ZoomSlowik

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 01:47 PM) Brandon. I can't believe I did that! Anyways, next year looks fairly bad for the Illini unless some guys develop fairly quickly. I won't argue that things don't look bleak. As of right now I have no idea who is going to be their major scorer. They'll need some guys to step up big time. I'm not just talking about recruiting with 2007 however. They should have some other fairly solid players with some experience. Unless some wierd things happen Randle, Pruitt, and Smith should all be fairly solid players, and Carlwell might be a pretty good big man in his second year. That's not even counting the guys we haven't really seen much of yet. On top of that, Gordon is an impact freshmen that could lead the team in scoring. If they actually get Derrick Rose or another solid PG, they'll have a pretty good lineup. They could also add some other impact freshmen, who knows (at least according to rivals they seem to be involved on a lot of pretty good players).

QUOTE(Jimbo's Drinker @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 01:27 PM) Coach Weber will show his true colors when Self's recruits are gone...Without Dee this team would be well below .500. And where would Kansas be right now without Kareem Rush? They have 6 losses with him, imagine where they'd be without their one legit scorer. Making the "take one player off the team and they suck" argument doesn't really mean anything because they are on the team and there are many teams that would be brutal without their best player. Still, there's no way the Illini would be under .500. They had quite a few patsies in the pre-season, they still have bottom feeders like PSU, Purdue, and NU in conference, and they have a big enough home court advantage that they'd win a few games they shouldn't at home. While they will have a suspect team next year thanks to lackluster recruiting early in Weber's tenure, they should still be fighting for a tourney bid in a conference that won't be anywhere near as strong next year. After that it looks like he's starting to get some players. One more impact freshmen in the 2007 class and they should be right back to competing for the conference title.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 30, 2006 -> 05:47 PM) UNI should definitely lose another game or two in conference considering they play at creighton tomorrow and come to carbondale the last game of the season. I understand what you're saying zoom about how mid majors have got the shaft before, the difference is imo that uni is a top 15 rpi team right now. The mid majors have been shafted before because their rpi sucks and they had no good wins. UNI has wins against Iowa, and at LSU not to mention the conference wins at Wichita State and against SIU. That's 4 wins against the rpi 25 right there, they got a pretty damn good resume despite the mid major status. Maybe so, but this isn't the first time that a mid-major has had a solid resume. I think they're going to need at least one more solid win and a decent showing in the tourney (two solid wins if they tank in the tourney). Beating Bucknell in the bracket busters would go a long way. Maybe the UNI situation was a bad example, but my point was that Lunardi seems to think that a lot of these smaller conference teams are going to get good seeds when in reality a seed higher than 7 is pretty rare. I also get the feeling that one of the MVC teams will get the shaft, but that's another story. On a similar topic, does anyone know what Nate Funk's status is for Creighton? He hasn't played in a while, and I have a hard time getting college basketball injury info outside of the original press release.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 30, 2006 -> 05:25 PM) Creighton was a 6 a few years back, siu was a 7 last year. UNI will be atleast a 5 imo considering the previous teams I mentioned who are in the same conference and when you realize that the mvc isn't a normal mid major this year, I believe the big 12 past it up now but still above the pac 10 in rpi. UNI's rpi is 14 as of right now, they'll be a top seed. Forgot about Creighton. Let me rephrase it a bit: when was the last time that a mid-major with more than 3 losses got a 6 seed or better (yes, I'm assuming that UNI loses at least one more)? I'm pretty sure that all of the higher-seeded mid-majors that we mentioned finished with ridiculous records and finished with 1 or fewer loses in conference. Again, I know the MVC is much stronger than your typical mid-major, I just don't think they'll get quite that much credit, since mid-majors have gotten the screw-job in the past. I get the feeling about the best they'll get is a #6 seed against another fairly good mid-major like Western Kentucky or San Diego State. I'm pretty sure that he had Old Dominion and Nevada floating around in the same type of spot last year, and things didn't end so well for them.