Jake

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.

You'd think, given the fact that he has demonstrated no ability to strike enough guys out to be successful, they would have him focus on generating swings and misses at the expense of anything and everything else.

Heat might do something to get better, but it makes no sense for Carmelo to go there. Less money, less glory (third fiddle in terms of popularity/recognition on that team in all likelihood), and gets stuck playing alongside another small forward who does everything better than he does.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2014 -> 07:31 AM) Of course, people need to recognize that a lot of this is just opinion, but it's always been my opinion that something was missing from Android, it felt clunky even after it's repeated revamps and "project butters". As said, some of this stems from the over customization OEMs do with Android, but a lot of it comes from the framework Android is built upon, which is why a lot of Google's own applications on iOS were superior to their own Android counterparts. Of course, Google has done a lot of work on UI framework as of late, and it shows ... but I disagree with anyone that thinks their UI's were ever good, it's just an opinion, but I believe they were fair to poor designs, and I think the proof exists in that Google obviously agreed with me, hence their entire rework of the framework Android is based on. And it's not just limited to Android, their web UI's (aside from Chrome) also tend to be clunky, poorly laid out designs with what I call "option bombardment", just look at gmail on the web for reference (and again, Google KNOWS gmail's web UI is terrible). As I said before, it wasn't that Android's UI was terrible, it worked, but it was akin to using Windows 3.x ... it was better than DOS, but it still sucked. And replacing a UI just so it looks different isn't what I'm talking about, either. I don't think changing how a UI looks does anything, it's just slapping a fresh coat of lipstick on a pig (which is what Android was doing from v1.0 to 4.4), as the underlying framework was largely the same. Starting with Android L, however, the framework is changing along with the look, which is an example of GOOD UI replacement...not just change for the sake of change. QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 28, 2014 -> 07:44 AM) I have never been a fan of widgets, not since Microsoft or Apple started using them eons ago on their desktop platforms...I was very happy Apple didn't bother bombarding a OS for smaller screens iOS with widgets. I DO, however, think Microsofts "live tile" approach is a better idea, and a good compromise between full blown widgets and useful icon launchers. The ONLY widget I find useful on Android is the search widget (Google Search), the rest of them are nothing more than glorified information poor, space wasting icons. For example, clock widgets are redundant space wasters, they take up 50% of your home screen when the time is ALREADY clearly displayed along the top bar on every phone. Weather widgets? Useless. At a glance high/low temps do nothing for me...I want to see hourly rain/temp forecasts and radar, which means using the weather widget to launch the weather program anyway. iOS 8 introduces widgets into the notification center, and I'm not sure how well that will work, either...I'd have preferred Apple went the way of Microsofts "live tile" approach with "live icons", versus widgets... I am a fan of live tiles, too. A genuinely unique and good idea.

While I agree that the Holo UI needs replaced, it was far superior of pre-iOS7. It was the most up-to-date UI on the market until September 2013. And I think HTC Sense 5/6 looks great, FWIW

