Chisoxfn

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 4, 2018 -> 09:49 AM) I don't think we are disagreeing, but Nagy being familiar with Trubisky will allow him to show off exactly what he would do to take him to next level. Others can do that by looking at film too, but everyone is busy with playoffs, so it's a huge help for him. For good or bad, "how will you handle trubisky" will be the biggest question each of these guys need to answer. Agree with everything you say.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 4, 2018 -> 09:33 AM) McVay went on Rich Eisens show and talked about how he spent time in the interview process breaking down film with Goff and showing how he could help. That was essentially the reason he was hired. https://247sports.com/nfl/los-angeles-rams/...w-with-74900039 That is different then him being all in on Goff (which I thought you were implying). I agree that they tried to work with him. The Rams were sold on McVay because of just how electric he was. Supposedly he blew everyone away and his film sessions, etc, were just super impressive with what he said he brought. It wans't that they were convinced 100% he could turn Goff into a star...it was that they thought he was going to be the guy who could ultimately turn the right QB into a star (turns out Goff was that guy).

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 4, 2018 -> 09:08 AM) Obviously all will say they like Trubisky. But McVay had opportunity due to the redskins not being in the playoffs to hang around with Goff and hit it off. That Nagy has a prior relationship that has been ongoing is going to be very helpful for him. Would be very surprised if Trubisky isn't brought into round 2s just like Goff was. Living out on the west coast, I don't believe McVay and Goff hit it off. In fact, there were major open questions about Goff being the starter throughout the preseason. No one knew whether Goff was a McVay guy or not. Goff was so bad last year that I think even the Rams front office was pretty uncertain regarding Goff's long-term potential. At least that is what most of the reports said leading up to the regular season. A lot of people were expecting Mannion to be the starter at some point in the season.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 09:58 AM) Oh yea, that would have been a GREAT idea with Cutler. LMAO. Look, they tried to trade up for both Mariota and Wentz and didnt get it done. They dealt with Cutler and his b**** attitude for 2 seasons, like they said they would, then they moved on. you think your way was better, but it didnt happen because of Cutler and the money he was owed. I think you are right that they tried. It wasn't like the Bears had a full deck (and were picking #1/#2 and passed up on guys to keep Cutler). They went after Mariotta and Wentz, but ultimately didn't have the ammo to make those moves. The reality is the 1st real good opportunity they had the chance (this past year when we had a really really high pick), Pace went and got his QB. I also think because it was year 3 and he had missed the guys he wanted the 2 years before (because he didn't have the luxury of picking so high in the draft), that he was not going to miss out and that was why he moved up to #2 (to guarantee he wasn't in a panic mode again and going another season without having the QB of the future on the roster). The team probably got bit too that after that 1st year (where I truly believe they wanted to move Jay but needed another option) but then he played well under Gase. I think if Pace did it all over again (and probably Fox), the biggest thing they would redo is they would have dealt Jay for anything (or cut him) in that initial year and just tanked. Get the high pick the following year and take the QB and build from there.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 09:14 AM) I will say one thing - I remain totally stunned that the Bears did not try to fill their QB position at all prior to the 2017 season. They knew the date they could Cut Cutler with little cap damage the second Pace took over, even with Cutler around in 2016 there was always going to be playing time for someone else since Cutler always missed a few games, and no matter what John Fox did there was basically no way they were going to turn this franchise into a winner in either the Cutler era or with a rookie, just drafted QB. It cost them $18 million in cap space this year that could have gone elsewhere and guaranteed that Fox had no shot even if he did everything right. Yes; This x 1000.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 3, 2018 -> 08:55 AM) I actually think John Fox did exactly what people expected him to do. The team was an utter mess under Trestman, they stopped trying, they were fighting, it was a complete s*** show. The consensus was that Fox was a professional coach, and he would get them together to put out a true effort on the field, and for the most part they did. They loved playing for him. It was rare that they came out completely flat, usually when they lost big it was because of lack of talent, 4 QB turnovers, or his conservative game management. Which many people brought up the day he was hired, so that was never a surprise. Not a single person thought Fox was the next Super Bowl coach of the Bears, he was a placeholder. The results could have been better, but the tenure wasn't a surprise IMO. I agree with everything you said. I think he could have taken the team to the superbowl with the right talent (he's proven that he isn't going to get in the way of a good team). Basically he's proven to be a more than competent head coach. I laugh at people who call him the worst coach in franchise history. It is laughable at best. Did he win enough games, no, did they have some letdowns, sure, but they also had minimal talent. This team did not underperform under John Fox...period. Players actually developed under Fox, culture improved, players played. I realize people think that is a given but it is not in this league. He had zero shot at exceeding / excelling with the Bears and I feel for John for that reason. The only major mistake I'd pin on him is possibly Loggains, however, even then, I don't think the Bears ruined Trubisky with their development. I think the Browns ruined any chance with Kizer with how they handled him. That said, Trubisky was never going to make Loggains look good (THIS YEAR). Wasn't happening. Odds are whoever we hire will be a worse head coach then John Fox...that said, they very well might have a better record (cause they have more talent). Now Jack Del Rio, he is not a good head coach. The lockeroom was a disaster in Oakland, they had made numerous poor decisions with coordinators, and the team flat out had talent (even with injuries). John Fox in Oakland would actually do better then Jon Gruden. We'll never see it happen but he would. I actually think Oakland would be a tremendous fit for Fox. Fox would bring a very good OC (historically he's proven that...one mediocre guy in Loggains doesn't just mean the past umpteen years of doing things right are ignored...mistakes are made, sometimes you bring in the wrong guy) and he'd get those guys playing hard. Fox has his faults too, don't get me wrong, but the Bears are in a better spot today because of Fox and I think with the right coach and right moves by Pace are headed towards a bright future. They are going to have to get really creative at wideout though (I presume they will take Ridley).

