Exile on Waveland

Yeah, top 4 seemed pretty obvious. Now is where it gets interesting... I like Horford better than Conley, but Conley seemed like a better pick for Atlanta. I personally think this is correct. But Atlanta does have tradeable assets to get a PG, plus the #11.

That'd be awful, Durant would just get abused. Play him at the 3 and watch him take off. I'm not saying I agree with it. Maybe they think he can play the 2, as was alluded to earlier. But Durant should be a 3, which is clearly Jeff Green's position. Green is also not clearly the fifth best player in the draft, so I certainly wouldn't pick him at #5 if I was Seattle.

Was it Allen straight up for the #5? Or was Theo Ratliff somehow involved? I know Delonte West is going to Seattle and there was one other player but I don't remember who it was. Wally Szczerbiak.

Eh...the 5th pick wouldn't do much for me unless Horford or Conley is there...they want Jeff Green though...? Yes, please explain this to me. I understand moving Ray Allen, but moving him to get another SF when they just picked Durant? I'm confused. I'm also dubious about Allen and Pierce fitting -- though the East is a whole different story.

OK, I'm confused. Seattle would use the #5 in that trade scenario to pick Jeff Green? They're going to take two SF's in the top 5? They must think Durant is going to be a 4.

I AM STEPHEN A. SMITH AND THESE CHEESE DOODLES ARE DELICIOUS!! This made me laugh out loud. Oden #1. This has been obvious for at least four years now, and it's the correct decision for Portland. Congrats on your (future) NBA Championship, Portland.

You're wrong. Is that too harsh a stance to take with the site's founder? I have no idea, but I've seen Conley, Jr. play since the 8th grade and his potential, while high, is not higher than all but two players in the draft. Not at all too harsh. I think the only reason that Conley's not being recognized is because he isn't 7 foot. But he's a heck of a player, he has the age, the athleticism, the performance as a freshman and more. He has everything it takes to become one of the top few point guards in the game. I don't think I could say the same for anyone else in the draft except Oden & Durant. I think Conley, Jr. is the third most likely player to reach his potential -- heck, maybe even second most likely. However, he is a 6-1 point guard that can't shoot. His potential is limited. That said, I really don't like arguing against him, he's and Indiana player that I really like. I think he's going to be very good. Not necessarily putting up huge stats, but always leading a winning team. He has that knack for leading a team and winning, which is basically impossible to teach. But if we're talking about potential he can't match a 7-foot athletic shooter (Yi) or a 6-10 athlete with go-go gadget arms (Brandon Wright). As far as Hollinger's ratings, they have a long way to go. To begin with, stats in basketball are far more tricky than baseball stats. Also, he bragged about Carlos Boozer being ranked #1 in 2002, but that fails to mention some rather ridiculous rankings. Examples: Mike Sweetney over Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade in 2003; Drew Gooden, Chris Wilcox, Curtis Borchardt (!!!), Mike Dunleavy, Jr., Jared Jeffries (Go IU), Udonis Haslem and Vincent Yarbrough (!!!) over Caron Butler in 2002; Deron Williams behind 10 players in 2005 including Marvin Williams, Sean May, Rashad McCants, Channing Frye, Andrew Bogut, Raymond Felton, Chris Taft (!!!), Danny Granger and Nate Robinson; Sheldon Williams over Brandon Roy in 2006. Not to mention his quote that "it's pretty obvious that Paul ... should have gone ahead of the likes of (Deron Williams)." Williams is better than Paul (unless you prefer style over substance), but that's a whole different argument. I'll remain in the extremely skeptical camp when it comes to Hollinger's rankings -- in fact, if these were my rankings, I would have been too embarrassed to release them to the public.

You're wrong. Is that too harsh a stance to take with the site's founder? I have no idea, but I've seen Conley, Jr. play since the 8th grade and his potential, while high, is not higher than all but two players in the draft.

He could turn into someone like Chris Mihm or Brad Miller. ...whether or not that's what you'd want out of the #9 pick is another matter altogether. Hawes is skilled around the basket. However, he isn't athletic and his poor rebounding total concerns me. As is probably obvious from my post above, I much prefer Brandon Wright.

