ZoomSlowik

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:57 PM) McRoberts has been fantastic in every aspect besides scoring this year. Anyone that was expecting him to replace Redick's scoring is going to be disappointing, but he's far and away the best player on Duke. Noah and Horford offset each other, and neither has been as good as they were last year. No one is a bigger fan of Aaron Gray than I am, but he's struggled recently. He'll be better when he gets more consistent playing time, even though teams are taking away his touches and making Pitt burn them from the perimeter. Sean Williams of BC had a great stretch of games, but he's fallen off the table now. Davidson is a solid center, even though he's trying way too hard to impress scouts with his outside game. He's gone through so much though, and I only wish he can be a first round pick. Ronald Steele has been bad this year, but that's due to injury. If Drew Neitzel qualifies as a point guard, he belongs in the top 3. He's really impressed me this season, and Mich St. would have been so much better the past few years if he played with this much assertiveness. I wouldn't call him fantastic. His scoring numbers are pedestrian, they really need him to score more than anything. No, he was never going to touch Reddick's performance, but he could easily be over 15 a game if he were more aggressive and finished better, and 18 a game is well within reach. He's a lot more talented offensively than Williams was but doesn't do anywhere near as much with it. His shooting percentage is also fairly low for a big man of his talents. Given how much he plays his rebounding numbers aren't THAT great either. About the only aspects I'd call him above average in are passing (impressive numbers for a big man) and shot-blocking. He's certainly better than your average centers, but I can't put him among the top handful of guys at the position. Both Florida players are just as good statistically, and would be even better if they weren't on the same team. They shoot a much higher percentage from the floor. They also get far fewer minutes per game, both are playing under 25 minutes while McRoberts is over 34. They are significantly more productive, and would crush almost anyone statistically (outside of the top tier guys like Boggan, Davis, Hansbrough, and Fazekas) if they played more. Corey Brewer would also probably be in the discussion at SF on a lot of teams. Gray also plays fewer minutes but is a bit better offensively and is a much better rebounder. He also shoots a much higher percentage. He's not as versatile as McRoberts, but he's more efficient in the traditional big-man areas. I would say Williams is the best defensive player on the list, but he lags behind the others offensively and as a rebounder. 7.1 boards for an athlete like him that plays 32 minutes a game isn't exactly elite. I like Davidson, but he's been awful offensively this year. 39% for a big man with his talents? That's just brutal, though I'm sure his head isn't really in the game. He's a great rebounder and defender though. QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:57 PM) I'll throw Acie Law's name into the mix. I thought he was more of a shooting guard, but I guess he does qualify. He'd definitely be third on my list, not sure if I'd put him ahead of Collison or Shakur.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:22 PM) My All-American team (not including Fazekas) at this point of the season is: PG- Shakur/Collison SG- Dudley/Lofton C- Boggan/McRoberts SF- Durant/Tucker PF- Big Baby/Hansbrough Hold on, I missed this before. McRoberts as the 2nd team center? Talk about overrated, he has been disappointing. He's very inconsistent, if he were playing to his potential Duke would be a lot better. I'd much rather have either Florida post player, or the one-handed Greg Oden, or Aaron Gray just off the top of my head. And though Shakur has been better than in the past I'd still take Collison. He's got similar numbers across the board and plays much better defense. Man, this is a down year for PG's, my next two are probably an injured Ronald Steele and freshmen Javaris Crittendon. I can't really argue with the rest though, other than the fact that I'm not really sure Dudley qualifies as a SG. I'd probably consider him the #3 SF, with Afflalo as the #1 SG.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:22 PM) If you take Hansbrough off of UNC, they're still a top 10 team. However, if you take Davis and Boggan off of their team, those teams don't even make the tournament. I disagree, UNC without Hansbrough is basically a more athletic Duke team. They're fairly generously ranked #11, and realistically they haven't played very well this year. They would be extremely young. I would also say LSU still makes the tourney without Davis, albiet they'd be in the 7-10 range. Mitchell and Temple are still pretty solid, and Mason, Martin, and Lazare are all fairly good. Depth would be an issue, but they'd still have talent.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 01:01 PM) He must have had 2 late points then, because you're forgetting that he missed 5 free throws also. Great call on Boggan, as he's been great this season. As much as I hate to say it, Durant's probably been the best overall player in college basketball so far. Hansbrough definitely doesn't deserve it either, as his numbers haven't been anything special so far. With all the talent around him this year, he doesn't get as many touches/playing time. Well, stats aren't everything, otherwise Morris Almond would probably get it. Besides, Hansbrough has still put up good numbers despite playing less than 30 minutes a game on a loaded team, and they'll probably go up with him playing more against better competition. I would say you should generally give it to the best player that is on one of the top few teams (unless there is a legit candidate on a lesser team, like possibly Glen Davis depending on how LSU ends up). None of Florida or Kansas' guys stand out enough to give it to one of them IMO and Oden missed too much time and hurt his cause with subpar games against Florida and Wisconsin. That leaves Hansbrough, Afflalo, Tucker, and a couple of guys from lower rated teams like Davis, Boggan and Durant. Durant probably won't get it as a freshmen even though he's probably the best player, kind of like Carmelo. His team also hasn't been all that good, which will hurt his cause as well. Afflalo and Tucker are good but not quite dominant. I wouldn't pick those two, but I wouldn't really gripe if they got it. That really only leaves Hansbrough, Davis, and Boggan IMO (feel free to speak up if I'm missing somebody), and since LSU has already lost several games he could drop. Since Hansbrough plays on the #1 team and is an ACC guy I would expect him to get it.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 09:36 AM) Tucker missed just as many shots as he had points. He's a good player, but he's severely overrated right now. I can't believe some people are claiming he's the Player of the Year in college basketball this year. Other players who are massively overrated are Dominic James and Brandon Rush. The most underrated players in the country are Mustafa Shakur and Richard Hendrix. Your math is off, he had 17 points and was 8-18 from the field. While that's not a great shooting night it's not awful either. He's shooting .496% from the field on the year, which is pretty good. Most of the POY hype so far comes from his big performance against Pitt, that'll vary a bit as the season goes on as more guys get major opportunities. I would probably lean more towards Davis or Hansbrough for POY, or maybe Mario Boggan if Oklahoma State keeps doing well, but I wouldn't really have a problem with Tucker if Wisconsin does well.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 10:06 PM) A ton, they havent yet learned how to play together especially with a potentially dominant big man. They are a team that should improve throughout the year. I get the feeling that Wisco and OSU may split the series this year, both winning at home. That should make for some interesting games later on. They definitely need to work on getting the ball to Oden in good spots. They need to lob it over the top so he can get more dunks instead of throwing it into him in the post. He's just not good enough offensively at this point to consistently score that way, especially with the wrist issue. They need to find him in transition too, he runs the floor well and that's easy points. As I type OSU is trying to make it interesting again, only down 3. OSU Missed a 3 at the buzzer that would have tied the game. They finally got the ball to Oden in space with Wisconsin concentrating on the perimeter.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 10:02 PM) OSU is just a dumb team at the moment. They're going to have to mature a lot come March. As of right now, they kind of remind me of last year's UConn team. They've got all the pieces but aren't sharp enough yet. Lewis and Cook need to get their s*** together and become more consistent if they want to make serious noise.

