Jump to content
North Side Baseball

mul21

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    10,868
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by mul21

  1. That's probably just because they assume the Cowboys will run for 300 yards instead of pass for 300 yards.
  2. I think it's been much more noticeable this year, especially when the guy who's best at it, Peanut, has been hurt for much of the year. I did think they sacrificed some yardage on at least a few plays trying to strip the ball, but I generally agree with you that they're just terrible at tackling and, even more importantly, at being in the right spot to tackle a guy.
  3. I'm not sure why they would. It should be a no-brainer sign for the elite postings. The player has little leverage and you can still probably get him for a fraction of his open-market value. Right, but consider the scruples of teams like the Marlins and WS and I think it's probably a good clause to have in there. You also risk pissing off the NPB teams if there isn't a deal reached and they don't get their money. I think it's a good CYA move.
  4. Hopefully there will be language in there that if the team with the worst record can't come to an agreement, the next team gets a shot so that the crappy record teams can't just block deals by max bidding.
  5. Yeah, you'll have to draft a speedy WR, but I agree that it's not necessary, especially early. The Bears have been just fine without a blazer. You're talking about the 5th option in the passing game. At least at TE, you could get a guy that could block at times and create more matchup problems vs. a base defense. Obviously if a speedy WR falls into your laps early, you take him, but I don't see that as a priority. Oh and DeAnthony Thomas is not very good. I'll scream if the Bears take him in the 2nd. He's a 3rd day pick to me, though I will admit I've seen plenty of places having him as a top 60 pick. Sproles and Vereen are significantly bigger than Thomas though. And you'd be getting him touches at the expense of Forte, not in addition to him in that role. Yeah, that's exactly why that's not a good fit for the Bears. They already have a guy who is capable of being out there all 3 downs and the Saints and Pats don't have that, which is why those guys become valuable. That's just not a commodity they need to waste a pick to acquire right now.
  6. This is exactly what I'd like to see them do.
  7. That's shady as hell. I'd bitch about that endlessly.
  8. That's quite an exaggeration. The Bears also had a lot of things go their way also. It was just an amazing collection of errors and [expletive] ups by both teams. Terrible refs helped the Vikings in a huge way This. If that was a Bostic taunt, then that was a late hit on Allen. Terrible. I honestly think the most costly error by the refs was the Alshon catch being ruled both short of the first down and inbounds at the end of the first half. It was one or the other but not both and probably cost the Bears a field goal attempt, which based on the way the game ended, would have been pretty huge.
  9. He was in bounds (the whole 1 knee equals 2 feet thing) but that bobble late should get it overturned. However, it's the Bears, so I'm not counting on it.
  10. Man, if that receiver can do his only job of catching the ball, that's a Vikings TD.
  11. That was an absolutely amazing catch. I thought the ejection was kind of bush league.
  12. 2nd half adjustment Billick? Yes, they've made huge changes in running AP 2 of every 3 plays. Moron.
  13. I know nobody cares, but Alshon was the best pick in my entire fantasy draft. He's so awesome.
  14. They got hosed on that. It should have been a first down and running clock or 3rd and 1 and out of bounds. Such BS.
  15. Nice whiff by Steltz and then the bad tackling by the LB. Pathetic.
  16. Not with 2 losses.
  17. Nah, they'd be in the title game with MSU and Duke wins. No way they get in over Mizzou or Auburn if they play each other in the SEC championship game. I would bet a hell of a lot of money that 1 loss Bama would make it over 2 loss Mizzou. I'd bet a slightly smaller amount they'd get in over 2 loss Auburn. The winner of the SEC championship game, if it is Mizzou/Auburn will only have 1 loss.
  18. Nah, they'd be in the title game with MSU and Duke wins. No way they get in over Mizzou or Auburn if they play each other in the SEC championship game.
  19. I despise Michigan since I'm an Illinois fan, but I'm even more annoyed by them than usual simply because their QB wears #98. I hope both teams lose today.
  20. I think most teams would have had a rough year last year if they had lost their veteran QB and had crap for a backup, especially the way Mizzou runs their offense. They have been pretty lucky with injuries this year, even with Mauk having to fill in.
  21. Carson Palmer @ PHI or Andy Dalton @ SD
  22. It's so nice to watch a team have a clue as to what they want to do down the stretch and on the last possession and actually execute a play to score.
  23. So Chris Duncan is a giant meathead and I take most of what he has to say with a grain of salt, but he did play in the bigs, with the Cardinals no less, so he probably has some perspective on this that most of us wouldn't. His thought today was that if Peralta was going to Bosch to get some sort of illegal undetectable steroid/supplement, should we really think that this is hist first foray into PEDs? I tend to agree with him and I hope he either gets suspended again, or better yet, he stops taking them and hits .210 for the next 4 years.
  24. I generally agree with your point, but the play call is part of the decision part. Execution is what the players do with the play call, and that was atrocious as well.
  25. Well, personally, I'm not a big fan of trying to measure $/WAR linearly like that. It really doesn't seem to work for really good or really bad players, no matter what David Cameron says. But if someone offered me Mike Trout on a 1/$50m deal, I'd probably take it. This is my biggest problems with these discussions. I mean, the average value of 1 WAR may be $5MM or whatever on the FA market, but those first 2 WAR a guy provides are typically much easier to come by than numbers 3, 4, and 5. I'd think it would need to be looked at (in this hypothetical case) as something more like 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 million for WAR 1-5.
×
×
  • Create New...