jumbo

Ballesteros really is a tank, isn't he

Have to wonder how long he can stay at SB if he keeps this up. I should try to see him while he's here (I'm near SB). It will be like when I watched Javy hit a 450' bomb over the batter's eye

This is eveidence of how massive the gap is between AAA and MLB. Madrigal is a AAAA stud, but horsefeathers at the highest level

I heard some chatter about Sewell as a push rusher/edge rusher on 3rd downs? Someone said that he was good at this in college. I kind of think that is dreaming on limited college production while increasing a skill level. I noticed that TE Kuntz was on the board when Bell was picked. I would have liked him there and think Bell would still be avialable at 258, but that's a small nit to pick and I don't know if they would have liked Kuntz.

They picked up Walker , who I look at as set the edge type guyversus being a pass rushing profile, many because of his bigger size and lesser speed. I've heard that most of his sack production came from DT, so maybe he kicks in on pass rush downs when he's on the field. I looked up the RAS #s on Gipson, Robinson, and Green (other FA vet pickup). They are all pretty similar, roughly 4.7 speed, 33-34" arms, 6'4 ish, Green is a little heavier than the other two. So in my view they've already got their 2 DE vet types. The only way they upgrade is if they pick up a talented cap casualty or work a trade for Chase Young or their other end (name is escaping me). I don't think a trade is likely. We'll see with cap cut guys, but I think we're mostly looking at our DE roster.

I think that Poles and Kahn and trading rumors for each other. "Steelers talking to Bears about trade up to #9 for Jalen Carter" Now "Bears are talking about trading to 32" I get the sense that those two get along and are willing to work together to make markets for each other.

I move for a second DH Already have one for pitcher, go ahead and make one for catcher, too

Also popular opinion that Mr. Biscuits would have rode the defense to a title in 2018

This comment is perfect when your avatar is next to it - I can see that guy saying this

Scrolling right past it felt good to me

I hear about his "clouds" of players on podcasts, and I think if his 7 blue chips are gone he'll trade back. He can do this because the roster has so many holes.

I have it. I thought I would use it a lot more than I did. I don't have cable so I thought I could use it to watch live games or watch them later and plug my computer into my TV HDMI. The live game worked but is subject to all the same blackout stuff (local game only). Watching later seemed to work fine, but if you tried to move the slider ahead in the game it got all f'd up and would lock/lag/drag and it sucked. So if I wanted to go back 10 seconds to rewatch something it took a minute or two before it was right. I have Fiber optic and really good speeds, btw The condensed games were fun, but they don't have many replays and the same lag thing happened on this. If you can stand the lag issues it's worth the $99 in my opinion

I just started to follow the team again after checking out for a couple seasons (hard to believe, right). A lot has changed on the overall baseball landscape, so I’m not sure if the call up is happening when it would have in the past. I guess I don’t see a guy like Canario, Cassie, or Pinango being impeded by this. Davis and PCA can battle it out for CF in 2024. I guess I don’t think this blocks anyone. Suzuki and Happ will miss time eventually and if one of these guys Wally pipps them then that’s a good thing.

Some Twitter stuff out there about Steelers wanting to trade up and that they’ve talked to the bears about it, among other teams. jimmy johnson chart says 17+49 = 1360, #9=1350 I didn’t look up the others. Getting 32 back would be slick but not likely.

Just posting this cuz I keep thinking about how the draft will go... A few scenarios In general, assuming the player grades and availability are equal, in my view the picks would ideally land like this from a needs/positional value point of view: 9 - T (day 1 starter type) 53, 61, 64 - DT (3 technique ideally), DE, CB (boundary corner, Gordon to nickel) 103 - C (given the positional need spectrum this could be a starter this year or next) 133, 136, 148 - BPA with and eye towards depth at OL, DL, TE (very deep class), RB (very deep class), WR 218, 258 - BPA/flyers, maybe get your RB here I don't know all the players well enough to know which is a scheme fit/etc., so this is as close as I'd get to a mock draft projection. A couple other scenarios are Carter dropping, in which I'd take him at 9, then package the two seconds to get to the end of round 1 to pick a T (I think there are 4 or 5 who will go in that range). Another scenario is Carter does not drop and the Bears can snag a medium trade back, Washington's 16 and 47 for example, something along these lines. I would still go with T in Rd 1, but you can take a luxury pick with that extra pick or just stay focused on needs. Anyway, nothing new here, just waiting it out until draft time comes.

