Jake

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 06:57 PM) Again, does that sound like something an organization with this major impass between front office and coach? Maybe that was part of the reason they did it (to alleviate that perception), either way, it sure seems to me that everyone is on the same page and all this media talk about Thibbs and FO is completely overblown. I'm guessing that Gar and Thibs have beef but they've managed to sustain a solid working relationship anyway.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 05:24 PM) She got her degree. She resigned her post as president in what appears to be about the calmest manner possible. Her statements throughout scream "me me me; I am great." Well what she did is a pretty minor offense. She put on lacrosse clothes and mocked the right wingers on her campus. She also said she recognizes that she hurt people's feelings and then voluntarily left her post. I fail to see the big deal here. Seems like another example of white folks wanting to feel like they too are oppressed.

I don't see your point, greg. It seems like they ran her out of town.

So since it is not the individual owners keeping something from employees, but instead the company doing so...am I allowed to start a company and bestow upon that corporation religious beliefs that, rather than reflecting my own, could earn me the most profitable exemptions? QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 03:19 PM) Because it's 100% their money that is going to support something they don't believe in. That's why the distinction between Hobby Lobby and Wal-mart, to me, is key. You're talking about what basically amounts to a very large mom and pop shop. They don't share their revenue with anyone else. And if they all don't want to contribute towards something that offends or runs counter to their religious beliefs, I think it's perfectly fine for them to be exempted from it. I mean, let's step back - do you agree that the Catholic Church or some other religious groups should lose their exemptions? Should they be required to provide that coverage even if their employees will, by choice, never use it? Yes - and the bulk of their tax breaks. Yes - they cannot coerce their employees not to use benefits whose presence are guaranteed by just refusing to provide those federally guaranteed benefits. The risk pools are larger than just them anyway (usually, at least). The most ironic part is that this will indubitably increase abortions.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 12:15 PM) This is SOOO bulls front office: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bulls/post/_/id/19663/ This is the reason they get so much s***. This just sounds like a reporter grasping for straws.

Make sure your business fills a need. If you're the type of business that serves a geographic area (like a storefront), this is even more important. Talk to your wife about contingencies before you launch. How much money are you willing to lose, how much time are you going to allow to get things off the ground, what kinds of personal/social sacrifices are you and aren't you willing to make. On a related note, know when to pull the plug. If it isn't going to work out, then it isn't going to work out. No sunk cost fallacies. I'm of the belief that the small things matter. Every little thing about your company should look excellent to outsiders. Get a good looking logo, a well-designed website (hire a professional if needed and don't accept a mediocre job from them), and ensure all your materials look great and are devoid of things like grammar and spelling errors. Nobody will tell you that these things put them off because it will happen subconsciously. Make all of their interactions with your business give them the expectation that you're great - then, when they actually approach you for whatever service you offer, they'll be convincing themselves that what you say confirms their initial impression that you guys are good. Be personal.

Unions are one of the best safeguards against unfair wealth distributions. Like everything, especially economic things, there are pluses and minuses.

QUOTE (dasox24 @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 10:28 AM) I thought teams could go over the salary cap (e.g. go into luxury tax) as long as it's re-signing their own players. Or am I completely crazy? Is this not the same situation with the Heat? Example: They sign several free agents from other teams before the re-sign LBJ, Wade, and Bosh. Then it doesn't matter where they sit in regards to the salary cap because they can go over it as long as they pay luxury tax. So all of them could still get max deals, right? They would just end up paying like $100M in luxury tax. Your salary cap figure includes "cap holds" for free agents at roughly the amount they earned last year, with the exception of rookies where a rougher estimate is used. You have to renounce their Bird rights in order to use the cap space those players' cap holds occupy if you want to sign someone else. QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) Why can Melo make more on the max than him? They have the same years of service. I don't remember specifically, but does this have something to do with previous earnings under old CBA? QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 10:57 AM) I think the Heat thing is going to be very interesting. If these guys come back, you are going to probably have a lot of teams asking the commissioner to step in. Below are some interesting snippets from Wojo (best NBA reporter in the biz as far as I'm concerned). It would be one thing if Wade truly takes less money but if they all sign for these "reported" deals, you wonder what amounts of "circumstantial" evidence would be needed to get the league to pull a CP3 veto attempt. The other question is whether it would be for the good of the league to try and block said superteam (kind of like they did with CP3 and the Lakers). Of course, another could argue that having a "thorn team" could actually be good for the league, as long as other teams have legit shots at upending them. I can't believe that it's a violation of the rule to ask the front office what kind of free agent value you'd have. Obviously, that's pretty damn close to coming to a gentleman's agreement on a contract. QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 12:02 PM) I think Ben Gordon will be signing a minimum deal with the Bulls during free agency. It makes some sense, though I have to think he'd make Thibodeau's head explode

I'd love to see it, it's a lot of fun, but if he's so set against it, that's his call. Get Dunner in that thing

What I like about adding Melo vs. all the other options, including Love, is that he makes us a great team regardless of Rose. With Rose, wow, what potential. Without Rose, still a very serious contender for a Finals run.

