whitesox61382

Its nice of Omar to join our board. I guess he got tired of KW hanging up on him after his lowball offers for the best pitcher on the trade market, so he has decided to try his hand on a Sox message board. 1) In regards to the Mets rotation being better than the Sox rotation - You have to take into consideration both league and park factor to get an accurate analysis. Only an idiot who knows nothing about baseball would assume that all factors are held equal allowing someone to accurately compare the Met's starters ERA to the Sox's starters ERA. For example, the AL ERA is currently 4.43 compared to the NL ERA of 4.24. In 2006, AL ERA was 4.56 versus NL ERA of 4.49. In 2005, AL ERA was 4.36 versus NL ERA of 4.22. In 2004, AL ERA was 4.63 versus NL ERA of 4.31. I think you get the point. On average, the AL ERA is usually .10-.25 higher than the NL ERA. This is cased by a number of factors such as style of play. The biggest factor is obviously the DH versus the pitcher batting. In an case, anyone who knows anything about baseball(which is a catagory you don't fit into) knows that ERA's need to be adjusted to take into consideration league factor before comparing the AL to the NL. This is the main reason why AL teams are reluctant to sign/trade for pitchers from the NL. Another factor that must be considered is park factor. Obviously some parks are better hitters parks and others better pitchers parks. For example, in 2004 USCF was rated the 3rd best hitters park while Shea was rated the 16th best. In 2005, USCF was rated the 9th best hitters park while Shea was rated 21st. In 2006, USCF was rated the 6th best hitters park while Shea was rated 26th. Point being, even if you weren't smart enough to know that USCF was a better hitters park than Shea, the stats clearly show that USCF is consistently a top 10 hitters park while Shea consistently ranks in the bottom half. Pitching in a great hitters park makes a significant difference. A routine flyball in Shea might be a HR in USCF. When you consider these 2 factors and adjust ERA's accordingly, the Sox actually have a better ERA from their starters than the Mets. There is a little baseball 101 for you Omar. Next week we will move to baseball 201 and get into ERA+. 2) It is certainly not a sure thing that Milledge is better than 2 compensative picks(like you make it appear). For example, did you know that over 25% of BA's top 100 prospects for 2006 were either late 1st round, compensative, or 2nd round picks(which is the region where compensative picks are)? You make it sound like compensative picks are trash, but they are usually top 60 picks that turn into top 10 prospects within an organization(and have a decent shot of making BA's top 100 list - especially if you get 2 picks). The only advantage that Milledge has versus 2 compensative picks is that he is closer to the majors. Personally, I think that Milledge is drastically overrated and would much rather look around for a better package(if one doesn't come about, than settle for the compensative picks).

I think a Buchholz, Lowrie, Crisp deal would be realitively fair for both sides. Buchholz is their top prospect(IMO) and could be a future front of the rotation starter, so I think he would have to be included. The Sox need a top 10 calibur middle infield prospect, and Lowrie would be a perfect fit(I like the fact that he is a high BA/OBP type guy). Finally, I would prefer another top 10 calibur pitcher(or outfielder), but my guess is that the Sox would have to settle for either Crisp or Pena(especially if they want Buchholz). Personally, I would much rather have Crisp. He is solid defensively(a regular on webgems), has good speed(14SB this season), might be coming out of his slump(.315BA .794OPS this month), and has some past success(.297/15/71 .790OPS in 2004 and .300/16/69 .810OPS in 2005). Pena is a one-dimensional player. He doesn't hit for average, has terrible plate disipline(would strikeout 200+ times if given 550AB), is terrible defensively, and has little speed.

I can understand Minaya(and others) reluctance to trade top prospects for rental players because 4-5 years ago I held a similar opinion. However, with time I came to realize a few things that made me reconsider my standpoint on this issue. 1) Track record of prospects traded at the trade deadline - Every year ESPN puts an article on their website around the trade deadline reviewing previous deadline deals involving mostly rental players for prospects, and the conclusion is that that majority of the prospects never develop into solid everyday major leaguers. Prospects are simple unproven potential. They can put up big numbers in the minors or have all the tools in the world, but at the end of the day all that matters is major league production which is no guarantee. Everyone is so afraid of giving up the next superstar that they ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of prospects never develop into solid major leaguers or live up to their potential. 2) Winning it all is all that matters in the end - Everyone becomes so worried about the future and potentially mortgaging the future by trading away top prospects that they forget about the present. In the end, all that matters is who is hoisting that trophy at the end of the year. That’s all the majority of fans care about. If adding a difference maker at the deadline is the missing piece to a championship run, than it is certainly worth giving up 2-3 players whose futures are uncertain at best. Trust me, winning that championship in 2005 was worth every prospect ever traded away the previous decade. Even if it means living with a mediocre team right now. 3) Get future return from the rental player - Not only do you get that players production for the stretch run/playoffs, but you get the right to negotiate with them before they become a FA. If the Mets had intentions of keeping Buehrle after this season, than they get the upper hand by being able to negotiate with him first. The Sox used this to their advantage with Garcia after they traded for him. Worst case scenario is that the Mets would offer him arbitration and get two compensative picks from the team that does end up signing him. Two top 50 picks certainly softens the blow of trading a couple of top prospects. In the end, teams almost always get more than just a rental player for three months. These 3 concepts have changed my opinion of trading top prospects for rental players, and I am sure that there are a handful of GMs who hold similar opinions and will be more than willing to deal a couple of top prospects for a difference maker like Buehrle.

