ORS

Who cares what UK did in the '50s? I'm talking about recent history, which is what you should be looking at when determining the strongest basketball conferences. There are 5 conferences that have been stronger in the tournament than the SEC has the last 5-7 years (recent history), and they are the ACC, Big-East, Big-10, Big-12, and Pac-10. BTW, by your loopy logic, the Pac-10 is the best basketball conference now becuase of what UCLA did in the '60s/'70s. Sometimes it is just better to keep your mouth shut and let everyone think you are fool than it is to say something and prove them right.

Ask that question again when you have a 2 y/o. They don't sit still for 3+ hrs. Plus, it was a night game and Tampa is 2+ hrs. away, meaning we didn't get home until 1 a.m. or so. I took my wife to one game, but she couldn't go two nights in a row with little sleep. For those interested, she is due April 26 (right around the corner), so I will post some pics in the photo gallery once my daughter is born. EDIT: And if you are asking about whether or not I will be taking them to some games this season, well, the same reasons for not taking the whole family apply. Sleep is a precious commodity when you have a newborn, so I doubt the wife will want to be out all night with a new baby. It will probably be a couple of years before the whole family takes in a game. Hopefully I'll be up north by then and my daughters can have their first live baseball experience at the best ballpark in the game, Fenway.

Yes, it counts to the fact that he is the only Korean position player in the Majors and last year's HR Derby was the first one where the participants represented countries. This is good pick up since it provides some insurance in the Minors without costing much in return. For a team with the Sox resources and their question marks at corner IF positions, the $750K salary due to Choi is a drop in the bucket for the insurance he provides. To whoever mentioned Choi's PECOTA comp to Oritz circa 2003. Let's take that with a grain of salt. I mean, Ortiz' 2003 line of .288/.369/.592/.961 with 14.5 AB/HR is very similar to Choi's 90th % projection line of .289/.400/.560/.960 with ~15 AB/HR. However, there is only a 10% chance that Choi's 2006 will match or exceed that (90th % forcast means that there is a 90% chance that the numbers will be below the numbers listed).

Watch out Stocker, GIARSF will get on your case about putting Florida and GMU in that group since his true rant is really about the overratedness of the Big East and the ACC. You know, the two conferences that have produced 6 out the last 7 national champions, including the last 5 in a row. Clearly those conferences deserve no national attention, and the media should spend a lot more time focussing on the SEC. [/sarcasm]

Oh, one of those games. Don't worry, I watched enough of Sean Dockery this year to know what you are going through. I mean, I love the kid's heart on the court, but at times I just prayed he wouldn't touch the ball when he was on the court because he would invariably jack up a bad shot or throw the ball into the stands.

I'm not getting that game because I live in the South East, so I'm getting the UF game. I didn't watch much college ball this year, so I didn't see Washington play before the conference tournaments began. I have to say, they are an impressive team. Really well coached, and they can fill it up.

Unless you are studying a science, engineering, or finance, you most likely won't have to take a class beyond Calculus I. And there are a lot of degrees that don't require anything higher than College Algebra, so it may be no big deal if you have to remediate a bit. I had to do it for a semester when I started college because even though I zipped through the placement exam for College Algebra, there wasn't time to take higher level placements due to the fact that I registered 2 days before classes started. I had time during the break after that semester and I skipped Trig and Pre-Calc by passing those. Most schools don't allow you to attempt to place higher than Calc I.

Sure, what are you studying?

I just checked it. Each game you have a 1/2 chance of getting correct. So the formula is: (1/2)^(32+16+8+4+2+1) = 1.0842 x 10^(-19) Divide 1 by that and you get: 9.223 x 10^18 which is: 9,223,000,000,000,000,000 So, you are missing 6 orders of magnitude.

I feel bad for BC because the refs kept 'Nova in that game, but they did go 8-17 from the stripe. That's horrible.

What planet do the NCAA refs come from? A BC player was just pulled to floor, and the ref calls a travel. f***ing unbelievable.

Opening day. Thank god for mlb.tv; I can watch both games at the same time.

