CWSGuy406

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 04:57 AM) CWSGuy406 -- Lowery and Weber may be good coaches, but for me UI basketball is not the most entertaining thing to watch. Maybe it would look better with guys that can shoot, but as run by Weber the motion offense seems to include a lot of moving the ball side to side for 30 seconds and then missing a jump shot that could have been taken much earlier. The guards don't seem to look to penetrate much at all, and one thing I really enjoyed about Marquette was watching James with the ball. On defense, Weber's refusal to play zone seems silly to me and UI also seems to insist that their guards get right up in the grill of opposing players regardless of whether or not they are quicker. This lead to a lot of fouls and a slower game. Maybe it would be different with other players in that system. I know Weber isn't a perfect coach. Then again, Marquette isn't in a position to ask for Roy Williams or Coach K here. Your gripe about the defense doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. It'd be one thing if Weber's teams (defensively) were ineffective, but they weren't -- the Pomeroy stats (IIRC) usually have U of I among the better teams in the nation on the defensive end. Obviously this year things were a little different, but even this season when I caught a few Illini games they seemed pretty tough defensively.

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 04:13 AM) Yes, the player can still sign another LOI with the school they had initially signed with. However, this doesn't happen often. I read another thing tonight by Taylor saying he's going to start looking at other programs. But they already signed the LOI -- Marquette doesn't have to let these guys out of their LOI. That would be a complete dick move on their part, but they can still make them come here and go through the business of transferring (if they felt so strongly about it). And I don't need to be reading that right now, especially with regards to Taylor. I'm going to have faith, though -- Beasley stayed at K-State even though Huggins left, right? Or is that more of an exception-and-not-the-rule thing? One more thing that works in Marquette's favor -- and hitless first brought it up and the previous poster mentioned it as well -- Marquette has a financial advantage on most other schools. Crean had to have been ranked among the top coaches nationally as far as annual salary, right? I'm relatively confident they'll bring the big bucks to the table. And to be quite honest... I'm kind of really, really hoping for Weber or Lowery. I'd be fond of either of the two.

BTW -- how does this process work with regards to the recruits? Nick Williams, MU's other 'prized' guard coming in, has officially asked out of LOI. That's par-for-the-course for a situation like this though, right? Marquette's new head coach (so long as MU moves swiftly) will have a chance to speak with these signed players, yes?

QUOTE(scenario @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 03:36 AM) I'm a Marquette alum and I'm sorry to see Crean go. Great coach, great recruiter... and squeaky clean. I didn't know that -- you should post in the college basketball thread more often. It'd be nice to have someone to discuss MU hoops with (I'm a current sophomore at MU). I disagree on the words "great" for either of those, but like you I'm disappointed that he's leaving -- he looked to be improving in the recruiting area and I think he was also getting better an an in-game coach. ---------------- In response to B>W, I think the Weber/Marquette connection is only a small one -- I'm fairly certain Weber is an alum of Marquette High School, which is several blocks away from the University and -- IIRC -- used to actually be connected to the University as an 'extended' school program (if that makes sense). The only reason I could see Weber leaving, though, is if he was in any way fed up with the job at U of I -- perhaps people getting on him for the terrible season or the Smith issue. Marquette would in no way be a 'step up' for Weber -- it'd be at best a lateral move if not a step down. Marquette has its positives -- great facilities, pro-stadium to play in, decent fan-base -- but they're not 'positive' enough, IMO, to warrant a move from Champaign to Milwaukee. If on the small chance that came to fruition, though, and Weber became Marquette's head coach, I'd be relatively pleased for a couple of reasons: (1) Weber may have his faults, but one thing Weber does is coach defense damn well. I love teams that are able to bring-it defensively in the half-court (like Wisconsin), and Weber is similar to Crean in that respect. (2) While his recruiting record may be sketchy, we weren't getting great recruiting with Crean. And this is more of a (2a), but Weber can point to Derron Williams and Dee Brown Luther Head as guys he helped make into NBA players. I think that type of 'cred' may be useful with the guards Marquette has coming in (i.e. in trying to keep Tyshawn Taylor and Nick Williams in Milwaukee for the near future).

