WrigleyField 22
-
Posts
19,067 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by WrigleyField 22
-
I mean, this at least takes a lot of grey area out of evaluating Pace right?
-
Let's be clear, the only thing making up for those picks is Mitchell Trubisky.
-
Well I dont think the trade was about what SF wanted.
-
They.... gave up a lot.
-
It has to be QB right?
-
So are they gonma trade down now?
-
Rumor floating around that a team within the Top 5 is real high on Watson... So many damn rumors right now. This has got to start.
-
I mean, they'll probably lose some regular viewers, which is why they are getting paid. Well, no...I mean. Yeah they may lose some viewers, but that's not why they're getting paid. They're getting paid to allow someone else to air content that they produced. Well yea. It factors into the economics though. If 5% of their Intentional Talk viewers are also regular viewers of ESPN2 programming, theres a pretty good chance theyll lose those viewers to ESPN2. So getting paid should in theory offset some or all of that.
-
Which means it will be watched more on espn2, because it's in more households, right? That's why I don't understand this. If espn is shedding talent, why is a competing network bailing them out? If I'm a regular viewer of Intentional Talk, I'm going to continue to watch it on MLBN. Little chance of MLBN losing viewers because of this. Instead, they're going to make additional money from ESPN paying them to be able to air that content. I mean, they'll probably lose some regular viewers, which is why they are getting paid.
-
Lol. I AM THE KEEPER OF THE INFORMATION! #WhiteDraftPicksMatter.
-
1 -Cle) Trubisky 2 -Car) Fournette 3 -Chi) Garrett Yes please I dont think that happens. It makes way more sense for Cle to actually use their considerable draft resources to move up than to pass on a prospect like Garrett.
-
Supposedly Carolina is in talks to move up to 2 (Fournette), but Cleveland is still interested as well (presumably Trubisky) The former can really only be good for the Bears. The latter... depends on how you feel about Trubisky.
-
It said "a player expected to be taken in the first round" I'm sure some internet sleuth can figure out which prospect(s) might have been in Cleveland the past few days I think the article said April 8/9. Still, kind of a weird article, and yea, I'm sure the internet is gonna sleuth the heck out of it.
-
Assistant coach Mike Kitchen fired.
-
I would say terrible, less terrible, the only option.
-
No point guard could be a problem. Luckily Thomas is an awful defender. Jimmy and Wade should probably be bringing the ball up/starting the offense the majority of the time tonight, IMO. Let MCW do it a little but Jimmy/Wade should be the primary ball handlers tonight. If I were the Bulls I'd be trying to get IT guarding Wade tonight and let him work him. Also try and run a lot of pick and rolls with Jimmy picking IT to try and get a switch and let Jimmy go to work. MCW should do a good job guarding IT, right? But they can kind of hide IT on him defensively. Obviously you try to force matchups where you can, but Grant or Zipser with Jimmy playing point, should provide more well rounded lineups. MCW will probably have to log some minutes though.
-
I feel like any argument in favor of a major rule change ultimately ends up arguing "look, it will impact relatively few amount of games", which kind of undermines the argumemt for needing a change amyways. The best arguments in relation to this "issue" is roster construction and related rules... which basically has always changed, so why not change those to whatever you need rather than the rules of actual gameplay?
-
That was my exact thought. It sucks, but hopefully Jimmy can run some point and Grant/MCW can be a non-disaster for a few minutes at a time. Yea, I think you gotta just ride Jimmy, and then like Wade said, go to him when you ride Jimmy as far as you can.
-
Whos coming out Christmas Eve to watch that game with huge playoff implications between the CHICAGO BEARS and CLEVELAND BROWNS?
-
Wtf at the Bulls being the most entertaining team in Chicago right now. As an NFL draft junkie I'd normally even count the Bears having the third pick as more interesting than the Bulls as an 8th seed in the playoffs.
-
Is Theo a grandma killer?
-
For as many flaws as this team was built with, that was kind of always their path, with Portis last night playing the stretch 4 role envisioned from Mirotic.
-
I haven't read much rumor mill stuff, so I don't know what to expect, but those are all bad reasons, generally, for not taking a QB and Derwood's pitcher analogy makes zero sense.
-
I think this Bulls team needs a major overhaul, including the front office. I think that's less likely to happen if they make the playoffs. It's admittedly probably unlikely in either case, to be fair, but I still think missing the playoffs provides the best opportunity for that. Yeah everything I've read suggests that there is no way GarPax or Fred is gone after this year. And like I said in my last post, making the playoffs is unlikely to change the perception of this team. Everyone knows the team sucks, lacks talent, fits together awkwardly and is depressing to watch and follow. If you take the pessemist view, playoffs this year is two playoff revenue games closer to keeping their jobs, I guess? I don't think it makes a difference for this year, but a year from now, "third straight missed playoffs" is maybe more impactful in bringing about change?
-
Sweet t shirt too
