ZoomSlowik

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ May 29, 2005 -> 11:20 AM) Theo Ratliff in his prime is more valuable to a championship squad than Elton Brand. It's hard to argue with people who only look at numbers and don't watch the games. Ratliff has obviously been a superb defender, easily one of the best in the NBA for a number of years and damn near legendary despite the fact that he's never had a proper supporting cast. He's been a poor man's Dikembe Mutombo. As of now, he is past his prime, but that's besides the point. Anybody who doesn't recognize how valuable he was is either a new jack, or a straight up basketball dumbass. Chandler is so much better on D than Elton Brand that it's hard to put into words. I can't even begin to comprehend your level of confusion when it comes to evaluating guys. How the hell are you gonna argue against pure numbers, you ask? That's why you lose every time you type anything on here. Remember when you said that Rod Strickland was a winner? Or how Larry Hughes should win Defensive Player of the year? Holy Christ. Don't use the Wizards series as a crutch. It only makes you even more annoying than usual. I could envision the wackness now...here comes a post with like 10 smilies lined up one after the other. You pioneered that, though. I gotta give credit where it's due. Please don't mention Ratliff and Mutumbo in the same sentance again. There is a MAJOR difference. Mutumbo absolutely shut down the other team's inside game and dominated the glass, and he was definitely a bigger impact on the offensive end too. Ratliff has been pretty good, but he's not on the same level. The difference between Wallace and Ratliff being on so many different teams is Ratliff was starting and in his prime when he was moved, Wallace wasn't. If he was such a defensive stud and a centerpiece of a team, Philly would have kept him and won something with him and Iverson. I won't argue that he wouldn't be valuable piece on a good team when he was in his prime, but there is no way you start your team with him. You need some other really good players around him to do something. With Brand, you have more flexibility inside and you could afford to use someone like Chandler for defensive purposes. As for Chandler, I've watched enough Bulls' games to know that he is not that kind of player in any stretch of the imagination as of yet. He isn't the kind of guy that can absolutely shut down the paint like Wallace or Mutumbo or Hakeem in his prime. I've watched a good number of middling post players put up close to 20 against us, and it isn't all Eddy's fault. He has "shown flashes" of excellent defense and rebounding, but that's quite different than doing it in the long run. I've seen flashes of talent from a lot of players that never amounted to anything, so I'd like to see more from him before I even consider taking him over one of the top 10 (I'd argue top 5) PF's in the league. I wouldn't complain about his offensive abilities if he were on the same level as those previous players I mentioned, but he isn't. Given the choice between a pretty good defender with no offense and a decent defender that puts up 20 a game, I'd go with the latter. You really need to be proficient on both sides of the floor. You can say all you want about how good the defense is on pretty much every team that won the championship, but pretty much every title team I can think of other than the current day Pistons could score too. The Bulls could put up 110 on any given night, and the Badboys, any of the Celtics teams, and the Lakers' dynasties were quite proficient on the offensive end too. That was the difference between the Bulls and the teams the ran over like the Knicks and the Heat: they could beat you at both ends of the floor. Realistically I'd hypothetically replace Curry with Brand before Tyson becuase Eddy is so one-demensional, but I'd still take Brand over any of our post players because he can help on both sides of the floor. Also, I won't argue that Childress doesn't have the potential to score 18 points per game, I just don't see him doing it next season. 12-14, maybe 15 but not much more than that, for the season seems to make more sense for the current state of his career, and the same for Smith. I was talking about his scoring in the context of a discussion about how having a PG like Paul would fit into their offense as opposed to a guy like Deron. Obviously there are other important facets to a player's game. As for claiming that the final four teams left in the playoffs is irrelevant, I don't really see how. These have been the best four teams all season, with none of them really doing any better than the other. You can argue that Ducan being hurt and Wallace's suspension were a factor in their win totals (which they were), but you could also argue that Shaq being out was a major factor. There are plenty of other teams that were decent-good on defense that got knocked out before these teams. This isn't exactly new to the playoffs either, at least one of the last few teams is less than stellar on defense every year. Yes, I know the Mavs get knocked out every year, but they have to go through the west, and they take weak defense to an extreme.

