bukie

And if his motion had continued forward, they probably would have. Illinois really needs to make the free ones they get. And boy was that a ticky-tack foul on Augustine.

Hardly. Wisconsin players are all working on their acting minors this evening. My bad, when I saw that held ball live it looked like he had him on the arm, but when they showed the replay, he didn't. But that earlier call or non call should have been a charge. I think they would've called it if Augustine hadn't stopped. However, there's no physical way the Wisconsin player could've flown that far backwards from the force considering that he did stop. Made it too obvious. Plus, the fouls are 14-3 right now. Wisconsin is getting more than their fair share of calls.

Hardly. Wisconsin players are all working on their acting minors this evening.

I want Wisconsin to win this game, and he's not making it very easy for me. That probably should've been a charge on Augustine though. Hard to tell, seems like a lot of flopping going on. That play it looked like he stopped and the Wisconsin player dove backwards. Was close though. It's like their plan of attack in the second half is to dive at or away from Augustine whenever they get the chance.

Ok, Bo, not every contact is a foul on Illinois, and you can't just call a play to run into Illinois players and demand a foul.

Okay, now you're just putting words in my mouth. One question, do you think the BCS is a fair system? Cause if you do, then there's no point even going on in this. It's more fair than using human polls. At least the RPI is a factor in selection of tournament teams. The polls are not. Personally, I like the rankings organized by offensive/defensive efficiency, as Ken Pomeroy has been doing this year: http://www.kenpom.com/stats.php?y=2006&s=19 By that metric, it certainly appears that 1-7 the Big Ten is best, but overall it's hard to argue that the Big East is better overall at this time. Maybe if Indiana beats Connecticut there's a better argument since it's been difficult for every other Big Ten team to win on the road against one of the 7 good teams.

First year in a very competitive conference for DePaul. I think it'll only help in the long run. Yep...no Purdues or Penn States to beat up on in this league. For every Purdue, PSU, or Northwestern, there's a Providence, South Florida, or Depaul. I submit that DePaul would destroy any of those three Big 10 teams listed. Don't fret Derwood, at least you beat us - at a game I was at. :x DePaul beat Northwestern by 10 at home earlier in the year. I'd consider Seton Hall-Providence-DePaul-South Florida about the same set of teams as Minnesota-Penn State-Northwestern-Purdue. All are teams that (aside form USF or Purdue) might occasionally sneak up and beat someone in the upper tier of the league, but have no business doing so. The major difference between the leagues is that the Big Ten has 6 very good teams, 1 good team and 4 bad teams, while the Big East has 6 very good teams, 2 good teams, 4 average teams, and 4 bad teams. Both conferences, along with the ACC, will comprise likely 1/3 of all tournament teams this year, barring significant team changes among the quality teams this year.

Shame they could never quite catch IU after finally waking up on defense midway through the 2nd half. Solid effort though in a game I didn't expect them to be that close in.

Doesn't look like the Illini are going to have quite enough tonight, but it was nice to see Pruitt, Frazier and Randle participate when Brown and Augustine struggle. 3.9 left, Vaden shooting 2...

Dee is missing shots. Augustine is in foul trouble. Randle just fouled out. Illinois can't hit free throws. Yet, somehow, they trail by just 4 in Indiana.

Since the league went to 32 teams, the schedule works out very nicely. Here are the games the Bears will play every year: Home-and-home against division foes (6 games) Games against an NFC division (4 games, 2 home, 2 away) - 2006 is NFC West Games against an AFC division (4 games, 2 home, 2 away) - 2006 is AFC East Games against NFC teams that finished in the same place in their division as you (2 games, 1 home, 1 away) - 2006 is Tampa Bay, NY Giants This past year was NFC South, AFC North, San Francisco and Washington.

Augie was there defensively, but not offensively. Dee was there offensively, but nobody else was. Man, Augie needs to work on his footwork.

Here's a Big Ten prediction that I fully support: http://bigtenwonk.blogspot.com/ No clear favorite, as any of 3 teams have a legitimate argument to being the best team in the conference this year. And, as an Illini fan, anything lower than first or second might be disappointing after several years in a row of being at the top, but it's not altogether unprecedented. The first game they lose this year will be highly disappointing, especially if it's not at Michigan State or at Indiana.

So not only does he pick against the Bears for like the 15th time this season, but he has no idea that Minnesota was eliminated from the Playoffs last week???? Is there anywhere you can see how he picked for the whole year? I know he hasn't picked the Bears much, I just wonder exactly how his picks went this year.

Nice to see Illinois actually play well on both halves of the ball in a game...absolutely throttling Oregon in Portland right now.

