Bertz

Hamels is pretty comfortably worth 1/20. IMO, but I don't expect him back. The team's payroll situation is too tight currently, and picking it up and trying to flip him could be too problematic for what would likely only be a moderate reward. I expect one of Harper/Machado, and then a trade of Schwarber or Happ to net some pitching and/or payroll flexibility. If they swing and miss on the two big guys, I see a belt tightening kind of winter, where they try and improve the team's payroll situation going forward while only adding low cost/short commitment types to the big league club.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds Bears now clear favorites to win the division, and nearly 80% to make the playoffs. DAVE, which at this point is I believe a 50/50 blend of how they were projected coming into the year and how they've played so far, has them as the third best team in the NFC (way behind the Rams, slightly behind the Saints, and slightly ahead of the Packers).

There's also his 17 rushes for 117 yards, which would pace to 68/468. Mitch still looked a bit shakey at the start of the game, but basically was prime Aaron Rodgers after that first TD. I'm hoping that pass got the monkey off his back, restored his confidence and he's good to go from here on. Also, the line was amazing today, I hope they get their due credit.

There's lots money to be made from always betting against rmack being right.

I'd guess Escobar and one of the higher end relievers. And probably try to do something creative to help our longer term cap situation. Similar to the Dodgers/Braves trade last winter. One interesting possibility is Grandal. I love Willson, and don't totally believe this, but there's an argument to be made that our pitching staff's issues (aside from Chatwood obviously) fall in his lap. Signing Grandal and using Willson in trade to plug another hole might be shrewd. It's obviously not as extreme but a lot of the things that make us say "horsefeathers pitchers" apply to catchers as well, so I'm not super nervous about getting a little older at the position.

It's definitely not the second half thing. People were complaining just as much in April/May/June. Remember "vaunted run differential?" I think it's about 60% people being spoiled, 30% the Brewers not letting up, and 10% the offense/pitching rarely being good at the same time.

Bears are ever so slight favorites to win the division already. https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds Odds probably go up another smidge with Tampa's loss last night. I'm torn on Mitch. On the one hand I was very high on him coming into the year, and I'm reticent to change my mind on anyone after three games. On the other hand he's been pretty bad all around. Given his age I'd be okay with a few inaccurate passes (like the underthrown INT in the SEA game) coupled with good decision making, or a few poor decisions (like the should have been pick 12 in the Seahawks game) paired with good accuracy, but fairing poor in both respects is scary. That being said, unless they're a superstar or a total bust I don't think you really know what you've got in a QB until threeish years in. There is also the complication of working in a new system/playbook. His performance probably won't move the needle much for me good or bad for at least another month or so.

Weird that Dave Kaplan is sensitive to criticism of a man who was terrible at his job, actively avoided learning how the game works to make himself better, and whose only case for sticking around seemed to be corporate politics and inertia.

Nobody is good, everyone is just varying degrees of bad I think the Rams are actually good, but yeah basically this.

Yeah the money is hard to make work. They basically have to trade Chatwood (or Heyward?). I think there's a better chance than we all think of them exercising the option and then trading him. The only reason they didn't do it with Hammel a few years ago was some gentleman's agreement when the contract was initially signed (and the surplus value was likely nominal).

Yeah, I suppose it's some level of progress that there's the level of outrage about these things now that there is. Did we know Bradley was a DV offender when he played? It was my understanding that stuff came out after he was done. Of course, we already knew he was an horsefeathers. This is my memory too. I don't think anything more specific than he was a jerk and a hot head came out until after his Cubs tenure. Though considering how the media treated him from day 1 (Paul Sullivan talked a ton of horsefeathers during the very first televised ST game that year), they probably had a pretty decent idea. This sucks about Russell. This was always what was most likely, but all we really knew for sure was that he was a cheater. Now that Melissa has come out and said these things, there's no ambiguity. Send him home today. Non tender him in November. Don't drag this whole saga put in the hopes of netting some B- prospect.

Yeah the Braves have no one except Freeman and Inciarte signed past next year. So while they don't have as much money as the bigger market teams, they're much better positioned to do something crazy like 5/250. The Phillies are in a similar boat, they only have Santana and Arrieta on the books long term and they've shown they can run a $200 million payroll when they're competitive. The Cubs should be the favorites to sign Bryce, but the Braves, Phillies, Yankees, and maybe Dodgers all have a lot of money to burn this winter. Thankfully, the latter three are all likely more focused on Machado, but except for the Yankeea I don't think we can count any of them out on Bryce. Houston's kind of an interesting dark horse. They likely need to focus their money on retaining/replacing Keuchel and Morton (and prepping for Verlander and Cole to hit FA the year after) but they could potentially pivot to just building a "horsefeathers you" offense and worrying about the pitching later.

If the Cubs win tonight I wouldn't mind Joe sending out one of those Dusty style forfeit lineups tomorrow. Give all the important guys two days off with the offday.

I'm assuming they would have gotten something done with Amos if not for the Mack move, but now they'll have to do it next offseason. It should be fine, it looks like the Bears have ~20 million to play with (Spotrac says 30.1, but that's not updated for Goldman yet), and that's before any cuts to guys like Dion Sims.

