Jump to content
North Side Baseball

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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

  1. WrigleyField 22
    You'd honestly get too many people who don't understand the process if it was televised, even further flaming the conspiracy nuts. Teams have reps at the drawing and it is validated by Ernst and Young. If thats not enough for people, nothing will. I'm actually shocked Kahn might actually believe it. He has a rep there to verify it. If he somehow believes the NBA is rigging the lottery balls... well...
  2. WrigleyField 22
    Not if the Minnesota pick was outside the top 10 in 2011, which was another uncertainty (however unlikely)
  3. WrigleyField 22
    More or less, they over committed their future picks even though it is unclear exactly when those commitments would be realized.
  4. WrigleyField 22
    Okay here's my clearest attempt to run through the Clips future picks: What we know (at time of trade): Are due Wolves #1 pick in 2011 (top ten protected, unprotected in 2012) Owe OKC first round pick in 2012 (top ten protected, top 10 13-15, unprotected 16) 1. Minnesota 2011 pick falls outside top 10. a. LA has two first round picks. b. LA keeps pick from Cle because of protection Then in 2012: 1. LA Owes top 1o protected pick to OKC. Still have not paid Cleveland. Now you don't have to give a first round pick. For instance, they could protect it top 3 in 2011 or give nothing, but then obviously Cleveland isn't doing the deal. Maybe you walk away there, but it is what it is. They could give a conditional top 10 pick to Cleveland if they don't have to give OKC the pick, but you'd rather lose the top pick in 2011 than 2012. So actually it doesn't even come down to the consecutive pick rule, just the rule stating you have to actually be certain you have a pick to trade, which doesn't seem like the case. But thats when you say, we'll just hold onto Baron for now...
  5. WrigleyField 22
    I think they can still hold a draft during a lockout, just like the NFL did. Also, it appears the thing about LA not being able to trade a pick beyond 2011 may be true. In the NBA you can't have two consecutive years without a first rounder into the future. And with pick protections, there is often uncertainty about when a team will or won't have a pick. The picks due to them: Clippers have a pick due to them from Wolves (top 10 protected in 2011, unprotected in 2012). But they also owe a pick to OKC (top 10 protected 2012-15, unprotected in 2016). You can run through all the scenarios and it leaves you with a situation where LA wasn't allowed to commit future picks else they'd break the consecutive first round pick rule, or owe two picks in a year but only have one to give. Depending on the rules they may have been able to offer a conditional top 10 pick in 2012 (if outside top 10 it goes to OKC) but given the choice of possibily losing a top pick in 2011 or 2010, I guess you'd take the chance on 2011, being a weaker draft.
  6. WrigleyField 22
    Is it a rule that requires Sterling to remain amongst the worst owners in sports?
  7. WrigleyField 22
    Isaiah Thomas must have consulted the Clippers on that trade.
  8. WrigleyField 22
    Today I'm a Cleveland fan. haha Clippers (at least you have Griffin still)
  9. WrigleyField 22
    To some extent I definitely agree with what you are saying Tim, but you're also going to be judged against your peers. So the top person in any profession may be in the 90 percentile of "clutch" (or rather not blowing in in high pressure situations), but when you've weeded out the field and you only have the top tenth percentile, the bottom "clutch" guys might realize the immense competition they are against and suddenly pysche themselves out. Its a moot point either way because I don't think there's anyway to measure clutchness so from a personel standpoint you're just going to look for the guy who hits the best regardless of situation. Edit - also with your example, its a bit more like the comparison between performing between the majors and minors. OTOH there could maybe be a speaker who speaks perfectly fine in front of thousands of people until he's they keynote speaker and he starts thinking about how much he wants to wrap it up well). Still a rough example, but closer.
  10. WrigleyField 22
    Regarding clutch, I also think its way more likely that unclutch players exist than clutch players. In other words, it would be extremely rare that a player could flip on a switch and suddenly hit better when it was needed most, but it isn't too hard to imagine that a player can tense up during a critical moment and suck. That doesn't mean everyone with poor clutch numbers is unclutch, some may just suffer from luck and a small sample size. Not that I would make personel decisions based on it or anything, but some people just don't perform well under pressure.
  11. WrigleyField 22
    Rip had his chance to go here but wouldnt accept a buyout to come here. If he would have accepted the buyout that Indiana offered him (after being traded to IND), he would already be a bull True, but that doesn't mean he doesn't want a buyout, just that he was unrealistic about a buyout number. Closer he gets to being expiring, easier that number is to negotiate. He is also candidate number one for cap relief cutting if that scenario happens with the new CBA. Last time it was nick-named the Allan Houston clause. This time, its getting nick-named the Rip Clause if it happens. You sure it wouldnt be the "Boozer clause"? :lol: JR pay someone $60M+ over four years to wear another jersey? Not even for a championship contender. If the Bulls ended up using this hypothetical clause at all it would be one of Brewer/Korver/Watson, and they'd only be doing it because they were required to get under the new cap and couldn't without cutting someone loose.
