Chisoxfn

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 06:03 AM) I think they are in a similar position as the Sox were with Sale. There is no rush here, they have the hot property(not nearly as valuable as Sale of course), and can slow play it. They may not get a 1st and 4th, but I dont think they are getting only a 2nd back I would be okay with the deal Greg Gabriel proposed, where you give up a 3rd or something this year and then a conditional pick next year, that could be as high as a 1st round pick (based upon how well Jimmy G plays). I don't know if Pats would do it. AJ McCarron is going to get a lot of looks as well. Is the Wyoming QB going pro or staying another year? I have a feeling he's going to shoot up some draft boards (has a ton of tools).

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 05:42 AM) Yeah this is true. Kevin White can't be counted on. This kind of hinges on Jeffery. Jeffery and Meredith each had 800+ yard seasons with bum QB's. Jordan Howard is very good. It's clear that QB and secondary are top needs but another pass rusher, a starting TE, and more speed at WR is also necessary We just have to hope that Kevin White emerges in year three like Demayrius Thomas did for Denver. Thomas wasn't quite as injured, but he battled quite a bit of injuries his first two years before emerging as a very good wideout.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 08:21 AM) There is no more infuriating team than the Bulls in the NBA. They own wins against Cleveland (2) and San Antonio this year. They also own losses against Timberwolves, Dallas, and the Lakers. They can win, there are just times they choose not to. To me, it is an inditement on their coach (and obviously players) cause it does seem they play pretty solid against good teams, while wetting the bed against more mediocre teams. The general thoughts are, our coaching staff can't get our guys to play at consistent levels. That said, last night was one of the more enjoyable Bulls games in a while (despite the Cavs obviously missing Kyrie / Love). Niko actually took good shots (and by that, I mean he took three's where he had his feet set and was in good form, with the exception of about one three last night). That is not the norm out of him as he usually has such poor shooting fundamentals (because he takes a lot of bad / rushed shots). When he actually uses his right mechanics, he's lethal from long range and Doug was fantastic in that 2nd quarter. MCW is such a step up from Rondo, mainly because he isn't afraid to go for the shot. That drive and dunk he had was awesome to watch last night. MCW has his own massive limitations cause he clearly can't shoot that well, but he's clearly a major upgrade (both offensively / defensively) from Rondo who has been totally worthless this year. Grant doesn't show me much and Valentine got hurt a day where he played well (couple nights back) which stinks cause I'd like him to get more minutes. They did this all on a night where Butler struggled, up until the fourth, where he played like the superstar he is. Taj was fantastic too. Unfortunate how crappy / inconsistent a lot of our parts are and in Doug's case, I don't really understand why we don't look to get him more involved cause he's such a damn good scorer. Wish we could replace Wade / Rondo with Cousins / CP3.

Shutting this down due to turning into a gigantic massive catch all. Especially in light of some new / fresh updates coming out.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 02:00 PM) Are you willing to give up that 2nd round pick for JG? That was the price for Cassel. I have absolutely zero problem giving up a 2nd for JG. None at all. I prefer that to any other plausible scenario. I'd then try to trade down from #3 to accumulate more picks. Jimmy G is ready to start. Whether he's good or not, hell if I know, but I've seen enough that I'd have no problem going that route and taking the chance.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 01:26 PM) Do you count a 2nd as a high pick? I would be genuinely disappointed if there's not at least a 3rd spent on that spot this year. I totally get not using that first round pick on a QB, but especially if one of the "potential 1st round QBs" falls as we have seen before, picking early in the 2nd could set this team up. Very rarely do later round picks pan out, so while I always get the fascination of waiting a bit, I think you either like Kizer or others and think they have a shot or you don't. If you don't, then you need to find a QB another way and it can't be, well lets take a flyer on a guy in the 2nd / 3rd / 4th, cause reality is, if you thought they had a good shot at starting, you'd have taken them higher, so there is a lot more crapshoot to it already (and QB is such a difficult spot to scout) to where I just don't see how you can do that. To me, we are either taking a QB in the 1st round or trading for one (Jimmy G / AJ McCarron / Tony Romo). Had Cutler not totally sucked, I could have gotten more on board with taking someone in the 2nd-4th this year and hell even again a year from now cause you'd have the luxury of time, but we don't have that luxury anymore. They could have had it if they just used a pick on a QB a year ago, but I don't think any of them saw Cutler blowing up as much as he did this year (and the reality is, he'll bounce back and go back to being a league averagish starting QB...unless his arm is shot). And I recognize all my talk of McCarron / Jimmy G is counterintuitive to my late round picks normally don't pan out. Part of that is also the fact that you look at AJ / Jimmy G and it took them a couple years before they were even ready to be "starting" material and if Fox/Pace get a guy like that, forget about them ever being around long-term and remember, while they have to make decisions in the best interest of the franchise, they also have to view things from the lens that these decisions should also maximize their ability to continue to get paychecks from the Bears!

