ZoomSlowik

Northwestern is absurdly tough, though I think some of it depends on what program she chooses. I applied to Medill with somewhere around a 3.8 at Fenwick (private Catholic college prep school, typically 99/100% college enrollment) with a 30 ACT and didn't get in after applying early decision. With a 4.0 I would think she's at least in the running, but test scores and extra-curriculars matter too. IIRC they were big on activities that displayed leadership. That was a pain in the ass application too, they wanted like 4 essays.

QUOTE (SleepyWhiteSox @ May 22, 2008 -> 11:51 AM) As much as I absolutely luv my Blue Demons, I feel that the 1981 Draft is the closest similar situation to this year. Now, Aguirre was an absolute beast scoring over 20 ppg throughout his 13-year career with a 29.5 ppg season too, but who would you rather have? (Don't say tom chambers) I can see the point there, but Aguirre was a SG, that's not quite the same thing as a 6'9" 240 lb combo forward that might be able to put up 25 and 10.

Almost forgot, the Bulls also have a $5.2 mil trade exemption from dealing Smith to Cleveland, so that's a very useful salary-filler in an attempt to get someone like Brand.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 22, 2008 -> 11:30 AM) Losing Deng would defeat the purpose of getting Brand IMO. Clearly it would, I don't think it'd come to that though. Brand's value on the market is incredibly low right now, partially because of the injury and partially because he can opt out this year or become a FA the year after that. There's probably a very good chance the Clippers won't pony up the cash to keep him, so they could very easily deal him for whatever they can get now. Plus I would think if he went to a team that looks like they can compete like the Bulls you can negotiate an extra year or two on the deal. There aren't a whole lot of teams I could think of that'd be real threats to top that... Cleveland- plenty of expiring money (Sczcerbiak is the big one, also Jones and Smith), but don't really have talent to send back unless they're thrilled with Gibson or Varejao. Would have to be a Gasol-type salary dump. Golden State- Would they really give up Baron Davis? I probably wouldn't, especially since Brand isn't really a running-style big. Miami- Something with Marion and/or Haslem? I'd think they'd want to go younger personally, especially since they have #2. Or I suppose if they REALLY don't like Beasley they can send the pick, but that'd be very stupid. New Jersey- Richard Jefferson? Money and talent kinda makes sense, but the Kidd trade again seems to suggest a rebuild. Harris-Carter-Brand is a fairly interesting combo though. Philadelphia- Would they really give up Miller and someone like Louie Williams? I kinda doubt it... Sacramento- If they feel like taking Artest then maybe, but that seems unlikely. Toronto- This one would be interesting. TJ Ford looks expendable, and if they get another big Bargnani is suddenly less interesting to them as well. Again though, they run a lot, and neither Brand or Bosh is really a center. Washington- Maybe. Sign and trade of Arenas or Jamison, but they can't do that until after the draft.

QUOTE (lostfan @ May 22, 2008 -> 11:07 AM) Also, those PER stats and whatnot are probably misleading considering Joe Smith played for us for half the season, and was probably the most consistent player. That's a big one right there, Smith was very good for us for the first part of the season, that and Gooden's stats look a lot better than his actual contributions. We still don't have one guy I'd call a comfortably above average post player and none of them are complete players. Tyrus and Noah can't score and Gooden can't defend. I don't think it's a stretch to say we can get Brand for Hinrich and one of Gooden/Nocioni/Thomas (maybe even 2 if it has to be), and we wouldn't miss any of them. Carmelo Anthony on the other hand would minimally cost us Deng, and probably 2 or 3 more pieces.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 22, 2008 -> 09:47 AM) Wow, quite the Gooden believer eh? That's the most incorrect statement I have ever read... sorry brother! Seriously, that's way off base. Even on one leg at the end of the year Brand put up numbers that Gooden can't even touch. His "injured" line towards the end was 18-8 with 2 blocks, when healthy he puts up 20-10 with ease. I don't know how you can call him "injury riddled" either considering he had missed 6 games total in the previous 3 seasons.

