raw

I've been kind of assuming they'll be a playoff team next year. Probably wrong of me but LaVine has improved every year so far. Him and Vuc for a full year will be enough for a 6-8 seed IMO. Williams improving and I have faith they'll get a PG. Lavine is kinda recruiting Lonzo, but he won't be cheap or without options. I do think AK will pull off something. My bold prediction is a trade for Malcolm Brogdon. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk As a Pacers fan reading this you piqued my interest. What do you think the Bulls would be willing to give up? My only warning is that even though I may want to go backwards a little bit, the Pacers don't, and their hiring of Carlisle makes that even more clear. They won't make a deal unless they think it makes them better next year. Yeah, Carlisle hire may make a trade less realistic. And I have no idea what the Bulls would trade. Their only bargaining chips are Thad Young's expiring contract (came from Pacers so doubt they'd want him back), Markannen in a sign-and-trade (redundant with Sabonis?), and Coby White (not sure Bulls want to trade him). Probably have to have a 3rd team involved.

Growth from Pat Williams and acquiring a PG would push them into playoff territory. Probably not enough to get them past the first round but Knicks fans had a lot to be excited over this year and unless you get another true superstar you usually need to crawl before you run They need some more shooters and big improvement on defense. How realistic are the chances of getting Lonzo? I've been kind of assuming they'll be a playoff team next year. Probably wrong of me but LaVine has improved every year so far. Him and Vuc for a full year will be enough for a 6-8 seed IMO. Williams improving and I have faith they'll get a PG. Lavine is kinda recruiting Lonzo, but he won't be cheap or without options. I do think AK will pull off something. My bold prediction is a trade for Malcolm Brogdon. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

Zach, hang out with Dame and Beal and try to convince one of them to force a trade to Chicago.

Zach, hang out with Dame and Beal and try to convince one of them to force a trade to Chicago.

I actually wouldn't be surprised to see the superteam thing go away in a couple years. Could have LeBron retiring, which is a huge reason for superteams (him orchestrating some and some being created simply to beat him). Especially if the Clippers and Nets fail to win again next year, and you have the Bucks, Suns and Hawks all in the final 4 teams without superteams. I think you could see players taking the opposite approach and getting with teams where they are the unquestioned star who the team is built around, because the last 3 years has shown (Warriors injuries, 76ers, Clippers, Nets, 2021 Lakers) that a superteam falls apart if all the stars aren't healthy and/or playing at an elite level. The depth just isn't good enough because it has to be depleted to get stars. I don’t completely disagree. But you think a non-superteam could handle losing their only star and competing? Regardless if your star(s) aren’t healthy in the playoffs, you’re not going anywhere. Brooklyn lost 2/3 stars and still almost got past Milwaukee. It’s all luck on health. No, that wasn't the point I was making. But using the Nets as an example. KD not winning a title this year is probably based on the fact that Kyrie and Harden got hurt. So, KD may see this and be like, "my ring depends on someone else staying healthy". He obviously has the talent to lead a team to a title as the unquestioned star. Brooklyn might have won that series (and still be title favorites) if they never did the Harden trade and they held onto Jarrett Allen, Taurean Prince and Caris LeVert and they were healthy. So if he goes elsewhere he just has to bet on his own health instead of putting risk that 2 other guys are taking care of their body enough to get thru 82 games plus 4 rounds of playoff games.

It's a really weird season. Lots of injuries due to short offseason for some plus the condensed season. If LeBron and AD are healthy, or maybe even if Klay doesnt miss the entire season, you probably see the usual suspects winning in the playoffs. If Kyrie and Harden are healthy, they almost certainly get past the Bucks and continue the superteam trend. But maybe we're headed to an age of parity similar to the mid-70's NBA. The Raptors winning the title is still incredible to me and now seeing 4 teams left that all have 50+ year championship droughts including 2 teams that came out of nowhere without top 10 players...just really unexpected for the NBA. I actually wouldn't be surprised to see the superteam thing go away in a couple years. Could have LeBron retiring, which is a huge reason for superteams (him orchestrating some and some being created simply to beat him). Especially if the Clippers and Nets fail to win again next year, and you have the Bucks, Suns and Hawks all in the final 4 teams without superteams. I think you could see players taking the opposite approach and getting with teams where they are the unquestioned star who the team is built around, because the last 3 years has shown (Warriors injuries, 76ers, Clippers, Nets, 2021 Lakers) that a superteam falls apart if all the stars aren't healthy and/or playing at an elite level. The depth just isn't good enough because it has to be depleted to get stars.

