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
-
Edit- whoops
-
Their roster, while it has talent is just an awful jumbled collection of a non-team. And the West looks pretty strong for the foreseeable future. The only silver lining is their shot at Parker. But if they even merely get a top 4 pick, I see just another talented piece that will get thrown into an awful situation there. I suppose it's possible they at least have the ammo to rebuild in a short time, but they Gay trade wasn't a fine example of that.
-
Ah Jesus, according to a CBS Sports article, that pick swap is lottery protected. Three future second rounders and $15m is the package.
-
This shouldn't be a meaningful detail for fans, but unfortunately is. The saved money is hopefully enough to cause no issue for a Boozer amnesty. We were also likely to want to get under the tax at some point to avoid the repeater stuff so now is as good as ever.
-
Eh, according to Draft Express that Sac pick isn't that great. It's top 12 this year, top ten protected in 15, 16, and 17, and if not conveyed by 17 turns into a second round pick in 17. We're getting three second round picks and a swap in 15 fellas. All our bets lie in that swap, but it's apparently not full swaps so probably at least top 3 protected.
-
Yea it's unfortunately kind of late. They've been on a relative tear and distanced themselves from a respectable tank pick. If you want a meaningful tank you have to be all in. Noah and Boozer( if possible) gone. Move Butler if you need to ensure proper assets in return. Just moving Deng does nothing really meaningful. Edit- Damn I'm sad to see Deng gone. Was awesome to watch him all these years and glad they stuck with him through his rough injury patch. Good luck Deng!
-
What's really great is if we do whiff on big FA (which obviously isn't great in itself) we have the ability to only free up exactly what we need, allowing to rain flexibility going forward. Bears have ways been fairly conservative with salary cap planning so I don't expect we'll see a huge FA splash and the full amount converted over, but it's nice to have some flexibility.
-
Well my original post said "I'm not sure" and subsequent posts talked about league minimum and giving a chance, so I do believe we both do fall somewhere between ruling him out and signing him to a guaranteed deal.
-
That is not a meaningful statement. Believe what you will I suppose. Theres a pretty decent chance he won't even be the 62nd or 32nd PFF ranked safety he was in 2010 and 2011. Safety is littered with mid-round picks and young guys who can be passable. What's so special about Rhodes at age 32 a year removed from any football activity? I'd put good money on him being a substantial upgrade over any of the safeties we played in 2013. Well if you're gonna compare him to our safeties, I might stretch it out to guys who have been out of football for 2 or 3 years (particularly Wright) in order to find a chance of an upgrade, but that kind of ignores the whole pool of FAs and draft picks who have a chance to be better than both with more upside. You're not setting the bar very high in support of Rhodes though if thats the level of satisfaction.
-
That is not a meaningful statement. Believe what you will I suppose. Theres a pretty decent chance he won't even be the 62nd or 32nd PFF ranked safety he was in 2010 and 2011. Safety is littered with mid-round picks and young guys who can be passable. What's so special about Rhodes at age 32 a year removed from any football activity?
-
The likelihood of finding a better football fit for the cost is very low. But if it's that important to you to not be the team to break the blackball, so be it. Are you out of your mind or suffering from poor reading comprehension? I'm being a smartass based on what appears to be you hiding behind the "it's not a true blackball situation" and "I don't want the distractions" defense. I could give a [expletive] about "distractions" and haven't once mentioned them. If anything I've ever posted anywhere on this site gives you the impression I would try to hide behind an issue like gay rights (using some lame excuse no less) I'm not sure what it would be. Its 100% football related.
-
I think you are misinterpreting the notion of "blackball", which is probably due to people misusing it. There isn't a decrease coming down from on high saying you cannot sign the guy. The point is the league is filled with people who are outright bigots, as well as cowards who hide behind the BS storyline of "distractions". That combines to mean limited to zero opportunities, which is effectively being blackballed. Well whatever the reasons for him being out of the league the whole year, I think you understate the reality that has on his likelihood of stepping in and being a contributor at age 32 or 33. I want my team to make the best football decision and not try and correct some past league injustice. Would it be really cool if those aligned? Yea, but at the end of the day, I'm not convinced at his ability to contribute beyond what we can get elsewhere.
-
The likelihood of finding a better football fit for the cost is very low. But if it's that important to you to not be the team to break the blackball, so be it. Are you out of your mind or suffering from poor reading comprehension?