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jan 30, 2006 -> 02:46 AM) When Leinart has 3 Super Bowl rings, I'll allow him a bad big game. Also, Leinart currently has a resume very similar to Dorsey's, eerily similar in fact. I may be wrong about Leinart, and if so bring up this thread and i'll eat my crow, but I doubt that will be the case. Peyton Manning had an even weaker resume than those two guys and never did anything in a major game against a strong opponent in his whole career until last season. So did a lot of other guys, but I digress. Peyton didn't beat Florida once in his career and got blasted in his senior year by Nebraska in the Orange Bowl. He won a couple of bowl games, but the only one he played a major role in was the drubbing of NU in the Citrus Bowl. He was the same kind of player: great numbers on a great team who's best asset was his intelligence and leadership. So now everyone that plays on a good team, puts up ridiculous numbers, and has one or two bad games is a scrub that isn't going to do anything in the NFL. Jesus.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Jan 30, 2006 -> 04:54 PM) What 8 teams do you have above them for the 1/2 seeds, out of curiosity? Maybe I exaggerated a bit. As of right this second, they would be likely be a #2 seed. However, I expect them to end up as a #3. I definitely like what Duke, UConn, Memphis, and Texas have done thus far a bit more than what the Illini have done. They're in roughly the same range as Gonzaga, Villanova, Florida, and Pitt right now. I realize that Gonzaga, has a much weaker conference and Florida doesn't really play anyone, but you can make arguments that other teams besides those guys are in a somewhat similar place record-wise with a tougher schedule. West Virginia and NC State are examples, and roughly half of the Big Ten has a good chance to put together a similar or stronger resume. If Illinois comes out of that stretch later in the year with 5 or fewer total losses and makes it to the Big Ten tourney final, then that's another story. But as of right now they haven't done a whole lot to impress me.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jan 30, 2006 -> 04:45 PM) Lunardi always gets almost every team right in his bracketology, but is clueless as to the seeds. He's a guy to pay attention to if your team is on the bubble, but one to ignore in terms of what he predicts your teams seed will be. You've definitely got a point there, he seems to put a lot of teams in wierd places. Besides my rant on the Illini, I have 3 major issues with the way he seeds them... 1) He seems to overrate mid-majors. Gonzaga and St. Joes are the only non-power conference teams I can remember seeing above the 7-10 range, which seems to be where a lot of the tougher ones end up. The committee doesn't seem to give the teams a high seed unless there is a considerable amount of hype around a team, even if they deserve it. I find it highly unlikely that UNI gets a #5 seed (I know the MVC is tough, it's just that mid-majors usually seem to get the shaft, even Gonzaga before last year). GW might suffer this fate too, although the A-10 seems to get a little more respect and their #6 seed makes some sense. 2) He likes putting major conference teams in the sub-10 seed area like Cincinnati, Arkansas, Alabama, and Iowa State. That almost never happens when the real brackets come out. Usually those bubble teams end up in the 8-9 or 7-10 game. 3) He seems to over-value how weak you dog opponents are. I know he mentioned it with UConn and WV this year, stating that it might hurt their seed. Is there really any difference between facing a sub-150 team and a sub-200 team if you're one of the powerhouse teams? I don't see it. Looking at their tougher games makes a world more sense to me. What's funny is that he still puts Memphis as a #1 seed even though like 3/4 of Conference USA is under a 200 RPI.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 30, 2006 -> 04:15 PM) The new bracketology is up. Lunardi has Illinois as a 1 as of right now. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology I really don't buy Illinois as a #2 seed as of now, much less a #1 seed. They've got a few pretty good wins, but nothing that will blow you away, and their performances away from Champaign are less than stellar. They just barely got by a young UNC team on the road, and just eeked out neutral court wins over Xavier and Witchita State. I know that there aren't a lot of stellar teams out there right now, but come on. I fully expect the 4th #1 seed to go to either Texas or the 2nd place Big East team. They seem to be giving Illinois an awful lot of credit for beating the 2nd place A-10 team and the 3rd place MVC team on neutral courts. I guess I shouldn't gripe too much. It will be tough for the Illini to stay ahead of those guys with a tougher stretch coming up. They still have road trips to Wisconsin, MSU, Michigan, and OSU, plus a home games against the two teams that beat them. If they can split those road games and take the two at home maybe they're 1 see material, but I'm not sure they can do that.