  12. WrigleyField 22
    Rip had his chance to go here but wouldnt accept a buyout to come here. If he would have accepted the buyout that Indiana offered him (after being traded to IND), he would already be a bull True, but that doesn't mean he doesn't want a buyout, just that he was unrealistic about a buyout number. Closer he gets to being expiring, easier that number is to negotiate. He is also candidate number one for cap relief cutting if that scenario happens with the new CBA. Last time it was nick-named the Allan Houston clause. This time, its getting nick-named the Rip Clause if it happens.
  13. WrigleyField 22
    Lebron may have a gambling problem too. You never know. We can only hope.
  14. WrigleyField 22
    Re: Age of Lebron v. Jordan; Who cares about age. Going by number of years, Jordan was on his way to his second title. In terms of longevity, NBA minutes will be a bigger factor than age. Of course Lebron will most likely not miss out on 1.5 years of his prime too.
  15. WrigleyField 22
    I'm gonna say one of those guys who is dying to play with Rose and the Bulls isn't a FA, but hoping for a buyout. Rip Hamilton (though I disagree we need him. Meh) Maybe Grant Hill, although he likes PHX a lot. Its not gonna be anyone under age 32 in the context of this conversation. Edit- also who knows what the potential CBA change will bring. If it includes lowered salaires all around and a one time amnesty clause/release, there could be big pickings in free agency (not necessarily quality-wise, but quantity wise).
  16. WrigleyField 22
    No option for switching from Bulls to Heat? Bad poll.
  17. WrigleyField 22
    Hendry is saying "20 years 1 billion dollars, thats my final offer"
  18. WrigleyField 22
    1. Heat 2. Mavs 3. Bulls 4. Thunder 5. Celtics 6. Lakers 7. Hawks 8. Grizzlies Its a hard list to make, because despite the fact the Hawks and Grizz could both reasonably win their series, I don't seem them having any chance of winning two more series on top of that. The Bulls and Thunder meanwhile both lost a game of HCA, but have stars that make them very dangerous if they do advance. Then the Lakers should logically be the last on the list, but if they can come back, get a clean slate and HCA for the Western Finals and immediately shoot up to #1 on my list. So it kind of depends how important you make the current series. I'll say right now, I'd choose the Bulls over the Heat if they both advance, but the fact that the odds currently favor the Heat to advance, make them have higher chances. Once the next round comes around, I'll almost throw out the past round completely, only using it as a guage of how hot the team is at the moment, but even that can change quickly.
  19. WrigleyField 22
    I am pretty shocked he got that much. I figured he was the favorite, but would do so with ~70% of the first place votes, not the 90%+ he received.
  20. WrigleyField 22
    Isn't he listed at 6'2", 250 ish? That's pretty good size, even on the interior. He can run like an outside LB though. He has produced in college. And he was one of the top recruited HS players a couple years ago. I think Burflict's a better LB, but that's the only one in potentially the deepest ILB class I've ever seen. 6'2" is on the short side for an NFL linebacker, and that's a college listing. College listings are notoriously generous. There is no way that is true. That's got to be at least average. LB is a position where height does not help. There are all sorts of 6'0" to 6'2" LB. I wouldn't say height doesn't help, its just not as important as some other positions. The height thing can hurt if you can keep your center of gravity low to take on blockers, but if you are tall and can keep your proper Center of Gravity, you're height is a huge gift at LB. But yea, I would not be worried about a guy in the 5'10" - 6'1" range just because of that.
  21. WrigleyField 22
    Huh? Starters come from the 4th round and beyond every single year. Not likely one who would start this year though. We already have plenty of developmental guys at WR, another one isn't necessary. We need someone who is going to step in as a #1 right away. Free agency is our best bet. Guard we also have some developmental options. A Free Agent to step in there would be nice as well, then leaving the other guard spot long term to be fought for with who we have. I think you can make a strong argument against the QB pick, but LB depth became a big need for us in the past year or so. I'm glad they picked one. Part of the problem is they just didn't have many picks to add depth. I would have loved a CB, OL, WR, and DL but with our FA binge we didn't have compensatory picks, and Jerry actually traded up this year and lost picks, when we're accustomed to him trading down and gaining picks. Also, I'm counting Harvey Unga as a part of this draft class since we lost our 7th to get him.
  22. WrigleyField 22
    Heh, Patriots and Eagles make useless trade to keep silly streak alive. Nice.
  23. WrigleyField 22
    When you have a clear cut #1 at QB, why not. Its not like you need to bring in competition for the spot. The only problem I have is that we should be developing LeFevour right now, except we had to endure Todd Freaking Collins.
  24. WrigleyField 22
    Will Martz bitch for a veteran? I like taking a development QB, but its useless if you lose him like LeFevour last year.
  25. WrigleyField 22
    Well its not quite 10 cent beer, but its still going to encourage more consumption of beer to what can already be an obnoxious part of the stadium (even though I do enjoy sitting there)
×
×
  • Create New...