Edwards LHP 19 low A 4-4 3.90ERA 67IP 60H 6HR 22BB 43SO 1.22WHIP - The small lefty doesn't have electric stuff, but he knows how to pitch and get the most out of his ability. De Los Santos RHP 21 low A 4-2 2.54ERA 63.2IP 35H 2HR 28BB 74SO .99WHIP - I don't think anyone has mentioned him, but I know a lot of people like him as a sleeper. His fastball is consistently in the low 90's and hits the mid 90's on occasion. Hernandez C 21 low A .293/4/27 16BB/18SO .852OPS - He once was considered a top prospect, but has really fallen off. It appears that he is finally putting together a solid full season of pro ball. I like his plate discipline and I think that will help him as he advances. Schnurstein 1B 22 high A .304/16/43 26BB/53SO .994OPS - I think he is worth mentioning because he isn't a top prospect. The true test will be when he is promoted to AA. Not only is Birmingham a great pitchers park, but a lot of prospect struggle with the jump from A ball to AA. Two guys who are currently hurt worth keeping an eye on are Getz and Cassell. Two guys that the Sox drafted who I think can be considered sleepers in Gallegher and Miranda.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 02:59 PM) Supposedly Minaya said he will not give up Milledge or Gomez in a Buerhle deal. Than Minaya doesn't get Buehrle! It is that simple. I realize that he is just a rental player, but history has shown that front of the rotation rental pitchers are worth roughly 3 top prospects/young major league players(see Colon to Montreal and Garcia to Chicago). If Minaya isn't willing to give up 1 of his top prospects, than I say good luck facing Buehrle in the playoffs(if you get there) and hang up. Minaya doesn't realize that KW has all the power in these trade talks. If Minaya doesn't offer at least 2 top prospects, than KW will simple move onto the next playoff contender. Pitchers of Buehrle's quality are rarely on the trade market, and some team will certainly give up 2 top prospects(at least) to add a difference maker like Buehrle. Personally, I think Minaya is just talking big, but will likely give up one of those two guys along with another top prospect to land Buehrle(unless another team offers a better deal).

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jun 20, 2007 -> 06:38 PM) I will say until my face turns blue that Milledge > Gomez. For the love of God, Milledge > Gomez. You make it sound like that is a fact. Are you are pro scout? Because I would venture to guess that most scouts are torn about 50/50 when presented the choice of Milledge or Gomez. Furthermore, there are a couple of key categories in which Gomez is CLEARLY better than Milledge. Milledge has shown the ability to hit for a higher average and shown more power(although most scouts feel that Gomez will develop power as he matures). Gomez on the other hand is clearly the better defensive player, has the better arm, has more speed, and is a better base stealer(at this point). Neither player has shown great plate discipline with Milledge drawing more walks and Gomez striking out less(in the minors). Personally, I think that both players are overrated, but I will take Gomez over Milledge because I think this team needs to build around solid D, speed, and average(two of those three categories Gomez is clearly better). Having watched Gomez a few times this year, I do see some power potential. I think a perfect comparison is Alex Rios from Toronto. They are very similar in size, skill set, develop(at age 21), and potential. Like Rios, I think Gomez will develop into a 20 HR hitter. Only time will tell which one turns out to be better, but to declare with absolute certainty that Milledge is going to be better is just foolish.

