Transmogrified Tiger

It wasn't a strike, wasn't really all that close. It got called because that's where the catcher set up.

"the great Derek Jeter" .....

Sorry about not getting the last entry in Bukie, time escapes me sometimes. Surprised that MSU got up to a 4 seed in our bracket, most things I've seen have them as a 5 or maybe a 6.

I don't suppose there's any gun readings, are there?

You seem to have quite a Big Ten bias. There's been no greater underachiever this year than State. On the other hand, I think OSU deserves a no. 1, and if not, they are no worse than the 5th best team in the nation. What? I'm a State fan, so BC winning the ACC tourney in this fashion makes MSU look better for having beat them. I wasn't making any evaluations, I don't see how that displays bias.

Haha, Dickie V has BC and Illinois fighting for the last #2 seed, with Gonzaga, Texas, and OSU as the other two. Thank you BC for making Michigan State's victory over you at MSG look impressive.

Redick is a lot better than Langdon, although he's going through a Jay Williams slump atthe end of the season. Langdon had better players around him otherwise he likely would've shot as much as Redick does. Bigger shooting guards in the NBA will eat him alive, and he's not quick enough to defend NBA PGs.

You do know that Duke basically gets whatever calls they want, right? There have been many worse than that. My favorite is when J.J. Redick, The Biggest Prick Known to Man, can't find a good shot to take, so he just dribbles it into the fray in the paint and haphazardly lobs the ball in the air. Since he's such a good shooters, the refs go, "well, he must have been fouled," and they call it on somebody. Drives me nuts. That and Shelden Williams' elbows. Of course, I am a little biased. And not just a little upset about losing to Boston College. UNC has had trouble putting it together in the ACC tournament recently. You'd take Redick in the 'Heels backcourt in a heartbeat :P Call me crazy, but no I wouldn't. Yeah, he's a great player, but I credit the team and the coach for his success more than his own natural ability. That team is constructed to give J.J. the ball as often as possible. When he has a bad night, he still scores 20 points because he takes so many shots - plus the free throws. I don't like a team structured that way. And I fully expect him to be a flop in the NBA, because the only thing he does really, really well is shoot. Plus, he's a prick. I love to see him go into a school like Temple, who is barely a division I team, and still taunt the fans. Yes, he'd make the Heels better, but I still hate him, and I don't want him. Plus, his poetry (yes, he writes poetry) sucks. No, his poetry is baaaad. But I will say that Redick will have a nice NBA career. There's always a place in a 9 man rotation for a guy who shoots like that. He's not going to be a star, but to think he couldn't have a Paxson/Hornacek type career is underrating him. As far as the Duke offense goes, they've relied on the 3 for a lot of years now, and always had good shooters, but Redick is so much better than the Collins/Langdon/Williams type players as far as shooting goes, it's not a fair comparison. Redick is Trajan Langdon incarnate.

is it just me or does it look like he threw the pitch with his right arm in the first picture? That's really strange. You can see his right hand, but I don't think the picture is backwards because the logo on his hat is facing the right way. In fact, after comparing it to the other pics of him, I think they mislabeled that as Pinto.

Even though he wasn't an option, would you rather have Grissom or Restovich?

If Texas loses tomorrow, I think it's a very real possibility.

And why is that? How many Mid-Major schools have even made it to the Final 4? You would think one would have gone that far sooner or later. Let's see...Marquette made it 3 years ago as a member of Conference USA. Maybe that doesn't count. Kent State made the Elite Eight in 2002. Gonzaga made it in 2000. Indiana State made the final game back in 1979, too, if the Elite Eight isn't far enough to be considered "far". Not letting teams get in unless they've "been there before" is quite the catch-22. I don't consider Conference USA as Mid-Major when it comes to basketball and I don't consider the Elite 8 the Final 4 as I stated. You are right about Indiana St and they had to go back to 79 which is 27 years ago. The top teams have been in and haven't gone far so why let the middle teams go to the 65? When was the last time the 7th and 8th place team in a power conference made the final 4? The idea that they haven't been very good in previous years, so they should be precluded this year is ridiculous.

That's unfair. No one's expecting Northern Iowa or Bradley to go to the final four, the same way no one's expecting Seton Hall or Cincinnati to go to the final four. I think any team that is asked to be an at-large team should be able to win it all. Also, you weighted the top of the conferences the same so what I'm saying is if the Missouri Valley is as strong as the BE or any other major conference then they should send one of their teams to the Final Four but history has shown they haven't since the 60's. Once they prove they can start to put teams in the final 4 then I'll respect them and say they are worthy of 4 or 5 teams. Let me add that almost every team in the Big East has been in the Final 4 since 1985. No one said the MVC was as strong as the Big East. Past success of the conference is next to irrelevant in deciding the field. Any team that's an at large could win it all, but no one's expecting most of them to advance very far. That goes for Northern Iowa, George Mason, Cincinnati, Indiana, whoever. The point is that these top teams in the MVC, CAA, etc. have as good or better tournament resumes than the middle of the pack power conference teams, and shouldn't be ignored because the only ESPN coverage they get is in Bracket Busters. I do not deny that they are good teams but they would be at best a Cincinnati or S Hall and the top of the major conferences are what makes it so tough for the Cinci or Halls to make it while the Mid-Major don't have to play the top teams like a Illinois, Ohio St, UConn, Duke and NC in their conference. I think the past has a lot to do with it. These teams (MM) have to prove they belong and winning and getting to the sweet 16 seems to be all they get to and they get a ton of credit for doing so. If they really want to be compared with the bigger name conferences they have to win and go to the elite 8 or final 4. They get a chance to prove they are as good unlike football where the good ole boys take charge. This isn't like Football where the small conference schools don't play anyone. Northern Iowa beat Iowa and LSU. Bucknell beat Syracuse, DePaul, and lost to Villanova. Who's to say they wouldn't have finished similar to Georgetown or Marquette if they had played their schedule? Like SSR brought up, big schools don't want to play the good mid-major teams in a lot of cases. I really don't understand how small-conference schools have to prove they belong any more than the 7th or 8th place team in the Big Ten, ACC, or the Big East. To piggy-back what Bukie said, erring on the side of "who's been there before" is a self-fulfilling prophecy that makes it nearly impossible for these teams to crack the cycle

