nitetrain8601

I thought the Blue Jays were going with Adam Lind. A's is going to be a competition between Fox and Cust. Royals and Orioles are the only teams that are going to flat out have rotating DH's. Either way, I don't see the Sox getting Johnny unless he goes really cheap. I think it's more to drive up the Tigers' cost like many think.

QUOTE (knightni @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 05:35 PM) Missouri makes the most sense, imo. Missouri or maybe Pitt in my honest opinion. I sure as heck would welcome Texas though, without a doubt.

Best overall: Kumas Corner Best from a chain: Fat Burger

QUOTE (knightni @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 05:15 PM) Is the Big 10 seriously talking to Texas - and is Texas listening? Texas is way too far away for Big 10 athletes to travel to. The lesser non-revenue sports are going to be spending way too much in travel expense if Texas joins. Plus, there goes the Texas-Texas A&M/Texas-Oklahoma rivalries then. That would kill any conference change, in my opinion. I've read the same, but I don't think it'll go through. If it did though, OSU can kiss future Big Ten titles away. Texas will run this conference. I'm sure Texas A&M and Oklahoma will still face off with Texas though.

QUOTE (knightni @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 05:17 PM) That's fan suicide for the Wizards. First Arenas, now Jamison and Butler? Prepare for 10 years of empty arenas and high lottery picks. Well, they want to completely rebuild. Jamison is old. Butler is in his prime. Arenas will be gone if they're able to void his contract or trade him. Stein had a conflicting report though which states Haywood and Butler going to WAS for Howard, Gooden and some throw in with Dallas.

So the Bears need to go after every FA out there. Bagboy in the RedEye(who never makes sense) made sense today. To compete for the SB, Bears need: Brandon Marshall Steve Breaston Darren Sharper Shawn Merriman E Dumervil Terrel Owens

Bulls reviving Tyrus for Al Harrington per KC Johnson Anyway, just a thought, if the Bulls trade Deng for just expirings, would the superstar FA's think the Bulls have enough with themselves +Noah + Rose?

Apparently preliminary, don't want to post it.

Apparently, three teams have trades in place for Amare Stoudemire. The Bulls are one of them per Ric Bucher. I'm guessing another is Miami. I wonder who would be the third team.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 01:21 PM) Question...I fully expect the Bulls to acquire future 1st round picks, not current ones. In fact, most likely they will deal all of the 1st round picks this year because of the cap hold that is set on those selections. I think it will be future firsts as well unless they feel that getting another mid first means packaging it to slip into the top 8 where they would have a shot at Xavier Henry. If not, they will probably look to stack picks in future years to fill out their roster.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 01:20 PM) If the Bulls can get 2 max fa's to work, keep Deng/Noah/Rose....they will most certainly be willing to pay the luxury tax. No f***ing doubt about it. That team would contend and I believe win multiple titles. Jerry won't pay luxury tax for Byars because Byars doesn't make the team ridiculously better. My question is can the Bulls even have enough room under the cap to offer 2 max guys without moving Deng/Hinrich/Salmons? I didn't think there was a way to do it if Deng was on the roster, but I might be wrong? Nope, no way possible without moving Deng. The only good thing about Deng is that, while he takes up a nice chunk of cap, his salary is deferred. Also, again, JR has said, he will not go into the cap until he has a proven winner/championship team. That's why he turned down Gasol when Memphis wanted nothing but expirings.