We have an opening at the PF position as far as starting lineup goes. Tyrus may or may not be ready to start next season. Noah could immediately start in that spot in November if drafted. In the NBA, high ceilings also come with high bust potential. Wright smacks of Rudy Gay. First, I don't see how Rudy Gay is a bust (at least at this point). He's certainly not terribly energetic or enthusiastic, but he did average 10.8 ppg, 4.5 rpg and 1 bpg. I don't like Gay a whole lot -- he's a worse version of Vince Carter (who I loathe) to me -- but his rookie season was not a bust. Second, if Brandon Wright is there at #9, the Bulls (or whomever was picking there) should take him. It's all about value. He likely won't help as much next season as Noah, and he does somewhat duplicate Thomas. However, Wright has enormous potential, at worst he's got the fourth most upside -- though I have no idea how to evaluate Yi. Wright averaged 14.7 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 1.8 bpg, 1.0 spg and shot 65% from the field, which was good for 1.54 pps. That's while playing alongside and often forced to defer to Tyler Hansbrough. I also don't think Wright is nearly as sedentary on the court as he's being portrayed, he just makes things look so easy.

I would definitely take DePodesta as the Cubs GM. He would be an enormous upgrade over what the Cubs have had recently. He's highly intelligent and has, what I believe, is the correct baseball philosophy. He was unfairly, egregiously singled out by the mainstream media as being simply a nerd. It centered around LoDuca, as the article mentions. However, he's not Billy Beane. DePo struck me as a bit naive and wishy-washy in his baseball dealings. Beane is an eloquent wheeler-dealer. DePo will succeed at his next job (if that opportunity arrives) but I don't believe he's a GM savant.

Does Penn St play Wisconsin? If so where? I like Penn St this year. I see the Big Ten coming down to Michigan, PSU and Wisconsin. I think Wisconsin will win in the end. they play Wisconsin October 13th at home I like Penn State a lot this year. I think they could be one of, if not the, big national sleeper.

I shudder to think of how many wide open opportunities Beasley would miss if he was converted to striker full time. lol. man, at times america looked horrible. they really should have won 5-1 or 5-2. and what i didn't expect was all the acting mexico was doing, like they knew they would end up being the butt of jokes after losing to usa, and you could tell they were getting salty as hell towards the end. america just makes horrible passes. they are slow and bad dribblers. when mexico was on, they made usa look foolish when dribbling towards the goal. there was one point where mexico would have scored if #9 hadn't gotten in the way of #2 heading it to the guy who took the shot, because 9 headed it too far in advance, but 2 had the best line for the pass (mexico trying to score, sorry). not a bad game to watch, just not as fun as the real madrid/barcelona buisness earlier. and now henry is with barcelona(!!!), with beckham leaving madrid... so barcelona had better win next year Barca with Henry, Ronaldinho, Messi and Eto'o...wow. (Though there are rumors of Eto'o leaving). Still, they should be amazing offensively. Oh, and HOORAY US!!!

RIP. I don't know anyone that didn't lover the shooter. :(

No team should be allowed to get through the Big Ten schedule in a year without playing at least one of OSU and UM. Those two are most consistently good teams in the Big Ten. To give any team a chance to play a full season without facing one of them is unfair. IU misses both, as raw said. Though that could be chalked up to mercy scheduling. However, this figures to be the best Indiana team in a long time. Coach Hep's death puts a damper on things, obviously. Last season they went 5-7 overall, but lost to both 1-AA Southern Illinois and UConn without Hep on the sidelines. So, they certainly weren't as good without him. That said, this team should make a bowl. Not a good bowl mind you, but a bowl nonetheless. When you haven't been to one since 1993, you take what you can get. The Hoosiers should rack up four wins in the non-conference (though they also should've last season) and then should win the necessary two in conference for bowl eligibility. I am hoping for 7-5 or so, instead of 6-6, though.

Sounds like KG nixed that idea.

Is that a dare? Because Jim Hendry thinks it is.

i'm in a good mood, so i won't bust out the eye roll I'll do it for you. :roll: Ok you convinced me - he has looked outstanding both behind the plate and on the basepaths Do you consider Manny Ramirez a bad baseball player? In true Joe Morgan fashion I will tell you no I don't but I don't watch Manny every day either. Having said that Manny OPS+ 129; Barret OPS+ 80 - I believe that gives Manny just a little more room to make gaffes in the field and on the basepaths. Not to mention Manny is a LF while Barrett is a catcher Um, that hurts your argument. Manny makes boneheaded plays and costs lots of runs in one of the easiest defensive positions. My point is the reasoning for calling Barrett a bad baseball player(always you said, even when he was putting up great OPS+s) was bad baserunning and bad defense, which Manny certainly trumps him in. Um, no it doesn't. While I certainly don't agree that Michael Barrett has been a bad baseball player for the Cubs, your arguments aren't persuasive. However important defense actually is, there is no doubt it's far more important at catcher than left field. Ramirez makes bad decisions and costs his teams runs every once in awhile, a catcher doing the same thing would negatively affect the game far more frequently. Does Barrett make more bonehead plays than Ramirez? I have no idea, honestly. I'm unaware of a stat entitled BoneHeadPlays+. Also, asking if Manny Ramirez is a bad baseball player is disingenuous and condescending. Ramirez is so far above Barret offensively it's silly to discuss. Those 59 points of OPS+ leave a lot of wiggle room as the previous poster said. Something tells me you know this. Again, I side with you on the this argument. Barrett's offense has outweighed his defensive shortcomings up to this point -- though that may not have been the case to this point in 2007. However, if I was a neutral party, I'd be less than convinced of that.

