Magnetic Curses

illini fans are so taken with chasson randle, but i have no idea why. he's certainly a very good player, but illinois is stocked at guard, and he's undersized for a 2. he's not great at anything but is solid at everything, i'd much rather have henry from that class. if we can get henry and shaw from that class, i won't much care who else we get.

is everyone seeing what i'm seeing? what a bunch of goons.

i said going in that i'd rather face luongo than quick.

vancouver's been on the pp all period.

the canucks don't have anyone as big and skilled and expendable as buff, though. i can see buff taking a stick to the face or something, though. just seems like something that might happen.

Can you be kicked out of the hof?

Can you be kicked out of the hof?

my problem with cal stems from him being a scumbag at the college level. i would never want his like coaching the illini, but i have no problem with him as the bulls coach. especially if he scores a player like lebron.

props to dex for calling at after the second.

down a game, and then 2-0 in the first. showed some spirit.

this whole thing really freaks me out.

i ask him what i ask the skateboard guys, how do you practice that [expletive] without getting killed at least once?

sorry if you're upset with me using one of your cool words you think is original. how about we make deal where i don't use "meatball", and you don't use "awesome". that's my word and i'm afraid of it catching on. I think meatball was a Sulley creation, but I could be wrong. Boers & Bernstein have been using that term for years, but I couldn't tell you whether it started here first. this is correct, but i was the one who brought it to this board.

can i kind of agree with you without you getting all whatever?

yeah, but they broke my little elementary school-heart so many times that i can't do it.

they're hard to compare because they're so different. i wouldn't put either that much farther ahead of the other one at any point in their careers. they've gone back and forth and hopefully will continue to do so. deron's the king right now, though.

yeah, didn't krause find jackson coaching the albany patroons of the cba? and the pippen thing was sheer genius. there are no dynasties without great players, so you can't hold the fact that krause had great players against him. he did no wrong until the end, and then he just kind of went mad. if he'd have hung onto brand, miller, and artest, the bulls would have been competitive a lot sooner, and he's the guy that brought all of them in. stupid teenagers and jalen rose.

i would be so over cubs fans if i were him right now, though.

you're just full of obstinance today, huh?

If that how you get throught the day, is taking pot shots at me, then fine, but at least do it with some creativiity, and not as if you are still in 8th grade. Otherwise, I might confuse you with a White Sox fan. the fact remains, regrettably. jerry krause is the best gm in chicago sports history. unfortunately, no one comes even close enough to compare.

Six to nothing is a tough one to overcome, but in general I agree with his statement that success isn't the only measure of a GM's job. It wouldn't take a great GM to build a championship basketball team that already has Jordan as a foundation. Success in the NBA is largely driven by great players and Krause inherited one heck of a head start on success. So his point there is well taken. However, I think Krause did a great job putting together those two teams and isn't getting enough credit from some for the moves he made there. After all, in the period of two seasons, he completely remade the original threepeat team into something new and better. He does have to get marked down for his hand in breaking up a team that could have had one or two more great years and then fumbling the ball badly trying to rebuild. But Angelo? Really? Hendry or Kenny Williams would have been better choices. If I had to pick someone to run up there against Krause, I'd probably go back to Dallas Green. In his fairly short stint with the Cubs, he put together a team that could have won it all and built the foundations for future years by building up the minors and bringing in young talent like Sandberg. If you want to go with the Bears, Vanisi would be a much better choice for putting together the truly great Bears teams in the mid-late 80's. I wouldn't say he completely remade the original 3 peat team. I mean he still had Jordan, Pippen, and Jackson. That's 90% of the equation right there. Auerbach going from the Cousy/Russell era to the Cowens/Havlicek era to the Bird/Mchale era would be an example of someone completely remaking a team. the only players to get six rings are jordan and pippen though. i'm not even sure if anyone else has more than 3.

Billy Beane has been successful as a GM, but he is not regarded as the best GM in baseball. So being successful and being the best GM are not mutally exclusive. For instance, when Cashman eventual steps down as Yankees GM, will you consider the next Yankees GM the best GM if the Yankees continue to win? Being the best GM and being the most successful do not alway go hand in hand. But it often can. Krause wasn't in Cashman's position of having an unlimited budget to work with, yet he look at the results. There's no Chicago GM that even comes close. He was given a substantial payroll to work with. As for his abilities as a GM, they sucked. He pulled out a couple of moves out of his ass (based on part from his scouts, especially on Kukoc) and all of the sudden he is consider the best? Correct me if I am wrong, but who drafted Jason Caffey right in front of Michael Finley? Who drafted Fizer we the Bulls already had Brand? His later years as GM showed him for the fraud he was. it's funny how you pick and choose your situations. angelo traded down in 2003, passing on kevin williams, terrell suggs, and jordan gross to take michael haynes and rex grossman. angelo is full of draft-day blunders, as well. pick a year and he's done it. as far as the fizer draft, that's one of the worst drafts ever, just look at it, look at it, i dare you. and michael finley? joe smith was the number one pick that year! everybody passed on michael finley. next.

he was guilty of outthinking himself in those years, but granted, there just weren't a lot of good players that came from those eras or drafts, either. basketball completely sucked.

Billy Beane has been successful as a GM, but he is not regarded as the best GM in baseball. So being successful and being the best GM are not mutally exclusive. For instance, when Cashman eventual steps down as Yankees GM, will you consider the next Yankees GM the best GM if the Yankees continue to win? Being the best GM and being the most successful do not alway go hand in hand. this doesn't make any sense. there's no one even close to krause in terms of success, how could you even begin to compare anyone to him?

ooh, kukoc was the shiznit. krause was the best GM that any chicago team has ever had and i wish it weren't true.