Built Ford Tough

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates The day that Donald Sterling pays somebody who isn't working for him is the day the world will come to an end, even if it means screwing up his team in the process.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates I pretty much agree with everything stated here, so I can't really say much about what the Pacers should do. They are already in a great cap position so they can choose to hold onto their amnesty cut in hopes of landing a stud free agent in a year or two, should the situation arise.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates I can agree with this thought process. There is nobody on Houston I would cut unless I was guaranteed to land a stud in free agency. Morey has done a good job of collecting relatively cheap assets and because of that is in a very good position financially. Even his high salary players are all fairly vital pieces to the Rockets, so I just don't see the point in cutting anybody.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates If it were up to be Biedrins would be gone and I wouldn't even have to think twice about it. He is quite possibly the worst free throw shooter I've ever seen, he contributes next to nothing offensively, is a poor defender and isn't even the rebounder he once was. He is being paid like a top 10 center in the game and it is debatable if he is even a top 20 center. It makes absolutely no sense to cut an expiring contract like Bell over Biedrins. I get the thought process, but what Golden State seems to be missing is that quality big men are always tradeable and overpaid. Biedrins is not a quality big man at all anymore.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Outside of the Bobcats, the Pistons are probably the team with the most options of who to use their cut on between Hamilton, Gordon and Villanueva. Hamilton makes the least sense in terms of total dollars saved as his contract is nearing its finish, but his relationship with the Pistons has turned toxic over the past few seasons. I can easily see them using it on him just to rid themselves of the headaches that he has caused as of late. From strictly a cost saving standpoint, cutting Gordon would make the most sense as he is due $37.2M over the next three years and what he brings to the team is clearly not worth the amount of money that he is being paid. However, he is still a solid player capable of bringing some very nice scoring off of the bench. Lastly, Charlie Villanueva is due a lot of money over the next three years and he simply isn't a good player at all. From an overall viewpoint of bang for your buck, Charlie V would be my pick to get the axe in Detroit. I can see the rational behind cutting any of the three, though.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates I honestly don't see why the Nuggets wouldn't cut Harrington. He is vastly overpaid, has a long contract and doesn't even provide much positive attributes to the team. Even if they don't have Chandler, K-Mart, Smith or Nene, I still believe that they should cut ties with Harrington, but I don't know if Kroenke would be open to the idea of cutting him and being forced to pay him while he plays for another team. They may decide that it is best off keeping him and hoping that he can provide an offensive punch to their team as it is very conceiveable to think that the Nuggets may have trouble on offense if they aren't able to bring back somebody like Nene or JR Smith and if Chandler isn't about to get out of his contract with his Chinese team.

I'm sure the Mavs will search for trade scenarios before even thinking about using their amnesty cut on Haywood because, as you said, there are definitely some teams that would be all for adding a center like Haywood. A lot depends on the cap system as his price tag may scare some teams away but I do agree with you that there are inevitably going to be some teams that would be interested in acquiring him. I doubt the Mavs would cut anybody on their roster to be perfectly honest. Cuban has never been cheap and I can't see him starting now, regardless of what the cap is like. If he thinks that Haywood will help his team repeat as champions, I'm sure he will keep him around even if it means he is forced to go deep into the luxury tax. The only way I see him using it is if he thinks he can clear enough space to go and land a marquee free agent like a Dwight Howard or Deron Williams. However, even if he uses the cut on a guy like Haywood, they are still not going to have nearly enough cap space to get a star free agent, or have the assets to land one via sign and trade.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates If Chandler leaves I agree that Haywood should not be let go. He isn't the defender that Chandler is, but I still think he is a serviceable starting center and would provide the defense and muscle to allow Dirk to focus more on the offensive end of the floor. If they retain Chandler it may make sense to cut ties with Haywood's fairly large contract since it seems like there will be harsher penalties for going deep into the luxury tax. Paying nearly 7 figures for a backup may be too much for even an owner like Mark Cuban to swallow.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates As stupid as this sounds, I actually wouldn't be surprised to see Gilbert pull such a stubborn move just to continue to try and screw with LeBron. He has shown in the past that he is very bitter. However, at the end of the day it makes absolutely no sense from a business standpoint to hold onto Davis so I'm sure Gilbert would cut Davis as soon as the new clause is implemented. Jamison doesn't make any sense at all since his deal is up at the end of the year and there is just no legitimate reasoning to keep Davis over him.

