Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (shysocks @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 02:39 PM) Exactly. I would argue that no coach could have won those series. Just because Thibs isn't a miracle worker doesn't mean he hasn't maxed out his teams' potential. I'm not arguing that he doesn't max out the potential. But maxing out their potential doesn't mean his teams are vastly overachieving. I think they achieve what they're capable of in a pretty s***ty conference with 1 or 2 really good teams: they get to the playoffs and then lose. At best you could argue that he overachieved by beating the Nets. Everything else is up to expectations for the most part. Without Rose and a different coach, are you (and SS2k5) suggesting they shouldn't have gotten to the playoffs at all?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 02:34 PM) Unless you're willing to say that Derrick Rose's injuries are on Thibs, then I'm going to go with bad luck. You could make a case that he pushed Noah too hard through the Plantar Fasciitis, but at the same time they also thought they were going for a title that year and he didn't seem to show any ill effects in following seasons. Beyond that, basically every key player has been healthier under Thibs than previously or their injuries have been things like what happened to Butler just now. So will you stand up and say that Thibs overworked Rose or are you going to ignore the question like the last time I posed it. Would Derrick Rose be a much healthier player under a different coach? He overworks all of his players, including Rose. Does that directly lead to injuries such as Rose's ACL tear, or Butler's elbow injury? No. And you're basing health on games played, which doesn't mean much if they're playing through injuries they shouldn't be playing through.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 02:33 PM) That is total crap. Explain to me how GarPax were able to turn Jimmy Butler into an all-star? Or able to turn a steady stream of mediocre PG's into useful players on an NBA roster? Or turning Taj Gibson into a guy who would start on a lot of teams? Getting 10 more wins out of a team then most anyone else would is the very definition of over-achieving. From a pure talent standpoint, without a healthy Derrick Rose, this is a mediocre talent team. It is a .500 team, or worse in the modern NBA. They signed them? They drafted them? The Bulls have put together a pretty good roster during Thibs' run. He's had a lot of parts to play with. And I think the bolded is crap, especially this year. Noah is an All-Star/All-NBA player. Not every team has one of those. This year they have Pau. They've had the best 6 man in the game for multiple season in Taj. They've had solid 3-4 guys like Deng and Dunleavy. Thibs grinds out more wins than your typical coach would. Fine, i'll grant you that. But those extra 5-10 wins don't mean dick at the end of the day.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 02:20 PM) Of the playoff series the Bulls have lost under Thibs, which should they have won with their roster at the time, and how much would it have mattered had they won? 2010-2011 they achieved their ceiling and lost to a better team. Based on roster alone they should have beaten the 76ers in 2011-2012 for sure. But obviously there's a huge emotional component to losing Rose in the first game. In 2012-2013, beating the Nets was probably a slight over achievement. But nothing earth shattering. Neither team was very good 2013-2014 they totally ran out of gas and lost to a better, younger, more energetic and athletic Wizards.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 02:14 PM) You're not allowed to do a "Can't really help that" while complaining about things like Jimmy Butler's injury, where he was in the middle of a normal game, a competitive game against a solid opponent, a normal screen was set, and he jammed his elbow. There's literally nothing that can be done to help that. You can't prevent a guy from being screened. You can't bench guys in normal games so they don't get hurt. I don't disagree, and i'm not blaming Thibs for acute injuries like that. But come on, this team hasn't been fully healthy since 2010. That's either some extremely, unlikely bad luck, or it's due to the style of play/amount of play, which is on Thibs. I think it's a combination of both.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 01:58 PM) So you are saying there are coaches out there that would have had a championship with the Bulls at least once the last 5 years? When is the last time the Bulls have been healthy on opening night? No, but I think a lot of coaches would have won 50 something games and reached the playoffs with the same roster.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 01:53 PM) Turning a mediocre talent team into a top regular season is improving the team. He doesn't have to win a title with a crappy team for it to mean that he gets a team to overachieve. I give credit to Thibs for that. I also give GarPax credit for that. Thibs was obviously an improvement over VD. No question. I just think the "overachiever" angle is a little overplayed at this point. Losing your MVP/superstar is rough and they maintained some consistency without him. Kudos to Thibs. But it's not like they really OVERachieved. I say they achieved, given what they had and the s***ty state of the East. Should they have beat the Nets in round 1? Probably not. But it's not like the Nets were the 1 seed or a true contender either.