ZoomSlowik

I'm also not 100% sold on this guy, but this isn't a stellar draft, so I think he could be the #1 overall pick. I think it will depend in large part who gets the #1 pick and who comes out. Someone like Charlotte probably wouldn't take him because they have Okafor, and I don't really see why Utah would take him with Boozer and Okur there (unless they unload one of those guys). Marvin Williams could also be a major obstacle to him being the number 1 pick. That guy has future star written all over him.

Seattle may be a smaller market, but they aren't a small market team in terms of attendance and payroll. Their average attendance last year was over 36,000 and their payroll is over $85 mil after signing Sexon and Beltre. Financially this isn't quite the same Mariners team that had to let A-Rod, Griffey, and the Big Unit go (altough pretty much anyone but the Yankees and Red Sox couldn't afford to keep those 3).

Pick just about any of the real old timers, like Ty Cobb or Joe Jackson. As for current players, my vote goes to one of the more obvious ones, David Wells.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 12, 2005 -> 07:16 PM) I need that guy in my league! I think everyone needs that guy in their league, unfortunately you're also going to need several people that are just as clueless to get the trade passed. Sometimes I wonder why these people even bother running teams. What's worse is he flat out dropped Orlando Cabrera, Mark Mulder, and Eric Chavez (works for me I guess, I got Chavez).

That's a major difference, Texiera is a second or third rounder, Overbay is much later. On a side note, check out this laugher. It's certainly going to get vetoed, this came right after Pujols for Damon was vetoed: Pujols, Podsednik, and Delgado for Orlando Hernandez, Scott Kazmir, and Esteban Loaiza I'm not sure if the better smiley is :headshake or

I'd trade either Hafner or Overbay for an outfielder, that's a fairly big hole on your team. It looks like you could use some more speed too.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Apr 11, 2005 -> 10:40 PM) I had him in a couple leagues last year after the break(9-1, 3.31ERA). I just went to drop Madritsch and add Hampton or Gavin Floyd only to find that both have been picked up. Hampton is a solid pick up -- Another demonstration of Mazzone's genius Brett Myers man. 15 K's in two starts, ERA of .73. The guy has a good amount of talent.

I think games like today will happen a lot for them. Their offense doesn't have a whole lot of punch to it, and they have a less than stellar pen. I think they're going to lose a lot of one run games, especially of the 2-1, 3-2, 4-3 variety.

I know mine are a little late, but oh well. AL East- New York AL Central- Sox AL West- Anaheim AL WC- Boston NL East- Florida NL Central- Houston NL West- San Diego NL Wildcard- St. Louis AL Champs- Yankees NL Champs- Florida WS Champs- Yankees AL MVP- Vladimir Guererro NL MVP- Albert Pujols AL Cy Young- Johan Santana NL Cy Young- Ben Sheets I forgot an important bold prediction. Zambrano, Prior, and Wood all finish with ERA's over 3 and the Cubs lose numerous games 5-4 or 4-3 due to inconsistent offense, a weak pen, and somewhat inconsistent starting pitching, finishing within 5 games of .500.

Ozzie is nowhere near as bad as Manuel. Jerry used to switch up the lineup EVERY DAY, whether or not there were bench players involved. IIRC, at one point he used a different lineup in 28 consecutive games. He'd bounce around every player in the lineup. He even batted Frank #2 for a good stretch for God's sake. It's part of baseball, managers switch their lineups to give guys some rest and get better matchups.

Take a look at those numbers from the strike year man, they're ridiculous. He was easily the best hitter in the league for a while there.

Thanks a lot guys, would have responded earlier, but I was recovering from last night.

The drop in playing time still doesn't give him an excuse for having that big a drop in FG% and 3 point %, plus his turnovers stayed pretty much constant.

I think this is a pretty easy explanation for the drop off in play. McInnis went from a fairly efficient PG to one that is mediocre at best. Pre-Allstar break 14.9 points 5.7 assists .43 FG% .371 3% Post-Allstar break 9 points 4.1 assists .358 FG% .28 3%

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Apr 7, 2005 -> 10:28 AM) Worst bang for the buck...Phillies? I'm going to put in a vote for the Giants. There is no way they have a $90 million team. Bonds and Schmidt are worth it and the newly acquired Benitez and Alou (think they overpayed, but he's productive) are okay, but the rest of their contracts are pretty brutal. For $90 mil they somehow have only one above average starter, a mediocre lineup that Bonds is carrying, and a less than stellar pen. I really don't see them hanging around with Bonds out, he's been propping that team up for the last couple of years. Yeah, the Phillies, Mets, and Orioles also underachieve, but I think the Giants have the fewest productive players and the least balance of that group.

I am so sick of hearing about the loss of power. I am still kind of pissed that we traded Lee, but it was clear that Magglio was not going to be back, and we played most of last year without him anyways. Our leader in homers(Konerko) is still hear, Rowand hit 24 when he wasn't even a full time player the whole year, we added Dye who has always been good for 20-30 in medicore to poor hitting parks, and between Everett and Thomas we should get at least solid 30. That doesn't even count Uribe or Crede who both hit over 20 last year. It pisses me off especially when I don't see him talking about the drop in power on the northside. Lee and Aramis are good for 30 apiece and Patterson and Garciaparra should be somewhere in the 20's, but the rest of the team isn't exactly power-ladden. And yet there is nothing from Jay. I'm so sick of this guy it's ridiculous.

