UMFan83

Yes it did because we had the MVP (deserved or not he was an elite superstar) and the role players we signed fit around that MVP. If we strike out in 2017 we have Jimmy Butler and marginal role players. what? butler isn't far off from what rose was (aside from age which obviously didn't wind up mattering since he had the knees of a 45 year old)...seems like a combination of rose being overrated and jimmy being underrated. especially once you factor in defense. i have no idea how your differentiating the 2010-11 role players from the theoretical ones signed next offseason. In Rose's MVP season he was worth 13.1 wins, and a VORP of 6. Last year Jimmy was worth 9.1 wins (11.2 year before) and 4.2 VORP. 1) The number were closer than I thought so maybe I am underrating Jimmy a bit, but there's still a clear difference between the value of Rose in his MVP season and Jimmy, more than what you imply IMO. 2) I have no idea how accurate those numbers are at judging value in basketball, but they seem to be pretty relied on in baseball so I'll use them I'm not differentiating the role players in 2010 from next offseason. In fact the players they get next year could be better. I just don't think there is much on the Bulls besides Jimmy that these FAs would be coming to whereas Booz, Brewer, Korver and Watson were joining a team that had Rose, Deng and Noah. Thus they are very unlikely to build a 62 win team from whats left in FA after the top guys spurn the Bulls.

The Cardinals have lost 7 straight home games and 10 of their last 12 at Busch. 15-23 overall at home.

Maybe, but I think its more likely to get at the very least a useful player with an inexpensive contract and years of control picking at the top of the draft. If you throw all your eggs into the FA basket and you don't have a sexy market or a team that is ready to contend, especially in the wild wild west that is FA with the cap exploding, you are far more likely to be used as leverage similar to what is happening to Dallas today with Whiteside, Conely and someone else whose name is eluding me, than you are to steal a superstar. If you strike out when you throw all your eggs into the FA basket, you are left with overpaying a role player to save face/hit salary floor. Meh. Our 2010 strikeout resulted in the best team we've seen since 1998. If you strike out in the lottery or with our pick, you are left with having a team you can't watch at all for more years than you already weren't. Yes it did because we had the MVP (deserved or not he was an elite superstar) and the role players we signed fit around that MVP. If we strike out in 2017 we have Jimmy Butler and marginal role players. Look at top 4 picks from the last 4 drafts (and yes 4 was mostly arbitrary selection but also because that's the lowest pick you can get with the worst record). Players that at a minimum are young cheap assets that can anchor a trade: Towns, Russell, Okafor, Porzingis, Wiggins, Parker, Oladipo, Anthony Davis Players that are useful players and good but not as strong of assets (pre-extension): Kidd-Gilchrist, Beal, Waiters Belong in an NBA rotation but minimal upside/value: Gordon, Porter, Zeller Giant useless busts: Bennett Unknown: Embiid So you have a pretty good chance of getting someone cheap and useful, and a non-zero chance of acquiring a superstar in the draft vs. a great chance of getting someone useful albeit overpaid and a virtual (imo) zero chance of acquiring a superstar in FA. Also because of the current climate, everyone is going to have money next summer, so the competition for these players is going to be extremely high. Honestly if we were back in the 2010 climate and we had space for 2 max guys I'd be all for it. But having money really doesn't mean much next season.

Yeah it should definitely help. Not complaining about blue line depth anymore, now just concerned about offensive depth

Gotta say, knowing how unlikely this is to work and all the times we've seen it fail, it's still a wayyy more likely path to a superstar than "blow it up and draft one." http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/what-exactly-are-the-bulls-doing-waiting-for-2017-or-bust/ Maybe, but I think its more likely to get at the very least a useful player with an inexpensive contract and years of control picking at the top of the draft. If you throw all your eggs into the FA basket and you don't have a sexy market or a team that is ready to contend, especially in the wild wild west that is FA with the cap exploding, you are far more likely to be used as leverage similar to what is happening to Dallas today with Whiteside, Conely and someone else whose name is eluding me, than you are to steal a superstar. If you strike out when you throw all your eggs into the FA basket, you are left with overpaying a role player to save face/hit salary floor.

Classic Rondon Fan

I know I'm supposed to hate the Knicks but I have a hard time hating them with Jo and Derrick on the team

I have them at 14-14 against "good" teams this year but only 2 wins in the last 11 games against them.

Fake rally's suck. I got over the shitty Baez decision that cost them the lead and was already at the "oh well if we lose we lose" point. Then zobrist hits the double and suddenly I'm "holy crap this team is so amazing we will win this" only to be more devastated than I should be about a relatively unimportant June baseball game.

the mets are probably even money to make the playoffs. I think I remember seeing fangraphs had them at 50.1% today

League average, the runner scores 51% of the time. Cubs are at 53% of the time, which is tied for 10th in MLB. Cubs's BA is .373 in these situations, which is 7th in MLB. Thanks, I'm a bit surprised by this. Seems like the numbers would be worse. Maybe because it's so frustrating when they don't score, it just stands out more. If it makes you feel better (or not) last year they were dead last in getting runners home in those situations

I would call out the opponents shitty hitting if our pitches threw 26 balls and 4 strikes and their guys swung at about 24 of those pitches

What have the Cubs been hitting with RISP during this slide? 0-7 tonight..

Well you knew either Bryant or Rizzo was getting walked and given his success against righties you knew Bryant would be the critical AB of the inning. After that you have a rookie in a very high leverage spot and a free swinger. Once Willson couldn't check on the 1st pitch it was not looking good for the Cubs

Seriously for a team that has been so patient this year it was really unlike him. He literally threw like 4 total strikes to 5 batters and managed to get 2 Ks and no runs allowed

Maybe not I just hate going into the weekend knowing we need to beat 2 of deGrom, Syndergard and Colon to have a winning road trip especially when the Cubs basically had to fail in every single one of the most critical 4-5 spots of the game to lose

Either way it's really more on Bryant and Willson. On this night they just happened to really choke bad. Eh He's really good against righties, but yeah all you need is Bryant or Willson to put the ball in play and they didn't. Very annoying

It's his 2nd week in the majors and by far his biggest AB against a tough reliever. Not surprised to see that type of AB at all. Another reason why I'd send wood. There was a pretty decent chance that Contreras and free swinging Javy would play a part in deciding the game if Wood isn't sent

June losses down get more frustrating and annoying. Again I know what I saw I think Jones should have sent Wood. He would have scored IMO and even if he doesn't runner on 2nd and 1 out for Bryant

2nd and 3rd no outs, 2-3-4 hitters coming up and the only ball in play is a pop up to the pitcher. Wow

This was my least enjoyable loss of the year

Some terrible ABs with the game on the line

Up to Javy.... Don't like those odds