Man, if you would have told me that OSU would have 10 made 3's and still be down 10 I'd say you were nuts. Oden hasn't been that big a factor, I'd say it's a combination of good defense, the guards not getting him the ball very often when he's in good spots, and Greg not taking it up strong. Lewis and Cook have been bad as well, the former hasn't been that good of late and the latter is very streaky. Harris and Butler have kept it close. Great D for Wisconsin, they're really swarming and have enough size to bother Oden. Tucker, Taylor, and Flowers have been great.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 03:00 PM) Grossman also put up ungodly passing numbers for a couple seasons and had a rocket ship of an arm. And even than he went 24th overall and had the Bears not taken him (although there was speculation the Packers had interest) he probably would have fallen to the 2nd round. I do think you are right, his arm is good enough but I wouldn't even think of comparing it to that of Grossman's. Brees was a 2nd round pick and took some time and I could buy this comparison a bit, however, Brees was 3 times the passer Brown was at the collegiate level. I would rather draft Booty than I would Brown. Grossman also had an awful junior year thanks to a season under Ron Zook, which adversely affected his draft position. 2001- 3896 yards, 65.6 completion percentage, 34/12 TD/INT, 170.75 rating 2002- 3402 yards, 57.1 completion percentage, 22/17 TD/INT, 121.54 rating Outside of height I still don't really see why Smith wouldn't go higher, but after that bowl performance his stock is going to drop even more.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 03:02 PM) Yep thats the crew. Ward is made a lot worse because of who she sits with. She'd at least be bearable on her own, but when combined with Gottfried & Dykes...WOW. I can't stand that group, and they always seem to end up doing the Northwestern games. It was about 10 times better when we got Wayne Laravee for the NU-Iowa game...

Yeah, some of those old votes boggle my mind, I don't know how you can leave some of those guys off the ballot. What possible logic is there to not vote for guys like Mays and Aaron (other than a racist non-vote, which would be pretty pathetic). I didn't realize that it took DiMaggio 3 tries to get in, that's ridiculous.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 8, 2007 -> 07:58 AM) Aw, poor little Sony. Any reports on how much they are making per game cartridge? I didn't think so. Well, the profit/cost ratio on the software is of course a lot higher, that's where they really make their money. Still, that's a hell of a hole to makeup right now, especially with the rather limited array of games out right now. Even assuming 100% of the retail cost of games is profits every PS3 owner would have to buy 4 of them to get into the black, and that doesn't count the cut that retail stores and game designers take in either. However, they can easily make that up once the full game library is there, and the cost of components will eventually come down (if I read correctly Microsoft is making like $70 per console now).

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 7, 2007 -> 04:21 PM) Not for atleast a year, IMO. And I wouldn't expect one by then either, although I could be entirely wrong. I would agree, don't expect a drop for a while. I've seen numerous reports of Sony losing $200-$300 per unit sold even at the current price, so until the price of the components come down a bit it's not too likely to drop.

