WrigleyField 22

Will Nagy have Trubisky on a short leash Sunday? If so, does he go with Daniels or Bray? I have to think if he doesn't show some success in the first or second offensive series the boos are going to cascade down. They would have to make a roster change to get Bray on the active roster. It would be easy to do by dropping Mike Davis. When you only run 7 times a game, you don't really need a 3rd RB. Also if they cut Davis early enough in the season (week 10 maybe?) the comp pick for Amos is back in play....

ROY/6MOY Jump on the bandwagon.

If we know one thing about this front office, it's that they know how to make good #7 draft picks They've made many solid picks at 7. Let's hope this is finally the franchise altering one.

If you're throwing away mid round picks for meh QBs mineaswell throw a future first and some mid round picks and hope it gets you the next Mahomes, or at least Watson. Based on Pace's 1st round track record so far...

I doubt anyone available is worth what it would cost to get them.

It's officially a trend What a weird, unflattering picture choice. That was actually the most flattering.

Well this shot data is going to ruin my day. The Bulls actually had pretty strong shot selection last year in context of the rest of the league. From wide open to very tight. 55% / 35% / 9% /0% ( again there are some lost shots in there which is why it doesn't equal 100). They only took 3 very tight 3's last year. But they were God awful at open 3's, with only the Mavs, Jazz, and Raptors coming close in terms of variance betweem open 3 % verse total 3%. The Jazz and Raptors were very good at therefor taking less open 3s and more wide open 3's. The Bulls were also near the bottom third in total 3s taken, so perhaps they also just sucked at generating those wide open 3's (only 4 teams shot less of them).

Well apparently its right based on NBA's official data; https://stats.nba.com/teams/shots-closest-defender/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&sort=TEAM_NAME&dir=1&PerMode=Totals&CloseDefDistRange=4-6%20Feet%20-%20Open It turns out that NBA players are a lot better at shot selection that I gave them credit for. Wide Open 3's on average were only converted at 38% of the time, but made up 52% of all 3 pointers. Open, Tight or Very Tight together were converted at 32%, and each had about a 4pt spread. But Tight and Very tight 3's only accounted for 11% of 3's taken. *Note* - The NBA stats from last year seem to be missing 346 3's or about 0.44% of all 3's. ETA for Context; On a individual player basis, Klay Thompson hit 43.2% of open 3's. https://stats.nba.com/players/shots-closest-defender/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&PerMode=Totals&sort=FG3_PCT&dir=1&CF=FG3A*G*200&CloseDefDistRange=4-6%20Feet%20-%20Open Steph Curry hit 52% of Wide Open 3's https://stats.nba.com/players/shots-closest-defender/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&PerMode=Totals&sort=FG3_PCT&dir=1&CF=FG3A*G*200&CloseDefDistRange=6%2B%20Feet%20-%20Wide%20Open

Can't speak to the accuracy of this (seems a bit low to me) Um yea there's no way that's right, league average on ALL 3 pointers was 0.355 last year. .362 the year prior.

To the extent that coaches matter, it's mostly their ability to manage star players/egos. Anything gimmicky you worry about wearing thin over time. That said, the Bulls don't have that star player yet unless LaVine wants to turn into one. So whatever, a scrappy young team that runs a modern offense and can make the playoffs would still provide some entertainment. Maybe I'd watch them a little this year!

Are club options normal on manager contacts?

I hope every player was given bootstraps and a lunch pail too

GM first, but the next GM has to keep Nagy and that eliminates any hire with self-respect. I'm still betting that they want to avoid the constant churn they've had of late and will keep these guys together for one more shot at a QB fix. They can't keep doing the "new gm new coach" every other year thing. Probably. Hard to imagine Pace getting a third HC hire. Right now their contracts align through 2022 so that offseason would be the time to fire them both. If they don't pick a new QB in 2020, but pick one in 2021, you only have one year to evaluate that QB, plus the possibility of saddling a new GM/HC with someone else's QB choice one year in.

That's a bit of a stretch. Both offensive tackles are on the back half. Nearly all of the DBs are in their late 20s if not 30s. It's Trevathan's 8th year. All of Pace's early picks are huge question marks (at best) right now. There are plenty of guys that have not stepped up that should, but there's also a good deal of natural regression. Pace is starting to look like early era Angelo, hitting on a ton of mid round picks to float success and missing on every 1st rounder. We know how that turned out...

I know it wasn't technically the case, but it sure seemed to me that game was way out of hand even when the score was close. They went blocked punt safety, punt, fumble to start the game. The offense was trash from the get go. I really don't think "trying to establish the run" does anything there. Hey I get that it's somewhat symbiotic... If they could have passed worth a damn, it would help the run as they could have stringed longer drives together. But I think I saw that they had 13 straight passes after Cohen 9 yard run in the 2nd. The last two runs of the day then were DMs fumble and a end around to Patterson. Obviously you don't want predictability and handing it off on 1st down every time like it's 1980, but Nagy just isn't doing the offense favors right now. Yea the line has sucked and Mitch has big mental issues, but it shouldn't be this bad either.

Also there's a pretty wide gap between "passing enough to maybe hit lightning in a bottle and get Mitch going" and "passing 80% of the time to get Mitch going"

Well the 2 yard runs are certainly an issue and it's entirely possible that this team just isn't capable of a good running game, but a week after making a line change they certainly didn't even give themselves a chance to find out, and before you try and claim it, it wasnt by virtue of being down. It was a 7:35 ratio before things got out of hand. Mitch certainly ain't good enough to beat a D that barely has to worry about the run.