QUOTE(South Side Fireworks Man @ May 28, 2005 -> 10:55 PM) I would make the trade Crede for Chavez even up. If they want Crede and McCarthy, they can take a hike. I'm sorry, I had to laugh out loud at that first part. Chavez is a proven gold glover and 30 HR hitter. Crede hasn't done anything of note. At worst, he is a defensive upgrade over Crede, at best he is our #3 hitter. While I'm not a fan of trading B-Mac or taking on all of his contract, he'd certainly be a major upgrade.

Just some comments. For one, Smith and Childress definitely only qualify as decent options in my book in terms of SCORING OPTIONS, which is what I was talking about. I highly doubt either of them will average 15 points on the year, which would lead me to consider them solid scoring options. As for the Brand/Tyson/Ratliff/Wallace comparisons, I don't think it works at all. Wallace and Brand both are on another level. Brand is basically Eddy Curry, only he can rebound and block shots. He might not be an elite defensive player, but he is definitely better than average. The Bulls would be an entirely different team if he were still here. He's an elite post scoring option, which would drastically improve the Bull's consistency in offensive production without hurting the defense all that much, if at all. There's no way I take Ratliff over him. Ratliff has never been an elite rebounder (the guy has never hit double figures despite playing 30+ minutes virtually his whole career) and is about Ben Wallace's equal on offense. Basically he blocks a few shots and takes up space. If he really had that much of an impact on his team he wouldn't be on team #4. As for Tyson, he might eventually be an elite option, but he's not even close yet. He's a solid defender and rebounder when he's healthy and on his game. Unfortunately we never know when that is. He doesn't always play the way he should and gets beat by guys he shouldn't on the defensive end way too often. Also, his offensive game, or lack thereof, is absolutely depressing. He has no shooting ability and no post moves. Basically the only way he scores is off a rebound or on a dunk from a nice pass. He drastically needs to improve in that area. Given the choice between an inconsistent 22 year old get that has had some injury problems and a 26 year old All-star that has put up around 20 points and 10 rebounds his whole career and more than 2 blocks per game the last four years, it's a no brainer. Take a look at all of the teams left in the playoffs. I'd say only two of them play well above average defense, while all of them have at least one player averaging close to 20 points per game and at least two other players that can get there on an above average but not stellar night. I can't say that about the Bulls. Even assuming Curry is gone/done, replace Tyson with Brand and the Bulls would still have above average defense and at least 3 consistent scoring options in Brand, Hinrich, and Gordon, with Deng doing fairly well also.

Wells would definitely be nice, he's a very good fielder with some pop. I'm not surprised he isn't hitting that well now, the offense in Toronto is pretty iffy. If we could get him I'd happily dump one of our struggling players and throw in a decent to good prospect. Worst case scenario you get a better fielding Dye who's younger and costs about the same, best case you get a middle of the order hitter.

I don't see how this is a rip off on either side. Despite all of the s*** he takes, LaTroy has been decent in his time on the Cubs. He's still got pretty good stuff, and as long as he doesn't close he should be a very useful reliever. As for the guys the Cubs got, they both are/were solid prospects, but Williams has been less than impressive and is getting rocked, and Aardsma is still not that close to the majors. This could work out very well for both teams.

Even assuming that Maddux gets dealt and Wood either keeps sucking or gets dealt, they have a lot of decent pieces. Zambrano and Prior clearly aren't going anywhere, which is a nice start. I know, Prior gets hurt too much, but this injury was pretty freakish, as was the collision with Giles. Lee obviously isn't going anywhere either. While I doubt he'll keep hitting like this, he should be good for about .280/30/100 every year. I also expect Ramirez to get back on track whenever he gets over this back thing. Some may be skeptical, but he has a ton of talent and I personally think he is over the chronic underacheiving from early in his career. They also have some decent younger players. They can sign some FA to fill their holes. Of course this is assuming that their goal is to win, which in the past they have shown is not true. I expect them to unload some players but not everyone and fill in with non-descript replacements, making them just competitive enough to appease the lemmings.