It is funny that they seem to think that the Mets could get him for a bunch of garbage and spare parts. I realize that we aren't going to get Milledge, but Kenny is going to net something useful if that trade happens. I understand that he's old and doesn't have a lot of time left on his deal, but he was also one of the best pitchers in baseball down the stretch. The only guy I would trust on their staff is Pedro, and if they're in it around the trade deadline I'd move to get another solid starter pretty fast. Adding Zito or Contreras (unless he starts pitching like his old self) would be huge, making Glavine the 3rd starter instead of the second. I might not want him in New York given how he performed there last time, however. Another issue is that the Sox probably wouldn't want to trade him once the season gets going unless we have some major problems.

QUOTE(DukeNukeEm @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 10:16 PM) Imagine Vince Young with the two best RBs in the game, the best OL in the game, the best WR not named Rice or Johnson in the game and Dom Byrd. Leinart is a product of his teammates It's not like Young was playing with the local Pee Wee league team around him. He played with a well above average line in front of him, probably on the same level as USC's. Also, his skill position players weren't as explosive as USC's guys, but they were very highly recruited players that were pretty productive. Thomas was a more productive receiving TE than Byrd, Sweed is a talented receiver that would probably be just about as productive as the USC guys with a more pass oriented offense, and Young and Taylor are both very explosive players. Neither QB has been in a whole lot of close games the last two years. In fact, Leinart has probably had to do a lot more in close games than Young has. Using the arguments that his teammates did all the work isn't a very good line of reasoning to use because it will vary from player to player. Dorsey definitely seemed to be a product of the players, but some people were also using that logic when comparing Peyton Manning to Ryan Leaf. You could also argue the same thing with Tom Brady at Michigan (David Terrell, A-Train, good line) or Carson Palmer at USC (Williams/Colbert might have been more explosive than Jarrett/Smith). Maybe Leinart isn't the next great quarterback and he doesn't appear to be as gifted as those guys, but judging him based on the team he played for is pretty asanine. As for Young vs Leinart, I'd say both are far from a lock to be above average NFL QB's. I'd say Leinart has the better chance to be decent, but if Young pans out he will be exponentially better. Both have their strengths. Leinart has shown a pretty good ability to read the defense and get the ball to the right guy, usually in stride because he has better accuracy. Young has also shown some ability to read the defense, although he doesn't throw as much. His major strength is his his speed and his ability to break tackles on the run. Leinart's skills probably translate better to the NFL, since Young isn't going to be able to run around and through every defense he faces. However, Young is also clearly the more naturally gifted QB.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 05:40 PM) Tom Brady has much more arm strength than Leinart from what ive seen of both but still... at this point of his career Leinart > what Brady was...... and id say Leinart is the most polished QB coming out of college in a LONG time. Yeah, Brady was so "polished" coming out of college that he was a 6th round pick. Even in his senior year he was solid but not spectacular, throwing for about 215 YPG with 20 TD and 6 INT. He was decidedly average his junior year, throwing 15 TD's and 12 INT's. He also had a year and a half in the pros before he took the field. Peyton Manning and Dan Marino get my votes for most polished coming out of college. Edit- Sorry, I totally read that post wrong when I was commenting on it. I agree, Leinart seems to be among the more NFL ready QB's in recent history.