Top 10 will do in a pinch. I'm sorry that you don't wanna hear it, but the Bears are screwed. They blew their wad betting on Trubisky and Mack and since one of them is bad, it won't be enough, and it's gonna take years to unwind it all. Running the ball more won't save them. This isn't a "future of the Bears" post its complaining about Nagy's awful use of what he has now to try and win and your posts every time in the matter add nothing.

I know this is you schtick or whatever, but the 49ers are currently undefeated with an offense featuring a basically an average QB in Garappolo handing off a bunch and a strong defense. And it's not even like they have a bunch of highly pedigreed RBs either and are handing it off to an Ezekiel Elliot-type 30 times a game. Where you're kind of right is that you better be able to defend the pass in the NFL in 2019, which is a huge part of the 49ers success right now. The Bears D, not so much, but it'd be a lot more interesting to see if their performance could improve if they had an O capable of staying on the field. Although that may not be it either, they have given up huge series at the beginning of halves or games where they shouldn't be fatigued at all. I got to see very little of the past 3 games, mostly listening on the radio, so this isn't even a defense of Mitch or anything. Yesterday sounds like it was very ugly by him, but there isn't a justification for Nagys play call split at this point. It certainly isn't a winning strategy. At best it only serves to force Paces hand on Trubisky's future. ETA: Bears D is still average at defending the pass, but last year they were elite. At the end of the day you want a elite passer rating differential. You can be elite at one and average at another like the Bears were last year. But average at one and below average at another... Well it's obvious the Bears could easily be 2-4 and are fortunate to still be at 3-3. If they can fix the pass D, they don't need to pass a bunch. Sure. You can overcome a bad offense if your D is fantastic. But depending on running the ball still makes your offense bad. You're not winning because you're running. The 49ers can enjoy their one-year blip in the sunlight like all the other elite-D, no-QB teams. Maybe they'll get through to the SB, maybe they won't. But then next year the same four teams with elite QBs will be back in the mix again and they won't. But your posts ultimately boil down to "have a top 5 passer" which is dumb and pointless and adds nothing.

If the Bears wish to capitalize on their current window something such as that must be done. Thought I read something about Bridgewater as well? Hell be a FA and if all the established starters resign would probably be the biggest FA name. Would take some cap work to get it done... Not sure exactly what roster bonuses they gave out there hanging that could be converted, but they're probably there.

As a trade or in the offseason?

Is it too simplistic to chalk up to Hicks? Is his impact that big?

I know this is you schtick or whatever, but the 49ers are currently undefeated with an offense featuring a basically an average QB in Garappolo handing off a bunch and a strong defense. And it's not even like they have a bunch of highly pedigreed RBs either and are handing it off to an Ezekiel Elliot-type 30 times a game. Where you're kind of right is that you better be able to defend the pass in the NFL in 2019, which is a huge part of the 49ers success right now. The Bears D, not so much, but it'd be a lot more interesting to see if their performance could improve if they had an O capable of staying on the field. Although that may not be it either, they have given up huge series at the beginning of halves or games where they shouldn't be fatigued at all. I got to see very little of the past 3 games, mostly listening on the radio, so this isn't even a defense of Mitch or anything. Yesterday sounds like it was very ugly by him, but there isn't a justification for Nagys play call split at this point. It certainly isn't a winning strategy. At best it only serves to force Paces hand on Trubisky's future. ETA: Bears D is still average at defending the pass, but last year they were elite. At the end of the day you want a elite passer rating differential. You can be elite at one and average at another like the Bears were last year. But average at one and below average at another... Well it's obvious the Bears could easily be 2-4 and are fortunate to still be at 3-3. If they can fix the pass D, they don't need to pass a bunch. Edit/Quote, even before the last two offensive series, which were really just for shits and giggles, the run/pass split was 7/35. That was by my count 9 drives, one in which they were tied, 6 within a 1 TD game, and 3 with a 2 score game. Still can't justify that run/pass ratio. Granted, it's hard to measure the impact of those 2 lost fumbles that killed drives quick, and things maybe are out of hand even earlier with the Patterson return, but it's still head scratching play calling by Nagy. Also since I had to put in some of the legwork anyways: Mitch when the game was still at least somewhat withing reach (to the extent it ever was) 20-35, 119 yards, 0TD 0 INT, 63.87 Pasar rating Mitch in garbage time pointless football 14-19 132 yards (2TD 0 INT) 127.52 passer rating Just to put into context how much the Stat padding helped him yesterday.

I know this is you schtick or whatever, but the 49ers are currently undefeated with an offense featuring a basically an average QB in Garappolo handing off a bunch and a strong defense. And it's not even like they have a bunch of highly pedigreed RBs either and are handing it off to an Ezekiel Elliot-type 30 times a game. Where you're kind of right is that you better be able to defend the pass in the NFL in 2019, which is a huge part of the 49ers success right now. The Bears D, not so much, but it'd be a lot more interesting to see if their performance could improve if they had an O capable of staying on the field. Although that may not be it either, they have given up huge series at the beginning of halves or games where they shouldn't be fatigued at all. I got to see very little of the past 3 games, mostly listening on the radio, so this isn't even a defense of Mitch or anything. Yesterday sounds like it was very ugly by him, but there isn't a justification for Nagys play call split at this point. It certainly isn't a winning strategy. At best it only serves to force Paces hand on Trubisky's future. ETA: Bears D is still average at defending the pass, but last year they were elite. At the end of the day you want a elite passer rating differential. You can be elite at one and average at another like the Bears were last year. But average at one and below average at another... Well it's obvious the Bears could easily be 2-4 and are fortunate to still be at 3-3. If they can fix the pass D, they don't need to pass a bunch.

Use Gravatar.