Chelsea came up with a Lampard equalizer just before the half on a busted play. Got a nice bounce off a defender and the keeper was a bit off balance.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ May 21, 2008 -> 01:12 PM) Yeah, he loves candy, is nicknamed "Pooh" which I believe is short for Winnie the Pooh, and is generally regarded as very quiet but a good leader. In terms of attitude and potential trouble factor, Rose has as big an advantage as you can get over Beasley, who is known to be a bit crazy and generally to have attitude problems (although to be fair, I don't think Beasley has had any sort of legal problems). Eh, most of the character stuff comes from high school where he was a bit of a prankster and he coasted through games because he was exponentially better than everyone and could still dominate. Some have questioned his work ethic, but you don't get his kind of offensive repetoire without working on it. I wouldn't worry about that personally, there are far bigger pains in the ass in the league and few of them have his talent.

Just throwing my thoughts in here. Obviously both are supremely talented players and I'd be extremely happy with either of them, but as things stand right now I'd take Beasley. I think the Brand comparison is a bit off, he plays on the perimeter more than that though he can still bang inside. I'd say something more like Carmelo Anthony with a mean streak or Shawn Marion with offensive abilities. The guy is a stud and will be a serious matchup problem at the 4. Things can change though, and if we can deal Kirk for an upgrade inside I wouldn't hesitate. You won't miss him at all with Rose, he has all the physical gifts to be a stud. I'd just really rather not see us depend on Tyrus, Noah and Gooden to hold down the interior again, that'll make it very hard to win in the playoffs (yes, I'm talking playoffs with one of those guys) unless Tyrus has that breakout season everyone keeps praying for that I still kinda doubt is coming since he has basically no offensive abilities. You gotta remember that Nash has Stoudemire, Williams has Boozer and Paul has West, none of our interior guys are anywhere near that good and they STILL can't seem to get over the hump. Elton Brand would be phenomenal, that'd give you a lot more talent inside on the offensive end and I don't think it's a stretch to say you could get him for Hinrich and one of Gooden/Nocioni/Tyrus.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ May 21, 2008 -> 12:32 AM) The assist stat, to be fair, is deceiving. It is low, but Memphis runs that dribble drive offense which does get a lot of open looks, but does not lead to a lot of assists. Plus, Memphis didn't really have any good three point shooters or consistent scorers inside, so Rose wasn't in a situation where he'd have a lot of dimes. It gives you a ton of opportunities to create a shot for yourself or the big man on the drive depending on the D, and there are plenty of kick-outs to a roster that still shot 35% from downtown (which is okay), not to mention a whole lot of transitions opportunities. It's basically tailor-made for his skills and he didn't truly produce to his potential until the tournament. I'm not saying he's going to be a bust by any stretch of the imagination, he's incredibly gifted, I just wouldn't be surprised if he averaged closer to 6 assists than 8+ for the first year or two, maybe even more depending on how often he looks for his own shot on the drive. From what I've seen of him so far he looks more like Tony Parker, he'd have to force the passing a bit more than he has in the past to be the kind of difference maker as a passer those other two are.

Man, I know you guys are excited for Rose and he has a ton of talent, but we're being awfully quick to put him in the Williams/Paul tier. Yes, he's athletic enough, but we're also talking about a guy that posted 4.7 assists on a loaded Memphis team that ran a lot (Paul and Williams both averaged around 7), I have a hard time seeing him be THAT kind of a playmaker right away. Point guard is the hardest position in which to make an immediate impact in the NBA. Plus Boozer was a 16-9 post player before Williams got there and David West is much more talented offensively than our guys. The PG's make their lives easier, but they're not going to score 8 a game if they're not there. I really don't think you can really go wrong either way. Beasley is an elite scorer that will improve our interior play and draw a lot of attention away from the guards, while Rose can obviously be a difference making PG that will greatly improve their driving. As things stand now I'd personally lean towards Beasley, but if you can unload Hinrich and get some value Rose makes a lot of sense too. I just don't want to see us rely on Tyrus, Noah and Gooden inside for another year (and Gooden may be gone soon), that'll make it hard to win in the playoffs.

It's gotta be Enis, especially since we decided to pass on Randy Moss to get him. Things never really went right with him at any point, from the long holdout to the early knee injury to the putrid 3.3 career rushing average. Benson would have to have another enormously awful year like last season to even start the discussion IMO.

I'd generally go with the hard salary cap or the age limits for the draft. I think I've done the former for 3 seperate papers/speeches and the latter twice.

White Sox and Northwestern football are way out in front. IMO it's debateable which is really #1, but basically anyone I know would say NU. Though it's painful to watch a lot of the time, NU basketball is #3, though I'll actually skip games for that and don't follow it quite as obsessively. After that it drops off even more. I would still call myself a fan of the Bulls and Bears, though I'm far more casual about it and haven't been to a game in quite a while for either of them. I also generally adopt college basketball team on a year-by-year basis when I like a particular roster since I follow it so closely and my primary team is generally so crappy, though I didn't really do that this season.

