StrangeSox

QUOTE (almagest @ Jun 30, 2008 -> 12:23 PM) Boston Red Sox Offense 84 games played 19 games scoring 2 or less runs 5 games shutout 5.04 R/G Chicago White Sox Offense 82 games played 24 games scoring 2 or less runs 8 games shutout 4.83 R/G So the Sox average roughly a quarter run less per game than the Red Sox, which is a team most consider to be very good offensively on a consistent basis. The Sox also have only 5 more games scoring >= 2 runs (6% more), and have 3 more shutouts against (~4%). I haven't looked into it beyond the Red Sox, but I'd bet the White Sox are not as inconsistent as you think, at least as compared to the rest of baseball. We also have the second-highest run differential in baseball, as someone mentioned previously. That's a far better measure of W/L records than offensive "consistency." Start looking at standard deviation of runs scored instead of average. That will tell you how consistent they are. I'd also guess that as your runs scored deviates more and more, your run differential becomes less and less accurate at predicting wins and losses.

I watched Mystery Science Theater 3000's "Wild Wild World of Batwoman" (the actual movie's plot makes ZERO sense) over the weekend. My girlfriend and I had put it on our Netflix que, but we were worried that maybe MST3K wasn't as funny as we thought it was 10 years ago. I'm happy to say that the very first line had us both laughing out loud, and there were many more quality moments throughout the movie.

Boone Logan domination.

Another gem from Mr. "But he's got great stuff!"

Alexi!

I saw some interesting things up in the nosebleed seats yesterday (sect. 514). Drunkards everywhere, a girl throwing up all over some guy's back, and after the 5th inning or so, someone was being ejected every 5 minutes it seemed. The calamity in the stands was almost more entertaining than the game at that point (since it was a blow-out). Can't complain about the tickets, though. My boss stopped by at 9 yesterday morning and offered me one for free + paid day off!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 27, 2008 -> 07:52 PM) Simple question then...where is the "Right to self defense" (and that's a quote from Scalia's opinion) in the 2nd amendment? That is the specific right that Scalia stated in his opinion he was protecting with that ruling. Still, there wasn't any precedent overturned.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 03:34 PM) I can promise you that people will be tracking gun violence in DC for the next few years. I'd be curious to see the numbers. Why not just look at Chicago's numbers? Clearly, gun bans don't stop gun violence. King Daley's nonsensical rant is hilarious.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 03:25 PM) What happened on Berroa's fielder choice? Danks tried to go to third instead of taking the easy out at 1st.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 02:14 PM) Very stiff penalties for anyone caught carrying a gun? I dunno. I'm no expert on these matters. Just sharing my personal opinions. If you're going to kill 30+ people, I think its safe to say that you won't give a damn about some penalties. Look at drugs. There are very, very stiff penalties for possessing even small amounts (longer sentences than shooting someone!). Does that stop it from being a multi-billion dollar industry in this country?

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 02:06 PM) Tell that to the neighbor of the VA Tech gunman. Owning guns didn't get anyone killed. Someone going nuts got people killed. He could have just built a simple pipe bomb and done the same thing. And, on the other hand, say we had a trained, armed student in one of those classrooms. Now the killer is dead quickly instead of being able to kill 30 people while we wait for the police to show up. A gun is nothing more or less than a tool.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 12:28 PM) I can't think of any other amendment that can directly get me killed. None of them can. Your neighbor owning 50 guns isn't going to get you killed.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 26, 2008 -> 12:07 PM) I know I'm in the minority but I feel that the 2nd amendment is completely outdated. I don't see why we need to own guns as individuals. It just doesn't seem like something a civilized society would require. I could see a case where hunting specific rifles were allowed but that's about it. Why shouldn't law-abiding citizens be allowed to own guns?

Absolutely awesome start.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 07:32 PM) lol, that MoveOn ad is so stupid. It's an insult to our intelligence, and I wonder if it even works? I liked Stewart's line on it last night (paraphrasing): "MoveOn.org: making even those who agree with you cringe for over 10 years."

