NBA OFF TOPIC THREAD

[tabascojet]

No way wentz is a better option than winston...

 

[Battlelyon]

 

[Stakesarehigh]

It's bad enough Lamar is a dumb person. But he's so dumb he isn't even self aware enough to hire a smart person to make him money.

 

[shopson67]

We're supposed to be concerned about a guy's minutes in OT and the example they use is a guy that takes half the season off already? Too funny for words...

 

[shopson67]

No way wentz is a better option than winston...

Wentz will end up somewhere as a backup to try to rebuild his brand, a la Mitch Trubisky.

 

[bksballer89]

We're supposed to be concerned about a guy's minutes in OT and the example they use is a guy that takes half the season off already? Too funny for words...

He's doing too much...not focused on the real issues

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Browns Cutting John Johnson

Look for him to rebound after being misused for 2 years.

 

[shopson67]

He's doing too much...not focused on the real issues

Refs, refs and....refs.

They are working on the new CBA currently.

The chief concerns for the NBA will be luxury tax rates and load management. There are negotiations underway to increase the lower luxury-tax brackets, which would allow teams to be more competitive on the open market, especially as the salary cap continues to rise. The league has also grown significantly in just the last few years, so raising the lower tiers and re-organizing the luxury tax rates seems like a natural response. Staying along the lines of salary cap flexibility, the two sides are also discussing raising the limits for contract extensions.

Silver had touched on load management during NBA All-Star Weekend. He said the league remained in talks with the NBPA, but did not provide a concrete solution. It will be interesting to see what sort of compromise could be met on this increasingly prevalent issue. Less games has always been the most feasible solution, but revenue sacrifices would likely be a sticking point in this new NBA CBA.

One long debated topic that seems on its way to becoming official is a league proposal to revert back to allowing 18-year-olds to enter the NBA Draft. This should come as no surprise to fans, as the one-and-done rule was already losing a bit of its effect with players opting for alternatives like the G League and Overtime Elite. The NBPA would want to protect their interests, though, and are proposing an addendum to require veteran mentorship of the incoming teenagers. That way their value cannot be so easily replaced.

 

[shopson67]

Browns Cutting John Johnson

Look for him to rebound after being misused for 2 years.

Back to LA?

 

[Shanemansj13]

Browns Cutting John Johnson

Look for him to rebound after being misused for 2 years.

I thought it was a possibility they would keep him bc maybe he just struggled in Woods' scheme but they save right around $10M so it was expected. They will look for a cheaper option in FA

 

[Shanemansj13]

I thought it was a possibility they would keep him bc maybe he just struggled in Woods' scheme but they save right around $10M so it was expected. They will look for a cheaper option in FA

Down to a little under -$11M in cap space but the JJ cut isn't official till after June 1st. A Watson restructure and the Browns will have $23M in cap space. That doesn't count other restructures they can make.

 

[Wamu]

Man, you guys like to move the goalposts. I said I like Young more than Fields. Suddenly that means can't miss, lol.

How have I moved the goal posts? You need to explain. All I said was nobody has called Young a can't miss pick at # 1. Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong in saying that. You foolishly say I moved the goal posts for no other reason than asking a legit question.

So in your world because I said not a single person has called Young a sure-shot # 1 overall pick I've somehow moved the goal posts? Thanks for the laugh.

 

[trojanfan12]

How have I moved the goal posts? You need to explain. All I said was nobody has called Young a can't miss pick at # 1. Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong in saying that. You foolishly say I moved the goal posts for no other reason than asking a legit question.

So in your world because I said not a single person has called Young a sure-shot # 1 overall pick I've somehow moved the goal posts? Thanks for the laugh.

Bryce Young is going to be interesting. He's not the typical "QB from a big time program throwing to nothing but wide open receivers because his team is so much more talented than everyone else". He actually had to carry Bama in a few games.

However, in most games he was still throwing to wide open receivers.

Also, he's pretty small. Heard this morning that he's 5'10.5" and weighs under 200 pounds. Whoever gets him is going to need to invest heavily in their o-line, imo.

 

[shopson67]

How have I moved the goal posts? You need to explain. All I said was nobody has called Young a can't miss pick at # 1. Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong in saying that. You foolishly say I moved the goal posts for no other reason than asking a legit question.

So in your world because I said not a single person has called Young a sure-shot # 1 overall pick I've somehow moved the goal posts? Thanks for the laugh.

The responses (yours and others) were all about Young not being a can't-miss prospect, something I never claimed. I merely said I prefer Young to Fields and think Chicago should pick Young and trade Fields.

The can't-miss discussion was irrelevant to my post.

 

[fightinfunbags]

The responses (yours and others) were all about Young not being a can't-miss prospect, something I never claimed. I merely said I prefer Young to Fields and think Chicago should pick Young and trade Fields.

The can't-miss discussion was irrelevant to my post.

Let’s clarify. If you’re saying that an organization should bail on a young QB they already invested in to reset everything and start all over again with a new QB prospect the assumption is that you view that prospect as a “can’t miss” for you to make such a desperate move for another young QB. That’s where all that came from. The move you were positing is one that gets pulled when the QB being taken is a can’t miss prospect.

 

[Wamu]

The responses (yours and others) were all about Young not being a can't-miss prospect, something I never claimed. I merely said I prefer Young to Fields and think Chicago should pick Young and trade Fields.

The can't-miss discussion was irrelevant to my post.

I never claimed you said anything though. All I said was nobody is calling him a can't miss # 1 pick. That's not moving the goal posts. That's going by what all the talking heads have said.

If they trade that # 1 pick they can turn it into multiple picks. If they take Young # 1 that leaves them fewer picks to get better talent around him. So the Bears better be 100% sure he can be the QB they're looking for. If they take him he'll be the shortest QB ever drafted # 1. And playing with the same teammates JF had last season for the most part.

Getting rid of Fields and starting all over with Young doesn't address any of the other issue they have on both sides of the ball.

 

[shopson67]

Let’s clarify. If you’re saying that an organization should bail on a young QB they already invested in to reset everything and start all over again with a new QB prospect the assumption is that you view that prospect as a “can’t miss” for you to make such a desperate move for another young QB. That’s where all that came from. The move you were positing is one that gets pulled when the QB being taken is a can’t miss prospect.

That's an assumption I didn't make. The Bears are still a mess, Fields is still a work in progress, and they had the #1 pick fall in their laps due to a worthless late season win by the Texans.

Can't miss QBs are once a decade more or less. Upgrading from Fields does not require that high of a prospect IMO.

 

[Wamu]

Bryce Young is going to be interesting. He's not the typical "QB from a big time program throwing to nothing but wide open receivers because his team is so much more talented than everyone else". He actually had to carry Bama in a few games.

However, in most games he was still throwing to wide open receivers.

Also, he's pretty small. Heard this morning that he's 5'10.5" and weighs under 200 pounds. Whoever gets him is going to need to invest heavily in their o-line, imo.

Young's size is my concern. Football's violent and by NFL standards he's a little guy.

The main reason I think it would be wise for the Bears to keep Fields & trade down is the extra picks they'd receive.

 

[shopson67]

Getting rid of Fields and starting all over with Young doesn't address any of the other issue they have on both sides of the ball.

Whether they trade the pick or trade Fields, either way they are getting extra picks to build the franchise. I wouldn't be surprised to see Young a better QB in year 1 or 2 than Fields in year 3.

 

[Wamu]

Whether they trade the pick or trade Fields, either way they are getting extra picks to build the franchise. I wouldn't be surprised to see Young a better QB in year 1 or 2 than Fields in year 3.

Why don't you just say that Young's already a better NFL qb than Fields?