UMFan83

Hawks are gonna catch a huge break tonight. Ryan Miller is sitting tonight and our old friend Patrick Lalime will be starting in the net.

Yeah I think the defense has been outstanding. Huet (and Niemi) deserves credit, but the defense from every position on the ice has been stellar. It's a good thing too, because the offense hasn't been producing as much as expected.

Would you want a coach on his way to another program(in the same recruiting grounds) out "recruiting" for you for 6 weeks? If a program didn't want that coach around, they could let him go ahead and go. It's the one thing I'll ever give credit to Michigan, dumping Frieder after he said he was on his way out. Some coaches will stay and genuinely recruit for the school. Sometimes, though, it's better for a coach to go ahead and go to the school hiring him. Yeah but come on. What recruit is going to seriously listen to someone talk up a school that that person chose to leave just a few weeks prior? That's nice of that coach to stay and give an honest effort, but he's just a lame duck coach, and one that volunteered to leave for "greener pastures" at that.

Or didn't want to resign a 5 inning oft-injured pitcher. I'm not saying Sheets is any better but still.

I think we'll all know a lot more about how good this Bengals team is after the next two weeks.

And the Browns have beaten the Steelers. Unbelievable.

I can't believe how mediocre Pittsburgh is. Thanks for making the Bears only decent win this year look a lot less awesome Pittsburgh.

Sounds like it will be Pat The Bat aferall, and we'll either flip him to an AL team or use him as a really expensive Jake Fox and then sign some garbage like Byrd or Podsednik. Why would Tampa do this? They want out of Burrell's bad contract, but they are taking back a 2 year deal to get rid of a 1 year deal. Maybe instead of paying $9m for Pat this year they pay $6m for Milton this year and $5m the next year. They save money in the short-term, acquire a reclamation project that could be a very cost effective player in 2011 as well. Or maybe they get even more of a break. In short, Milton Bradley is a depressed asset right now. He's probably not worth his contract, but as a player he clearly has value. If you can get him for a fraction of his cost while getting rid of your own overpriced guy, it's a buy low and potentially sell high later scenario (what would he be worth if he OPSs 850 this season and is only owed $5m for 2011?) or buy low and hold scenario. This. I know a couple of Rays fans, and their opinion is that Burrell is washed up. Who knows if that's true, but if you can get someone likely to put up better numbers than Burrell (assuming he's healthy), get him for cheaper, and lock him up for another year, why wouldn't you? Remember, TB doesn't have someone ready to take Burrell's spot, they would love to replace him with a younger, better, cheaper player, which is what this is.

Honestly, it'd be nice to have a little money to spend this offseason, but I think we need to stop throwing money at our problems, especially when Jim Hendry doesn't make the right decisions when he's doing so. I think to get out of this mess Jim has left us in, we need to look in terms of multiple years. I would sign a filler FA or two (Cameron is fine I guess), see if we can get lucky and click, but have the focus be long term.

I would be with you, but after I saw the way the players reacted with relief after Bradley was suspended at the end of the year, I am pretty certain it would be better for the team to play next year without Bradley. For me the trouble with that is how much of that was truly directed at Bradley and how much was that just frustration over the crappy season and looking for someone to blame? Or how much of that was just based on the feelings at that moment due to a specific incident? Bradley made plenty of stupid comments/decisions, but I think it's reasonable to think that effectively starting fresh with a new season that it would be a much different situation. I think it would basically come down to how the 2010 season kicks off. If the team is winning and/or Bradley isn't ice cold again I highly doubt anyone on the team is going to have a problem with him. If the team was winning, or Bradley started off the season well, it would mask a lot. But overall I see Bradley as a cancer to this Cubs team. The core of the team seems to strongly dislike Bradley, and while it won't directly affect their play, it will have an effect on the 2010 season. I do see your viewpoint though. Even if Bradley was only a minor nuisance with occasional outbursts, I'd be willing to keep Bradley because there's no way we'll be a better team on paper after trading Bradley for whoever they get. But I think the bridge has been burned, and having Bradley back next year would be horrible for the Cubs. Baseball is an individual sport. Clubhouse cancer is just another excuse to point fingers. Maybe. And I'm not a huge fan of accounting for chemistry or intangibles to affect team performance, but after seeing the crap everyone had to go through with Bradley last season, I think it would be better to not have Bradley on next years team.

I would be with you, but after I saw the way the players reacted with relief after Bradley was suspended at the end of the year, I am pretty certain it would be better for the team to play next year without Bradley. For me the trouble with that is how much of that was truly directed at Bradley and how much was that just frustration over the crappy season and looking for someone to blame? Or how much of that was just based on the feelings at that moment due to a specific incident? Bradley made plenty of stupid comments/decisions, but I think it's reasonable to think that effectively starting fresh with a new season that it would be a much different situation. I think it would basically come down to how the 2010 season kicks off. If the team is winning and/or Bradley isn't ice cold again I highly doubt anyone on the team is going to have a problem with him. If the team was winning, or Bradley started off the season well, it would mask a lot. But overall I see Bradley as a cancer to this Cubs team. The core of the team seems to strongly dislike Bradley, and while it won't directly affect their play, it will have an effect on the 2010 season. I do see your viewpoint though. Even if Bradley was only a minor nuisance with occasional outbursts, I'd be willing to keep Bradley because there's no way we'll be a better team on paper after trading Bradley for whoever they get. But I think the bridge has been burned, and having Bradley back next year would be horrible for the Cubs.

Can we please get top news status on the Trib's sports site for the Blackhawks. Every game they win, and every game they are a small article with no picture on the right side of the page, while teams like the crappy Bears, or the pathetic Bulls, or the 100 miles away from Chicago Notre Dame get headline status. There is so many horrible teams playing in Chicago lately, and they all get priority over the only hope for Chicago sports.

I would be with you, but after I saw the way the players reacted with relief after Bradley was suspended at the end of the year, I am pretty certain it would be better for the team to play next year without Bradley.

The 3 star thing is pretty cool, but I wish the players selected wouldn't look so apathetic when they came out. Understandable since they just got done playing 65 minutes of hockey but still.

THAT WAS [expletive] AWESOME!!!! BUFF!!!!! Seriously that was just beautiful stick work. He speeds past the defenders, makes a couple of nifty moves to get the goalie off balanced, and then puts a wrister right into the perfect spot.

Sharp getting an open look on the wrong side of the ice. Grr

none that matter, unless you think nashville has a chance at catching us. It's a long season. The Hawks are an awesome team but they still gotta earn the points.

Eastern Conference points are irrelevant, though. I know, its just to point out the Hawks aren't playing their best. That said, when they aren't at their best they are still getting points which is great. In that stretch they are either going to be 3-2-1 or 2-2-2

Sam Rosen?

6 straight games the Hawks have given their opponent points.

There's point number 40

Really bad power play there. They weren't able to generate anything.

Does every NHL team have to play the trap religiously these days? This is turning into Riley's slowdown tactics of the 90's

The Hawks have really had trouble scoring lately with during 5-on-5 play. Starting to worry me a bit.

The Atlanta Hawks won too, over the Bulls by 35 points!