Pelfey and Gomez - that would be my asking price. I know that people tend to overrate their own players(myself included), but Buehlre is a difference maker/front of the rotation starter who could take a team over the hump. I think you have to look at similar trades in the past for a little perspective(see the Colon to Montreal trade and the Garcia to Chicago trade). I would say that it is going to take AT LEAST 2 of your top 5 prospects to land Buehrle based on these previous trades and the high demand for pitching(especially of Buehlre's calibur). Personally, I think Pelfey is the guy the Sox should target and say that no deal will happen without this guy included. He has great stuff(front of the rotation potential) and he is a groundball pitcher which works well in USCF. I know that the Sox have more pressing needs than pitching, but you can never have enough pitching and this guy is their best prospect IMO. At this point I would want Gomez over Millage. I think Millage is overrated(I think Gomez is overrated as well but to a lesser extent). Gomez minor league numbers are so-so(.279 career BA .400 career SLG coming into this season), but when you consider his age(one of the youngest prospects at each stop in the minors), his tools(quick bat, blazing speed, electric arm), and his size(6'4) I think he projects better than Millage at this point(and will develop power). I would take no less than this, and if the Mets don't like it than move onto the next contender because some team will likely give up 2 top 5 prospects to land what is likely to be the best pitcher on the trade market. Worst case scenerio is that the Sox don't trade him, offer him arbitration(slight chance of working out a long-term deal), and get a 1st round and supplement pick. I think the supplement picks can be used as bargaining chips in the sense that KW can say "if you don't offer me better than 2 first round calibur prospects, than I am just going to let Buehrle walk and you will miss out on a difference maker".

Don't look now but ND appears to be heading for another top 5 calibur recruiting class. They already have 14 commitments including 8 - 4 star recruits and 1 - 5 star recruit. Rumor is that they will likely get a commitment from 4 star safety Blanton today as well. With that said, the most important aspect of this early success is ND's ability to fill their needs on defense, especially areas of weakness. ND's two biggest weaknesses heading into this recruiting season were - DT and LB. ND already has 4 DT(1-2 might be moved to DE in the new 3-4 system) including 2 - 4 star DT, and 3 LB including 2 - 4 star LB. Add Blanton to the mix and ND appears to be matching the talent they receive on offense. The addition of Brown as DC is already having a drastic effect on defensive recruiting. ND still hasn't landed that difference maker(5 star recruit) on defense, but loading up on 4 star recruits to complement the difference maker type recruits on offense and ND will be in the title hunt possible as early as the 2008/2009 season.

When is Getz suppose to be back? I was semi-optimistic about him after his solid start to the season(I love high average great plate disipline players and think the Sox offense needs more of those type of players). However, with his injury combined with the addition of Richar his window might be closing.

I always like to remain optimistic about the Sox picks, but another potential negative is his age. He will be 24 in November. Most top prospects are in the majors by the age 24, and he will likely be in A ball.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan99 @ May 10, 2007 -> 12:55 AM) No Thats what I thought, but Aboz made it sound like Crawford being redshirted would free up a scholarship to offer Hamga.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ May 9, 2007 -> 12:59 AM) Right now his top 2 are us and Miami (FL), Rutgers is 3rd and Texas has stopped recruiting him at this point. I think once KS shows him the place where 17,000 will be on their feet cheering as opposed to 5,000 fans who are ready for spring football practice, this kid could be ours. I'd really like to finish with a 2008 class of Ebanks, Mackey, Jones and Garcia. I also heard that we still have a legitimate shot at Beas Hamga for 2007 (Holman could go to prep school or Jordan Crawford could be redshirted). Does redshirting a player free up a scholarship? Here are some random tidbits about IU basketball/recruiting: *I really hope that Holman doesn't need prep school, because I have really been impressed by the video I have seen of him. I saw some offensive potential/talent to match his shot-blocking, which is rare for big men right out of high school. *I heard that Shaw is still up in the air about transfering as well. I do like Shaw, but I would gladly trade his scholarship for Hamga. IU could use all the big guys they can get after Davis's recruiting/lineups with only 1 guy over 6'4 on the court at a time. *On a side note, I heard some info that Hamga wants to go to a place where he can start right away(like UK) and he might not have that chance at IU if Holman beats him out. *It appears that IU is second with Ebanks behind Miami at this point. I think KS needs to get a commitment this weekend from Ebanks or else he will likely be wearing a Miami uniform in 2008. *It is looking more likely that Garcia might need a year of prep school. Lets hope that IU can secure a commitment in the near future whether he is ready this year or not. No need to give the big fish another year to recruit this kid if he needs a year of prep school. *If IU strikes out with key big men(already missed out on Gates and Jurick), than look for them to go after Zeller pretty hard. He has been getting some positive press and most think he has more upside then his older brother. *Finally, Mackey is getting a lot of pub of late and saw himself rise quite a bit in the most recent rankings. He might have an outside shot of making the Burger team.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 09:46 PM) There's been several articles like this recently in the Louisville paper. That doesn't mean it can't change before November. Anything can happen in recruiting. Exactly! Wasn't Gordon saying the similar things when asked about his commitment to UI up until he changed his commitment to IU? In most cases, these guys stay true to their word, but you never know for sure until they sign that dotted line.