I think this is Sanchez's best chance to make an impression before Semien and Johnson leapfrog him (again in the case of Marcus)

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jun 30, 2014 -> 01:54 PM) Not worried about Micah - his AAA numbers have likely been affected by playing hurt/returning from injury, and he's required a bit of an adjustment period at each level. I also think they favor him developing his SB technique at the MLB level, and his lower #'s there may also have something to do with the injuries. I think it's telling that Semien is getting a look in the OF and not Micah. Rightly or wrongly, I believe the org see's MJ as the 2B of the very near future - maybe 1 month from now if a Beckham deal happens. Semien is their ideal super-utility. Things could change. I think the reason Micah is playing 2B is because he's an iffy defender there and it's unlikely to increase his value to move him off the one position where he is becoming serviceable. They know that Semien is competent around the IF and are less concerned with his getting reps at IF positions because they are less critical for his development

I think Derrick is a really bad interview, which is why we always get these kinda sorta bad-sounding quotes from him via private interviews. Also, I think he has bad handles, particularly Reggie. While it's irritating, it's hard for me to fault someone who is so loyal to his own brother who, despite benefiting from Derrick's success immensely, was certainly there for Derrick when nobody else was. I'd do/take a lot of s*** for my brothers, too.

LOL that is so absurd that I don't even know if I would have addressed. I might have just have had to do some soul-searching to decide if I really had been there in the first place

More reasons for federally-run single payer.

Also bear in mind that Castro is approaching FA

Some people feel like that's too much, still. Shouldn't be required to do anything for the union. Would happily forgo the benefits if it means they can someday, maybe earn more money than everyone else. Damn the odds that it will lower everyone's pay/benefits.

I'd like a Sox license plate.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/0...michael-waldman A quick and easy version of the interviewee's book about the history of the second amendment

There's something I've noticed about Tank's splits over the years and I check again today...and voila. Every full season in the major leagues, he's hit significantly worse at home. It just seems like a thing that, at this point, can't be attributed to chance. Let's look at the numbers: 2012: Home - .240/.276/.422, 13HR, 42RBI, 3.6BB%/25.4K%, 81 wRC+ Away - .273/.326/.467, 12HR, 36RBI, 6.8BB%/18.6K% 116 wRC+ 2013: Home - .261/.303/.379, 5HR, 20RBI, 6.1BB%/20.2K%, 80 wRC+ Away - .270/.306/.470, 9HR, 36RBI, 4.1BB%/21.2K%, 111 wRC+ 2014: Home - .230/.283/.333, 2HR, 10RBI, 6.9BB%/20.7K%, 63 wRC+ Away - .263/.315/.474, 6HR, 17RBI, 6.1BB%/20.0K%, 117 wRC+ Career: Home - .256/.299/.405, 24HR, 85RBI, 5.3BB%/22.4K%, 85 wRC+ Away - .265/.311/.450, 29HR, 95RBI, 5.5BB%/20.2K%, 108 wRC+ The splits are within 13 PA of each other, so it isn't as if he's gotten more playing time in one place than another. He's about 7% more likely to a lefty on the road Remember that wRC+ is a league and ballpark adjusted statistic, so it isn't a matter of trying to declare the Cell a worse ballpark to hit in. It seems as if, despite the fact the Cell is a great hitters park, his raw numbers are slightly worse. Here's the closest I can come to explaining it: Home vs L, career - 192 PA Away vs L, career - 218 PA Home vs R, career - 585 PA Away vs R, career - 550 PA Does that explain the difference in numbers? You tell me. It seems really close, but he's basically a handful of homers and singles away from being pretty similar I suppose. Any other theories? Random chance despite the sample size?

NBA offseason rumors - constant stream of contradictory information from sources that often seem equally reliable. Despite the relative impossibility of knowing anything until right before it happens, I must follow everything religiously.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 29, 2014 -> 10:58 AM) I can't figure out why else a guy who spent 6 innings hitting 93-94 with the fastball regularly wouldn't be able to start missing more bats. We've seen this with Nestor Molina too, to some extent. I understand that Beck has a great sinker, which is going to come at a cost to strikeouts, but it seems he just has no put-away pitch/ability.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jun 29, 2014 -> 10:03 AM) What? At 19th years old? What the hell happened? I mean, I know he was awful in his 2 rookie seasons in Bristol, but he was supposed to be such a tough sign out of H.S., that I figured they would have just kept him in rookie ball each year until he got older and improved. Seems like a short leash for a guy they tried hard to keep away from college. He has spent a BUNCH of his life in extended spring at this point. That could probably drive a young man insane

LeBron expects max deal when he re-ups with Heat or elsewhere, doesn't give a f*** what the other guys sign for

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 28, 2014 -> 05:23 PM) If Gar/Pax fail, there is always the possibility JR winds up taking the heat. Lawrence is a NY loudmouth, so take it with a grain of salt. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketba...ticle-1.1847672 What an idiot: Bulls fork over 393,233 dimes and 6 pennies in luxury tax money for 2012-13 season.