Jake

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 30, 2015 -> 11:08 AM) But that sort of ignores reality right? They're not going extinct because people are killing them just for s***s and giggles or even for sport. I'm sure for most animals the biggest problem there is habitat loss. But even with regard to human killings, there's a market out there for hides, ivory, skins, etc. We can pretend like that will just magically disappear, but we all know it won't, at least not 100%. Keep working on that angle, obviously, but an additional method to save these animals IS to allow some heavily regulated, for-profit hunting. It has to be done right. There needs to be control. But what they've found is that in some cases, MORE animals get protected and MORE people guard against poaching because they want to appeal to big game hunters (i.e., have animals to shoot, usually old, non-procreating animals). There are a few examples of big game ranges in Texas that are doubling and tripling the number of safari animals because with the price for the few that they allow to be killed, they are able to buy, bring over, save, and then multiply other animals. I think there's an antelope that went extinct in Africa but is thriving in Texas. I was reading on some of this yesterday and a lot of conservation groups and even the US Wildlife service agrees that the big game hunting can and does help conservation efforts. The devils in the details though and how the system is set up and managed. As a principle, while it sucks that a beautiful animal will be killed, if it's saving even more, i'm all for it. I think very similarly with regards to zoos and their breeding programs. Yeah it sucks those animals are stuck in cages and small enclosures, but at least they're still around and even breeding. I think you make good points, but I want to make clear that the premise is that those indirect causes of population loss like habitat loss would arguably also be a result for our low regard for the animals. With that said, I'm not closed off to other solutions that use the same negative impulses (greed) to try to extract some positive (intentional protection of the animals in some way, shape, or form)

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jul 30, 2015 -> 04:15 PM) Is his name Toby Sellers? No

If true, it's just an org. depth move. No reason to think the guy would be on our 25-man.

Original source on the Sellers deal is a 14 year old self-described reporter who hosts his own website.

If the BoSox really wanted to win, they'd have signed up Delmon Young for the night.

I'd be surprised if we did anything that is likely to mainly improve this year's team at the possible expense of the next 2 or 3 years and I wouldn't support doing so.

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 11:28 PM) Am I the only one who wants the sox to stand pat? I'm happy for them to do that. Even if you had a lot of faith in the team, our record isn't good enough to justify selling out just to win this season. But the team is playing so well and the pitching staff is so great that you can't justify selling off either. Keeping Samardzija is a risk, losing Samardzija is a risk. I think keeping Samardzija is in and of itself a gamble and maybe the only appropriate one for this season.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 11:20 PM) It's based a lot on run differential. So while we're +35 over this winning streak the overall number is still crappy. I wouldn't put too much stock into that number, considering we were putting up that horrible run differential when we couldn't hit s*** and our defense was awful. Both have improved, which the formula doesn't account for. Even when our record was at its absolute worst, pretty much every system there is suggested that our record was better than we deserved. So a run of good play can't erase just how "lucky" we may have been to only have had a sort-of horrible record a few weeks ago

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 07:53 PM) Major android vulnerability http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/how-to/google-a...-virus-3621072/ The vulnerability is deep in the OS, the MMS method is only one of several potential attack vectors. It could be executed via browsers as well (other than Firefox, according to the guy who found the hole), it's just that the MMS method is the easiest way to target a particular person.

The best argument I've heard about the whole raising money for conservation by shooting endangered animals business is this: the thing that is threatening these animals is the way that many of us humans regard them. We don't value their lives, well-being, habitat, etc. While we may get some money to throw at the problem by encouraging some legal, controlled hunting, we may in fact be making the actual cause of the problem worse. Hunting them trains us to continue believing that killing them is fine, morally speaking. Nobody wants the animals to be extinct but no one kill makes them extinct. But if every person can kill them for their own selfish reasons and feel no guilt, nobody will feel responsible for the collective well-being of the species. I killed one to put it on my wall sure, but that's just one and I paid a lot of money for it. It's hard to say for sure what the best way to approach it is. People have made similar arguments about global warming/pollution/the environment and I think there is a good counterargument in that case: technological and policy solutions could very realistically be a relatively permanent solution to the human-induced CO2 emissions problem and if we can do that rather than try to change worldwide attitudes, we should go ahead and do it. But when we're talking about preserving a living species, it's an ongoing problem that seems very difficult to fix with some sort of magic bullet solution. If someone could convince me that using the market to save them could work, I'd be open to it even if I would continue to be fairly disgusted by the means (killing innocent animals for no reason beyond self-fulfillment/aggrandizement).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 20, 2015 -> 12:31 PM) And yet his numbers were always pretty darn solid for a guy who has less than overwhelming offspeed stuff. His changeup is nasty IMO, but it's rarely a strike if batters don't swing at it. And I mean his fastball isn't exactly meat, it just always surprised me that people weren't really swinging at it like it was hard to hit. Luckily it always had a ton of run, too.

In general, this is a case where it doesn't make sense to compare Brady's punishment with people who have committed crimes. What Brady did can only be adjudicated by the NFL because it only concerns football games. Comparing to PED abuse makes sense.

LaRoche was adequate albeit slightly underperforming for the first two months or so and then suddenly just dropped like an absolute rock. Maybe it's injury, maybe it's mental, but something out of the ordinary for sure.

Crap defense, not a good baserunner, doesn't walk, has only a little bit of pop. He's one of those guys who has very few methods of being successful: has to just hit for a really high average because the rest of his game doesn't add value. If he were a right fielder, he'd be Avi Garcia. He's not a right fielder, so he has more value, but it's the same thing.

lol If you didn't get Bryant back, which you wouldn't, you'd be walking away from a Sale trade with Schwarber, Russell, and several other guys who aren't just throw-ins.

Trump has a relatively small portion of the stated votes in the national polls. A huge portion of his popularity as a candidate (as measured by the polls) is simply that there are a lot of people that like him as a celebrity and he has by far the best name recognition in the field. You could also frame this whole thing as >80% of Republicans vote against Trump. Our friends on the right aren't insane and Trump won't win the primary. I'd of course be tickled if he ran as a third party candidate and grabbed some votes, though.

I think it would be pretty crazy to acquire a huge money player and offload a great player at the same spot based on the hope you could flip him a week later. Why not just do a three-way deal?

I think the best argument Brady has is that the NFL's past and the way the investigation was carried out led him to have no trust that things would be carried out fairly. He was uncooperative because he didn't believe they would be looking for the truth when they used his evidence, only for anything that could be used against him. Of course, he probably did try to get those balls deflated, but they've done a fairly poor job of showing it.

We could always, you know, put him on the DL...

Moto G is an excellent option that is affordable but not so underpowered that it will frustrate you now or in a couple years.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 11:41 AM) Ivana stated it wasn't true that The Don raped her. This is Trump's lawyer not Trump making the statement. I think the media blew this up a little too much. Ivana said that she felt very violated but didn't want people to interpret her comments as a criminal accusation. That's fair. It's also what I'd do if I didn't want to be in court against Donald Trump anymore. Trump's lawyer's comment was incredibly callous and inaccurate and is getting so much play because he proceeded to threaten the reporter with Donald's resources.

Samardzija's sinking K rate, velocity, and release point worries me as far as an extension goes.

Always assumed that was a self portrait

Are you guys having fun or what? ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 09:05 PM) Why did Betts jump over the fence? He had no reason to and could have stopped himself or crashed into the wall. I'm so tired of these hotshots trying to get their exposure on Baseball Tonight's web gem segment. If I was the pitcher I'd be LIVID if an outfielder did that to me. I'm pretty sure he did it to avoid crashing into the wall