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 01:22 PM) Using a high pick on this QB class looks to be pretty darn stupid. I think they will plug that hole while improving the rest of the team. The problem is, the GM / Head Coach can't just wait forever to address QB. You aren't going to win keeping Hoyer and odds only increase of you never seeing your way to success longer term without finding the solution. Kizer has all the tools to be an NFL QB. I don't see how you ignore the position. I think the best move is to trade for Jimmy G or go with Romo and let him buy you time (i.e., allow you to take a guy in the 2nd or 3rd and evaluate and maybe even take another guy a year from now if after a year you don't like what you see from the first pick).

Our RB coach wasn't let go, he is taking a job at Texas under Herman.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 07:10 AM) You know saying something that dangerous is the exact sort of thing that people warned of with Trump, and were met with claims of exaggerating Trump's danger. People are just too far removed from the 1930s and 40s and for some reason think stuff like this can't happen again. But it wasn't happening again because those citizens post WWII valued that peace and stability, and it's clear many are taking it for granted. Boy, the book "the end of history" really had a short shelf life. History repeats itself. Civilizations forget the first hand impacts of war and therefor repeat the past. I am so damn afraid of going to war, more selfishly, bringing it to our land or getting to a point where we had to instill a form of draft. The scariest part is, war in the modern era can literally wipe the population off the face of the earth with the threat of nukes.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 22, 2016 -> 01:57 PM) Even then, how many professional who average thst type of salary for 20+ year don't end up with a net worth in the $2.5-3 million range, at least? They might not be true 1%ers....but they're still generating most of their retirement income from investments (many shielded from taxes) and real estate. You don't have to run a hedge fund or work for one of the big banks to fall into this category. There was an article weeks ago asserting the average benefit to the 1% would be $300,000 while the average middle class tax payer would get $900 back. With inflation expected to rise eventually, a good chunk of that will be completely wiped out...the deficit will grow to $25 trillion...and those families will still vote for Trump because he "saved" a handful of jobs at Carrier and put a 5% import tax on Chinese and Mexican goods which further wiped out the remaining tax cut benefits by passing added costs onto consumers. It's also a consistent GOP talking point to claim that the estate tax kills numerous small businesses (forcing them to be sold or split up) and small American farms, but that's also been determined to be the case only 3% of the time. But slap the label of death tax and death panels on it...the majority will buy will buy that narrative. The same argument is buried here...those who are being taxed too highly are "good Americans" and hard-working people like everyone else with upper middle class (not elite) values. That statistic is probably skewed because I presume the 1% impact as a percentage of their income could be significantly different. As a percent savings, it might be pretty significant. I still fully believe that the people who are the most tax screwed are most likely the upper middle class people or for the sake of this exercise, because the data is available, the 80-99%th percentile (134K - 615K by tax bracket), they also pay approximately 38% of total taxes). The 1% pays about 46^ of the taxes, but that is largley skewed by the fact that you are taking about huge mega dollars getting applied to a capital gains rate, so the effective rates at that level are much lower then the effective rates of the 80-99% percentile of income). More specifically, it is those who are in that percentile who are not self-employed who take even more of the brunt as their are just so few tax advantages.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 10:55 AM) They need to collect as many picks as possible in this draft and have to hit on most of them. If that doesnt happen then next offseason will be much much worse for them. I also think they need to use their free agent money wisely and they probably need to spend a good chunk of it on secondary pieces (as well as using a pretty high pick on the secondary). The most critical decision will relate to the QB position, which is such a freaking crapshoot. I disagree on having to hit on most of them, they need to have a few big wins though, that is for sure, and I do think they are best served by trading down a bit. To me they should acquire a QB outside of the draft.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 10:19 PM) I thought we already had an idea what the Astros offered ? Keith Law or someone thought it was light and since that was posted many posters have followed along with that viewpoint. Correction...Shack and Chisoxfn thought the offer was lite, many posters disagreed (some agreed), then Law came around and agreed with Shack and myself, and posters came along to agree. That rumored Astros offer from Gammons was and still is a ridiculously lowball offer for Q. Not to toot my own horn, haha.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 10:39 AM) I don't like Fox and especially hate his in-game management, but he definitely wasn't the problem. They competed. The problem was lack of talent due to current/prior front office and injuries. I'm not as concerned about the head coach as I am the GM. How much time do you give Pace? I feel as if he has been hit or miss on his picks so far. He did nothing with the QB position for 2 years and now it's a black hole. You don't wanna fire him too soon, but you let him drag you in the mud too long if he's not up to the task. Outside of the lack of talent at the QB position, I've been quite happy with Pace. This years draft is thus far, looking like one of the best drafts in football (Floyd / Whitehair / Howard would all go in the 1st round if you did a redraft today, imo). His free agent signings were very solid (Trevathan / Freeman / Hicks were all quality additions, albeit Trevathan might never be the same after his injury). Last year's draft is not looking as good, but I can't really blame him for the Kevin White fiasco and Goldman looks like