BTW, apparently, Butler/Jamison to Celtics for Allen, Scalibrine and JR Giddens is being talked about.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 11:57 AM) Your post makes no sense. In the first part you claim that they won't go over the salary cap because of what might happen two years down the road, but then in the next part with actual quotes they're trying to add at least one max salary player, if not two. If you're really peterified about a $52 mil luxury tax two years down the road, wouldn't you think not paying someone $17-18 mil a year (since it's two years down the road we're factoring in raises) would be a good way to avoid it? If they go the two-max deal route, that'd be over this imaginary $52 mil luxury tax that has yet to happen with two max salaries, Rose, a likely Noah extension and the remaining roster filler. If they moved Hinrich and Salmons, they'd probably be over it with a max deal, Deng, Rose, the same Noah extension and the rest of the roster (even if you got Noah at $6 mil, they'd only have $10 mil left for the other 8 active roster spots). About the only way they could avoid the tax in that scenario is if they didn't make any trades, let everyone walk that expires between now and then and filled out the roster with guys making no more than $5 mil, which might cause rioting among Bulls fans. If the luxury tax really fell that far, they'd be f***ed not matter what they do, so I have a very hard time believing that they wouldn't use the current $52 mil of cap space. Besides, even if they went $10 mil over that theoretical tax they'd still be at roughly the same roster expenses the Bulls had the last few years, so assuming they'd still avoid it like the plague is a pretty major assumption. There's a pretty big difference between not adding an end of the bench guy that won't make an impact to definitively avoid the tax on a team that already has a payroll around $70 mil while struggling with the .500 mark and threatening the long-term health of your team by not spending on starting talent to possibly avoid a tax two years down the road that is almost $20 mil below what you spent the last several years. Theoritically, they would sign and trade Noah once he gets expensive to make room for Omer Asik. The Bulls, apparently, are really high on him. I personally haven't seen him play, but the Bulls love him. I agree that the Bulls wouldn't be able to afford to max guys down the road, but you don't know what the CBA will be and the Bulls will probably worry about the problem when they get there. If Gar is right and everything works, JR will pay the tax if he has a championship team(meaning a team that has already won the championship), JR will pay the tax. He has never hid that fact. But he won't pay for the LTax if he doesn't have a proven championship team. The Bulls also would probably just keep their future picks(if they get the team they want, they'll be picking in the 20's anyway and probably trade down for upper second rounders) to round out the roster. Thereotically, a team like PG-Rose SG-Wade SF-James Johnson/2010 pick PF-Bosh C-Whomever/Noah would win with the rest of the squad being filled in with role players and draft picks. I'm pretty sure with the new CBA, I'm pretty sure teams that already have a higher payroll than what would be agreed upon wouldn't have to pay as much of a tax if any as long as they weren't above the previous cap. That's just my own speculation. Believe me, I've thought about the possiblity of two FA's and it doesn't seem plausible if they keep everyone from the "core". Someone brought it up on RealGM. I think it was TommyUdo who is a CBA expert along with Sham who is the expert on the cap. The only way I think it could work is if they sign a Joe Johnson and David Lee. We shall see what happens though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 08:57 PM) Unless the cap drops to $40 million, that'd be no where near the luxury tax threshold. The fact that all of those guys together come to $52 million is actually a good sign, because it's possible this year's cap could be in that range. QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 09:10 PM) It appears that you're confusing the salary cap and the luxury tax. While the Bulls would be right against the salary cap, the luxury tax threshold for 2010-2011 is expected to be $65 mil. Using the minimum salary exception, they have WAY more than enough room under the luxury tax to fill out the roster. I'm not confusing the two, but I know the Bulls will not surpass the cap number. They're looking at it like a hard cap figure because of the looming new CBA for 2011 with contract potentially dropping drastically. The Bulls wouldn't be near the luxury tax threshold in 2010/2011, that's without a doubt. But the thing is, JR & co. do not want to pay any luxury tax unless they have a proven championship team. Yes, that means even Wade and Bosh. The Bulls would surpass the cap of 52 million under the scenario before because they would need at least 2 minimum vet players to fill out the roster. With those two players, they would be paying tax. Hell, why do you think the Bulls didn't add Byars? It's because they do not want to pay any lux tax. I think the articles in the trib and by Ken Berger today support that as they're now trying to unload Luol to be able to afford a 2nd guy. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baske...0,6301615.story http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/...838893/20035997

I agree in that you shouldn't be friends with woman from personal experiences. Just acquaintances(sp?). It helps you keep that mysterious factor, but also keeps you available.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 04:24 PM) Wait, I always thought if they traded Salmons, it would give enough room to squeak under the cap...? If they trade just Salmons for an expiring, they'll get rid of $5,808,000. Say they trade Tyrus for an expiring and draft pick like they're rumored to want to do. That leaves them at $31,850,976. Let's say the cap is at $52 million. Now raises are factored into the previous $31,850,976, but let's look at draft holds. Let's say they get a 15th pick for Tyrus. Say the Bulls draft 17th and 47th which they're currently projected. That means 15th pick: $1,398,200 17th pick: $1,261,900 47th pick: $825,497(rough estimate based on league minimum) Right now, the max salary threshold for Wade who will have been in the league between 7-9 years is $16,224,600. If he's signed and traded his number would be roughly at $17,149,243. We will go with the lower number so we can dream big. $31,850,976 $16,224,600 $1,398,200 $1,261,900 $825,497 = 51,561,173 Now that roster only includes PG-Rose/Hinrich SG-Wade SF-Deng/J Johnson PF-Gibson C-Noah + 3 other players. If we pay the Minimum to those 3 other players to have at least 12 players, we would be in the luxury tax easily. Heck, I think it works even if we don't trade Ty and just flat out renounce him, but I could be wrong.

