nitetrain8601
-
Posts
9,673 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by nitetrain8601
-
-
6 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:
The bold still an issue after today. That game plan worked for a half, but failed badly on the last 2 drives. I don't know, on those drives had the run game been better or Mitch not fumbling or throwing a ball on a 3rd and 5 3 yards short of the first down, we might have sealed the deal.
In the end, I don't want it to get confused. The Bears biggest problem isn't even coaching, it's Pace. Asset management is the number one job of a GM and he's been at the league bottom whether it be draft capital, cap, or talent. He's hit on some mid tier picks, and that's it.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:
But Bears did not score 45 today, they scored 23 in the first half and 7 in the second half. The lack of confidence on this offense is why they were playing conservative and trying to not lose the game, and they ended up losing because of it. The playing not to lose plan has been a theme under this Nagy coached team, which has resulted in a lot of ugly wins,
Hold on just a minute. I hear, read, listen to Bears fans all day long asking to play to the strengths. Mitch sucks on the deep ball, Mitch sucks in the pocket, the OLine is trash. Nagy finally has a gameplan that protects him and plays to his strength. The Bears score 30. And the loss is on him? WOW.
8 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:With the percentage of cap allocated to the defense, losing when the offense scores 30 is completely unacceptable.
Thank you. The cap, the resources, and the fact that they've already shown dominance when they had less talent under Fangio. And the problem is, the schemes suck. Bears fans should root for improvement everywhere.
The defense is better than the offense. Well the bar is low. How is the defense relative to the talent on defense? How is it relative to the league? Are they meeting expectations, have they been meeting expectations, etc?
Same goes for offense and special teams. If the goal is a championship, you look for a solution in all areas, not just one.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, thxfrthmmrs said:
WTF, they faced a bottom 2 defense today. So we're going to ignore the embarrassment we've been calling an offense all season because they scored 30 points against a bad defense, and still lost? And really, they had a good first half and scored 7 points in the second half, against the said bad defense. They'll get credit when they show they're capable move the ball against even a league average this defense.
What I'm saying is this: If the Bears scored 45 points and loss, people would still be calling for Nagy's head after today's loss. Today is not on Nagy. Today is on Pagano. Call out what the actual problems are. Pagano, is a problem.
-
3 minutes ago, TheTruth05 said:
They hadn’t scored 30+ points in a game in over a year dude. Keep carrying the water for Nagy and his offense
Carrying the water? I'm not even a Bears fan. And I do think Nagy has flaws. I do not think he should stay in Chicago. I also am smart enough to realize that Pagano has turned driven a Maserati like a Hyundai and Page does not know how to build a team. Those are two much bigger issues. I also know when to give credit. Nagy and the offensive staff had a good gameplan. Nagy and the offense do not deserve to get fired like many Bears fans are asking for, for today's loss. That's on Pagano.
-
2 minutes ago, TheTruth05 said:
They all suck tho, they were facing an abysmal defense. I get no game is given but they should have won this game
Typically Chicago sports fan. "Nagy is my scapegoat and until he's gone, I don't care what anyone else does."
Bears ran the shit out of the ball today. They moved Mitch out of the pocket. They did everything right on offense. Defense is why they lost the game. And yet, everyone continues to ignore the defense.
-
Amazing how Bear fans won't give credit for the offensive gameplan, which worked well and continue to ignore how shit of a coach Pagano is.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:
The majority of the Bears success in 2018 on D was that Fangio was great at disguising coverages and that the Bears could reach the QB with rushing 4 or 5 guys at most.
While true, disguising is a talent as a playcaller. But tonight, Pagano was rushing 3 guys.
-
1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:
I think Pagano is an issue as well, but.....Fangio did a lot of the same stuff because the 4 men could get to the QB back in 2018. Now that Mack doesn't command the same attention, they can't get pressure on the QB with 4 men like they used to.
