scarey

Because I think he is a liability to the organization serving as a coach. I did post questioning your reasoning, but I think it all boils down to this: I just don't understand this point of view. I have my assumptions, but in the end it just doesn't matter. My guess is you wouldn't convince me and I wouldn't convince you. What don't you understand? I can see you disagreeing, but what don't you understand? I don't understand how he can be that much of a liability just being a part of the organization, even as a coach. Honestly, how many more losses do you think the 2011 Cubs would have with Sandberg as the bench coach? You don't have to answer that, I'm just explaining how I don't understand your pleasure.

Because I think he is a liability to the organization serving as a coach. I did post questioning your reasoning, but I think it all boils down to this: I just don't understand this point of view. I have my assumptions, but in the end it just doesn't matter. My guess is you wouldn't convince me and I wouldn't convince you.

Why does this make people happy? I realize everybody here was scared shitless about him becoming the manager... but he didn't become the manager. What's there to be happy about exactly? Not that anyone should be especially outraged, I just don't understand why anyone would be happy about this.

by the way, charlie v is a [expletive]. garnett's comment was ultimately harmless since it was on a basketball court between basketball players that don't have cancer. i'm pretty sure nobody with cancer heard him say it, so who cares? classless blah blah yea ok whatever, but it didn't hurt anything. now i'm sure there are a number of kids with cancer who are big KG fans, and now they have to hear that he made fun of cancer patients. why? because charlie v thought it was necessary to post in-game trash talk on his stupid ass twitter. I'm assuming you don't know that Villanueva has alopecia? Granted he's probably heard stuff like that all his life, but it's still shitty to trash somebody for a medical condition. Especially one that effects one's outward appearance. I'm glad he called out KG for that one.

although i wasn't so fine with randle picking stanford, [expletive] punk. Just be happy he didn't pick Purdue. Painter is having a rough time with his 2011 class.

Demetri McCamey, Jon Leuer, Kalin Lucas, Jajuan Johnson, and E'Twaun Moore selected to preseason All Big Ten team. I wonder if all three of Johnson, Moore, and Hummel would have made the team if Hummel had not been hurt.

It's what I live for, defending Deng. You got me pegged. I can't wait for his next bad game, we can do this all over again. Sorry, let me rephrase that. We can do this alllllll over again.

or we were hating on deng for his atrocious What was the explanation in the off season after the season he had last year? people think he's overpaid? i don't know that's not the point. people in this thread were complaining about his bad game, and there's nothing wrong with that. he has a horrible game. nobody is saying deng is a bad player, even if you want to pretend we are. You're probably right. It's probably just coincidence that the criticism of Deng's bad game is prominent in this thread when half the team played a fundamentally flawed game and the biggest reasons for the loss was Rose's poor shot selection and turn overs down the stretch.

Meh, it's called homerism. Despite that, you need to understand that Noah brings more to the table than 10/12. Only about half the teams in the NBA have centers that can legitimately play the position both offensively and defensively. Noah is a very good defender, good enough offensively, runs the floor well, and can shoot free throws. That's a rarity in the NBA. Yes, Melo is a rarity too, but I think the Bulls will get enough production from their team to make up for not having a superstar like Melo. I don't think they can fill the void that losing Noah would create.

or we were hating on deng for his atrocious What was the explanation in the off season after the season he had last year?

That's exactly why you trade for Carmelo. You can always find a guy pretty similar to Noah. Rose is great, but he isn't the guy on a championship team. Huh? Name 5 players that are over 6'11'' can give you 10/12 consistently every night, have a relentless motor and bring it every single night. I would think there are many more players who can score and create a shot than there are players of Noah's style of play. I looked at the TV and found a guy in 2 seconds. Chris Kaman. And Dwight Howard, Brook Lopez... It is not just creating shots with Carmelo. He demands double teams and is a 1A guy. Rose is a 1B guy. You rarely win championships with the Detroit style team that won that doesn't have a 1A guy. Carmelo is a type 5 player in the league and you trade a guy who has never even made an All-Star team for him! The problem here is you are looking at the stat sheet and making your decision based on nothing else. It's about match ups. If Noah is gone off this team, Boozer is forced to play center and Scalabrine gets a lot more floor time. The KGs, Bosh's and Howard's of the Eastern Conference would run wild on that. We can't just make Kaman appear out of thin air. There's a reason he's been a Clipper his entire career. Lopez isn't going anywhere either (I'm going to pretend you didn't list Howard because he's obviously in another world relative to these players).

