Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 09:19 PM) Get outa here with your trumped up trickle down talk. Nobody named me was proposing that. If i understand the brackets correctly, the top % of wage-earners currently pay 40%? That's a s*** ton if true. Curious what the Bernieites and Hillaryans think it should go up to to make it a "fair share". 50-60%? And these aren't even the rich people of America. These are the doctors, lawyers, athletes & entertainers...who all donate tons of money. But they aren't the rich. I mean rich enough but not the smart super rich running businesses (the charitable corporate bastards). I'm not saying lower it, just wondering how high becomes too high. I'm not saying privatize research either caulfield...because i didn't say that. I'm just saying if you go after the semi-rich mentioned above, which is a super popular talking point to rally the "revolution of the young people", you're not only removing the incentive for those young people to go to school for 10 years, but you're also going to remove 100s of millions, maybe billions, of yearly charitable donations. Uncle Sam will get it instead of child leukemia etc. You really think Uncle Sam can better direct the use of $10M than the rich guy who's kid died from leukemia, who wants to prevent other kids from the same fate. I don't buy it. I feel like $10M is a piece of dust to Uncle Sam, lost in the redtape of some wasteful govt program developing canine soldiers or something. One thing to remember is, that is the amount taxed on ordinary income. The wealthier you are, the less likely your income is "ordinary"...it is far more likely to be in the vein of capital gains, etc....which have a significantly lower tax rate, which is ultimately why the effective tax rates of the wealthy can be much lower then expected. The people who actually have an effective tax rate closer to that 40% rate, are going to be more the people who are making close to those income levels (say 500K / yr)...so maybe a doctor or a good lawyer or a finance executive, strong sales guy, higher up engineers / IT people, etc. Those people are less likely to have anything they can deduct and they'll pay the most (even though at that income level, while they are certainly well off...they aren't what you would consider the ultra wealthy or anything along those lines).

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Dec 22, 2016 -> 08:52 AM) The idea of Forman hiring ANOTHER coach is nauseating. If Hoiberg goes, Gar goes down with the ship. I agree. I can't see Hoiberg going by himself. If Hoiberg goes, I presume Gar goes too. I don't think Paxson goes. The real question is, does Paxson take over GM reigns and hire next coach or does he stay as president and hire a new GM and coach.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Dec 22, 2016 -> 08:49 AM) The Bears lack so much talent at so many positions, to trade high picks for any one player is a mistake. The idea of having a draft like Dallas did last year is incredibly tantalizing. The only pick for Dallas that hasn't really panned out yet was never going to play this year. Give me draft picks any day of the week. Technically, if you look at the draft the Bears had, you have Whitehair, Howard, and Floyd...all of which if you did a redraft, probably are 1st round picks. PFF has Whitehair and Howard in their top 10 of all rookies (and I don't quite understand how Floyd is off the list, outside of maybe the slow start and time missed from injuries...but when you watch him, you see a guy who can be a totally dynamic pass rusher). No way of not saying the Bears 2016 draft (as of right now) is anything other then a big success. The other guys: Bullard - Inconsistent play. Coaches seem to be trying to get a little more push / want out of him. Jury still out Deon Bush - Injured / Inconsistent play; For a 4th round pick, hard to expect greatness everywhere...but he's back on the field so we'll get a couple more weeks to see if he can flash some quality instincts / playmaking abilities Kiatowski - Has looked solid, with some upside over the last 4 weeks of getting starts. Other guys...nothing to highlight yet, but I wouldn't say we have any definitive busts either. All in all, as of right now, I'd rank the Bears as having one of the best draft classes of 2016. That could change (for better or worse) but I like what I see right now.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 07:30 PM) Agreed. There just aren't words to describe how idiotic the concept is. Edit: I could see it if there was a limit on how many they could let in per year. Some players are more deserving than others. Yep. Sometimes voters strategically don't vote for one of the "guarantees" so they can try and get up the vote for other players who they also think are a fit (or even just get enough votes for players to stay on). Bit more strategy to it in some cases (although clearly some of the voters were just straight up delusional).

