Jump to content
Brown v. Gausman at Wrigley! Come join our game thread! ×
North Side Baseball

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,007

  • 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 Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by WrigleyField 22

  1. WrigleyField 22
    So a year?
  2. WrigleyField 22
    Wait, I messed it up, 6 months in age difference, not 18 lol Decision tree for each: 2025 1st Round Pick (CAR) 2024 2nd Round Pick (CHI) or or 26.5 year WR 27.0 year DE 4 Y / $52M 4 Y / $96M
  3. WrigleyField 22
    He had a big(ish) contract. That's still paying a guy twice yea?
  4. WrigleyField 22
    18 months in age, and you're still doing the "paying them twice" on an existing deal as much as you are on a hypothetical new deal. Obviously not exactly the same, but obviously these decisions exist on a spectrum, and they're two shades of same color and not black/white here like you're treating it.
  5. WrigleyField 22
    Why don't you like good players though?
  6. WrigleyField 22
    You'll miss out on lots of talent upgrade opportunities then. Unfortunately I don't know that Sweat is high second + contract worthy, although he is very good. But to get elite "FA talent", it's normally getting done with a pick and extension and not true FA.
  7. WrigleyField 22
    Oh an extension is almost certainly gonna follow. So I don't think it's a playoff or bust move. Sweat is a high quality edge and you often do need to trade capital to not let a guy hit FA. But that's still a steep price. Like, at least should be balanced with a pick swap if you're giving up a possible 33-38 range pick.
  8. WrigleyField 22
    Pick 33 tracking time. 😑 Poles panic buying at the trade deadline for non playoff teams two straight years because FA spending scares him is certainly a choice.
  9. WrigleyField 22
  10. WrigleyField 22
    Not enough emphasis on dumb imo
  11. WrigleyField 22
    Probably Sweat
  12. WrigleyField 22
    Yea, they did reinstate that rule after initially being waived during covid years and still kept last year. But I'm not sure that's a justification really either.
  13. WrigleyField 22
    I went to that Clausen start! (in my Cutler jersey)
  14. WrigleyField 22
    I'm pretty sure it's specifically barred by CBA. Was it the NBA or NFL players union that talked about wanting to get pathways to ownership in next CBA? I think it was NBA. But NFL union should fight for that too, absolutely. So yea isn't happening.
  15. WrigleyField 22
    At the end of the day I feel like generational gets used every time it's a consensus #1 guy. So a guy like Lawrence or Burrow werent viewed quite like Luck, but they were no brainer #1 picks so generational just got thrown around. The hype for Williams seems as crazy as since Luck though. Burrow obviously only came onto scene late, but people were already talking about Lawrence going #1 basically from his freshman year in and there was lots of talk of tanking for him. But people are throwing around the Mahomes type expectations for Williams, which seems like a totally unrealistic expectation.
  16. WrigleyField 22
    This is for @Hairyducked Idiot
  17. WrigleyField 22
    Speaking of rigged hockey events, they totally rigged this slot machine pull
  18. WrigleyField 22
    Bears giving 3 and Panthers deciding Moore was the one I remember from the Athletic article after the trade. But I guess other rumors have said Bears insisted on Moore. The other rumor was the negotiation over which 2nd rounder the Bears got back in 2023 between 61 and 38(?) and Carolina ownership throwing in the 2025 2nd to keep 38 instead of 61, which is just incredible value for Bears IMO.
  19. WrigleyField 22
    To be fair,it's possible it's worth less than zero. I can guess how it probably went in this one. One random article talks about the recent success of the O and wonders "how did it take Getsy and Fields 3 weeks to start targeting their best weapon?" SM: Fields has to ask Getsy to target DJ Moore more.
  20. WrigleyField 22
    So worth zero.
  21. WrigleyField 22
    I mean I think I saw NGS had that as a 25% completion probability throw. Even with Moore it's basically a toss up throw. He has thrown endzone balls like that plenty. Having Moore is a big difference (though Mooney has occassionally been capable of grabbing those, not to the standard of Moore). You do T see that type of throw much outside the redzone. But Fields has done fine with those from my recollection.
  22. WrigleyField 22
    I mean, I don't think this play is the best example to the point you're trying to make. This is a redzone placement throw to his stud wideout. It's absolutely the type of throw that just having a great WR makes easier. Fields biggest issue hasn't been placing those type of balls. It's the type of throw that really only gets called in the endzone.
  23. WrigleyField 22
    I mean the think with Trace also, is I think, he's legitimately a "power agent" in the coach and exec space. I haven't seen a list, but probably tripping over him as representation when interviewing up and coming candidates. Anyways, even the Fox rumors have always been really poorly supported IMO. I went back and looked a few times and Greg Gabriel is one of the biggest insiders I've seen who's adamant on it, but I've also seen him say Fox was hired first when in actuality he was still Denvers coach when Pace got hired. Then he does his normal appeal to authority nonsense. Fair to wonder if he is indeed just a confused old man. DBB also recently called Pace-Fox an arranged marriage. While I'm inclined to believe a lot of what he says cuz he's broken verifiable facts before, its also assumed he sat really close to Phillips or McCaskey family and has at times pushed out a pretty Pace apologetic view. So it has big BS vibes to me given the hiring timeline and that these rumors first popped up as soon as Pace's seat was hot. Anyways, will be my hottest take to end days to say that ownership probably isn't forcing these guys together, but also if they are I really don't care either.
  24. WrigleyField 22
    On the Emery front. A GM being forced on a successful head coach is not at all uncommon. Off top of my head, GB just had that with the finally McCarthy year as an example. No one's panties should be in a bunch about that "forced pairing" and I doubt Emery's was. He was allowed to make the change a year after going 10-6. Not exactly like ownership was pulling strings there. So for all we know most GMs might prefer it that way be cause they have an easy out year after getting the organizational side established in year 1 while not really having to be concerned with staff stability. That's assuming the coach is a known/solid commodity.
  25. WrigleyField 22
    My assumption is that at most, Flus was a common bond between Bears and Poles that made the bond strong. Not being forced on it. We know it wasn't a purely linear process and they never claimed it was going to be. Teams often do just fine (Detroit had a similar process arguably with a heaver President hand, and look to have done pretty well with their pairing). But it makes sense they were basically cross checking lists during the process. And Poles said as much. But to create the conspiracy we have to believe Poles agreed not only to a forced pairing but to REALLY carry ownerships water on this. I believe a guy might accept to "forced terms" on a head coach, but Poles reported spurned Minnys follow up overtures to focus on Chicago. Bears have never had a problem getting highly valued GM-HC commodities from the "rising ranks". If ownership was as meddling as people want to believe AND was constantly requiring to engage said coaches and GMs in their media cover ups, I feel like you'd probably see guys turning down interviews.
×
×
  • Create New...