ZoomSlowik

There seems to be some question if this is going to be a roto league or not right now. Because of that, the roster isn't really finalized. I was planning on making it a head to head league, but I have no problem with making it a roto league if that's okay with the other people in the league. That's the only real issue, and I have different people to fill in the open spots for roto versus head 2 head. By the way, the roster I have as of right now is: Knightni Goldmember ZoomSlowik Chimpy2121 farmteam Buehrle>Wood Beastly q\/\/3r+y

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 02:25 AM) I'm with you on that. And Michigan is in a funk since losing its guys. Although it took a ridiculous shooting performance from the Buckeyes to beat em. If they get one or both of Abram and Harris back, they're a dangerous team again. Michigan was up 3 on OSU and already without Abram before Harris hurt his ankle. Harris would be more important for them, and I think he's more likely to come back. I'm not sure on that though, since it seems to be hard to get decent injury info on college sports unless they are out for the year. If they have to play the rest of the year without them though, they could really take a dive. Sims is very inconsistent with his production, and Horton's play seems to suffer when he forces things.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 02:40 AM) So do we have any of the leagues setup yet? We're getting close, I should have most of the info out by the end of the day. In your case, talk to Southsider. I think he's pretty much setup and just needs me to fill in some players. Also, I'm not 100% sure what the status of League #8 and the roto league is as of right now, so I may have to wait those out a bit.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 12:12 AM) Broadcast Journalism, Communications, Media, etc. Is phony major. Lubchenko learn nothing. Nothing! Sorry, I had to. I was in the same position, and I ended up at Illinois. Northwestern was my first choice, and if that is any kind of possibility for you I'd consider it, because their program is pretty good. I enjoyed my time at Illinois, but I wasn't as thrilled with the classes as the ones I saw at NU. The environment was probably a better fit though.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 13, 2006 -> 12:38 AM) So what does everyone think about the uconn-nova game tomorrow?? I absolutely love to watch nova play but this is one of those games where they really could use Mr. Sumpter. Uconn is just to big for nova to win this game without Curtis imo. I say Uconn takes it. EDIT: I am really excited for this game tomorrow though. I'm missing my im bball game and missing something for school just to watch this one. Should be one hell of a fun game. Unless Villanova shoots the lights out, I don't see them keeping up with the Huskies (and Nardi needs to play). They're going to have a really tough time slowing UConn down inside, and Gay is a tough matchup for them too. Another problem is that misses on the outside shots make it a little easier for UConn to get into fastbreak situations. I like Nova, especially if Sumpter somehow comes back at the end of the year, but UConn is probably just too much for them.

If I got a message from you or if you posted in this thread already, you're already on my list. You don't need to do both.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Feb 12, 2006 -> 10:49 AM) And just for kicks, if you could make an All-World team, who would you have as your starting 11. I would run a 3-4-3 and have: GK- Gianluigi Buffon (Juventus/Italy) RB- John Terry (Chelsea/England) CB- Paolo Maldini (AC Milan/Spain) LB- Rio Fredinand (Manchester United/England) Mid- Pavel Nedved (Juventus/Czech Republic) Mid- Kaka (AC Milan/Brazil) Mid- Frank Lampard (Chelsea/England) Mid- Ronaldinho (Barcelona/Brazil) RF- Thierry Henry (Arsenal/France) CF- Wayne Rooney (Manchester United/England) LF- David Trezeguet (Juventus/France) Shevchenko man! He might not be on a team that is going to make noise in the World Cup, but he is a monster for AC Milan. Trezeguet has talent, but I don't think he has the credentials of your other two strikers and Shevchenko.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 12, 2006 -> 08:48 PM) West Virgina goes into Gtown and gets a nice W. The pittsnogles outscored the Hoyas by 21 in the 2nd half. I was really surprised by that. I know West Virginia beat them earlier in the year, but I though Georgetown would take them this time. They're the type of team that should handle West Virginia: they're big, physical, and play tough defense. Most of Georgetown's team just seemed to struggle. Green and Bowman were solid, but Hibbert and the guards didn't play very well.