That would be a good and fun idea. But my favorite idea is just starting the season with Fields. I actually think Nagy is going to do this [expletive]. He already had this mapped out for Mitch when he was the backup last year. Of course Mitch injured himself on the very first play and was out multiple weeks but I’m sure Fields will be just fine. I'd be OK with it, if it's done for the right reason. If Fields isn't comfortable with the entire playbook and has certain things that he does well but you can't build an entire offensive gameplan around those things, then it makes sense. But nothing about Fields leads me to believe that will be the case. He transferred to Ohio St in January, threw TD passes in the April spring game, and completed 72% of his passes and accounted for 5 TDs in his first game in August. So, I have no doubts the guy who eats, sleeps and breathes football can't have this offense as close to mastered as possible from April to September with reps in rookie, mini, and training camps, and preseason games while not having to worry about a college courseload.

That would be a good and fun idea. But my favorite idea is just starting the season with Fields.

Even Rondo has increased his willingness to shoot the ball later in his career. He's not great at it or at the FT line, but he's willing to get to the line or take an open shot. Prime Rondo didn't really shoot the ball much, but he also was not a max contract or a #2 option. He had KG, Pierce and Allen to do the scoring. With the money Simmons is making, you can't surround him with the 3 scorers you need to make up for his lack of shooting. Simmons averaged 10 shots a game, making 55%. Rondo never shot more than 12 per game, and after age 29 never averaged double digit shots. Simmons shot 61% from the line this year, Rondo was a career 61% FT shooter, with some much worse years than Simmons ever had. The contract situation is obviously very different, but unless you think this playoff stretch is what he'll be going forward, I think he's definitely a second/third piece with 2 proven scorers and a Clarkson/idealized Coby White type off the bench. It's not necessarily what I expect going forward full-time, but it'd be nuts to assume this won't happen when the lights get bright again. Simmons is a worse FT shooter for his career than Rondo (59%). And his shot attempts have gone down from 10 to 8 and 11.5 to under 10 in the playoffs the last 2 years. The difference in shooting percentage can be summed up by 6'10 vs. 6'1, which is where Simmons maintains some value. 76ers had that blueprint you speak of with Embiid, Harris and Curry and it still wasn't good enough. I said in the Bulls thread though that i'd be willing to give Simmons a shot with LaVine, Vucevic and Coby White and hope having the top option be a wing instead of a C would help. But I wouldn't give up anything worthwhile to take that shot.

Even Rondo has increased his willingness to shoot the ball later in his career. He's not great at it or at the FT line, but he's willing to get to the line or take an open shot. Prime Rondo didn't really shoot the ball much, but he also was not a max contract or a #2 option. He had KG, Pierce and Allen to do the scoring. With the money Simmons is making, you can't surround him with the 3 scorers you need to make up for his lack of shooting.

I actually love Simmons' fit with the Bulls, but I'm not trading anything worthwhile to get him. Obviously, you aren't trading LaVine or Vucevic. Patrick Williams is untouchable. Wouldn't trade Coby or draft picks. I'm talking Al-Farooq Aminu, Sato and Thad for salary match purposes.

The Sixers have had 3 top 2 picks in the last 11 years. All 3 of them (Evan Turner, Ben Simmons and Markelle Fultz) have developed crippling mental blocks to the point where they either physically couldn't or wouldn't shoot the basketball. Turner and Fultz have basically played themselves out of the league or to roles where they are buried on the bench. Simmons will hang around for at least 4 more years (mainly because he pockets 140M+ in this time), but interesting to see where his career goes from here. Clearly needs a change of scenery, but if I'm a team I wouldn't take him for much more than a salary match trade. Maybe the Sixers can get CJ McCollum if the Blazers want him to get a change of scenery and think they can fix Simmons, but I wouldn't do more than other disappointing big salaries. I'm talking Otto Porter, Pistons Blake Griffin type contracts. Simmons is not 25 til next month, but I don't remember anyone being able to turn it around with these type of mental blocks shooting the ball.

Bears signed former Chiefs (and Packers) NT, Mike Pennel today. Seems like the team isn't sold on Goldman being in and/or ready to go in camp in 6 weeks. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

That was my first reaction as well. He looks slimmed down. I wonder if he's not as padded up as he'll actually be on gamedays. I don't think I can even fathom how fast he's going to be if he is actually slimmed down just a few pounds.