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 11:05 PM) Final score #5 Texas: 72 #22 Oklahoma: 82 I still think OU isn't very good, but a very nice home win for them. Also, I keep hearing how good Texas is.....but I just don't see it (although they are going to win the Big 12, whatever that is worth). Oklahoma came up with their best game in a while. They actually shot well, something they haven't done much this year. While talented, Everett (38% overall, 28.3% behind the arc) and Neal (34.1% overall) have been awful with their shooting accuracy. Everett had 25 on 10-15 shooting and Neal had 14 on 5-9 shooting, combining for 6-11 from downtown. Goldbond also was pretty good, with 11 on 4-8 shooting. That doesn't sound that great, but he's averaging about 5 points on 35% shooting. For whatever reason they were just hitting them tonight. Gray also was very good, but that is somewhat expected. Texas is a pretty good team, but not quite an elite one (that's pretty much everyone's story this year). They've been playing good defense and putting people away, but they'll always be vulnerable to a team that shoots well because they aren't an elite outside shooting team themselves (Gibson is, Paulino is solid but probably doesn't shoot enough, and Buckman apparently thinks he can shoot). All you have to do is look at what they did against Duke, Tennessee, and now Oklahoma for some evidence. They also have no bench whatsoever, so if one of their main guys is off or hurt they could have problems. It'd be huge for them if Abrams could develop into a more reliable option so they can actually rest some people. However, because of their talent level and size they have the ability to beat any team on a given night.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 25, 2006 -> 12:57 PM) Ya, those games scare me a lot. Especially NU, they've taken us to school year in year out at least once or so it seems. Just ask Dan, he loves rubbing it in. Luckily not as much as when his teams beat ISU. I don't think any of the major teams have to worry all that much about NU this year. I'd be very surprised if they pulled an upset, this team is just brutal. I watch them extensively, and they're just weak in so many aspects of the game. They just can't seem to get easy baskets with any kind of regularity. Yeah, they hit Vedran in the post every once in a while and he usually converts, but they often have trouble getting it to him. What makes it worse is outside of occasional spurts from Hachad they can't penetrate, and they get no transition baskets. Too often they rely on jacking up threes, and only Vedran and Moore can hit them with any consistency (even Vedran seems to be in a shooting slump). The bigger issue is their total lack of a post presence on defense. Pretty much any team in the country can impose their will on them in the paint. I've seen 6'6" guys kick our ass in the paint, ignoring what real post players can do. Besides the personel problem down there, because they often play a 1-3-1 zone they get some nasty matchups down low. Because the guy at the back has to cover both corners and the post if the ball gets down there, they put a guard back there instead of one of our few big guys. You'd be amazed how often Michael Jenkins, who stands 5'9", ended up covering James Augustine in the Illinois game. They seem to stop penetration fairly well, but they end up allowing a lot of open 3-pointers because of it. Any decent shooting team should be able to light them up from beyond the arc. All you have to do is look at the fact that Rich McBride scored 12 against us, and he could have had more with better accuracy. Unless NU has an unusually good night shooting from outside, they probably won't even stay close to some of the better teams. End of rant. My apologies to anyone that doesn't give a damn about NU's deficiencies.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 25, 2006 -> 02:02 PM) Wow Zoom, I totally agree with you on a lot of points. My AL bust was the Red Sox however. I think that they made alot of spotty moves this offseason and they lack a true lead off hitter. Alot of their core players are gone and I still think their pitching is sub par. Becket is not the ACE they need. I can definitely see why people are picking the Red Sox to be a major bust. However, I just don't know if they can blow it. I only see the Yankees as a major threat in that division (They're about even in my book. Yankees have a better lineup, but their pitching doesn't impress me outside of the back of the pen), and the loser of those two should still be right in the Wildcard race just like every other year. The Orioles and the Devil Rays definitely can't stick around, and despite spending a ton of money in the offseason the Jays just aren't a serious threat. Their lineup revolves around Vernon Wells and Troy Glaus, and their starting pitching still has major issues. Halladay is a stud but is coming off a major injury, Burnett is about as