AI
-
Posts
974 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by AI
-
Too bad that elderly lady wasn't driving a little bit faster Its a damn shame you need an elderly woman to accomplish what the Bungles couldn't. And even after all that, Big Ben will still be ready to play before Carson Palmer.
-
I liked it so much I gave it its own thread.
-
Just in case, anybody, especially Rocket, forgot... http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/ACT/Steelers~Pittsburg-Steelers-Super-Bowl-XL-Champions-Posters.jpg
-
US, Lets not forget the Italians' brilliance on set pieces. How many goals did they score from corners? Tight D and Buffon certainly won them this Cup, but their ability to cash in on set pieces was key, especially when you are talking about things that Team USA can learn from Italy. We were dreadful with a capital "D" on both ends of set pieces.
-
raw>vance
-
If Jim Brown, Walter Payton and Barry Sanders had been on the Cowboys at the same time (and obviously at their proper age and skill level) do you think that any of those three would have better numbers than Emmitt? I think they all would. Additionally, I think you are giving way too much credit to longevity. Big deal. He hung around until people laughed at him and called him washed up. I don't think he accomplished enough by that point to be considered the best ever. In comparison, Jordan did the same thing (hanging around too long) but his body of work through 1998 already made him the best ever. Also, purely playing a numbers game makes it difficult when talking about football. Its easier with baseball because of the individualized nature of the sport as it relates to many statistics, but football is different because there is greater interdependency among teammates. You can throw all the statistics you want at me, but can you really tell me that when you watched Emmitt that he was better than Payton, Brown or Sanders? I just can't.
-
I'd like to address this. Of course Aaron should be in the discussion, but is he the best all time? Listen, he had 40 more home runs than Babe Ruth. In terms of raw numbers, he had more home runs. But he also accomplished this in 4,000 more at bats. So is he really the best all time? I mean, its the same with some of these running backs and Emmitt Smith, in my opinion. Yes, in terms of raw totals, he has the market cornered...but he also played much much longer and thus had less "impact" seasons, and not to knock Emmitt, but for all that longevity and consistency, it sure took him a long time to crack those records. It took him a long time mainly because the one who held the record (Payton) was also noted for his longevity. It also should be noted that Smith broke Payton's rushing record his final season in Dallas (13th). Payton also played in 13 seasons. Even without those final years in Arizona, Smith would still be the rushing yards leader and the leader in rushing TD's. He would have still trailed Payton in total yards from scrimmage by a back and total TD's by a RB. Those last two records he needed the season in Arizona to accomplish. Furthermore, Smith's last season in Arizona was nearly if not as good as Payton's last season in Chicago. you do realize payton lost a part of year in his prime because of the '82 strike. without that, i think emmitt would need the arizona debacle to break the record.
-
Smith is in the conversation, to be sure. But I highly doubt that any GM, past or present takes Smith over Brown, Sanders or Payton. You keep citing Smith's longevity, but to me, it was his complete inability to walk away from a game that had passed him by. He's not to be rewarded for this. He wanted Payton's record and he has it, but he's not a better back. Payton had a better yd/carry, yds/rec. and is only one behind Smith in 100 yard games, while having played less games. He would have tied smith for 11 straight 1000 yd seasons if it wasn't for the strike. Jim Brown only led the league in rushing EIGHT TIMES, three more than anyone else. His 5.22 yd/carry is absurd. The fact that you are a Cowboy fan clouds your judgment, which is unfortunate. I'm a Steeler fan and I hate everything ever associated with the Cleveland Browns, but the guy was the best ever.
-
I haven't taken the time to read the whole thread, but, to me, its absolutely absurd to claim that Emmit Smith is even in the top three greatest running backs of all time. Great? Yes. Consistent? You bet. Longevity? Absolutely, especially if you considering hanging on way past your prime. If I needed a running back for one game, one season or ten seasons, I take... 1. Jim Brown - to me, its not a discussion 2. Walter Payton 3. Barry Sanders 4. O.J. Simpson 5. Emmit Smith
-
1908, I'd love to hear a summary of that article. How are the numbers going to save the Bulls from .500-dom?
-
I agree that Bill Simmons act is overdone and gotten tired (it goes without saying that the Boston-centric thing was tired the day after he got to ESPN), but his basketball articles are usually pretty insightful. I completely agree with him about Ben Wallace and this was sort of the idea that I was painfully unsuccessful at articulating about Wallace.
-
Yes, it will be terrible to lose all the scoring we were getting from Chandler. I never said it would be terrible to lose Chandler. In fact, I think its necessary in light of this signing. I am saying I think we overpaid for him. I just want to know where the scoring around the rim is going to come from. Purely perimeter teams rarely go far in the playoffs. Yeah, those Mavs and Suns sure did disappoint this year. The Mavs were an exception and Dirk still did plenty of scoring 12 feet in. The Suns rely as much on transition scoring as they do a perimeter game. They also have Shawn Marion and when Amare Stoudamire returns, they are going to be dumping it inside more often.