a potential pro bowler when on the field, although you can't deny the fact that he has had a problem staying on the field. A year ago, I would have said this draft looked good as we saw flashes from Langford, Goldman, and Amos (while still having a bit more hope about White then I do today). Now I'd say that it is a bit more dissapointing, but some of that is due to injuries (and not in the sense that the guy we drafted was injury prone as White wasn't that) and you also have to remember for that draft he didn't have his scouting regime in place, etc, so to some extent you are relying pretty heavily on the work of the previous regime. Grassu looked like he was going to have a much better second year prior to getting hurt as well. Basically put, injuries put a real damper on the 2015 draft (at this point) and we can only hope that somehow guys recover from those injuries and emerge in year three. With me, I'm about being patient because a new GM is just going to restart the entire shuffle process and in theory, by switching a lot, you end up taking a lot of steps backward without ever really giving yourself the opportunity to step forward. I haven't seen anything from Pace yet that makes me think he isn't the right guy and I think a GM deserves 5 years. On Fox, I completely agree with you that his in-game management leaves a lot to be desired, but I do think he does a good job of finding good coordinators and coaches and keeping guys hungry. I don't know if we'll win a championship with him, but I still believe we are in a much better place then where we were. Maybe at some point, the front office will need to make a change, but now wasn't the time. In hindsight, maybe we should have kept Gase while we had him in the building, but hard to make that call after one year and Fox has proven that he is absolutely a competent head coach. I also agree completely with you on the criticality of the GM, but I think coaching is just as critical if not more critical, because that is who ultimately puts the players in the best position to succeed and develop and it is very clear that some staffs can do it and some staffs can't. I think there are often times players in this league who fail because they went to the wrong place (not because they didn't have the talent). It is also why it is important/critical for the GM / Coach to be on the same page regarding talent, needs, use of players, scheme-fits, etc, to ensure everyone is bought in on what you are doing and that you are bringing in the right guys to help achieve that. I really do hope the rumors of Fox / Pace not seeing eye-to-eye and the whole Fangio thing are just that, because if those issues exist and we aren't making changes, then I think that is the ultimate recipe for disaster. Pace either needs to fully believe or he doesn't and if he doesn't, he should have the power to make the change and if the Bears don't trust him to do those things, then they shouldn't have Pace around either. You put people in positions and you then have to trust them to execute and if what you see isn't working (more the process, etc, cause right now, obviously with the personell we aren't going to be happy with the record), then you can't be afraid to act.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 09:33 AM) Zero accountability for a 3-13 season. I view it differently. Did the talent level (when considering injuries) look like a team that should have been way better? That answer is no? Did we see the team quit? That answer is largely no. By and large, I felt the coaches did what they could and did the best they had with what they had and we saw many players take steps forward (recent draft class was fantastic and Hicks came in and looked good on the FA front, etc). I'm not going to fire people because the roster wasn't ready and I'm not going to fire Pace because it is going to take time to turnover this thing like they are trying to do. If we go with a young QB and lose, but see more progress on the development side, I wouldn't want to fire our coaches either. I base things more on available talent, etc. and long term positioning and I do believe we are headed in the right path, however, I do agree, that QB is a massive questionmark. I am a believer that we need to find a way to get Jimmy G here (without sacrificing our 1st round pick). I'm also very open to a trade down to make up for the blow lost by giving up a high 2nd round pick plus something else for Jimmy G.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 09:42 AM) RB coach is gone too. Still a bigger head needed to roll. I was really disappointed with Fangio this year looking back. We have no playmakers. Without playmakers, you won't get turnovers. It is amazing how we were able to scheme to prevent yardage, but until you have quite a few playmakers, you aren't going to be an elite defense. Right now we have one guy (Floyd) who looks like he could emerge into that and another who has potential, but missed almost the whole year with injuries (Goldman). None of the other players on that roster are what I'd view as difference makers or even potential difference makers (at this point). We do have a lot of solid players though (guys like Willie Young, Freeman, Hicks, Trevathan (pre-injury), etc). McPhee was lousy this year, so who knows what he'll be going forward (you can hope for health, but his track record says don't expect it). Secondary is brutal and needs a dynamic player or two and the front seven could use at least one more dynamic player as well, if not two. I find it interesting we fired our RB coach and oline coach when I actually thought those units were fairly solid. I can't really evaluate Loggains given the fact that we had so many freaking injuries on offense.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 05:28 PM) Gar Forman's wife and Michael Reinsdorf's wife are best friends. They also think it's beneficial to get into the playoffs rather than going young and losing. I wouldn't expect anything to change. It certainly seems that Paxson has been more visible (since the end of last year) and that his comments haven't exactly been ringing endorsements of Gar. I don't know what we are going to do, but I would hope at some point Reinsdorf could separate business from friendship. Also, while I know Michael is being groomed to take on the chairman role when Reinsdorf passes (as the general thoughts are the Bulls will maintain ownership after Jerry passes away), I would suspect JR would still have a pretty heavy say in the matter still.

