of salary cap to players. After all, owners have been trying to impose such a cap pretty much the entire time there have been labor negotiations in baseball, going back more than half a century. Other major team sports have caps, but all have some sort of floor and also have a much larger percentage of league revenues going to players than MLB does, as I noted in the article here earlier this week. “No matter what it takes” is an interesting position. Will owners be willing to torch part or all of the 2027 season to get such a cap? What form would this system take? Drellich writes: Owners still have to determine what salary floor and ceiling they’re comfortable proposing, a discussion that’s expected to be a topic at next month’s regularly scheduled owners meeting. The floor, in particular, could be a contentious issue for smaller-market teams, some of which might stand to make more money on an operational basis in the current system. The value of all 30 franchises would instantly rise if a cap is introduced, however. It would take at least eight owners of 30 to effectively hold up a labor deal, but when it comes to a cap, internal politics will not be the owners’ biggest hurdle. Players have historically been willing to miss many games to avoid a cap system. The last sentence is why we lost the last third of the 1994 season, the entire postseason that year, and had the 1995 season begin late and shortened to 144 games. Owners were pushing hard for a cap and players just as strongly were resisting, as I noted in this 2022 article here summing up the history of baseball labor disputes: Arbitration, salaries and free agency were once again at the forefront. In June, owners made this proposal to players, which would have eliminated salary arbitration, given players free agency two years earlier (but with restrictions) and institute a salary cap. You can imagine how far this went with players. It’s worth reading the New York Times article I linked in that quote, which lays out details of what MLB owners were proposing at the time. Owners have never backed down from wanting a salary cap (again, check out my 2022 article for the history), and apparently for many team owners now, the Tucker/Dodgers deal is the proverbial “last straw.” Drellich’s article concludes: The biggest question seems to be not whether a cap proposal will be made, but which side caves on the matter first: do owners hold steady on such a proposal into a work stoppage that costs regular-season games in 2027? Do players cave? And how long does the staredown last? Both sides will project strength, but little is likely to be decipherable until crunchtime. During the 2021-22 lockout, a deal was reached in March ’22, just in time to preserve a full 162-game slate. Those are indeed the key questions. I think many don’t remember just how close we came to losing part or all of the 2022 season. MLB…