http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-080811-chicago-cubs-ask-ryan-theriot,1,4167988.story?page=1

Im sure some of you have read this by now, but Theriot took over Paul Sullivans mailbag on chicagosports.com. Some of its pretty funny, my favorite is the one where he addressed his pitching record at LSU.

Yes it's true. Everyone knows that I've pitched. I make sure of that. I have nine different pitches, all of which are awesome. I have a 0.00 ERA, got one out, throwing all knuckleballs. I don't remember who I faced -- some dude from Ole Miss

He also goes on to say that he could take Fontenot in a fight, but the duo would lose to Z, and that DeRosa is actually the worst looking guy on the team.  He also has a few good things to say about the balance of day vs night games.

All in all its pretty interesting, he seems like a funny guy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3510261

Multiple media outlets reported on Tuesday that the Sacramento Kings had agreed to trade the forward to the Rockets.

The Houston Chronicle reported that the Kings would receive Bobby Jackson, a No. 1 draft pick in 2009 and another player that the newspaper's source could not identify. KRIV television in Houston reported that the Kings will also receive cash.

Pack it up fellow Spurs fans, we will not be winning the west this year with the Big 3 plus the poo poo platter, not with the way the rest of the conference has improved.

Bobby Jackson, a 2009 first rounder and a player to be named later? Are you kidding me, thats all they got? The Spurs surely couldve done just as well.

I think I got that right, my French is a bit rusty.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3499347

Apparently the Cubs didnt alert the MLB central office that they had signed their draft picks before allowing them to play following Junes draft and will face a financial penalty.

Or as they put it:

A baseball source said the Cubs broke a rule requiring clubs to report signing agreements to the MLB central office. The Cubs also violated a rule requiring approved agreements to be in place before signed draft picks take the field, the source said.

The Cubs also made mincemeat of the "slotting" guidelines for Draft bonuses:

The Cubs have butted heads with the commissioner's office several times in recent years for exceeding the recommended bonuses under baseball's "slotting" system. This year, Chicago signed California high school infielder Matt Cerda, the 131st overall pick, to a $500,000 bonus, according to Baseball America.

Cerda's bonus was more than twice what the 131st pick received in 2007, and exceeded the reported $385,000 bonus the Cubs gave their latest third-round choice, Kent State pitcher Chris Carpenter.

The interesting part at the end discuss the growing sentiment amongst MLB teams for an international draft.

In the midst of a scandal involving scouts from multiple teams and other club officials "skimming" bonuses from Latin-American players, Selig said MLB continues to look into the possibility of a worldwide draft. The draft is currently confined to the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico.

"I don't think it's any secret that support for a worldwide draft is growing amongst all baseball people," Selig said. "I've had a lot of people, including a significant number of general managers, say to me in the last couple of months that they wish we had a worldwide draft. I think that's something we will discuss in the future."

Their is some question as to the validity of the draft, concerning its efficacy in rebuilding teams, particularly small market teams, primarily b/c the large market teams go way over the recommended slots to accumulate talent the smaller markets cant afford.

Not sure what they could do about that short of a rookie salary scale, like the NBA, but I think a world wide draft might be more equitable than the current system.

But the initial violation seems really strange, why wouldnt the Cubs notify MLB that theyd signed their picks before sending them off to rookie league?  Sounds like somebody had a case of the Mondays.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3498795

Jeremy Shockey is leaving New York.

 

The Giants agreed to trade the tight end to the New Orleans Saints for second- and fifth-round draft picks, according to a report on FOXSports.com. The deal is pending league approval, and Shockey must also pass a physical.

 

The Saints had offered the Giants the same deal for Shockey prior to April's draft but were rebuffed.

 

The Saints and Giants had also previously discussed a three-team trade in which the Giants would have landed former Miami Dolphins defensive end Jason Taylor, who was traded to the Washington Redskins on Sunday, the Saints would have acquired Shockey and the Dolphins would have received draft picks, according to SI.com.

 

 

That last part hurts the most, to think they couldve had Jason Taylor to replace Strahan....ugh

http://www.nba.com/rockets/news/Brent_Barry_Agrees_to_Join_Roc-277178-34.html

its official from the Rockets website.

