RynoRules

Free Jim Edmonds (to retire)

I really don't care where he hits in the order. I care more about if his injury is hampering his range in LF and preventing him from taking an extra base where appropriate. As far as his public proclomations, I don't much care if he lies to us or the Cubs staff about his health. He wants to play everyday and earn his money - I have no problem with that. T he Cubs staff sees the same thing we do. I guess as long as he is hitting they figure he's worth keeping out there. He's also walked three or four times in the last two games, which is encouraging.

Way to go, Sean!!! Hopefully the first of many.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-080527-alfonso-soriano-defense-chicago-cubs,1,204570.story The criticism was warranted; the cheap shot was not. His point was well-made without the sophmoric "dart" comment. With respect to his running, I have noticed that he is loafing-it around the bases (at least relative to what he looks like at full strength). But are we really criticizing him for being hurt?

Please explain how Sosa's last contract was a bad idea.

Keep your head up, Murt. Hope to see you in Chicago (at least as the 4th OFer) soon.

I don't understand your 2nd paragraph. You think if Johnson had options and Edmonds sucks for a few more weeks, they'd get rid of both and what, put Fukudome there full time? Seems unlikely. Johnson's here for the season. He'd had to start sucking something awful to at least not start in CF against LHP and spell Soriano occasionally. They clearly thought Edmonds had something left, though I'm not sure what the scouts saw in SD that made them think that. If Edmonds gets cut, I wouldn't be surprised to see Hendry go out and get another veteran CF. But this doesn't make any sense to me. The team is going great offensively while getting nothing from CF against RHP. As many posters have said many times, now is a great time to let a young guy develop while giving you stellar defense in CF. I more or less agree. I wasn't defending the logic so much as I was playing devil's advocate. I think they overreacted. What I thik we need more is another SP.

Rosennbloom has always been awful, both in print and on the radio, where his show on ESPN 1000 with the equally horrendous Salisbury was mercifully short-lived. I am not sure that I get what role he plays for the Trib - court jester? The Trib columnists aren't very good in general, but he really is over the top. I think its intentional.

I more or less agree with Neyer on this one: If they had at least let him try it for a while at this level they'd have a better argument that something needs to change. On the other hand, I also understand that they want to win now and feel like they need better production in CF to do so. I'd bet that the only reason Reed Johnson is still here is that he has no minor league options, and Edmonds - unless he really turns it around - will be gone by the ASB.

I think scouting is more important in pro hoops than in any other sport (though pro football might be close). All of these guys play at different levels of competition with mitigating factors such as overall team talent and the system(s) they play in. If not for scouting, there would be no Yao, no Tony Parker, no Dirk, etc.

Oy vey.

That's true, but the early returns (his rep from college and HS) are not promising. No one is questioning Rose in that manner, to the best of my knowledge. In any case, we need a guard who can create for himself and others. Rose is the answer.

I don't really either. Webber is probably a better comparison. Of course, Xavier McDaniel put up a similar stat line to Beasley....

Well put. Hendry seems to be a decent guy for whom the lightbulb is now finally going on.

I am not so much proud of it as I am convinced of it. Its like "de ja vu all over again". The fact that we are debating it is the fun of it. We'll soon see if the comparison is apt. there's just no proof that beasley is much like coleman. he dominated the competition while being constantly double-teamed, remaining the focus of the opposing team's defensive strategy. again, his perimeter game is more developed than coleman's ever was, which isn't saying much, but oh well. he routinely took men off the dribble from 25 feet out, he could hit the three with some regularity. he controlled the boards, he was as effective an interior scorer as anyone who has played the college game in recent memory. there's really not much about his game to badmouth. in fact, i can't think of anyone to compare his game to. he's a very unique player in that he's an animal inside with the skills of a 3. you're honestly comparing a guy who dominated the america east conference to a guy who dominated the big 12? a guy who had no outside game, no outside shot to a beasley? are you kidding me? if we're going to get so abstract in our comparison, how about niko skitishvili or darko milicic? how about oliver miller or kurt thomas? if our only criteria now is that said player be relatively tall, why aren't we talking about dwight howard, chris bosh, rasheed wallace, or tim duncan? the more i think about it, the more derrick rose reminds me of scoonie penn, jacques vaughn, and jay williams. there, is that pessimistic of a viewpoint for you? because it makes just as much sense as comparing derrick coleman to michael beasley. I think that is major hyperbole on your part. Makes it difficult to respond to you. Vin Baker had a nice jump shot Perhaps not as developed as Beasley's, but still. The Baker reference was mostly to refute your "he's left-handed and so is Beasley" argument. My main concern with Beasley was and is that he won't work hard enough when he gets to the pros. There are lots of guys who have "mad" athletic skills at that level - will he do what is necessary to put himself into an elite category befitting a number one pick?

