Jack Parkman

D'oh! Didn't mean to be captain obvious

It's hard to see the player's union and the owners coming to any sort of agreement in any league until the scientists say it's safe to do so.

I was listening to Rosenbloom today and JJ Stankevitz was on saying that Pace is going to get another QB........I don't like that. The team is cap fucked anyway in the next couple years and they're going to lose a lot of guys soon. Pace bet everything on Mitch...and lost. Time to go. Then again, I'm the VP of the Fire Pace club.....so.......maybe I'm biased.

The national perspective is that the Bears are awful. Power rankings range from 23rd to 29th at worst, with the average being 25th. It's always interesting to get a national perspective on the teams I like.

That was my understanding on how the game has changed, The classic 7 ft center has all but disappeared from the NBA. (I know this much) I'm wondering if they're just not wanted or if there's just no talent there. I should have phrased it as a question rather than a statement. My understanding of it was that NBA teams don't want one dimensional slow inside scorers anymore, but it could be a talent issue as well. I don't know which is the truth...But if it's a talent issue, then where did all of the big men go? There were a lot of greats coming into the NBA from Jabbar in the late 60s through Duncan in 97. Then, somehow after Shaq and Duncan retired they're gone. My question is....why? In the 80s and 90s you had guys like: Jabbar in his prime, and guys like: Sampson Olajuwon Ewing David Robinson Shaq Duncan coming into the league, and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few more.

Ok, this makes more sense. It seems like teams are asking if someone can play rather than how tall they are now. Talent dropoff makes sense....which begs the question....Where did all of the pure centers from Jabbar to Duncan come from, and why don't they exist anymore? Next question: Is Tim Duncan the last great big man? How long before we get another transcendent center?

Is there anyone even on the level of Ewing? I guess I'm just that out of touch. Most of my info comes from listening to the radio rather than watching games. I watch maybe 10 Bulls games per year and the conference and NBA finals and that's it these days. Haven't been a hardcore NBA fan in about 7-8 years. \ If I'm being honest with you guys, I don't even know who the stars in the NBA are outside of LeBron, Giannis, Durant, Curry, Leonard and Anthony Davis. I know a few guys on good teams like Draymond Green and other old vets that were holdovers from the days where I was a hardcore NBA guy.

Maybe I gave him too much credit. If he's not as good of a shooter as I thought he was, then maybe it's just that there aren't that many gifted big men anymore. I was under the impression that outside shooting is a requirement to stick nowadays, with all of the talk of analytics and 3>2 etc.

I agree if you're talking Orlando Shaq... sure. Like I said, Shaq couldn't let himself get fat like he did in today's NBA. LA Shaq where he was 350+ and couldn't move as well has no place in today's NBA. LA Shaq overpowered people with strength. Orlando Shaq was a freak that could hang with today's players. Counter argument- Shaq couldn't stop Giannis from taking jump shots.....and making them. If Shaq(the LA version) played now he'd be in foul trouble constantly. I don't know if there's a place for a 7 ft guy that's great from 15 feet in anymore. I'd love to drop 30 year old Shaq from 2000 in this NBA and see if he could hang. It would be fascinating. I never said he could or couldn't....I just said I didn't know. I agree that there aren't many players that could guard Shaq in the NBA now. It's just a completely different game. There are probably guys who were busts in the late 90s and early 00s that would be able to stick now as well. Absolutely Shaq would eat Draymond Green alive. Is the difference that there are no great centers anymore, and the league has adjusted to that fact....or is it that raw athleticism and jump shooting has taken over?

I don't think you can play in the NBA if you can't shoot from 18-25 feet anymore. Being able to make 3 pointers is a requirement now. That's why I question whether or not LA Shaq or Ewing could stick in today's NBA. There's a premium on contested jump shot making rather than inside scoring now. Shaq and Ewing were great from 15 ft in. The great players in the NBA now have to both be athletic freaks inside AND be able to pull up from 3 and nail a shot. The thing that separates players now is how good you are from 18 feet out. LeBron, Durant, Giannis....All are great jump shooters as well as post players. If your game is entirely low post, you're obsolete. The game is completely different now than it was even 10 years ago. Jump shooting is the name of the game. Players would get benched 15 years ago for taking shots that the greats make with regularity now.