I can't remember the last time I saw Brian even hit 92 on the gun...

There's an awful lot more to defense than fielding percentages.

ESPN says it's Vizcaino, Ohlendorf, Gonazalez, and possibly Jackson, with the Yankees only picking up $1-2 mil.

That contract Zito got really worries me. I like Mark, but I wouldn't pay him more than $14 mil a year. This is a tough spot now. We just can't give him that kind of massive extension after what he did last year, and Mark would be stupid to take something like 4-48 right now. We can't really wait until the end of the year to negotiate either, because no matter what kind of year he has he'll end up getting a big offer on the market and we'd probably lose him for nothing more than draft picks (assuming they even still do compensation by then). I think the only route they can go is to try to sign him to a reasonable deal for the next few weeks. If that doesn't work, I think you almost have to trade him, especially if they could get a good package from the Mets. Minaya will be getting desperate and might do something stupid...

QUOTE(IowaSoxFan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 10:00 PM) In the current market, that ends up being pretty cheap. See Gil Meche - Ted Lilly At least Meche and Lilly are healthy.

QUOTE(NCsoxfan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 08:59 PM) Regardless of how adamant you are against Mulder there is no denying that he has a chance to return to his form while he was with Oakland. All this at a RELATIVELY cheap price, while costing us zero prospects. Everyone has their own opinions, but it seems well worth the risk. Some pitchers do come back and return to form - it is not unheard of. I don't really see how that's very likely at all, considering he started to slip BEFORE this past season. He was god awful the second half of 2004, he didn't pitch very well at all in 2005 but got very lucky with stranding runners (his WHIP suggests an ERA closer to 4.50), and he was awful before finally shutting it down in 2006. Even before the surgery, there was maybe a 40% chance that he got back to that kind of performance, the surgery drops that significantly. If you really want to go out and get a former star that has some slim chance of returning to form we could get Chan Ho Park a lot cheaper... I'm sorry, I don't see how Mulder is that good an investment considering someone is probably going to offer him a fair amount of guaranteed money. If you really want him, I guess you're entitled to that opinion, but I really don't see him being any more than a 3rd starter again, even if he gets back on track.

QUOTE(NCsoxfan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 08:36 PM) In 2005 Mulder went 16-8 3.64 ERA 1.38 WHIP 205 IP 3 CG 2 SO Since when is that mediocre or poor? 1) It's in the NL 2) That WHIP is horrendous 3) Jason Marquis posted a 3.71 in STL in 2004 and Jeff Suppan posted a 3.57 in 2005. Those guys aren't exactly studs...

QUOTE(IowaSoxFan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 07:04 PM) And who's to say that his decline has been due to the injury, I know that he was out this year with the injury, but he may have been battling it for a while. With almost a year off to recover he could be back into his Oakland form, or he might stink, buts its a gamble that is worth taking. I'm sorry, but he's been mediocre to poor for the last 2 1/2 years. If he's been hurt that long (which I doubt), someone on either Oakland or St. Louis' medical staff needs to get fired. Geez, maybe we should talk to the Cubs about getting Kerry Wood and Mark Prior, then if they could all regain their 2003 form we'd dominate.

QUOTE(NCsoxfan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 02:20 PM) Its a moderate/high risk if we expect him to win 15-17 games for us. Is it risky to expect him to compete and have a chance to return to prominence for a price well below the Ted Lilly range? IMO - No. You're still going to have to throw probably at least $5 mil at a guy that won't pitch until June at the earliest, and the best you can reasonably expect from him IF he is healthy again is what he did with St. Louis 2 years ago, which probably translates to an ERA in the low 4's in the AL. Seriously, Jason Marquis out-pitched Mulder over the last 3 years statistically, and now there's the surgery to worry about. He's been on the decline for about 2 1/2 years, and now he's hurt. I don't like that as an investment. I just think there are better ways to invest that kind of money, especially when we have some younger arms already on the roster that have about as good a chance of being a major asset as he does (and probably better for Danks).

QUOTE(NCsoxfan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 02:00 PM) If you wait until he's healthy then every team is after him and he becomes expensive. The whole point of this would be to take a low risk / high return chance. There's a difference between being healthy and being good. No one really knows if he'll ever even reach the latter again. It's highly unlikely that he ever reaches the All-star/Cy Young level that he once had, his velocity was down well before he really got hurt. To get him we'd have to throw at least a few million at him and he might not pitch with any efficiency ever again. At best that's a moderate risk, and his odds of recapturing his old form are slim.

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 01:14 PM) Actually, they were a #4 seed. You're right. Their 25-9 regular season record isn't exactly impressive, though Miles Simon was academically ineligible for the first semester. I would say they're somewhat similar then, with Arizona having a clear guard edge and Florida having a clear edge inside...

I wouldn't touch him until he shows that he's at least close to healthy, and even then it's unlikely that he'll be his old self. He was starting to decline even before the injury, I don't want to think about what he'll look like afterwards.