Say Carter drops to 9 and is the pick. What do we think it takes to get to pick 27-28 and pick a T? Would the two seconds get it done?

It should be a multiple value judgment, BBA + current needs. You could have a player at the spot you are picking who is clearly the best player on your draft board, but he isn't the best fit for the current needs of the team. In a perfect scenario, you would be able to trade the pick and get some extra value and get the player who at that pick, is the BPA and meets needs. That perfect scenario doesn't exist in the NFL draft due to other teams' needs and values. I want them to draft the best player available that meets the current needs of the team. A wide receiver who is BPA is great, but it doesn't appear to fit the needs of the Bears. So you overdraft a guy who might be available at some later pick that you don't have, what is the problem? Agree I think of it as a matrix of grades, positional value, and existing roster. Each team grades each player against their ideal version of that position. Obviously scheme impacts this, hence the Bears not chasing Orlando Brown. He wasn't on their "board" for FA because he didn't fit, or his grade would have been very bad in their scheme compared to a power running scheme. They won't be selecting a "0" type 3-4 NT because of scheme fit/impact on grading. So you have your draft board constructed from 100 down to zero, allowing you to see who the most talented player is at any moment. If you were building an expansion team you'd just pick from the top of the list every pick except for positional value. I think of it as a multiplier against the players grade. For example, QB is so incredibly important you would put the higher factor/muliplier against that position. Then you'd follow with the next groups, loosely T/Edge/WR/CB, then the next group, etc. Scheme/philosophy of course affects this, too. Finally this is all set against the backdrop of your roster. Some of your players are locks and you aren't going to pick that position. QB is an easy example, but all positions are affected by this. The other extreme is an obvious hole, such as Bears RT and DL at the moment. Other positions have a placeholder that you could replace or create competition. You all know all of this, but it's clearly a blend of all these factors when assembling a roster. A lot of the BPA yelling on Twitter and such is either someone who has no clue or someone making an intentionally dishonest argument.

nah, I think when people are talking about BPA, they are talking BPA in a position of need or fit for the organization. What it isnt is fixating on a certain player and going all in to get them. And I think every year certain players drop. Justin Fields is a perfect example. This year for example, one could see Carter dropping to the Bears at 9, and he would certainly fit all the definitions of BPA Well said

while being as careful as I can not to read his posts too closely, he said mooney isn't an outside guy Use the "mute" tool, that's what I do

I totally agree on the BPA comments. I just think last draft Poles had the flexibility of holes all over the roster to not "remove" a position group from the board. I was hoping for a WR and OL with the two second rounders last year and was upset when they didn't sign any notable OL (I wanted the Saints T that went to Miami, blanking on his name). At this point the first rounder basically has to be a T to avoid a massive hole on the roster.

I think Poles and his scouts built a board and religiously stuck to it. Those picks were the top guys on their board when their turn came up. Poles seems so committed to a good process that I don't think he would veer off course with the first few picks in his career. It should also be said that their board was edited based on what Flus/Getsy likes in various positions based on the intended scheme. Additionally, Poles selected very athletic players (the OL specifically were all high RAS guys) in the draft and that has continued into this free agnecy. His FA selections were all 28 or under, most were 27 and under, prioritizing young players. Not sure what you mean about trading the 2nd rounders in the last draft? You mean trade back a few picks and still get the same guy along with a later round pick? At the time I remember thinking that he should trade back in the second if he could get another 3rd. Maybe trade back and get a fourth with the other. He ended up trading back three times and picking up a few picks, but all were late rounders. One of the fifth rounders was Braxton so that's a vote for the volume concept of drafting. I can't predict who would have been available so I wasn't suggesting he could have traded those picks and still got Gordon and Brisker; rather that I would have traded back and taken BPA. I just felt that we could have stacked more capital and the roster was so bare that there was no need to prioritize any specific positions. Sent from my motorola one 5G UW using Tapatalk I get it. I was glad to see the trade backs to pick up more picks, but I agree that we could have added some earlier round picks by trading back the twos. We'll see how much Poles continues to trade back. I think until they get a little closer to a full team without holes they shouldn't trade up a whole lot.

