rawaction

I'm not even 100% convinced he'll throw that much more than the Bears did last year. If you figure in what should be a better defense, preventing them from getting in the crazy shootouts, and a more dependable running game, Cutler shouldn't have to throw a ton. If you factor in what should be an increased completion percentage and increased yards per attempt, the number of attempts doesn't necessariliy have to go up all that much. 550 certainly isn't out of the question, but I think that might be the upper end of the range. That's a good point. I think I was basing that number more on my perception that the Bears never threw on 3rd and 4 to 6 yards. I am probably very wrong though.

Wow. I'm surprised. So, either this is gonna work again or I am going to look smart. But do the Hawks have a legit shot against the Red Wings?

Here's what I think. Cutler threw 616 times last year and completed 62.3% of the throws. The Bears threw 528 times last year. Gotta figure Cutler throws more than Orton/Grossman did last year, but less than he did in Denver. If you figure about 550 throws, that's about 346 completions, 42 more than the Bears had last year. Somebody has to catch them! Last year Denver got 104 and 91 receptions from its top 2 WRs. 49 from the #3 WR. 40 and 32 from the 2 TEs. And 43 from the plethora of RBs they played. The 4-6 WRs caught 27. The Bears won't have anyone catch as many as the WRs, but the TEs and RBs (Forte) should catch a lot more than their Bronco counterparts. Hard to predict Forte to catch more than the 63 he did last year. But Hester and Olsen, who both caught 50+ last year, could easily catch 70 balls. Putting the ball in Hester's hands 70 times, plus reverses, plus punt returns gives the Bears a lot of legit chances to score. But even if you have 70-60-60 from those 3, there's still 150 passes to go around. Clark doesn't have great ability anymore and much more than the 41 he caught last year would be a surprise. The big improvement should be in the other WRs. If Iglesias and Bennett have good camps, there could be nearly 100 balls split between them.

114 on pro teams. Missed the Magic and Bucks in the NBA. Leafs, Sharks, Ducks, Oilers, Predators, and Blue Jackets in NHL. NFL and MLB were perfect. Got all the school nicknames. 67 on the BCS schools. Perfect Pac 10, Big 10, and ACC. Forgot the state of Kansas existed (KU and KSU), missed Vanderbilt in the SEC. And WVU (stupid of me), St. Johns and Rutgers. Took like 2 minutes trying to figure out how to type Texas A&M. I kept putting a space in there or putting AM together.

You could argue that, sure. But people tried saying that last year too. The Bears, with Cutler, are much better than they were last year. I'd give the edge to Minny, just because I anticipate a growing period with Cutler. Doesn't mean the Bears won't win it though. What's their to grow? It's not like getting a new QB is throwing off all the offensive chemistry. The team has had 3 different QBs start the majority of its games the last 3 years. And it's not like Cutler is inexperienced and will need a ton of time to learn the offense. He should be fine to run the entire playbook by opening day. And a lot of his success comes from extending plays anyway. If their is a growth period w/ Cutler the same can be said with Rosenfels or Favre, even with playing for Childress years ago. It'll take growth from the WR to adjust to Cutler. The receivers will invariably drop lots of balls that hit them right in the hands because they're busy jumping into the air or diving to the ground where they're used to seeing the ball end up. Also, Hester will stop dead in his tracks awaiting dead ducks instead of continuing routes so he can run right under them. You think that will happen into the season? That's what minicamp, OTAs and preseason are for. You don't think the WRs will adjust to Cutler at all over the next 4 months?

You could argue that, sure. But people tried saying that last year too. The Bears, with Cutler, are much better than they were last year. I'd give the edge to Minny, just because I anticipate a growing period with Cutler. Doesn't mean the Bears won't win it though. What's their to grow? It's not like getting a new QB is throwing off all the offensive chemistry. The team has had 3 different QBs start the majority of its games the last 3 years. And it's not like Cutler is inexperienced and will need a ton of time to learn the offense. He should be fine to run the entire playbook by opening day. And a lot of his success comes from extending plays anyway. If their is a growth period w/ Cutler the same can be said with Rosenfels or Favre, even with playing for Childress years ago.

