Jump to content
North Side Baseball

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,036

  • 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
    Eh, there's still the Tom Telescos of the world who unequivocally hit on QBs and still having everyone very much care about their other moves.
  2. WrigleyField 22
    So Bedard is better than Gretzky confirmed
  3. WrigleyField 22
    Im pretty doubtful you can get good enough to be close without also being inefficient first. Which perhaps begs the question of how me meausure efficiency in the first place. But no, they were doing things like spending huge on Quinn after one offseason and the supposed terrible cap situation Pace left behind lasted like 4 months (generously, it actually didn't exist). They weren't ever hamstung by having the deal, even if it didn't hit desired efficiency/results measures.
  4. WrigleyField 22
    For funsies: The net cost of Mack (because the claim was made that it saddled them, I'm also counting picks they got back at the end of the deal) Pick #24 equivalent (yes, just the one pick, everything else netted in value, any time value adjustments aside) 90M/4 years, 22.7M or about 12% of the average cap Cost of Sweat: pick number (insert your best guess) and 98/4, 24.5M if he plays the full deal, or an anticipated 10% of the value of the average cap.
  5. WrigleyField 22
    Man, I'm not sure you can make more a vibes statement than that. Once we see where that pick 2 lands, the total value of both those moves (draft capital + extension) are not gonna be magnitudes of difference. Plus Mack deal never really hamstrung them.
  6. WrigleyField 22
    Again the math's proving to be difficult.
  7. WrigleyField 22
    Flus can't add up percentages to 100%, maths is hard for him.
  8. WrigleyField 22
    This game has lived up to the sicko expectations
  9. WrigleyField 22
    Just has to be the least bad option (as bridge QBs are)
  10. WrigleyField 22
    Eh, let's not debase it down to extremes. There's plenty of plausible scenarios where he is your QB for 2024. You're basically asking if he can come out of this year comparable to end of 2021 Daniel Jones.
  11. WrigleyField 22
    I don't think I can be talked out of a top two pick at QB at this point. More interesting questions would be: 1. Could Fields play well enough to be a bridge to those QBs for a year (maybe like a Rivers/Brees scenario?) Or 2. If they land outside of the top 2, how agressive should they be in getting into the top two and/or accepting the 3rd/4th QB off board, or exploring other options altogether (like say a Kyler Murray if Cardinals finish top 2?). If picking 3rd or 4th QB insert Fields as bridge or punting long term decision scenario.
  12. WrigleyField 22
    I don't know if I can get behind the idea that certain decisions are defensible if that brain making the decision is attached to an arm incapable of making it.
  13. WrigleyField 22
    Cardinals really come down to Kyler Murray. Hopefully he balls out.
  14. WrigleyField 22
    Holy horsefeathers
  15. WrigleyField 22
    Has there been reports about whether Stroud was their QB anyways? Maybe Houston still takes Stroud and Bears take a slightly worse trade down offer for Young on draft day, OR they end up with the other Houston trade (I guess technically that was the Stroud trade)
  16. WrigleyField 22
    It might be begging the question, but if Bears lose to Carolina, do they have a few likely wins left on the schedule? 🤣
  17. WrigleyField 22
    Even a Carolina W isn't looking as bad for SoS tie breaking as it did earlier. And later in the year it is, the more stable SoS should start to be. 10 teams have hit the 5 L mark. This is the SoS ranking from worst (highest pick) to best, with their current game behind rank Green Bay +2.5 Chicago +1.0 Tampa +2.5 Carolina +0.5 Denver +2.5 Los Angeles (Rams) +2.0 New York (Giants) +1.0 Arizona +0 Tennessee +2.0 New England +1.0 So their worst tie break scenarios for either pick have already picked up a couple games. When it comes to a team like NYG, NE, or ARI, they basically have that extra half game edge with the likely tie breaker. Anyways I said I wouldnt tank track again, so I officially hate myself.
  18. WrigleyField 22
    Eh, I don't know if a Bears L gets them much further, if at all, away from #1 pick than a W: Carolina loss: still just a half game "back" from Arizona Bears loss: one game back from Arizona The difference between each scenario is the bye week imbalance, and the fact Bears play Arizona, whereas Carolina doesn't. Either way, both teams are one L back from Arizona right now, but both positioned to win the tie breaker. So in any case you're hoping for Arizona to outplay one of them by a game the rest of the way.
  19. WrigleyField 22
    If you're gonna jump into tank rooting the rest of the way, might as well tack on this. Almost certain to control their #1 pick destiny if they lose out (since I don't think either Carolina or Arizona can realistically catch them in SoS)
  20. WrigleyField 22
    Sicko game alert
  21. WrigleyField 22
    Plays his way to Green Bays slot / becomes next hall of fame / my nightmare
  22. WrigleyField 22
    That doesnt look right. Also Watt's are all fully guarantees, whereas looks like Sweat's aren't. If I have my math's right he has 4th highest % of full guarantee and 3rd highest % total guarantees. Effective value wise should slot in 5th richest amongst current top 10.
  23. WrigleyField 22
    So the guarantees are a lot but upon closer inspection, I don't hate the structure against Gary's. It should be noted Packers tend to operate as a "signing bonus are the only guarantees " standpoint, with really only Bengals as the other team in that camp. His contract reflects thst, but that can be good or bad. I tend to think it's limiting over time. The cashflows are very similar from years 2-4. Really the biggest difference is Sweat's 2025 salary vests in 2024 whereas Gary's doesnt until 2025.
  24. WrigleyField 22
    Yea, that AAV is fine, but those are big guarantees. I'll have to compare to other contracts, but that might be near tops of guarantee % for Edges. I'm not gonna dog him too much on the deal though. With the pick it's all together agressive, but on the contract front the Bears likely have a bad team premium they will pay until they are a good team
  25. WrigleyField 22
    At this point, the only real standard of Poles is "isn't Pace" Yeesh
×
×
  • Create New...