Buehrle>Wood, I didn’t ignore anything. You simple didn’t read my post carefully. I clearly stated “unless you have seen the kid play a handful of times this PAST season, I don’t think you have the ability to accurately assess his CURRENT ability/talent”. I am sorry, but how a kid plays 2-3 years ago isn’t that relevant compared to how he is currently performing. He is currently ranked as the 7th best JC player and drawing interest from some elite programs, so my guess is that he isn’t as worthless as you think based on seeing him play in high school. No offense to you, but I am going to go with the opinion of scouts/coaches whose job revolves around scouting players versus your opinion on this matter. Let me restate that I don't think that Thomas will be a difference matter, but there is a decent chance that he will do a solid job adding depth up front and filling a huge void. Let me start by saying that I don’t frown on recruiting players who are already committed to another school. With that said, how can Pearl call out Sampson and the way he handled the Gordon situation, only to turn around and do the exact same thing with Mackey? If that isn’t hypocrisy, than I don’t know what is! How about taking the high road, or leading by example, or two wrongs don’t make a right(or any other applicable cliché)? Am I missing something here in regards to Pearl or is he the biggest hypocrite in the world? Like I said, if Mackey decides that UK is a better fit for him in the long-run and ends up committing to UK instead of IU, than I will wish him the best of luck. I just hope he doesn’t go to Tenn. at this point.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 01:13 PM) HAHA, you've also seen him play more than once I assume Imagine that, a couple of UI fans bashing an IU recruit. No offense, but unless you have seen the kid play a handful of times this past season, I don't think you have the ability to accurate assess his current ability/talent. I personally haven't seen him play so I really can't comment on his ability, but I can rely on relatively unbiased sources such as JC rankings and the quality of the colleges interested in Thomas. He is currently rated the 7th best JC player in the country and is drawing interest from the schools listed above along with almost every Big 12 school, so calling him worthless is probably unwarranted and untrue. Is he going to be a star at a high major D1 school? Highly unlikely! Rarely do JC transfers develop into stars at the D1 level. However, he does potentially fill a void on the IU roster. Anyone who has watched IU knows that they have very little depth or talent up front after DJ White. So adding another potential big body that can possible give IU 10-15 quality minutes up front would be a huge addition at this point. Finally, I can't image that you would be saying these things if Thomas decided to commit to UI instead. I am sure that you would remain a little skeptical, as I am right now, but you surely won't be bashing him like you are now. Point being, try and be just a little unbias with your opinions. With all that said, it could be a moot point since IU currently doesn't have any scholarships available.

I want to start by saying that I think KW could have gotten a little more for Garcia, but lets not foget that Garcia has 3 pretty big negatives that hurt his trade value(last year of contract, big salary, and inconsistent performance in 2006). Furthermore, i hear a lot of people comparing the Garcia trade to the package that Colorado received for Jennings, but here are some interesting numbers to consider: Floyd minors - 3.77ERA 706IP Hirsh minors - 2.90ERA 472IP Buchholz minors - 3.92EA 765IP Hirsch's ERA is better, but you have to consider both sample size(fewer IP) and age(Floyd pitched at higher levels at younger age). Floyd and Buchholz minor league numbers are almost identical. Floyd majors - 6.96ERA 108IP Hirsh majors - 6.04ERA 44IP Buchholz majors - 5.89ERA 113IP Buchholz has had a little more success with a similar sample size, but has been far from impressive. Hirsh's sample size is probably too small, but he certainly didn't impress. Floyd ST 2007 - 8.39ERA 9.2IP(including todays impressive performance) Hirsh ST 2007 - 9.45ERA 6.2IP(Sox knocked him around the other day) Buchholz ST 2007 - 6.75ERA 8IP None of these guys has impressed or gone out and won a job based on their ST performances. When you look at things critically, what have Buchholz or Hirsh done that makes them better at this point? It is like bragging about being the tallest midget with these guys at this point. They all have above average raw stuff, and are relatively the same age(Floyd is actually the youngest of the bunch). Hirsh is getting a lot of hype at this point because of his size(6'8) and consistent minor league performance, but I think he is overrated. Would Sox fans be complaining about Hirsh and Buchholz at this point if they were in a Sox uniform and struggling? Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't a team have to offer a FA player arbitration in order to get compensation via draft picks if that player signs with a different team? Everyone assumes that the Sox are guaranteed to get draft picks if they lose their players via FA opposed to trades, but that isn't always the case. In fact, based on the Sox track record, I would say it is 50/50 that they offer arbitration so please be careful in assuming that the Sox would automatically get draft picks for FA they lose.

