Exile on Waveland

i don't know. who's the better pro? michael beasley or drew neitzel? neither are pros yet and they don't play the same position. but i'd wager that there are far more examples of successful, high major players that put up great stats in college and succeed in the nba than there are examples of players who put up good stats and succeed. furthermore, the lesser team argument doesn't hold water. beasley shot a high percentage, meaning he wasn't just running down the lane and throwing shots up because his teammates sucked, nor was he shooting every time down the court due to a lack of a better alternative. i don't see how the rebounds are really a function of his team being bad, either. his team wasn't a good shooting team, but it wasn't incredibly bad, at least not enough to be able to point to team shooting percentage and say "there are your rebounds". lastly, as i've said before, beasley got double and triple-teamed all year because his team was bad. he still managed to score a lot of points and shoot a high percentage while dominating the boards. i don't really know what's there that's not to like--or a reason to be praying for rose. Not only that, but rebounding is one of the most, if not the most, transferable statistic to the pro game.

Yes, Indiana basketball is relevant, just as I said. Illinois is not. What are you not comprehending? Clearly something, because if you had understood what I said, the entire second sentence of your response would have been unnecessary. How is a team with 2 returning scholarship players relevant? Illinois is a borderline tourney team next year, but I think even even the homer-iest of IU fans would tell you Illinois is a better team next year and '09 barring some big gets by Crean. First, two returning scholarship players is only a half-truth; Indiana is actually worse off than that sounds. (Kyle Tabor was a walk-on originally and has since earned a scholarship, but that happens often and I don't consider him a true scholarship player.) Second, I do think Indiana is relevant for next year -- to see how low they will sink, how an almost completely new team will mesh, and how the new coach will perform. I think you can be bad and relevant at the same time. UNC was relevant when they went 8-20, just for the anomalous record. I certainly don't expect Indiana to be better than Illinois.

[-X Two five stars. Crandall is number 12 in the newest rankings. But, we don't have Bruce Pearl, the greatest coach to ever coach a team. My bad. The rivals commitment list for Illinois needs to be updated then. He's currently listed with no stars, and I didn't look at names. I would've known better if I had.

Illinois is three years removed from a two-loss season and an appearance in the championship game. They have one five-star player, three four-star players and one three-star player lined up for the 2009 and 2010 recruiting classes already. I'd say that's pretty relevant.

You are weird. i was going to say something about it, and then i saw the his slg is all the way down to 431. i wouldn't say that i'm "not at all impressed," but he really needs to start hitting for some power. I'll amend my statement to say what tree said. Maybe if Lou batted him higher in the order like he should it would make things better for me. He's in a run producing position in the order. I'll agree with this. As far as I'm concerned he's been very impressive, they're just batting him in the wrong spot. Hey Roast, I'm about 2 blocks south of you at the Chicago Hilton. I passed by Columbia college and almost bought a shirt. The Hilton on Michigan Ave? I stayed there Wednesday and Thursday nights. Nice contribution to the thread by me.

Gordon played the second half of the season with a fractured wrist, despite not publicizing it. His game suffered tremendously (though he still struggles with his ball-handling). That is not to say I would take him over Rose, though.

I think that was actually a traditional homerun, but inside the parker is even better for a catcher.

Friday: Cubs win with Lilly struggling prior to game Saturday: Cubs come from behind to win, bring Marmol in to shut the door. Cubs up 2-0. Sunday: Ace (big Z) on the mound against a 41 yr old pitcher. Good odds there. Cant say I blame Lou. He is rolling the dice abit, but its a good gamble. You'd rather gamble that today's game is a blowout against the best team in baseball and Marmol won't be needed than gamble that Fox/Wuertz/Howry could protect a five-run lead in one inning? That's not a good gamble; it is, in fact, an incredibly short-sighted one.

Wow, that's great. I should be able to see almost every game. Four years ago I had to either pay per view games (and that wasn't even an option all the time) or hope a bar was showing the games (they likely weren't). Should be a great tournament. Good thing it won't be too distracting for me as I study for the bar...

