CubinNY

This is probably Calipari's last game as Memphis head coach. I wonder what is going to happen to his resteraunt?

Same goes for Brett Favre. Favre has never actually retired though. And he hasn't sat out a game since Madden worked with Summerall on CBS (I think).

OK. One more dribble and five more feet. How much does it increase the % of the shot? Anyway, game over, moving on. I'm rooting for UCLA.

one second isn't going to make a bit of difference. It makes a huge difference right there-if he had one more second he could have sidestepped that defender and then dribbled up to the 3 point line-with the time he had, all he time to do was sidestep the defender, so he just decided to launch the shot while straight on rather than moving to his right. Whatever Great argument. One second makes a huge difference in that situation. Yes. Maybe one more dribble and 3 more feet. Increases the shot percentage by a lot I'm sure. Are you drunk right now? The difference between 3.1 and 2.0 in that situation is huge. I realize you made a claim and now you want to stick to it, but give us a break. Sober as a judge. How about you?The difference wasn't 3.1 and 2.0. It was whatever it was when the ball touched the floor and the Memphis player touched it and it went out of bounds. So 2.7 or whatever and 2.0. Maybe one diribble and three more feet.

one second isn't going to make a bit of difference. It makes a huge difference right there-if he had one more second he could have sidestepped that defender and then dribbled up to the 3 point line-with the time he had, all he time to do was sidestep the defender, so he just decided to launch the shot while straight on rather than moving to his right. Whatever Great argument. One second makes a huge difference in that situation. Yes. Maybe one more dribble and 3 more feet. Increases the shot percentage by a lot I'm sure.

one second isn't going to make a bit of difference. It makes a huge difference right there-if he had one more second he could have sidestepped that defender and then dribbled up to the 3 point line-with the time he had, all he time to do was sidestep the defender, so he just decided to launch the shot while straight on rather than moving to his right. Whatever

Go Buckeyes!

one second isn't going to make a bit of difference.

Yes!

Down to the last. 64-63 A&M Memphis with the ball and :28 to go. Wow.

Memphis A&M is a great game 63-63 A&M 3 min to go.

Memphis/A&M is a barn burner. All of Memphis's games have been good. 40-37 A&M 10 seconds left

I don't think so.

Calipari will have a few good options. I doubt Memphis could come close to matching what he could get at one of the Big 10 schools or Kentucky. Down here though, nobody asks questions about anything.

I think it's all in his lack of consistency, but that is just me. Prior's problem is he hasn't really pitched for a long time when he's been healthy in game conditions.

He's hit 90-91 a few times in the second inning but his command still isn't great. Check out the game thread. This may get locked, but- He topped out at 93 on a fastball with movement. He looked like a different person after the first inning, and he wasn't really hit that hard in the first. He's still struggling with command a little, really brought to attention by Hill pounding the zone in his inning of work, but he certainly looked a lot better than any appearance I read about. I'm tempted to go back and find the Rich Hill thread in baseball discussions last year and bring it back for this year with a huge bump. I loved posting in that thread after yet another stellar outing in the 2nd half of the year. That thread was a 'bueat.

Game called

Jabroni I think he is still stalking Vance_the_Cub_fan.

So are we going to have a bet between Rocket Sauce and Richhillisabeast or what?

It depends on the type of dancing your wife dose. She could have made a lot more money than you :wink:

I perviously used "Tipsy Tony" in this thread. Falling asleep at the wheel and drinking are very bad things. Hasn't he had problems with drinking in the past?

You can say that all you want, but you're wrong. Last team wasn't a fluke. Last year was a more exaggerated version of 2005. It simply exposed the flaws of a poorly run team. The Cubs have had the lowest walks in the league for several years. It's been part of their plan. Acquiring Soriano will not change that. You can cite all the bad breaks that hurt last year, but bad breaks are part of the game. I think you are exhibiting blind pessimism if you can't admit that the Cubs had more than what would be considered an "average" amount of bad breaks last year and had to rely (more than nearly every other team) on not ready minor league players to fill in for quite a few holes--namely in the rotation. The Friken' Marlins entier team was filled with AAAA and AAA and AA guys last year and still finshed better than the Cubs. The Cubs were terrible. This year they've put together a team that doesn't quite fit. And a pitching staff that includes Hill, Lilly, and Marquis. All suspetible to an inordinate number of HRs. Last year the Cubs were among the worst statistical teams in baseball and had one of the worst records in baseball. I think it is unrealistic to expect them to be drastically better. But even if they are drastically bettter that still only puts them around .500. Are you saying that this teams ceiling is around .500? There is no such a thing as a ceiling unless you are talking about a house. Ceiling is nonsensical scoutspeak that someone uses when they want to appear to be smart. I'm saying that the chances that the Cubs are a 90+ win team are small. It's not impossible, but it's not very likely either. I consider a 90 win team to be good.

You can say that all you want, but you're wrong. Last team wasn't a fluke. Last year was a more exaggerated version of 2005. It simply exposed the flaws of a poorly run team. The Cubs have had the lowest walks in the league for several years. It's been part of their plan. Acquiring Soriano will not change that. You can cite all the bad breaks that hurt last year, but bad breaks are part of the game. I think you are exhibiting blind pessimism if you can't admit that the Cubs had more than what would be considered an "average" amount of bad breaks last year and had to rely (more than nearly every other team) on not ready minor league players to fill in for quite a few holes--namely in the rotation. The Friken' Marlins entier team was filled with AAAA and AAA and AA guys last year and still finshed better than the Cubs. The Cubs were terrible. This year they've put together a team that doesn't quite fit. And a pitching staff that includes Hill, Lilly, and Marquis. All suspetible to an inordinate number of HRs. Last year the Cubs were among the worst statistical teams in baseball and had one of the worst records in baseball. I think it is unrealistic to expect them to be drastically better. But even if they are drastically bettter that still only puts them around .500. With all due respect, the Marlins team was filled with very talented AAA and AA guys last year. Ours not so much. So stipulated. Even so, they were still better than the Cubs.

You can say that all you want, but you're wrong. Last team wasn't a fluke. Last year was a more exaggerated version of 2005. It simply exposed the flaws of a poorly run team. The Cubs have had the lowest walks in the league for several years. It's been part of their plan. Acquiring Soriano will not change that. You can cite all the bad breaks that hurt last year, but bad breaks are part of the game. I think you are exhibiting blind pessimism if you can't admit that the Cubs had more than what would be considered an "average" amount of bad breaks last year and had to rely (more than nearly every other team) on not ready minor league players to fill in for quite a few holes--namely in the rotation. The Friken' Marlins entier team was filled with AAAA and AAA and AA guys last year and still finshed better than the Cubs. The Cubs were terrible. This year they've put together a team that doesn't quite fit. And a pitching staff that includes Hill, Lilly, and Marquis. All suspetible to an inordinate number of HRs. Last year the Cubs were among the worst statistical teams in baseball and had one of the worst records in baseball. I think it is unrealistic to expect them to be drastically better. But even if they are drastically bettter that still only puts them around .500.

Shouldn't this go in Rivals or Social (no pun intendend). I couldn't care less about Tipsy Tony.