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 was reading a Gordon Hayward thread at RealGM and supposedly he likes to go to walk to the Olive Garden near MSG when he's in NY so apparently this is a "thing".
-
And the other draft site: first-pick.com Your score is: 3895 (Drafting Ability: B+, Player Quality A, Future Draft Picks: N/A) Your Picks: Round 1 Pick 14: Ra'Shede Hageman, DT, Minnesota (B-) Round 3 Pick 4 (CLE): Jackson Jeffcoat, DE, Texas (B+) Round 3 Pick 14: Dion Bailey, FS, Dion Bailey, FS, Southern California (A-) Round 3 Pick 15 (CLE): E.J. Gaines, CB, Missouri (A) Round 4 Pick 4 (CLE): Donte Moncrief, WR, Ole Miss (A) Round 4 Pick 14: Jeremiah Attaochu, OLB, Georgia Tech (A-) Round 5 Pick 14: Andre Williams, RB, Boston College (A) Round 6 Pick 7: Ryan Carrethers, DT, Arkansas State (A) Round 6 Pick 14: Tyler Larsen, C, Utah State (A) Tried to not take the obviously awesome trade down offers but I had to in Round 2 because I just hated the options at the time. I'd be okay with that draft, though.
-
My draft: Rd1 Ha'Sean Clinton-Dix - S - Alabama -I honestly don't love 1st round safeties, but seems like it'd be a safe pick. Honestly though, I see him going one pick before us Rd2 Timmy Jernigan - DT - Florida State -One thing that will definitely help our safeties is continuing to upgrade the front 7 Rd3 Donte Montcrief - WR - Ole Miss -Obviously WR isn't a need but this guy is in the Emery mold for WRs and could be a real good WR Rd4 Anthony Johnson - DT - LSU -Double up on DLine in the draft for sure. This is where the value seems like it starts to get wacky Rd5 De'Anthony Thomas - RB/WR - Oregon -Not an every down player, but in the return game and as a change of pace guy, is an intriguing prospect. I think his return abilities make him go by day two though. Rd6 Aaron Lynch - DE - USF -Once highly ranked, he still is an intriguing prospect and could be a piece to the pass rush puzzle Rd6 Victor Hampton - CB - South Carolina -Honestly don't really know much, but he was the highly rated on their big board and can't draft enough DBs. Anyone recall that site we all used last year? You could do all those ridiculous trade downs and just acquire like 20 picks?
-
The Sac pick is as follows: 2014: Top 12 protected 2015: Top 10 2016: Top 10 2017: Top 10, if not conveyed, a 2017 second rounder (apparently 55-60 protected, but this doesn't make much sense to me, so we'll just say it would be a second rounder in the 31-40 range) Assuming the 2017 pick is top 10 protected, and it converts to a second round, how could SAC possibly be picking 55-60 in the second? What I've since learned is that their second rounder in that year was traded with 31-55 protection, so they can't technically trade the 56-60 pick, making the protection on that entirely a formality. No, they can pick there and not convey their 1st, though if that happens they'd lose both picks.
-
NFL coaching carousel/NFL Offseason thread
WrigleyField 22 replied to dew1679666265's topic in Other Sports
He's probably at least an average OL coach as long as you don't let him get too involved with personnel decisions. As much as he wasn't given a ton to work with in Chicago he really put his rep on the line for Webb and that obviously didn't work out. In fact as a 7th rounder he ended up surpassing expectations. But I'm struggling to figure out how much blame he gets for lack of developing young guys like Carimi or if Webb even could have done better with better development and more time to learn on the sidelines. Now I'm just rambling, but I'm really glad I'll never have to experience his OC work again. -
Both of who clearly got in based on awesome names that Jack Morris lacks.
-
I think there is only a certain portion of his salary, which is the 54 guarantee that can be continually rolled into a pro-rated signing bonus like that. Of course that wouldn't stop future re-negotiations in future years.
-
LOL if Lance Stephenson was our big answer
-
Deja Vu. Didn't realise you posted at RealGm too.
-
The Sac pick is as follows: 2014: Top 12 protected 2015: Top 10 2016: Top 10 2017: Top 10, if not conveyed, a 2017 second rounder (apparently 55-60 protected, but this doesn't make much sense to me, so we'll just say it would be a second rounder in the 31-40 range) Let me make sure I have this right, cause it seems like it shouldn't be the way I'm understanding it. If the Kings finish in the top 10 in the lottery every year up until 2017, the Bulls ONLY get a 2nd round pick? Or do they get the 2018 pick unrestricted along with the 2017 2nd round pick? Just the 2017 second. This was part of the Caspi/Hickson trade, so obviously Sacramento was hedging their bets so the didn't eventually give up a top ten pick for Hickson, which Cleveland obviously found as reasonable. Slightly OT, but I hate those drawn out pick protections for teams. Do you know for Sacramento, they've been unable to trade their pick and will remain so for the entire time that protection lasts? For JJ Hickson! What if an opportunity had come up to trade firsts for a star player. Granted you have teams like the Knicks on the other side who just give them away unprotected, but trading firsts is a tricky thing to do in this business until you get much closer to the draft in question.
-
The Sac pick is as follows: 2014: Top 12 protected 2015: Top 10 2016: Top 10 2017: Top 10, if not conveyed, a 2017 second rounder (apparently 55-60 protected, but this doesn't make much sense to me, so we'll just say it would be a second rounder in the 31-40 range)
-
For the right price I think they would be and probably everyone outside of Butler should be made available. Honestly thats laughable to include Butler as some untouchable. He has one cheap year left and then will likely be an overpaid wing player. I'd actually put him higher on the list of tradeable assets as he's probably one of the better bets to net us a draft pick who could give us 4 years of below market production. I do like Butler, but he's fair game with everyone not named Rose.
-
This is how I feel too. Wish the return was more meaningful. I think its extremely meaningful. There was almost no way for the Bulls to get under the luxury tax this year without making this move. Now this sort of resets the luxury tax clock a bit going forward. The Bulls will be able to go over the luxury tax in one of the next 2 seasons and not have to pay a steep penalty the rest of the way. My guess is that they stay under the threshold next year, bring Mirotic and anywhere from 1-3 draft picks and then build for a run in 2 years. If we don't get out of the luxury tax this year, we would have to stay under it the next 2 seasons because there is no way JR is paying the repeater penalty. Makes sense to go under in a year without Rose and the team going nowhere. I definitely agree with you, and I always try and view the decisions as though JR is my boss. That being said, the average fun just doesn't get all that and expects the team to just pay whatever. So I preface it with the not-meaningful. Definitely does make sense to avoid the tax now though.
-
FWIW, I ran a few figures and the Bulls tax would have been a about 12.1M and they save whatever the pro-rated portion of Deng's 14.275M salary for the remainder of the year, which puts them in that $20M range that's been quoted. They'll likely see a little bit more for being a non-tax team, roughly 3.2M. And they'll get about 2.5M from revenue sharing from the lux tax, but they would have received that either way, although it would have been almost $3M because they would have been getting their 1/30 portion of the tax bill back. For anyone confused, the league can split the tax in 50% from league purposes and up to 50% to non-tax teams. Based on precedence, its likely they max out the non-tax payment of 50% and the entire 50% for league purposes go into the revenue sharing. Neither is guaranteed though. The only guarantee is the 50% for leauge purposes, which technically can be used for a wide range of things.
-
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.