I don't know, it's just something I see. Pagano runs a scheme (and has done this since he got to Chicago) as if he doesn't have much defensive talent and safeguards against the homerun plays. He's driving a Maserati as if he's in a Hyundai.
-
12 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:
I know this is sacrilege around these parts......but Mack has not been the same guy that the Bears traded for the last two years. He got really old really fast. He was great in 2018, and hasn't been the same since. I think a lot of the decline of the defense from being an elite unit to just a very good one has to do with Mack falling halfway off a cliff. He's now just a good pass rusher, and nowhere near elite.
1 minute ago, Chisoxfn said:Not sacrilege. I have been ripping on Mack for 1.5 seasons at this point. If I could trade him for anything close to the package they gave up, I would do it.
As a non-Bears fan, Mack isn't the problem. It's the schemes. If the Bears had an offense that was even league average, Pagano would rightfully be getting ripped. He sucked as a head coach and I'm afraid he was better at that than he is as a DC. Packers don't deal with the blitz well, so what does Pagano do? Run a bend, don't break defense which is what you do if you have bad defense, not an elite one (before he took over).
-
Vaughn is not a prospect you extend early. That's asking for a Sean Kingery situation. Vaughn is also not someone who you say "Oh, we can't block him". He's a good prospect, that's it at this point.
With that stated, Joc in RF and SP is the way to go for me. I think it will give you the largest ROI for next season.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Soxfest said:
Fire Nagy tomorrow and make Pagano head coach rest of year
Why? Pagano is trash. And why are we blaming Nagy this week?
This team has a talent deficit. I don't care if they were running the I-Form all game long, they would still lose. They don't have players on the offensive side of the ball. It begins with the line and it has been ignored or mis evaluated since Cutler was yelling at his OLineman.
Gotta stop the Chicago mentality of trying to find a scapegoat. Pace has been terrible with asset management. That is at the top of the list for a GM.
-
2
-
-
You need someone to catch Giolito. Coop gone, McCann gone. That's going to be tough. I do think you should have a good backup. McCann was as solid as they came.
-
2
-
-
Joc or Yasiel on a 1 year deal please.
-
16 hours ago, SouthSideGeorgia said:
Not sure if Dodgers HC Dave Roberts has been mentioned in the previous 29 pages but I needed a change from LaRussa and Hinch.
Long shot, but would probably need the Braves to beat the Dodgers tonight and for frustrations to boil over in LA enough to fire Roberts.
No. As someone who follows the Dodgers religiously, Roberts is the absolute wrong guy to bring in. He's awful and I was pissed they gave him an extension when they did. He cost them the World Series against the Red Sox by sitting his best bats in favor of analytics. The man would've sat Trout if he hit righties at a .290 clip as opposed to a .291 clip against lefties.
He's awful. He doesn't deserve to manage. Bench coach at best. And that's stretching it.
-
2
-
-
I do think Hinch is a little overrated. Not because of the cheating, but he didn't move the needle in Arizona at all. Also, the more I think of it, I'm surprised there wasn't a bigger penalty to Houston. I just remembered their FO was caught hacking into the Cardinals' system a few years back as well. To me I would've given them a 3 year postseason ban, take some picks.
-
Just now, Tony said:
So then if you’re OK with Hinch becoming the manager then, why not now?
Look at the threads around here now. Hinch hasn't been away long enough for people to forget, nor does he have anyone vouching for him. His players really F'ed him over tbh. And it doesn't help that many Astros players seemingly had a down year.
-
1 minute ago, HahnsKiddieTable said:
No way they pair LaRussa up with AJ Hinch. Why would he sign up for that when I’m sure Detroit would give him full reign of their organization if he asked for it.
Because if he sucks with Detroit (which he will), that's it. He's done for. People will think he's a shitty manager without the cheating, whether right or wrong. Hinch is only going to get one chance at this in terms of rebuilding his reputation. It honestly would be really smart of him to latch onto a HoF manager to give him back some credibility.
