Precious Roy

I think they definitely need to start planning for life after Joe, AJ, Daniels, Strong, Aries, Shelley, Homicide, Lethal and whoever else TNA decides to snatch up, but that's at least a year away and probably much longer. TNA is so far from being a touring company at this point, they're just now testing the waters with house shows. It's inevitable that as TNA expands some guys will have to take less ROH dates as TNA will no doubt want to run weekends (Joe), and some guys may cut out ROH altogether (AJ), but to say that ROH is "dying" is the grossest of gross overstatements. New indy darlings pop up on a yearly basis, and TNA can't sign EVERYONE to a contract, by the time ROH loses some of these guys there'll be new talent ready to step up in their place

The question was name a dominant center who didn't dominate in his first two years, and that's the question I answered. You didn't ask about per 48 averages, which while it can be a usefull stat is oftentimes misleading. Why didn't Ben Wallace play much his first couple years? He was still developing and was very raw on the offensive end. Basically he was a liability, he turned the ball over, he didn't know how to make himself usefull in an offensive scheme. Also, his personal fouls per 48 (here's where the stat is best applied to Wallace) have decreased pretty much every year, his first couple years he couldn't stay on the court because he was so overly agressive. These may sound like simple things, but they're the signs of a player who came into the league with weaknesses and improved with experience. Robert Parish was most certainly a dominant center in his peak years with Boston, and there was close to a decade where he could be considered among the best centers in the game. He never averaged over 20 because he played alongside two great scorers, he had the skills to score more. The reason his career average is only 14.9 is because he played for 20 years and had averages of 4.8, 3.9 and 3.7 his last 3 seasons, when he was clearly over the hill. To be fair to Eddy Curry, I don't expect him to ever be a dominant defensive player. He can be a good one, but I don't have the expectation of him ever changing the game like a Wallace or Mourning. Where he has the chance to be a dominant player is on offense, where everything points to him being a nearly unstopable force. He has great moves in the post, great touch on his shots, tenacious around the rim, can hit his free throws, he's got every skill you need to be a dominant low post scorer. The guy led the league in FG% when he was 21 years old! All I ask is that he become dominant on one end of the court. Why does the guy have to be Wilt Chamberlain for the Knicks to break 40 games in the next decade? That's just silly.

Something in the range of "buttload" or possibly "mega-assload" It's MSG/Cablevision, a billion dollar telecommunications empire, and it really sucks having your favorite team run by a giant corporation. At least with someone like Steinbrenner his giant corporation is a result of the Yankees, the Yankees are the centerpiece, the Knicks are more of an investment for Cablevision, a dalliance. Part of the reason Houston got that contract, and wasn't cut with the amnesty thing, is because he was Dolan's favorite player and they were golf buddies. There's also been a lot of shit where Cablevision has screwed over their customers, most notibly when they refused to carry the YES network over a petty dispute with Steinbrenner, leaving millions of people without coverage of the Yankees for an entire season. Also, it was James Dolan way of doing business that's most likely responsible for (the hopefully temporary) end of the WWE/MSG relationship, which is a great tragedy to the tradition of both entitys. So really, I have no sympathy for the Dolans, and I could care less about how much money they have to spend on the Knicks. Crying about how they have to pay Rose $17 million next season rather than be less over the cap, when they'll STILL be insanely over the cap, makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. $17 million is a drop in the bucket for them. BEN WALLACE and Robert Parish off the top of my head. I wouldn't call Vlade Divac dominant necessarily, not from a purely physical sense, but it took him several years to fully blossom as a player. Ditto for Brad Miller, Rik Smits and Yao Ming, none of whom are "domiant" but are/were all-star caliber centers. But again, guys coming straight from High School is a recent trend, and Eddy Curry isn't Moses Malone. Greg's analysis is flawed. Historically most centers came into the league with at least 3 years of college experience. Jermaine O'Neal is a C/PF, and he did jack shit his first 4 years. Andrew Bynum has the potential to be dominant, will he do much in his first couple years? Probably not. Not going through college before hitting the pro-game is a major alteration on the development of a player, and in Curry's case was probably detrimental to the speed of his development, definitely detrimental to his maturity. But, he's still 23, his game has lots of time to deveop. I was crazy immature when I was 23, and I didn't have millions of dollars to spend on entertaining myself.

