Magnetic Curses

the thing is, we have no idea how far the steroid scandal goes. i doubt we can trust any modern record at this point.

they should, they have virtually every team in division I. Hey a third and they are the old guard. The new guys are trying to sneak in there but the original ones are still the best! :D And let me add that in football the BE only has 8 teams when most have 12. just kiddin ya. :lol:

Then avoid saying silly things like this: I agree that the Pierce situation is pretty bad, but your initial statement is ludicrous. so, there's no difference between the two situations? or are you implying that i'm saying that you shouldn't care if someone on your favorite team commits a crime and goes to jail--thusly hurting his team by not being present to play? let me clarify: I DO care if a player on my favorite team robs a liquor store and goes to jail--ending his professional career. I DON'T care if a player on my favorite team is rude to the clerk at a liquor store. I DO care if a player on my favorite team goes to this particular liquor store frequently and is also frequently intoxicated, consequently affecting his performance on the field. I DON'T care if a player on my favorite team gets rocked once and put squirrels down his pants for the purpose of gambling.

Bobby Hill is most similar at age 27 to Patsy Gharrity. :shock: I hope that's a dude. :D I guess its 20-20 hindsite, but I am not positive that Hill is/was a head-and-shoulders better pro than Harris was in 03'. Plus, sending him back down to the minors may have allowed him to maintain his value enough such that the Ramirez-Lofton deal got done. Had he languished on the bench in Chicago, his value might have dropped. Its probably too close to call. In Grissom's case, there seem to be better options. You don't think Hill was better than this: .183/.255/.229/.484 That's what Harris put up in around 145 PA's. You'd be very hard pressed to find someone worse. Point taken. But how did Harris do in 2002, the year before he made the team?: .305 / .355 / .411 Plus, he played well for FL after we released him in 03': .286 .412 .286 Point is, I don't think anyone could have predicted that large a decline. well, i think you'll have to admit that it's someone's fault. either hendry for signing him or dusty for playing him everyday. you can't excuse blame for both in this instance. imo, they both suck.

I don't think there is such a thing as getting a grasp on Soriano. While with NY he put up MONSTER road stats (Yankee Stadium is not friendly to RHH). One would assume that he would have put up monster numbers at a hitter's park both home and away but he didn't (and if he did he would NOT be available). Did he stop taking pitches? No. Has he slowed down? No. Did his power diminish? No. He is what he is. A very good offensive player with power and speed. If he added OBP he would be a great player but there's no reason to expect him to suddenly go Bonds on you. He is what he is. sosa changed his approach, and was more successful in those years than he ever was in the years in which he "made things happen" on the basepaths. sosa is great example of how a player with discipline and power is far better than a player with no discipline, but bunts and steals all the time.

as much as it pains me to say it: joe morgan was the superior player that set the offensive standard for all modern 2nd basemen to be judged. That's the thing that is so shocking. He is a sabermatrician's wet dream. Yet, he still preaches old fashioned baseball. How Ironic. john kruk, too. it took the anti-moneyball player to finally champion the cause. if i see corey patterson running a successful team in 15 years while bobby abreu is doing moronic commentary for baseball tonight, i'll marvel at the way history continues to repeat itself.

So do you think U of I will finish worse then second ever again? Or so you believe that from now until the end of time the finish first or second in the Big Ten? nope, that's ridiculous, your attempts to frame this argument are faulty. if illinois returned a few marginal players and tunred over their starting lineup, then go ahead and write them off.

he hasn't been shooting as well, but he's taking 3 more shots per game and is burdened with more of the load. he's also averaging more assists and rebounds while staying put defensively. he's the best player in the B10.

they should, they have virtually every team in division I.

Wish I could get disrespected like that. as has been stated before, anything short of projecting the illini to finish first is a slap in the face. saying that a "3rd place finish is admirable in this conference this season" is total BS. the illini haven't finished lower than second since 99-00. anything less than a conference championship is disappointing.

as much as it pains me to say it: joe morgan was the superior player that set the offensive standard for all modern 2nd basemen to be judged.