Think about it, how often has Illinois really been a player on the national level? We've got two Final Fours and one Elite Eight in 16 years, that doesn't really compare when the major programs get interested in a prospect. They've only started to put something consistent together recently. Plus as Southsider said, the coaching is big. Our best recruiting classes came at the end of Lon Kruger's tenure and at the end of Bill Self's tenure. If Webber sticks around a while and they have more deep runs in the tournament they'll do fine, but until then they're not going to have a very high success rate on the really good players in state.

I need some help determining what Barry Bonds is worth in a standard 5x5 league. There is currently a pending trade: Prior for Bonds. My opinion is that Prior is worth a lot more right now because all indications are that he will start next week, while Bonds' return date is unknown. I also don't like the fact that Prior was a fifth rounder while Bonds went in the 15th, and that these guys already made a trade involving their top picks: Pujols and Mussina for Helton and the Big Unit (I let that one go. I thought it was iffy but not veto worthy). Thoughts?

How did this turn into a 7 page thread? It's not that big a deal. I admit, I was one of the offenders (especially since I type such long posts), so I just took out the quotes that used to be in my sig. End of story.

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Apr 5, 2005 -> 08:07 PM) The lane is wider in the NBA, is it not?? FWIW, I don't want the college game being anything like the NBA, so that would not be incentive for me to change the distance. I don't want them to make any changes besides the 3 point line, although they probably will. There are already too few decent post players in college, we don't need to make that any worse. We don't need a 24 second shot clock, or 4 12 minute quarters, or any of the other NBA characteristics either. I'd just like to see it be a little tougher to get a made 3 pointer. Moving the line back won't affect guys like Redick or Stoudamire, it'd just make the poor/mediocre/decent 3 point shooters either get better or stop shooting. I'd like to see more penetration, backdooor cuts, mid range jumpers, and post play, which would be necessary for more teams with a 3 point line that is more like the international one.

It was probably an inevitability after the Carlos Boozer debacle.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Apr 5, 2005 -> 07:18 PM) Your cousin hits better then practically every college player if that's the case... Take just about any above average college shooter and put them in a typical pickup game and they would shoot the lights out. The defense played by any college team would be light years better. Watch most of these guys warm up and the better shooters can hit 75-80 percent of their 3's.

A quick NBA/college comparison concerning 3 pointers. There are 20 college teams that make more than 8.5 threes per game, with 8 of them averaging 9 or more (including Louisville, Duke, and Illinois). Only Phoenix makes more than that number in the pros, and only 2 teams hit more than 8, even with the extra 8 minutes per game. Also, 12 college teams shot better than 40% from the arc during the regular season. Not a single pro team did this, and only Phoenix was even close. This shows how much more of a factor 3 point shooting is in college basketball. It is clearly much easier to make a three in college and is a much bigger part of the game. It also makes up a much larger percentage of the team's scoring, considering that only Charlotte averages fewer points per game than national leader UNC. I'm not against the 3 pointer, but let's make people work to get those 3's. Keeping the line that close puts too great an emphasis on outside shooting to the detriment of other facets of the game. I love college basketball, but I'd rather see teams running plays to get good shots close to the basket than everything revolving around the 3 pointer. Some of these games have turned into giant 3 point shootouts, like the WV-Louisville game. The open 3 is the easiest shot to get because of all of the ground the D needs to cover, and the reward for making is simply too great right now. Moving the line back should drop this emphasis and also allow more room inside the arc to run plays and get better shots, and weaker shooters would have to limit their shots or draw the coaches ire. I really think it would make for a much better game to watch.

I like Head's pro potential. He's not going to be a star, but I think he can be a solid player. He's got good athleticism, he can finish, and he has a pretty good jumper. With some experience he should also be a pretty good defender. I don't really see why he is any different than guys like Tony Allen. I don't really know where he is going to be drafted because that depends greatly on how pro GM's view him. I personally don't think he needs to play PG, but from everything I've seen so far it sounds like that is how they feel. I see no reason he can't be a solid contributor on the pro level, maybe not as a starter on a good team, but a solid bench player, or a starter on a weaker team.

I personally think that Felton will be a better pro point guard than Williams. One major reason is his driving and finishing in the half court offense. Whenever Williams drives, he almost always tries to dish it to someone else. That ability to finish is a major factor for PG's, and from what I have seen Felton is better at it. Felton also is probably the best passer of any of the PG prospects, and has greatly improved his jumper. I stilll think Deron is a better shooter than Felton because of the mid-range game, but from the games I have watched I have more faith in Felton being able to hit the NBA three. Most of the time Deron is on the line or damn close when he hits them, I don't see him hitting them from the parking lot like Brown or Felton very often. Williams does have an advantage because he is bigger, but I really think that as soon as Felton cuts down his turnovers he's going to be a very good pro player.