This is my guess too. They'll try like hell to get two games in this weekend, and if they can manage that they'll let the third one go unless it ends up being needed. I'm actually not even sure they can play a game this Thursday. I think in the CBA there's a max number of days teams can go without an off day and it's right around 25. Unless a rainout counts as an off day (which would be dumb since they still have to come to the park and everything) that'd rule out this Thursday.

I feel pretty good about this game, even though objectively it's probably the toughest one on the schedule. The first 3-4 weeks of the year are generally the most prone to weird stuff happening, especially the last several years since the amount of practice time teams have during training camp has been limited. A game that in November would be a 70/30 affair is probably closer to 60/40 in September. Beyond that, we have the Nagy factor. We know his offense is going to have a lot of unique and interesting looks. I could see the offense being pretty monstrous early this year, even if we ultimately look back on it as a flash in the pan. On the flip side, Smith, Floyd, and Mack are probably not going to be at 100% effectiveness this week, which really sucks since I'm sure Rodgers is going to come out in full terminator mode after missing so much time last year.

OHHHHHH MYYYYYY HORSEFEATHERS!!!!

I think you're wish casting here. Stafford's perfectly fine in the clutch https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/ranking-matthew-stafford-s-eight-fourth-quarter-comebacks-in-2016-020117 And I'd bet Cousins would do similarly given the same situations. I'd guess that, much like in baseball, clutch in football is just talent meeting opportunity with a splash of luck. So you're going to use an article about Stafford's one playoff season where he's team won 9 games while Stafford put up 24 TD / 10 Int and lost in the wild card round for your example about why he's good in the clutch? And he was losing at some point in 8 of those 9 wins? I didn't read the article, so maybe there's something that would convince me that Stafford makes the playoffs again at some point in his career, but probably not. And obviously, we're just going to have to disagree on the impact of QB performance in the 4th quarter. I really do not care enough about this meatball opinion you have to go back and forth. I just think it's funny that you're going on and on and on about how Stafford is "not a winner" and how good quarterbacks get it done in the fourth quarter and Stafford doesn't when he literally won 8 games in one year via fourth quarter heroics.

Lol so tell me, are guys like Brady and Montana or whatever other QB with a winning record just lucky? Getting by on the strength of their teams and coaches? We watched Cutler for years miss on down field passes when he just needed 5 yards to keep a drive alive at the end of the game. Stafford’s win numbers against good teams are atrocious. If there were an easy to navigate stat site like FG for football we could probably see how many times Stafford was within a TD with 5 minutes or so to go and still lost. The Lions have had decent enough teams and head coaches where Stafford’s record is largely on him. This isn’t baseball, where we’re debating the validity/weight of performance in clutch situations. In the NBA and for QBs in the NFL there are guys who consistently get the job done at the end of the game when it matters and those who don’t. It’s all a spectrum, so if the eye roll is for me viewing things in binary terms then maybe ok, but Stafford is at one end of that spectrum for me. We’ll see what Cousins can do with this talent but he’s going to have to prove he can go from a career sub-.500 QB to one who wins this division. I think you're wish casting here. Stafford's perfectly fine in the clutch https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/ranking-matthew-stafford-s-eight-fourth-quarter-comebacks-in-2016-020117 And I'd bet Cousins would do similarly given the same situations. I'd guess that, much like in baseball, clutch in football is just talent meeting opportunity with a splash of luck.

I don't expect big moves on the pitching side. I think they bring back Cole, and otherwise focus on depth. The main goal basically being not caught with their pants down again like they did this summer. Basically I'm expecting something like this - Exercise Cole's option - Sign Bryce - Trade Happ to someone who is willing to both eat Chatwood's salary, and give us a back an Alzolay-esque fun young starter who we can stash at Iowa The team can't really move on from Lester or Darvish, and they probably shouldn't move on from Q, so it becomes about having depth and options. If the rotation had had a strong year, I think Montgomery would have been moved this winter, but instead he comes into the year ticketed as the Wilson replacement, but also sticks around for additional starter depth. Smyly is the long guy and designated 6th starter. And then Alzolay plus the guy who comes back in the Happ trade hang out in Iowa. That basically gives us 9 guys we're comfortable having start, probably overkill but after this year probably necessary to truly have peace of mind.

If Trubisky is for real, and I believe in him, this team is loaded. Defense was above average before Roquan and Mack, and should be comfortably Top 10 now. Skill players are great if Robinson is back to at least his '16 form. And the O-line is higher variance than I'd like but is probably at least average.

And the Cubs should have run away with it while the opposite when the Cubs had the easy stretch and the Cardinals and Brewers had the tougher stretches. Baseball is baseball like that; what's more likely is the Cardinals' pace slows down despite them playing "easier" teams. It can't be overstated how they essentially have to keep winning like maniacs AND the Cubs have to really play flat or worse for the division to really be an issue. Very much this. The Cubs have 29 games left, if they go 14-15, the Cards need to go 18-10 (104 win pace) and/or the Brewers need to go 18-9 (108 win pace) to match. Crazy things can happen in one month of baseball (I think the Rockies in '07 won like 22/25 or something to end the year) but at this point the Cubs not winning the division would only happen because the Cubs played like crap.

Wilson's good, but I think it's fair to give him side-eye. I feel like he's the most likely of our good relievers to have a meltdown.

Len just said Tommy "bit the hand that once fed him." That is absolutely a wink wink nudge nudge seal joke and no one will convince me otherwise.