The US is in a really tough spot with the draw they got in the World Cup. Italy and Czech Republic are both very tough teams, and Ghana, although not stellar, is athletic and has Michael Essien. I'd be somewhat surprised if they got out of their group. After that, Brazil is a probable matchup, and they can't touch them. The US is getting better, but I don't think they have enough playmakers to beat the elite teams. Donovan, Beasley, and Johnson are fairly solid, but that just can't compare with the type of talent that teams like Brazil, Spain, and Italy have up front.

Tony, I wouldn't touch Radke or Grienke. Definitely go with Giles and Tracy. Giles could go 20/20 at a short position, and Tracy could go .300-30-100 and will be 3B eligible. Both are pretty solid for a 10 man keeper league.

Part of it depends on who your other players are, since none of them are slam-dunk choices. Beliard and Belte aren't exactly big needs if you already have credible 2B and 3B. Garcia and Burnett are both pretty good, but you generally want to lean towards hitters. If you don't already have a 3B, I'd definitely say keep Beltre. My other pick for you team would depend on whatever other pitchers you have. If they are highly rated, fairly safe guys (like Santana, Oswalt, Pedro, Zambrano, Peavy), I'd say keep Burnett because he has a higher ceiling. If they are somewhat more risky pitchers (like Carpenter, Prior, Sheets, Johnson, Schilling, Harden), I'd say keep Garcia.

The Big Ten never ceases to amaze me. I kind of expected Michigan to start circling the drain once Harris got hurt though. They just don't have enough options right now with Abram and Harris out. They could be really dangerous when/if those two get back, but until then it's going to be rough. Amaker must have really pissed off someone upstairs to have to deal with so many injuries the past two years. The MSU loss completely blew me away though. I really didn't think that they were going to take a giant crap on the court to deal a serious hit to their chances though. I kind of thought they might close things out on a good run now. No one wants to make anything clear for us in the conference. Iowa and the winner of tomorrow's game seem to have the inside track, but I made up a different list just last week. Who knows who'll fall victim to a conference bottom feeder before the season is over?

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 05:36 PM) Thats what im saying, a decision had to be made, and it was the correct decision. I think we overpaid for Thome a little, but Young had to go for Vaz. 3 years ago many scouts would have said Borchard had the higher ceiling when compared to Anderson. That's pretty true. After a while it was somewhat obvious that he couldn't make enough contact, but by then it was too late. Thome was a necessary addition too. It'd have been nice to keep those guys, but I can't complain too much about who they got.

He actually hasn't been all that bad the last two years. If he had a better line, he'd be dangerous. They're in a tough spot because they need a lot of things. It's hard to pass on a guy like Bush, but that's actually one of their stronger positions. They need help on the offensive line, everywhere on defense, and they could use another playmaker at WR or TE.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 04:29 PM) Everyone who is complaining about trading young. Would you have rather traded Brian Anderson? Sort of a tough call. Anderson is more polished and closer to the majors, but Young has a higher ceiling. Personally I'd probably rather have let Anderson go, but that would have create a problem in center for at least this year.

QUOTE(crazyman26 @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 03:17 PM) Ok I get you now. Even though Rex will end his career never having started more than 3 games in any NFL season he has been a starting QB in the NFL. Gotcha. By the way Culpepper has proven he is an NFL starter since he has played many seasons starting 14, 15, 16 regular season games. Grossman has not, and I will never acknowledge he is an NFL starting QB until he does, and I certainly wont hold my breath on that ever happening, in fact I would bet money it never does, and already have with somebody. There's a difference between being a starting QB and being a good starting QB. You're apparently arguing for the latter and trying to use that to prove that the first isn't the case. Just because he hasn't held the job for long stretches doesn't mean he hasn't been an NFL starting QB yet, especially since the only reason he has ever temporarily lost his starting spot has been to injury. There are plenty of quarterbacks that have been starters at times and sucked, that doesn't mean that they suddenly never were a starting QB. That's a pretty unusual line of thinking.