HOUSTON - The waiting game has ended. Brent Barry is finally headed to Houston.

The 36 year old free agent guard made his decision today, coming to terms on a two year deal. Per team policy, financial terms were not released.

Barry was one of the Rockets' top off-season targets -- in fact, he was contacted by team officials the minute the free agent recruiting period commenced.

Not a big loss per se, but it leaves a bad taste in your mouth right? Mostly b/c its the god @#!$ Rockets.

Im sure we're all pretty upset, or at least apathetic about the Spurs poo-poo blatter 2008 Draft. Taking a small college point guard when CDR, Donte Greene and Mario Chalmers, amongst others, were still available.

To make matters worse, the Rockets got both Nicolas Batum and Donte Greene, The Grizzlies got OJ Mayo via trade with Minnesota....So essentially we're going to ask a 37 year old Bruce Bowen to chase those guys around in addition to his Steve Nash and Kobe Bryant duties.

So I looked around and here are a few reviews of the Spurs performance, if you can call it that:

First is Chad Fords review on espn.com, he gave the Spurs a gentlemans C

Round 1: George Hill (26)

Round 2: Goran Dragic (42), James Gist (57)

Analysis: The Spurs are one of the best-drafting teams in the league, so I'm wary of criticizing them. But sometimes a team can be too clever for its own good. Hill is a nice player, but I don't believe he's a better point guard than Mario Chalmers.

 

I do like Dragic at No. 42 as a guy who could eventually find his way here to play an important role on a team. Gist is a great athlete, but I'm not sure he's got what it takes to stick.

I have to agree with the point on Chalmers, if youre going to get a back up PG to compete with JV, why not take another Jay Hawk at the very least? Hes a proven big game player from a big school....so George Hill will be getting Stoudamires 90 seconds of PT a game now?

From Chris Mannix at SI.com

• Anyone want a pick? The Spurs, who made it known that they wanted nothing to do with their first-round pick before the draft, selected IUPUI guard George Hill at No. 26. I'm surprised they didn't take a chance on Arthur, who has the potential to play both forward positions.

Another good point, and less than stellar review, Im not that familiar with Arthur, but if he can play the 3 and 4, he would help this team more than a backup PG.

From Mike Kahn at Foxsports.com

San Antonio Spurs

First round: George Hill, PG, 6-2, 180, IUPUI
Second round: Goran Dragic, G, 6-4, 200, Slovenia
Second round: James Gist, F, 6-9, 220, Maryland

Certainly one of the most interesting drafts the Spurs have had in recent years. Hill was the Summit Conference Player of the Year, but how does that translate to the NBA? Dragic will likely stay in Europe and Gist looks like good NBDL fodder.

Grade: C.

Another mediocre review of the Spurs draft.

I thought Chad Ford summed it up best, perhaps the Spurs are trying to be too clever for their own good.  Or, as was mentioned last nite in the draft blog, perhaps the Spurs are going in with a set roster that doesnt allow for many minutes for rookies, that would presume that they plan on dipping into the free agent market though, wouldnt it?

But to pass on legitimately proven, big time, college players like Chalmers, Greene and CDR seems foolish when this team desperately needs an infusion of youth rather than european players who will most likely never set foot on American soil.

*** Dragic has since been traded to the Suns for the draft rights to Malik Hairston a G/F from Oregon and a 2009 second round pick***

( Hopefull Dragic wont turn out to be another Barbosa, who they also traded to the Suns)

http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/446583

some of you may have seen this by now, but supposedly the Continental Hockey League, in Russia, is prepared to offer Malkin a 12.5 Million/yr tax free contract.

Continue reading this post »

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=lukas/080619&sportCat=mlb&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab6pos1

Not sure how many of you are familiar with "Uni Watch" a site completely dedicated to the history and minutae of athletic uniforms.  This story details, comically, the history of Cubs uniforms, uniform innovations and how they relate to our supposed curse.

