SpongeWorthy

I've seen a variation of the following statements all offseason: The Bears can't win with Rex (or Orton) at QB. Rex has proven he can't compete in the NFL. It's obvious the Bears could never have success in the postseason with a QB like Rex at the helm. While it's perfectly sane and rational to have doubts about the Bears, Rex and Orton, and it is not out of the realm of possibility to imagine the Bears struggling to win 7 games next year, why do people have to ignore the simple facts in this case? The Chicago Bears have won 21 NFL regular season games with Grossman at QB, losing 11. They have won multiple playoff games including an NFC championship game with Rex at Qb. They have won 12 games, and lost 6, with Kyle Orton at QB. When discussing the Bears QB situation it is fairly obvious that they have struggled. There are major questions and no sure things at the position. But the suggestion that it is not possible for the Chicago Bears to enjoy any success with these 2 QBs in charge is simply contrary to any and all facts available. They have enjoyed success under these guys, and therefore, it very clearly is possible for them to enjoy future success. Whether they won because of, or in spite of these two players is meaningless. This is not meant as an endorsement of either player. I would love to get a real improvement over both Kyle and Rex. But it is absolutely ridiculous to go on pretending it's impossible for the Bears to win NFL games, regular season or postseason, with these guys playing. It's happened before and can happen again. Having quarterbacks as awful as Grossman and Orton is an uphill proposition to begin with. I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that poor quarterback play (and that's all we're ever going to get out of Grossman--the. guy. can't. play.) is going to scuttle this team's endeavors moving forward. Did we have a modicum of success with Orton and Grossman? Sure, we had a stellar defense and outstanding special teams play. The division being pathetically weak helped a ton too. Green Bay has improved tremendously and Minnesota at least looks quite a bit stronger. Is a strong defense still in the fold? Possibly. We all know how injury riddled it was last year and we still won a decent amount of ball games. The difficutly for the Bears in returning to 2005-2006 levels is that it requires a lot of things to go right. A return of the opportunistic defense, a decent running attack, continued special teams excellence, a string of good luck, favorable divisional conditions, health, coaching staff stability are all going to be necessary. Could we regain all of those things in one season? It's possible, but unlikely and the main components of what made us successful in the first place are all a little bit older with a little bit more tread on the tires. Good quarterback play would help cover a lot of that up. It always does. But we're not going to get it out of Grossman or Orton. I think that's obvious. I do agree with you that proclaiming the Bears as contenders dead is primarily media histrionics at this point. Then again, I'd rather have that as some sort of training camp motivator than have everyone salivating over our prospects. We know how that turned out.

I love Westbrook's game. As a USC alum I must admit that he may even surpass Mayo as a pro (who I believe will be very good). But I don't see him being a point guard in the NBA. I do think he has the game to be an adequate point guard but I like him as an off guard in an up tempo scheme, ala Monta Ellis. I still think he could fit in very well for the Bulls given his athleticism and defense. Howland really should've stuck Westbrook on Rose rather than let Collison get dominated.

These highlights, in particular, really make one question whether the rising fastball is really a myth. You'd swear half those fastball punchouts were moving UP.

I'm hoping for D'Antoni. I do think both Avery and Mike have a tendency to get badly outcoached in the playoffs, however. I still think D'Antoni is the best option for this team, at this time. 1) A free flowing offense that suits our youth/athleticism. 2) A way to get our big men flowing towards the rim without resorting to isolation. 3) An attractive brand of basketball for the fans, players, and potential free agents. I am not sure of Hinrich's ability to be a lead guard under D'Antoni. He doesn't have Nash's handles, shotmaking ability, or vision. I think bringing D'Antoni into the fold makes drafting a PG a very viable option. I think the shooting guards I've been hoping for (Mayo, Gordon, Westbrook, etc.) are less attractive if D'Antoni is here. A dynamite PG who will push tempo becomes crucial.

Can anyone shed some light on the supposed Cuban/Reinsdorf imbroglio? I know Reinsdorf voted against Cuban's purchase of the Mavs but is it totally a matter of Reinsdorf not wanting "meddlesome kids" screwing up his good ol' boy network? I know this probably won't be a popular opinion around here but I never had a problem with Reinsdorf until the Cuban issue came up. I at least had a little bit of respect with how he dealt with Michael and Phil on non-Krause related issues. And if Cuban offers a significant premium over the other potential buyers he should get the team. If they block him he should sue, sue, sue.

And the Panthers officially will not have a QB in this draft. With Delhomme in the last year of his contract. And no legitimate backup. I hate my team. colt brennan and andre woodson. i like both those guys better than henne. Why? Brennan, MAYBE. I think his delivery is messed up and he's too small. But I never understood the view on Woodson as a good prospect. He's inaccurate and as soon as he's drafted he's going to have the slowest delivery in the NFL (is Leftwich still on a roster?). He's not very mobile either. Woodson is a dreadful prospect.

If we can't get Brohm or Henne I'd rather take a deep sleeper like Dixon or Josh Johnson late than go with one out of the Booty/Ainge/Woodson trio.

