WrigleyField 22
-
Posts
19,041 -
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 just remember stupid people on RealGM clinging onto Mirotic and the Charlotte pick and not wanting to trade them. I wanna say it was for something awesome too like Aldridge. I thought it was Love. Ah probably for Mirotic, yea. "But Mirotic is the next Love!"
-
I just remember stupid people on RealGM clinging onto Mirotic and the Charlotte pick and not wanting to trade them. I wanna say it was for something awesome too like Aldridge.
-
To replace Loggains?
-
I'll say this from a roster construction standpoint; if Mirotic and McDermott hit three like they did last year, this team is probably top 4 in the East. It was a bad decision to put your three point reliance an a couple high rate shooters rather than spreading the love around a little bit. Were they going to always be light on 3's? Yes, but they were built to and have made up for it in other ways, like FT. That they are even clinging to a playoff spot by a thread with their 3 pt rate is actually pretty amazing. Although neither is a true PG, a Etwaun Moore/Justin Holiday rotation would look pretty good right now. So going forward? Probably better off trying to surround Jimmy and Wade with a bunch of 33-35% 3pt shooters rather than relying on a couple very high rate shooters.
-
If youre into day 2 and 3 prospects, the head football writer for RealGM is posting lots of East West Shrine stuff, including this Bears tidbit;
-
one theory I've always had is the helmet provides a false sense of security. Football players use it like a weapon, which is dumb. But the baseball helmet is barely a thing, it really doesn't do much but provide minimal protection from a pitched ball, and players aren't going to go crazy thinking they are protected from it. The softball helmet is like a baseball/football helmet hybrid and it may give some players a false sense of security to play with reckless abandon with regards to their head. Combine that with shorter base paths and shorter infield plays and more opportunity for quick contact and that's why it's exponentially more dangerous. Wasn't thinking of the facemask and stuff. Yea, those softball helmets are overkill. Side note, my niece played rec league sodtball - which was awful to watch- no one could field AND they were allowed to steal, so the average 6 inning game looked like a high scoring football game. But my niece's team all wore facemasks in the field (no head protection just a facemask with an elastic band). Now safety is great and all, but there was probably one girl out of 20 who could hit the ball past the dirt. I think the "LF", standimg right next to the SS, was gonna be okay. On the other team, only the pitcher wore this facemask.
-
small field, short distances between bases, not a lot of room to maneuver and a whole lot of bang bang infield plays may play a part. That's exactly the reason I was going to mention. Everything is so much closer than baseball that the likelihood of getting hit in general is higher and then factor in the head mass/neck muscles and you have your answer. It makes sense, but is still suprising. If we look at the increase in other sports between men and women and strike it up soley to physical differences, that still leaves a 2-3× increase of collisions because of the closeness of play and other issues noted.
-
I dont care who the fug we have at either spot because neither is that great. Pick the better one.
-
Read more: http://www.momsteam.com/health-safety/concussions-women-more-succeptible#ixzz4W7fHE5Y2 Yea I assumed the overall rate was higher for physical reasons, but that doesnt explain how a low contact sport like softball is rivaling higher contact sports like basketball and soccer is kind of weird.
-
Well yeah, hockey isn't far off from football. Concussion rates by sport per 100,000 "atheletic exposures": Football: 64 -76.8 Boys' ice hockey: 54 Girl's soccer: 33 Boys' lacrosse: 40 - 46.6 Girls' lacrosse: 31 - 35 Boys' soccer: 19 - 19.2 Boys' wrestling: 22 - 23.9 Girls' basketball: 18.6 - 21 Girls' softball: 16 - 16.3 Boys' basketball: 16 - 21.2 Girls' field hockey: 22 - 24.9 Cheerleading: 11.5 to 14 Girls' volleyball: 6 - 8.6 Boys' baseball: Between 4.6 - 5 Girls' gymnastics: 7 http://www.headcasecompany.com/concussion_info/stats_on_concussions_sports It's kinda interesting to me that girls' soccer is so much higher than boy's soccer. What the heck is going on in girls softball?! 4x the rate of baseball.
-
2015 was the only time he missed time due to injury in the last 4 years. He suited up, but he came into TC with hamstring issues and he didnt really seem 100% most the season.
-
My biggest issue with Jeffery has been health, but at the end of the day, you bite the bullet, but limit years and guarantee if possible. Maybe put in some big incentives?
-
That steelers helmet to helmet last night is perfect example. People ask, "what are you supposed to do" and the answer is the complete opposite of what that guy did. He brought his arms down and braced himself for purposeful helmet first contact, with a launch. That is just terrible technique but everybody does it because when you hit hard it looks cool. I had to laugh as his teammate came up to him all jacked up over that hit, even after the flag had already been thrown.
-
I could go either way. Raw has brought up the good point on Allen before, that were effectively in a 2 down lineman set 1/2 the time, so he isn't a full time player. On the other hand, you're maybe less interested in a guy like that playing every down than being a dominant force on select plays when he is in. The steadiness and long life span of a dominant safety on the ither hand has huge appeal. Or if they like a QB enough, I'll be on board and hope for the best too.
-
Cubs to visit the White House Monday
WrigleyField 22 replied to gobigred's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
This I actually believe. -
Went with only the Bryant shersey of the Cubs stuff, but added 4 other shirts, a fitted hat, and socks (NFL,NCAA) for only 60 bucks total. Pretty good deal!
-
I really wanted the charcoal or black lockerroom hoodie, buy apparently those sold out of my sizes pretty quickly.
-
No 2017 Heyward will double down on 2016 Heyward. Schwarbers knee will implode. Montogmery will be second half Hammel all year and Rizzos tiny face will shrink into itself. Enjoy 2016 guys. You can tell your grandkids on your deathbed about the last time the Cubs won the WS in 2016, 100 years ago (medical advances will keep us all alive that long)
-
You can get a Kris Bryant shersey with the WS patch for just $16. Might have to get that.
-
Fine. Does the fact this years QB class sucks change your mind? Not sure I agree with that assessment yet. Not if hes really awesone in years 2 and beyond. How many guys in next year class will be in their first year of draft eligibility? Well see what happens with Taylor or other vet options. I don't see any as true long term options. Taylor could be a medium-term option. But there isn't a guy, Taylor included that should preclude you from still drafting a long term QB if theres one you identify as a good pick. I'd ask the same question as above. QBs very frequently go back to school if they eligibility remaining, even when they look like top picks. And some of these guys have less than a season under their belt right now. A ton can change.
-
Letting next years draft class influence your decision this year is silly, IMO.
-
DeShaun Watson hasnt decided on the Senior Bowl, but will train with former Bears great- Jordan Palmer
-
Seth Maness Surgery doesnt have quite the same ring to it.
-
I cant decide if its a boring logo or just a bad one. Like, are they going to just a blue and white color scheme? Are they dropping what us one of the best helmet decals?
-
I thought you were making some joke that I didn't understand. Nope, they are really playing in a soccer stadium for 2 years. How could the NFL approve that? Pretty sure there is some sort of requirement to play in a stadium with a minimum capacity more than 30k the last priority the NFL has is butts in seats situations. they don't give a F about it in relation to what matters most. they got a sweetheart stadium situation, they get to flood the LA market, they open up the San Diego market for the next "we're moving" threat. and they get a big relocation fee from spanos. They don't care that the least paid attention to team in the league is going to play in a glorified high school stadium (or downsized high school stadium in some instances). I mean, I think they care to some degree, but short term for relocations or stadium renos, it definitely doesn't matter.
