Chisoxfn

I'll at least give them credit...he'd be a top my list....whether you can pay enough and give enough draft picks to steal him from the Rams is another story and likely highly unrealistic. He's just been insane for the Rams thus far.

Dodgers appear to be out on Machado. One thing I have to ask...if you are the White Sox...would you rather offer a ton of money to Harper (who is literally one of the "faces" of MLB) or Machado (the better statistical player)? There is a component to the Sox of landing star power (I.e., Harper...who also has obviously oodles of talent...albeit has had health and other things pop up which have got in the way of fully maximizing it). Or are you better off staying completely away from all of these big name guys and going bargain shopping?

Really really hope somehow the news on Long isn't what we are all thinking it will be. Dude has always given it his all and could certainly use a good "break" in terms of health news. Seperately, I presume Mack and Robinson are both going to be out this week. I think its best to take your chances against the Bills with our existing squad (sans those guys) and hope you have enough to built the Bills and ensure those pieces are available (and healthy) for the key divisional stretches.

I agree and I think the accuracy is something we will see improve over the course of the season and especially heading into next season. Your footwork and fundamentals aren't as sharp when you are thinking and processing. He's gotten better from the first few games, albeit, will have his ocassional lapses and I think it goes back to him still thinking a lot, however, his progress on going through reads, poise in the pocket...all have gotten significantly better from those first few games of the season and give you reasons to think that the arrow could continue to point "up". Hard for me to gauge his accuracy this week as the wind conditions looked pretty tough. I was surprised the Bears attempted as many "deep" balls as they did given the conditions. That said, it helps keep the defense honest.

Quite frankly...for most of the years, so have the Packers.

Gotcha, back when I worked at Deloitte I had a client who was in Surety.

Brian - What do you do? Are you on the P&C side or Life side? Credit analyst/portfolio manager?

This. I think he clearly has the offensive talent to keep up a pretty high-level scoring production. The key to me is that he can stay healthy. He is a fantastic shooter and an electric athlete who has enhanced his ability to finish at the bucket (presume he got a bit stronger and obviously had a full off-season to focus on his game). There is zero reason he can't be a highly efficient and effective scorer with his ability to slash into the basket...but if you give him too much space to cut his ability to drive, the guy is a pure shooter as well. He'll never be a great defender but to me offensively its a matter of staying within his game and being smart and efficient about it. The dude has so much offensive talent and capabilities. I'm sure he won't keep his torrid pace up (its been absurdly efficient) but the game is there. I sure hope none of this is foolsgold (when it comes to Lavine's production).

That was good.

I'm legitimately bummed out, because I looked forward to watching Lavine, Dunn, Lauri, and MCJ developing. I don't have a problem putting blinders on when watching basketball (as long as I don't have to do it for too many years). They are going to have a tough time winning games with their lack of depth at PG.

Technically, them winning late probably isn't that big of a deal cause it is more about a little "luck" than anything else. I presume they won't be bottom 3 bad, but they will likely be bad enough that with the adjusted odds they can "try" to contend and even win some games without drastically shifting their odds. I figure they'll be somewhere between 5-10 (in terms of worst teams) but would have better odds than prior years when it comes to "moving up"...at least I think they would. Also more "downside" risk.

When did that happen? During the game? The tank is on! I still say the best thing for this season is probably Lavine crushing it, MCJ showing progress, and Lauri/Dunn playing well when they come back, only for their overall record to be impacted by general youth and inconsistent defense, largely from Parker/Portis and others, who are ultimately moved (leveraging the expiring contract of Parker) either to a contender for assets (those guys would help any contenders bench but are probably not building blocks) and/or combined with another piece for a high end player demanding a trade (Parker, Portis plus a draft pick or Dunn or something for a high end player demanding out) and than go all in on adding another free agent in the off-season. Again...just talking out loud.

I don't think Caufield was advising anyone to chase returns across funds, I simply think he was pointing out an interesting fact regarding Bill Miller's fund track record during an extended span. Probably more to that point was the fact one guy did it, but with all of the funds out there, it kind of highlights how difficult it is to do. All that said, there isn't a one size fits all to investing and all decisions need to take into account an individuals risk tolerance and the duration they expect to have the funds invested (i.e., what sort of liquidity needs).

On another aside, I'm slightly worried that Hoiberg will lose this team quickly (due to all the losing). I don't want "chemistry" and "off the court" issues plaguing a young team that needs good veterans, role models, and stability to enhance their development.

By the way, I realize it was a small sample size, but Doncic is going to be a star. He looks like the real deal. Just a complete package.