Abreu alone makes it all worth it

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 26, 2014 -> 06:57 PM) Me either? I think Microsoft made a LOT of horrible decisions under Bamler, but purposefully trying to get people to stop using their products wasn't one of them. I believe Microsoft is in much better hands now. Aside from that, Android L *finally* looks like an OS I can take seriously, and no, I couldn't take previous versions seriously, as I personally believe they had horrendous UIs (and apparently Google agreed with me hence the change). I think the Holo UI, but it now looks well over 2 years old. It was time for a change and I was very hopeful that they would do a UI-focused update like they did. Apple has proven that design isn't some silly thing for the non-techie. QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 09:11 AM) Their largest pieces of software used by most people is office, they are trying to take that to their hosted service instead of actually selling it on the desktop. They are selling more dumb computers or tablets which eliminates the full windows license. They are trying to get people away from on prem Active Directory by moving them to Azure. Essentially trying to have everyone use their service which directly competes with what Google does. I think the subscription model is a good move, if that's what you're talking about. Takes away the sticker shock - does anyone want to pay at least $120 for an office suite, outside of the people who would also be willing to pay much more? Right now, the $6.99/mo. personal subscription is worth it for the 1TB OneDrive storage alone - you couldn't get 1TB cheaper anywhere else. They're trying to maintain their market dominance of office programs by offering something (holy hell a lot of storage) that would lure people in regardless of whether they're sold on needing the Office suite. You probably know more about OnPrem vs Azure, but it seems like it's going to be making less and less sense for people to manage their own data centers. Whether Azure can out-Google Google is another thing, but if nobody is going to want OnPrem they may as well prepare. Much like how Google is trying to do office, even though they aren't nearly as good at it as MS. What I like about the direction of Windows is that they are going to be prepared for a world in which many fewer people are interested in a desktop or even laptop. They've now been building both software and hardware for hybrid-ish devices for a couple years and there's still not anybody doing this in earnest. Meanwhile, the Internet is being accessed more by mobile devices than laptops/desktops and that trend has not yet begun to slow down. If people are going to abandon the traditional "pretty big device with a hinge" or "computer on a desk" style of computing, MS is pretty far ahead of anyone else at offering an OS or form factor that might satisfy the needs of both portability/touch/small screen and hardware power/useful software/serious productivity. The thing the market hasn't yet decided is where they stand on phones/tablets/laptops. The phones are getting larger, the tablets are getting smaller, the laptops are getting smaller, the desktop screens are getting larger. Will we be wanting big-ish (9 to 11 inch) tablet/PC hybrids for everyday browsing and today-sized phones (5 inch)? Tablet-sized phones (6 to 8 inch) and laptops (13 to 15 inch)? Big phones and desktops? I doubt the mass market will continue wanting to purchase three different things, at least with any frequency. Right now, I think people are buying computers infrequently and phones/tablets frequently. We'll see if that's what people continue to do as their laptops age. QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 12:26 PM) I did not particularly like later versions of Android despite being smoother/better than early versions. Android has always been lacking in uniformity and slickness, some of which was caused by 3rd parties such as Samsung or HTC re-skinning Android, and some of it was because Google was just all over the place on the design front, where programs often had settings in different locations, and it's overall feeling of lack of optimization. To be sure, there was nothing 'wrong' with later versions of Android, but to me, it was like using Windows. It worked, it did what it was supposed to do ... but it just wasn't very ... good, and if you wanted to make it good, it took a lot of customization and digging around. Ten years ago I would have been all over Android because of that ability to customize it into exactly what I wanted...I used to hack and tinker with everything, and it was great because it taught me the in's and out's of a device/operating system, and at that point in my life that was important to me. Even now I get the bug once in a while, but it fades quickly, and I just want whatever I'm using to work without hassle...and after a few days of making iOS or Android look unique, it gets old and I fall back to the, "Jesus, could you please just work when I try to do X, Y or Z, instead of me having to figure stuff out?" Android L, however, looks like it's approaching the uniform/optimized/fluid state I expect out of modern hardware/operating systems. After being on Android for a while now, when I use an iPhone for something my first thought is CAN I do x? Then, of course, given that I have hardly used iOS 7, I find it "non-intuitive" because I'm unfamiliar. I put that in quotes because it's easy to do all of the main functions on all of these mobile OSes, it's just a matter of whether it takes you 2 seconds because you know exactly where it is or 30 seconds because you looked through everything. One of my main beefs with iOS, and it continues to be with iOS 8 it looks like, is the launcher. Launchers on Android are often a way to customize the look of things (which I like to do sometimes), but it is also a way for me to set up specific workflows. I like having a search bar widget, a weather widget, and an agenda widget and just a few frequently used apps. Then on the next screen a few other things - a rotating Feedly headlines widget along with some of my news/sports apps. The rest? Out of sight in the app drawer. Notifications are probably my next highest priority - I think iOS 7 was a big improvement in this regard, but I honestly don't recall the details. Speaking of Apple and notifications, the notifications menu interested in Mavericks is just awesome. I'd be hardcore committed to Windows forever if they would implement that. Until then, I'm considering going MacBook Air for my upcoming computer purchase. Also thinking about Surface Pro 3 (really).

Jeff Goodman - Bulls are tonight's big winner

Eaton in June - .326/.402/.483 11.9% BB%, 16.9% K% 143 wRC+ This is a lot like how he looked in the minor leagues. I hope it sticks and I hope all he had today is a cramp. Please, someone tell him to quit stretching for first base.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jun 26, 2014 -> 11:12 PM) I agree with a lot of this but Iguodala has been a clearly superior player to Deng and Gordon and he went after both. You should really look at the numbers. Iguodala always seemed more promising talent-wise but he took a while to come around and even at his peak there's not an easy argument to be made that he was better than Deng. Iguodala hasn't averaged over 14 points since 2009 and I won't take easily to an argument that he's a superior defender to Deng (I could go with a wash, they are about as different as two different elite defenders at the same position could be). He's had a bit more staying power than Gordon, who fell off pretty quickly after being one of the more explosive scorers around in a time where the league wasn't scoring much. Hard to argue that he's been better than Iguodala, but given that I'd prefer Deng at SF during that time period it's not such a bad thing that we went with a true guard there. There are shades of gray and context-dependent things so it's valid that you brought up Iggy