Conference wins are going to be tough to come by next year; same as in Maui. They also play at Wake Forest in the ACC-Big Ten Challenge and at Kentucky. However, if the schedule is similar to last year's pathetic non-conference slate they'll have about eight cupcakes at home. I also don't know the NIT's regulations regarding Division II teams, Indiana always seems to draw Chaminade in the first round (which could be an embarrassing loss or a win to help them get NIT-eligibility). Those eight and five in conference actually get them pretty close to .500. It'll be a struggle but the NIT is possible. Plus the rest of the Big Ten isn't going to be great either. MSU should be great, but they should have been great this year too. Wisconsin will be very good. Me and 4 other posters on this board would be very good for Bo Ryan. Although he has more talent than people believe. Purdue is gonna take a step back I think. Losing Martin will not be the non factor a lot think it will be. OSU will be good, could have been gat had Koufas stayed. Minn will be ok, still gonna take a bit for Tubby to get his guys in that system. Illinois is the biggest wildcard in the conference. Either our three guards will do well and we will be good or we could be horrible again. Iowa lost it's best player, but I like their coaches system and think they will be better than a lot of people think. Michigan just lost Udoh, I bet they are about the same as last year. Penn State lost one of their two players. I always mixed the two up, so I don't know if it was cornley or claxton. I imagine with their other guys progressing they will be around the same Northwestern will be better. Indiana could be the worst, but I bet they aren't nearly as bad as everyone is predicting. Pretty good assessment. I think Purdue definitely finishes top 3. As much as I like Izzo when was the last time they really lived up to expectations fully? I think Minnesota takes a slight step back along with IU obviously dropping to the bottom third. Illinois can make a jump to 5th maybe 4th if things come together. Iowa and Michigan are still building and I think losing Udoh hurts more than many would think. They don't have many rebounders and he was the best shot blocker in the league. Yeah Udoh was by far their best player on defense, but I don't think he fit in Belien's(sp?) offense at all. It will hurt them this year losing him, but going forward it won't too bad. The Big Ten is on the rebound though. In 2010 we are recruiting like mad men. Wisky has a 5 star committed. We have Richmond and Head who both could be top ten players. OSU has 2 tops tens and another right outside of it. With the influx of coaching talent (and Weber's recruiting resurgence) it's just a matter of time before the Big Ten is the powerhouse conference it should be. Eh, I still maintain we have been ok this decade. Although we have only the one national title, We have had 9 teams reach the final four which ties us with the ACC for the most in the last ten years. Last year was a down year, but the ACC sucked last year as well, but it isn't the fashionable thing to slam on them. UNC was very good, but past that they had some paper tigers. The Big Ten hasn't been as bad as many would like to believe, and the top has generally been very strong. However, it hasn't been as deep recently. Michigan has been down for a long time. Purdue was really down a couple seasons. Indiana was bad a couple seasons and never the national player they'd been in previous decades. Minnesota and Iowa have had their struggles. The conference needs most of those teams to be competitive, especially since there is one team guaranteed to be terrible (Northwestern) and another that's not likely to be very good at all (Penn State).

Conference wins are going to be tough to come by next year; same as in Maui. They also play at Wake Forest in the ACC-Big Ten Challenge and at Kentucky. However, if the schedule is similar to last year's pathetic non-conference slate they'll have about eight cupcakes at home. I also don't know the NIT's regulations regarding Division II teams, Indiana always seems to draw Chaminade in the first round (which could be an embarrassing loss or a win to help them get NIT-eligibility). Those eight and five in conference actually get them pretty close to .500. It'll be a struggle but the NIT is possible. Plus the rest of the Big Ten isn't going to be great either. MSU should be great, but they should have been great this year too. Wisconsin will be very good. Me and 4 other posters on this board would be very good for Bo Ryan. Although he has more talent than people believe. Purdue is gonna take a step back I think. Losing Martin will not be the non factor a lot think it will be. OSU will be good, could have been gat had Koufas stayed. Minn will be ok, still gonna take a bit for Tubby to get his guys in that system. Illinois is the biggest wildcard in the conference. Either our three guards will do well and we will be good or we could be horrible again. Iowa lost it's best player, but I like their coaches system and think they will be better than a lot of people think. Michigan just lost Udoh, I bet they are about the same as last year. Penn State lost one of their two players. I always mixed the two up, so I don't know if it was cornley or claxton. I imagine with their other guys progressing they will be around the same Northwestern will be better. Indiana could be the worst, but I bet they aren't nearly as bad as everyone is predicting. Pretty good assessment. I think Purdue definitely finishes top 3. As much as I like Izzo when was the last time they really lived up to expectations fully? I think Minnesota takes a slight step back along with IU obviously dropping to the bottom third. Illinois can make a jump to 5th maybe 4th if things come together. Iowa and Michigan are still building and I think losing Udoh hurts more than many would think. They don't have many rebounders and he was the best shot blocker in the league. Yeah Udoh was by far their best player on defense, but I don't think he fit in Belien's(sp?) offense at all. It will hurt them this year losing him, but going forward it won't too bad. The Big Ten is on the rebound though. In 2010 we are recruiting like mad men. Wisky has a 5 star committed. We have Richmond and Head who both could be top ten players. OSU has 2 tops tens and another right outside of it. With the influx of coaching talent (and Weber's recruiting resurgence) it's just a matter of time before the Big Ten is the powerhouse conference it should be.

