southsider2k5

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 01:14 PM) That's just brutal. Hopefully the SOX fix this. It isn't the Sox fault. WGN is getting out of the sports business.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 02:08 PM) He will also have to adjust to pitchers who will be studying much more tape and finding his holes. He will adjust to having seen pitchers before.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 11:51 AM) I agree on one and two, not sure about three. If Johnson does look really good, I think that only increases the chances the Sox keep Rodon in Charlotte a few months or put him in the bullpen. If Rodon has a big spring, I don't see how they don't take him north.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 10:13 AM) If Johnson has a good spring, anyone think he can overtake Noesi for the #5 spot? Odds are slim. To my eyes it would take the following 1. A big spring from Johnson, where he has his form, velocity, and results back to 2013 type. 2. A bad spring from Noesi, and/or an injury to another pitcher 3. Rodon, or another highly ranked prospect, not having a huge spring in front of Johnson, as all things being equal, Rodon would win out.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 09:55 AM) When healthy, he is about as ideal of a lead-off hitter as they come. I'd love to see him flirt with a .400 OBP this year, and I don't think that is totally out of realm of possibility. Plus having a real hitter behind him is going to help him out a lot.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 08:28 AM) That's a big IF. Yeah, the whole thing with Eaton is health.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 08:28 AM) That's a big IF. Yeah, the whole thing with Eaton is health.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 08:38 PM) Hawks have definitely seemed to be the better team tonight. It just hit me that these teams could totally face each other in the Stanley Cup Finals now. I sooo miss these two teams in the same division.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 07:40 PM) Yeah, now. Back in 2002, everybody outside of LA said he he'd suffer a great deal without Shaq. Westbrook is the most physically/athletically gifted pg in nba history, with an impressive skillset to boot. He'd be just fine without KD. He'd be Allen Iverson without another superstar.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 05:18 PM) Or taking into account the cost of the trade. That isn't it for sure. That would be reflected in your account balance.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 06:24 PM) I (and many others) said the same thing about Kobe when he was playing with Shaq. We was a little wrong there. Westbrook could easily lead the league in scoring on above league average efficiency without KD. Westbrook isn't anywhere near peak-Kobe. Kobe Bryant is an all-time great.

Jimmy Howard is standing on his head so far. That first PP was as good as you can get without scoring.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 04:42 PM) No. Because the post you quoted specifically compares Westbrook this season to Rose in 2011. Thunder without both Westbrook and Durant this year are just 5-11, but with Westbrook and no Durant they are a respectable 7-4. Let's not forget he plays in the Western conference as well. Westbrook has certainly proven that he's capable of leading the team when opportunity presents itself. But if he had to do it on a nightly basis, his efficiency wouldn't be nearly as good. Contrast that and give the MVP Rose a guy the calibur of Kevin Durant, and watch what his numbers would do.

SportsCenter ‏@SportsCenter 18m18 minutes ago THIS JUST IN: The Dallas Mavericks have signed free agent Amar'e Stoudemire.

anthony fenech ‏@anthonyfenech 2h2 hours ago The Tigers say "it's optimistic Miguel could be ready close to Opening Day."

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 03:41 PM) Awesome. I'm sure it's the latter. That makes complete sense. Thanks man, appreciate it! Any time.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 03:21 PM) Yeah it's difficult to explain without specifics, so it's easier this way. I don't really care if y'all know which stock I'm talking about : DAL went up 1.34% but when I look at my position on my schwab acct it's only up 1.14% on the day. I've bought in on three separate occasions at different price points and for different share amounts. Color me confused. It could be a couple of different things. I think the most likely is that most quotes are 20 minute delayed, while your position profit and loss are not. If it isn't that, it could be the way that they are pricing the position in regards to all of your purchases. For example: Buy 100 shares of XYZ for $100. Next day buy 100 shares at $101. The day after that, the position is trading at $102. If they combined your position in your account summary, you would show 200 shares at $102. Your gain on the first 100 shares is 2% ($100->102) while the second 100 shares is about 1% ($101->102) and if they average it out, it would show up on your statement as a 1.5% profit, or the average profit on the entire position.

Perfect irony there.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 03:13 PM) question guys. I'm pretty new to investing, and I was wondering if y'all could answer a question for me. If a stock goes up a certain amount, but my position in that stock doesn't go up the same amount as the overall stock, is that because of the different price points at which I bought in on the stock? I assume that's somehow related, but I'd love to actually understand it. Thanks Trying to understand your question here, so excuse me if I have something wrong. If you are actually buying a stock, and not an ETF, your gain/loss should exactly mirror what the stock price does. If you buy 100 shares of IBM, and it goes up $2, you make $200, on paper. Your position only changes if you are buying or selling more of the stock. ETFs are a bit different because they are setup to mirror something else, and are not exact copies of what they follow. If you want to give me more details for a better explanation, feel free to PM me.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 02:13 PM) I don't think the Bulls have the cap space to get him if he's an FA. If he was bought out, wouldn't he get the minimum?

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 02:02 PM) The Durant thing is really getting old. Durant missed a ton of games and IIRC Westbrook has the highest PER of all time in games without Durant this season so I say he's doing just fine on his own. Why? Because it is true? It is much easier to be good when you have an even better superstar attracting attention. I would swear to this day that Scottie Pippen wouldn't have been a Hall of Famer if he hadn't of played with Michael Jordan.

My gut tells me that Tex missed "K"

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 12:59 PM) I thought I had heard Kiley McDaniel say the scouts all thought he had an agreement with the Cubs like back in the fall. Could be them too. I just remember seeing that he was taken.

If we are talking about pure hitting... Not defense, not base running etc. There are only a few guys that belong in this conversation. Right now I would say Miguel, but that is because I want to see Jose do it again.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 01:05 PM) Well yea, he didnt like being part of a rebuild, who would? It cant be fun being in the middle of your prime while the team is being torn down around you and rebuilt, without being in those rebuild plans. But he didnt really put it the way you said it, I never heard him say he didnt like playing for the Cubs. Jon Lester?