southsider2k5

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 09:45 PM) I know he shouldn't have the final say...but KW did give him the final say on this. Which makes it Kennys fault even more.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 08:07 AM) Didn't we just have the exact same thread a few days ago? Yep, right about two weeks after the send Beckham to Charlotte thread.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 05:45 PM) I agree. The redistribution of wealth upwards that we've seen since 1980 was a key part of the economic collapse. So W saw the biggest dip in that curve. Interesting.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 04:37 PM) Thus proving his point. Exactly.

Damn. I was hoping they were going to get stuck with his contract again.

Happy Birthday ptatc! And great spelling to the genius thread starter!

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 04:22 PM) Read somewhere that D-Rose wants T-Mac on the Bulls, said T-Mac was his favorite player in 6th grade. Oh Derrick... There is a Kenny Williams joke in here somewhere...

QUOTE (ICP! @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 10:33 AM) lostfan, whats with all the angryblackmanitis going around ? It is so frustrating for us white guys to deal with. oooh, he is totally kicking your ass now.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 05:46 PM) We can drop it but I asked him a simple question in a polite way so WTF? You didn't think the closing of the first thread was a hint?

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 02:03 PM) chw are you trying to build a case where if and when we lose the division we can all simply say, "It's Bobby Jenks' fault!" Not flaming. Just asking. Because if that is the case, it's pretty f***ing stupid. The season is a marathon and you'd have to look at all other contending teams and how many games their closer blew, etc. CAN WE PLEASE DROP THIS?

QUOTE (ICP! @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 02:55 PM) I have to go to Marriage Counseling tonight so no Sox for me....thank God for that eh...

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 11:51 AM) If you only take into account the win expectancy when the closer comes in at the top or bottom of the 9th inning with nobody out, the only time where win expectancy is at 95% is when there is a 3 run lead. When there is a 2 run lead in a similar situation, the win expectancy is 93.6%. When there is a 1 run lead in a similar situation, the win expectancy is 80%. Are we really going to quibble about 93.6 versus 95%? You also forget that the expectancy goes up as you get more outs as well.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 12:10 PM) I may be the only one, but I am not a fan of going 12 deep on a roster. I think it screws the minutes up for the better players. Here is what I predict for the minute distribution this year: PG: Rose (35 minutes), Watson (13 minutes) SG: Brewer (30 minutes); Korver (10 minutes); FA or Johnson (8 minutes) SF: Deng (33 minutes); Korver (10 minutes); Johnson (5 minutes) PF: Boozer (35 minutes); Gibson (13 minutes) C: Noah (35 minutes); Gibson (10 minutes); Thomas/Asik (3??) I just don't see how the numbers align with all this depth. I would much rather have eight strong player than 12 above-average players. Taj deserves 20+ minutes per game easily, but if he does, Asik/Thomas get nothing. You can't take away from Noah. Gonna be some minute problems. With the injury history's of the guys on this team, you go as deep as you can.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 11:37 AM) Anybody willing to trade Q if it would bring us back Haren? If a trade takes either TCQ or Beckham to get done, I would rather stand pat at the deadline.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 10:56 AM) That's if they play 20 games like that every year, which they are not on pace for. So far, Jenks has entered a situation like the one we are talking about 7 times, including the one he blew. In this case, they are on pace for 12 of these situations this year. Since this is an estimate, we can give or take two or three games. If you want to be liberal about it, 5 games even. Even in that case, it will not be 20 games and you really can't lose partial games. How many times a year to we get to the point where we have a 95% chance of winning a game? It has to be a fairly big number. If you look the closers save%'s it almost has to be. They always come into situations where they are winning in the last inning by at least a run, if not two or three, which kicks the odds way up. Looking at just the # of opportunities there are tells me that it has to be most games at the very least.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 08:40 AM) BP: Five trades that need to happen I'd be thrilled with that.

QUOTE (ICP! @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 08:08 AM) A trade for Fielder today would be right what the doctor ordered. I just need some kind of big splash to get the juices flowing. Kenny, just make a balls out move dude. You know you have it in you. Prince has the potential to become a mega star in Chicago. You just stay off of the bandwagon...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 10:29 AM) the EPA? Its total budget decreased last year to $10.02 billion. How is that getting lumped in there? The gulf of mexico ring a bell?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 09:38 AM) We're talking about one game and the win expectancy of the game going into the bottom of the 9th. In that game, you had a 95% chance of winning. If you were to play that game from the bottom of the 9th and on 20 times, you should win 19 times. I understand what you're trying to say though. In other words, we are going to lose a statisitical amount of those sort of games, every single year, and you really shouldn't be freaking out if you believe in those type of stats that much.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 10:24 AM) Well, then I'd believe that number. We saw quite well though how great the response was from the right to a $20 billion increase in DOD funding if it was associated with things like killing the F-22. As I keep saying, while you keep trying to hammer the partisan point, I am not married to my party. I can see fault in them. I also see this number being way low, especially in view of the reactions to the financial crisis and the EPA, if we are going to start making "waste" judgments on things other than actual waste.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 10:22 AM) Are we counting the DOD or not? Count it all Mr Democrat.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2010 -> 09:06 AM) I'm pretty sure we signed the bill to do that yesterday. So the government is admitting to misspending $110 billion last year. Does that mean we drop the whole waste isn't that big thing? And in reality, if the feds are will to admit to $110 billion, how much bigger is that number in reality? Right now we are talking about pretty much 10% of the deficit.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jul 22, 2010 -> 10:04 PM) When the chemicals of your brain are altered that quickly, it can make you really not normal. Especially if your chemical make up isn't quite "right" anyway.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 22, 2010 -> 05:45 PM) They could cost us, do you remember that this division has come down to a play-in game the past two years? You can't afford to blow games you had a 95% chance of winning. Especially not against a division rival who is going to be right there with you for the entire season. It happens to every team, every year. Each team in the division probably could pick out at least five of those kind of games. Think about it for a second, if there is a 95% chance of victory, that still means one in twenty games you will lose. That means if you got to a 95% chance in say 60 games a year, you are statistically going to lose three of them, on average.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 22, 2010 -> 02:32 PM) there'll be a lot of s*** if congress people can't get back to their constituents. Some people view that as an important part of our democracy. Big deal. Speaking as a person who gets ahold of his Congress-people on a regular basis for official business type reasons, (for things like radio/web interviews, and for personal issues) they don't get back to people like us anyway. Its not like I would notice a difference.