Things I didnt realize: The Cubs pioneered vests, powder blue jerseys, numbers on the front, pleated pants, zippered jersey fronts and at one point even had "chicago cubs" splayed across their jersey fronts, and the blue alternates are the only ones in either league with a league logo on them, in this case the NL logo.

Its pretty interesting, Uni Watch scores each innovation/quirk on a scale of Billy Goat heads. Coming in with a whopping 10 Goat heads is the fact that the Cubs uniforms actually have the "registered trademark" circle R thingy on their jersey; making them the only professional team in America to do so.

I usually check out there stories when theyre on espn.com, its pretty amazing they dedicate so much time to uniforms, but they are sacred in many respects to many fans, myself included.

http://my.journaltimes.com/post/woelfel-world-of-sports/bucks_redd_makes_latest_olympic_team_cut.html

I found this link via si.com, I believe its from a paper in the Milwaukee area, its mostly about Michael Redd's chances of making the olympic team. Which he should; hes an excellent shooter, particularly mid range.  But two parts buried at the end are of interest to Spurs fans.

It’s almost a foregone conclusion that either Michael Redd or Mo Williams will be jettisoned to another zip code this summer.

Redd has piqued the curiosity of a bunch of teams, including the New York Knicks and Los Angeles Clippers. But Redd has two guaranteed years left on his contract for $33 million, plus a player’s option for another $18.3 million.

Williams is guaranteed $35 million over the next four years plus a player’s option for another $8.5 million. Some NBA officials believe the Bucks could obtain a mid-to-late first-round pick for Williams.

 Obviously, Redd would be a great addition to the Spurs, giving them the off guard they desperately need, Williams wouldnt be a bad consolation prize either, but Im not sure how he would fit; whether or not hed accept a bench role.

What would it take to get Redd? At this point, perhaps their first rounder, hell give em Splitter, hes never coming over.

Then there was this nugget:

Curious minds want to know why the Spurs, picking at the tail end of the first round, are interested in Syracuse forward Donte Greene, a projected mid-first round pick?

The author doesnt really go into greater detail; maybe Pop and the gang have something up there sleeves.  Ive seen Greene in person a few times, he projects to be a sort of Rashard Lewis type, a big slashing 3 type player....so if they could figure out someway to swing that, thatd be sweet.

less than 2 weeks to the draft, Im more curious about the Spurs draft plans than perhaps ever before.

(Hopefully no one else has posted this already)

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3443088

A more in depth look at how the replay system would work, according to a MLB memo obtained by espn.

It seems to work like the NHL replay system, in which disputed goals are reviewed in Toronto. So substitute goals for homers and New York City for Toronto,and there you go.

The one kicker, the replay is provided by Major League Baseball's Advanced Media offices in New York, but the decision to review is still at the umps discretion.

The nuts and bolts of it:

In the event a crew chief decides to use instant replay, the crew chief would use a dedicated communications link that will be available in each ball park to contact the replay official. The replay official will tell the crew chief what the replay official sees on the video replay or replays. The replay official will only report what he sees on the replay video or videos, and will not offer any advice or recommendation as to what the call should be. Based on all the information available to the crew chief (including what the crew saw in real time, and what the replay official sees on video), the crew chief will decide whether there is "clear and convincing evidence" that the original call by the crew is correct or incorrect. The original call would be reversed only if the crew chief felt there was a "clear error" on the original call.

The effect of any overturned call (for example, the placement of runners and the batter) would be governed by all current rules, any new rules specifically developed in connection with instant replay, and the crew chief's judgment.

 

There would be no limit on the number of times that a crew chief could use instant replay in a game, but MLB believes that instant replay would be used only about 10 times per season.

 

A crew chief's decision to use or not use instant replay on a particular call would be final, and not subject to second-guessing by team or league personnel. Team personnel would not have any right to demand instant replay.

So there it is. MLB says there is no time limit on reviews, and in their estimate, it would only be used about 10 times per season.  This all seems pretty unnecessary to me and a bit strange to implement  it so late in the season. 

I was under the impression the replay official was the one who made the decision on the call b/c they have an objective view point and the technology to do so, but in this system it appears they are just a facilitator, the umpires still retain full discretion.