A couple things(adding to Aboz’s points) to consider when comparing Illinois and Indiana’s incoming classes for next year(minus Gordon). 1)Rivals doesn’t put much emphasize on JC players. Ellis has only a 3 star rating on Rivals despite the fact that he is a consensus top 5 JC player(#1 overall in some rankings) and likely 1 of the top 50 players entering the college ranks next year(when considering all avenues – US high school, international, and JC). Scout does a much better job of incorporating JC players into their rankings. 2)Holman is probably rated lower than he should/could be. Holman missed most of his junior and parts of his senior year to a suspension, but when on the court he is one of the top big men in the country. He is an automatic triple double at the high school level and shot up the Rivals ranking shortly after being reinstated and playing only a handful of games. Unlike a lot of athletic high school big men, he also has a decent offensive game at this point as well. If he played his entire junior/senior seasons, than he would probably be a top 50 overall player as well. 3)In regards to Illinois class being more well-rounded, I have to question that as well. Indiana has two good combo guards in Crawford and Gordon. Neither are true PG, but both can be used as primary ball handlers(both have good size as well at 6’3 and 6’4 respectfully). At 6’5 with good athleticism, Ellis can play either the 2 or 3 and be a match-up problem. McGee is kind of a in between a 3 and a 4, but at 6’7 220lb he should have no problem playing the 4 in the Big Ten. Holman is 6’9, but with his reach and athleticism plays closer to 7’0 and will be a very good 5 in the Big Ten. So I would argue that Indiana does have a very well-rounded class coming in next year. I don’t think that Weber is a terrible recruiter, however, he needs to do a better job of locking down the Chicago area and closing with blue chip caliber recruits. Sampson doesn’t have a track record as a great recruiter either(minus his last class at OU), so it will be interesting to see if he can continue to land blue chip caliber recruits at IU and combine good X’s and O’s coaching with good recruiting. He understands the importance of keeping top Indiana players instate, and that is a key. It will be interesting to see if he opens up his coaching style a little(a little more offensive) if he is able to land blue chip recruits on a consistent basis.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Feb 9, 2007 -> 01:52 PM) i think you need to make a distinction between football and basketball recruiting. a lot of what goes on in football doesn't in basketball, so it's hard to compare the two. my biggest problem with weis was his hypocrisy. to stand up there on signing day and lambast kids for not remaining committed when he was trying his best to get kids to de-commit was ridiculous. he b****ed about benn being a silent verbal and changing his mind, when he experienced the exact same thing with robert hughes who was a silent verbal to illinois and changed his mind later. that stuff happens in college football and i wish charlie would shut his yap about it and be consistent instead of talking out of both sides of his mouth. as far as the zook new york times thing goes, illinois just keeps getting more positive fall-out from it. a good article about it was in the orlando sentinel today: bianchi I am just curious, where did you hear that Hughes was a silent to Illinois? I haven't seen anything on that, although I am certainly not saying that it isn't true. I am obviously a huge ND fan, but Weis doesn't have much room to talk. He got just as many committed players to change their commitment to ND(Gray, Smith, Walker) as he lost(Trattou, GLittle, and CLittle). Unfortunately, that is the way the recruiting game is played today. If he doesn't like it, than he should lead by example. In regards to Gordon, I think that situation is a little different. Any time you have a coaching change, either the school that the player is committed to or a school that he was strongly considering, I see no problem in reconsidering your commitment. A player commits to both the school and the coach IMO. Like I have stated before, the only issue I have with the Gordon situation is the fact that he didn't publicly decommit from Illinois. I don't think there was anything illegal or against the rules with the Gordon recruitment. Simple a kid from Indiana wanting to go to IU after they hired a coach that he liked. In regards to Zook, I think it is partially sore loser syndrome. ND is reportedly one of the schools that feel that Zook has cheated, but I think that is really only because they lost Benn and Wilson. People might have to accept that Zook might simple be a great people person and relates well to recruits. Furthermore, sometimes kids want to stay close to home or go to a school with a lot of kids from a similar area(DC for example). Also, when you have a bad record that usually means that there is instant PT available and that can be a big selling point. Go to a powerhouse and wait 2-3 years before you see the field or go to a non-powerhouse and start from day 1. Unless there is hard evidence against Zook I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt.