-
Here's a pretty decent article that digs a little deeper than "the 4th best safety in football went all year unsigned and also had gay rumors" http://thebiglead.com/2013/09/20/reviewing-the-case-for-kerry-rhodes-being-blacklisted-is-it-an-age-thing/ Again, just taking the league and applying the averages of the rest of society, we know there are going to be quite a few bigots or people who otherwise just don't want to be bothered by it all, so I'm sure some teams wouldn't consider him, and some of those teams probably even needed a safety. But I think the case for league wide blackballing is tenuous. And for whatever reason he spent the whole year not playing at age 32, I don't see a huge upside bringing him in now.
-
If Rhodes was as good of a safety as Peyton was a QB, without question. But he isn't and even as the number four safety in one year by PFF, he doesn't have the consistent track record that suggests he might step back on the field an additional year on the wrong side of 30 and solve our safety problems. I'm not opposed to giving him a chance but I hardly see him as a guy to solve our S issues. I'd like a little more of a sure thing. I'd pay no more than the minimum to him, with little to no guaranteed money. IF he was blackballed, that really does suck and it saddens me, but I don't want my NFL team to be the one to break the blackball just so I can be proud they aren't a bunch of cowards, if he isn't the best football fit. Thats the real question. I am 100% certain at least some teams would not sign him due to the controversy over his alleged sexuality. I think theres several more teams who just had no safety need. And we pretty much know for a fact he priced himself out of his former team who offered $3m in March, before the April controversy, which he turned down. I am struggling to readily accept a league-wide collusion to keep him or Kluwe off the field.
-
I'm not sure I want a guy who was out of football for a year. Blackball be damned.
-
Any WR who project as good return men? (Or DBs for that matter).
-
Jumbotron is a brand, like Kleenex right? Maybe it's not accurate? Maybe it's just a small video board.
-
I don't want to say its easy to find a late round or even undrafted C because it's not, but a lot if teams seem to fill the spot that way and it seems the most important part of this is having the guy learn for 2-3 years. So even though Garza should be upgraded, if he's holding the spot for another year or two until we hand it over to Boggs (not sure what they think of him though on my limited knowledge I'm not high on him) or someone we get this year, it's not the worst thing in the world. It's not my preference but the money is probably better used elsewhere. The only guy I could really see as a smooth transition is La Puenta because he should have the basic calls down from his time with Kromer, but it doesn't make sense to spend a lot more on him that whatever Garza would cost and I think he will. I think you get a guy like that if you don't believe Boggs or any prospects in the draft or from practice squads are ready to be groomed, as La Puenta is young enough to stay as a fixture. I did read somewhere recently that this is a good draft for C (no 1st round types but plenty of mid to late round depth).
-
Just take Clowney. There won't be any trade up advantage unless St Louis were to trade out.
-
Agreed. Doesn't Tucker have experience running a mixed front in Cleveland? Could work in his favor. Ultimately I think even any 3 man front we decide to run won't be the traditional 3-4 with two man gaps, but we'll just look to disguise as much as possible and just bring in the best playmakers we can.
-
Nice ballpark with a massive burger I failed to finish.
-
Bottom line the Bears have almost always been in a solid cap situation so I don't expect that to change dramatically. Finally having a big money QB makes it a little tougher, but I'm sure they'll have room to make improvements.
-
Sammy Watkins just seems like the prospect to me that you don't pass up. He has that kind of crazy potential (but still pretty advanced skills wise) that exceeds current needs, and is a different receiver than the guys we have. He's a play-maker, and I just wouldn't pass that up. I do agree with raw though, he's just not going to be there. Most of the mocks that show him dropping are showing that mainly because they have the top 10 going QB crazy. I think ultimately, some of those teams will pass QB early, and probably because they get a guy like Watkins. There were still be plenty of QBs taken later in round 1 and in round 2, but I don't see the QB fury thats currently being projected by many mocks now. And fwiw, I don't feel the same about Evans, so if Watkins goes early and Evans is the WR dropping, I don't pause much to still go D (maybe just a little). Seems many places still have Evans over Watkins, though.
-
Well, he kicked it right at the guy, I thought it was pretty clear he was trying to get the ball deflected off of him. Someone needs to draft that kicker in the first round. The ability to aim your kicks at defenders so they deflect back to your guys would be a pretty valuable skill to have i would think. Teams will adapt to it eventually. Round 3 at the highest.