I don't know what it is, but I'm finally starting to get the feel that something is imminent and we might actually see a Q move happen soon.

Hub Arkush reportedly made a comment that Jimmy G (of Patriots) would be the #1 overall pick in the draft (if he was eligible). Kind of a moot point all things considered and it doesn't mean his value is that (since whomever acquires him will also have to pay him a lot of money). We all know I'm very high on Jimmy G and would gladly give up our 2nd pick and a future 3rd round pick. I'd also be willing to dangle Jeffrey & picks as part of a package as well.

Everyone who said Rondo sucked when we signed him this off-season, was absolutely right. Good god he is awful.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 07:44 AM) Reagan has a mixed legacy. What's so very odd to me though is, I can't think of a modern President who is so thoroughly caricatured by both sides of the aisle. It's absurd. Republicans (or at least many GOP politicians) prop him up as a paragon of conservatism, when in reality, he was far more liberal than any candidate the GOP has run out there for nomination in the last few cycles. Democrats make him out to be an evil, warmongering poor-people-hater, when in reality he did plenty of good things along with the bad. He's become folklore. By the way, I though Bush Sr was a better President than he's gotten credit for. Bush Sr was a good president, imo.

A potential pirates deal excites me.

Nice.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 20, 2016 -> 10:09 AM) Take it for what it's worth, this was at the deadline. whitesoxdave ‏@barstoolWSD FWIW I was told the #WhiteSox turned down a Benintendi, Kopech, Johnson/Ball, and PTBNL package for Quintana from #RedSox I know I'm late to the party, but that is a deal that would have really excited me. Oh well...Red Sox move isn't happening now, but I think I'd have made that deal and flipped Sale elsewhere (mainly because I think in order of operation, I'd have rather moved Q before Sale...because I think it would be easier to move Sale vs. Q).

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/12/19/gab...s-from-success/ Thought this was a great write-up by Gabriel.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 09:25 AM) They need at least 10 more talented players up and down the roster. Thats still going to take more than one more year IMO. I agree, although depending on the QB situation, I would expect to see quite a few more wins next year (vs. this year).

QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 08:21 AM) Agreed. Sox best course of action is to let Robertson rebuild his value and trade Jones and his incredible contract now. I agree. I actually think putting Jones in the closer role would have had more downside then upside. We all know there are certain players who just can't close (for whatever reason) and if Jones had a few bad outings, it could have hindered his trade value a lot more then the potential upside from a solid couple months (imo). Jones value should be high, the only real question is how much of a negative in trade value is his injury history. Jones is very high on my list of guys we should move now.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 07:29 AM) Yeah, it is really easy to argue that the Bears are a few plays and their starting line up away from the playoffs. They have quite literally given away three games they should have won even with this s*** squad they have had for the last half of the season. The defense is a legitimate top 10 defense right now, even missing a couple of players. Give the offense a quarterback, even an OK offensiveline, plus receivers that don't absolutely suck, this is a team that could win 10 games. Fox has advanced this team a ton in just under two seasons. The team has made strides, but there are a lot of missing parts still. I suppose if healthy, they could be a 10 win team if everything went right (and playing a last place schedule), but I think they have major gaps in the secondary and obviously major questionmarks offensively (LT QB is a huge mark). Defense is trending upwards, but we still have very few playmakers (that said, Floyd looks like a beast, which is fantastic).

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 07:51 AM) I thought our offensive line has been +. Give us a playcaller that knows to run the ball, legit tight ends, and revamped defensive backfield and we could be somewhere. Honestly, can we really knock Loggains for getting 27 points with Barkley at the helm. I think if we all looked at our expectations of Barkley when he was first announced and then look at what he's done and talk about how well he's played, we can give Matt a ton of credit, but is it fair to ignore Loggains? It is so hard to know what Loggains is, given all the injuries, etc.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 18, 2016 -> 03:34 PM) I don't get this...why the heck would we want to fire him now? Yeah...I don't quite grasp. The team clearly hasn't quit and with all the injuries and backups playing, they are playing pretty competitive football against quality teams. I hope this trend continues cause I like the idea of continuity (albeit I clearly want Fangio around).

QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 08:16 AM) I've heard the market for Robertson described as "ice cold." Sox aren't getting anything of significance for Robertson. Which to me means, why even try. Just wait until the deadline..see if he kicks butt and if he does, you can get more for him. It isn't like payroll is a major issue.

I think one day we are all going to login and there will be a report that Q has been traded. Seems like whomever else the Sox are talking to have quiet lips and with everyone staying radio silent, we all might be surprised at who acquires him or how quick it goes down.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 11:44 AM) Like really? First off, the deal was going to include Lavine and Dunn. Second, I don't think anyone was jumping at the deal. I want Butler traded cause this team is never going anywhere with him as the number 1 guy but I certainly wasn't jumping at the proposed deal of the Wolves. And calling anyone foolish right now with this team still stuck in the mud is pretty ridiculous. Trading a star in this league is a foolish notion...period. When it is a star who is signed to a mega cheap deal, it is even more foolish. Having Butler makes it far more likely to contend then not having him. I don't believe the Wolves were ever willing to include Lavine. The Boston deal was more likely and even in that deal, you weren't getting loaded...maybe you get lucky on whatever the Nets next pick becomes. I'm not saying front office is great or we are great, but trading Butler would have been an awful thing to do.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 02:30 PM) http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2680788...ng-unemployment "John Fox is likely gone, the coaches and officials with whom B/R spoke believe. One of the names that has come up for this spot is Lions offensive coordinator Jim Bob Cooter." I don't see the Bears dumping Fox for at least one more season tho If we dump him for Jim Bob Cooter, I'll be pissed. Fox probably will too, since he had tried to hire him IIRC. Either way, first order of business should be to make sure front office is willing and able to make Fangio one of, if not the highest paid assistant in the league. Will be interesting if there is truth to this.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 12:50 PM) OK, in that case, those two trades could surely make for a super-large jump. But when it comes to overall farm systems, top 10 is going to be a heavy component of the overall rankings (including how elite your top guys are). 2 might be high, but clearly a top 5, and I'd be dissapointed if we were anything but #1/#2 after a Q deal.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 06:10 AM) This is what Keith Law said: Nick: If you were Lunhow, would you trade Musgrove + Martes + Tucker for Quintana, and why or why not? I go back and forth as an Astros fan but think I’d be happy with him pulling the trigger. Klaw: If I’m Luhnow I do it. If I’m Hahn I’m not even countering because it’s so low. FWIW, I don’t know that that was ever discussed by the clubs. Seems to echo Shack & I's sentiments and I hope Hahn has the same opinion. I also hope the rest of the baseball world values Q like some of us on here do (in the sense that he is a borderline ace whose contract essentially values him at an "ace" level).

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) Exactly how I feel. When you have a star, or in this case a star and an aging star, there is always a way out. Its a star league...they aren't going anywhere with this roster, but all of you who wanted to deal Butler for Dunn and a couple other middling picks are looking awfully foolish. Stars in the NBA don't grow on trees. Gar and company have failed to surround that talent with the right players, but the team will need to pivot and whether it is Chris Paul or others, they need to find a way to replace Rondo with an upgraded point guard plus add more shooting / enhanced talent off the bench. Ideally, you'd upgrade the bigs as well, albeit Lopez / Taj are the least of the Bulls worries. The terrible bench and the fact that Rondo stinks are the major things separating them from being an upper echelon team (I didn't say title contender, cause they'd need to find at a total superstar plus enhance depth and even then, with the Warriors so talented, it will be hard to address).

I was pretty surprised to here the talk of "pink" slips from the commentators, especially given Reggie Miller has a personal connection with Hoiberg. I don't like Hoiberg, but the bench play isn't necessarily his fault. I just don't think he is going to maximize our talent. That said, I was glad we sent Niko a message for his crap play (by benching him). We need to get Denzel a run where he has the ball (and if we aren't going to do it on the team, we should let him get a bit of run for a week or two in the Dleague so he can get some minutes and regain confidence in his shot). At least they weren't outscored in the 4th, haha.