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 09:40 PM) I despise all of the "hot names" in coaching this offseason. Have a horrible feeling whoever they pick, they are doomed. Pick a name out of a hat, why dontcha, because everyone's getting s***canned in 2020. I think the ultimate success is going to rest heavily on Pace and his ability to acquire talent and obviously, the coaches will play a key role in coaching that talent up, etc. There are stark differences between being a head coach and being a coordinator and that is why many excellent coordinators fail miserably as head coaches. You also have to have some form of talent. One reason I like Toub is that I think he has a strong attention to detail and in a special teams role has to regularly work with all the various members of the coaching staff, etc. Toub has also worked with a lot of good coaches and with many solid coordinators which should give him a good ability to bring in very good specialists (again, very important). The reality is there are things to like about many of these guys, but we are all reading articles, etc. None of us know these people and are going through the detailed interview process but its probably still a lot like any other interview...somewhere in the process, there is quite a bit of luck involved as to whether you got a good candidate or a not so good candidate (all the diligence, etc, can only go so far when people haven't been in this ultimate position in the past).

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 05:29 PM) So if you were to hire an offensive-minded young coach, then to me, the bigger hire is your d-coordinator than your o-coordinator. If you can get DeFillipo or LeFluer or Nagy or McDaniels, and then someone who knows what the hell they are doing with the 3-4 but with a little bit more experience, to me, that is the ideal move. Yep, like the rams hiring old man Phillips for their DC job last year. Great hire so McVay could entirely focus on the offense (at least initially). I think if you go with a younger specialist on one side of the ball, you have to give them a really good, real veteran specialist coordinator on the other side of the ball.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 05:20 PM) Given that priority 1 is Trubisky I have to think they'll go offense. I agree with that, but I am not going to ignore defenses. I agree a lot of risk exists with an OC leaving (shift of systems, etc), but the HC is such a different skill-set than a coordinator as well. Ultimately we have to find a good head coach. Whether they are offensive or defensive centric doesn't matter as long as they can bring in the right assistants on the other side of the ball.

