Cheech Tremendous

Seneca was serviceable in the backup role last year. I don't think they need to draft another QB.

They were both on his non-throwing hand. Obviously, injuries don't explain some of the poor decisions he was making on the field at the end of the year, but I'd assume there has to be some sort of correlation there. Hasselbeck's a top 5 QB and he looked absolutely dreadful on several occassions.

The Braves raped the Pirates in that deal. Not only did they get the two best players, they can now move Wickman for something valuable if they choose to go that route.

I didn't know it was possible to not know you could die from drinking too much water.

Well, to take this discussion somewhere else besies Colts v. Patriots, it turns out that Matt Hasselbeck was playing with a torn labrum and two broken fingers the second half of the season. I don't think this explains away all the problems he had down the stretch, but it does shed some insight into his erratic play and the Seahawks' underperformance this year.

Well, I don't think much of kicking in the grand scheme of things, and if anyone has followed my posts in the NBA and MLB threads, I think clutchness is the single most overrated thing in sports. Fee free to have different opinions. I don't care.

I tend to agree with KingPK on this one, but no one's really right or wrong because we don't know what other moves woud have been made. You could say that Brady wouldn't have won with Vanderjagt, but I would argue he never would have had to because Belichick would have figured out in 5 or 6 weeks that he couldn't kick for shit outdoors and made a move. I think New England would have won those titles even without Vinateiri. He didn't do anything that Nate Kaeding, Josh Brown, David Akers or 5 or 6 other kickers couldn't have done. He still gets credit for coming up big when he had to, but they weren't superhuman feats.

Which makes you what, about 7 or 8 years old (if we aren't counting 04-05 season, when they were one of the five best teams in the league..

2002- Didn't make playoffs 2003 - killed 41-0 2004- easily defeated 24-14 2005- waxed 20-3 2006- lost closely 21-18 Oh yeah, give those Colts a decent kicker and they probably would have won the championship every year. Are you serious? They might have been able to beat the Steelers last year if Vanderjagt makes that FG and sends it to overtime, but they still would have had to win that game, the AFC Championship and Super Bowl. Vinateiri is a great kicker, and has come up big every time they've needed him. But they haven't won anything because of him. It's like a closer in baseball. He might be able to lose you a game, but he's not doing anything to win it for you.

I think Melky does have some talent, but I don't think he will ever be a starting outfielder for the New York Yankees. I suppose you don't count the time where he was the starting LF for the Yankees from May until September. No, I don't count that. He was only in that position because 2/3 of the original outfield was injured.

would the teams still have Vinatieri? So now we are going to diminish the importance of Brady in winning those SBs and give extra credit to the freaking kicker?

If I was ranking them, I'd go Nash, Dirk, Kobe, Arenas. It's still way too early to get a read on this sort of thing though. Any of those four guys has a legitimate claim.

Does anyone here actually think the Patriots would have won three Super Bowls with Marc Bulger or Steve McNair as their quarterback?

I don't see how I'm not making sense. What am I missing? He said Brady wouldn't be considered as great as he is if he didn't win three Super Bowls. He won those because he's a great fuckin quarterback!

And how I am stupid? HarleyQuinn wasn't making any sense with his post.

That doesn't make any sense. He won Super Bowls because he's better than all those guys. So you're saying if he wasn't as good as he is, he'd be in the same tier as guys who aren't as good as him? Brilliant. Are you stupid? Is that directed towards me?

That doesn't make any sense. He won Super Bowls because he's better than all those guys. So you're saying if he wasn't as good as he is, he'd be in the same tier as guys who aren't as good as him? Brilliant.

I like Creed's one liners, but I don't think he's much of a character. He's way overrated on this board. Give me Kevin or Stanley the Manly any day.

espn.com has now incorporated daily NBA Power Rankings on their site, based on a complicated formula developed by John Hollinger. It accounts for margin of victory, strength of schedule, recent performance and home/road splits. Sort of interesting, and I suggest you check it out. Here are the top 10: 1. Phoenix 2. Dallas 3. San Antonio 4. Houston 5. Chicago 6. Orlando 7. Cleveland 8. LA Lakers 9. Toronto 10. Utah

I think Melky does have some talent, but I don't think he will ever be a starting outfielder for the New York Yankees.

Nash will not win it because I don't think the writers could handle Steve Nash, three-time MVP. It's unfair, but it's the way things go.

Here's to 2007 and beyond with Melky Right, because a 4th outfielder is as valuable as a lights out lefty in the pen.

All I can say about the Gonzalez trade is that at least the Yankees didn't get him.

I guess because people still know the name Chris Webber. I remember that they made a huge deal when the Sixers acquired him from the Kings when he was no more than a walking corpse at the time.

That's a steal for the Warriors.