The Bears lost for a couple of reasons. 1) The Colts are simply the better team. Can the Bears beat the Colts? Of course, but more times than not the Colts are going to beat the Bears. They dominated the game in every facet except special teams. The Bears were lucky that they only lost by 12 points. It could have easily been 20+ win if it wasn't for special teams(Hester's TD return, Colts missing a PAT and short FG) or the Colts settling(3 sub-30 yard FG and not attempting a FG in the 4th). I am sorry, but when a team gets dominated like the Bears did you simple can't chalk it up to a bad game by the Bears(you guys know all the stats by this point). Give credit where credit it due, the Colts are simple the better team. 2) Bears defense. I know that a lot of you guys are defending the Bears defense, but they did not play that good, especially considering all the hype they receive. Yes, they did a decent job of bending and not breaking(holding the Colts to 3 sub-30 yard FG) and holding the Colts offense to 22 points, but that number is deceiving(considering the fact that the Colts missed a PAT, a short FG, and decided not to kick a FG in the 4th - all factors the Bears D has no control over). Any time you allow a team to have 24 1st downs, 430 total yards, 191 rushing yards, 80+ plays, and 38+ minutes of poss. you did not play a good game defensively. Yes, they were on the field for a long time in part due to the offense, but shouldn't the Bears D take some responsibility for not getting the Colts offense off the field? The Colts had 13 series(not including the Addai fumble on the 1st play) and only 2 were 3 and outs(not a good ratio). Finally, anyone who watched the game saw the Bears routinely miss tackles as well. Overall, it was not an impressive performance by the Bears D any way that you slice it. 3) Play calling/game plan. Anyone who has watched the Colts at all, knows that the Colts offense struggles against teams that blitz and have a lot of movement pre-snap to confuse Mannings reads. Yet, the Bears D rarely blitzed and rarely moved when the Colts were set pre-snap. Manning picked up on this and exploited it by mixing in runs and short passes, while the Bears made no adjustments. The Bears offense fell into the same trap. The Colts defense is very similar to the Bears defense in regards to game plan/style of D, yet the Bears rarely attempted the same short passes that were effective against the Bears D(especially given the weather conditions). 4) Rex. Throwing 2 bad INTs and fumbling twice(one lost and one resulting in a big loss) is going to cause you to loss a lot of games no matter who you play(with the exception of AZ maybe). With the Bears D and running game, I think they would be much better off with a QB that can manage a game and doesn't make many turnovers that cost them the game(I know I am preaching to the choir). The Bears are still in good shape though. They play in a very weak division and conference, and have the talent to reach the SB a few more times over the next couple of years, so stay positive Bears fans.

ND finally got some good recruiting news. Unfortunately, they lost out on Peters(GT) and Wright(Flo) as expected, but they were able to take away two other recruits. Walker(K) - Was committed to Louisville, but was wavering after Petrino left. Answered that he will change his commitment to ND today. This is a nice addition considering that ND's kicking game was bad to say the least last year, and freshman kicker Burkhart didn't instill much faith last year. Smith(LB) - Was committed to Iowa, but was always a big ND fan after his father played for the Irish. ND originally didn't offer him, but new DC Brown liked what he saw in Smith and ND offered him. He changed his commitment last night and gives ND a good looking four star LB for their new three-four defense.

Bad week for ND defensive recruiting. Four star DE Justin Trattou decommits from ND to commit to Florida. This is a huge blow considering that Trattou was one of the few potential difference maker type defensive recruits, and he would have likely started from day one at ND. I always thought that Trattou was underrated, especially by Rivals. He had another big year stats wise, lead his team to an undefeated season, and really impressed during the AAA week. One coach said that he was the most dominating DE on the East squad and was beating the OT so often that they moved Marvin Austin to OT to try and slow him down in practice. Scout recently moved him to a five star recruit and rivals will likely upgrade his rating to a high four star and possible even a five star rating when their new rankings come out. To sum up, a huge blow for ND. With all that said, while I am upset that ND is losing a great recruit, I have nothing wrong with a player decommitting. I think these kids have a right to change their minds and find the school that they feel is the best fit for them(or the one that pays the most). A verbal commitment is not written in stone, and until these guys sign the dotted line they have the right to change their minds. Lets not forget that these are still boy/young men and the decision they make will have a drastic effect on the rest of their lives. That is why I have no problem with Trattou decommitting, or Benn supposely being a silent commitment to ND and changing his mind, or Gordon deciding that IU was a better fit for him(although basketball is a little different). ND took another hit when four star athlete(likely to be a LB) Malcom Smith choose SC over ND. This wasn't a huge surprise considering all the writing on the wall was pointing to SC(him being from Cal, his brother playing for SC, ect), but it was ND's last shot to get a potential difference maker at the LB position. ND is still in the running for four star safety Wright, although word on the street is that his visit to ND was not great and ND is not in good shape with him(will likely come down to OSU and Miami). Four star DE/DT Peters is planning on taking a visit to ND, but word on the street is that they have to really impress on this visit to have a legit shot with him. He would lessen the blow from the loss of Trattou, but I think he ends up in the South(if you are making pick one school I would say GT). Some think that ND will go hard after DE Wilson with new defensive cord. Brown's ties to Chicago and Hughes committing to ND, but I think that it is an extreme long-shot and he will stay at Ill. It looks like another top ten class for ND, but still some questions about the defensive side of the ball.