inconsistent as a pitcher can get, and Chacin, Lilly, and Towers just aren't all that good. As for the other wildcard teams, I like their chances slightly more than Cleveland (should be interesting) and I'm not sure that the AL West loser will be close enough (I like the A's and the Angels, I'm just not sure their lineups have enough punch). The Red Sox still have some things going for them, although they have to finish the Crisp trade and get Alex Gonzalez. Those are two major holes in CF and SS if they don't happen, and I'd be more inclined to agree with you in that case. Still, their lineup will be among the best in the league as long as Ortiz and Manny are there. Lorretta and Varitek are also solid hitters (as is Crisp if they get him), and Nixon and Lowell could be fairly good. I think they have enough options to get at least credible starting pitching. Schilling may be old, but if he's anywhere near healthy he's a huge asset. Beckett and Clement both have a lot of talent and could make an impact, although there are obvious question marks. Wells, Wakefield, and Arroyo are also semi-credible options, and their bullpen should be somewhat stronger than last year. They made the playoffs with weaker pitching before, plus with their lineup they don't need it to be quite as strong. I think they've got the chance to win close to 100 if a lot of things go their way, but I also think their floor is probably in the mid-80's, which isn't all that bad.

I'll be really interested in watching MSU-Michigan tonight. The loser takes a pretty big hit in the standings by being the only contender with 3 conference losses. Michigan's chances of winning the conference and possibly their chances of making the tournament could take a major hit if they lose. They need to start beatin some quality opponents some time. They get quite a few chances the rest of the year, with MSU, Wisconsin, Illinois, OSU, and Indiana all visiting Ann Arbor. They also still play at MSU, Iowa, and OSU. It's a tough road, but watch out for them in the tournament if they come out of it alive.

AL sleeper- Oakland A's. I've bashed them in the past, but I'm starting to like their team. If they don't trade Zito, that gives them a solid 1-2-3 with Harden and Haren, plus Blanton is pretty decent too. They also have a strong bullpen. I'm still concerned with the offense though. Their only really dangerous hitter is Chavez, and he's very inconsistent. Kotsay, Swisher, Crosby, and Bradley have some talent at the plate, but one of them really needs to step up and become a middle of the order hitter. AL bust- Cleveland Indians. I don't think they're going to fall apart, but I don't think they're going to make the playoffs either. Their starting pitching really needs to step up, otherwise they'll suffer the same fate we did for the early part of this decade. Lee and Byd are decent but not stellar starters, and one of Sabathia or Westbrook really needs to pitch up to their abilities. Sabathia just can't seem to keep his ERA under 4, something they really need him to do for them to reach the promised land. I also don't think their lineup will be as potent with Michaels replacing Crisp (I'm assuming that deal will eventually get ironed out). They've definitely got some talent in Sizemore, Perralta, Hafner, and Martinez, but out of the rest of their hitters only Belliard is a real threat. NL sleeper- Miluakee Brewers. I think they have a fairly good collection of talent now, and I'm not overly impressed with the rest of the division. The Cubs are decidedly mediocre in all aspects of the game, the Astros have a weak lineup, and the Cardinals just keep losing players and could be in for a somewhat rough year if Rolen isn't back. The division might be a stretch, but I think they can contend for the wildcard and maybe make things interesting if the rest of the division slips a bit from previous years. A lot will depend on how youngsters like Fielder, Weeks, and Hardy perform. They all have a ton of talent, but they need to show it for the Brewers to make noise. NL Bust- Tough call. Can I just take the whole NL East? I guess I'll stick with Atlanta. They have a spotty bullpen, a rotation that goes about 3 deep (and I'm really generous counting the third), and a lineup that lacks a leadoff man. Plus I seriously doubt that Andruw Jones comes anywhere close to matching his power numbers from last year. I really don't think their offense will provide enough punch to compensate for a pitching staff that keeps getting weaker.