Conference wins are going to be tough to come by next year; same as in Maui. They also play at Wake Forest in the ACC-Big Ten Challenge and at Kentucky. However, if the schedule is similar to last year's pathetic non-conference slate they'll have about eight cupcakes at home. I also don't know the NIT's regulations regarding Division II teams, Indiana always seems to draw Chaminade in the first round (which could be an embarrassing loss or a win to help them get NIT-eligibility). Those eight and five in conference actually get them pretty close to .500. It'll be a struggle but the NIT is possible.

Went to the game last night; first game of they year. Still celebrating graduating law school. Tons of fun, and Cubs won!

Next year is still going to be a tough season, but if they add another big man that can play some the NIT might not be out of the question. The Class of 2009 is shaping up to be a very good class for Indiana, too. Already committed are Maurice Cheek (6'5" SG, four-star #63), Derek Elston (6'8" SF, four-star #96) and Bobby Capobianco (6'8" PF, three-star). Capobianco is expected to jump into the top-100 in the next rankings. The 2010 team could be pretty good by the end of the season.

How did the East get better? Boston got better, I'll give you that. But Detroit is the same. Orlando improved a little while Cleveland, Washington, and Toronto all took steps back this season. Philadelphia and Atlanta improved, but neither of those teams are that much better than the Bulls. There's really no reason to believe the Bulls can't bounce back and be in the 2nd round of the playoffs again next year with the right moves in the offseason. That starts with hiring Avery. 2005-2006: 36-46. 2006-2007: 40-42. 2007-2008: 52-30. I think that's more than a little (not that I love their team at all).

Great! My Syracuse love for the Colts will continue! Didn't realize that. Colts have all kinds of Syracuse ties: Marvin Harrison, Dwight Freeney, Josh Thomas, and now Hart from Syracuse, New York.

I'm very happy about this pick. He should fit in well and the Colts really, really needed another tight end.

Jinxed. I must not have been the only one to think that.

Prediction: Colts take Cliff Avril, DE, Purdue.

I didn't think they valued non-LT offensive linemen enough to take a center in the second round. The thought crossed my mind, but I dismissed it, thinking they'd take a center in the mid-rounds and let Howard Mudd work his magic (Saturday was an undrafted free agent). I figured if they went this route -- it is their general strategy, but not unfailingly so (i.e., Joseph Addai, Bob Sanders) -- it would be a corner, since Kelvin Hayden's contract is also up next year. I don't know anything about Pollak other than what I read, but I'm pleased. Interior offensive line was an immediate need and center a need for posterity.

The Colts must really like Mike Pollak. They basically don't take offensive linemen early in the draft, except at LT. However, the pick does make sense as the Colts draft to replace future holes, not current ones. Jeff Saturday is getting older and only has one year left on his deal. Pollak will be his replacement.

It's not out of the question the Colts take him. He'd be a very good fit for their system.

....59... True. I'm not necessarily saying it was the right pick, just that people I know who really follow this stuff liked him quite a bit (I haven't really seen him play). I probably would've taken Brohm-Henne, but Forte has potential.

A lot of Colts fans liked Matt Forte a lot for #59. Just sayin'.

Back-to-back Hoosiers!!!!