whitesoxfan101, don't forget about Aldrige. He will likely be the #1 back to start the year. Personally, I am not a huge Aldrige fan based on what I saw last year. He runs too uptight and rigid, and rarely makes people miss. He is a bigger back and does have the ability to break tackles, but I didn't see a 5 star RB. Granted, I have to take into consideration that he was a true freshman and coming off a pretty serious knee injury his senior year, but I wasn't impressed. Chisoxfn, I agree with you that Walker is an underrated COLLEGE RB, with the key word being college. I don't think Walker will be a consistent every down back in the NFL. He just doesn't have the measurables that scouts look for. 1) He is undersized(legit 5'9 195) 2) He is slow(4.55-4.6 40 time) 3) He doesn't make many people miss on a consistent basis. He is very patient and hits the hole well, is a very good receiver out of the backfield, and does a good job of blocking/picking up the blitz. That sounds like a classic 3rd down back to me. In fact, I think a good comparison would be Kevin Faulk of the Pats. At best, I see Walker going in the 3rd round, and more likely going in day 2. I do think it was wise for him to leave after this year for a couple of reasons. 1) This years RB class is relatively weak 2) He is leaving on a positive note. An impressive bowl game against one of the top defenses in the country. 3) Next years ND team is going to be young and inexperienced, and go through some growing pains. He probably would have also lost some carries as well.

My initial reaction was that it was a great trade for the Warriors from a talent standpoint(this coming from a Pacers fan). My reasoning was that Harrington was the best player involved in the trade, and I didn't like who the Pacers got in return. However, after I took some time to look at this trade and review some stats I have come to the conclusion that it is a wash with the potential of favoring the Pacers in the long-run. What the Pacers gave up: Harrington - He is a very good player who has really improved his outside shooting since his first run with the Pacers, and I hate to see him go after working so hard to reaquire him. With that said, he never really found a true position with the Pacers and that article about his defense(and rebounding for that matter) is telling. He is still the one guy I hate to see leave, but he really hasn't taken his game to that top level like I hoped. Jackson - I have been wanting to get rid of this guy for some time. He has some decent talent, but he is very inconsistant and his off the court trouble is really hurting this team. He has the reputation for being a great shooter, yet he is not even hitting thirty percent from three point range. He is also very turnover prone for a two guard. Finally, his defense is overrated in my book. When he wants to play D he is good, but he takes a lot of plays off defensively. I have no problem seeing him go. Jas - I was never a big fan of his from the start. He is a one dimensional player. He is a good shooter, but that is it. He isn't a true PG(undersized at SG), is very turnover prone, and is a liability defensively. What the Pacers got: Murphy/Dunleavy - I hate the fact that both of these guys are defensive liabilities and have bad contracts. When healthy, Murphy is a solid double-double guy. Dunleavy has some potential and could be a decent point forward type player. Both are also good outsider shooters, which is a weakness for the Pacers. With that said, neither player does much for me and it brings up the question who will play the SG(probably Granger and Daniels)? I would love to see the Pacers turn around and trade Dunleavy to LA for Maggette. Ike - This guy is the sleeper in this trade that could turn the trade to favor the Pacers. I live in AZ and got to see this guy play on a regular basis at ASU(hated him being a UA grad), and this guy has some talent(Pacers wanted him in return for Artest last year and GS said no). He didn't really fit into Nelson's running type offense since he is a traditional low post threat, so he saw his minutes drop a little this year. With that said, he still put up some solid numbers(given his minutes). He has some good fundamental low post moves, a decent mid-range game, and he is a very good FT shooter for a big guy. He is a little undersized height wise at a legit 6'7, but he makes up for it with strength and surprising athletism. Remember that he is only two years removed from being a top ten pick. McLeod - Gives them a decent legit PG.

