jersey cubs fan

it's not that ESPN doesn't have people who know advanced metrics. rob neyer and keith law certainly do, buster olney does a little bit (though for a vanderbilt guy, he's still way to married to small ball and "traditional" stats), gammons did, i believe kurkjian does to some extent. but espn isn't going to start running features about UZR and WAR if 95% of their viewers don't know what those things are and don't want to know. they're a business and they cater to the casual baseball fan and the set-in-their-ways baseball fan; baseball prospectus caters to the much smaller segment of the population that is really into baseball and has an open mind for advanced metrics. Is it just me (and apparently will leitch) or did everyone first get real exposure to and explanation of advanced stats from rob neyer? If not for him, fjm may still be sitting out there with like 3 readers. btw - every time i hear timmy kurkjian talk about baseball, something inside of me dies. He likes baseball history, which I guess is cool, but the comparisons he makes are almost exclusively based on old stats. Bill James. just reading his books? how did you hear about him? I'm interested b/c I sort of stumbled upon Neyer on espn.com and his analysis really struck a chord with me. I'm not sure when I would have read about this stuff if not for him. I think Neyer was the first to hit the masses and hit the non-old people like Tim generation. I know that was my first real exposure. I didn't buy baseball stat books when I was a lad.

this is what was said, there's no room for interpretation, here. There's plenty of room. Calling the game a disappointment or calling the season a disappointment.

I would have to assume that he's the #1 based simply on being by far the most highly paid. If Olsen were to stay, he'd have to be a part-time guy, because they aren't going to go 2 WR, 2 TE, 1RB all that often. I'm guessing the look will most often be 3 WR, 1 TE, 1B, that allows for 7 blockers on any given play, and both the TE and RB can also be an outlet if the 3 WR don't get open.

no semantics. were you disappointed when they lost the super bowl? Being disappointed in the result of a game and calling a season a disappointment are quite different. The 2006 Bears were not a disappointment.

And yet they will be able to maintain these expectations for a few years, at least. Last year they had the 6th most points in the NHL, this year they are third. I understand having some disappointment whenever they lose their last game, but as long as it's not a 1 and done scenario, there's no good reason for the disappointment to be deep or lasting. Ownership is clearly committed to this team, the core is quite young. If they flame out with Huet, you can be close to convinced they will solve that problem, even if it involves cutting him to get the numbers off the books. This isn't a team with a closing window. They are a contender and quite unlike the Cubs their strength is not based simply on having more resources than the competition, and unlike the Bears, their contention isn't based on an unsustainable combination like defense and special teams with no QB. There's plenty of reason to have patience with this team and happy with something less than a championship.

If they can trade Silva for him, sure.

Ooooohhh, I wanted him to fall to the Jets. I only saw a few ND games last year, but really liked Tate.

Very very few players are rich beyond imagination in the first 5+ years of their career. The only guys who get FU money are taken in the top 5-10, and by the second half of the 1st you're looking at guys who aren't close to having funded their retirement. Almost all of them have significant financial reason for motivation at least until their 1st free agency contract, and many need a 2nd.

It's not nothing, but it's certainly less. peppers has been ungodly rich for a long time, now. if there is no motivation for team success, then it can most certainly be reasoned that he's playing for the hall. sometimes players just aren't good anymore and it has nothing to do with guaranteed money. Sure, sometimes. But football is a game where max effort matters, and there's no question that some guys lose motivation as their careers go on.

It's not nothing, but it's certainly less.

This only makes sense if: 1) You ignore that Khabibulin had plenty of shaky moments in the regular season last year. 2) You ignore that Khabibulin had plenty of shaky games in the postseason last year. 3) You ignore that Huet and Niemi are both capable of making amazing saves. Khabi had proven he could carry a team through the playoffs and win it all and he was doing it again. That is complete nonsense. Khabi was not in the process of carrying the Blackhawks through the playoffs last year.

I'm not going to pretend the goaltending isn't an issue, but I was more disappointed in the play of the rest of the team to allow some of those scoring opportunities. After Buff was robbed they looked sloppy as hell until the 3rd.

