CaliforniaRaisin

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.

And Carlos Perez finally got his WHIP below 2! Almost makes the Corey Patterson trade worthwhile...

Those who saw the game said Mark only went 3. Stupid MiLB.

From what I've gathered, Salas is a fan favorite in Daytona. Sotolongo started the last game of the first half for Daytona and did pretty well (4 shutout innings, 5 Ks).

This is Darin's third try at Boise. His first two: 2004: 4-3, 4.95 ERA, 60 IP, 61/35, 1.50 WHIP, .234 BAA, 5 HRs 2005: 5-4, 3.50 ERA, 61.2 IP, 63/22, 1.35 WHIP, .248 BAA, 5 HRs And his brief stint in Peoria: 2005: 0-2, 18.47 ERA, 6.1 IP, 3/4, 2.53 WHIP, .387 BAA, 1 HR

Probable Starters: WT (game 1): LHP JR Mathes (5-4, 3.43 ERA, 76 IP, 59/17, 1.22 WHIP) vs. RHP Dave Coggin (0-3, 4.50 ERA) WT (game 2): RHP Bobby Brownlie (2-4, 4.60 ERA, 29.1 IP, 21/12, 1.60 WHIP) vs. LHP Chris Waters (3-5, 4.70 ERA) Daytona: RHP Justin Berg (5-5, 4.54 ERA, 73.1 IP, 62/33, 1.53 WHIP) Boise: LHP Darin Downs (2005 Boise & Peoria: 4-5, 4.89 ERA, 68 IP, 66/26, 1.46 WHIP) vs. RHP Jackson Quezada

Heh, I just posted that in the JAD forum, didn't see you had done the same here. I like his quotes about how much he likes baseball. Thought it was interesting the Cubs have created friction between him and Selig.

: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.

C'mon guys. I love Brandon Roy. I went to a rival Pac-10 school of his and have seen him play throughout his career. And I can say without a doubt that Tyrus Thomas should be drafted ahead of Roy. Roy will probably win ROY (heh) because he's currently the most advanced player in the draft, but Tyrus (and maybe Bargani - I don't know much about him) should definitely end up as better pros. I have no problem with the Bulls selecting any of those 3. Just no Morrison.

Scherzer was actually in this year's draft. He went 11th to the Diamondbacks.

He didn't do half bad in his 4 shutout innings in the big leagues too. Don't forget about Ricky Nolasco while you have that drill handy.

I don't believe they've ever scored more than 26. The Cubs FRANCHISE once score 36 runs in a game against Louisville back in 1897. :shock: I remember day as if it was yesterday...aw...memories... Ya know..... I vaguely recall the CUBS beating Louisville the day before Custer bought it out in South Dakota !! Fred wrong on a stat?? :shock:

We'll get those added right away! No trades with Braves, Astros, Cardinals, White Sox, Royals, Dodgers, Giants , or A's because several of us Cub fans don't wanna be made fun of! Since LA, SF and Oakland are already on there, add the Angels, Padres and the Red Sox. C'mon guys, we should be able to ban the Cubs from trading with every MLB team soon enough (that might be the best strategy for Hendry at this rate, but that's for another thread).