I would give Rose more than one game to prove that he has a three point shot. I only watched the end of the game, but I saw Korver get open and drain a bucket. He just has to do so much running around to get to that point. It takes forever. He reminded me of Hinrich in that regard. Well I am not basing it just on tonights game, but on the World Basketball Championships and the preseason where he bricked 3 after 3. Korver got open on 1 play, but there were at least 4-5 possessions down the stretch where it was obvious the Bulls were looking to get Korver a shot and he couldnt get even an inch of space. Boozer will change that. Everyone on the floor for the Thunder were watching Korver and moving out of the way for Thabo. A double team on Boozer and Korver won't even need to run like that.

That's exactly why you trade for Carmelo. You can always find a guy pretty similar to Noah. Rose is great, but he isn't the guy on a championship team. Huh? Name 5 players that are over 6'11'' can give you 10/12 consistently every night, have a relentless motor and bring it every single night. I would think there are many more players who can score and create a shot than there are players of Noah's style of play. People will appreciate Noah when Dwight Howard doesn't stomp on the Bulls for 40 points while using Scalabrine as anal floss all game.

Honestly, Deng deserved all the criticism tonight (although he did play good D and had some nice drives and dishes). It's just that I know most of the people criticizing him for this game are not really criticizing him for this game alone. He had a bad year 2 years ago, and I guess I was naive to think people would have a little more faith in him after a good year last year. Watching him in the preseason, I saw him drawing fouls a LOT. He got to the line early tonight, but he missed his shots. If he shoots from the line as he normally does, he puts up 15 points in an extremely mediocre effort. We'll see better games from him IMO.

I see everyone's primed for Deng hating. Mid season form. I'm looking forward to the bitching and moaning after he averages 18 and 7 again...

Durant = the human foul call.

Flaherty playing the outfield, eh? That's pretty interesting. He could be a great super utility.

I've always been a believer of Deng. Sure, he was a let down in '08-'09 (when he was unhealthy), but look at his numbers last year. He averaged 17 and 7 while shooting 38% from behind the arc. Thibodeau seems to be trying to make him more well rounded with a post up and Deng is showing he can finally finish through a foul and even draw a foul. I think Deng is going to have a very good year. And he's only 25! Sure, he's not Carmello. But he's only a tier down from him offensively and provides very good defense at a position that is going to need it in the East with Pierce, Carter, and LeBron to contend with.

Purdue is still going to be very good. Robbie Hummel isn't all that great. Tough loss, but I sitll think they can be a very, very good team. Hummel gave them range. Plus, as ryan pointed out, he is their best player period. Moore can shoot the three, but he is best working in the lane and creating his own shot. Unless someone emerges that can stretch teams out defensively, everyone is going to just crowd inside and shut down one (Jajuan Johson) of their two scoring threats and make Moore beat them them on the perimeter. The only other chance they have is if one of their big guys steps up and becomes a third scoring option. Even then though, Purdue's offense doesn't work that great with two inside threats. The motion offense worked so well with a catch and shoot guy like Hummel who could also distribute well. Not to mention he was a great defender. If you watched Purdue last year before and after the Hummel injury, they were a totally different team. I like Painter a lot and I think he's an excellent coach, but he has his work cut out for him.