Technically they wouldn't have a 19 year old trying to cover everyone's mistakes if Lauri was around. Lauri isn't a stellar defender, but he's at least solid and this was also the first game Dunn was back and he's a good defender. The problem is when Lauri is out, whether it is Portis or Parker, you are replacing a solid defender with a porous one and when Dunn was out, you were taking an above average defender and replacing him with Payne (who is a big step down). The bright side is, I still like the talent of Lavine, Dunn, Lauri, and Carter and all of them are actually nice pieces with each other. Portis can't start with that group though and while I think he's a valuable player, he's best served off the bench (if the Bulls are going to win). Parker certainly showed that he can score the ball but a lot of his points were what I'd call old school "iso" and were detrimental to the team movement. He can score though. A nice pick and Durant/Kwahi would be great this offseason

Given you are in a target 2050 fund, meaning you have another 32 years until your "target retirement date", I'd say you should not even look at the returns and be more focused on the contributions and match. That said, if your 401K has options, you should look to see if there are any low cost target funds out there. Given that you mentioned you aren't financially savvy when it comes to investments, I think the leave it in a target date fund in your retirement works best. The target date fund will be diverse and ensure you are taking enough risk while slowly moving to less risky assets over time. Do note that a 1.4% YTD drop is nothing and there will be a point where the markets drop more...just continue making your contributions and invest with the long-term in mind. Do not try to time the market as the steady contributions will serve as a balancer...sometimes you will be buying at "low's", other times at "high's", but over the long haul this strategy should reap very positive returns (6-8% would be my best guess but that is based upon past history and future history could always look much different). Also, since these are "long-term funds" set aside from your retirement, even in that down market, resist the urge to sell off and continue contributing your funds. It is the contributions which matter most as the LT returns should be positive (and any day to day / year-to-year volatility should be ignored....at least for the next 15-20 years). I'd probably give the same advance to a "financially" savvy person as well. I think in many cases a financially savy person can make an even worse mistake because they think they know more than the average joe, but reality is, timing the market is a difficult thing to do. A lot of "financially" savy people thought markets were hot 2-3 years ago and if you believed that, you would have missed out on nice returns. I tend to think markets are hot now, but again, I'm investing for the long haul and taking a strategy of making steady contributions, albeit I might be a little defensive at this point in time (in the sense that I want to make sure I have some liquidity for an eventual recession to target potential opportunities).

Yeah - I don't agree with this; They have to pay him a lot of money in a year vs. a typical draft pick. And that is for a guy having a down 18 month span. That said, he clearly had a ton of talent and an upward arrow after those 1st two seasons. The move might work for the Cowboys, who knows, but the fundamentals behind the trade just don't make sense to me (for the Cowboys).

Wouldn't be a bad idea for Raiders. If they did that...I'll give Gruden credit...maybe the Mack trade is less bad when you consider they were blowing things up and took what they felt was their best offer. Basically they are hitting "refresh" and planning for Vegas.

That is awful. Cooper isn't any good. I will give Gruden a lot of credit on that move.

Oh man. I remember when the Bears signed him, I was completely perplexed...than we drafted Shaheen with a 2nd round pick and was even more perplexed. Of all of Pace's moves, those two just struck me as extremely odd. I was somewhere hoping Pace was an evil genius, but that definitely wasn't the case. Maybe Shaheen will prove me wrong but that still looked like an overdraft in my mind. That said, I can see that Shaheen has talent....Simms is just a bum.

I'm not going to lie....was completely rooting against the Brewers. Can't stand that style of baseball. Takes a lot for me to root against a team playing the Dodgers.

I can't imagine the Bears have the draft capital to pull that off...unless they get creative and do some three team swap involving Jordan Howard.

I am finely okay trading Jordan Howard. I would have thought the Bears could have better fit him in this offense, but if they were able to get a pick or two and than fill another hole with a good piece that can be around a few years, I would do it. Of course my preference would be to figure out how to leverage Jordan Howard. Dude is a beast but he's been completely neutered by scheme / use. Some is on him / some on our coaches, etc.

By the way, for all the griping I'm doing, long-term, I continued to get more excited (vs. less) about the franchises future. It is also fun to know that, talent wise, we belong with the best teams in the NFL. Unfortunately, we still have a long ways to go when it comes to doing the "little" things it takes to win football games and close-out games. I hope that will come over time...but as a good starting point, it is nice to basically be in every game we play (and not by "fluke"). Its been the opposite where "fluke" has cost the Bears 2 games.