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 01:52 PM) The 3 years before Thibs, Deng missed 19, 33, and 12 games. Then Thibs arrived. Deng then missed 0, 12, and 9 games the next 3 years (prior to being traded). He got more minutes and missed fewer games. I have no idea what other conclusion you could draw. He missed 28 his 2nd season with Thibs, not 12. And the 33, IIRC, was due to a broken leg, can't really help that. It just seemed to me, with Thibs, he was always playing with some nagging injury. The wrist he played through half a season. edit: ok strike that, you're right. That was the lockout year.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 01:38 PM) The flip side is why do you think the Bulls consistently outperform their talent levels? They don't. That's such a myth. Occasionally beating good teams in the regular season is great, but it doesn't mean much. What was the record against the Heat? Like 6-2 in the regular season? How'd that work in the playoffs? The Bulls have (and have had) good, deep teams in a conference with about 4 solid teams. Thibs does a great job maximizing what he has, no denying that. They still haven't won anything though. One ECF appearance and one first round win isn't Hall of Fame worthy. edit: for clarity, i'll say again that Thibs is a top 5 coach and the Bulls would be stupid to get rid of him. But that doesn't mean Thibs can't be criticized and shouldn't change with the league.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 01:16 PM) As Balta pointed out, Deng was far more fragile before Thibs. Noah missed 18 games playing fewer minutes per game the year before Thibs came on. Wasn't he the subject of the VDN/Pax fight? The Bulls are loaded with guys who cannot stay healthy. Blame genetics, blame the training staff (I really hate to do that), blame bad luck, but don't blame the coach. If these guys were playing 12 minutes a night, they still would get hurt. Jimmy Butler's injuries this season have nothing to do with exhaustion. Taj Gibson sprains his ankles all the time.The only way to keep them all healthy is never put them in the game. Gar/Pax needs to flip some roster and get guys who have a history of staying healthy. Boozer was hurt all the time before he became a Bull. Then he hardly ever got hurt except tripping on his gym bag with the Bulls. http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/2429/luol-deng Deng wasn't always 100% healthy, but I'd say the trend accelerated after Thibs. You really don't think those extra 3-4 minutes per game had an effect? Are Deng's injuries 100% on Thibs? No, absolutely not. Is it partially? Yes, IMO. Taj is a pretty good example this year. He had a bad ankle sprain and then rushed back and played more minutes than he should have, and then he re-injured it again. The 2nd time they're being much more cautious about it. If the Bulls had a Spurs-like philosophy about the regular season, is he playing through that ankle sprain, or is he letting it heal up 100? How'd they treat Kwahi's hand injury? Did he play through it? Or did they let him sit about a third of the season? I'm not ignoring the fact that the Bulls have had some bad luck (and/or a piss poor medical/training staff, also a contributing factor). But I think we've all screamed at Thibs for keeping guys like Deng and Noah and Rose in games that either didn't matter or were already won/lost. I think it's a partial factor.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 10, 2015 -> 12:48 PM) Back to the DRose injury is all Thibs fault. Yeah, I'm sure DRose would be 100% healthy if he never met Thibs. Thibs has won 65% of his games usually with a depleted roster. When he is gone, probably next year, we will not see improvement. But it's the old, it hasn't worked so try something else. If it didn't work because of the coach, that would make sense. But that is not the reality.How many years did Michael Jordan play for the Bulls before it really worked? I guess he should have been traded a couple of years before he starting winning every year. At least he could have researched his Thibs is killing the players again claim. 2 guys are averaging over 31 minutes a game. I think he makes a decent point about the NBA changing and you either change with it or don't. Saying guys used to play 40 minutes a night in the 90's doesn't really apply anymore. I think the game is much more demanding now than it has ever been. There's more pressure to play every night. Little injuries becomes bigger injuries. There's obviously a philosophical divide between Thibs and GarPax and it makes sense that demands on the players physically and mentally are a big part of it. And no, I don't think you blame Thibs for Rose being a glass figurine. But I do think you can blame Thibs for guys like Deng, Butler and Noah being sidelined quite a bit with small, nagging injuries. They end up playing through those injuries which just creates bigger problems down the line.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-hous...at-thibs-built/