Being cocky and funny works. If you take it too far, you'll end up going out with a stripper, a girl with psychological problems, a puppy, or you're just trying to get laid. It's good to be mysterious, good to be cocky, but don't take it as far as David Deangelo.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 08:12 AM) If the Bulls need backups, they'll also be in a position next offseason to spend the MLE dollars on grabbing those. Or they could do sign+trade deals involving Miller or others. How sweet would it be if the Bulls were able to move TT, Salmons, and Hinrich, without taking on cap space next year? That'd be 2 full max deals they could legitimately offer even if the cap plummets, in addition to having the MLE, sign and trade options, Rose, Noah, and Deng. Not possible considering the cap holds/draft picks they have to pay. Again, unless JR goes into the tax, I don't see this plan working at all. Even if the Bulls decides to trade Deng, which there has been whispers that they would be willing to, you have to find a team that would be willing to pay him his 14 million towards the end of his contract. If contracts get smaller as well as the cap, Deng even playing at his current level, would be considered a horrendous contract.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 04:01 AM) I'd really like them to hold onto Kirk, and trade Salmons instead. Otherwise, Pargo is your backup PG. And with the Rose uncertainty now, that's not good. Also, if Wade needs another bigtime FA to join him, then you're gonna have to go and get Bosh instead, and I'd rather have Kirk at SG than Salmons. Of the teams mentioned, I'd ask the Knicks and Kings, as you could luck into the #1 (and do a trade in the offseason or a sign-and-trade) or get something like Aldrich if it isn't a high pick. Bulls would not be able to sign a max FA if they kept Hinrich. It's that clear. So he must go. In fact, for the Bulls to have the ability to sign two max FA's. They would have to trade Hinrich, Salmons(unless he decides not opt back in) and Luol Deng or else they wouldn't have enough money to field a complete team. Even with that, the Bulls would be in cap hell once Noah's and Rose's extensions are due. I honestly don't know how they're going to do it, especially considering they have owners who don't like to pay tax.

Darn right. Jerry as far as I know, paid for his own stadium. Me thinks Ricketts should not have bought the team. He's trying to get everyone else to pay for them and will be cutting payroll two years in a row. They won't fire Hendry, even though he doesn't fit in with that philosophy because it would cost more money to do so and replace him.

At UIC, about half my curriculum was gen ed courses. I agree, they are severely overdone.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 6, 2010 -> 02:19 AM) Other thoughts from the loss: Man, I miss Joakim. Also, the Bulls signed Chris Richard for 10 days as a stop gap. Since he's in town, anyone know if we could afford another minimum salary? Byars would be nice for 3 point shooting. Edit: Wow, just checked BG's 3pt%. Salmons is worlds better than him this year. Only if we trade some people. Bulls don't have money unless they go in the luxury tax which they won't for Byars. They'll sign him once they are able to trade Hinrich, Salmons or both.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 5, 2010 -> 06:32 PM) I don't care, never did I say they were. I don't think going to a trade should be included as someone who just finished high school and did nothing else. There is a big difference than graduating from high school and than working at Walmart as a cashier than there is graduating high school working with someone in the field during high school and continuing that on during the next few years and becoming a very skilled tradesmen. In America we should be pushing people two ways...into an established trade program or into college. For the sake of the argument this thread was based on and the new facts coming out(which were on Fox News today), college and trade are vastly different. Coming up, it is implied, College = Most Money by far It is found that it is not. I also don't consider trade and college the same. In college, you might get an internship or two which will last a year. In a trade, you are getting paid to learn and actually apply your learnings in the field as you are learning it. The only similarity between trade and college is that you're learning something. You can say the same about a high school student who starts working full-time at 18. They are always learning something at their job as well.

I'm rooting for the Saints to win. But I think the Colts pull it out.

QUOTE (dasox24 @ Feb 4, 2010 -> 01:25 AM) Yeah, she really is a great girl and we get along very well. I'm fine for now with proceeding how things are, but I guess we'll need to talk about it sometime. She seems to be coming around (and all my friends think we're gonna get back together), but I'm just going to let things play out and go from there. Oh, and thanks for the advice. Sometimes it just helps hearing an outsider's perspective with a fresh take rather than what all my friends say. Though, everyone says pretty much the same thing (but I guess that's good). I personally ask why you guys broke up if I were you. To me, it doesn't make sense to breakup, but yet nothing has changed except for the title of BF and GF. As far as saint, as someone said before, don't confuse love with infatuation. I would probably say, start dating some girls, maybe bring them around to meet this best friend of yours. See how your best friend reacts. If she starts criticizing the girl you bring around, that means you still have hope. If she says nothing, well at least you know you have nothing to wait around for.