Jump to content
The trade deadline is one day away, and 76 of our top 80 are still on the board. Click here to stay up-to-date! ×
North Side Baseball

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,035

  • 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
    If they brought him back to try and woo Rodgers back it's dumb. If they're gonna try and develop a QB and some WRs, I think McCarthy probably can do that and then dump him later to upgrade.
  2. WrigleyField 22
    Interesting. I beleive Sirianni has indicated this will be a coordinator job that has full coordinator responsibilities, but as an O coach himself there's always some question as to if the role is a bona fide coordinator role and thus whether it is blockable or not. Edit - though Ben has all but said he's welcoming his guys getting interviews so I don't think he'd necessarily block anyways.
  3. WrigleyField 22
    Probably a bit. Again for 0.74-1.2% of cap, I'll trust Ben
  4. WrigleyField 22
    Keenum was 0.8% of the cap last year. And any serious team should be outspending the cap, so call it like 0.74% of their target cash outlay. Do you need to bring him back? No. But one of the reasons teams have prioritized these vet QB "player-coaches" is it allows them to get around offseason coaching restrictions. If Ben think that's worth a fraction of a percent of the total player cash outlay I trust it. Even if you kept him through camp and waste another 900k bonus on him for just offseason.
  5. WrigleyField 22
    Brisker and Wright leaving gives a pretty good chance of recouping a 4th comp pick in 2027 I'd think. If they are thinking trade route as their big defense addition, may get back into the comp pick game. Now I think the comp pick thing often gets overrated by fans, but guessing how Poles will attack FA (not agressive) it'd be nice to see a guy like Wright pay off that way. You want to see these type of one year success stories pay off like that. They were originally projected a 7th round comp pick in 26, but per the latest projection from Over The Cap, the Tryon-Shoyinka waiver claim apparently offset that which seems like a very niche and bizarre technicality of the CFA rule. But a scenario can't ever remember actually impacting a team. So will be interesting if that gets confirmed as the case.
  6. WrigleyField 22
    Owens also has been front and center for like every good better best video. He's Ben's number one cheerleader. He's a minimum guy anyways, bring him back 🤣
  7. WrigleyField 22
    All logical reasoning would be let Byard walk and resign Brisker. But damn if I don't feel the opposite.
  8. WrigleyField 22
    The only way you can is that you're prepared to go full Howie Roseman. Regularly and consistently using max voids, restructures, and option bonuses. He's been a big softie at times because cap leverage has allowed him to do that. But it's a broad commitment, not a one year thing. And even then you'll run up to your limits eventually.
  9. WrigleyField 22
    Needs 1. Safety. It's not the most important position compared to others, but it literally has no returning guys under contract 2. DT. This is a bigger need than edge IMO. Hopefully the draft lines up to address it early as I think there are some better EDGE FA or trade options 3. LT. Trapillo injury bumped this up, but it's still close with next two 4. EDGE. It's odd for it to be this low, but I think if you really address the above needs it could be addressed with good depth. That said, the most realistic move might be a big trade here and flow the D improvements downstream of pass rush. But Sweat/Booker are a better starting point than rest of D. 5. LB. Edwards is probably done. Of course he has 10M guaranteed due to the head scratching extension, but for a guy already slowing down, he's either totally or functionally done. They have options on Edmunds. Hell be overpaid, but they could keep him ans pair him with a resigned Jackson on the cheap and/or some young guys. If they do cut Edmunds this goes above EDGE in need. The cap situation is fine as long as Poles understands it. Hopefully Ben explains it to him, I don't know.
  10. WrigleyField 22
    I'd be shocked. I don't even know who for. I'm not a big college football follower and unlike most years I have not been consuming the early draft content.
  11. WrigleyField 22
    There's been lot of buzz about moving DJ Moore either directly for D or recouping picks from a big DL trade. And even throwing out any of the narrative from that last route Sunday, it kind of makes a lot of sense. All the designed DJ stuff Burden can do. You are dropping off a bit on the rest, but there's only one ball and all of Loveland, Burden, and Odunze have opportunity to step up and grow. Loveland will probably be the number 1 target in the O, with or without DJ. You obviously have to backfill some depth (OZ is a FA) and how agressive you go depends on how you feel about Walker. But man that's a young O skills group with massive potential. Swift is another interesting decision. In September he looked like an easy cut. Now not so much. Defense is gonna look way different.
  12. WrigleyField 22
    Doubtful. Right after the Trapillo I just I was saying they should just go top of the market swing tackle money and let that OT and Benedet compete. Give another year to focus on D, let Trapillo rehab and reevaluate into 2027. After seeing them go Thuney at LT, who knows what Ben will cook up. A competition. Thuney playing outside. Wright to LT, who knows. I definitely don't want to see them do any big trade for a LT (usually takes a 1st), but several years ago Trent Williams went for like a 3rd or 4th. If you could recreate that success, that would be fantastic.
