JorgeFabregas

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 21, 2009 -> 02:59 PM) Eh, he was that same shape when he threw 222 IP and stole the Cy Young from Johan in '05. Yeah, but he was 4 years and 3 or so injuries younger then. He didn't pitch that many MLB innings in the the following 3 years combined. It's easier to play in lousy shape when you're younger. After a while it starts to take a cumulative toll on the joints.

Got a link? That just seems to be one of the many rumors floating around out there--among other deals involving Hughes.

Hollinger's take: Chicago: This is an outstanding deal for the Bulls, who dump one bad contract in Nocioni and get a big boost for the playoff run with Salmons and Miller. Of course, the Bulls were hoping to strike richer with their combination of Drew Gooden's expiring contract and the $5 million exception from the Joe Smith trade, but once Chris Bosh and Amare Stoudemire were off the table this was the next best option. The moves set the Bulls up for a nice free-agent run in 2010, especially if Salmons opts out of his contract that year. And since Chicago is enough of a major league city to be a free-agent lure despite its blustery weather, the Bulls stand a decent chance of ending up with Bosh or Stoudemire via that route a year and a half down the road. In the short term it helps too. In Miller, the Bulls get a physical interior player who can shoot and pass, and one who may be rejuvenated by playing on a better team. He should be an excellent complement to the Bulls' more athletic but less skilled combo of Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah. Certainly he's better than Aaron Gray. As for Salmons, he's quietly become among the most productive two-way wing players in the league and should supplant Larry Hughes and Thabo Sefolosha in Chicago's guard rotation. If the Bulls' discussions to move Kirk Hinrich pan out, it seems Salmons' role will be nearly as large in Chicago as it was in Sacramento. Certainly he's a major upgrade over Nocioni, who had taken to hoisting wild shots, and could put the Bulls over the top in their quest for a playoff berth. However, if I'm wrong and the Bulls can't carve out playing time for Salmons, there could be trouble. The one negative about Salmons is his reputation as a me-first guy who gripes if he's not getting lots of minutes and shots. Grade: A-minus

What the Suns want in absolute terms is not important. The relevant questions are what they can get and how interested they are in moving Amare. I'm sure they'd like LeBron. The deal they proposed is simply not realistic.

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 02:52 PM) I wouldn't plan on getting him. Who will the Bulls match that equals Rudy Gay, Hakim Warrick, and Mike Conley? The Bulls don't have a deal to match that. However, that was reportedly a trade proposed by the Suns and rejected by the Griz.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 11:26 AM) I never heard that story. Not so much of a story. He mentioned in a couple of interviews that he took the el to the stadium. Not sure which line. Red, I assume.

Yeah, I love that story as well as the fact that MacDougal reportedly took the El to home games. I don't love that truck or the fact that MacDougal sucks, though.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Feb 15, 2009 -> 11:32 PM) he seems pretty frugal

What metric values his performance lat year at $14.7 million?

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Feb 11, 2009 -> 08:37 PM) First nightmare situation: All the CFs are their usual bad in spring training. The last time Brian Anderson had a bad spring training was 2004.

Zach Zaidman annoys me. This evening he said that Amare gets a lot of points outside. As evidence, he pointed out that Amare has a 40%+ shooting percentage from the 3-point stripe. He did not mention that he has all of 7 attempts this year.

2 years, $20 million http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/base...ts/?eref=sircrc

When you were young you were the king of Tyler Flowers...

QUOTE (rangercal @ Feb 5, 2009 -> 02:48 PM) Steves photo is better than your steeler depot photos By what criteria? A better moment in time? You like it better than the second link I posted, which is from an AP photographer? Did Steve's photo smile at you? If I uploaded it to a Cardinals website would it work?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 5, 2009 -> 02:19 PM) I have yet to see definitive evidence that his toe ever touched the endzone. That is all. Of course, I have also yet to see definitive evidence that Warner's fumble wasn't really an incomplete pass. Here: http://www.steelersdepot.com/blog/2009/02/...-for-touchdown/ Here: http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l50/rope...0109_photo9.jpg

QUOTE (lostfan @ Feb 2, 2009 -> 11:03 AM) I've heard, but have not confirmed, that they actually did review the play quickly but the TV crew dropped the ball. But I'm not completely buying it since a review takes at least a couple minutes to make sure it's right. I had NFL Gamecast pulled up and it did say "play under review."

He has Tyrus as the PF of the present/future and the Bulls trading for a starting PF...

To wit: the free market took a lot longer to get hot dogs and hot dog buns to be sold in the same quantity.

Well, unless Daniel Cain was outright lying on the criminal complaint... They will need better evidence to impeach him. However, I think it's a great bet to assume that better tapes will be played in the criminal trial.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2009 -> 08:17 AM) Did anyone else listen to the tapes last night and wonder if that was the best of the evidence they had? You really had to read into his statements to get out what the government is saying. I am sure there is more, but what was released yesterday was pretty weak on its own merits. Did you read any of the criminal complaint? The feds have better tapes. They just didn't release them for the impeachment trial.

Oh yeah? It's a willy-nilly patchwork right now? Are there markets currently with no over the air HD signal?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 27, 2009 -> 07:27 PM) So who exactly should be deciding how the airwaves are divided up? I can't imagine anything closer to a definition of interstate commerce than that. Right. Public airwaves and if it was handled strictly by the market the conversion would be a willy-nilly patchwork. Or would just never happen at all.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jan 27, 2009 -> 07:01 PM) That's pretty cheap. Yes it is. I was using a conservative estimate since I was arguing against paying for it. Still, that's $18,000 for 50 years of TV watching.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jan 27, 2009 -> 12:46 PM) Get basic cable. Come into the 21st century for God's sake. No. I do not want to spend $360/yr on tv in perpetuity.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 27, 2009 -> 11:36 AM) I should note, that after the transition, some channels will be broadcasting stronger and on a different frequency (channel 2 in chicago is moving to channel 12). So, that will help some. As for the delay... yea, if you dont know about it, you;re a fool. It's been badgered for the last 6 months. Shame on you! but, a 4 month delay isnt that big of a deal. but no more delays. That's good. That's and WTTW are the only stations that I don't get right now.