Andy

I counted at least 3 shots made by LeBron with the shot clock under 4 that had no business going in, counting that one. Terrible game by the Bulls. Have I mentioned I'm sick of losing to Cleveland? The Bulls need to steal one back that they shouldn't get to make up for dropping both the Cavs games.

Chris Quinn earns a very well-deserved spot on the (11-man) all-Big East first team. I hope someone gives him a look in the upcoming draft, because he's much more well-rounded than Matt Carroll was, and he's doing pretty well now with the Bobcats.

We'd better win tonight. Bulls need a win, and I'm sick of losing to LeBron. 7:30 ET tip time on ESPN tonight.

Have you ever been to NY during the BE tournament? Many of my friends have gone since the first one and never miss it. No, never been. It'd be awesome to go, though, especially to the first round 4-games-in-one-day event.

Maybe with Wood and maybe Prior's 2004 injury. I don't think Prior's current condition or his being hit by a line-drive had anything to do with the 2003 work load. The sad thing is, I'd be perfectly willing to accept the crap we go through with Wood and Prior every year - if they'd closed it out in 2003. :(

BSU at Buffalo tomorrow night in the first round of the MAC tourney. ND, as the 12th seed in the Big East, will play 5th-seed Georgetown on Wednesday at 2 p.m. (Thank you, South Florida. I really didn't want to play Marquette. And thank you, Rutgers. I didn't want to play Pitt either.)

Then, in the next couple of weeks, there are hundreds of articles written about how the Cubs should trade the injury-prone Prior. Only half of these articles will actually mention the injury's cause, and those that do will stick it in at the very end.

ND wins 66-61! We're goin' to New York, baby! BSU wins 89-77 to lock themselves in as the ninth seed in the MAC tourney, which begins on Monday.

Speaking of which, Flames, I was wrong about DePaul being eliminated from Big East tourney contention. They can get in if they beat ND on Saturday (please don't) and Providence loses to Marquette on Saturday (likely). So they'd get in as the final seed and get humilated by UConn or Villanova. Great! The top 4 get byes. The 12th seed would play the 5 in the 1st round, and as that stands currently it would be Georgetown. Actually, I'd prefer that to playing Marquette, the 6, so I hope we don't succeed in passing Rutgers for the 11th spot, which we could do if we won and they lost their last game. I'm becoming more annoyed with Taquan Dean by the day. If he doesn't hit that buzzer-beating shot to send the game with ND to OT, the Irish are 10th instead of tied for 12th and are staring a game with Seton Hall down.

Reminds me of when Peter Gammons picked Nomar to win the MVP last year, when there were 3 or 4 guys on the Cubs who had a better chance.

I don't. That bastard Squeaky ruined my bracket by single-handedly knocking UK out a couple of years ago. UAB won. Wow. I'd think that pretty much kills Memphis's #1 seed.

Without Hughes, you are probably right. But with Hughes, I can see us playing as good as anyone. He makes such a difference. Defensively, offensively, etc. That we can both agree on. We learned this in the 2005 first-round playoff series. :(

Speaking of which, Flames, I was wrong about DePaul being eliminated from Big East tourney contention. They can get in if they beat ND on Saturday (please don't) and Providence loses to Marquette on Saturday (likely).

What I really hope is that MLB.com's Top Plays archive stops shorting out and showing only video frames and not video after about 12 seconds into the highlight, as I noticed was going on today.

has to be over 10, probably closer to 15 games. Absolutely sick how we have blown so many games this year. and btw, I hate the Cavs a lot too..not on the level of the Knicks and Pistons, but they are up there. Mostly because of the bandwagon Cavs "fans" at my school. LeBron gets way too much star treatment too, another thing that definitely turns me off from the NBA. I also don't like how pretty much every one of their games is on network TV just because of LeBron. Hello, we made the playoffs last year and I can count the number of network games that we have had this year on one hand. Something is not right with that. Actually, we've had a fair few national games this year. More than I expected actually considering we still don't really have a "star", and the NBA's TV schedule pretty much revolves around LeBron, T-Mac, Kobe, Carmelo, the Pistons, Shaq/Wade, and AI.

I only hate the Knicks and Cavs. Knicks because they have so many unlikable ex-Bulls on the team, and Cavs because I can't stand how much leeway the refs give LeBron. I can only imagine how irritating it would be to play against Kobe more than twice a year with the calls he gets either.