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 06:53 PM) I found that post hilarious, I wear a GMTII, coke bezel, and if he thinks more than 100$ on a watch is a crazy, his head would explode if he saw the price tag on my watch. It was part tongue and cheek. I'm not knocking your guys' enjoyment of it, I just couldn't get to that mental state. I could be given a 20k watch and wouldn't care. I don't have a need for it, I don't look for it on other people, etc. To me it's akin to buying the 15k apple watch when the 350 version is the same absent some flair.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 06:58 PM) great post! Thanks!

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 04:18 PM) I find it hard to believe this would help. I don't think they would view this as "their" pocket book. More of a "not my problem" It'd be their problem once the Chief is on their ass. The pressure would start at the top with budgets from the city/county and it'd trickle down soon enough. At some point, if people's jobs are on the line, changes down stream will happen.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 04:00 PM) It's not aimed at being a permanent replacement for your phone. It's a companion device for people on the go. For me, it's much more ideal to look at my wrist than pull my phone out of my pocket. It's similar to the tablet. Tablets aren't meant to replace you desktop. They're companion devices. It's not a companion device, it's an accessory that costs $350 and requires a charge every night. Fitness trackers are popular because phones can't obtain that data accurately. And they're cheap. That is a true companion device, not just an add-on to an existing piece of technology. That's why i'm saying, if smart watches are going to catch on, it has to eventually become the replacement of the smart phone, not just an accessory. Otherwise it's an incredibly niche market that's being served, namely people who want to look cool and don't really require functionality. Your smart phone is still right there, 2 feet away. It does the job that the smart watch offers about 1000 times better. I suppose if you want to wear this thing as a fashion accessory, fine, but stop marketing it as this great fashion piece with all this amazing tech behind it. Just market it as a watch with a screen. And tablets aren't companion devices, nor were they meant to replace your desktop. They replaced laptops and they've done a pretty good job of it. That's why they are a big hit. They've taken an existing piece of tech and made it better (more mobile, much cheaper, a go to piece of entertainment tech).

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 03:42 PM) Mine has also increased by similar components and that is with 2 different companies. Additionally, coverage has worsened (but still obviously meets obamacare standards). So remember, you can't just look at cost savings, you have to look at cost to benefit components as well. In my case, it would have been up significantly more had the coverage actually remained consistent. You're white (I assume), male, employed and educated. Your opinion/experience doesn't mean anything in this argument.

While some of it has to do with race, I think a lot more of it has to do with the victims being poor and uneducated, i.e., easy victims who won't complain and even if they do it's difficult to do anything about it. Personally I think these sorts of actions should lead to changes in law making it easier to sue cops and police departments. You know the easiest way to change the behavior? Hit them in the pocket book.

Well put: http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/the-regul...dium=socialflow edit: also, the best watch I ever had was that super mario bros 3 watch. Best thing ever for an 8 year old. Anyone spending more than about $100 bucks on a watch needs to reevaluate their life.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 02:47 PM) I highly doubt we will get more than a 5th rounder. You can honestly name 15-20 QB's who are better than Cutler, and most of them make less than him. The problem is there are no good FA QB's left out there and the draft is pretty awful at QB outside the top 2. The negotiating tactic is sink or swim this year. Maybe not worth a 1st, but hold out and get better than a 5th.

They don't tell you what the year of the ball is, that's the only thing. Not sure how much that matters. I just don't want to be buying balls from 2000.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 09:09 AM) why would anyone think that is a cool thing to do? Look at this historic landmark that represents a civilization from hundreds of years ago. Lets deface it and take a picture Clearly a human trait since it's been done a bunch of times the last 2000 years.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 12:09 PM) We already know what it is and how much it costs. We still don't know how much Glass will really cost. Neither will catch on unless the cost is less than your smart phone and/or it can fully replace your smart phone. That's why the watch stuff is going to be limited to fitness tracking with notifications. Not to mention battery life sucks on these things with real screens. Glass may catch on, eventually, if it can replace the size of your smart phone screen into your field of vision (along with the ability to make calls and voice recognition is good enough to write emails/texts). Still, I don't think either are long for this world, especially as standard every day items we would use.

Prediction: Apple Watch = the next Google Glass, i.e., lots of talking/writing about it, but ultimately a bust.

Anyone ever buy refinished balls? I'm looking at some pro v1's. $45 for 3 dozen in "mint" condition. http://www.rockbottomgolf.com/titleist-gol...golf-balls.html Seems too good to be true.