I bet none of those happen. Why trade Kirk? He is one of the best reserve guards in the league. Agreed. He's a little overpaid, but what's done is done. If you re-sign Gordon and trade Hinrich, your only players 1-3 are Rose, Gordon, Salmons, Deng. Four guys at three positions isn't going to work. Who says they can't get another player or two? They'd have to get somebody in a trade. They have 2 first round picks. Run of the mill guards who can you some valuable PT in spurts are always available, see Shannon Brown in LA, Flip Murray in ATL.

Because $10M is a lot to pay a reserve guard, especially if you're trying to add an impact PF like Bosh or Amare. And who wants an overpaid guard? Bosh and Amare aren't getting traded this offseason. How many more years does Kirk have under his contract? For the Bulls (if they re-sign Gordon), he'd be a backup at both G spots for $10M. If you get him on another team, he's a decent starter with some playoff experience. Hinrich is a pretty good player. Granted, you can play a 3 or 4 G lineup, but it's not necessary on the Bulls to have a reserve G that good when you have 2 guys in the rotation ahead of him who are 40 mpg guys.

No, but Favre is only an upgrade over Safe/Tavaris is name/reputation only. Favre was a great player, but I just don't see him improving the Vikes at that much. He won't hurt, but after watching last with the Jets, it's clear he doesn't have much left in the tank. Again, before he got hurt last year he was completly 65 percent of his passes. He had thrown 20 TDS. He was turning around a team that was 4-12 the year before. He played bad when he got hurt because he played throught it and he had to throw the ball 30+ times a game. He will not have to do that in Minnesota. It's not like last year was Favre's only bad year. Look at 2005 and 2006. 70.9 and 72.7 QB ratings. That's absolutely horrendous.

Before Rose I would be on this bandwagon, but after Rose no way. Wade and Rose are both at their best with the ball in their hands, so I think Wade would stunt Rose's development moreso then help. This is part of the reason why when the Bulls mare discussing what their 2010 plan is, either Chris Bosh or Amar'e Stoudamire names are mention. That, and the Bulls need an inside presence. At this point, I don't see the Bulls being interested in Wade. I don't buy that argument. I agree Wade and Rose are best with the ball, but having both assures the ball is NEVER with anyone else, and the Bulls have a good chance to score everytime down the floor. Plus, Wade can do much more without the ball than Rose. Wade can come off screens, post up, cut to the rim and finish if the ball is in Rose's hands. Basically, everytime now when the ball is in Gordon's hands, it will be in Wade's. And I think when Wade has the ball, Rose can do a lot of the same stuff Wade does without the ball assuming he has a smaller defender. That being said, if you can go in another direction and get an elite player, you do that. But if they miss out on Bosh, Amare, Boozer; they shouldn't NOT go after Wade because he may be too similar to Rose.

What's the money look like to sign Gordon and trade for Bosh or Amare, even if Deng can't be traded? I am assuming Hinrich, Miller, Tim Thomas, and James would have to go. I'd imagine Phoenix would be interested in Tyrus, a pick or 2, and Miller or Thomas. Could revisit Hinrich to Portland or Minnesota, shouldn't be much of a problem trading him. That would give the Bulls a rotation of: Rose, Salmons, Gordon, Bosh/Amare, Deng, Noah, whover they get in trades.

