thxfrthmmrs

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Feb 9, 2014 -> 08:56 PM) I think anyone with a brain knows that was Pat Riley's work in those early Knicks years when he took over and implemented the 1-3-1 trap. (which was brilliant and he was also the first coach to watch video during halftime to break down adjustments) Guys like Oakley, Ewing (although he was already a stud), Starks, etc. were already all defensive players before Van Gundy took over. Now, he used alot of Pat's philosophy in his coaching and it helped hide...er..."made non defensive players better" such as LJ as you alluded to (same with Thibodeau on certain guys currently), but his in-game adjustments/creativity (which is part of what he was criticized for) was indeed poor. This is a rather flawed argument. Your premise was McGrady should get some slack for not playing for the "best" defensive coach, but then you went on to discredit Van Gundy in his early days as a head coach. From 2004 to 2007, the Rockets were perennial ranked in the top 10 or top 5 in defensive efficiency. He wasn't the best defensive coach, but it doesn't take the best defensive coach to coach the best defensive player. And you can even say McGrady was a below average defender in certain years prior to 2008. I've watched most of the Magic/Rockets games from 2002 to 2008, and in certain games, T-Mac looked brilliant defensively when he tried. The defensive work in 2005 playoffs against Dirk was brilliant. But he was never counted on to defend the other team's best players otherwise, even at the end of games. The superstars we have today, Lebron, Durant, George, and Kobe in years past, all guarded the other team's alpha dog in late stretches or even throughout the game.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 9, 2014 -> 03:01 PM) If only Rose's work ethic was better, maybe he would've - oh that's right, he still would've gotten hurt over and over and over. Just like Grant Hill and Penny and others. If your body betrays you, nothing else matters. Please, stop trolling. You are confusing injury to work ethic.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 9, 2014 -> 02:48 PM) No, the ignorance is coming from you for not acknowledging the chronic back issues and all the other physical ailments that cut down his career. I'm sure Van Gundy could go back and say a lot of things about guys he's coached, you know, since he won exactly nothing and the only thing he's really remembered for is calling MJ a con-man and hanging off of Alonzo Mourning's leg like a f***in' idiot. No doubt injury has derailed his career, but what I am trying to get at is even when healthy, McGrady wasn't trying as hard as he could have, and yet, he was close to being the best player in the league for a few years. If you have time, please read this piece, it pretty much sums up McGrady's career in 10 minutes. http://tuesdayswithhorry.com/2013/08/28/th...hat-comes-next/

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 9, 2014 -> 02:20 PM) GMAB. Let me guess - you have to scream, yell and punch guys in the face to be a competitor. Guess what, LeBron doesn't do that either and he might be the GOAT in 5 years. T-mac routinely had those Magic teams in the playoffs with guys like Pat Garrity, Darrell Armstrong and Andrew Declerq. T-mac put up most of his great scoring seasons in the early 2000's which was the peak of defense aka, grab, maul, punch, wrestle, etc. In Houston, neither he or Yao could stay healthy at the same time. I don't know what Van Gundy said and don't really care. He got two scoring titles through undeniable talent but yet questionable work ethic. If he had put in more work in his jump shot, use better shot selections, and compete harder on defense, he could be have been hands down best player in the league for at least 5 years, that's how talented he is. If you choose to ignore a comment coming from a guy who coached him for 4 years, and who is around him for everyday of the basketball season, that just shows how ignorant you choose to be sometimes.

You're kidding right? Even when he was the best offensive player in the league, T-Mac wasn't the biggest competitor on the court, often settling for outside jumpers when he could take anyone off the dribble. He was an All Defense talent when he tried, but he never made much effort on that end. And even Van Gundy has called him out in recent years about the amount of work he has put in when he was with the Rockets. Vince also had the same issue, but I'd take maxed out T-Mac over him for range, playmaking, and length advantages.

Looking at Kevin Durant today, I can't help but picture how good McGrady would have been if he had better work ethic and put everything together.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 26, 2014 -> 10:45 PM) Really? You liked Orton/Cena? Man, the party I was with hated that match(as did I) It was a decent match, and as the others had point out, Orton played the crowd pretty well as a heel. But the crowd just seen that movie way too many times, and they made the match feel worse than it was. Frankly, until the E puts a guy like Bryan, or to some extent, Bray in the WM main event, I don't think they will be pleasing any fans out there.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Jan 26, 2014 -> 10:08 PM) The Roman Reigns chant both confirms and denies this post lol. Umm no. Batista is the last guy the fans wanted to see win the Rumble. They would much rather have a guy who worked his ass off the past 2 years win it than a guy who failed at MMA and come back and get back on top, when he wasn't anything special before he left. Even if Reigns had won, most fans would still be pissed Bryan wasn't in the Rumble, because he deserves it more than anyone else. The issue is there is just too much played out crap with the E these days. Personally I thought Orton and Cena was a lot better than the reaction suggested from the crowd, but they were chanting for Bryan majority of the way.