if you want me to stop, simply quit proving my point. with every word you write, it becomes more and more evident that you simply can't stand looking up at illinois in the standings. 1. redick is nowhere near the best player in the country, unless, by player, you mean best outside shooter--i wouldn't dispute that. he scores, but not much else, can't defend, can't pass, and can't run. his a/to ratio is significantly worse than dee's, anyone who drafts him is drafting a nice little steve kerr in the first round. watching him play in the NBA will be something to behold. your boy ager is a much better player than redick--but ager isn't the returning B10 POY, is he? 2. so augustine sets "laughably illegal screens", does he? so what? the best players in the country cheat-jj "the chosen one" redick is the biggest criminal in the nation in terms of pushing off. shelden williams routinely travels when he gets the ball. if you can get away with it, why not? he must be very adept in disguising his cheating, which is the mark of a great player. i'm not sure of your point on this one. so, we've decided that: redick is a great shooter, but otherwise can't run, pass, or defend in the league of dee brown, but not many in the country can, that's a fact; and augustine is a cheater, but gets away with it. i'm not sure why you keep bringing up redick, has this turned into a "my dad can't beat up your dad, but i know this guy down the street who can" argument?

garza doesn't have an acl, which is strange.

i would argue that not picking them #1 until they prove that they aren't is a knock on them. one can't some out and say "illinois isn't good". that would be lunacy. what they say is "illinois is going to finsih third and they're going to have to like it." as i've said, illinois has turned over their team a couple of times without finishing lower than second. So, should UNC be #1 this year? By that logic it would seem they would be. They lost players as did U of I. It's not the same team that won it last year, that's why they aren't picked to win. So why was Duke selected as preseason number one. They return a guard who has less talent than Dee Brown, and a center who has more than James Augustine. Demarcus Nelson is pretty much Brian Randle. Paulus and McRoberts were highly touted, but so was Shavlik. Before the year how did they know what these guys would be? Who said Duke deserved to be number 1? But if you have to compare them to U of I, Redick is much better than Brown, and Williams is much better than Augustine. Their recruits are ranked higher than U of I, and most importantly, they are DUKE, who the media loves to pump up at every opportunity. And don't use that as an opportunity to use that as a platform to claim Illinois is underappreciated, because then that claim is made about every team in America. well, as far as proving my point is concerned: you certainly never pass up a chance to take a shot at an illini player. dee's not the shooter that redick is, no doubt. but in addition to winning the POY, dee was B10 DPOY as well. unless you want to consider defense as not being half of the game. i don't think many would compare the low-post abilities of williams and augustine, but augustine is the better perimeter player, runs the court better, and, as bilas pointed out, may be the best screen player in the country. williams may have the edge defensively, but augustine is no slouch, either. there IS most definitely a comparison there.

i would argue that not picking them #1 until they prove that they aren't is a knock on them. one can't some out and say "illinois isn't good". that would be lunacy. what they say is "illinois is going to finsih third and they're going to have to like it." as i've said, illinois has turned over their team a couple of times without finishing lower than second. So, should UNC be #1 this year? By that logic it would seem they would be. They lost players as did U of I. It's not the same team that won it last year, that's why they aren't picked to win. UNC didn't return the ACC POY, nor did may choose to come back. if felton and may decided to come back, they'd be the concensus pick to repeat. i'm not exactly trying to compare the abilities of augustine and may, but you get the point.

it has to do with trends. i wouldn't necessarily agree that soriano will never return to his career norms, but i think he needs to improve his plate discipline over anything. i wouldn't care that he's a butcher in the field if he got on base. this is a stat that he's never had, and i don't want him if he doesn't show improvement anyway.

I always wondered about Cruz and his work habits. We we're privy to that information but something just didn't add up IMO. I see Rusch as having a good year, for him. 13-9 3.80 ERA kind of year. I like the OF's that the Cubs have ability wise to catch fly balls and that is what Rusch gives up quite a bit. actually, rusch's career G/F ratio is a decent 1.19. I thought I read before he was a flyball pitcher but you're right that is pretty close. if he had the stuff to go with this, he would be very valuable, but he just doesn't. i think putting him out there is a real crapshoot.

no, welcome to the club. i think the gist of what this thread has become is: illinois is underrated, perrenially.

I always wondered about Cruz and his work habits. We we're privy to that information but something just didn't add up IMO. I see Rusch as having a good year, for him. 13-9 3.80 ERA kind of year. I like the OF's that the Cubs have ability wise to catch fly balls and that is what Rusch gives up quite a bit. I'll take that kind of year in a heartbeat from Rusch. I doubt we'll get it, but I'd be thrilled if it happened. i don't think there's really any chance of that happening. just put hill out there and use rusch in spot and long situations. that's really the only way of using him effectively. he's a bad option for the rotation and a bad option for regular bullpen duty. the only thing he's useful doing is absorbing innings-either in mop up duty or flipping a coin if another starter is unable to go.