QUOTE(crazyman26 @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 03:19 PM) Starters at all positions lose their jobs to injury in the NFL. The GM said he was starter going into training camp, not the regular season, and also talked about how rookies like Orton play alot better in their 2nd and 3rd year. I already know what the GM was saying, Orton is starter next year, the funny thing is I bet none of you acknowledge I knew that all along when it happens and will just say I was lucky. In fact it will be that I knew all along. NFL starters typically only lose their jobs while they are hurt if the fill-in performs very well, or at least as well as the previous player did before he got hurt. Tom Brady and Larry Johnson are two prime examples. Orton didn't exactly blow anyone away with his performance. Very few GM's are going to say that someone is their starting QB on opening day of regular season (unless they have a stud like Manning or Brady), and certainly not any team that has any semblance of a QB controversy or potential injury issues. You're basically arguing semantics and misreading what he is saying. Angelo is saying that right now Rex is the starting QB unless something happens (much like the last two years), not that he is expecting things to change in training camp. There is too much uncertainty right now to know who is going to start the first regular season game. It is possible that Orton could outperform him in camp and win the job, but in no way is he saying that he expects that to happen. It's also possible that Grossman gets hurt again, and then Orton would be the starter by default. But as of right now, Angelo is saying that Grossman is first string. There is no insinuation whatsoever that things are suddenly going to change in training camp.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 03:00 PM) DId anyone catch this quote, and do you know who posted it? Theoretically you did . I found that seriously confusing.

QUOTE(crazyman26 @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 02:51 PM) Sorry but to be considered a starting QB he needs to start alot more than 2 games in a given year, and I dont care if 1 of them is a playoff game. Lets say a player was healthy and benched almost all year, and was brough in to play the playoff game would you say he was the starting QB too? I know Rex was not healthy but my point is there is NOTHING so far to prove me wrong on him being a starting QB in the NFL, he has to be alot more games in a season than he so far, whether he plays a playoff game or not. Being a starting QB has nothing to do with how many games he actually starts, at least not when injuries are involved. He's been our undisputed #1 quarterback for the last two years before injuries knocked him out. Using that same logic, Brad Johnson is the Minnesota Vikings' starting quarterback because he started more games this year. Clearly Culpepper is their #1 QB, which is quite similar to our situation. Orton is not a starting QB on the other hand because the only reason he has played thus far is because of an injury to our number one quarterback. Just because Orton has started more games doesn't mean that he is the better quarterback, that he is currently #1 on our depth chart, or that he will be the starter going into next season. In fact, none of those are the case.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 08:42 AM) add another name. 6-7 wing davon jefferson out of new jersey. here is some info: draft express article, mentions illinois davon jefferson profile jefferson is a five-star recruit who decommitted to unlv whne one of their assistant coaches left for louisville. Although that would be a huge addition, I wouldn't exactly count on it. That article made it sound like Illinois was kind of an after-thought, much like it appears that Jefferson is with Illinois. Plus he definitely has some grade issues and could enter the NBA draft. Although you can't turn down a guy with his talent level if he wants to sign with your school, they need more guard help than anything.

QUOTE(Cuck the Fubs @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 12:35 PM) Give Orton a few more weapons, i.e a speed WR and a tight end and see what he can do. Throw the ball 5 yards over the head or out of bounds every time? I'm sorry, but Orton was just brutal as a passer. Many of his passes weren't even close to the receiver. At times I think the receivers were almost in shock that it was actually hitting them in the hands. There were some drops, but Rex had to deal with that too. There simply wasn't any semblance of a passing game with Orton in, while Grossman could actually make a play once in a while. Just think of what he could do if he's actually healthy and works out with the first team offense all season. I just can't endorse playing a guy that finished with fewer than 100 passing yards in a game 3 times while only cracking 150 3 times. He might not have turned it over, but he didn't exactly make a whole lot of plays either. Rex probably won't turn it over much more (if any more), and there is actually a threat of a passing game with him in. I don't really think it should be a question who the starter is for now.