No I remember. There's a big difference between 6-8 and 7-1.

Zion is not 7-1. He's more like a super athletic Robert Traylor.

Let's put it this way: It's questionable if Shaq or Ewing would have a place in today's NBA. Kukoc there isn't even a question about. If Shaq and Ewing would have a place in today's NBA, they probably wouldn't be getting huge minutes. And when I talk about Shaq, I mean LA Shaq not Orlando Shaq. Orlando Shaq would have a place, it's questionable about LA Shaq. This is coming from one of the biggest Shaq fans as a kid. I liked him as much as I liked Jordan.

Out of all of the guys that the Bulls have on the roster, the only ones that I care if they give a longer look to are Markkanen and White. Anyone else on the team I couldn't care less if they move them. I'd be disappointed if they gave up on Markkanen without giving him a decent coach.

Quit replying to my stuff. Bye.

They don't really have a top pairing and their forwards as an entire group suck on D. That's why the Hawks are bad defensively. They're missing skilled grit from the forward group.

The Moncada post was a fucking joke. I was poking fun at myself for overreacting.

I only came back to post because it's big news. I maintain that the problem with the Hawks D lies with the forwards and not the defensemen, other than the fact that they're missing a true #1D. Not gonna argue anymore on here about this. I commented on the big news and I'm done.

Reading is hard.

You're referring to yourself, right???? (with regard to the Hawks)

BTW, I don't doubt Chief has sources, I think his opinion pieces are the meatball of meatballs. 100% Spicy Italian. He's broken stuff before, I know that. There's a difference between fact and opinion.

Yesssssss......This made my day. Quite frankly, despite my defense of Bowman over the years, I'm pretty indifferent about him. I think McCub lost his job because he was pulling some strings that Bowman didn't want. Bowman has been pretty average since the 2015-16 season. If there are changes, one thing they don't need to change is their amateur and international scouting department. They've been nails for a while. Over a decade, while winning, the Hawks only drafted one complete bust in the 1st round and found a lot of contributors. I don't know how much is the Bowmans and how much is Mark Kelley. This is the most important department for the Blackhawks right now. If they choose to retain Bowman, I'm fine with that decision and if they choose to move on, I'm fine with that. Just don't lose the scouting department that looks pretty smart lately with Kubalik and Dach.

I don't see Mitch being any better than last year, especially when he himself said he's a reps based learner and we have the covid situation going on. I think worst case scenario with Foles is that he's serviceable and best case he's above average.Objectively, even Mitch isn't horrible, but he's not good either. Mitch hovers around the lower edge of serviceable. If he was a 2nd or 3rd rounder instead of the 2nd pick in the draft people would think differently about him. I think that he has some untapped potential but he has to sit for 2-3 years in the same system as a backup for it to come out. It won't happen here. I also think that Foles is going to get kilt behind this offensive line and only play 8-11 games. The 5-8 games that Mitch plays are his audition to stay in the NFL as a backup. I'd rather the Bears trade a late round pick for Josh Rosen and have him as a developmental backup than waste any more time on Mitch. Rosen is still only 23. Just my opinion, Foles has had his best years outside of his 1st year as a starter under Chip Kelly with Reid tree offenses. He went toe to toe with Brady in a damn Super Bowl with a Reid style offense. I actually think the offense has more upside with Foles than Mitch. The only reason to keep Mitch on the roster is if you just want to take one last look before waving bye to him.

I think Foles will be servicable to good as long as he can stay healthy. I don't think he's going to play more than 10-11 games.

I'd like them to sign Eric Reid.