I vaguely remember some comments when he first arrived in Seattle, and then this. Not a heck of a lot. I thought those were more along the lines of "that's last year, I'm not talking about Chicago anymore." But I could be mistaken. Wouldn't be a big surprise to find that Bradley said that, and then ultimately couldn't keep his trap shut about it. 1 comment 3 months later? Trap, not shut.

http://deadspin.com/5488410/quarterbacks-no-longer-welcome-in-ladies-room-at-millyvegas-bar Helen Hunt really has to take a piss though.

I vaguely remember some comments when he first arrived in Seattle, and then this. Not a heck of a lot.

If they are really hammering it into these guys heads to be more aggressive this spring, then it's hard to say it's just spring training thing and will but shut off when the regular season begins. If you spend the spring always trying for the extra base, is it all that easy to show up in April realizing, "wait, now is the time for real baseball I will be more cautious."

The Nets don't have any fans either, let alone celebrity fans or a very popular basketball writer who writes about them all year long. Yes, they will be moving to the Prudential Center until that mythological Brooklyn arena opens, but that Brooklyn arena is still no sure thing, and there's no telling what that market is going to look like. Right now there are no Nets fans. When the Nets were good, there were no Nets fans. I live in the most densely populated county in the country, not far at all from where the Nets played, and I've never met a Nets fan. I find it hard to believe that a free agent would look at the Nets and Bulls markets and think the Nets offer more. There's going to be at least 2 years of playing in a hockey arena in Newark on a team with no fan or media following, compared to the Bulls who have a clear built in fan and media following.

The 2nd rounders don't tie up much. Forte is still a cheap player. But if he does have any sort of resurgence this season, he's going to be looking at a big payday next offseason (not that I would mind such a dilemma). Also, Olsen is cheap right now, but if they don't trade him, and he goes through a year of being under utilized, those negotations could get ugley next year. Actually, look at the contract Williams signed as an earlier first rounder, it's much smaller than what this blocking tight end just signed.

I have no concern whatsoever on how this affects the 2010 payroll structure. The fact that contracts can be broken makes most of this easier to manage. However, it's almost a lock that there will be a cap if/when the CBA is finalized, and my concern is that they will be in a tough spot 2 years from now because they've guaranteed so much to these guys. The desperation is obvious, and necessary. However, desperate decision makers are dangerous, and somewhat like what happened with the Cubs a couple years ago, a sudden splurge in spending may have a lasting effect when those purse strings are tightened later on. And you can guarantee the Bears won't always be this aggressive with the money.

The Nets won't be in Brooklyn for a while, and nobody really knows how great that market is going to be if/when it opens. The Nets are playing in the Prudential Center next year, a nice hockey arena, but a hockey arena first and foremost in a completely dead Newark. There's a dream of some idyllic Brooklyn situation, but that's a long way off, and it could be a big risk to sign with a team with zero fans, zero media interest that is going to play in a hockey arena in Newark, NJ. They are a lesser "little brother" than the Clippers.

I know it was a 5 year deal (which of course means nothing in the NFL), but I hadn't heard the money. I heard it the other day on TV, and here's the Sun-Times: Compare that to the extension Desmond Clark signed when he was 30, 3/6, with 2m guaranteed. I don't know how this deal breaks down, but with $6m guaranteed I would assume the "real portion" of the contract is something like 3 years for $10-12m for a guy who is strictly a blocker and offers no threat in the passing game.

Did I see that the TE's contract was for 5 years $17m? Forget Taylor's deal, that's a lot of money for a blocking tight end.

Giants select Jason Pierre Paul, DE South Florida

2 problems with that theory. One, Sammy was a Cub and McGwire was a Card, so why not boo him if that's your thing. Fans boo past stars of other teams all the time. Also, if you "ever" cheered Sammy doesn't take into account people who cheered him then and were changed their opinion later. Why couldn't they boo Mac?

It's only 3 years guaranteed, but if they do cut him in year 4, presumably that will be a big chunk of a cap hit.