I would hate to ignore Arizona's DC James Betcher. Arians is lobbying hard for him to be the next head coach of the Cardinals. He is really good and flat out runs an aggressive and exciting defense and his unit has ranked extremely well each of the past few years (since taking over for Bowles).

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 04:24 PM) Nagy & McDaniels are definitely the right names to be looking at. Hope we get one of them. Defilippo is a FA at the end of the year I believe. Makes things interesting because not only could he be a HC candidate, he could also actually be a potential OC candidate (say for a Toub). Or heck, even Nagy could look at him and have him as the OC. I don't know if that would be as interesting to Defilippo.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 02:58 PM) Basketball IQ can be taught. Talent cannot. Dunn is young and missed development time in college due to some injuries. I've seen monumental leaps forward that get me really excited. Guy is a physical specimen on the court too, as is Lauri and hopefully the other piece in our trade comes back healthy cause he too is a total athlete. Very nice starting point of a core when you add in free agent money, another draft pick and then consider existing players on the roster. I guess that is why I'm not as bummed as others are because I still think to win a championship you need a little extra luck your way and most likely need to lure a free agent. I don't believe that just tanking and picking at the top is some fast-track to long-term sustained success in the NBA. Yes, top talent is always going to be easier to acquire at the top but lots of great players are drafted outside of the top 3 as well (and it would seem like more often in recent years). I look at it as you want to be a team whose good, with an arrow point up, and the ability to hopefully add a new talent by having flexible cap / assets who you can move. Bulls front office didn't do enough to leverage the assets it had to get the last core across the stretch (injuries, etc, and other excuses, but bottom line they didn't get it done). This team had one asset a year ago (Butler). This year it has Niko (I'm being premature but dude, he looks like a different guy out there), Lauri, Dunn, & Lavine. Now none of those guys are as good as Butler, but they all are young and developing and under fair contracts (albeit Lavine will get expensive, however, as an RFA, we can leverage some creativity). Bulls need to acquire more picks (somehow / someway) and get creative doing it but even if they ended up with the 7th or 8th pick and if it was because all those other guys played really well and continued to grow, then while our draft pick might not be as high, I think at least you have a nice core of talent you can sell potential free agents (and I recognize that is a whole seperate argument as to whether the Bulls can obtain them...but if they can't, no rebuild will work, imo).

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 02:49 PM) I don't really think about Doncic as he's not in the NCAA and so it's not really easy to follow, and Bagley didn't reclassify until mid-August. The top 3 of the class were considered good, but the depth that has been added with sexton and young playing out of their minds has made it a really exciting draft. I know people like Bamba, but really this class for most of the summer looked like MPJ and Ayton and then not that deep after. Now MPJ may be pick #5. That's why I like this class so much. We heard about the 2014 class forever with Wiggins and Parker. But aside from MPJ, every one of these guys that plays in the states is either living up or greatly exceeding. I agree with you that the depth was always questioned (not the high-end talent). Every year I feel that "next years" draft is ultimately overhyped a year away and often times as it gets closer, it never pans out or is even worse then the prior years draft. Every once in a while a generational draft happens and it usually wasn't something where everyone clamored that it was a "generational" draft leading into the draft. Heck, look at the NFL. So many people said this years draft was going to be stocked with QB talent and right now, on paper, I'd argue last years draft was stronger at the top (on paper...doens't mean reality holds). No QB this year took major steps forward and most of the top ones took steps backwards (Rosen, Darnaud, Allen). That said, QB is important so just like last year (where people were originally "down" on the class, at some point, we'll see a number of guys go in the 1st round and 2 or 3 go top 7). The more the better (push the non QB talent to the Bears).

They have also scheduled an interview with Matt Nagy next week. Nagy is a really intriguing name. Andy Reid's coaching tree has been quite good.