I think it kind of depends on what you do with the D-League. If teams actually send their raw prospects with upside that just aren't ready instead of a bunch of washouts that are just fighting for the last couple of spots on the roster, then screw the age limit. Then you wouldn't be forced to keep guys like Ndudi Ebi or Darko Milicic or Nikolas Tskitisvili rotting on your bench and adding nothing to the team when they could be getting playing time elsewhere. Of course then college basketball takes a bit of a hit if the NBDL becomes a legit alternative, and the NBA teams are still pissing away fairly large contracts on guys that aren't contributing and may never do it. If on the other hand the D-League kind of stays with the same structure, then you really do need an age limit of some kind to cut down on the number of guys that simply aren't ready and/or good enough to contribute. Granted you're always going to have guys that think they're better than they are jumping earlier than they should, but that cuts down on it a bit. I do think teams need to have some leeway with guys with questionable academic abilities though, since there will often be guys like Lenny Cooke that can't really hack it in college but still aren't good enough to jump right to the NBA.

At least I can spell lightweight.

QUOTE(ChWRoCk2 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 09:25 PM) Hes only a sophomore. From what the ESPN analysts and other sites seem to indicate he isn't leaving for the NBA just yet. Yeah, I doubt he leaves, shooting guards that are closer to 6-foot than 6'6" don't generally fair well in the draft.

84. The offense rebounds a fair amount with the Swisher and Cabrera additions, and one of the 3 back end starters comes up with a decent year to complement Mark and Javy (don't ask me which one, just a feeling). I also have a hard time seeing the bullpen being quite as putrid as it was last year. They don't have enough for a huge year without an awful lot of breaks going their way though.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 11:39 PM) You don't remember Kobe's hype coming out of high school, it was a little less than OJ's. In fact, OJ was ahead of Kobe if you compared the two coming out of high school. Both supposedly had maturity problems (Kobe moreso). Kobe wasn't seen as a once in a lifetime player coming out of high school, that's why he wasn't even a top 10 pick. Only difference between Kobe and OJ is that one is taller. They both play the exact same game and both have the exact skillset. And no, I would've taken OJ over Durant last year. Durant IMO is destined to be a quick PF. You put him at SF and you lose out a bit. He needs to bulk up and be able to bang. I also was very down on Jeff Green and Corey Brewer along with Noah. Again, the spacing will help OJ a ton in the NBA. He has a lightning quick first step just like Kobe has. OJ is as legit as there will be. His worst case scenario is being Larry Hughes(at his very best). Yeah, OJ had a lot of hype. He also slid down the rankings as he got older (junior and senior year) because other guys that were considered to have higher ceilings (Beasley, Rose and Gordon) started passing him up. He finished #4 on Rivals. I didn't realize that hype and draft position are the ultimate determining factors of future success . Kobe was also the first perimeter player to ever declare for the draft straight out of high school, was only the second player to declare in recent history, and was in a historically strong draft class. Because of the success of Kobe and Tracy McGrady a guy like Martell Webster went #6 three years ago, who can't hold a candle to those guys. Mayo may be able to handle the ball fairly well, have good quickness, and have a decent jumpshot. So do Jamal Crawford and Larry Hughes among others though, and they're not exactly franchise-changing stars. Kobe is on a different level. At the same age Kobe was averaging 15 a game on about 12 attempts with a 1.25/1 TO ratio in the NBA. That takes a lot more than just pretty good skills, and is quite a bit harder than doing what Mayo did in college (as Gordon and Bayless support to some extent). Really? You're about the only one then. Even in a sub-par rookie season Durant is averaging almost 20 points a game, albiet he has turnover and shot selection issues and plays for an awful team. OJ has the same kind of issues, which isn't a good sign. Durant was an elite gunner in college too, and he's shooting below 30% from behind the arc. Any benefits from improved spacing is negated by the quality of opponents. He's not going to be able to light up second tier guys on lesser schools anymore, and he already struggled a fair amount against most of the better competitiion on the schedule. He's simply not the kind of guy that is going to come in and totally dominate from day 1, his decision making skills still need a lot of work. Yes, he has talent, but so do a lot of college players, and very few of them turn out to be true superstars, possibly none out of this draft class. We'll have to wait and see, right now he just looks far too inefficient and turnover prone to come in and dominate right away, and I'm really not convinced that he's an upgrade over Gordon and Hughes in the short term. I'm sure we've both been wrong before, so I plan on stopping contributions to this thread-jack.