It was actually me who referred to him as a "top 10-15 QB". And by that I mean he's definitely one of the top 15 best QBs and probably one of the top 10. As for the QBs I'd put ahead of him: Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rivers, Romo, McNabb and Warner. Carson Palmer is better if he recovers fully from his injury (if he gets back to old form, he's a top 3 QB in the league). Marc Bulger, Matt Schaub and Ben Roethlisberger are comparable, though I'd say Cutler is better than all three. Eli Manning and Aaron Rodgers are close, but need another great year or two. Now obviously, I'd take Cutler in a heartbeat over guys like Romo, McNabb, Warner and Bulger because of age and future expectations. But if you're talking about production, Cutler is probably right around top 10. It won't be long until he's top 5, though. No way on Earth you can get away with that Carson Palmer argument. That's like saying if the Vikings sign Favre, he'll go ahead of Cutler because he holds all the QB records and is a sure HOF. Palmer hasn't played much or well for 2 years. Romo is an interesting situation though. He's put up better QB ratings than Cutler every year. But his comp % has decreased every year. He has several Rex Grossman like awful games in December on his resume. Three each the last 2 years, Cutler has 3 in his career that bad. I did underestimate Rivers though. He was the best QB statistically in 08. He was mediocre in 07 though, but was pretty good in 06. He's clearly right with Cutler at worst. But his 2007 was Kyle Orton like. I pointed out after the trade that about 1/2 of Cutler's INTs came when his team was down in the 4th quarter or his team was down by more than 2 scores. He seems like a clear case of a guy trying to do too much.

Agreed and this should not stop. If the Bulls lose due to Rondo and Davis hitting 18 footers, more power to the Celtics. The key will be getting Perkins in foul trouble again. He's the only thing keeping the Bulls from getting to the basket at will. If the Celts stay big and bring in Scalabrine or Moore, Noah and Tyrus should be able to dominate the offensive boards. If the Celts go small, the Bulls will destroy Eddie House. I thought the Bulls were a lot better without Gordon in the game. And frankly, if he's not shooting well, the Bulls are better without him on the floor. I like Hinrich on Allen.

QFT Jamarcus Russell has a better arm. But it hasn't done him any good.

The only Qbs definitely better than Cutler are P Manning, Brady, Brees. The only others that may even have an argument is Warner, McNabb, Roethlisberger, and Romo. And of this group, 1 will be retired soon, 1 is on his way down, 1 has had the luxury of an amazing defense, and the other has the most talented team in the league and can't win after November. However, I do think another great season by Rivers, Cassel (especially in KC), Rodgers, Eli (especially w/o Plax), a healthy year from Schaub, or an MVP like year by Matt Ryan could put them in the discussion. As of this moment, I would rank Cutler as the 5th or 6th best QB, depending on how you feel about McNabb.

Hey OMC here ya go: Notice the bold? http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=5794 Like you, I hope Pegues does well to get a contract for training camp later in the summer. I saw 2 mocks that had Pegues going to the Bears in the 4th round.

Nah, I've copied and pasted this link and will post it every page. http://i42.tinypic.com/218kuf.gif You know what? I didn't realize how bad this was last night. Rondo had Kirk's arm from inside the 3-pt line and flung him out of bounds about a foot away from the sideline. He literally dragged him about 10-12 feet, and then flung him into the scorers table. If he was just trying to get him off of him, he could have thrown him down at the 3pt line, but I think it's pretty clear his goal was to get Hinrich to hit the scorer's table. There's no reason Rondo should be playing tomorrow night's game.

Sadly, I didn't really care what happened in this game after a certain point. I spent 4 hours of my life watching a basketball game! I just wanted the game to be over. I'll be a nervous wreck for game 7.

I'm not a coach or anything, but any defense being called that ends up with Hinrich on a 6'11" player in post defense is a bad freaking call. This game is over. Where the hell is Rose?

At this point, I'd like to see Aaron Gray get some time and just let him goon it up. Pierce, Rondo, Perkins all hit the deck if they come within 5 feet of the rim.

Refs need to grow an damn pair.

Send his ass to the lockeroom. He's trying to get suspended at this point. Complete BS if Rondo plays another minute.

Yes they do. no offense to Blues fans but they are not as good as the Hawks. Also, even though it was a sweep, 3 or those games were pretty close. I am leaning towards the Canucks winning this series, but it is not a slam dunk. I can see the Canucks almost dominating and winning it in 5. If the series goes deep, I like the Hawks chances.

I admit, I'm not the biggest hockey fan on Earth, but I do follow. Do the Hawks have any chance? They are running into a red-hot team with a red-hot goaltender, a week off after a sweep, and home ice advantage.

Looks like he already did. Listed on chicagobears.com as a guard. He was discussed in today's draft recap story as a likely TE. According to the site, he got #60 though. Obviously, that could change a lot though.