iamshack

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 10:53 AM) It's 12/12/6.5, then he gets a million a year for next 7 years. That 6 million figure for 2013 is probably evidence that we didn't want to go that 3rd year and we're going to be paying Jake Peavy $4 million to buy out his contract. Great, now we are derferring money too.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 10:49 AM) Really? Why? Because I don't believe he's going to earn that. He didn't earn his last contract at $12/year over 5 years and my guess is the chances of him earning more annually isn't going to happen with him being 5 years older. Have the terms of each year been released yet? My guess is this one is backloaded a bit too.

I think it's irresponsible. Screw you, PK.

Jerry is as loyal as they get, but he's also not stupid. Hopefully he understands the position Paul and his evil agent are in and sticks with what is fair, not with what PK would "like."

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 10:09 AM) #WhiteSox boss Jerry Reinsdorf vows to get Konerko signed today. #Orioles #Tigers #MLB #MASN less than a minute ago via TweetDeck Barf. Walk away, Jerry.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 08:20 AM) Why exactly are both the Red Sox and Yankees out of the picture? The Yankees have been believed to salivate over him for years, and have a habit of jumping in late in negotiations with huge offers (that's what happened in the Teixeira deal. Especially if they lose out on Lee). The Red Sox have another LH bat now, true, but their OF is still full of holes. Ellsbury, Cameron, and Drew are their current starters, and between them, that was only about 205 starts last year for 3 positions, which means they used their backups a ton. Heyman this morning still says the Yankees and Red Sox are in the picture, along with the Angels, Ligers, and Rangers (most of those names are also in on the Lee deal and suggest to me that Crawford may be becoming the consolation prize) It's in Crawford's best interests to make it seem as though many teams are still in the picture, especially the Yankees and Red Sox. But read between the bs, Balta...

QUOTE (chisox2334 @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 09:33 AM) this might be what is going on and I haven't heard anyone being to the point of being aggressive with Konerko than white sox. Every reporter thinks hes still coming back except for mainly cowley but nightengale, rosenthal, heyman all believe he will be back with w sox. Because it's pretty clear that Arizona can't make a competitive offer now that they have signed Putz, and the Angels are still trying to figure out whether to sign Beltre or Crawford. The White Sox know this, and so are sticking to what they think is reasonable. Both sides are just in a bs'ing contest right now.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 08:23 AM) Why aren't we hearing more about Arizona with Paul Konerko? The D-backs want him badly but are offering only $8 m a year for 3 years. - Phil Rogers. Enought said, neither Rangers nor Orioles will give Paulie anything above 12M a year, I'm pretty convinced. I hope Kenny/JR play this smart. I think Baltimore would give Pauly more than $12 million per year. But he just has absolutely no interest in playing there, and is too classy to pretend he is just to drive his price up.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 08:20 AM) Why exactly are both the Red Sox and Yankees out of the picture? The Yankees have been believed to salivate over him for years, and have a habit of jumping in late in negotiations with huge offers (that's what happened in the Teixeira deal. Especially if they lose out on Lee). The Red Sox have another LH bat now, true, but their OF is still full of holes. Ellsbury, Cameron, and Drew are their current starters, and between them, that was only about 205 starts last year for 3 positions, which means they used their backups a ton. That's a fair question. They're both going to sign players to long-term contracts for over $150 million shortly, as I am guessing the Yankees will eventually sign Lee. While that shouldn't stop them from signing Crawford, I think it would inspire a bit of caution in regards to signing another huge deal this offseason. I think they'd probably be more willing to dole out another whopper of a contract like that next year, after they've had some time to see things play out a bit, but that's just my guess. It's been made pretty clear that the Yankees want to fix their pitching staff and are not worried about their offense. Plus, they've got Brett Gardner, who is a fairly similar player to Crawford, minus a bit of power. The Red Sox, meanwhile, have been very hesitant to hand out longterm deals lately, and now that they've just committed to signing AGon, my guess is they aren't super excited about offering Crawford some 7 or 8 year deal. But hey, I guess you never know.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 08:14 AM) #mlb rival teams who bid on Konerko are convinced he is returning to Sox. - Nightengale Mainly because it's obvious he is trying to bend us over simply because he knows JR is loyal. I'm really ready to walk away and let Pauly go play in Baltimore.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 08:41 AM) The LA Times floated 8/$180 as a possible. Who is he going to get that from, the Angels? I can't see him getting this deal now that the Red Sox and Yankees are both out of the picture. If I were Crawford, I'd just sign a 1-year deal with one of NYY or Bos and go try and win a ring while putting up huge numbers and try this again next year.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 03:33 AM) Hasn't Lewis played in a 3-4 most of this decade? I mean, I'm going to argue that Ray Lewis is superior to Brian Urlacher no matter what scheme you want to use, I'm more or less just saying. They have switched back and forth a few separate times, yes. In 2000 they were playing a 4-3...but in 2006 they were playing a 3-4...then they switched back to a 4-3 at some point...not even sure what they are playing at the moment.