Ugh... are you f***ing kidding me? Nashville comes back from a 3-0 deficit and, to top it off, St. Louis has a goal (in regulation no less) called back? Give me a f***ing break.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Apr 2, 2008 -> 12:59 AM) the only criticism i'd have of crean is his tournament performance. no doubt he had a great run with dwyane wade in 03, but outside of that his teams have been meh at best when it comes to tournament play. now, there could be reasons for that i'm not aware of because i don't follow closely, but outside of 03 there's nothing really distinguished about his team's tournament performances. I can only speak about this year and last year -- I can't enlighten you about anything but that (i.e. the Final Four run or two years ago with Novak) -- but... With regards to the loss vs Michigan State in the 2007 tourney, Marquette was playing without its best player (McNeal). You do have to factor that in a little bit. That being said... Izzo completely and utterly out-coached Crean in that game. Michigan State didn't strike me as a very good team last season, but they completely controlled the game. I think that was the game where Marquette had something like one two-point FG in the first half. I was not happy at all with the performance and most of my beef was with Crean. It wasn't just a matter of MU not hitting open shots -- they weren't running any offense and most of their shots were contested. It was an absolutely terrible coaching performance. With regards to this season and Marquette's run... I can't say I have any complaints. Stanford was about the worst possible match-up for Marquette (outside of playing one of UNC or UCLA) and, if not for one freak shot, Marquette would've been into the Sweet 16. ------------------ If you Indiana folks are looking for a truly *elite* coach, I don't think Crean is your guy. But he's pretty good and certainly above average, and seeing that your last coach did his best to run embarrass the hell out of IU, this has to be looked at as a plus for 'Hooserville'.

Greasy, I'll give a more detailed 'scouting report' about Crean in the coming days -- if you care for one. It's a good hire for Indiana, probably not the best but still a quality hire. More than anything -- and you can correct me if I'm wrong -- I think Indiana needs a guy who can clean up Indiana a bit (while at the stay time try to raise Indiana to the level it was once at), and Crean will do that. I believe there was a study released a few weeks ago that ranked Marquette in the top ten for graduating its players (or something about grades -- GPA or something of its ilk, someone else may know better about what I'm talking about). Yeah... this sucks and I'm bummed. Not, mad, per se -- the only Marquette fans who will be mad at Crean are those who have no idea about where Marquette ranks relative to Indiana in the bigger spectrum of things -- but this is tough to take. I hope the recruits Crean was bringing in don't follow suit, as I love what I'm hearing about Nick Williams and Tyshawn Taylor. Oh what the hell, I'll do a small Crean breakdown for anyone who cares: Recruiting wise, it's tough to judge. He hasn't pulled in a five-star recruit and he didn't get a whole lot of four-stars, but he's been (seemingly) getting better and better in that category, as Marquette was extremely close to getting Shumpert. I say that "it's tough to judge" because for one, Marquette isn't one of the elite programs in the country and two, he's recruiting guys to Milwaukee -- generally a crappy city -- as much as he's recruiting them to play at Marquette. Coaching wise... again, not the best in-game coach but not terrible, either. I think he's a little too stubborn at times, but his teams for the past couple years have been above-average-to-great on the defensive end, so that will fit right into the Big 10. The interesting thing is that -- and SoxBadger can probably determine whether I'm correct here based on Pomeroy's stats -- it seemed like Crean liked to play a very up-tempo type game which seems (I'm using "seems" a lot because I'm not 100% certain on several assertions here) different from much of the Big 10. Yikes... this one's tough to take. Enjoy him, Indiana -- can't say I'll be rooting for the Hoosiers but I'll certainly be keeping more of a watchful eye on the IU program now. And wow -- I agree with just about everything Addison has to say in this thread (outside of the IU/UofI squabbling). SIU's coach was the first person that popped into my mind as well...

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 1, 2008 -> 03:35 AM) Think of it in terms of cost. Anything that costs more, is going to have less buyers, assuming normal behavior. If government borrows more money it drives up the cost of money, because it is the worlds largest user of money. At a point, it makes money to expensive, even for itself, so it cuts back on its own spending because money gets too expensive (I% gets too high, making borrowing too expensive). Y is income, GDP in a macro sense. Greatly appreciated. Thanks much.

So... MLB had Atlanta play Opening Night in Washington for just a one-game 'series'? That strikes me as odd.

It'll be interesting to see how Riske does now that he's in the NL. He's been a quality middle reliever in the AL -- does that mean he'll be a good setup man, dare I say close in the NL? Or does the anti-clutch aura around him transition over to the NL too?

Are there any economically-inclined people who could try and put the "crowded out effect" into more layman terms? If I need to be more specific, I need help with regards to what the "crowded out effect" does to interest rates. Combining my in-class notes with what Wikipedia says... The government borrows more money which means it's going to spend more money. More money out there means a higher money supply which, in turn, means a higher demand for money. Once there's a higher demand for money, the interest rates rise. I also have Y in there but I'm having a difficult time making sense of it -- Y (presumably income or GDP) rises with government spending but falls (just a slight fall, though) when interest rates go back up?

Thanks for the help, Calgary -- they've completely folded in the second and are now down 5-2.

