CaliforniaRaisin

There is one exception to this that I can think of and that's when teams used to do the Hack-A-Shaq and would just grab Shaq up until there were two minutes left in the half (when the foul became a shoot the free throws and get the ball back situation) to send him to the line. Shaq often had games where he would shoot 20+ FT's and occasionally had a game with 30+ FTA. He even had a game where he shot an unbelievable 39 FT's against Indiana in Game 2 of the 2000 NBA Finals. I'm not old enough to remember if they did this to Wilt as well but I believe they did IIRC. He was saying that in the context of Wade being a SG, not a big man. How many times will Stackhouse miss a dunk in this series? Nice start, Mavs.

Yeah, I've heard the Odom for Roy rumors. I don't think Lamar fits the Skiles' mold. Yeah, that'd be an awful trade. I've scoffed at the Lakers fans who have suggested it.

I got tired of the MJ-Wade comparison, the point of the highlights.

I haven't, but then again, I only listen to the Jaxx a few times a week (gotta listen a bit to the other teams too - maybe even the big league team)

Jaxx up 4-1 in the 5th. Chris Walker, EPatt and Nic Jackson with the RBIs for the Jaxx. Mathes has gone 5 and given up 1 earned on 8 hits. In the middle of the 4th, Daytona is tied with Palm Beach. Ryan Harvey with a solo HR, Jake Muyco (recently called up from Peoria) with the other RBI on a sac fly. Berg has given up 2 through 3 innings, both runs in the third inning.

Yeah, it's still not working for me. :(

You guys on 101.5 today? I can't seem to get the online broadcast to work. :(

At least they played postseason ball for the Cubs. Although certainly not because of them. Mark Guthrie doesn't serve up a HR ball to Mike Lowell in Game 1, we might be talking about a sweep of the Marlins and 2003 WS Champs I blame Dusty for that. Sheesh, pitch to Lenny Harris or Mike Lowell.

They're my 2nd favorite team. Yes, we've already established you don't have a soul. Nor does his girlfriend.

Kudos, Sports Guy.

His physical gifts are off the charts and allow for a sky's-the-limit ceiling. Did you see him dominate in the NCAA's? You seem to be projecting him to take a step back with NBA coaching. Don't you think there's a big difference between dominating NCAA frontcourts and NBA frontcourts? Brandon Roy dominated NCAA backcourts, but isn't there a big difference between the NCAA and the NBA?

Jeff's last 4-5 starts have been respectable, though. Respectable, but not lights out like Jered's were. I don't mind what the Angels are trying to do. They're trying to trade Jeff and his trade value certainly drops if they demote him to the pen. Jered will be back soon.

I would like to point out that a likely second rounder in this year's draft (UCLA's Ryan Hollins) dunked over me (5'7") in a HS game. Twice. :oops:

That certainly was an interesting goal.

Defensive, rebounding force with an average offensive game. He's long, has an amazing vertical leap, is incredibly quick off his feet, has excellent hands (unlike Chandler) and timing, and is a bulldog. He'll alter a lot of shots. So on a team that is pretty good defensively, but lacks low post scoring and a big guard, you'd want them to take a guy that will be average at best offensively in the frontcourt? Come on, you're better than this. You ask him to list a player's worst case scenario and then trash the player based on that? I can do that with Roy or Morrison or Aldridge. But Raisin, the point I'm trying to make is that while Aldridge and Roy's best case isn't nearly as high as Thomas', their respective worst cases aren't as deep. Do you want to take a gamble on a player that has such a range of possible outcomes? Actually, I think Aldridge's worst case is lower than Thomas'. You have to realize that a GM and scouts consider that too. They consider the likelihood of reaching the potential or anywhere near it. And with this considered, Thomas is a consensus top-3 pick.

By the way, I only take Roy if (like Mark_R), I can trade Gordon. Keeping Gordon defeats the purpose of having Roy and we'd have too many guards in the rotation.