I am not so much proud of it as I am convinced of it. Its like "de ja vu all over again". The fact that we are debating it is the fun of it. We'll soon see if the comparison is apt. Would you prefer a Vin Baker comparison, because I am reminded of him aswell? http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bakervi01.html

I completely disagree with your assessment of Coleman's game at the college level. He had small fwd skills and could still beat you with his back to the basket. His rebounding numbers (not effort, mind you) were also very strong. He avged 20 and 10 in his first few yrs in the pros too. EDIT: Coleman at Cuse: And don't discount how good his teammates were. The reason he didn't score as much as Beasley did last season is because he played with Sherm Douglas, Billy Owens and - for one season - Ron Seikley. 1. small forward skills? i didn't really see them. he could face up under 15 feet and take slower guys to the hoop, but he had no perimeter skills to speak of, and a non-existent outside shot. 2. your mention of the first few years of coleman's pro career kind of confuse me. 3. i wouldn't mention sherman douglas, one of the best assist men of his era, as a reason derrick coleman wasn't as prolific a scorer as beasley. My responses, point by point: 1) This tells me you never watched him play. 2) What's to be confused about? You said beasley is a better rebounder. Coleman's 10-plus rebounding avg in college and then during his first five seasons in the pros contradict your argument. 3) So because Douglas could both dish it and score it he somehow did not take away from Coleman's scoring avg? Douglas avged approx. 18 PPG during his four years, three of which were played with Coleman, so please explain to me how it was that Sherm Douglas was not a scorer in college. And what about Billy Owens, who avged 13 PPG in 89' and 18 PPG in 90'? Stephen Thompson who avged 18 ppg in both 89' and 90', and double-digits the two years before that? Seikaly who avged 15 ppg in 87' and 16 ppg in 88'? You don't think these guys took away from Coleman's scoring?

I completely disagree with your assessment of Coleman's game at the college level. He had small fwd skills and could still beat you with his back to the basket. His rebounding numbers (not effort, mind you) were also very strong. He avged 20 and 10 in his first few yrs in the pros too. EDIT: Coleman at Cuse: And don't discount how good his teammates were. The reason he didn't score as much as Beasley did last season is because he played with Sherm Douglas, Billy Owens and - for one season - Ron Seikley.

Its not even about athleticism - I don't question his ability to deal with strong and fast NBA players. I worry about his desire to be the best and to do the necessary little things. I keep coming back to Derrick Coleman. Same height and weight as Beasley. He dominated at 'Cuse and could have been one of the best PF's of all-time. Instead, he was happy to do enough to keep getting a paycheck. He drank and partied too much, was poorly conditioned for the vast majority of his career, ran Butch Beard out of NJ and caused Chuck Daley's head to explode. He was also allergic to playing defense and averse to taking on a leadership role after Drazen Petrovic's untimely death. Beasley screams Derrick Coleman to me. The same red flags have been raised in terms of his ethic, desire, and goofball tendencies (how many schools did he go to?). Plus he was recruited by Bob Huggins. ( I know I should not paint with a broad brush in this respect, but recruiting good kids with strong work ethics has never been one of Huggin's priorities. IIRC, his graduation rate at Cinci was less than 10%, and for a while was zero. And what happens when those kids get to the pros?: Kenyon Martin, Nick Van Exel, Dontonio Wingfield, etc.)

If Portland has offered the 13th pick for Hinrich we'd be fools not to jump all over it. Unload that horrible contract and get something decent in return? BTW, there is no way Westbrook will be there at 13. Augustin is a "maybe, but unlikely", as is Gordon. All of those guys are likely top 10.

This answer is completely wrong. Beasley is to Drew Gooden what Rose is to Kirk Hinrich. Gooden's game can't hold a candle to Beasley's. Beasley is taller, 150X the athlete, a better leaper, a better shooter, actually has offensive moves, is a better ball handler, can hit a shot outside of 12 feet and will probably be a better rebounder. And I would undoubtedly pick Rose over Beasley, so that's saying something. I disagree. Gooden is a better rebounder and shot blocker than Beasley, and based on Beasley's apparent aversion to playing defense, this may always be the case. Beasley might have a better face up game and is taller, I will grant you that. Other than that, the difference is minimal and based on athletic ability, which is not necessarily a good barometer for who the better basketball player is. From Hollinger's scouting report: And the notion that Beasley's face up game is head and shoulders above Gooden's does not hold water. Again, Hollinger:

How about Hinrich and Deng? http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/24099667/ Awesome. We'll gladly take the no. 2 off their hands and grab Beasley as well. (I keed - I keed) I don't know what Miami has to offer that we would want, other than expiring contracts, perhaps.

Here's the reason to pick Rose: Is Beasley that much better than and / or does he have a skill set that is appreciably different from that of Drew Gooden? (answer = no) Is Rose that much better than and / or does he have a skill set that is appreciably different from that of Hinrich, Hughes, and Gordon? (answer = unquestionably yes)

I doubt the Clippers would do that, but that would be sweet from the Bulls point of view. Then again, I wouldn't mind the Bulls doing whatever this offseason (besides getting Rose, and then throwing the bank at Wade next year). Rose and Wade would be absolutely incredible). Brand can opt out of his contract this summer and they have been trying to deal Maggette for two yrs, IIRC. That said, you'd have to do a sign and trade with both of them, as Maggette's deal is also at an end. I can't see Pax committing long term deals to them.

Correct. I agree 100%. And perhaps you can get a decent PF or C for Hinrich? Also, don't forget about Gooden. He could be a valuable as a starter at PF or off the bench, though he may also be trade bait. They really have a log jam at the PF spot. I guess the point is that Rose could make everyone on that team much better. EDIT: Who might be able to use Hinrich? What could we get back from that team?