Chavez makes some sense, but the cost is pretty steep. Not only B-Mac, but a monstrous monetary committment. If we can get him without dealing McCarthy and maybe have Oakland eat some cash it sounds like a very good move though. If Paulie's going to get around $10 mil a year, I'd rather have Chavez for that money. Chavez is not going to struggle forever. First off, moving from their horrendous lineup (Jason Kendall bats #3!) to ours where he can bat in front of/behind/in between Frank and Konerko will give him some better pitches to hit. Second, he's typically a much better second half player. In the last 3 years, his numbers before the break are .263/.348/.504, after the break they are .293/.379/.516. Aubrey Huff would be nice too (he has a similar improvement to Chavez after the break, .286/.349/.480 to .327/.378/.566), but I don't think he's quit as good a fit. He's not a very good fielder at 3B, which is where most of us would like to put him. He has 38 errors in 219 career games at 3rd, which is roughly on par with Jose "porn stache" Valentin. Yes, we could put him in right, but we already have Dye stuck out there with Everett probably playing a few out there. Huff is an everyday starter, making them useless. On the plus side though, he'll come cheaper in both areas. I wouldn't complain if either of these guys ended up on the southside, but I'd like to keep B-Mac in either deal, and Anderson if it's Huff.

If anyone has Insider, check out their mock draft. It looks decent to me outside of Miluakee taking Marvin.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ May 27, 2005 -> 03:51 PM) If you have a few scorers in place and you need a distributer you take Deron. If you need your PG to score for you, you go Paul. QUOTE(DBAH0 @ May 27, 2005 -> 09:47 PM) If you want someone who can run the fast break you take Paul. If you want someone who can set up in a half court set you take Williams. Both comparisons tend to suggest that the Hawks would go with Paul. They probably won't exactly be loaded with scorers by the time next season starts. Walker is already gone, and it sounds like Harrington is on his way out. Their next top two scorers were PG's (Lue and Delk). Childress and Smith will be okay options but not stellar. They're going to need a PG that can score, especially since they have no post players. They'll also probably be trying to run with their lack of size and decent wing players. That would lead me to think that they'd take Paul. Williams seems like he'd be a better fit for Charlotte since their team is more dependent on post players in Okafor and Brezec.

QUOTE(chi-guy2 @ May 27, 2005 -> 10:30 PM) you think so, theres a lot of talent in my opinion and i dont think hes mature and good enough for a first round selection He's projected mid to late lottery in most drafts. He'd have to fall a long way to fall out of the first round. The draft is full of guys who are not mature or good enough to contribute, but he happens to have a very high ceiling and he's a legit 6'10", so people will jump on him. He's this year's Marcus Haislip or Jerome Moiso.

We had a couple for our senior class. Most of them were used by previous classes, but we did several. First, we put maple syrup on all of the banisters in the school, which worked since they were brown. We also put vasoline on the door handles and toilet flush handles. The releasing of animals was also popular. We let loose two chickens and a pig in the gym. It was pretty funny when one of the chickens snuck behind the wrestling mats and the staff had to go chasing people behind them. We also released several hundred crickets in the auditorium, which I would recommend because the sound was really annoying and they were hard to track down. It was pretty funny, I had study hall first period which met in the auditorium balcony. The teacher didn't know what to do about it, so she told us to stomp on them if we saw them. That was a mistake, there were bug parts everywhere and the class was anarchy. That must have been rough on the staff. There were also a couple of others that I'm not sure happened, but they were rumored to have been done. All of the freshmen's lockers are in one wing of the school that is on the fourth floor, with two stairwells for exits. Supposedly one year the seniors waited until classes let out and baracaded the doors, locking the frosh inside. Another rumored prank was filling the pool with jello. By the way, this was at the previously mentioned Fenwick, and of you ripping on us can bite me.

That's total bulls*** that they cancelled graduation for that stuff. I guess it was just some really bad timing to pull those pranks, and that's what set the administration off. Also probably not smart since there was a very small graduating class, making it easier to single out suspects. I went to Fenwick, which is a private Catholic co-ed high school, and we got away with a lot of similar stuff. Our graduating class was about 200 people though. We put maple syrup on all of the banisters on the stairway (worked because they were brown), vasoline on door handles and toilet flush handles, released some small animals (think it was two chickens and a pig) in the gym, and released a couple hundred crickets in the auditorium. The last one was particularly fun. I had a study hall first period which met in the auditorium balcony, where most of them were. The teacher didn't know what to do, so she told us to stomp on them if we found them. That was pretty fun for a while before she figured out the errors in her ways. I feel sorry for the maintenance staff on that one.