I'd like some insurance too but we are in HUGE trouble if Grissom becomes an everyday player for any length of time. As injury insurance Grissom is useless, I'd rather use Corey for that. He at least has a chance of returning to being a decent everyday guy. the day that grissom gets 2 starts in a row is the day that i stop wathcing the 2006 season altogether.

i would argue that not picking them #1 until they prove that they aren't is a knock on them. one can't some out and say "illinois isn't good". that would be lunacy. what they say is "illinois is going to finsih third and they're going to have to like it." as i've said, illinois has turned over their team a couple of times without finishing lower than second.

I always wondered about Cruz and his work habits. We we're privy to that information but something just didn't add up IMO. I see Rusch as having a good year, for him. 13-9 3.80 ERA kind of year. I like the OF's that the Cubs have ability wise to catch fly balls and that is what Rusch gives up quite a bit. actually, rusch's career G/F ratio is a decent 1.19.

So, Indiana's not a good team because they lost to ISU? Not gonna earn respect by putting down every other team in the country. There was really no reason to bring up IU. And if you think IU isn't that good, then what does that make Illinois, who was picked behind them, and not unreasonably so? BTW, Memphis is twice as good as any team Illinois has played all season. and this certainly is putting down Illinois in my opinion. and its fans and numerous people in this thread. no, you're crazy, just like i'm crazy and paranoid. my problem with being called a paranoid whiner is that maybe there's a reason to be a paranoid whiner. you can't consistently negate the returning runner-up in the NC game, two-time defending OUTRIGHT Big Ten Champ--which returned the B10 POY and their top big man, is adding their best athlete, and possibly the best shooter in the B10--without ruffling a few feathers of some illini fans. they're negated when people say the Illini should feel special to be picked third in the B10. newsflash: MSU has been picked to finish first in the conference each of the last two years--they haven't, what's so different about this year other than the hype surrounding their supposed star players? IU couldn't beat ISU (i think this is the point of bringing up the sycamores), what makes them think that the illini are going to roll over? is it the addition of killingsworth? he's a very good player and a dominant force down low, but the illini players have seen better. and then to hear some nimrod OSU-guy (mr. kellog) come out and say that the conference is actually up, despite putting 2 teams in the final four and 1 in the title game last season is absolute torture to fans who have been looking for their team to garner some NATIONAL accolades after going 37-2 last season. it looks like the illini are just going to have to take the rest of the B10 out back, tie them to a tree and bash them with a shovel like they did last year, to get any recognition. but why should they get it? they did it last year and nobody learned.

The HR rate. Check out guys like Greinke and Milton. OK, even very good control...but horrible disgusting HR rates. What that implies to me is that they: A) Can't locate their fastball. OR B) Chuck the fastball up there and hope to fool hitters...which it rarely does as you move up. I mean look at Greinke's minor league stats, it doesn't LOOK like he gives up a boatload of HRs but thats because he had such great breaking stuff and you can be damn good in the minors with decent velocity and great breaking stuff. Now balls fly out of the park against him, why? When you watch him pitch he is just tossing fastballs hoping it gets by hitters down the middle. After seeing Hill I wasn't so shocked as to why when his control got better but his HR rate shot up. His fastball isn't anything special, and he doesn't even really seem to try to locate it. MAYBE I'm wrong, but really from what I've seen in him, and from what I've seen of guys like him...I definitely don't see this as unreasonable. i just wouldn't compare hill to milton based on minor league numbers. milton has always had a terrible G/F ratio, his career average is .60. it's hard to maintain any sort of success with a ratio like that. most likely, he should be out of the league. generally i associate HR-rate with a poor G/F ratio, which just means that his fastball doesn't have SINKING action. milton gives up a HR every 5.9 innings, or has during his career, and the numbers haven't varied much from year to year, he's rock solid in his medicority. zito's career G/F ratio isn't a whole lot better, but it consistently better: .87. In addition, he's given up a HR every 10 innings. I'd suggest this is a product of being a much more deceptive pitcher, if not being a great groundball pitcher. I can't find Hill's overall G/F ratio, but he appears to be better than milton, granted in a much smaller sample size. His major league G/F ratio is 1.07. His career major/minor league HR-rate is one home run every 10.3 innings, which is actually better than Zito's, while his G/F ratio last season in 23 innings was better than Zito's career ratio. meaning that either hill is just much more deceptive than milton or has much better sinking action on his fastball. i think the milton comparisons for hill are premature, let the kid see what he can do in 10 starts.

if soriano can ever raise his OBP to a respectable level, he'd be a very good player. as it stands, for all his talent, he's a waste of a lot of money.