-
Yes, it will be terrible to lose all the scoring we were getting from Chandler. I never said it would be terrible to lose Chandler. In fact, I think its necessary in light of this signing. I am saying I think we overpaid for him. I just want to know where the scoring around the rim is going to come from. Purely perimeter teams rarely go far in the playoffs.
-
He's an aging one dimensional player. I don't think he's near worth the money. Nice melodramatic overreaction though.
-
I think Ben Wallace is overrated. This signing has to be followed with a Tyson Chandler departure, otherwise we have three forwards who can post awesome lines like this. 5 points, 12 rebounds, 1 assist, 3 blocks. If we rely too much on perimeter scoring we could be in trouble. The only guy who really gets to the rack is Gordon. I am not nearly as excited about this signing as the rest of you. I think we are going to regret this signing in two or three years when this team is supposed to be really hitting his stride. And if we knew we had this move in our pocket, why take Thomas instead of Brandon Roy?
-
HUH?
-
That is one of the craziest things I've ever read. Paul is frequently lauded for being down to earth and mature. He's nothing like Steve Francis or Stephon Marbury. You must be saying these things to get a rise out of me. You can't possibly really believe them, can you? Thats what Julius Hodge says anyways. um, ok.
-
That is one of the craziest things I've ever read. Paul is frequently lauded for being down to earth and mature. He's nothing like Steve Francis or Stephon Marbury. You must be saying these things to get a rise out of me. You can't possibly really believe them, can you?
-
They will, in my opinion, regret not taking Brandon Roy. Roy will be the ROY and an excellent player. This happens every year. Happened with Wade (no I am not saying Roy is Wade), Chris Paul, etc. Teams are afraid to pass on a potential star instead of taking the guy that can be a consistent threat. Keep drafting on pure potential Bulls. I thought we stopped that crap after the HS kids and all the Euros didn't pan out. Guess we're at it again. Who was picked on potential over Paul? Marvin Williams? Deron Williams was selected because he is was better than Chris Paul. Poll ten NBA execs and ask them which guard they'd rather have WIlliams or Paul and if less than 8 say Paul I'll be shocked. After year one they would have all wanted Jason Williams before Chauncey Billups. I like D. Williams, and I know he's your hometown boy, but come on. Paul is the more complete player. Time will provide the answer. No he is a better scorer. Williams is a better passer, better defender, and runs a team better. Then why were Paul's number's so much better and if Williams is the better player, why was Paul nearly the unanimous ROY?
-
They will, in my opinion, regret not taking Brandon Roy. Roy will be the ROY and an excellent player. This happens every year. Happened with Wade (no I am not saying Roy is Wade), Chris Paul, etc. Teams are afraid to pass on a potential star instead of taking the guy that can be a consistent threat. Keep drafting on pure potential Bulls. I thought we stopped that crap after the HS kids and all the Euros didn't pan out. Guess we're at it again. Who was picked on potential over Paul? Marvin Williams? Deron Williams was selected because he is was better than Chris Paul. Poll ten NBA execs and ask them which guard they'd rather have WIlliams or Paul and if less than 8 say Paul I'll be shocked. After year one they would have all wanted Jason Williams before Chauncey Billups. I like D. Williams, and I know he's your hometown boy, but come on. Paul is the more complete player. Time will provide the answer.
-
Hang on to your laptops, New Jersey!!!
-
Renaldo Balkman has Dennis Rodman-like potential. He'll be a crowd favorite from day one. A decent pick for the Knicks, except for the part about how they could have had him early in the second round.
-
He won't, he was traded. Oops. The tracker I was looking at hadn't updated.
-
They will, in my opinion, regret not taking Brandon Roy. Roy will be the ROY and an excellent player. This happens every year. Happened with Wade (no I am not saying Roy is Wade), Chris Paul, etc. Teams are afraid to pass on a potential star instead of taking the guy that can be a consistent threat. Keep drafting on pure potential Bulls. I thought we stopped that crap after the HS kids and all the Euros didn't pan out. Guess we're at it again. Who was picked on potential over Paul? Marvin Williams? Deron Williams was selected because he is was better than Chris Paul. Poll ten NBA execs and ask them which guard they'd rather have WIlliams or Paul and if less than 8 say Paul I'll be shocked.
-
They will, in my opinion, regret not taking Brandon Roy. Roy will be the ROY and an excellent player. This happens every year. Happened with Wade (no I am not saying Roy is Wade), Chris Paul, etc. Teams are afraid to pass on a potential star instead of taking the guy that can be a consistent threat. Keep drafting on pure potential Bulls. I thought we stopped that crap after the HS kids and all the Euros didn't pan out. Guess we're at it again. Because guys drafted on potential never turn out to be stars. (I preferred Roy too, but you're overgeneralizing.) Fair enough, but they aren't exactly churning out stars (see Curry, Eddy and Chandler, Tyson) with their "potential guys". They've done much better with established college players. I can't wait to see lazy ass Rodney Carney play for Scott Skiles.