I'd be more comfortable with this argument if I hadn't said it at this time last year, and then we went DB-DB-KR with our top picks and the cap casualties sucked (as they tend to do) and then Fields had his second year derailed by the worst sack rate in history. Im still of the opinion that neither Gordon, Brisker, or Velus needed to be taken when they were and I would have traded those 2 2nd round picks for sure, so I'm with you on sharing that frustration and angst. But he's filled in the floor decently well this time around and set himself up to where I don't see any way he doesn't hammer the lines hard in the first few rounds. Eberflus obviously has a decent amount of influence and I think he played a major part in those first 2 selections. Poles acquiesced possibly not wanting to make waves in a partnership that was just forged. IDK. FWIW, Fields is the reason for the worst sack rate in history. I think it's fair to state that. It would have been BAD but he made it historically bad, not the line, even accounting for the malpractice of making Mustipher the starting C. But Poles absolutely could have done more to improve that OL. However would we have the draft capital we have now... Likely hell no. So it is what it is and hopefully we will benefit from the negligence. Sent from my motorola one 5G UW using Tapatalk I think Poles and his scouts built a board and religiously stuck to it. Those picks were the top guys on their board when their turn came up. Poles seems so committed to a good process that I don't think he would veer off course with the first few picks in his career. It should also be said that their board was edited based on what Flus/Getsy likes in various positions based on the intended scheme. Additionally, Poles selected very athletic players (the OL specifically were all high RAS guys) in the draft and that has continued into this free agnecy. His FA selections were all 28 or under, most were 27 and under, prioritizing young players. Not sure what you mean about trading the 2nd rounders in the last draft? You mean trade back a few picks and still get the same guy along with a later round pick? At the time I remember thinking that he should trade back in the second if he could get another 3rd. Maybe trade back and get a fourth with the other. He ended up trading back three times and picking up a few picks, but all were late rounders. One of the fifth rounders was Braxton so that's a vote for the volume concept of drafting.

I don't blame him for moving when he had the chance. I don't think he was going to end up stuck with the pick, but you never know if the offers would have gotten smaller later. I'm sure its easier for him to move through FA and the rest of the draft process with this out of the way. I'm really happy to get Moore; that makes the deal for me (not that he wouldn't have been included in another trade). I watched a bunch of his highlight videos and he is pretty good at everything. He can high point it, goes over the middle, breaks tackles like a Deebo lite, has really good speed (not elite but very good - 4.42 40) and is really good with the ball in his hands. Most importantly he both gets open and can make contested catches. Fields should be comfortable chucking it up to him.

I don’t want them to get rid of him either. But they’ve had a target on him from day one and tried to get rid of him all last summer. I’m not saying he can’t switch sides, but it is a position change and not as meaningless as you suggest. It just strikes me that with four other positions less settled than RG, the one lineman they sign is a RG, and the incumbent RG just so happens to be a guy they tried to run out of town already. As raw pointed out maybe that’s just because he was the best available interior linemen that meets their criteria. Some poeple are speculating that Whitehair will be cut with Davis signed. I hope that doesn't happen. I'm not sure Whitehair is the best option, but given that players miss games I'd be happy to line him up at LG and have Jenkins available on a rookie contract to back up. Or switch them, I don't care, but don't put Jatyre Carter in when one of them goes down. I also think Patrick sucked balls all last year. I know he was hurt multiple times, but he was not great. So I hope he's not viewed as a starter in any way going forward. I hope I'm wrong and he is capable.

I was worried that was going to be your take. I would have said going into the off season that the Bears biggest holes were in the trenches, even more than WR. So far we haven't done a ton to change that. While they could focus heavily on this in the draft, I don't want the Bears to be in a position where they have to take OL and DL instead of BPA. I watched a YouTube video from a guy I follow on Twitter (didn't know he had his own YouTube channel until today). He's a Titans fan and he made me feel much better about Nate Davis. He thinks he's still an ascending player and he did say he became a really good pass blocker since midway thru 2021 and had his best PFF pass blocking grade this year, before getting injured late in the season. So, I could make that a solid B with potential to be a B+ I saw a good video of him climbing off duo to the second level and he was pretty nimble. I think he’ll do well in the zone blocking scheme. I expect at least a couple DL/Edge signings, at least one more OL On defense the whole line needs a talent boost, but you could make the case that the back seven only really needs a CB at this point. Offense obviously still needs some line upgrades, but receivers are there and a RB decision on Montgomery/FA is probably it. Maybe another wr and another te