I know that some ND fans are a little upset that ND didn't get as many commitments as expected yesterday, and ND haters are having a field day, but lets put things into perspective. ND is still guaranteed a top ten class for the second year in a row(probably top five if they can land Blackwell). When was the last time that happened at ND with the poor recruiting of the Davis and Willingham eras? Furthermore, a lot of people like to point out that ND can't recruit defensive talent, but if you look at the last two classes you will see quite a bit of defensive talent. Here is a breakdown as things currently stand: DT - This has been the weakest position in recruiting over the past two years. Landing Blackwell would drastically change that. LSU already having three four-star DT in this years class might help ND. *Mullen - was a three star TE who was converted to DT, only about two-seventy but has good quickness. *Williams - just missed out on a four star ranking on rivals, but made the top one-fifty on ESPN, a big three hundred pound run stuffer. DE - ND has added three highly rated DE over the last two years, including two highly underrated prospects in this years class. *Ryan - three star DE that has ideal size at this point (6'5 two-fifty). *Wade - just missed a four star ranking and was rated the tenth best WDE in country last year. *Neal - three star DE(although ESPN has him as the twenty-fifth best player OVERALL); take high school stats with a grain of salt, but this kid had one-hundred plus tackles, twenty plus tackles for loss, and double digit sacks his senior year. *Trattou - four star DE; will see his rating improve in the next ranking; was the star player on an undefeated top ten ranked team; was considered the second best DE at the AAA game behind Griffen; dominated practice at the AAA game to the point where they moved Austin to OT to try and stop him. LB - Didn't land the difference maker they were looking for(Edwards or Donald) and don't have great depth, but they do have a solid group over the past two seasons. *Richardson - three star LB; hybrid between DE and OLB; was used as pass rushing DE this past season. *TSmith - three star LB who just missed four star rating; underrated MLB who will probably start next year; doesn't wow you with his size or speed, but just makes plays. *Nagel - three star LB who played in the AAA game; LB with safety speed and quickness. *Paskorz - one of the top players in the state of Penn; four star athlete; was known more as a RB in high school; has good size and speed and will likely play LB at ND. CB - This is probably the strongest group over the past two years. ND has landed three CB that ranked in the top ten in their overall CB class. *McNeil - four star CB; ranked as the 7th best CB last year; has ideal size(6'0) and speed(four-four). *Walls - four star CB; ranked as third best CB last year; also has ideal size(6'0) and speed(four-four); played some last year. *Gray - four star CB; ranked as fourth best CB this year; doesn't have great size or speed, but is an underrated prospect who played very well in the AAA game. S - ND has added quality depth at this position with one potential playmaker in HSmith *Brown - three star S with very good speed and cover skills. *Gaines - three star S who is a big hitter and great against the run. *Gordon - three star S who is also a big hitter and good against the run. *HSmith - four star S; think Zibby with a little more size, speed, and experience as safety. So as you can see, ND has gotten some pretty good talent on the defensive side of the ball, especially at the DE and CB positions. ND still has a decent shot at landing DT Blackwell(50/50 between LSU and ND), have a slim chance with LB MSmith(likely headed the SC), and a slim chance with S Wright(likely headed to OSU). All three of those guys are potential difference makers that have the ability to start from day one, so landing any of those three guys would be huge. There has also been some talk of moving some top offensive players to the defensive side of the ball: Tate(from WR to CB), GLittle(from WR to LB), and Olsen(from OL to DT). Do these two classes have the makings of a dominating D that will carry ND? No, but it should improve the talent and depth level on the defensive side of the ball and provide ND with a respectable D. Besides, with Weis as the offensive coach and the type of offensive prospects he is bringing in, ND's D doesn't need to be great to contend for a BCS bowl(no smartass comments).

I hate being right! A bad day for ND fans, especially in terms of defensive recruiting as S Williams selects UM, LB Edwards selects FL, and LB Donald selects Tenn. The only potential good news is that two top DL(Barksdale and Davis) selected LSU which might help ND's chances with DT Blackwell. Besides that, unless there are a few surprises, ND is relatively done recruiting this year and will likely just miss out on a top 5 class. On a positive note, they did get a commitment from OL Romine as expected, and he has really impressed during practice at the AAA. Weis has done a nice job of rebuilding the OL depth with 1 5-star recruit and 6 4-star recruits over the past 2 seasons(plus 3 3-star recruits).