Defensive, rebounding force with an average offensive game. He's long, has an amazing vertical leap, is incredibly quick off his feet, has excellent hands (unlike Chandler) and timing, and is a bulldog. He'll alter a lot of shots. So on a team that is pretty good defensively, but lacks low post scoring and a big guard, you'd want them to take a guy that will be average at best offensively in the frontcourt? Come on, you're better than this. You ask him to list a player's worst case scenario and then trash the player based on that? I can do that with Roy or Morrison or Aldridge.

You don't think he's as good as people think he can be? What a colossal understatement. Your outlook is worse than the worst case scenario, and you ignore all of his obvious strengths. I think you'd be very, very hard pressed to find a single scout in the country that agreed with you. Not much else to say on this topic. Wow. What do you think the worst case scenario is for him? EDIT: His obvious strengths are all physical traits. He doesn't have much polish on his basketball skill. I think his physical gifts will allow for him to be, as I said, at best, a plus defender with little offensive skill. I won't believe in any offensive game outside of putbacks and garbage dunks until I see him make shots from midrange and beyond in a game situation. So I take it you missed the NCAA tourney? (Outside of the UCLA game. :D)

It was mentioned a few times in yesterday's minor league game thread. This was the third time Renyel has pitched against Iowa this season.

Fascinating read, thank you much, BK. I'd request a look at Mark Reed, Donnie Veal and Carlos Marmol, if possible. I know Veal and Reed might be especially difficult since they were/are in Peoria.

Why wouldn't you try and minimize your risks? Also, why would you value individual workouts and interviews with coaches more than actual game performance? Why should it be different than how we expect the Cubs to draft? If Thomas were a baseball player, no one here would want him. He wreaks of "toolsy" and potential. He's a scouts dream, but we have such limited proof of his ability to perform in game situations. It's not that I lack faith in Paxson. It's that I lack faith in one year wonders and athletic wonders actually turning out to be impact players. I'd rather go with a more proven commodity. Paxson has drafted Hinrich, Gordon, Deng and Duhon so far - a combination of "one-year wonders" (i.e. a freshman who turned pro) and proven college commodities. This particular athletic one-year wonder has quite a game already. You have to have faith that you have the coaching staff to turn him into a star.

:shock: Me too, but then I am a Carolina fan. EDIT: And how can you assert that Bargani will be a better pro than Roy if you admit to not knowing much about him? Reading his scouting reports. More than some of you are doing with Tyrus Thomas. I have read Mr. Thomas' scouting report, and my opinion is unchanged. If you look at him in a vacuum without considering the Bulls' circumstances, I definitely understand the notion that he has a higher ceiling than Roy andshould be picked. But the Bulls need immediate production, and particulalry need a permiter player with the ability to create his own shot. History shows us that players of Thomas' type are not as productive from the outset as guys like Roy are, and several of them have been outright flops. If you insist, I will create a list, but I think we both know to whom I am referring. Here is why I am not in love with Thomas, relative to what the Bulls need: From Collegehoops.com: Why do the Bulls need immediate production? They need what's best for them to get to an NBA title as soon as possible, and if it means drafting a better, but rawer, player who will take longer to develop, so be it. The Bulls could use a bigger perimiter player who can defend and create his own shot, but I think they need an inside presence much more. Thomas can at least give some inside presence. I agree that Thomas won't be as productive as Roy at the outset (I was the one who predicted Brandon would win the ROY award). But Thomas' potential, hard work (something Swift hasn't displayed much of), etc. can't be looked past. Yeah, he doesn't have a 3-point shot, but he has a great mid-range game. Thomas is more likely to flop than Roy, but he has a better ceiling too. You have to pick the player that you think will end up being the best player - not the guy who will be the best player in his rookie season. The Bulls aren't on the cusp of having their window close, they don't need to rush into this. I have faith in Paxson, whether he picks Thomas or Roy.

Jeff's last 4-5 starts have been respectable, though.

They'll be back in a year or two.

If it's a poll of consequence, it should be moved to Polls.