McDaniels is supposedly going to interview with Bears on Friday.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 02:15 PM) I think my favorite part about this draft class is people didn't think much of it as an nba prospect class going into the season but they have earned it by being so dominant. I'll take that over a dream class that mostly underwhelms but people believe in unlocking the talent. Bagley, Ayton, Porter, and Donic were all pretty hyped entering the season. That was part of why the Bulls decided they wanted to tank (was the lure of these 4 guys).

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 12:57 PM) I would deal any for a top 5 pick in a heart beat. He still relies a lot on midrange jumpers and isn't great around rim. But he could find his range and then be really good. I would be very hesitant to move Lauri for anyone...albeit top 1/2 are at least a wash (if not better). Ayton / Bagley look awesome. I would probably move Dunn for a top 4 or 5, but probably not past that.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 01:00 PM) Obviously with Fultz dnp it's hard, but I would still take Tatum over Lauri. Tatum has been awesome.

On the topic of the rebuild...have a question for everyone. Saw this on another forum, so thought it was worth posing here. What pick in next years draft (or what range) would you be willing to deal Lauri or Dunn for (if at all)?

So take this for what it is worth, but over the holidays I caught up with my buddy who is connected to someone in an NBA front office and he always gives me back some nuggets on the Bulls. Basically, he mentioned Lauri was mis-scouted / evaluated by a lot of people (major disconnect between what coaches saw working him out (which was, this is the best guy we've worked out) vs. what people could get on tape of him(questions about athleticism, ability to D, rebound, etc...maybe too "one dimensional"), but the chatter around the league is that if the draft were to happen again today, he probably goes #1. A lot of people think he's going to be a total star. I mention this mainly because a while back someone said we don't have a star on our roster...I'd argue we might have got lucky (plus I have to give front office credit cause they took him) but we got a guy who a lot of people are raving about (and since I am not in Chicago...I also watch a lot of opposition feeds of the Bulls and dude, they all talk about how the other teams coaches rave about Lauri and usually when they watch, the announcers are all in awe at what he can do for being an athletic big). If he were on another team, dare I say it, we'd all be giving J4L a hard time for calling him a generational talent. The other nugget, was more general, but more on the fact that a lot of NBA people are amazed at how much Dunn has improved (year-over-year) and given how much athleticism he has, think he has a lot more upside, given how well and physical he plays, with the key to his game being the continued refinement of that shot. Note: I am not calling Lauri a superstar or can't miss superstar...he's far from it and has a lot of growth that he'd have to add in his game, but he has shown some pretty darn impressive tools and skills. I really hope he stays healthy and continues to work and develop his game (especially that low post game). I have faith in Hoiberg enhancing his shot to be more consistent, which should help reduce some of that "streakiness".

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 11:53 AM) Bill O'Brien would have lost a power play in Houston if he is out. That would pretty much rule him out in Chicago's rigid structure in my mind. Excellent point.

Jackson would have been a great OC hire. I'm curious to see if any other jobs open up. Could be far fewer teams looking for head coaches then initially expected, right? Oakland, Arizona, Detroit, Indy, Giants, Bears. Anyone else I'm missing? Browns is uncertain since Marvin Lewis is out of contract.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 11:33 AM) I am also on the DeFillipo train, but also have some interest in LeFleur and the two Pats coordinators. I like DeFillipo, Reich, the Arizona DC, Shurmur, and as you all know I'm intrigued with McDaniels. Bill O'Brien would top my list if Houston did part ways with him. I also am accepting of Toub.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 2, 2018 -> 11:21 AM) For me McDaniel's terrible year as Rams OC is a bigger indictment than his Broncos run. Bradford got worse that year, they had a good RB, the only thing really right was the emergence of Brandon Lloyd, but they were like 32 or 31st in offense that year. I agree with this. Brady makes everyone look good.

I should also point out that McDaniels could be an epic disaster. I think he is near top of the list from an upside perspective, but downside is he is actually crazy and too emotional to stay level headed and make rational decisions (critical as a head coach). You'd have to interview him and do a lot of homework. When things get tough (and they will be tough early on for the Bears), you got to have the ability to maintain the course and handle the adversity, not meltdown.