QUOTE(Nokona @ May 26, 2005 -> 05:19 PM) I've had him on all of my fantasy teams since he came up. The kid is a stud! He's definitely a beast. He pitched a complete game shutout tonight. He's about the only thing going right on my ESPN team other than my early Cliff Floyd pickup. Monster picking on my part. Beltran, Beltre, Sheets, Boone, Hafner, and Mike Adams as my #2 closer. That team's costing me some sleep.

C- Ray Schalk (just to be contrarian, HOF catcher) 1B- Frank 2B- Eddie Collins SS- Luke Appling 3B- Buck Weaver (kind of want to cheat and move Nellie over hear) OF- Joe Jackson OF- Minnie Minnoso OF- Tim Raines DH- Dick Allen SP- Ed Walsh SP- Ed Cicotte SP- Billy Pierce SP- Jack McDowell (not sure about the career numbers, but he has a Cy Young) SP- Red Faber (HOF) CL- Hoyt Wilhelm (an absolute beast in the pen)

The point is did he really get prospect packages that were any better than what he could have had at the All-star break? I'm not so sure, especially since neither Haren or Meyer were ranked as top 50 prospects when I checked after the trade. He could have hung on to Hudson and seen what happened. If the team was weak, he could still trade him at the deadline. Atlanta and St. Louis would still need an ace pitcher, so I don't see where that package would have gone. Doing this with Mulder would have made even more sense because he still had a full season left on his contract. You could have traded him NEXT offseason just as easily. Instead you're stuck with Zito, who I can't imagine you can get anything for, Harden is on the DL (although he's a stud), and the three prospects at the back of rotation are getting let up. His team this year didn't have to look anywhere near this disastrous. He's going to look like a real ass if Meyer and or Haren don't pan out, which is highly possible. He hasn't secured anything with these trade and managed to tank this year's club. None of these guys were Mark Prior type prospects, so I don't see how he did so much good for the team in getting them. If these guys were so certain to make an impact and so close to being there, they wouldn't have traded them. Harden looks like the only ace pitcher that he's still got. If anything he should have traded Zito while he had a chance a couple of year ago. He's nowhere near the pitcher he used to be. He's basically got a team full of Juan Cruz's right now. All of them are getting seriously rocked (Meyer doing it at AAA) and only Haren has a good strikeout rate. Even Cruz and Calero are getting rocked, and those guys were supposed to be solid setup men. These guys need to get better fast or he's really going to eat some crow.

I wouldn't exactly count out Beltre or Ramirez just yet. Both of these guys have a ton of talent, which is why it was so frustrating when these guys were disappointing early in their career. Beltre has certainly looked bad, but I think in the long run his numbers will be somewhere between those of this year so far and those of last season. Remember, he hit 48 homers playing most of his games at Chavez Ravine, which is definitely not a hitter's haven. Ramirez has had a couple of years that were pretty good. He was almost as solid in 2001 one for the Pirates as he was for the Cubs last year, and his combined numbers from 2003 weren't all bad. Both of them still have several years to deliver on the contracts they received.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ May 25, 2005 -> 09:05 PM) He wasn't going to be able to resign either of them... He didn't really have to worry about resigning them yet. He could have easily kept both of them and taken another shot at the division. As badly as they have played, they'd be in much better shape with those two still on the team. But he decided that he had to break up the team now and try to rebuild it. Even if he dealt Hudson, he could have kept Mulder. If it didn't work, the packages he could get for those pitchers near the trade deadline wouldn't be that different than the ones he got. I said it at the time, I didn't get trading Mulder. If they kept him, you'd still have gotten some prospects out of it and still had a pretty impressive top 3 in Mulder, Zito, and Harden, with a top prospect coming up in Blanton, and either Meyer or Haren depending on which deal he took. Did he really need that extra pitching prospect badly enough to basically tank this season? I don't see how. His baseball decisions have been questionable in the past outside of fleecing us on the Foulke deal, and it's finally showing now that two of his aces are gone.

