brinoch

Pierre is what Pierre is. Nonetheless, I think he'd be better served by better plate discipline and showing more selectivity in what he swings at -- even with two strikes. Pierre swings at a lot of balls, it's a simple fact. Granted, he fouls many of them off. However, if Pierre can lay off some of those 'waste' pitches and make the pitcher throw more strikes, lest Pierre draw a walk, he'd see more and better pitches to hit. The improvement in plate discipline would create more walks and more hits, and thus a concomitant increase in his OBP. If he shows good plate discipline, I don't care if he's adding that much more power. Pierre will be a fine addition to the Cubs, and if he can give us an OBP of .350+, I'll be pretty happy with his performance. I don't love the trade, but he's a solid acquisition. Unlike, say, Jacque Jones.

Deal. ;)

That's... interesting.

That's pretty funny. :) I like Scott Eyre... good sense of humor.

Actually, Carlos and Barrett should consider squashing Edmonds between the two of them.

I'm going to go with the TIVO route and avoid spoilers online -- at least for the USA games. The other games, I don't so much care to wait. It's fun to watch regardless, just to see the games. But for our boys I have a hard time watching if I know they've already lost.

Nice link. Seems there is a difference in a torn and frayed labrum. Reading parts of that reminded me of my shoulder seperation, and I felt similar to how I feel when I see a bad knee injury in a game. After my own shoulder issues this last fall, I really didn't enjoy reading that. Blech.

Yes, there will indeed be a 2006 predictions contest. Look for an announcement in the near future from contest coordinators extraordinaire Serena and DJAXX.

It is physically impossible to demonstrate something does not exist. One can only demonstrate that something exists. Convential wisdom often gets people in trouble. So the earth's still flat? Different question. A theory can be proved or disproved by logical analysis of collected evidence, but non-existence of any particular thing can never be proved because for us mere mortals the collected evidence will always be incomplete, since it would require an encompassing knowledge of all things presently contained in the universe to state authoritatively that something does not exist. Non-ominiscient beings can never have more than a subset of the evidence required to prove non-existence. Different question? No, that was a non sequiter. No one can disprove the earth is flat. They can only prove that it is flat, and that is impossible. If it is impossible to prove it is flat the earth must be something else. It is fun to believe in ghosts, UFOs, and "intangibles" like the fast guy on the basepaths bugs the pitcher. But at some point most people grow up. Then again some people never do. the non-flat nature of the earth was proven millenia ago with a couple of sticks and a marking device. You've got the falsifiability of science backwards, NY Any repeatable observation or experiment that disagrees with the predictions of a theory disproves it. On the other hand, you can never absolutely prove a theory is true because you can never be sure that an experiment won't contradict the theory.

Please. Argue about the contents of the post, not about the poster. If you have any questions, please check the posting guidelines, which are linked in my sig.

Gotta catch up somehow! Eliminate all posts from the chit-chat threads, I keep telling you. :)

An excellent primer for those who may be unaware of the greatest tournament in sports this summer, in Germany. It would be nice to offer some thoughts on the challenges facing our boys as they head over to Europe. Our group is tough, for sure, but I still think Italy isn't as good as everyone makes them out to be. There's a reason they underperform at seemingly every international tournament -- they're consistently overrated. I'll add some more thoughts as I continue scouting (err... drinking beer and watching friendlies). Oh, and off topic, I made two seriously unconscious, wicked, evil saves last night during my team's indoor game. The first was when we were down 4-0 five minutes into the game (my defense was asleep or non-existant and kept giving up 4 on 2 breakaways until I went crazy on this save). This player was one-on-one with me from about 4 feet when the shot was kicked. I was moving forward towards the top of the goalie box, and as the ball was kicked, I was mid-stride, so I trailed my right foot behind my left and made a belly-up dive, feet first to my left, and so made the save of a ball that was behind and above my waist. My right leg deflected the ball. It was sweet. The second was on an open net with about 6 minutes left in the 2nd half (we were up 6-5). My defense broke down and left a forward unprotected on my right, who -- of course -- received a picture perfect pass. I sprawled out completely to my right and deflected the ball with the tip of my fingers, popped back up, and saved the rebound, too. We won 7-5.

fixed Well, that got a nice lol out of me. Well done, sir.