The one guilty of an illegal act is whoever provided the reporters with the information. Once it is in their hands, the freedom of the press takes over, IMO. Now, if they were guilty of somehow stealing this information, then the onus is on them. Somehow, I doubt they donned black mask and gloves and went Hudson Hawk into a government building. What I find interesting is the fact that Bonds' lawsuit is seeking the profits made from the book. By not suing for libel and only seeking the profits from the book sales, he is essentially saying, "Yeah, all the s*** in the book is true, but you aren't making a dime off my f***ed up tale."

Bonds to Sue Authors of Steroids Book, 3/24/06, AP What's the illegal behavior Bonds is suing for? Libel? Defamation of Character? Nope. His lawyer contends the use of illegally obtained Grand Jury transcripts constitutes contempt of court. Bonds knows his goose is cooked.

f*** it, I'm double posting. Unbelievable finish going down in the UCLA/Zags game.

Wow, UCLA got jobbed on that layup call.

Sorry, it's not an article. It's an image of a page of a memo from the commissioner's office sent to all the MLB teams' FOs. The url is an ESPN url and it appears to be from an ESPN the magazine piece. Image Link I back checked on google and found this. Article Link I seriously doubt those two investigative journalists are going to risk libel against 3 very wealthy ballplayers with the resources to fight a long drawn out court battle. Not to mention the uber-powerful MLBPA, which it wouldn't surprise me if they took up the fight for these guys if this was a fabrication. Incidentally, Bonds recently threatened to file a lawsuit, but nothing official has been done yet. Given the sourcing used in this book, I'll bet that Bonds is just posturing. Come on, man. Saying, "they probably didn't do it as Yankees, and that's what matters right now", is the last straw in the line of rationalizations. I mean, what did you mean by that other than "they weren't cheating as Yankees, so it's OK". This dismisses the fact that what they did permanently affected their bodies, and we don't even know the timeframe that the book lists for their drug use. It ok to change your mind and call these guys what they really are, cheaters. Hell, I've even changed my mind on the subject. I initially thought that steroids were no big deal since they don't put the fat part of the bat on the ball. As it turns out, these guys were using steroids and HGH. HGH improves eyesight and visuospatial performance (hand/eye coordination). So it does help them put the fat part of the bat on the ball. If I can change, ......and you can change, .... then, .....we can all change. Cue the Rocky music. EDIT: I forgot to mention something. The memo also lists prescription medications taken without a valid prescription to be illegal. HGH is a controlled substance (prescription only), so that means their use of HGH was outlawed by the 1991 memo.

The only statistical nitpick I have is that BA is the worst of the big 3 rate stats. By how they correlate to runs scored, they rank as such. 1. SLG 2. OBP 3. BA Of course, the combination of OBP + SLG (OPS) correlates higher than any of them.

I like this one. GoldenSombrero.com

Oh, so you meant that they don't run multiple screens in the NBA. You can't be serious?

They don't set picks in the NBA? Please tell me that isn't your point. And, what is an eman play? I've played a lot of ball, but that's a new one.

No it doesn't. You only think it does because you don't like JJ, which you've made abundantly clear with all of your snarky remarks about him. All it proves is that when he's the #1 option and he gets the full attention of a team with excellent athletes (double teams, rotating coverage on his drives, big men kicking out on mid-range shots) then he's going to have a rough night. It proves nothing about his potential on the next level because he won't be a #1 option on the next level.

Proving what? He won't be a #1 option on the next level, and the kind of contact that is allowed in college ball is a foul in the NBA.

Duke's weakness inside killed them tonight. I thought it was telling when Bilas?/Enberg? said LSU's best offensive strategy was to miss and get the follow up. And he was right. EDIT: As far as LSU goes, this is the worst coached team I've seen make it this far. I doubt they get out of this brackett.

Yankee fan's guide to rationalizing Sheff and Giambi 1. "It wasn't illegal at the time" -- Verdict: Proven false by ESPN article showing the labor agreement from 1991. 2. "They didn't know they were using" -- Verdict: Proven false by Game of Shadows. 3. "They didn't do it as Yankee." -- Verdict: Undetermined? Care to bet how that last one turns out? EDIT: Stupid typos.