For the guy pegging Curry as an underachiever because he's in his 5th season, you have to take into account that he came to the NBA straight out of high school, didn't play all that much his first two years, and last year was the only time he'd been on a competitive team. For comparisons sake Jermaine O'Neal spent his first 4 years riding the bench on a playoff team in Portland, meaning he experienced a winning atmosphere and was practicing against high caliber players, and his numbers in his first year with Indiana were less impressive than what Curry is doing this year. Curry is 23 years old man, people be acting like he's halfway into his career, dude is just starting. Not every high school kid can be an instant star, some dudes need time. I don't mind the Rose trade because I like Jalen Rose as a player, I've been a fan of his since the Fab 5. It makes the team a little better balanced. I don't care about the cap thing because the cap is already FUCKED, and I don't care about them having to pay extra money for next year to pay Rose because James Dolan is a fucking SHITHEAD, he's spoiled rich, fuck him, I hate the MSG management....

no

I think we might see the Rookies take it this year.... And I'm loving the rookie Knicks being all over All-Star weekened, too bad they won't have anyone in the actual game

I've got a fantasy question that's been stumping me, could use some advice: I've got a team where my only center eligible guy is Emeka Okafor, he hasn't played in forever and isn't looking to come back any time soon, but I kept him on the active roster (It's a straight 820 games total limit) just to fill the spot because there were no centers on waivers I wanted. Now I've got Bonzi Wells coming off the IR, and I want to move him back onto the active roster, but that means putting Okafor on the IR and opening up my center spot. My choices are: Kurt Thomas (I don't like his production this year from a fantasy standpoint, would rather not pick him up) Zaur Pachulia (started out hot but has slowed down bigtime, has a lot of off nights) Joel Pryzbilla (this is who I'm leaning towards, good source of blocks and boards when he gets the minutes, starting to pick up his numbers, was dominant in 2nd half last year. I also tend to think Ratliff may be traded, which opens up more time for Pryz) Brendan Haywood (Has some big games but really inconsistent) Robert Swift (playing well since becoming a starter, but only 20 years old with a very small sample size to judge him on) Kristic and Brezec are also available, but I'm not a fan of either and need boards/blocks while they are strictly scorers. Of the 5 guys I listed, who do you think is the best option? I could possibly make a trade for a center, but I've tried a few times and nobody seems to want to part with one in this league. I'd be offering up Baron Davis, Joe Johnson or Sam Cassell. Personally I think that should get me a top of the line center, Sam Dalembert would be perfect for me, but the dude already shot down Baron for Dalembert.

Would it really surprise you to see the Knicks take back a fat contract for a wounded duck of a player for no apparent reason? Well, when they can't sign free agents due to the cap situation that's about the only way they can add players. Isiah has been justifying his additions of expiring contracts with this logic since day 1, I remember Mike Francesa ripping him on this approach last year, but Thomas is right. They can't rebuild proper, this is the next best thing.

My outlook is, "ANYTHING IS BETTER THAN A SCOTT LAYDEN TEAM!!" If you're not a Knicks fan you won't really relate to this attitude, but it was like Night of the Living Dead when he was running things. The team had no life, no personality. Jeff Van Gundy, who was our baggy eyed Jesus, saw the writing on the wall with Layden and got the fuck out. At the time I was mad at him, but looking back on it I can't blame him one bit. Seriously, that guy set us back a decade with his lamebrained moves. Isiah Thomas is Jerry West compared to him. I'll gladly take this young team that sucks but has potential over the middling, average, barely sneak into the playoffs, no upside whatsoever group that Layden put together. You think Isiah Thomas would have passed up Ron Artest for FRED WEISS?!? You think he would have traded Camby AND Nene for a guy playing on one good leg? It's just nice to have a guy who can actually spot talent. He's made a few bad moves, and yeah, the Knicks are way over cap and he's got some massive contracts on the books, but if you look at the situation he inherited, and keep in mind that the Knicks can't just take 3-4 years off to clear contracts and rebuild like some teams might do, I just can't hate on what he's done I'm probably over-optimistic, but Rome wasn't built in a day, and it's nice to have something to be optimistic about. The potential of this young team is exciting, it's something I've never really experienced as a Knicks fan. My whole life it was Ewing's team, and then the hangover from being Ewing's team. I just don't have it in me to be a pessimist at this point, and the gloom and doom Knicks fans are really starting to get on my nerves. And the Knicks only gave up their 2006 first rd. pick. Two second rounders as well, and a weird option where the Bulls can swap picks in 2007, which only really comes into play if the Bulls have a much better year than NY. Isiah was thinking Playoffs when he signed off on that. The 2006 pick is unfortunate as it's looking to be the highest NY pick since 85, but this years draft class does nothing for me, and I too would rather have Curry. Put it this way, Curry is about the age of a 4 year college player, and he'd be a no doubt #1 pick in this years draft. As far as Larry Brown goes, I'm still taking a wait and see approach, giving him a pass on this season. The constant changes in rotation are maddening, but I'm hoping there's a method to the madness

It helps along the development of younger players, not just on the field but off. The Braves have been doing it for years. You can't underestimate the importance of veteran leadership.