It's not so much that I think that the rest of the division is brutal. I think Cleveland will win somewhere around 90 games and that the Twins will be around 86-88. That'd work in a lot of other divisions. I just think that it won't matter because the Sox appear to have a 100-win type team. They have the best starting rotation in baseball and it goes 6 deep. Their lineup got a huge boost by adding Thome and now features two guys capable of 40 homers and 100 RBI plus 5 other guys that could hit 20 homers (Dye, Crede, Uribe, Iguchi, and half credit each for AJ and Anderson). They also have two young relievers that were dominant for good stretches and two other veterans that were very good last year. I really don't see any major problems for the Sox team, so I'm not particularly worried about the two teams behind us that have some flaws.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 24, 2006 -> 05:29 PM) Besides us and the A's you'll have a hard time finding teams with a better rotation in the AL then the Twins. As far as their bullpen goes, they have 3 absolute studs at the back end, Matt Guerrier who is a solid long reliever, and then they have a bunch of kids who knowing Minny will do just fine as the 5th or 6th relievers out of that pen. Their offense is nothing special but it'll be better then last season and their pitching overall will be better as well imo, they're going to ride their arms all year and I think they win the WC but obviously that's jmo. I'm sorry, their pitching just doesn't impress me (I'd probably take the Angels by the way, assuming Colon's shoulder isn't really bad). They're relying on two youngsters, a somewhat fading veteran, and another guy that missed most of last year pretty heavily. I guess they have Lohse too, but he's decidedly mediocre. Nathan-Rincon-Crain is pretty good, but as I said, none of them are lefty and they don't really have another solid arm in the pen. Plus their pitching has to be significantly better than ours or Cleveland's to really make a difference in those 30 something games that they have to play those teams. It's definitely not stronger than ours and I don't think it's that much better than Cleveland's. Outside of Santana, you just can't count on anyone on their starting staff to consistently win games against stronger competition. I'll stand by my statement that they need either Liriano or Baker to pitch like a front of the rotation guy to really make a difference. I forgot one other wildcard that could help their lineup: Jason Kubel. Assuming he's healthy, that could give them a legit hitter with decent power and speed. He might get lost in the shuffle a bit though since they seem to have several OF's.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 24, 2006 -> 04:55 PM) The Twins were ahead of Cleveland and a half game behind the yankees for the wc when Torii went down for the year. That, Castillo being just an enormous upgrade over anything they had their last year, the combo of Liriano and Baker who I believe will both be in their rotation eventually this season and the fact that I expect Morneau to rebound and Mauer to be a bit better are the reasons I think Minny will be better then the Tribe in 06. I don't know about all of that. Even if Morneau turns into the monster people thought he would be, their lineup wouldn't have all that much punch. They'd be similar to our offense last year, which isn't exactly a compliment. They just don't have a real #3 or #4 hitter right now. Two of the following 3 have to happen for them to have even an above average lineup: Mauer developing at least 20 homer power, Morneau putting up at least a .270-30-90 type year, or Hunter getting on base a bit more. Plus their pitching isn't exactly dominating. They don't really have a solid compliment for Santana. Radke is their number 2 starter even though he's really only had one good year since 2000. He'd might not even be in our rotation if he were with the Sox. Silva was starting to look decent, but now he's coming off a major injury. Liriano or Baker would have to pitch like a #2 starter for them to keep up, and I really don't see that happening. Also, their pen only has three credible arms, and none of them are lefties. I really don't see them getting past the high 80's in wins unless an awful lot of things go their way. In my book they're a Santana injury away from 4th place.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jan 24, 2006 -> 04:29 PM) I don't see why Michaels will "probably...be very mediocre in Jacobs field". I think Crisp will be better, but it's not a huge difference. I don't see how anyone can't be worried by the Indians after the pressure they put on us at the end of last season. They took a big hit to their rotation, the pen is a little worse, but this is still a very good team. They had better pitching and one of the best stretches to close the season in a long time and still finished with 93 wins. Plus they traded a solid player that was their #2 hitter and are replacing him with a guy that hasn't been a full-time player. Also, Wickman had his best season in years and might not repeat it. They're extremely similar to our teams before last year, only with one fewer major lineup threat and weaker starting pitching. Because of that, they're going to have a tough time winning much more than 90 games this year. On the other hand, the Sox are a team that won 99 games and definitely got some upgrades. The Sox shouldn't have to worry about the other teams in the division unless some things go wrong. They should definitely finish with at least 95 wins unless Thome gets hurt. Even if the pen drops off a bit they should be able to reach that with a deep and talented pitching staff and an improved lineup. The Twins and Indians both will have a tough time reaching that total unless they make some major upgrades between now and then.