I think it's difficult to discern in Orton's statistics how much of it is Orton, how much of it is the receivers, and how much of it is the play calling. I'm not defending Orton by any means, but there are some things that have been completely taken out of the playbook since the Cincy game that have never gotten put back in since. It seems now that the only deep passes Orton throws are 40-yard hail marys and 20-yard out fades. He overthrows each about 75% of the time, which makes me curious why the coaching staff keeps calling them. Aside from that, all Orton throws are 3-7 yard slants, quick outs and screens. It seems that the entire center of the field, and the 10-20 yard "medium" pass is completely missing from the offensive scheme, content to gain that medium yardage from one of the other methods (3-7 yard fade followed by a hopeful run after the catch, or 20 yard fade out), or hope the RB runs 11 yards. Now, if the coaching staff simply got scared of those routes since the Cincy game, they have to give Orton a chance to screw up again. The staff is just hurting the offense if they don't, which is becoming more and more obvious each week. Granted, with opponents stacking 8 men in the box, it becomes hard to throw that pass over the middle, but if they can get more completions in the 10-20 yard range, it forces the safeties and linebackers to play off a bit and respect that route. The longer the Bears go without doing something in that medium range, the less the opposing defense will respect that area of the field. As it is right now opposing defenses only need to respect about 1/3 of the field. Now, if that's Orton's decision making that prevents those passes from being thrown, it's up to the coaching staff to practice that more so that Orton becomes more comfortable with it again, or threaten to make a change to a QB who can make those throws. Because, eventually, the Bears will have to play from a TD or more behind, and when that happens, they won't be able to count solely on FGs to get them back into the game.

Yep, that's pretty much exactly what I was looking for. Not really any oddities, as that list pretty well describes the premier hitters of the past 40-odd years. Certainly all guys I would never mind having up in run-scoring situations (in their primes...not sure Bagwell right now is the best guy on their team at this point in his career). And here's an article from retrosheet that details my thoughts pretty much exactly: http://www.retrosheet.org/Research/RuaneT/rbipro_art.htm

I really can't stand Guillen's attitude towards the Cubs, or any other team for that matter (see: choking motion in Cleveland). I also wonder whether his "smartball" costs the Sox more than it benefits them, considering how many HRs they truly did hit this year. Running themselves into outs doesn't score extra runs. They do seem to be the master of the "productive out", though I have no factual information to support that position.

Again, when did it become mandatory for Cub fans to hate the Sox? Who wrote that..., besides you? See: first page, original poster, 4th post (i.e. J.R.'s sig), 13th post (that you replied to, actually, in agreement). Seems to me that most of the White Sox-obsessed posters are the haters that start threads like these. Which I think is juvenile and petty. One might ask then, why reply to it in support of the Sox? Well, just to make a point that there is another stance available, and it's not as silly as it sounds.

Yeah, I'm mostly trying to see if there is any such thing as a true "RBI man". Sheer # of RBIs has very little to do with ability, as where you are in the lineup and how many opportunities you get have more to do with that number. I know for the most part that BA with RISP varies year-to-year and most often is reflected in a player's overall effectiveness. I would assume RBIs per opportunity would vary in a similar way.

Was Burnitz really that good defensively though? And note Lee's limited defensive numbers using that system. I'll have to read up on the numbers to see where they come from. On the whole they seem solid, but there are some weird outliers (although, it could be just because of my perception of their abilities than anything else).

I understand the limited usefulness of the RBI stat in itself. What I am wondering is if there was ever a stat created that measured a sort of RBI percentage. Something that measured RBI compared to total RBI chances, even weighted pending the base each runner was at. Anyone heard of such a stat existing somewhere in the SABR universe?

Again, when did it become mandatory for Cub fans to hate the Sox? That's a very ignorant and childish approach, really.

Boo hoo! Those big bad bullies will make fun of me! It's a good thing you have met and been harassed by so many Sox fans out in State College, PA. I deal with Sox fans constantly, on a daily basis. For those who decide to trash talk, I refuse to sink to their level. For the many good fans that deserve a championship team just like many Cub fans, I hope they get it. If the only reason people are rooting against the Sox is that a few immature fans might make fun of you for being a Cub fan, think for a second about how silly that sounds. If you really dislike the team because of some fabricated "rivalry" based on the fact that the Cubs only interact with them 6 times a year, you're hating for the exact same reason many of us think it's ridiculous that the Sox fans hate the Cubs. Pot-kettle situation. As for me, I dislike Guillen's attitude, but I think he's handled the pitching staff spectacularly this year, and that's why the Sox are where they are today. Not because of "smallball", not even because of "smartball", but because their pitching staff carried them here. Even though I can't stand Buehrle's attitude when he loses ("they were stealing signs from center field!"). I don't see why it's viewed as a crime to root for both teams to succeed. Even in New York, it's stupid. The only time I root against the Sox is when the Cubs play them. Which is almost never, then.

Actually, I'd just as soon take the high road, and not act like the fan base I despise. Would be nice to see the city win a championship, even if it is the Sox. I never consider the Sox a rival but for 6 practically meaningless interleague games. To be honest, I'm embarrassed by the attitudes of some of the posters here towards the Sox. It's really become a pot-kettle situation.