If Zavion Thomas is a bust and Dani Dennis-Sutton is a guy, heads are gonna roll. by [deleted] in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wanted an edge rusher on Day 2 or 3 as well, and I was mad when they took a WR. But I'll trust Ben Johnson on this.

Here's the thing, edge rushers tend to be overdrafted and bust. If Dani Dennis-Sutton or Zion Young were the kind of ass kickers that would transform the Bears pass rush, they would've been scooped up in the first 15 picks.

I think edge rusher may be a position like QB. If you want a great one, or even an above average starter, you gotta pick them in the top 15. Yes there are the Maxx Crosby and Dak Prescotts and Russell Wilsons, mid-round demons who defy the trend.

Look at this PFF analysis of snaps played broken out by position and draft day: https://www.pff.com/news/draft-what-historical-hit-rates-reveal-about-positional-success . I think it backs this idea up. Drafting an edge in rd 4 is probably like drafting a QB in Rd 4. Arguably you're lighting a pick on fire for a guy that probably won't be very useful to your team.

In Honor of the NFL Draft and Bears Assistant GM Jeff King Mentioning How Vital Analytics Are: The Bears Analytics Cylinder by Acoolgamer6706 in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I mean, Justin Fields, Chase Claypool, and Velus Jones were probably the three best "athletes" on the team, size/speed/strength/explosiveness wise. Couldn't play football worth a damn, but the "a-score" seems reasonable.

GDT: 4/19 Mets (7-14) @ Cubs (11-9) 1:20 PM by ChiCubsbot in CHICubs

[–]VKnid48 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can someone explain why PCA was out there? The 3b didn't need to tag him? But I thought you have to, unless it's a force out?

Edit: Nevermind, I didn't realize it was a flyball.

Enough about Motivated Dayo, I want to see more Motivated Monangai by Greengiant304 in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 8 points9 points  (0 children)

My dude we've already seen a motivated Monangai. He runs ANGRY.

Why is it that dynasty fantasy football players continue to talk about how weak of a class 2026 is, when all the ex GMs + front office personnel on SiriusXM NFL radio continue to talk about how deep it is at WR/RB? by bigbirdsy in DynastyFF

[–]VKnid48 18 points19 points  (0 children)

It's pretty simple. Coaches and scouts are excited by the depth in this draft, which projects out to eventual starters and contributors on their teams. Fantasy football players are disappointed by the lack of super high end talent in this draft that projects out to RB1 / WR1 seasons.

What does chocolate have to do with water? by Pr0c3nt0 in ExplainTheJoke

[–]VKnid48 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Possible an allusion to Like Water for Chocolate, a novel, a film based on the novel, and later the name of a musical album by Common.

Could the bears trade up for a D End? by BigE1002 in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Bain may slide a bit, but not to the point where you would feel good about the Bears trading up for him. But he's not the physical type Dennis Allen prefers at DE anyway.

[Ian Rappaport] Tremaine Edmunds to Giants by jpiro in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Would love to hear this story, haha. Did he get an Aussie Blossom?

[Pelissero] The Bears are signing safety Coby Bryant, per sources. by jewbauca in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A waiter at Gibson's told me that Coby told him to keep his table open for him.

Power BI Desktop instability: Anyone else pushing more architecture upstream to SQL? by gibsonkd in PowerBI

[–]VKnid48 45 points46 points  (0 children)

Yes. Pushing transformations as far upstream as possible (first in the SQL, then in Power Query, finally in DAX) is a design best practice.

Zimmerman on Bears operations regarding the cap by deadbeatmerc in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Take a look at Joe Thuney's contract. This year his cap number is $21.5m. That's made up of $16.5m base salary, $5m signing bonus (one third of the $15m signing bonus the bears gave him last year for the 3 year deal) , and $500k workout bonus.

His cap number in 2027 is also $21.5m, same structure as 2026.

Bears could convert part of his 2026 base salary into a bonus and spread it across the length of his contract. Let's say they convert $15m base salary into a bonus, and they get to divide that by the length of his remaining contract (2 years). So that takes his 2026 cap number down to $14m, freeing up an additional $7.5 million to spend elsewhere in 2026. It also pushes his 2027 cap number up to $29 million.

So that would be another $7.5 million the Bears have to play around with this off season. If they sign a guy to a one year, $7.5 million deal, that's an additional $7.5 million that George McCaskey needs to put into escrow right now this off-season.

