SpongeWorthy

Is this a joke? Will he even get half that? Wow, great move for the Spurs. They must have pics of him naked ,playing golf with Satan. my first guess would be that they had a sit-down with his ex-fiance and discovered the real reason that they didn't end up getting married. Because he's gay?

I don't think his days are over, but he's certainly going downhill. Losing early at the French is one thing, but losing early at Wimbledon is another. He's not done and I still think he's good enough to win another major or two, but his days of dominating are over. In addition to Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and del Potro are all very good players capable of winning multiple majors. Yeah its starting to look like the normal days of tennis where winning 1 major a year was considered a good year. Federer just doesn't have the same edge that he once had, I wonder if having a kid had anything to do with it. Djokovic hasn't lived up to the expectations I had for him 2 years ago. Hasn't there always been a dominant player in men's tennis for at least the last 30 years?

Well he's definitely behind Rice and Harvin's going to get more and more touches if he can stay healthy. Shiancoe was extremely productive for a TE. Berrian's a 4th receiving option on that team, IMO.

Chad Ford tweeted that the Nets believe they're in the lead for Lebron. Sidebar: I really hope this free agency thing is resolved quickly because I don't want to have to use tweet as a verb.

I dunno about that. Even LeBron, Bosh and (especially) Wade would get tired playing 44 minutes a night. Which veterans are we talking here? I saw a list somewhere of guys that would fit the bill. It was pretty ugly. But really, even good teams have like 7 very viable rotation players that would go well on any team. The Lakers had crappy guys like Vujacic and Farmar playing significant minutes. Shannon Brown came off the scrap heap. It can be done.

They'd fill out the roster with ring chasing veterans willing to take the minimum. It wouldn't be pretty but it wouldn't really have to be.

I'd make do.

It just isn't very Marxist for one guy to hog all those grand slams.

There were some rumblings that Lebron and JJ really wanted to play together. In any case, it takes one more big fish off the board and part of attracting Lebron is being able to pair him up with another star, even if he's overpaid. I don't think Joe Johnson is good enough where he can just turn down an extra guaranteed year at his age.

lol

Woj tweeted that the Hawks offered a 6 year max Birds Right deal to Joe Johnson. It's good in the sense that he's not worth nearly that much but maybe bad in the Lebron sweepstakes.

I think there's something fundamentally wrong with the team that it can do so well in the regular season and flame out in the playoffs. Maybe it's just coaching but I definitely don't think it's just sample size. The Cavaliers were making some history by winning so many games and not even advancing to the Finals. And I wouldn't be breaking news to suggest that it's probably a big factor in his decision making.

Well if he wants to compare chances at winning a title relative to Cleveland then I'd say it's very relevant. What isn't an apples to apples comparison is to say "Oh he shouldn't go to Chicago (or anywhere else) because those teams didn't win championships just like Cleveland!"

Maybe at winning regular season games. If there's one thing this current Bulls team has proven, it's that it's a postseason juggernaut. How many playoff games are the Mo Williams and Anderson Varejao led Cavaliers capable of winning? You realize that's the apples to apples comparison here. I don't know, not a lot. Just like the Bulls. It just seems odd to go with the "way to not win the title Cavs" argument, when you're dealing with a roster that has a combined 1 playoff series win 4 seasons ago. It's a valid argument because if the Cavs had won the title we wouldn't even be having this discussion. He'd almost certainly resign with Cleveland. And my feeling is that if you take Lebron off the Cavs they don't win more than 30 games.

Probably depends on how good of shape they keep themselves in. Jackson's not known as the hardest worker around and hes kind of a knucklehead.

Without looking it up I'm pretty sure that Berrian's best years were on the Bears and now he's way behind Rice, Harvin, Shiancoe, and Peterson on the pecking order.

Maybe at winning regular season games. If there's one thing this current Bulls team has proven, it's that it's a postseason juggernaut. How many playoff games are the Mo Williams and Anderson Varejao led Cavaliers capable of winning? You realize that's the apples to apples comparison here.

Sure. But our skill players have generally been bad. Who did anything of significance on other teams? Jones and Benson. Engram had a nice little career. Conway was ok. MRob was a flash in the pan. Booker was productive. There's not elite talent there.

I don't think you'll find many people who agree with that.

It's not even that for me. If you told me the Bears are going to make a Jay Cutler like move and get an affordable young superstar in the making and never pick in the 1st 2 rounds again, I'd be fine with it (generically speaking). But a move for Jackson would be falling into the Cubs trap of spending big money and failing to continue to infuse young talent in to get better. Woah what? Jackson won't turn 28 till after this season is over, so if you trade for him and sign him to a 5 yr deal you get him for ages 27-32. We are talking about a guy who averages over 17 yards per catch. Yea hes never been the 100 catch reciever like some other guys in the league but hes gradually progressed his catches every year in the league from 41 to 59, and to 68 this past year. Hes played on a San Diego offense that hasn't lacked talent and that spreads the ball around pretty good. With this organizations history of developing offensive guys, Id have no problem giving up a 2nd round pick for Jackson. I think you guys are severely underestimating him here. The Bears have not had a problem developing offensive talent. They've had a problem developing QBs. 28 is when Jackson will get the big pay day. 28 is when NFL players typically start the decline. And I agree with everything you said about Jackson. He's great. He's a wonderful player, I would love to have him. But I don't want him that much to trade another early pick (haven't picked in top 70 in 2 years) and to pay him like he is one of those 100 catch WRs. No one is looking at the collection of Bears non-QB offensive talent from the last two decades or so in awe. As a rough measure how many Bears skill players have even made the Pro Bowl? I can't remember any.

Maybe at winning regular season games.

I would give up a 2nd for him in a heartbeat. He won't get a Marshall like return or contract I don't think.

The luxury tax wasn't put in until 2003. So basically people are holding it against Reinsdorf that he wouldn't go into luxury tax territory on the backs of the Kirk Hinrichs and Eddy Curry's of the world. But it is something to consider...if you get two max guys and then have to give Rose the max and Noah $10+ mil you'd be way into luxury tax territory. On the draft coverage, the cap specialist guy was talking about how the new CBA might have a more punititive luxury tax mechanism too. Boozer probably isn't a max guy yet and if you signed a guy like him or Lee alongside Lebron you'd have some money left over but not enough for Ray Allen. Maybe JJ Reddick or something.

What we need is Jo and Derrick giving FAs the full court press. Noah can be the hype man and Rose can mumble a thing or two about how great it would be.

You were the guy who said you were terrified if the story about the summitt turned out to be true.