I didn't have a problem with the prospects we dealt until this year. The only times I've felt that we dealt guys that had the possibility of a bright future in the MLB were the Todd Ritchie deal (which was before Kenny's time), and the deals this offseason. We managed to get several decent players without giving up high-ceiling future stars. We got Colon for a random collection of junk; we got Alomar (who wasn't that far removed from being an All-star at the time) for a relief pitcher that could barely break 90 MPH; We got Everett for guys that weren't going anywhere twice; and we got Freddy for a passable catcher, a mediocre SS, and an overrated corner-outfielder with little power and less than stellar speed. Few of those guys had any chance of making any impact whatsoever, with Reed being the only exception (and he probably isn't going to be any more than a slightly above average OF even if he puts it all together). I think we finally gave up a couple of those type of guys with Young and Gio, and I hope it doesn't become a trend. Our team is starting to get rather expensive, so guys like that are going to become important to our future success (past the next two seasons or so). We have Jenks, B-Mac, and Cotts to help our pitching a bit, and hopefully between Anderson and Owens we get at least one decent OF. But because of those deals this offseason there isn't much behind them for probably two years. We're eventually going to need some reinforcements from the minors, so I hope that when that happens they aren't already on another team's roster.

QUOTE(Jimbo's Drinker @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 11:21 AM) Puke my friend. I'm assuming that was his point... Of course there isn't going to be any evidence, how often is there evidence when any kind of conspiracy arises? Just watch a damn game without a pro-Duke bias and you can see that they get virtually every borderline call. If one really wanted to, they could build a case showing some extremely iffy calls that went Duke's way. I don't think you could come up with anywhere near as many going the other way (unless they're playing another top team on the road. I thought the UNC game was pretty even). I saw about 4 just in the Boston College game and 3 just from the highlights of the FSU game. What's worse is that all of them were in crunch time. The only reason the free throw disparities aren't ridiculously high is that Duke is a predominantly a jump-shooting team and has been for some time. If they took it to the rack like UConn usually does (Really bad comparison by the way. No where near as much dominance, and they're huge) things would be a lot worse. Isn't it nearly as irresponsible of him to suddenly jump to the defense of his alma mater and dismiss everything? It's pretty clear that he has a strong bias towards Duke, and that there were numerous iffy calls recently that benefitted Duke. The refs were reprimanded in back to back games, that should mean something. At least throw in some type of argument that says something like "top teams often get the benefit of the doubt (at least at home)", or "top coaches that know how to talk to the refs are going to get more borderline calls that go their way," even if it might be crap. The media seemed to think the same thing about the White Sox, but few if any were jumping to dismiss that.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 12:22 AM) I'm with you here, just playing devils advocate cause there are some scenarios where I could see them getting there. They've beat gtown at home also this season for the record, though I think gtown is the much better team. I really don't like using the who-beat-who argument in college basketball because there are a ton of variables. Georgetown wasn't playing all that well early in the year, so beating them wasn't that big a deal back then. They're a much better team right now than they were when they lost to West Virginia, Illinois, and Vanderbilt. A lot of that can probably be attributed to their offense. A lot of guys didn't mesh early on, and that killed them (what was weird is it was Green and Bowman who were struggling early, the veterans). They just look so efficient now, and a lot of different guys can beat you.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 12:05 AM) They've already beaten 3 pretty solid teams on the road(nova, ok, ucla). The thing about nova though is their tiny so what you said makes perfect sense. Herber can score as well if one of those two is having an off night. Look, I don't expect them to get to the final four but it wouldn't surprise me if they do shoot their way there. It all depends on the brackets, obviously. As you said, all of those teams have flaws, and two of them are really good matchups for West Virginia. Villanova has no post presence so it was basically a little-guy shootout. That also might be the best offensive game they played all year. UCLA is another team that has virtually no post presence and depends very heavily on only two players. They're really not very good outside of Afflalo and Farmar, and the former shot very poorly in that game. Oklahoma actually has some size, but they're not very good defensively and have some serious problems with shooting and ballhandling. I just think they'd have to get a really, really good draw in their bracket for them to make it to the Final Four. There are so many teams I can think of that they'd have some trouble with (like 4 just in their conference) that I don't see them doing it.