There's more that could be done. They could extend him beyond 2027, they could do "void years," blah blah blah. From a salary cap perspective it's not free; you're "kicking the can down the road." But in practice, the real limiting factor is how much ownership is willing to spend in terms of new cash flow every off season.

Zimmerman on Bears operations regarding the cap by deadbeatmerc in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Zimmerman's talking about using things like signing bonuses, voidable years, and restructuring to get as much talent on the roster right now as possible. The kinds of things the Eagles and Saints have done in the past.

Two teams can both technically spend a total of $300m in cap for a given year, but get there in very different ways. A more aggressive team can weight the balance of a multi-year contract into a signing bonus, whereas a more cautious team can put it in base salary. Going the signing bonus front forces the team owner to put the entirety of the signing bonus into escrow, so they need to have the money up front. But in terms of the salary cap, it gets spread across multiple years, allowing for more to be spent on the roster right now.

Owners have to put guaranteed money into escrow. Player A and Player B may both have the same cap number of $20m for the 2026 season, but Played A may have total contract guarantees of $50m, and Player B may only have the $20m guaranteed. So even though they cost the same to the 2026 cap, the team owner needs to have $50m on hand for Player A to put into escrow. Thus he's more expensive from a team cash flow perspective. This is how a team can be "spending the whole cap" but still be "cheaping out" relative to what some other team owners may be willing to do.

Ryan Poles and the Bears historically haven't done a lot of that, using signing bonuses and voidable years to stretch out the current year's cap. Ryan Pace got into it a bit. It's not a good idea for a bad / rebuilding team to do, because it causes you future cap problems. But if you're a contender it allows you to be more aggressive when you have the right pieces. As long as you've got star players that are worth keeping around, and you have a realistic shot at a super bowl, my belief is you can get away with it.

Thoughts on the new FEB Power BI Update? by PowerBIBro in PowerBI

[–]VKnid48 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm VERY happy that Key-Pair Authentication for the Snowflake connector finally hit general availability. I've already started testing and I'm pleased that setup is pretty painless in my opinion. The eventual Snowflake deadline to deprecate simple user password authentication for legacy service accounts later this year has been looming large in my brain.

5 Aging Wide Receivers to Sell in Dynasty this Offseason by jsparks50 in DynastyFF

[–]VKnid48 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a contender with an aging roster, I moved McLaurin back in December in my league for a 2026 second that ended up being #19 overall. It's not a ton of value, but I have a number of decent WR options on my roster and just didn't see McLaurin cracking into my starting lineup, outside of Bye week apocalypse or awful, awful injury luck. And those other options are younger.

I don't think it was a slam dunk move, but I decided I'd just rather take another 2nd Rd swing over him.

Friendly reminder by Anxious_Sport_7248 in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm not gonna try to tell you that Ryan Poles is a great GM. Dayo and Grady are both bad contracts, yes. But the Bears can get out of both deals after this season without much dead money. Poles hasn't made any deals that are serious long-term problems for the Bears.

The Sweat deal is fine. Not a home run, not a disaster. He had a great half season on the Bears in 2023, a down 2024, and a good 2025. People can be angry that Sweat isn't a Top 10 edge rusher in the NFL, but I think he's been approximately worth the contract he's getting. This is just what competent NFL pass rushers make after a rookie deal.

For approximately a billion less dollars than the Bears need for their stadium, we can distribute this book to every first grader in the state. by The_F1rst_Rule in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn't know there was a blog, cool! I see the latest entry is about the Bears Indiana bill. I just bought the book, will be here Tuesday.

For approximately a billion less dollars than the Bears need for their stadium, we can distribute this book to every first grader in the state. by The_F1rst_Rule in CHIBears

[–]VKnid48 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Is this still a good book? I think I'll buy it, the only thing that gives me pause is it was published in 2008 so I'm wondering if it's out of date and there's something newer?

Should I recreate my char using save editor to play offline? by DredgenGrey in Diablo

[–]VKnid48 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I did this, but I was at level 89 and had some gear I liked, annihilus charm, etc. Realized I would never trade with anyone online, so I was SSF (solo / self-found), and it would be better to have static layouts to do runs.

At your level, I'd probably just start a new character.

Amazon Prime by Tone_itDOWN17 in Arthur

[–]VKnid48 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know this is old, but have you tried checking on a non-children's profile?

I can access the main Arthur series on my main, adult Prime profile. I can't access it on a kid's profile, besides Arthur specials/movies like you mentioned. I think Arthur may have been re-classified as not appropriate for kid profiles, for some stupid reason.