Doesn't seem likely at all. http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Are there any players on the Bulls roster that you think should be let go, or do you agree with the notion that the Bulls don't have anybody worth using the clause on?

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates With Maggette expiring after this season it doesn't make much sense to use the clause on him, even though he makes much more than he is worth. Diaw is overpaid, but at the same time is still a serviceable player for the Bobcats. So that leaves Diop and Carroll, two scrubs who are being paid monumentally more than what they are worth. Who would you choose to let go? Is Diop's size and potential 6 fouls a game worth more than the odd Carroll three point jumper?

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates If you were Danny Ainge, would you cut ties with Jermaine O'Neal? If not O'Neal, are there any other players on the roster that you would consider using the clause on? If so, who would it be and why?

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Would you agree with the Hawks using their amnesty cut on Marvin Williams? Why or why not?

Jared Sullinger, Ohio State Terrence Jones, Kentucky Harrison Barnes, North Carolina Jeremy Lamb, Connecticut Jordan Taylor, Wisconsin Sullinger was a unanimous selection (first since Hansbrough in 08-09), Barnes received 63 of 65 votes, Taylor received 51 votes, Jones got 33 and Lamb had 25. Anyways, do you guys agree with the selections? If not, who would you remove and who would he be replaced with?

From The Great BFT of OTR http://www.otrbasketball.com/forums/topic/25055-nba-inching-closer-to-ending-lockout/page__view__findpost__p__294338 Still under discussion: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/sports/basketball/nba-deal-is-close-but-last-hurdle-is-a-big-one.html?_r=2&src=tp

And the last two games show how wrong I was in suggesting this. They were undoubtedly the Leafs best line last night and were flying in the Rangers game as well. Kulemin still seems a step behind Mac and two behind Grabo, but he was a slow starter last seasona s well, so I have confidence that he will catch up soon. He is too good of a player not to. Connolly looked great last night to. Made three really nice passes that all resulted in great scoring chances. He definitely has the best playmaking instincts of any center that Kessel has played with in a Leafs uniform and I think if he can stay healthy him and Kessel could develop some really nice chemistry. Nice to see him pot an early goal as well to hopefully boost some confidence. Gus was really good last night again. Can't really expect him to stop that Malkin rocket on the 5-3, nor can you blame him for the first two goals as the Leafs defense did a poor job of clearing the front of the net. His rebound control still needs some work but you can't really ask much more of him these past two games filling in for the injured Reimer. Lastly, Dion Phaneuf has been brilliant this season. Leading all defenseman in +/-, 3rd in points and playing great defensively. I think you can make a very legitimate claim that he has been the best defenseman in the league during the first 10 games of the season. Hopefully he can keep it up. In other news, the Leafs will be raising Mats Sundin's #13 banner to the rafters Feburary 11th against the Habs. A long overdue honour to one of the greatest Maple Leaf players of All-Time. Should be great to see as Sundin (along with Markus Naslund) was my favourite player growing up.

According to the NY Times, here are the details of some of the things that have already been agreed to: Still under discussion: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/sports/basketball/nba-deal-is-close-but-last-hurdle-is-a-big-one.html?_r=2&src=tp It says the deal is "about 95%" done and there are only a couple of more things to agree to. However, as everybody knows, one of those things that needs to be agreed to is the distribution of BRI, which has basically been the sticking point in every meeting since the lockout.