This is horseshizzle. Also, how the hell is Davis able to give an interview to ESPN shortly after the Iowa game when he is in bed recovering from a "very serious" flu? Your best bet is to shut your mouth in that scenario, Mike. It's not going to be in your best interest to give an interview when you can't even make it to Assembly Hall for the game. IU looked like crap again...careless passes...many, many turnovers. I'd rather watch a team with technical proficiency and little athleticism. I've pretty much not watched an Indiana basketball game for two seasons now. Thankfully, I sense that my self-imposed boycott of Indiana basketball may be ending soon. It's only a matter of time before Davis gets a pink slip.

I like the signing. Low-risk, high-reward possibility. Probably the best free agent signing this offseason. By far. And if that ain't a sad commentary on our offseason, well, I don't know what is.

No thanks. I'd rather keep Walker.

Unless the deal is ridiculously biased in favor of the Cubs, I do not want to see Prior dealt. I have to disagree with you, Cuse (as well as others who don't see his value)... I think Prior is the real deal and is an Ace, with a capital A. I'm higher on his future than I am with Carlos.

I'm rooting for Washington to win in the first round. I really would rather not face the Bucs again, and that would give us an extra day of preparation. Carolina was somewhat fading, in my opinion, down the stretch, and would be my preferred opponent. The Foster/Davis combo would be the easiest to shut down, and force the Panthers into a one-dimensional, Steve Smith-only pass attack. Seriously, though, of the six NFC playoff teams, there's not one that couldn't beat the Bears -- and not one that the Bears couldn't beat.

Yes, to the first question. The Cubs retain his rights.

This is a serious question. Is it a warning only when a mod is called nuts or when any poster is called nuts? When anyone is called nuts. But I have banning power! :w00t: :assault: So are you serious or what? I am serious. Nobody is to be called names. But I was joking about the last part. That's fine. Just wanted to know if there were two sets of rules. There aren't. There's one set of rules for everyone -- and there always has been. Attack the post, not the poster. In this situation, it's just a particularly bad idea to call a mod nuts for one obvious reason: they are much more likely to see that post than a similar one elsewhere. Like everyone else, the mods have jobs and lives. We can't be in every thread in every forum all the time, so we rely on the rest of the board's help to alert us to potential problems. If you see such a problem, PM a mod to get their attention and the situation will be dealt with quickly. Generally speaking, we'll see the post eventually and the situation will be dealt with, but it might be a couple of hours or much later in the day. If you see a questionable post, let a mod know!

I'd just install it for fun this week, partially to loosen up Orton, partially to give opposing DCs something extra to think about, and partially to screw with the Vikings. I'd like the shotgun, simply because it's a good idea. I think it would help Orton, because he would be away from the pressure from the snap, and wouldn't have to worry about his drop much. It would help Grossman, because he doesn't have great size to see over the line. I'm a big fan of the shotgun, myself. I think it would very much help the Bears. Turner likes play-action, of course, and it's typically not as good under a shotgun. I think the new look would give defenses a tough time, and would augment the effectiveness of play-action. Personally, I also think Grossman runs the play-action pretty well. But under Orton, it was pretty much a joke, but it's been better the last game and a half.

He's a junior...do we know he's going to be in the draft? i assume that if he's projected as a late first-rounder, he'll want to cash in. He might be a little undersized, but I haven't really seen him play at all, and I hesitate to make a judgement on that basis.

But at $9M, he's quite overpaid for what he brings to the team. Thankfully, he's off the books after this season.

Or a trade. Angelos has been pretty good with trades.

Never? There have been some amazing all-time great franchise tackles taken very early. Tait was a first round draft pick (14th overall). I would have no problem if they selected a top notch tackle in the first, they should be somewhere around the mid 20's, so they won't be getting a huge impact player, regardless. I'd wait until the 3rd or 4th for centers and guards though, and I'd take a late project for any O line position. I meant for the Bears. I don't believe in that kind of stuff. QBs don't work out for the Bears either, but I wouldn't stop trying to develop them. They've had no success with early RBs, but I wouldn't pass on one just because. Columbo was on his way to being a solid tackle before that injury. If there is not an impact TE available, and an olineman rates higher than anybody on the board, I would take that lineman without hesitation. The Bears are old on the line, and need reinforcements. That mid 80's offense was built around some very early O line draft picks. Covert and Van Horne were each first rounders. Marcedes Lewis, if he's available, would be a good pick. I don't know that much about possible o-line draft picks, frankly.