bukie

At the combine, Hardesty ran a 4.49 (and I believe he had a couple unofficial times in the 4.4-4.6 range). Gerhart ran a 4.53 at the combine. Dixon's combine time was 4.51, but he just ran a 4.45 at his pro day. It's fairly minimal, but I like Hardesty/Dixon a little better than Gerhart. The pro day article says Dixon ran a 4.45 short shuttle, but a 4.61 40. It's a minor quibble, I just like Gerhart better, I guess. EDIT: I suppose, though, I could always draft him in 5 picks if I like him that much. :)

It's a decent pick but if I am not mistaken Holmgren doesn't normally take RB's much at all in the draft. I thought strongly about Jason Worilds here as he'll be an absolute steal at this point in the draft, but couldn't justify it after the Browns took Norwood in the second round. The receivers aren't stellar here and most of the good NTs went a few picks ago. Maybe a defensive back here, but otherwise I think running back is the best value. I'd say the only thing that was a little surprising is that you didn't consider Gerhart, except possibly for durability issues. I'm not as high on Gerhart as I am on Dixon and Hardesty. All three are more power-oriented backs, but Dixon and Hardesty have both shown more speed than Gerhart. Both Hardesty and Dixon have run in the 4.4 range, while Gerhart has been in the low 4.5s. Everywhere I've checked has Dixon in the 4.6 range, with Gerhart and Hardesty in the 4.5 range.

It's a decent pick but if I am not mistaken Holmgren doesn't normally take RB's much at all in the draft. I thought strongly about Jason Worilds here as he'll be an absolute steal at this point in the draft, but couldn't justify it after the Browns took Norwood in the second round. The receivers aren't stellar here and most of the good NTs went a few picks ago. Maybe a defensive back here, but otherwise I think running back is the best value. I'd say the only thing that was a little surprising is that you didn't consider Gerhart, except possibly for durability issues.

It's a decent pick but if I am not mistaken Holmgren doesn't normally take RB's much at all in the draft. In four years of drafting as a GM, Holmgren has taken 2 RBs, Shaun Alexander and Maurice Morris. Wouldn't call that "not normally" taking a RB.

Because baseball doesn't have to clear its schedule with the NCAA.

The Williams one doesn't really matter, but just shows he either wasn't paying attention to what he was talking about or just didn't know what he was talking about. The Sampson thing was out of line. He called Weber out on ESPN and never issued an apology after it was proven that Sampson was a big POS cheater. Real stand up. And if there's one thing we can't tolerate here, it's baseless criticism of Bruce Weber.

Jay Bilas is the [expletive] man. The last few years he's become brutally honest. Bilas is an ACC homer. In 05 he dropped the gem that Deron Williams, the Big 10 preseason POTY, wouldn't be in the top 15 players in the ACC. Yeah spot on jackass. No, Bilas is one of the best commentators in the game today. Doesn't mean he's always right, and he admitted his Williams comment was way off at the end of the year. Heck, he called the Illinois-Arizona game in '05.

When was the last time the Final Four host school made the Elite Eight?

Trout has been added to the database. If someone could either pick him up and delete the bad one or at least let me do it, that'd be appreciated.

So, with the limited drafting the Bears do have (assuming they don't unload Olsen for picks), should they focus on need completely, or just try to get as much value out of the picks they do have as possible?

I'll expound: my pitching is really, really young, but I have two opening-day starters (one coming off TJ surgery!). If Escobar, Marcum and Masterson can produce decently, my team should be really good. I had a ton of exemptions coming off last year, which allowed me to keep some pretty good players for free.

Honestly, I feel better about my team this year than I did at this point last year.

And yet they were probably the second or third best team in the A10. They were the unluckiest team in the country this year.

It's not out of the realm of possibility that Detroit ends up with the 5 seed and gets Phoenix/SJ in the first round. It'd require a bit of a dive by the Kings, but it's only 4 points in 10 games. Here's how I'm thinking it'll shake out: 1. Hawks 2. SJ 3. Vancouver 4. Phoenix 5. LA 6. Detroit 7. Nashville 8. Calgary/Colorado

Yes, if only someone had posted about that in the last 2 hours... ;)

Half the MSG field is set with Ole Miss and UNC. Tonight's games are Virginia Tech-Rhode Island and Illinois-Dayton.

With last night's action, the Hawks clinched a better record then Minnesota, Anaheim, St. Louis and Dallas. "Magic number" for a playoff spot is 3 points (either Hawks get 3 points or Calgary wastes 3 points).

Almost the third round. Time to start scanning lists of OLs, DBs, DLs, WRs, and fast guys from Abilene Christian.

Also, I'd love to see a UNC-Illinois final. And I think the guys in charge of the NIT would also.

Here's the thing I have against the Weber bashing: For 4 years, the knock on Weber was that he was a fantastic coach that couldn't get A-list recruits. Part of that was due to the Eric Gordon fiasco, while half the recruiting he did manage was blown up by the Jamar Smith/Brian Caldwell incident. Those two things basically killed two entire years of recruiting at Illinois. And yet, Weber made the tournament as a 12 seed in 2007 that had a double digit lead with 5 to play against the 5 seed Virginia Tech when their best player was Shaun Pruitt. The following year, they dropped to 10th in the Big Ten after Smith was suspended midway through the year. They recovered to make the finals of the Big Ten tournament before losing to a very strong Wisky team. The next year, led by Chester Frazier, they overachieved ridiculously to garner a 5 seed in the NCAA tourney, for which Frazier was injured and unable to play. They dropped a close game to Western Kentucky without their starting PG, which was disappointing but not altogether unexpected. This year, it was apparent the team missed Frazier more than most thought they would. The trademark Weber defense wasn't on display very often for the team. When they buckled down and defended (like the second half last night), they were capable of beating anyone and running plenty of decent teams out of the building (like Vandy). Last night was their biggest margin of victory since mid-December, and against a decent team (well, Northwestern-level decent). Hopefully, next year, guys like Paul and Richardson will buy in from the beginning, and either Mike Davis can try every game like he tried last night, or Richmond can step in and provide what Davis was lacking this year in intensity.

why'd he pull mccamey? Give him a breather. The team all gave him pats on the back as he went to the bench. It was midway through the second half, with a TV timeout coming up anyway, good time to get him some extra dead ball rest time. He was back in the game a minute of game time later, but closer to 7 minutes real-time later. EDIT: I'm watching the replay on ESPN 360. You can see just as McCamey releases the shot in a 5 on 3 situation, all 5 Illini players were watching the ball and inside the free throw line, and you can see Weber on the sidelines pointing to the other basket and screaming for someone to get back. When the shot went down, nobody went back on D, so Weber immediately called timeout.

Weber called the timeout there because there were two Kent State players alone by their basket. He called a TO to prevent the easy 2.

Dayton destroyed Cincy, so Illinois will host Dayton on Wednesday. Dayton is probably the best team in this tournament.

Southern Illinois made the Sweet 16 in 2007.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs#Loss_aversion_and_the_sunk_cost_fallacy Summary: The Cubs owe him money whether or not he plays, so decisions on his playing time should be made independently of that fact.