Honestly, I would have rather signed Pena at 1/$10 than PK at 3/$39 or whatever it is that we are supposedly offering.

mlbtraderumors.com

QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:17 PM) That's a convincing stat that helps disprove Lovie's rigidity. I did notice that increase in blitzing last year, and I read this article in the offseason (I really like the work Seifert does on his blog btw). I overlooked it for the purposes of my argument (law school training). Still I don't think this proves that Lovie is a good head coach. In fact you could argue that this indicts Lovie for being an ineffective designer/play caller. Given the amount of blitzing the Bears did last season they still didn't rank in the top 10 in sacks. I am willing to attribute a good portion of that to poor execution by the players. But I think that a better coach would have been able to hide/scheme the blitzes better and achieve better results. FWIW, I am enjoying this debate and I think its perfectly reasonable to support Lovie. Just curious, Murcie, how old are you? Do you remember Ditka's tenure here, honestly?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:16 PM) I feigned nothing, and you'll note I said nothing about her at all except to point out her struggles. I said nothing of any deep sadness or concern, as I do not know the woman. Like I said, feel free to say whatever - I just find it tactless, and that is only my opinion. Your opinion is noted.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:04 PM) Say whatever you'd like, I just thought it was funny that you tried to make it out to be something it wasn't. I personally think its a little tacky to choose this moment to talk about her possible sketchiness - she just spent the past few years fighting cancer and a cheating husband while trying to help cancer charities and oh-by-the-way be a national politician's wife (which has to be among the s***tiest jobs one can have). Read Game Change. And personally I think it's a bit tacky for you and others to feign deep concern and sadness for someone you knew very little about. But hey, she passed away, so it's ok to grossly exaggerate who she was or all the wonderful things she did. Yes, it's too bad that she passed away. But people die from cancer and other illnesses or tragedies all the time and no one so much as flinches.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 05:59 PM) Not to speak ill of the dead, but, I'm going to speak ill of the dead. Fine. Sorry. I guess we'll all just lie about who she was because we're sad she died even though none of us have ever met her or know her.

QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:48 PM) I didn't mean to imply that he Bears should change from a 4-3 to a 3-4. What I was trying to say is that the Bears should not have played so much of their base cover-2 when they didn't have a pass rush, didn't have Urlacher to swallow up tackles and cover the deep middle, Briggs missed time, and had shoddy secondary play. There are teams that experience injuries and do a better job of adapting to them. Lovie was the play caller last year and the defense was a stanch 17th in total defense (an imperfect stat). Our entire linebacking core was out at one time or another, and all at the same time as well, and our offense was poor and turned the ball over far too much. Yes, it was a lost year, but hard for me to place the blame all on Lovie. Could he have done better, absolutely.

QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 05:39 PM) Derrick Brooks was an OLB. Not a MLB. Ahh, you're right. My bad.

QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:34 PM) Where did I argue that Mike Ditka was a good coach? I never did. Not once. I specifically agreed with you that he is probably overrated. I was simply contradicting the point you made that Ditka was CERTAINLY worse than Lovie (which you stated but didn't explain in any detail). In terms of win-loss records, you cited Wade Phillips as a failure earlier. Wade Phillips' career win percentage (.581) is higher than Lovie's (.563). Is Wade a good head coach? I guess his win-loss record indicates that he is CERTAINLY a better head coach than Lovie. I never said a word about Wade Phillips. Wrong guy. Sorry. As for Ditka, he had talent coming out the ears and couldn't capitalize on it except for the one year when there really were not many strong rivals to get in his way. Even the players will agree that they underachieved terribly. I don't really understand what more you need. Sports Illustrated

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:33 PM) And considering that they have perhaps the best 4-3 middle linebacker of the last 15+ years, that might not be the wisest move (seriously, I'm trying to think of who else has played that position recently and even been close to 54's level, can anyone give me a name or two?) Brooks in Tampa?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:21 PM) If the Bears go into the Patriots game with the same game-plan, letting the opponent hit those 5-10 yard passes and stopping them there, they're going to get eaten alive. The Patriots have come out and said that's their game now without randy Moss; they hit those shorter passes and have become a run after the catch team. If they try to re-do the Packers game earlier this year, they'll get eaten for lunch. I disagree. I think the only chance they have is to do exactly that. Tackle and be patient. Hope you can generate some pressure with 4. Hope to hold them to some field goals rather than touchdowns. Hope Briggs can shut down their run game. Keep Brady off the field with long drives of your own. Score touchdowns against a relatively weak Pats d.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 06:09 PM) per espn: The White Sox were believed to be offering three years and between $36 million and $39 million. But Adam Dunn's new deal was worth $14 million a year, and indications are that Konerko's camp is holding strong for at least the same, if not slightly more. Let. Him. Walk.

QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 04:57 PM) I tried to make a point about Lovie's game planning ability and you countered it by pointing out a single game against the eagles. I was just hoping you could substantiate your position with something other than "look at the result." The Bears defense played great against Vick and I am thrilled that we won. I have no ill will against him, I just think the Bears can find a better head coach. Lovie Smith will be the head coach of the Chicago Bears next year, unless they somehow lose their last 4 games. Even if they do I can see Angelo and Phillips rationalizing the circumstances and keeping him around. I don't really trust either of them to find a competent replacement anyway. So nevermind. I can counter with plenty of games if I actually look, but I don't feel that is necessary. His win-loss record seenms to me as a pretty good indicator. The level of defenses he has built in his tenure here seem to contradict your point as well. If you're going to argue that he's not a great coach, fine, but don't use Mike Ditka as your counterpoint. Give me a break.