On a sidenote, I actually am happy that Hoiberg has shown some stones (for the first time as a coach) these past couple of weeks (first time where I ever felt he actually "coached") when he benched Niko and now with what he's done with Rondo (all more then deserving). In general, I have thought Fred has given guys way too long of rope.

Realistically, they should can Gar now and bring in a new GM (now), who can then start to work with Paxson on whatever the long term plan is (I still support Paxson as a president...although I'm just fine if they dumped him too), start to retool the roster the way they want to, let the new GM evaluate the coach, and at the end of the year, make a decision on the coach. I don't see how you could let Gar dump Hoiberg, though.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 12:22 PM) Fred Hoiberg might be a bad coach. Personnel is a much bigger issue though. They've drafted really poorly and added a bunch of guys that don't even fit what the HC wants to do. Hoiberg might be terrible but how could anyone tell? I wonder what it says that we have started solid to strong both years and then totally collapsed says? Remember last years Bulls team had a very promising start (not we are going to win it all promising, but we are going to be a top 3 seed in the east promising).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 12:37 PM) You're right. Expecting Hoiberg to win with last year's roster and this year's roster is a bit insane. But the 2 people who thought it wasn't unreasonable are Gar and Pax. Thibs was supposed to win, and when he couldn't he had to go, and they and JR couldn't kick him enough on the way out. Last year was a far bigger disappointment then this year, imo. Partly because last year lowered expectations a lot. Nate Silver's model (which also had the Warriors and Cavs as the top two teams) projected the Bulls to go 48-34, which would have put them as the 9th best team in the NBA (and 3rd best team in the east...one win behind the Celtics). 88% shot at winning the playoffs. Silver's model has generally been pretty solid at modeling out NBA teams (not to say it is perfect). This years team had just a 48% shot. If he weren't a rookie last year, that season would have gotten many coaches canned (expectations vs. reality were far off). This year, they are kind of in-line with where many expected them to be, but the lack of development should be concerning.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 12:16 PM) It's too early to say one way or the other. Look at the roster he has to work with. I fully believe Niko, Dougie, and Valentine have NBA talent. I also thought Snell had some NBA talent as well. What I saw under Hoiberg is that players have not really developed / got better. From the player development side, I haven't seen guys step up. Now it might just be, they are not good players, etc and that it is all bad drafting. I haven't paid much attention to Snell with the Bucks, but he's getting almost 30 minutes a night on a playoff team, so he can't be flat out terrible. Derrick Rose's PER is also up from 13.5 to 16.5 (not saying this is cause of Hoiberg and could just as much just be being away from Butler, etc). On the flipside, Rondo's PER went from 16.9 to 11.2. Now part of that is Rondo looks bad, but is a component coaching?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 10:35 AM) The odd thing about them is that they have beaten some really good teams, so there is SOMETHING there. To me it feels like the Coach isn't getting through to the team because they seem to play hard when they feel like it. I fully believe Hoiberg is one of the worst coaches in the association, if not the worst. He is awful. I think I'd rather have Del Negro and I long thought he was hot garbage too.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 10:08 AM) That was after Rondo said the same thing. They aren't athletic and they can't shoot 3's. How can that win? They are about to enter a stretch where they play good teams. It will be interesting to see what happens. If they can stay around .500, I would think nothing changes. If they tank, it would force them to do something. Right now that something seems to be releasing Rondo, which would be lame if that was the only response. I do think Gar goes before Hoiberg goes. I think Hoiberg is here for the rest of the year (most likely, at least, unless of course he loses the team). Gar I could see going sooner.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 3, 2017 -> 09:54 AM) on his new years interview with David Schuster, he actually said that the roster was not athletic enough. Its one thing that we all know this, it is a completely different thing that Paxson said it. He is basically putting it on Gar I think Gar *might* get canned if this team keeps putting out these mediocre to bad efforts through january, but I dont think Hoiberg goes anywhere at least until next season. I don't see any way Hoiberg coaches this team next year.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 2, 2017 -> 11:45 PM) Absolutely hate that they are wasting his prime like this. I just hope he can recruit like a madmen. That is the way this team can get really good...with Butler leading the charge and pulling some big time free agents. Guy is a star, but the rest of the team is so pathetic. Hoiberg is part of the problem, but the roster is too.