MembersOnlyJacket

uh huh...

I don't know why that was such a difficult decision. You've got a second baseman who will play adequate defense, get on base 35-36% of the time, and allow Pierre to run. Sure, Walker is not what Perez is defensively, but what he brings in terms of run production has a greater effect on the team than what Neifi brings with the glove (in a starting role). Some of this decision might be predicated on who hits 2nd for the Cubs. Neifi is the worst option and I don't think the Cubs want Murton in that spot even though he has the skills to have success in that position. Walker is the best canidate to hit 2nd.

I picked this tidbit off on cubs.com---I know, I know, but---and I don't know how credibility is it, but....I think it should be interesting debate. Would anybody here at least consider a Felix Pie for Howie Kendrick trade? Is this the exact quote of an AP news release? I can't believe this to be real as the spelling and grammar are horrible. I'm betting this to be a fake. I'll go out on a limb and say the poster is actually named Matt Marrone...

Kendrick and Santana for Pie and Walker ...

Baseball, as a game, is so dependent on individual performance on each play and game. In football or basketball, you cannot discount team chemistry. A QB might throw to a guy he likes more, or a back may not block for someone he can't stand. A basketball team might freeze out a player. Or, a QB who has an experienced relationship with his backs and recievers will trust them on any given play. Or a basketball team who has played together for 2, 3, or 4 years can do great things with lesser talent based on familiarity with each other.

I don't know about NC, but I'm taking Dunn with the first pick. I was going to be shocked if you took anyone else.

who will nccubbies take ?

That is a classic quote! Does anyone remember Julian in tears during his two World Series trips with the Indians ? It seemed like every time he left a game, he'd be on the bench crying about it.

We heard a lot about, and I made a point of it myself earlier on, conference RPI when selecting this field. You have a Final Four consisting of two SEC teams from the fourth rated RPI conference (UK played well in the tournament --- could have knocked out UConn), a Pac 10 team from the seventh rated RPY conference, and of course George Mason from the tenth ranked CAA. I guess this begs the question of how we evaluate schools in terms of advancement through the tournament. I'm not sure how you do it really. Of the things that people typically take into account when seeding and filling a bracket, seemingly none have anything to do with the way this Final Four got to where they are: 1. Record (Overall/Conference) 2. Strength of Schedule (Overall/Conference) 3. Leadership / Experience 4. Power of Conference 5. Draw No one has a stellar overall or conference record. No one has much of a schedule outside of UCLA. In fact, Florida's non-con was atrocious (253). George Mason has 3 senior starters. No one else has more than one. I already mentioned the so called "weakness" of their respective conferences. All these teams marched over "giants" to get there. As others have brought up, I think being closer to home is helping on some levels. But, when you take into account the standard metrics in evaluating these teams, who could have expected this ?

Mason and UConn took fewer free throws combined than UConn shot by themselves in the Wash-UConn game. The game was well officiated and they let the action happen at the rim and they let defenders stay on the ball when a player entered the paint without calling a foul.

The Cubs won't open with 12 pitchers ? This is the first year I can recall them going with 11 pitchers and 14 position players.

I don't think Aldridge is consistent enough to be considered the best player in college basketball. He was on and off for much of the season, though I would say his performance tonight was a fatigue issue more than anything. The one player who was really overlooked this year was Brandon Roy. He was a 20/5/5 player and basically brought that every game this season.

Quoted for truth. Just abysmal. The final stat sheet is incredible: Wash took 29 more FG's (made 33, UConn made 27) Conn had 4 OFF Reb Conn had 27 turnovers Wash had 18 steals If you saw those, how could anyone imagine it possible that UConn won the game 98-92 in OT ? If you gave someone those numbers, they'd be baffled and could only imagine that Wash got screwed by the officiating. But, with only 4 OFF Reb, can anyone say UConn was the aggressor ? Hell no.

I wonder if Calhoun will bring these zebras with him through the Final Four ? What a screw job on Washington. Just brutal.

What a [expletive] screw job on Washington tonight. The entire starting lineup fouls out, Conn turns it over 30 times and shoots 24 more FT's. The refs missed 2 goaltends and numerous out of bounds calls. I really can't say I've seen a team get screwed so badly (don't bring up the Ill/Wash game --- Illinois was horrible). Calhoun rode the refs in the first half. Lorenzo Romar was passive and the refs just sucked on Calhoun from the start of the second half buzzer to the finish. Brutal. Washington deserves an apology from the NCAA.

you have to wonder how much UCLA has left in the tank after that game. I actually felt sorry for Morrison - boy does he push off a lot though. I don't think UCLA will beat Memphis. I figured they would have tough matchup (with IU actually). They played an exhausting game, and played late. It's not gonna be easy to get up for a great Memphis team, despite the location. Washington at the point makes the difference for Memphis, but i think they only take the game by < 5 pts. Go George Mason. !

Hah. Duke fails again to advance past the Sweet 16 and just mentally collapsed in the last 2 minutes.

I would like to see this tournament as bracketed double elimination in Round 1 with eight teams per bracket in four regionals (same regionals as this Classic). From Round 1, four teams on either side of the bracket advance to single elimination pool play. Then, onto single elimination semifinals followed by a 3-game Final Series. The best teams should be represented in the Final Series and I think a this structure would help in removing any doubts that the best make it to the end.

How's about that ? Mason against Wichita State in the Sweet 16 as a rematch to their Bracket Buster game in February. George Mason won that game 70-67.

It's at 11:57 am, Friday, Korean Standard Time.

How many of these wins were road/neutral --- which is the structure of the NCAA Tournament ? For comparison, lets look at the ACC which only got 4 in and I feel scheduled tougher and are 6-2 in the NCAAT so far: Wins: Memphis (N) OK State ® Indiana ® Kentucky ® Texas (N) Alabama ® GW (H) Bucknell (N) Cal (N) Seton Hall (N) Notre Dame ® Arizona (H) Duke: 15-1, 7 R/N Wins, 1 R/N Loss Boston College: 14-1, 6 R/N Wins, 1 R/N Loss NC State: 11-2, 4 R/N Wins, 2 R/N Loss UNC: 10-3, 3 R/N Wins, 3 R/N Loss 50-7, 20 R/N Wins, 7 R/N Loss I'm sure a lot of the conferences have solid OOC records. However, in helping to evaluate a teams work, the R/N wins against quality teams really help in gauging performance in the Tourny.

Yep, you had it for about 10 minutes before handing it over to me. My Final Four is still going strong!

Yep. They put up a weak performance outside the conference all year, so why expect these teams to suddenly show up in March ? The only Big Ten team I had through the Sweet 16 was Iowa and they suffered the greatest upset. My Atlanta bracket is a disaster as a result of this foolish call. On the other hand, my Minneapolis bracket is looking green. As for Georgia Tech, they'll be just fine. In fact, I'll call them to the Sweet 16 in '07 right now. In '08, they should be poised for a Final 4 run.

NCAA Tournament Recap: MVC teams in Sweet 16 - 2 Big Ten teams in Sweet 16 - 0

I'm not sure any Little Eleven teams will get past the Round of 32...