According to the ESPN homepage Artest for Peja has been finalized.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 24, 2006 -> 01:24 AM) I got to see a little bit of Aldridge today, but is he supposed to be the top pick this year? Anyone that follows him more (I really don't follow the big 12 much) tell us a little more about him? I'm assuming he'd be a hell of a pick for the Bulls, but maybe I'm wrong? The kid is a stud in the making in my opinion. He's seems to be pretty close to Amare Stoudemire in the athleticism department (size is also pretty close, listed at 6'10" 240), although he doesn't seem to have a go to post move. He shoots a decent looking turnaround jumper once in a while, but it still needs work. He gets most of his points on dunks and rebounds, although so does Amare. He'd be really dangerous on a running team. He does some of his work on the blocks, although they seem to like using Tucker for that more. As for his defense, he looks like he'd be a solid help defender, but I'm not 100% sure that he can guard the top guys 1 on 1. It's hard to say since there isn't really anyone that compares with him in college. He's definitely one of the more gifted college players I've seen in the post though. He's averaging 16.4 points, 9.4 boards, 1.8 steals, and 2.1 blocks. He could be scoring a bit more if they had a solid pass-first PG instead of the two hybrids Gibson and Paulino (He's only getting about 10 shots a game, shooting almost 62%). He'd probably be the #1 pick if he came out. That'd be huge if the Bulls can get him. Putting him next to Chandler would give us a ton of athleticism. Unless we get lucky in the lottery, we probably wouldn't have a shot at him however. He's really the only major post player that looks like he can provide immediate help. There are a couple of athletic guys like C.J. Giles, Jermareo Davidson, and Al Horford, but they are all pretty raw, and Horford probably isn't a center. If we could get him with one pick and trade the other one and Gordon for Pierce, I think we'd be a pretty major threat.

One of my favorite under the radar teams took a major hit. Maryland will not have Chris McCray for the rest of the year due to academic ineligibility. They might be able to survive this issue without too much trouble. Mike Jones is a very capable scorer that can really shoot. He will almost certainly slide into the starting spot now. It also helps that the ACC doesn't look as tough as usual this year. However, McCray was a solid all-around player while Jones is more one-dimensional. They'll miss McCray's defense and leadership, plus he was one of few guys on the team that would actually pass the ball. They also won't be as deep without him, which was one of their main strengths.

I'm pretty sure there was a similar incident in Pittsburgh a few years ago. There was some sort of quasi-holiday celebrating that Pittsburgh was in the playoffs in the school system and some kid wore a Cleveland Browns jersey. It was his favorite team and they had just gotten the franchise back. They punished it somehow and it was basically the same situation.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 03:15 PM) I don't think they'll blow them out, i'm mainly just messing with Jason. However, we will win that game. And yes, home court makes a HUGE difference. I see. Yes, the home floor makes a big difference, I just didn't think it was a -15 to +20 type difference. As I said, they should win the game at home, but I really don't think they're killing them. Illinois just isn't good enough this year to rout the top half of the Big Ten with regularity. Maybe a result similar to the MSU game, but I wouldn't expect too much more.