bmags

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 12:02 PM) The super delegates were put in place to that the party still has some control over the nomination process. They can and do change, though. IIRC Clinton had a huge lead in SD's in 2008 as well, but they slowly started to shift to Obama as the race went on. edit: I can't imagine a situation where the DNC uses the super delegate power to override popular support for another candidate that turns out well for them, though. Imagine that the only reason Clinton gets the nomination is because she held on to enough super delegates while Sanders actually won primary after primary. How many Sanders supporters would turn out to vote for Clinton in November versus being justifiably angry at the Democratic Party leadership? Right, when it became clear Obama was inevitable suddenly they changed to him. They may be useful to prevent a brokered convention in that way. I think, on its face, they are very stupid. But, I kind of like having it in the back pocket if a trump like insurgent ever happens on dem side.

We always expect best case scenarios though. One or several of our players will have career low years, hopefully several will post career bests. His projections are pretty modest. C is improved, but probably #1 position to expect significant time off.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 12:01 PM) And he was linked in all sorts of trades including Love and Melo but those didn't work out. And again, after his first half season and even after his first season in total everyone thought he was a great stretch 4. He's had stretches. He makes terrible mistakes, but from a skill standpoint, he's still got it. Why are we calling him a bust after 1.5 seasons? There are a lot of useful players aside from Love and Melo. None of them were acquired for a "stretch 4" who doesn't hit 3 pointers, can rarely play the 4, and is a horrible 3, bad at defense, and has had no confidence since refs have stopped rewarding his increasingly more ridiculous flopping. Good use of asset.

Agreed. Last year, you just knew when he had absolutely nothing. It was nice when Carroll was up because we could basically throw him in and get 5IP out of him, and pull danks in 2nd.

$7 mill in dead money is a lot.

I still have irrational confidence in Danks being a decent pitcher this year, just because I saw him pitch two gems last year in person that were the only entertaining games I saw in person.

Should be mentioned ta-nahesi coates said he was voting for Sanders today. Despite him not saying he's endorsing anyone that may hold a lot of power.

"What did the Bulls give up for Niko?" Literally? - They gave up Norris Cole - They gained cap space for 2 years while he was overseas vs. rookie salary for cole - They gave up, depending on how you are looking at it, 2 years of norris cole stats OR the value of that 25th pick if they didn't want to spend money on it that year (could have just tried to trade for another pick later) - In that same trade, Chandler Parsons went to HOU - In acquiring niko, they had to pay him 3/15 salary when he comes over - That salary could have literally went to a more useful player (for instance, thats what Shaun Livingston makes) - OR you could have used his asset as a trade piece to get a more useful NBA player These are all the ramifications and options that come out of one player like Niko. They kept him, paid him, and now have a not very player they don't have room on the court to develop because they paid for Pau Gasol.

Oh, you are only allowed to play hindsight when it works out? He was a more valuable asset and trade piece. They kept him assuming he'd be a PF of the future. He has no place as a PF so they are moving him to be a bad SF. That's their scouting and roster management.

Niko is not a "great" move. Great moves at the least provide you with a good player. Niko is bad. Pau is a fine player. He was a very strange choice to fit on this roster, it created a weird carousel of rotations, and killed our wing/pg rotations. That was a bad signing of a good player.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 10:55 AM) Phil was truly lucky (not saying he wasn't a good coach, but damn did he have talent). He had arguably the two greatest DUO's in NBA history at one point in time or another, between Michael / Pip and Shaq / Kobe and than again had a heck of a duo with Kobe / Pau. In fact, during most of his tenure as a coach, Phil had the best active player on the planet (from Jordan to Shaq to Kobe). Phil has certainly had a lot of talent, but all you need to do is look at the Thunder, which is a team that is just mindboggling to me that they will likely not win a championship (likely), as to the niche Phil fulfilled. His specific niche was taking over a bunch of alphadog superstars and making it work.

Does this theoretically move us up in that comp pick?