Is there still any question about Grossman's potential in the NFL? Yes, the line was horrible and the backs couldn't do anything. And yes the receivers and Turner were pretty awful. Guess what? Grossman still can't play. We need a quarterback. As for Forte, I don't know much about him (a scouting report would be nice) but if he turns out to be productive then it's hard to knock the pick considering how bad the running game was.

Woodson and Brennan are both dreadful prospects. If the Bears are going to take a QB with the expectation/hope of making him a starter sometime soon, it needs to be Henne or Brohm right here.

This would be comical if it were some other team. 4 pitch hitters wasted over 2 ABs is objectively very funny. If it were the Nats I'd be laughing my butt off.

San Antonio still would have been really, really good if you would have swapped those two players in the two years. Would they have been as good as they actually were? Probably not. But they wouldn't have sucked, which is what ElCaballo45 is suggesting with his Garnett-Jefferson argument. So the Bulls would have been nearly as good with Clyde or Dominique? I sincerely, sincerely doubt that. The intangibles that people get (correctly for the most part) up in arms about when talking heads use them for baseball (clutch play, heart, chemistry, etc.) actually do matter in basketball. And let's not forget that defensive metrics in basketball are still a long way away from being strong. I mean, I've seen enough basketball to realize that Garnett is fantastic on defense while Camby is largely a compiler of blocks and rebounds.

There are some people putting way too much emphasis on PER. It's a nice stat but numbers are a long way (at least the ones we know about) from having the same explanatory power in basketball as they do in baseball. The league has been littered with players who have put up good numbers on bad teams (Stephon Marbury and Zach Randolph being prominent examples from the same team). Garnett's counting stats aren't great but he's arguably the best defender on the planet. He absolutely erases the pick and roll. I don't think he's MVP but he's close. He has completely remade the Boston Celtics. Al Jefferson is nowhere close.

I love Westbrook's game and wouldn't mind seeing him in a Bulls uniform at all. Excellent slasher, decent handles, improving shot, lock down defender, and a great athlete. He reminds me of Monta Ellis a whole lot. Regardless, I think the Bulls have proven with this season that they lack a consistent guy who can get his own shot or create for others off the dribble (Gordon's too small). Hopefully one of Westbrook, Mayo, Bayless, or Gordon will be available. I wouldn't mind trading up to nab one of those guys. Hinrich is looking like an unmovable piece right now.

This is a long piece on Canseco that was posted on Deadspin a few weeks ago. It's well worth the read, though. In fact it'll be the best thing you'll read all month--Sam Zell would bank on it. http://deadspin.com/372409/chasing-jose-by-pat-jordan Anyone leaf through Jose's latest piece of hard hitting journalism yet?

lando calrissian?? duh http://bfcgroup.com/helluvatough/billydeesign.jpg

There's some rematches from last season. Like PHX/SA (and the Spurs won't be using their hockey thuggery to check Nash into the crowd), and Utah and Houston. I believe the Lakers will be sent home by Denver (my lone BOLD prediction). In a non-upset upset, I see Dallas knocking off New Orleans. San Antono moving past Phx quickly, and Houston finally making it past the first rd. I would say Denver over LA, while not a huge upset, would be fairly surprising. Dallas over NO slightly less. I think the whole lack of experience angle is being overblown for the Hornets. Paul is the only player without it--and he's just way too good not to abuse Kidd. I think the Lakers are going to blow Denver away. Kobe is going to be a man possessed and Phil vs. Karl is a monstrous advantage for the Lakers. The Lakers are very dangerous, IMO. Phil has never lost a series where he's had the best player in the world with a decent supporting cast (once we got past Detroit of course!). Spurs vs. PHX is a toss-up but I'll be pulling for the Suns because I like entertaining basketball and I have an irrational hatred for Ginobili. Should be an awesome playoff series despite the epic failure of the Bulls season.

He should use better grammar because he's black and should set a good example for his fellow African-American internet message board posters--especially when discussing racially sensitive topics. Also, the fact that the poster in question who ridiculed his grammar has the screen name of "OleMissCub" possibly hints at a nefarious undertone given the region's difficult history with African Americans. (Just to get things out in the open and end the ridiculous race baiting.)

How is Chris Gomez still in baseball? Has there ever been a more non descript 16 year career?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sports/images/oly98/photos/kerriganknee_0202.jpg WHYYYYYYYYYY

The horror...the horror

This is a Kurtzian nightmare.

How was Kerry's HR pitch? I can't watch the game but I'm guessing it was a trademark belt high fastball on the inner half while Soto was setting up on the outside corner?

I didn't get to see the last two games. How's Kerry's location been?

How much can final 4 experience really be worth when said experience largely consists of being embarrassed? Collison played worse than Afflalo did in his final 4's and that's saying something. Howland is a good coach but Donovan and Calipari have really made him look bad. When Dorsey went out with three fouls the only touches Love got were on high screen and rolls for 3s. What the hell was that? And they stuck with Collison on Rose/CDR for WAY too long. Should've been Westbrook and Mbah Moute. I think Rose and CDR are still abusing Collison off the dribble.

I can handle (sorta) being shut down by the Webbs and Sheets of the world. Not Livan Hernandez and Jeff Suppan.