I voted Frank, but Shoeless Joe might be the right answer. He was a great all-around player, and if not for the 1919 series he might have gone down as one of the all time greats, especially since he was about 31 when he was banned.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ May 25, 2005 -> 02:37 PM) Who ended up going back to the minors because they wanted him to develop. Why do you think he only had 15 games in 2001? It was even on ESPN last week. He tried to blow everyone away(and he was a stud prospect, prolly moreso than McCarthy). He pitched out of the bullpen, and then started. They didn't think he developed right and told him to not only refine his controls, but to develop a change and that's where he fell in love with it. So he's a bad example for your defense. But the main reason he went back down was to develop that extra pitch. He also still pitched in the pen after he returned to the majors. To the best of my knowledge they don't intend to have McCarthy add a pitch to his repetoire. I don't really have a strong opinion either way. If he can help in the bullpen, I don't have a problem with it. If they want him to get some more innings in AAA, I don't have a problem with it. In the end I don't think he really has that much more to prove in the minors. I doubt the relief stint is really going to hurt him. He already possesses two things that most of those guys that failed didn't have: control and a major league ready breaking ball.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ May 25, 2005 -> 02:14 PM) I think its easier to get good hitting OF's though than it is 3B... List of good hitting 3B: Mora Chavez Beltre(although might be a fluke) Blalock Chipper Aramis Ramirez Rolen Glaus(not good hitter but has power) and Chavez and Rolen are way ahead of any of those guys fielding wise.... I would include A-Rod in the list but he would be a SS on any other team besides the yankees so... There's also only one 3rd baseman on the field and 3 outfielders. That drastically affects the number of potentially solid hitters.

Davis isn't a throw-in type player on a deal. You don't throw in major league starting pitchers. Apparently you haven't realized this yet. Keep preaching, I can't recall a single move that you have endorsed making sense, other than the one's in this thread that are somewhat after the fact.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ May 25, 2005 -> 01:56 PM) I wouldnt necessarily say Lee is a better hitter... Chavez is slumping right now but he will get going he is awesome, also he is way more talented with the glove than Lee ever was... Chavez is probably 2nd best fielding 3B behind Rolen... I still remember last year or whatevr when Chavez was sitting down and he threw a guy out at 1st. I won't argue the fielding part, but he isn't that great a hitter. Even when he is on he's never come close to hitting .300 (best year .288, career .273) and he doesn't get on base a ton either, with a .350 career OBP (was pretty damn good last year, but I digress). And for all his power potential, his career high is 34. Lee's OBP is also pretty woeful, but he's hit over .300 the last two years with 30 plus homers and is hitting considerably better right now. I'd call it debateable. However, for 5 and a half years at around $10 mil per for the full seasons, I'd like to get a stronger or more consistent hitter. He's actually pretty similar to Paulie when it comes to the streaks, which most of us have a major problem with.

You're still proving his point. He said EITHER a 1B or OF, not both. Plus I think your list is way too long. Hillenbrand isn't anywhere near the impact player Dunn is; Pierre is overrated as an offensive option, especially since he isn't running as much as he used to; Overbay is a solid option but Dunn has considerably better HR and RBI numbers (kind of the main focus with first basemen), Derek Lee is playing much better right now than he ever has in his career (career .269 hitter with a career high of 32 homers); Matsui isn't anywhere near the hitter he was in Japan (pretty good last year, but disappointing his first year and this year so far) and is considerably older, and some of those guys are considerably older and aren't going to be as productive from here on out like Delgado, Edmonds, and Bonds (who might not even play again at this rate). Dunn's a 25 year old that hit 47 homeruns last year and has a career .385 OBP. There are guys I'd rather have, but not that many. I can't imagine that the Reds would trade him.

Granted that Fields is probably two years away, I'm still not sure that they'd want to make that much of a committment to a guy that plays the same position as one of their top prospects. A stopgap solution would seem to make more sense. You'd be getting a 3rd baseman with 5 and a half years left on his contract that would cost somewhere between $55 and $60 mil. Considering that they got rid of Lee, who was making less money for fewer years and is probably a better hitter than Chavez at this point in his career, I don't think that they'll do it. Fields is more of a justification for not making that move than the real reason for it. I think it'd be much more likely that they get someone like Polanco.

I realize that it is retarded to rank guys based on one outing, but I'll at least try to answer the guy's question. From what I saw of the two players I'd rather have B-Mac. Santana seemed to be featuring only two pitches: a 94 MPH fastball and a decent slider that he didn't seem to have full control of. He had no real breaking stuff from what I saw, which is a major problem. B-Mac on the other hand had a really nice curveball that he seemed to have solid control of, and he has a changeup that we didn't really see in that start. His fastball didn't quite have as much zip, but that could change as he fills out his frame a bit.