QUOTE (Brian @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 10:13 AM) Snell is just sitting in the dark corner, hiding from criticism. I didn't include him in the positives to last 3 years.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 10:17 AM) I don't really think Tom had issues. Other than you could say he should have done a better job getting along with Gar (but how do we know Gar didn't just totally sabotage him anyway). Gar seems like the "I'll throw anyone under the bus" possible type of guy. Who knows what he did to Tom that ultimately created the rift. All I know is Tom was a much better coach than Hoiberg and was one of the elite coaches in the league. Whomever gets him will be extremely lucky and I think in hindsight, Jerry has to realize the best course might have been to cut the middle man out (Gar) and see if Pax and Tom could have worked things out (essentially bought a year without Gar in the mix to see if it would help...especially based upon the reports that Thibs always, even to this day, respected Pax. Well, it certainly seemed like the firing of Ron Adams really accelerated things. (should be noted Ron Adams now an assistant coach on one of the best teams ever, to this point)

That doesn't mean they did well. I like all of the smaller pieces/role pieces the other top teams have acquired over the bulls. You guys are so literally minded. The bulls for 4 years now have relied on vet min PGs to back-up rose. It worked until it didn't. They committed their other small mid-money amount to Hinrich. That's a bad signing. They reserved their Boozer cap space to Gasol. Gasol has played well, but he was odd at the time and has clearly not worked out now. His style and position openly conflicted with our C Noah. It put a ridiculous amount of our resources to frontcourt, while our backcourt continued to thin out and become old, slow, or one dimensional. There are a huge number of possibilities in using assets. If people only looked at the trades that happened and FAs that signed, you would say "what could they have done?!". But nobody would look at how the Heat have stayed relevant and found any of those moves obvious. The signing of Gasol and overvaluing of Niko were mistakes. The trading of two 1st round picks for McDermott was a mistake. Each of those resources could have been applied toward better assets and players that fit their inevitable shift to Hoiberg. Would they be contenders for the title? I don't know or care, their job is clearly to put the best team on the court at all times and they failed for the last 3 years at every decision point with the exception of Dunleavy, nate robinson and hopefully, hopefully Bobby Portis.

Yeah I still think that deal is too low. Kendrick is very specifically a 2b or a DH. Fowler could pass in 3 OF positions, or DH (in a literal sense). He is younger than Kendrick. There's no reason he should be stuck to that specific deal. I'd be surprised if less than 12 mill per year.

Well, bullpen pieces are fickle. You get 3 guys with good stuff who can't throw strikes, there is a greater than 0 chance that one ends up having a dynamite year. There is also a great chance none do anything, and if that's the case, I don't think we are that far off. By these 3 guys I'm thinking of Cleto, Aumont and Kahnle.

I have obviously not been the biggest sign fowler fan, but 2 years 20 million is a steal for him. 1: I have no doubt he can perform to that value. 2: I have high hopes that he can outperform that value and 3: if he outperforms that value, I have high hopes that we could, if needed, receive value for him that may be greater than the 1st round pick we give up. De Aza signed for basically $6 million. To get Fowler for $10 would be a very good deal. Side note, push comes to shove we could probably get De Aza for very cheap right now.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 04:24 PM) Thibs knew the roster would get crushed with injuries? Yes, that's the only problem with the bulls. Injuries.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 09:19 PM) Sanders is winning every demographic group in NH. Race, gender, she, education, he's winning them all. Except income over 200k. She won 65+

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 04:19 PM) Why is everyone assuming that Rubio won't tack back to the middle on other equally important social issues like immigration were he to be the nominee? Rubio keeps repeating that Obama line for the same reason everyone says certain things in primary season and then differentiates themselves for the general. Finally, what is the actual likelihood Roe vs. Wade is ever overturned? What of Rubio's voting record screams to you moderate other than immigration. You have no ground here that there is any overlap between sanders voters and Rubio voters. You just wanted to write a list.

He is a much better lottery ticket than Jacob Turner and certainly Brad Penny

I do still have hope for EJ, obviously he wasn't trending up. But, he still k'd a bunch last year and has promise.

There's a reason Thibs has shut up and not said anything. He knew the clown show would collapse under the tent.

"I'd vote for 75 year old Bernie Sanders because he really speaks to me, but absent him, I'll probably go for the younger Rubio because he's younger and hopeful and optimistic, like when he says that the current democratic president that I liked is purposefully destroying america. Appealing to hope. And I'm really into his policies." - Young women