Serbian, duh.

Yeah. He was going on about how players wearing visors would change the foundation (or fabric, can't remember what he said for sure) of the game, how it screws with players vision (it is different, but its not like it hinders a players performance like he tried to make it sound) and a bunch of garbage like that. Then they showed a bunch of clips of guys with black eyes, bloody/broken noses and he went on about how he loves seeing these kind of things. Really, you love seeing blood pouring out of guys face? Idiot. The only semi-decent point he made was about fighting and how if visors are mandatory players would just take off their helmets when fighting and run the risk of hitting their head on the ice.

Mike Milbury is such an idiot. Listening to him every Saturday night is seriously making me dumber. Cherry is an idiot as well, but at least we can chalk that up to him being a senile old man. Milbury is just a moron.

Texas off to a great start with 2 runs in the first. It should actually be 3 if Kinsler doesn't have a brain fart at first base. Pretty much the ideal start for the Rangers after the heartbreak of last night.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/216224/NBA_Formally_Cancels_All_Games_Through_November_30#ixzz1c7j4FMPX The best part of this whole thing is that the approximate amount that they are arguing over during a 5 year CBA is $433M. The amount of money being lost with 4 weeks of cancelled games is roughly $325M.

My mistake then. The way you worded it: made it sound like you were calling Frattin classless. Anyways, on a different note, check out the mask Jonas Hiller is going to wear in November to support "Movember". http://i.imgur.com/fRGAY.jpg Absolutely brilliant.

But that is exactly what it was. Frattin is a gritty player and made a gritty play. He played that way in college, he played that way in the preseason and he has played that way in the regular season so far. I guarantee that he makes that exact same drive to the net whether or not Gustavsson is hit or not earlier in the game. Was the contact with Gus in the back of his mind when making the play? Probably. Would he have not made it had the Rangers not hit Gus? Absolutely. That is how Matt Frattin plays. Going above and beyond would be him actually intending to hurt Lundqvist, not making a strong hockey play. If the Leafs really wanted to send a message to the Rangers, they would've hit Lundqvist a lot harder than Frattin did. Also, it sure as hell would not have been a 23 year old rookie playing in his 8th professional game. It would've been Mike Brown. Callahan didn't make any attempt to get out of the way on the 2nd play (or really even attempt to avoid Gus on the first, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt as he was helped by Komisarek and off balance), so I guess the Rangers captain is classless as well. He didn't have as much speed as Frattin did and therefore the impact wasn't the same, but the general principle is the exact same. It goes both ways though. If Callahan isn't skating through Gustavsson's crease, he doesn't get hit and Gustavsson likely makes the save. Its not like Callahan didn't know exactly what he was doing on the play as he easily could've avoided going into the crease when coming out from behind the net, but he chose not to. You can make the argument that the goal could be waved off even if Komi doesn't hit him because of the fact that he was in Gustavsson's crease and impedeing his ability to move laterally to make the save. It really is a judgement call on a situation like that and on this particular night it was judged to be intereference. A different officiating crew could've been fine with it. I don't think you are dramatizing the Callahan play as I can see where you are coming from (and for what it is worth all three members of the TSN panel said the 2nd no goal was the right call while they were split on the 1st one and said it could go either way and many people of different fan bases over at HF Boards are saying the same thing), but I definitely think you are looking way too much into the Frattin play. He simply made a good, hard hockey move that power forward type of players make. Unfortunately he ran out of space and was left with no choice but to run over the goalie. It wasn't malicious or dirty or trashy by any means. If he really wanted to, he could've absolutely crushed Lundqvist. But I digress. It really isn't worth dragging this on.

Is the ice at MSG always this crappy? It seems like every game I watch that is played at MSG always features absolutely terrible ice conditions. I was just wondering if I have bad luck when watching games or if it is always like that. I'd imagine it is usually pretty poor considering the fact that the ice is likely taken out more than any other arena in the league.