I don't see all that much decline in Vidro's numbers. He was definitely hurt last year by the park in Washington, and in 2004 he had some nagging injuries, missed a lot of games, but still put up decent numbers. Hitting 3rd or 4th really only affects his run production, the guy gets on base and slugs at a decent clip no matter where he is in the order. He's still got some good years left in him and would be an important piece for a contending team, but his talents are wasted in Washington.

And, that 3-way doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but what's so bad about Jose Vidro!?! People are talking about him like he's a bum. The guy is solid at the plate and on the field, career OPS is .831, he's a major upgrade on what the Mets have at second base. I think if Minaya had a chance to dump Matsui and get Vidro and Livan Hernandez (a F'n workhorse) in return he'd probably give up Milledge to get it done. It might be a mistake longterm, but they're trying to win before Pedro's arm falls off, and that's definitely a haul for them in the shortterm. But anyway, that deal as proposed doesn't make much sense for the Nationals.

I like those signings, the Twins over-reliance on youth has hurt them IMO. They're adding three battle tested veterans, White is underrated and Batista can mash, and while Sierra won't do all that much as a part time DH I think he's a good guy to have in the clubhouse. Twins have a nice mix of youth and experience now. It'll be tough to make the Playoffs with Chicago and Cleveland in that division, but they've definitely improved.

Whatever..... NATE ROBINSON BITCHES!

Boston Herald is reporting that the Red Sox finally got a deal done with Alex Gonzalez, 1 yr $3 mil

I can't see Piazza being very productive in that park. Dude should have hooked up with an AL team and played DH, but I'm sure his ego dictated that he had to get time behind the plate

If you need 3's, steals and blocks take Wallace, he hits 2 3's a night along with over a block and a steal, one of the few guys that contributes in all three of those categorys. He's also shooting better from the field. If you're set in all those categorys and just need points and rebounds keep Webber, but Wallace is way more versatile and still gives you 15-7, and pts/rbds are the easist categorys to fill. Plus Webber is a constant injury risk. I think it's a no-brainer to take the offer. I wonder what drug(s) Chris Anderson is on? I'm thinking it's gotta be coke.

Rotoworld is reporting that the Indians are now asking for Marte, Shoppach, Mota AND Declarmen for the original package of Crisp, Riske and Bard. Boston came back with two lesser prospects in place of Declarmen, Cleveland declined. Not sure how true that is, but I'd imagine it's the dealbreaker for Boston, and will probably nix the Rhodes for Michaels deal as well. Also, what's up with Cleveland gutting their bullpen? They lost Howry and are looking to trade Rhodes and Riske. That doesn't leave them with a whole lot of depth, unless they're bringing in some can't miss kids. Wickman had a good 2005 but is still an injury risk, and Betancourt is real good, but hasn't performed well as a closer.

Crisp is 26

need.....torrent......

Kobe Bryant scored 81....that's fucking AMAZING I mean, I absolutely hate the way the guy plays the game....such a selfish ball-hog, but that's still majorly impressive.... I NEED a torrent of this game!

holy shit...

Albert Hammond Jr. He's the one who dates Barrymore I didn't really know who Saarsgard was either. The name sounded familiar, and I recognized him from Garden State, but if I hadn't seen that flick I would have been clueless. As is, I barely remember which character he played in that flick. I only watched because the Strokes were on, and because I'd downloaded the JB/Neil Young episode and thought they might have been in a groove creatively. Sadly, I was wrong...

There's no way he's as bad as Wayne Gretzky was, Anal Retentive Sportsman nonwithstanding. But at least with athletes you expect them to be bad going in, that's part of the humour, it's a novelty. I enjoyed Gretzky, Jordan, Montana, Barkley, Brady....didn't care about the Nascar guy or the Skier because I'm not a fan of those sports... Sarsgaard is a trained actor, he's supposed to be some hot young star, and not only did he have no comedic timing but he was constantly flubbing his lines and cues. Plus, does he always lisp like that? Dude came off really gay