Paxson's first draft was 2003. 2003 - Hinrich. No good today, but he was a really nice player for a long time. There wasn't anybody obviously better that went later. Good pick. 2004 - Gordon at 3 and Deng at 7. The only player I could have really criticized them for passing up on by taking Gordon at 3 was Deng, who they got at 7. Duhon in 2nd round was a rare contributor from that part of the draft. Great job here, considering the only great player in the draft went 1 overall. These guys and Hinrich turned the franchise around. 2005 - No first rounder, traded this first rounder for Luol Deng. Brilliant deal as we were picking 21st in 2005. 2006 - The big whiff: Tyrus Thomas. Made worse by the fact that we got essentially nothing in return for moving down two slots because Viktor Khryapa never had any real semblance of value. This is a big, big mistake. Moved from 16 to 13 to grab Thabo Sefolosha, which was a good enough move. Nice player and later spun him off for another mid-first pick. 2007 - Joakim Noah at 9. Arguably the second best player from this draft, more conservatively 3rd (making Al Horford better). Both those players were selected earlier. We got this pick by trading Eddy Curry and Antonio Davis to NY, getting Mike Sweetney, Tim Thomas, Jermaine Jackson, the Thabo Sefolosha pick the year before, and an option to swap picks with NY (we did - moved from 23 to 9). Great deal, great pick. 2008 - Derrick Rose. If you complain about this one, you're just being a dick. The only other players you'd want from this draft are Westbrook, Love, and Brook Lopez. Westbrook would be the most defensible pick there in hindsight, but indefensible at the time and this is not to mention the time it took for Westbrook to remotely compare to Rose. We also took Omer Asik at 36, a pretty excellent 2nd round choice. 2009 - James Johnson at 16 and Taj Gibson at 26. Johnson qualifies as a miss, but the fact that we traded him for a first rounder is noteworthy. Jrue Holliday, Ty Lawson, Jeff Teague and Taj Gibson are the main players to fret about not getting at 16. Gibson is an awesome selection at 26. Not wanting a PG at 16 is rather forgivable as well. 2010 - No picks. Our 17th pick, which was used on a foreigner that hasn't come over, was traded for another foreigner that hasn't come over, and we traded that guy with Kirk Hinrich to Washington. These are the hazards of going for the big name players. With that said, there really isn't a player worth a s*** taken at or after 17. Lance Stephenson in the middle of the second is the next best guy after Paul George at 10. 2011 - Jimmy Butler at 30: great pick. We traded our 28th pick for Nikola Mirotic. Jury's out on him, but the very fact that Chad Ford says he'd be a top 6 pick in today's draft makes that sound like a pretty good deal and a wash at worst. 2012 - Marquis Teague at 29. I won't call it a "whiff" given the expectations for a 29th pick, but no positive points here. Best players we missed (that we know of so far) are Draymond Green at 35 and Khris Middleton at 44. 2013 - Tony Snell at 20. I don't want to make too many proclamations about this given how little sample we have for him or anyone else, but I don't yet feel too bad about anyone else that got by. To Tony's credit, he has at least not yet ruled out the possibility of him becoming a decent rotation player. He could go either way IMO. It's a pretty good run IMO. Given the overall success rate of first round draft picks, we've done pretty damn well. One big miss, but several big hits and we didn't f*** up our biggest opportunity when we picked first overall. You can say what you want about it being obvious in 2008, but if you let 30 teams draft there you wouldn't have had 30 Derrick Roses. Countless examples of #1 overall picks being pretty much s***ty ballplayers or paling in comparison to players taken later.

Of players under Bulls control, there are some nice floor spacers: -McBuckets -Dunleavy -Mirotic -Snell Guys we had around last year and wouldn't be that hard to get back: -Augustin -Fredette And I think Jimmy will end up being an asset in that regard as he gets better and pares down his shot amount with the team around him improving. I don't think it would be too difficult to bring in some other shooters on the cheap as well. Disappointed to see some of the good shooting wings off the board early in the second, though

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 26, 2014 -> 10:13 PM) What leverage does Toronto have? Lowry is a FA. This is a S&T, not a normal trade. Edit: Sorry, i looked like an ass with my initial response. If that's the going rate, I'd take him on the Bulls. Seriously.

On a side note, I'm really excited to see what we get from Mirotic

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jun 26, 2014 -> 09:56 PM) Ric Bucher ‏@RicBucher now Now hearing that Norris Cole would also be part of the Lowry-to-Miami deal. Norris Cole and late first rounders at best for Lowry? That's an awful deal

The real questions are what lie ahead once FA kicks off. I can't figure out Anthony Randolph at all. A lot of ability, has wowed a few times in the NBA, but never any playing time outside of spot starts. Also, I'd love any of Cleanthony Early/GR3/Joe Harris

Why in the world would Toronto do that just on the hope of getting an inferior player in Bosh back