  13. WrigleyField 22
    Yea passer rating treats each of its buckets basically as equal inputs, which just isn't great. And ignoring sacks, as stated.
  14. WrigleyField 22
    ANY/A also takes into account sacks, which is probably it's main advantage over passer rating. Passer rating still also not a bad aggregate team stat, but ANY/A slightly more predictive.
  15. WrigleyField 22
    Hmmm. Cleveland ticket prices lasted pretty long before plummeting. Of course this is a divisional playoff game. I don't think there is gonna be any significant drop.
  16. WrigleyField 22
    What's funny is that there's nothing said about the tax certainty if the Bears were to buy it, a supposeded key part of AH. I get that Illinois has high property tax, but something to note and gets lost in the modern stadium convos. Publically held / minucipal stadiums have always been a key tax perk. More critical to Indiana there, and what's not mentioned, is ancillary revenue. As much as the soldier field reno was a massive failure, the city does at least own an asset that generates revenue outside of the Bears. When Bears proposed the lakefront stadium idea they were looking to claw that back and collect all the ancillary revenue. A similar story has unfolded in KC where Chiefs will technically be tenant but get ALL revenue from all events (among other perks). I'm guessing Indiana will offer up something similar. Which potentially puts them in the position as basically a bank IF the Bears did eventually buy back the property. However if the Bears don't have to take the option to buy it, why would they ever if they get all the ownership benefits without actually having to own?
  17. WrigleyField 22
    I don't think he'll be Jordan. If he ends up Hakeem Olajuwan we'll be building statues for him though.
  18. WrigleyField 22
    He doesn't know ball. Caleb can probably make case for most talented throwing to left, and yes I'm including Tua in that btw.
  19. WrigleyField 22
    Just gonna do a watch party at a brewery Stay warm!
  20. WrigleyField 22
    Yea I mean the whole shooting 3 things is valid analogy, but he is also missing some layups still. I absolutely believe Johnson still exects him to be a 70% type passer and still hit that big play percentage. But it's also totally doable. And of guys with similar depth of target the good ones still range from like 63% (Lamar) to 71% (Maye). Johnson gave a 70% target at some point and I'm not inclined to think he was lying or changed his mind. He should pretty easily become at least Lamar, but also, go be Drake Maye, eh?
  21. WrigleyField 22
    Also, Chicago already has top 10 grossing concert venues for both stadiums and arenas, that mostly is only being beat out by much larger metros or one mega tourism one (and one exception - Boston) https://www.billboard.com/top-stadiums/ https://www.billboard.com/top-venues-15001-capacity/ Also the small venues bring in way more revenue because there's so few acts selling 50k seat shows. There just isn't that much econ activity for 60k seat stadiums and SF already does pretty dang good with those and generating economic activity off it. It's just Super Bowls and Final Fours they can't host (and they'd probably get exactly 1 SB. Final Fours would be pretty rare too.) The payoff potential sucks.
  22. WrigleyField 22
    Look there is absolutely a potential boom for AH schools and other local tax jurisdictions with a finished AH park because they're starting at near zero now and would be taking it from another city. Unfortunately for ole Georgey boy that econ activity aint buying a stadium and development. And at both the county and state level they're negotiating against themselves on the move.
  23. WrigleyField 22
    I mean the main taxing authorities are local jurisdictions and their property tax. They all seem pretty willing to negotiate mutually beneficial tax payments but I think team wants state to override the local ability a bit to ensure low tax bills in perpetuity. When it comes to Infrastructure, the state absolutely needs to have a suspicious eye on what the number is. The initial infrastructure ask was pretty big which means one of two things (probably both) 1. The team is sneaking in actual site development as public infrastructure 2. The Bears chose a ****** site that needs tons of infrastructure to become viable. Needless to say the state shouldn't be jumping at making bad business investments investable if there isn't a clear payoff in terms of economic activity. The oft-empty stadium has shown time and time again there is no payoff. At best it's mostly displacing SF economic activity. If it's a broader entertainment district it's also just pilfering off any other nearby entertainment venues like Rosemont or whatever. Maybe there's like 2 extra concerts and events the state/area is missing out on annually that are served by a venue of that size.
  24. WrigleyField 22
    I don't think it carried any sort of protected landmark status. It was just a designation. They could have torn that down full stop.
  25. WrigleyField 22
    Even a well designed stadium at the same site would gave issues. I think McDome was the actual missed opportunity.
×
×
  • Create New...