That's unfair. No one's expecting Northern Iowa or Bradley to go to the final four, the same way no one's expecting Seton Hall or Cincinnati to go to the final four. I think any team that is asked to be an at-large team should be able to win it all. Also, you weighted the top of the conferences the same so what I'm saying is if the Missouri Valley is as strong as the BE or any other major conference then they should send one of their teams to the Final Four but history has shown they haven't since the 60's. Once they prove they can start to put teams in the final 4 then I'll respect them and say they are worthy of 4 or 5 teams. Let me add that almost every team in the Big East has been in the Final 4 since 1985. No one said the MVC was as strong as the Big East. Past success of the conference is next to irrelevant in deciding the field. Any team that's an at large could win it all, but no one's expecting most of them to advance very far. That goes for Northern Iowa, George Mason, Cincinnati, Indiana, whoever. The point is that these top teams in the MVC, CAA, etc. have as good or better tournament resumes than the middle of the pack power conference teams, and shouldn't be ignored because the only ESPN coverage they get is in Bracket Busters.

Didn't that happen last night?

I agree. I always thought that Marshall was higher on the prospect list than Hill when he was healthy. Its good to see him healthy again. Did anyone ever confirm that ridiculous rumor that Hendry wouldn't have traded Hill for Dunn? The way it was reported on this sight seemed pretty thin at the time. Did it somehow gain legitimacy over time? I don't think it was ever an actual deal, Bruce Miles used it as an example of how the Cubs valued Hill(or devalued Dunn, probably a little of both). That was the context I intended when I used it earlier in the thread.

That's unfair. No one's expecting Northern Iowa or Bradley to go to the final four, the same way no one's expecting Seton Hall or Cincinnati to go to the final four.

That's nice - really. But how is any of that comparable to beating UConn, the "cheese" between "sandwich" wins over Cinci and G-Town? I like Bucknell, but lets not compare them with Cinci or G-Town, nevermind UConn. The Big East was arguably the toughest conference in basketabll this year, and if it wasn't, it was no. 2. Cuse is getting ready to go for "four-in-four" against most of the top 5 in the league, sans Nova. Too impressive to ignore, IMO. Sorry, I can't lend more credence to the wins just because they came on consecutive days. It's also very important that both UNI and Syracuse hosted Bucknell, with UNI winning and Syracuse losing. I don't really see how Bucknell is worse than Cincinnati, and UConn/Georgetown(3/38 RPI) is pretty comparable to LSU(beating Florida right now)/Iowa(10/14 RPI). I completely disagree that Bucknell is on par with Cinci, or that beating Iowa or LSU is on par with beating UConn (at any time / place). We'll have to agree to disagree here, I think. I guess we'll have to disagree, but to clarify, I said that the combination of Iowa/@LSU was on par with UConn/Georgetown(both on neutral with closer home proximity).

Dude, chill. I wasn't intending to "crap" on the MVC. I think they are great. I was making a case that Cuse is as deserving as any of the NSBB bubble teams, and, specifically, more derserving than No. Iowa. I don't know why you felt the need to use the pronouns bolded above. I wasn't addressing the MVC as a conference. Looked to me like he was referring to the aforementioned Williams, Nance, other media people, etc. with the pronouns.

This is exactly what I was advocating earlier. Trying to be more selective and find a pitch to drive early in the count doesn't take away from anything Pierre does. With two strikes he can still be his slappy self and annoy the bejeebers out of pitchers. The only downside to being more selective and taking harder cuts at pitches early in the count is more 2 strike counts. However, because Pierre currently slaps the ball no matter the count, that's not really an issue, or at worst a relatively minor one compared to the improvement in extra bases.

So close to picking the final correctly...

Attention Billy Packer: Having 60% of your alotted fouls when the game is around 60% over is not huge foul trouble. It's not shocking for them to remain in the game, especially when they are attacking against and defending against someone in the exact same situation.

I don't see how this is a big gamble by the Indians. How much regression do you expect from Peralta that he won't be worth ~12.8M in 3 arbitration years? Weren't we just talking about Angel Berroa in the DeJesus thread? i don't think berroa was as highly regarded coming up as peralta was. peralta is the real deal - berroa was never considered that, i believe. They had pretty similar minor league numbers. Peralta had a bit more patience, Berroa a bit more power.

I don't see how this is a big gamble by the Indians. How much regression do you expect from Peralta that he won't be worth ~12.8M in 3 arbitration years? Weren't we just talking about Angel Berroa in the DeJesus thread?

If I hear Billy Packer make one more reference to tired or fresh legs I'm going to break my TV.