TruffleShuffle

bitter dexter face

pat williams is listed at 317 lbs? judging by the photo accompanying that article, that's with one leg on the scale.

It's a letdown to open a B2B trade thread and only have 2 teams and 4 players involved

i think pena is going to stink.

i have no reason to hate the packers (well they knocked out the eagles, but whatever, we weren't that good anyway), and the rodgers belt celebration is trashy and douchey, and anyone who thinks it was cool is an idiot.

his asking price is very reasonable. he's not injury prone and has consistently been one of the best players in the game.

no tree is right, that's pretty white trash

no personal attacks on snood plz

I think Mike Lombardi brought that up on one of Bill Simmons' podcasts last week, mentioning that it was unfortunate for Pittsburgh that their biggest strength would basically be wasted in this game. I'm sure that's true, but still -- RB surely cannot be considered a need for this team when they just showed they can run a road schedule all the way to the Super Bowl and then win it with Starks + all the top-notch passing game options they have. Obviously they would benefit from a better back, as all teams would. if you have an elite QB, good offensive line and good WR, a having a good RB really doesn't matter. your OL will open up holes, linebackers will be back on their heels to defend the pass and the safeties can't come up to help. peyton manning had edgerrin james for a while, but none of his other RBs have been anything special. tom brady's backfield has been a revolving door.

the packers picked a good opponent to have if you're going to have next to no running game. pitt was easily the best team in the league at defending the run, so abandoning it wasn't going to hurt gb that much.

Yeah, that long stretch known as baseball season sure does suck. it kinda does when the cubs are out of it by may

dear nate silver, please go back to bp and help them fix pecota

edited my post above - hopefully that answers your question. It does. So it really comes down to athleticism and conditioning, which can be predicted based on what types of things the player does well on the field. pretty much. if you take a guy like albert pujols, even if he loses some bat speed, foot speed and defensive ability, he still hits for a solid average, good power, and plays solid defense (as right now he's among the best at his position as far as hitting (for average) and defensive ability). then take a player like mark bellhorn, who was never a good fielder, hit for low average and didn't have much foot speed. he had good power and patience for a 2B, but when what little "young player skills" he did have began to slip, he collapsed as a ballplayer and was out of the game by his early 30s.

edited my post above - hopefully that answers your question.

I agree with you. But the old player skills/young player skills argument doesn't. Doesn't Crawford have young player skills? Avg/contact, speed, defense. Now, I would think that speed and defense are the first to go in old age - so then why are they more valuable and projectable? Jim Edmonds had old player skills - OBP, power, lumbery. Yet, we was able to stick into his late 30s. Can someone please give me a run-down of this argument before I go cross-eyed? he was not lumbery. maybe he became lumbery in his later years but he was a very good fielder for a long time. plus he always hit around .300. the traditional "old player skills" guy is like adam dunn, where most of their value is tied up in a good batting eye and power. as for the argument as to why those players do not age well, it's because guys who survive on skills like power and batting eye are generally not great athletes, so their athletic ability is already marginal, and when they age a little bit their defense and speed go from "poor" to "atrocious." plus they don't hit for high average, suggesting marginal hitting ability, and if they lose a little bat speed their average drops even more and they lose some of the power, so pitchers aren't so afraid to pitch to them any more, and they don't walk as much. the main thing to take out of the bill james theory of old player skills and young player skills is that players who get by on old player skills at a young age tend to peak early and decline quickly.

where is the pride in being a sox fan? proud that you haven't missed a visit to the methadone clinic in a month? proud that you scratched together enough cash to buy that 1987 iroc-z you've always wanted?

there's probably a reason that i post on a cubs message board

Fixed. hey go easy on sulley, his teams have only won 8 championships since one of my teams won one. but don't worry, the glow of that 1983 sixers championship has not worn off yet. i remember jumping around like a four year old, mostly because that's how old i was when it happened.

the steelers should have used their time out with 2 seconds left and everyone on the field, that would have been amazing douchebaggery.

hopefully steeler fans held off on beating their wives after the jennings td, this one's still a game.

hey that guy's the best WR on the packers, might want to cover him.

does fumble followed by long drive count as something good happening to the packers?

anyone who would rather watch the black eyed peas or a band that was good 40 years ago rather than puppies playing is a bad person.

Exactly, none of them are any good. Yeah, I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would have the Super Bowl on. lots of other channels make things specifically to air during the super bowl halftime. or does your remote not work during the super bowl?