bmags

Gar. Forman. Should. Not. Get. A. 3rd. Try.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 01:28 PM) Which is why Romo coming to the Bears makes a ton of sense for them. Not that I think they can emulate the Cards but I think they believe they can. Competition for Romo could be steep. Would definitely be a Houston/Denver bidding for his services as well, and I'm sure Romo would rather go to a competitive team.

I would enjoy getting rid of Rondo.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 01:11 PM) One thing to remember is, Palmer was the #1 overall pick in the draft, so it isn't like he didn't have a lot of talent. He has always been turnover prone though, but the Cardinals certainly benefited from having an elite defense (for a while). They had an elite offense with him for the second half of 14 and all of 2015. Hell, you could even go back to Warner. Cards have had a few good rolls of the dice with end of career QBs providing suddenly competitive windows.

If we do it well we could be in the same shape as the cards with their Palmer resurgence while we find a new QB. I probably watched less college football than any year of my life. So I can't claim to have a strong opinion, maybe I'll learn more, but it was just my impression there was not a can't miss prospect this year but it was deep. So that's why I've been fine with a stopgap qb plus a later round vs going after Jimmy G.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 12:08 PM) Just look at the Pats. Yeah, well you can get away with it when you win 4 super bowls, you can't when you say a player with a broken leg is day to day, and multiple players found to be out for season are day to day. It is stupid, they gain nothing, and it hurts the fan experience not even knowing who is going to play. this isn't putting 20 players on questionable when you know all will play, it's putting players on questionable when they are all out for season.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 12:01 PM) come on man, this is the NFL. they all do that s*** No, that is clearly what Fox thinks, but local media, national media, fans, their handling of so many injury situations has been bulls***.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 11:55 AM) To me, the press conference is irrelevant. If they come out and hang their heads and dont say much, they are crucified. If they come out and beat their chests and say they expect to win and compete, they are crucified. if they come out and talk openly about their deficiencies and what they expect to do, they are crucified. The only thing they didnt do is hang their heads and refuse to talk. THey talked about addressing needs openly, DB, QB, health, skill players, it was all addressed. The only thing that will make these end of season press conferences palatable is winning. There isnt much to say anymore, we all know the drill. We are heading to year three(year 5, post Lovie), this is a big year for the front office and coaching staff. I agree but I do feel need to say I find their obfuscating on injury reports infuriating as a fan and I hope it stops. They've gained no competitive advantage, but have made it look like they don't have a good medical staff.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 11:45 AM) I'm looking forward to seeing Tilson play. I really like him as the return for a Zach Duke. If we disregard the injuries which are becoming something of a pattern for him, he's relatively low risk in that there's little doubt that you have a reserve MLBer on your hands who can run and field. One of the reasons I see some upside is because he (more or less) never repeated a minor league level. Sometimes you don't really get to know what a player can be until you see him get settled in at a level. Maybe he's a guy who tops out during his first season at a new level and the roughly average-for-level production he has posted at every stop is all he can do at any level. But we just don't know. Since he clearly has a good hit tool and some ability to take walks, all he needs to develop into a productive hitter is just a smidgen of power. I think his physical tools dictate that he's not going to surprise us with an Eaton-esque power surge, but in the minors he's been more like Chris Getz in terms of extra base hitting. He only has to find the gaps here and there to start brushing up to an .800 type of OPS. Of course, if you told me the guy is going to be a decent CF with baserunning value and will carry a .700-.750 OPS, that's a nice player, too. But as we all know, players who were consistent in the minors don't always make the MLB leap as smoothly. His injuries are also a problem and might cause us to never really know what he could have been. Normally, Tilson isn't the kind of guy you're going to try and set aside a MLB position to get a look at, but the Sox are in a spot where he's the best option so we'll get to know him. To me it will depend on injury, but reading the STL reports on his defense, he was considered the best OF defender they had. We have 3 plus-defenders with questionable hit tools in engel/may/tilson, maybe one pans out, likely none do. But I like Tilson at least as a consistent major leaguer.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 11:32 AM) I don't see any reason to go after Taylor. We know what he is. I'm all for Romo and letting him bridge the gap. If you think Josh Allen or someone else that you can get in a later round is the guy, but needs time, you can bridge things that way. I'd rather have Hoyer then Taylor, to be honest. But you can't ignore QB, it is just such an important position. I suppose I could see some logic for Taylor, but I figure he's going to get too much guaranteed money. My push for Taylor is if you want to be competitive next year you can be competitive with a Taylor and not lose financial flexibility. You aren't signing a brock osweiler to market prices in other words. I"m not saying drafting a qb is bad, I'm saying that just because we have the 3rd overall pick we don't need to draft a bad qb. What if the QBs go 1-2, should we draft the 3rd best QB on board just because?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 10:42 AM) Spending the 3rd pick on a QB does seem excessive when there isn't an obvious Luck, etc., in this group, but that doesn't change the reality that the Bears have to fundamentally overhaul that position this offseason. Basically, out of their top 3 QBs, which one is a valid starter next year and which one do you want back? I'd rather have the cap space than Cutler and Barkley and Hoyer didn't impress as backups - maybe you're ok with one of them as a backup but you could make a case for bringing in 2-3 new QBs based on the weakness at that position. I've mentioned before, but Tyrod Taylor is likely available. Romo may be available. I'd rather draft a qb that we've rated appropriately then giving up a 3rd overall pick and a 4th for garoppolo.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 09:42 AM) I think you have to find the QB. Nothing else matters. The Vikings team and Texans team both have a ton of talent and pretty much can't do anything. Texans stumbled into the playoffs, they are at -49 net points this year. Colts have pretty much done as bad a job as you possibly can in drafting and adding players and still finished 8-8. If there was a really good qb at 3 i'd be happy to draft them, but just prioritizing "getting a QB" is not worth it. edit: for example - getting Jay Cutler