-
I'd honestly be fine with LaRussa. I don't think people give him enough credit for his analytics, but he was one of those guys who was super deep into pitching changes. He'd waste several pitchers on one batter in the inning.
I think they'll pair him with Hinch being his understudy to be honest. That'll be to help give Hinch some credibility back, then let him fully take over.
-
I don't think Springer is that great. Those stars all had some down years seemingly. At least my fantasy team says so. I had both Altuve and Springer.
-
9 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:
They didn't see eye to eye - I don't know that Mike didn't leverage analytics, he just didn't want to be told by the front office and the GM about what he needed to do with them. I think it was broader than just Mike not accepting analytics. That said - he certainly has a much heavier lean towards being a pure baseball guy vs. a pure analytics guy. His run with the Angels ended badly, but the Angels have struggled for a while under Arte Moreno and Mike was never calling the shots when it came to the guys they signed to big money FA contracts. Very rarely did anyone ever look at a Scioscia managed team and think that the team underachieved.
He is an interesting name, but I doubt he'll get his next change with this Sox squad. I think Mike would be a more likely fit with the Tigers or somewhere else and that is if he even wants to get back into it. Would be a guy worth chatting with though - after as long of a run managing as he had, it would be interesting to see the perspectives he's gained from a few years being out of the game.
6 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I really would like to hear the perspective on Mike from someone who saw a lot more of him. I only saw him vs. the Sox but I was always impressed (and not happy) how he would straight out-manage Ozzie. It was like a chess game Ozzie kept losing, and I actually thought Ozzie was a pretty decent game manager.
I do think he may be a pro-analytics guy perhaps if it was framed to him in the appropriate way. Who knows? But he is not the kind of guy that wants a poindexter stepping on his toes and telling him what to do, and I actually like that in a manager. As long as he is good. And I think the lack of pitching mostly on those Angels teams hurt them a lot more than any manager ever could have.
https://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-mike-scoscia-jerry-dipoto-los-angeles-angels-resignation/
Here is one article on it
-
44 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:
He doesn't fit all the criteria but my vote goes to...
Mike Scioscia
43 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:I remember how Soscia used to outmanage Ozzie every time we played the Angels. He's old school but the time off of managing I think may have refreshed him. He will probably be open to all the analytics etc anyway, and he will likely insist on a real smart bench coach to help him. It's a 4-star or 5-star hire IMO.
PLEASE NO HINCH OR CORA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't think you know enough about Scioscia then. There was a really good article about how he and the previous GM (then Seattle's GM) had a power struggle because he refused to look at analytics. He would get them and literally throw them out. The article goes into detail about how he cost his team a playoff run because of it.
-
2 minutes ago, bmags said:
I think your first 3 are right, I just don't think Kopech is the right stand-in for arias. I think it would just be a different package. Kopech/Engel/(Thompson or Dalquist)/some position player they were high on.
I agree. Hell, I think Kopech would be pretty high too. I think you would maybe put Vaughn in, if that. None of the prospects given up were Top 5 in the Padres system. But Clevinger also isn't thatttt great.
-
1 minute ago, soxfan2014 said:
Opens up a spot in the rotation for Plesac (unless they are still upset at him).
From reports on MLBTradeRumors, there were teammates that were so pissed at Clevinger and Plesac that they were going to opt out of the season if they both were brought back. So it seems like the whole organization was pissed at them. With that stated, they both are studs. Cleveland knows how to develop pitching.
For the Padres, one point that was brought up is they changed out both of their catchers including the best framer in the majors. This doesn't bode well for their SP if you ask me. I wonder if Castro is the primary catcher.
-
1
-
-
Padres are going all in. Cleve is not a bad move. Ty France had no position in the trade to Seattle, so it's not bad. WOW.
Joc Pederson: How long will he be a future White Sox?
in Pale Hose Talk
Posted
Why not put Joc in the field and Eloy as DH?