In 2014, apparently the fans decide who the face and the heel is. And it seems like Daniel Bryan or bust for them

The crowd is not having any of Cena vs Orton tonight

Looks like all the p**** money weed is throwing Jimmy off his game

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 06:14 PM) If you look at their raw numbers in Japan during their final seasons in that country, he outpitched both Daisuke and Darvish significantly, and did so at a younger age. Yet no one said Abreu will be elite from day one because he out performed his countrymen in Cuba. We can agree that it's difficult to project someone's career in MLB based on minor league stats or international stats. Arsenal wise, Tanaka is widely considered a grade below Darvish, and I don't think you can say Darvish's first year was "elite". With the type of contract he just signed, and the pressure from the fans and media to perform right away, I have a hard time imagining him being anywhere close to elite.

This just in, Keith Law thinks Tanaka will be an elite pitcher from day one.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 22, 2014 -> 09:30 AM) If he sucks it's a 7 year deal. If he is awesome, it's a 4 year deal. If his performance is mixed, it depends on how good he was in 2016-2017. What is funny is all the speculation, all the fake information by supposed insiders who make their living being insiders, and in the end it winds up being almost exactly what was predicted when it first came out he may be posted. What's even funnier is people taking serious time in denying any rumors of Tanaka linking to other teams and trying just as hard to find any new rumors of Tanaka to Sox out there. This shouldn't have been a 160 page thread, it speaks volume to the number of irrelevant and overreacting posts in here.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 22, 2014 -> 09:08 AM) What fans were holding out hope for was that the luxury tax would impact how the Dodgers and Yankees do business. It obviously does not. What this shows is that the posting cost Tanaka's Japanese team $30M that ended up in Tanaka's pocket anyway and wasted a lot of other peoples time. No. The rumored contract was upward of $140 million all along, luxury tax or not. Which definitely puts him out of Sox range. The only unknown factor was how much Tanaka values other factors in the offer.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 22, 2014 -> 09:02 AM) [/b] Said no one, ever. I was more so referring to this post. QUOTE (Frank_Thomas35 @ Jan 22, 2014 -> 08:01 AM) Argubaly the only real "contenders" out of the supposed "finalists" are the Dodgers. Every other team has major question marks even with the addition of Tanaka. That's why it's important to look at the future. Other than the Dodgers, I would put both the Chicago teams above the Yankees. They have a lot of age on that roster, and a lot of players coming back from injury. I think there is much more to his decision then the three factors you mentioned.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 22, 2014 -> 08:56 AM) Who was fooled? The White Sox flat out said if it comes down to money they will not get him. The cubs were the one's that said they would not be outbid. I think the Sox ended up around 5 years $100M not enough to outbid teams but if was not about money they had a shot did some work and it did not work out. He was an ideal for what they need at this time as he was for every other team. The general sentiment is the Dodgers and Yankees can over a lot more than we can. My guess was he signs for 7/$147, and Sox offered 7/$119. But bigger unknown was how much Tanaka would value the money over other factors. For those who felt Tanaka would leave $30 mil on the table, they fooled themselves. Hahn was wright, if it hasn't come down to $$, we had as much a chance as anyone, but the sad reality was it most likely came down to money, but a lot of people here refused to see that.

Props to all those who fooled themselves into believing Sox were higher than the Yankees on Tanaka's destination list.

QUOTE (Downtown518 @ Jan 22, 2014 -> 08:41 AM) Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal BREAKING: Tanaka to #Yankees, seven years, $155M, opt-out after fourth year. YESS!

Did anyone else notice the fact that Batista now rocks some tight ass jeans, got a tat around his belly button, and waxed his eye brows?

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Jan 21, 2014 -> 11:36 AM) Why is MLB radio saying it's down to LA, Cubs, D-backs and Yankees? Because Dodgers will clear cap space for Tanaka by trading Kershaw to the Sox, effectively putting the Sox out of the race. Everybody wins.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 21, 2014 -> 08:41 AM) God some of the noobies here are making this thread unbearable to read at times. Mostly just 14 year olds who are dying to find something to be excited about

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 20, 2014 -> 07:12 PM) When has anybody ever written that the Sox were favorites to land anybody? It certainly wasn't with Abreu, and even with Dunn it seemed like the national media kept pushing other scenarios even when it seemed obvious to everybody that he was going to the Sox. Good thing you brought up Abreu and Dunn because those two are the two biggest contracts in our team history. And tanaka might end up getting more than those two contracts combined. And I believe we offered the biggest contract in Abreu's case. Money isn't the end all be all, but judging by the figures threw out there, other teams are offering a lot more than we can. Which isn't a bad thing, I wouldn't want to see the Sox shell out CC Sabathia money on a guy who's far from a sure thing

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Jan 20, 2014 -> 07:03 PM) MLB writers don't know s*** about Tanaka, he and his camp have been silent this whole time and every "source" that has been cited so far is just the writer's excuse for making up bulls***. Yet if the MLB writers wrote that Sox has the best chance here, some people here would be creaming in their pants

I have not been following too much on the Tanaka sweepstake, but all I know that's confirmed was that we met with Tanaka in L.A. So do people really posted 125 pages of speculations when no one outside of south Chicago see us as serious contenders?