Original threads get updated with new info all the time.

New Olney article that pirates should pay up for Quintana http://insider.espn.com/blog/buster-olney/...r/post?id=15730 Nobody should make decisions just on what their fans want, but I don't think there has been any other org rumored that has as much cover to trade top prospects as the pirates, whom everyone agrees are suited to do so

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8">

I was looking up movies I saw and forgot that I saw Star Trek Beyond. I've had a rule recently where any movie that I saw that was so forgettable I couldn't tell you anything about it (goes for 50% of marvel movies) then I'll consider it terrible. Ghostbusters was pretty terrible. Maybe the worst I saw. Okay I'm starting to remember star trek beyond. Stuck on a planet. Rides a motorcycle in circles, their ship crashes.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 07:58 AM) This is the first in what will be 3 or 4 guest posts from Chris Kusiolek. Chris is a budding scout, who is about to head to the DR to work with a development pipeline down there. He's been scouting as an amateur the last few years, before getting this new professional gig. Fortunately, he got notes on a couple dozen White Sox prospects he saw in AFL and Instructs that he was willing to share. This article covers the first six reports. Future articles will cover more. Keep in mind that these are scouting NOTES - this doesn't read like a typical article. They are just his views on these players from his time scouting them. I'm going to guess that some of his takes here will cause some controversy, especially around Kopech, but also maybe on Collins and Hawkins. His views may not match popular theory on those players. Well, there's also Schwarber.

I don't want Garoppolo. Perhaps he is good and worth the risk, but I'd rather Bears just build a formidable base like Texans/Vikings/Raiders then take shots at finding a QB vs trying to recreate Colts.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 08:29 AM) Rodgers, Frazier, Meadows and Bell would be the ones I'd prefer. No interest at all in Mateo. I don't get why people would want Maitan as a major piece in a Braves deal. The kid is 16 years old! Way too risky for me, considering the slam dunk certainty of Quintana the Sox would be giving up. There is plenty of high end prospect talent available without taking on someone so far away who has an enormous bust risk. I know he wouldn't necessarily be a centerpiece, but still, he'd cost a lot to acquire thus lessening other parts of the package, and it wouldn't be my game plan. Nobody wants to say no to a 16 year old Miguel Cabrera. If you are getting Albies. Could he flame out? They all could flame out. But hard to read "best venezuelan prospect since Cabrera" and not get excited: http://www.baseballamerica.com/internation...hpZ2XSqxb5PA.97

If I were Texans I would cut my losses with Osweiler and try hard for garopollo. You would have 1 year of cheap garopollo and this year they face the biggest cap hit with Osweiler and can cut him more easily after. They'd avoid paying two rookie salaries and have a difficult FA, but when you are that close, may as well keep trying til you hit.

Mizzou basketball program is so dead. Amazing how fast it can happen.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 06:54 PM) Would you accept a smaller package built around Torres or a larger package around Meadows? I would take a larger package around Meadows.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 04:37 PM) They don't have less talent than they had 2 years ago. Their secondary is bad. The front 7 when healthy is pretty good. Two years ago they were heavy on skill players and barren on trenches. now have good/great play, young and improving dline play, and good linebacker core. And worse skill players.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 05:27 PM) One of the contributors on the Garfien podcast yesterday sure seemed to think/know that the Hammel is interested in the Sox Yeah said he'd love to stay in Chicago. I think Hammel can find a two year deal though and I doubt we give it up.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 05:01 PM) Still, if Hahn is asking for a deal similar to the Sale deal it'd look like Torres Rutherford Andujar Tate and that could be scaring Cashman off. Well, that goes back to my point of in my head cashman is willing to use Torres in a deal, but when Torres is added wants it to be in a situation where he is offering a talent so much more coveted than what other teams are offered he does not need to offer as much on the backend. Compare that with if Cashman is bidding Torres vs a Meadows, well, then they need to be competitive on the backend. But if Torres is dropped in an offer, Hahn isn't goint to respond "uh he's only half of 1/2 season of chapman therefore goodbye"