The Knicks are a goofy team. On paper they have a lot of talented players, but on the floor it doesn't work because they have poor chemistry, no defense, and too many me-first players. Aren't they still on the hook for Marbury? That's one that should really be moved too. That and I'm still not sure you can have a successful defensive team with one of Curry or Randolph playing heavy minutes. A pass-first PG would definitely be a good first step, but they could also use a shot-blocking center to cover for their other defenders, a legit 3-point marksman, and probably another defensive stopper on the wing that can also score a bit. It'd be pretty hard to overhaul that roster though with the number of bad contracts on the books.

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 11:21 PM) My basic point was, that the upcoming draft seems shallower in talent and has less hype than most drafts in the past that I've seen, outside of 1986 or 1987. That definitely appears to be true, a lot of the guys at the top of the draft appear to be tweeners, developmental prospects, or guys may not have the athleticism to be above average starters at the next level. I'm not particularly thrilled with this group and would personally like to see the Bulls trade the pick if they can get decent value.

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 10:59 PM) I look at Beasley, I see Shawn Marion, a guy drafted in the teens. I'm not an expert on Rose, but to me, very few point guards come out and "light it up" right away. Jason Kidd - the exception. Eh, maybe. Marion wasn't as dominant a scorer in college, and he was a bit under-hyped because he went to UNLV instead of a major conference school. He also wasn't as hyped coming out of high school, again docking his stock a bit. He still went #9 anyways, and given the same status coming in and going to a bigger school (pretty sure it was for academic reasons) he likely would have gone higher. True, most PG's do struggle a bit their first year or two (Chris Paul being another exception). You need a diverse skill set to succeed at the NBA level at the position. Besides the usual athleticism/scoring/defense things you also need to be able to run the offense, know where your teammates are/should be/will be, be able to balance looking for your own shot and creating for others, ect. Rose is considered one of the better prospects because he has all of the physical tools and has shown at least decent ability in most of those areas for one of the best teams in the country. He hasn't been quite as solid as some recent guys, but he's also considered to have a really high ceiling, thus the high draft stock. Granted those two may not have been top-5 prospects in 2003, but they definitely would have in 2006, and even last year at least one of them would have cracked the top-5 given different timing in all likelyhood.

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 10:46 PM) This is the first year in awhile that there seems to be no clearcut #1 guy. Beasley is the best of them if he comes out, but he'd be no better than Top 5 pick, compared to other years. That doesn't really appear to be the case at all. He's being compared pretty favorably to Durant and Carmelo Anthony. He's been absolutely dominant and guys as productive as him are pretty rare. The only thing that might stop him from going #1 are some concerns about his attitude/maturity, but those seem to have subsided a bit. Rose is also considered to be in the same league as virtually any PG has come out in recent years. The rest of the draft appears to be far less certain though.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 09:29 PM) Mayo is more like Kobe. And just to let you know, Andre wasn't as good as OJ was in college. As someone who followed OJ through AAU ball, he will be special at the next level. I will bet you $100 he shoots at least 40% his first year and closer to 40% from the 3 point line. Andre was much more raw and on a much better team so his stats weren't that impressive. I would assume the comparison would be to what he is now, which is a pretty solid all-around SG, though he's also on a bad team that's going nowhere. Either way Kobe is a stretch, he'd be doing so much more if he were really on that level and wouldn't be a borderline top-5 pick if he were. Kobe is a once every ten years type player, Mayo can't come close to that yet. He's so "special" that there are two other guys in his class putting up very similar numbers and another player at another position that is playing far better. You were probably one of the same people that said the same thing about Durant last year, weren't you? There's a very big difference between the two leagues, everyone is a lot quicker and stronger and things get a lot more difficult. Even assuming the same level of talent, the 3-point line is two feet farther back, which is just a huge difference. He's barely shooting 40% in college from the arc, I have a really hard time seeing him adjust to that, especially since he's pretty streaky from out there as it is. He simply can't play the same way and be productive, though he'll probably get his numbers. He will have an above average career in the league because he clearly has talent, but there's a very big difference between being a good scorer and being a legit star.

Smith with some nice speculation for once. I like it outside of the guys at #9, but that's likely to be a tough spot to be in this particular draft.