There have been few teams that I've had as much anticipation for as the 2009-2010 Boilermakers and the 2010-2011 Boilermakers. I think the 2009 Cubs and 2006 Bears are the only ones that top them. It's kinda funny that every one of those teams can be best described as disappointing. Kinda funny. Mostly just sad. I was really looking forward to watching Purdue play this year.

I don't want Ryne anywhere near this team, even if it's only as bench coach. I have terrible visions of us bunting in the 1st inning with our #3 hitter. In 144 games last year with the Iowa Cubs, Sandberg had non-pitchers sac bunt 27 times. That's once every 5.33 games. The majority of those 27 bunts came from Chris Robinson, Matt Camp, James Adduci, and Bobby Scales. Darwin Barney had 2 all year. Ty Wright, Marquez Smith, Sam Fuld, and Welington Castillo each had 1. Aren't we blowing things out of proportion a little bit? Yes, but people want to continue to use one example of his managerial career to the fullest. The season stats don't support any of their arguments, but that one example does. Don't get me wrong, I understand people don't like some of the things he says either (which I happen to think are cliches more than anything when he says stuff like "hard work" and "gut feeling"). This judgment is just getting way out of hand IMO. Talk about mountain from a molehill. Forget for a second that people are jumping to conclusions on his managerial style; I know people here have admitted that the manager has very little weight in the way the season record turns out. There's one undeniable fact in all of this: Sandberg has a good chance of being the next manager. I guess my point of view is wait and see if he actually does become manager and watch him actually manage before judging him as a manager. I'm not telling anyone how to feel, I just don't understand all the hand wringing on a decision that hasn't even been made about a manager that we honestly know extremely little about.

I don't want Ryne anywhere near this team, even if it's only as bench coach. I have terrible visions of us bunting in the 1st inning with our #3 hitter. In 144 games last year with the Iowa Cubs, Sandberg had non-pitchers sac bunt 27 times. That's once every 5.33 games. The majority of those 27 bunts came from Chris Robinson, Matt Camp, James Adduci, and Bobby Scales. Darwin Barney had 2 all year. Ty Wright, Marquez Smith, Sam Fuld, and Welington Castillo each had 1. Aren't we blowing things out of proportion a little bit?

I guess Kopitzke really wanted to give the Cubs a showing yesterday.

I was unaware that Ha had the ability to play centerfield. That could up his prospect status quite a bit if he's capable of playing at least average defense there.

Maybe I'm crazy, but if I had just invested in a baseball franchise I think I would like to get my feelers out there before making a big splash. You guys are looking at this strictly from the perspective of getting rid of Hendry. I know you understand that someone has to replace him, but do you understand that Ricketts probably doesn't want to be doing another search for a GM in 18 months? Sure, Ricketts could just ask the baseball people in the Cubs organization (which consequently nobody on this site trusts the opinion of the Cubs "baseball people") and find out who they think would be a stat driven GM in terms of personel decisions. That's not it though, that GM needs to know how to conduct themselves publicly, be able to juggle multiple organizational goals outside of personel decisions, and I'm certain they want this person to have some type of idea or more likely experience in running an organization of some type. Remember, this isn't just picking the best player. This is running a freaking organization. So, isn't it within the realm of possibility that Ricketts wants to get to know people around the league? Get to know other organizations and who possible stand-out candidates would be? This is a new business for him. He already is paying a GM and will have to continue paying him whether he fires him or not. So, why let him run the organization, limit any negative recourse (I think we can agree that there hasn't really been much negativity from Hendry's moves since Ricketts took over, right?), and get to know the baseball business. Then, when he's ready he can make a smart business decision instead of a snap decision to "make a statement". That sounds pretty reasonable to me. Sure, it's also possible that he just feels Hendry has done enough to keep his job instead. I personally feel it could be a combination of the former and later. My point here is maybe we should wait and see where Ricketts goes with this before getting upset about a "passing interest to a more statistical approach" after year one. One year may seem like a long time as a fan, but it really isn't very long at all in terms of reaching organizational goals.