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 07:25 PM) My problem with this ruling is that they didn't say where the line would be, it just seems completely arbitrary (even though they cited all the states' laws) I thought it was drawn at the only way to get the death penalty is to actually take a life? This was just part of the NPR summary, though. I haven't read the actual decision.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 02:29 PM) The group is stupid, hurts artists at times, makes dumb decisions. I agree. Radio stations are now deriving more benefit from freely playing records then they are giving. A new arrangement would seem fair. Again, Jim. If you were the RIAA, how would you stay in business? Back in, say, 1995, I'd realize with all my business prowess, that this weird internet thing isn't just a fad and maybe we should get in on it instead of trying to sue people using it. I'd stop producing and peddling garbage for $20 a CD with only one decent track. If they cannot adapt to the times and come up with a modern, workable business model that doesn't involve trying to squeeze every last dime out of every possible user, no matter how much it might actually hurt them in the long run, then they'll go under. They don't have a right to exist. IMO, they don't really have a need to exist anymore, either.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 09:12 AM) This is wrong. It's not that pitchers are babied, it's that most of these guys shouldn't be in the majors. Back in the good old days as you put it, the pitchers whose arms couldn't handle the workload were sed up in the minors and were out of baseball. With the increased number of teams there is a need for more pitchers so you have to take it easier on arms that really shouldn't be here. they should throw more and should throw more innings and many could handle it but many could not so with the money invested in these pitchers you have no choice but to be careful with pitchers who back in the good old days would have been out of the game before they saw the majors. There also wasn't anywhere near the financial risk of leaving a pitcher out there to burn up his arm. You didn't still owe him $80M if you overwork his arm in the first year of a 5 year deal.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jun 24, 2008 -> 02:45 PM) And where would many radio stations go if there was no musicians? The markets would support just so many talk shows. They need each other. Imagine if someone could publish a book and anyone could immediately copy it and print their own copies for sale next to the author's version, and call it advertising for the original owner. Has anyone ever said, I want to listen to that station that advertises Classic Rock? How many stations claim to play the most commercial free music? Why can't two or three television stations head to US Cellular and cover a game as a "news story" with live, as it happens, play by play? Artists are getting screwed. I can't believe stations can't cough up a bit for the recording industry. You don't need the RIAA for there to be musicians. Look at Radiohead or any other number of bands that are self-producing now. I would not be sad to see the likes of Columbia and the other mega producers go the way of the dodo while more efficient self-producing methods (MySpace/ Amazon/ other internet sites) become more and more the norm. None of this money (or at least very, very little of it) would get into the artists' hands. That is what the other fees are for. These new fees would be for the dumb-as-dinosaur executives.

There's a difference between "Osama video" and "terrorist attack on American soil." Weak sauce.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jun 24, 2008 -> 09:40 AM) Like the guy who blew himself up along with tens of Iraqis in Mosul after being released from Guantanamo? That was probably our fault too. We made him into a terrorist by detaining him. After all we are less safe, just ask Barry. Olbertool should count the days since our last attack along with his mission accomplished schtick. I'm sorry, what does your nonsensical rant have to do with due process and proving someone's guilt through evidence? Or is it just a complete non-sequitur that sets up an absurd strawman and then attacks Obama and Olberman for some reason? Do you support BearSox's position of summary executions for anyone we think might be a terrorist?

QUOTE (Brian @ Jun 23, 2008 -> 01:05 PM) I really hope "Hancock" is good cuz the trailers and stuff make it look sweet. And Charlize....yummy. The commercials make the entire movie, and especially the CGI look awful IMO.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 23, 2008 -> 12:16 PM) Its GOING to happen, I would bet you money. If terrorists are going to get the same rights as everyone else, they are going to get the same kind of odds at getting off in court. That's a part of our system, just ask OJ how well the justice system works. I had thought it already happened, but then I came across this link while looking for a supporting article: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/21/gitmo-report-scalia/ That doesn't mean it WON'T happen.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 02:00 PM) This isn't McCarthyism. These people are known islamofascists and terrorists. Call me naive, but I don't think the military picked up a couple hundred random people and declared them terroritsts for the hell of it. Hey, what the hell, why not read these terrorists their miranda rights before we detain on the battle field as well? You're naive. Many people were turned in in Afghanistan for the reward money. There was never any evidence, except person X (Who was paid several thousand dollars) saying Person Y is a terrorist. Hundreds of people have already been released from Gitmo over the last 5 years because we found out that, hey, they really weren't terrorists and there was no evidence that they were. Your line of logic is "If you've been arrested, you must be guilty. Why else would they arrest you?!" That is 100% opposite of our legal system. We don't "know" that these people are terrorists. We suspect it. You go to court, you present evidence, and you give a fair trial to prove your case.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jun 23, 2008 -> 03:38 AM) Javy and JC are struggling right now. I'm not very confident in Contreras but I'll bet that Javy finishes with an era under 4 this year. He's had 4 below average starts in a row now but none of them were horrible, it's not like he got absolutely crushed. He'll be fine 5 runs in 5 innings is pretty horrible.