Sigh... Baseball Tonight has become so pathetic. Steve Phillips just said that the Tigers will score 1000 runs and be the best offense in the history of baseball. Making things worse, tonights "analysts" are Eric Young and John Kruk. The former can't put a sentence together while the latter once admitted on radio that ESPN gives them controversial things to say on the air. Oh yeah, and he sucks too. How far has that show fallen. Ravich is terrible now, too, as he -- for some reason -- feels the need to interject his opinion. He's equally clueless and was much better when he was asked to 'drive' the discussions between Gammons and Reynolds.

QUOTE(daa84 @ Mar 30, 2008 -> 01:45 PM) as much as i like pablo...now that we have alexei, is there really a need for a guy like pablo on this team? No, not at all, but the Sox have to justify a mistake(giving a guaranteed contract to a mediocre bench player). The worrying thing about Pablo is that (arguably) his greatest asset -- his speed -- looks to have deteriorated a bunch since 2005. Take yesterday, for example, where two instances stand out. On Pablo's first single down the line, that's a play where Pablo always goes (or at least attempts to go) to second. The second was his caught stealing -- cripes, he was out by a good five feet. It wasn't even close. It's even worse because not only does A-Ram make Ozuna completely redundant, but the Sox have an equal (probably better) version of Ozuna at Charlotte in Bourj-wahhhh. Then again, the Ozuna decision pales in comparison to the Masset/Wasserman catastrophe, Carlos Quentin's deal -- "We wanted Carlos Quentin -- not somebody like Carlos Quentin, but Carlos Quentin himself..." to be a fourth outfielder, apparently -- and the Crede/Fields situation. Cheat said it well over at his blog -- the Sox sure know how to make an 85-win talent team into a 78-win team.

Gotta hope for an Edmonton loss tonight -- they're scoreless with Calgary entering the the third. Vancouver most likely won't finish well, as Morrisson is out for the rest of the season and I'm pretty sure Luongo is away with his wife (giving birth to a child). They're not going to make the playoffs, but hey... it'd be neat to see them win out and at least make Nashville, Vancouver and Edmonton sweat a little bit.

Absolutely absurd decision. Apparently the Sox would rather have a guy who can throw three innings terribly than one inning well.

Jesus Christ -- how many steps did Lawson (?) take on that rebound. My goodness...

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 29, 2008 -> 02:49 AM) I was just embarassed by that statement. Two teams made it to the Sweet 16, with one losing to a mid major double digit seed by 20 and the other down by 30 at halftime. They sure showed me!! I may have been wrong about the timing of the exits, but not about the garbage that is the teams. That statement embarrassed you? Really? It's a hard-and-fast issue here without a gray area. I'm pretty sure I recall you making a statement that no Big 10 teams would make it past the first weekend. Perhaps I'm recalling incorrectly? If you I'm remembering correctly, however, and you said no Big 10 team would make it past the first weekend, you were wrong, plain and simple. And there's not a whole lot more to that. My comment wasn't a defense of Big 10 teams, just calling you out on a failed prediction. But it's certainly possible that I'm confusing you with someone else.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 29, 2008 -> 01:44 AM) Looks like I was right all along about the Big 10 and should have stuck to my guns. This Davidson group is a much better TEAM than I thought though. Curry is obviously amazing, but they force so many turnovers and have a lot of guys that make shots. Good luck to them dealing with Kansas though, not sure how that is going to go for them. Didn't you claim that no Big Ten team would make it past the first weekend (at some point)?

I love me some Joe Alexander.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 08:30 PM) Please repost that quote and source please. for good times. I think I stole that line from someone (Pratt, perhaps? or even Flash?) but if I have a few minutes tonight I'll make an effort to find the link.

Buh-bye Mr. "Tick Below Bobby Jenks" Masset.

The Blue Jackets' announcers have to be among the worst in the NHL -- absolutely terrible. Not a lick of insight from either of 'em.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 09:15 PM) What I am arguing is that it is pure fiction and ridiculously uninformed speculation to suggest that Fields' career will be retarded by going back to Charlotte to work on some things. If you're just arguing that, I will back off a bit and digress. In no way is this smart roster management, though (which you haven't argued for or against, so this is not a 'claim' against you).

QUOTE(iamshack @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 09:09 PM) Howard dominated every step of the way throughout his minor league career. And pretty much every baseball fan on the planet earth knew he was ready for MLB after 2004. And yet, sitting in Scranton for another 210 ab's until Thome was too hurt to continue playing in 05' certainly did not stunt his growth or retard his career. That, again, is how these situations are comparable. So it does have to do with Thome, because they quite clearly had a lot invested in Thome. That isn't at all comparable to Crede -- the only investment the Sox have in him is ~$5 million (a marginal amount) and our GM's ill-conceived perception of said-third-baseman's value.