The left foot seems incredibly awkward to me, too.

I agree with that. Kobe would be a huge get and make the Bulls the Eastern Conference favorites. Garnett would be a huge get and make the Bulls a NBA Champion contender. (I am assuming similar deals would be traded for each)

Kobe is also an solid defender, which is why I'd be willing to include Hinrich in a package for him. True, but I'd rather part with Gordon. Ha ha, of course. Hinrich is better than Gordon. I do think you (and the Bulls) might be in luck in this case. Gordon's scoring, which will be needed to "replace" Kobe's, will make him very attractive and maybe moreso than Hinrich. This is in the minds of NBA GM's, of which Kupchak is a poor one.

How cogent is my Wolves of the East example? Very. Gutting the entire team for Kobe isn't a good idea. If the Bulls enter next season with something like Duhon-Bryant-Nocioni-Brown(?)-Wallace, I don't think they're much better off, and they are certainly worse off long term. I would think Kobe could be had without totally gutting the team. maybe Gordon, Deng and Duhon/Hinrich for Kobe and a throw-in. Then draft the best available PG. That would leave Conley/Law/Hinrich/Duhon, Bryant, Nocioni, Thomas and Wallace. I think if Bryant were aquired, it would negate the need to draft a scorer like Julian Wright. Waht Kobe was missing in L.A. post-Shaq was a good point and a competent inside game. He would have both in that scenario, IMO. I agree, I doubt the Bulls would have to gut their team if Kobe is traded. I just simply meant the Bulls shouldn't give up everything the Lakers want. The T-Wolves of the East is a legitimate concern, although a few of their teams would easily win the East next season. The #9 pick will likely be involved, if not, I don't suggest taking the best PG available. The team that takes Acie Law at #9 will be very disappointed. Not that he won't be good, but he's nowhere near the ninth-best prospect in the draft. Julian Wright isn't a scorer. At least not yet. He's a skilled complementary player. Along with his size/length/athleticism, his best skill is his playmaking. Besides that, the Bulls don't (and wouldn't if the Kobe deal came to fruition) need scoring from the 3.

How cogent is my Wolves of the East example? Very. Gutting the entire team for Kobe isn't a good idea. If the Bulls enter next season with something like Duhon-Bryant-Nocioni-Brown(?)-Wallace, I don't think they're much better off, and they are certainly worse off long term. There is no chance that would be the team. One of Hinrich or Gordon will be here. One of Deng or Thomas would be as well, I believe. I've seen a lot of suggested trades involving one of the guards, Deng, Thomas, and this year's first rounder. That was my point. If that was the deal, I'd pass. As great as Kobe is, you can't give up your entire team for him. If you do, then you're basically the Lakers.

Barkley and Miller also didn't get very close until they were paired with an All-Star level player or two. What's your suggested trade to bring Kobe to the Bulls? It's a difficult question. The Bulls biggest need is and remains an interior scorer. Now, in the East, adding Kobe could easily make them the favorites. But is that the goal? Favorites in the East? I wouldn't think so. Personally, I don't really remember the details of the rumored Gasol trade (you can refresh me), but I likely would've done that. As for Kobe, I'd push for Gordon-Nocioni (S & T)-Thomas/#9 pick and PJ Brown (S & T) if needed for salary purposes. If it gets to Deng-Gordon-Thomas/pick, I think I'd pass. I'd pass because the Bulls should be able to get something pretty damned good for Gordon-Nocioni-Thomas/pick and still have Deng, Hinrich and Thomas/pick.

How cogent is my Wolves of the East example? Very. Gutting the entire team for Kobe isn't a good idea. If the Bulls enter next season with something like Duhon-Bryant-Nocioni-Brown(?)-Wallace, I don't think they're much better off, and they are certainly worse off long term.