While I understand your frustration, it is impossible to say that they would have won the game with that shot.Maybe not but points are points and that should've been called. I refuse to blame the refs for these things though: - Un-clutch FT shooting by Gordon and Hinrich - Nocioni becoming brainless at the end of games - Skiles not drawing up a play for Gordon to get the ball right away (not off a stupid two-pass) - Flip Murray inexplicably shooting the best 3-pointer of his life when it comes late in the game down 2 to the Bulls

I could be wrong, but I think they're eliminated already.

The fact that the Bulls are shooting like 20 percent might have something to do with it too.

Didn't Detroit trade for a star in Wallace, well after he was developed, to put them over the top from perennial eastern bridesmaid to championship team? Anyway, I just think the Bulls chances depend on when they are able to find somebody else's superstar, because they don't seem to have one, or the ability to develop one (how many top 10 picks have they had since the dynasty broke up?). 1999: Elton Brand (netted Tyson Chandler) They also picked Artest in the first round that year who was eventually moved along with Brad Miller in the Jalen Rose deal. Oops. 2000: Marcus Fizer, Jamal Crawford, Dalibor Bagaric all first-rounders. Three misses. 2001: Eddy Curry (got us Sweetney, Thomas and a slew of draft picks) 2002: Jay Williams (I'm still pissed off at how this played out) 2003: Kirk Hinrich 2004: Ben Gordon The Bulls have picked well in all these drafts except for 2000. The problem has been what we did with those players, along with a huge stroke of bad luck with Williams, who would be better than Hinrich and possibly even Gordon had he had a chance to improve after his solid rookie season. The fact remains the Bulls have the pieces. They have a good young core with Gordon, Hinrich, Deng, Nocioni and Chandler, and will have a top 5 pick in the 2006 draft along with our own, along with a bunch of cap space, and then are likely to have another top 5 pick in the 2007 draft, along with our own first-rounder and two second-rounders, the top 5 pick assuming the Knicks are awful again. If Pax doesn't screw it up (and all indications from the last couple of drafts are that he won't), this team will be a perennial championship contender over the next 5-7 years.

Good times! Yeah! What was it again, it was a pile of rotten fruit right next to all the bats or something...that was a fun season all the way round.

It depends on the two players. If the Bulls traded Gordon and Deng plus their two first rounders for Garnett, would the resulting team be any better? Or would it be a borderline playoff team with a superstar? Seems more like the latter to me. Ford's suggested trade of Deng and the two first rounders for Garnett appeals, though. Garnett-Chandler-Noch-Gordon-Hinrich -- yep, that would work. skiles would probably play songaila over garnett in 4th quarters, though. Sulley's quest against Skiles is laughable. This team has the pieces and assets to make a run for a title in a few years. i'll believe it when i actually see a skiles-led team make a title run. Do NBA teams actually develop? I was always under the impression that you either win by drafting a great player and hope he develops into an elite within 3 years (doesn't look like any current Bull will come close to that), or you sign/trade for somebody else's superstar. Is there much of a history of sub .500 teams gradually getting better with the same group of players, without at least one of those players turning into a superstar, or trading for a superstar? I can't imagine the Bulls ever going far with Skiles as the coach. He seems to be more interested in sending messages than winning. That's fine, actually it can be great to develop some guys, but usually you have to change the coach to then go to the next level. I would say Ben Gordon's stretch of play over the last month or so would qualify him as a guy that could be an elite player next season. And Luol Deng is only 20 years old and probably won't develop quite as fast as most college draftees (remember how long it took Jermaine O'Neal to become a star?).

I don't know if you've been paying any attention, but Gordon's been starting since around the second or third week of the season.

Because, as we all know, the Cubs have made no effort to win over the last few years. That's why they gave Prior a huge contract straight out of college. That's why they traded for DLee and immediately signed him for 3 years. That's why they gave Aramis Ramirez a nice extension right before Opening Day last year. That's why they've picked up (at least at the time) very good relievers every off-season for the last three or four years. That's why they signed Sammy to a gargantuan contract back in the early 2000s. That's why they gave Wood a rich extension. That's why they were prepared to pay Furcal $10 million a year before the Dodgers trumped their offer. I could go on, but I think you get the point, which is that this ownership group has actively tried to win. Wrigley's not holding us back, injuries, bad managing and suboptimal performance are.

The attendance figures tell a different story. Apparently, most folks don't go to the ballpark to sniff the pavement, ogle vendors and hang out amongst the chamberpots. More likely, most Cub fans just have no clue what they're missing with a modern ballpark. Even more likely, most Cub fans have seen what they're missing and realize that Wrigley is better.