I think its overwhelmingly likely Dalton starts week 1, and he's obsessed with repeating 'the Mahomes experience' but I definitely think the door is opened at least a crack if Fields destroys the preseason. I think it's mostly coach speak. It's not like the QB job is a 50/50 competition like it was last offseason between Foles and Trubisky. Nagy is tempering everyone's expectations for Fields and letting us know it's not the end of the world if Fields doesn't start Week 1. I think the Bears have a "plan" for Fields, but I don't think it has anything to do with what people have speculated as getting Fields against an easier defense than the Rams, or waiting until the bye week, or waiting until the OL shows they can protect him and Dalton well enough. The "plan" should be all about Fields. When can he run the offense well enough to be the best guy to win games. I think Nagy has hopes that it will be Week 1, but if it's not, that's fine as well. I do think Dalton will be the guy Week 1. If there's any doubt on Fields he won't be in there. But Nagy's not an idiot. There's very little reason to waste time with Dalton with him being 34 and on a 1-year deal just because Mahomes sat for a year. I fully expect Fields by Week 5 at the latest

Young Joc! It's goin' down!

Yadi imploding is soooo fun

I agree 17 games is too long but I don't think playoff contraction is the answer. I'd rather do "Student athletes can only play in 15 games" or something and keep this proposal than go back to the BCS days. Keep it at 4 teams. What's the motivation for expansion other than money? Sure teams like Coastal Carolina get a chance, but it's not much of one. It's not like we've been saying in the playoff era, "boy if only that midmajor got a shot against historically good Clemson, LSU and Alabama teams".

It was a shortened season so only 10. But yeah, normal season would be 16 for FCS title game participants.

I feel like I'm always close to being alone on this hill, but I hate playoff expansion....every iteration of it. 10 years ago, the national champ played 13 games. Last full season LSU won at 15-0. They aren't going to cut out conference games because Ohio St. played 6 conference games and there were some that took exception to them even being in the playoff in a season that was shortened anyway. They aren't going to cut out non-conference games because then you get questioning a team's schedule if they run thru an easy conference. So, if you don't shorten the regular season, you have teams potentially playing 17-game schedules. Look at 2019. Georgia had their 12 game regular season schedule Play powerhouse LSU in the SEC Championship. Just missed the playoff, but would now be an extremely capable 5th seed. Pretty safe bet they beat the #12 team in the first round. Could go either way in the 4/5 game. Now they get the #1 team in a rematch in the semis, familarity, ability to adjust, can see a scenario where they win and play game 17 for the title. You can't talk about the safety of football and then make college kids play NFL length seasons (for free), while they're supposed to be going to school and maintaining certain grades, when like 90% of them won't even play professionally to even make it worth their while to do all this for free.

Kemba Walker would make me lose whatever interest I'd have in the 2021-22 Bulls. It'd be the Carlos Boozer, 36-year old Dwayne Wade, Rip Hamilton of moves. Good player in name only at this point of his career, that it doesn't make sense to sign to add to a young core for such an expensive cost.

He didnt You'd both lose your money. I don't know the totals or percentages of plays under center, but a quick google search reveals 13 snaps under center in his 1st career start in 2019, a year after Dwayne Haskins took 0 snaps under center as the Ohio St QB.

Lifelong Suns fan here. That Denver series is going to be nuts. I still don't know what to think about the Jazz or Mavs (or Clippers for that matter). I don't know if either of those teams are good enough to get out of the West or win a title. Obviously the Jazz has the best record, but they seem vulnerable to me. Mavs need more help for Luka. Clippers seem like a team that will get better as the playoffs go on, but they are an L away from being done. So much is going to come down to health. Chris Paul, Mike Conley, Joel Embiid, Porzingis are all clearly under 100%. I honestly think Denver has the best shot to come out the West. Jokic is that good right now. I'm rooting for the Bucks to pull out that series, but Nets are the team to beat obviously.

Buy from their own store.

I thought the key was getting the guy out at 1st though. A 6-4-3 means getting the batter out at first. The batter reached first, I thought that was the determining factor. Nope. If the final out is a force out, it doesn't matter what base it's at. That run won't count. Yeah, I was thinking because the batter reached first and there was only 1 out when he reached that that mattered. But yeah it's still a force play and not a tag.