Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:28 PM) Great timing on this post. Yeah having a s***ty CB in Jennings and relying on a rookie CB is always a good plan.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:27 PM) The d is pretty healthy this game. And two straight deep uncovered players is coaching. Again, I'm not saying Tucker is good or the D is acceptable, but when you start the list of what needs to change going forward Tucker is about 6-7 on my list.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:11 PM) No, it isn't. The terrible defense is half the problem. Is that the coaching or the players the coach has? And how have injuries factored into that? Tucker sucks, not denying that, but there's not as much to go on with him as others.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:07 PM) People defending Tucker is nonsense. It's not a defense so much as a he's not the main problem. He's down the list of issues this team has.

Delay of game. Nice.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:03 PM) lol what? Thats what I imagine Cutler thinks when he throws those passes. f*** it, I'm Cutler and it'll work.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 08:00 PM) Over/under 4 TDs for Rodgers tonight. Not likely. This game will get out of hand and the starters will be pulled.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 07:58 PM) Trestman experiment is a total failure.......Emery needs to go also. Conte allows another TD against GB! Not Conte's fault there. He had the back zone. Our LBS just f***ing suck. Oh and our 15 million a year QB turned the ball over on the wrong side of the field.

f*** it I'm Jay Cutler!!! God he sucks so hard.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 10:11 PM) A lot of our projected increase in talent lies on those guys. Our 3 biggest acquisitions were Gasol and the 2 rookies, plus return of Rose. People are raving that this would be the best Rose led Bulls team yet. But if rookies can't make a major impact this year, then I don't think we are actually better than years past. It's early, but I am saying that, we too, have a long way to go. What rookie plays defense well the first 5 games of the season? Hell, the first half of the season? Those guys are learning the nba game. It's going to take time.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 08:40 PM) Noah returned tonight, yet we give up 115 to team worst offensive team in the league, and out rebounded once again. Even with Noah in the lineup this season, we've not been good in both areas. His knee issues are a real concern, and will be for most of the year, as is Rose's health. Yet people are already penciling Bulls in for ECF and knocking Cavs out. I think we should worry about ourselves first and foremost. They're playing two rookies a lot of minutes. I'm not really worried yet.

Wasn't it crazy windy at that game last night?

What the hell is vape?

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 12:17 PM) It's also a results business. Popovich looked at this back to back, said the Hawks should be a win and the Rockets is probably a loss. I'll give Duncan and Ginobili a day off against the Rockets because we're probably losing that game anyway. The NBA knows Pop does this stuff - as has been said previously, you don't need to change the Spurs' schedule, but know that if you are putting them in a prime-time slot on a back-to-back, you might not have a competitive game... I don't see why this is an issue at all - the Spurs have the right to run their team with an eye on June - just like the Sixers have the right to run their team with an eye toward '17... Totally agree. Also, I'm sure the NBA would rather the stars play with s*** teams than stars against stars (on weeknights anyway). No one is showing up to a Spurs @ Sixers game unless Duncan is playing. Plenty of people will show up to a Spurs @ Rockets game because there are other stars to see.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 12:14 PM) I don't get the love for this franchise. I was not at all impressed by the first one.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 11:07 AM) The turnout figure I posted is not at all based on registrations. It is based on the voting-eligible population, which includes both registered and non-registered voters. They use data from census research, American Community Survey (to determine the amount of non-citizens), and prison records (to determine number of incarcerated and felons). A quick look at state-by-state data: Top - Maine, 59% Wisconsin, 56% Alaska, 55% Oregon, 52% Colorado, 52% Bottom - Indiana, 28% Texas, 28% Utah, 29% New York, 29% Tennessee, 29% Mississippi, 29% Oklahoma, 29% Even disregarding explanations, it's sickening to think that we are effectively ruled by such small portions of our citizenry. There's an extent to which we try to keep people from voting, there's an extent to which people's lives are too hard to really think about politics, some people just suck, some people are careless, the entire institution is rather unsupported structurally....whatever the reason, it hardly feels like living in a democracy when only a third of the people who can decide who governs end up deciding who governs. The portion of people old enough to vote who cannot legally vote has also increased in the past 30-40 years due to the rising felon population. While I get pissed at the Republican Party for what I believe are voter suppression tactics, the Democrats that have control in various places in the USA hardly over-extend trying to use their power to get more people to the polls. The goal of both parties ought to be to get as many people to vote as possible with as little fraud as possible. One party is just focused on the fraud and the other party isn't focused on anything. You couldn't spend too much money on trying to make sure your country gives a voice to as many people as possible. What's most difficult to account for is the possibly disenfranchising effect of geography. I live in Ohio, which is supposed to be super swing state. Despite living right smack dab in liberal Columbus, I live in an uncompetitive Republican congressional district. In statewide elections, it was clear long before the elections that Republicans would win everything easily. Several city-wide positions were uncontested. I voted, but I feel that the main thing of consequence that I did was cast votes for the local Green Party who needs them to get ballot access back (state government had no problem using bipartisan cooperation to pass laws removing third parties from the ballot unless they meet new, onerous requirements). Something I think people ignore: apathy in voting may be a sign that the vast majority of people in this country are happy and satisfied. They don't want change for the sake of change. They don't need a cause to latch on to. Can things be better? Sure. Is it imperative that we have massive change every 2 or 4 years? No. In fact that's usually a bad thing. And really, most politicians who promise some kind of change are talking to a small percent of people. Rauner talking about getting rid of the 2% tax hike is great. But it's not going to affect the majority of people greatly one way or the other. Same with minimum wage. How many people does that really affect? 5%? 10% of the population? The rest don't give a s*** other than "yeah, you know, I think that's a good idea!" edit: Another thing that gets me: people talk about change on a national level, when in reality 99% of change that is going to affect your daily life comes from the local level. If you're disenfranchised a senator in Washington isn't going to be the solution. Yet that's where all the debates about change go, and I'm not sure why. It's been this general trend of increasing the importance and authority of the federal government (and mostly the executive the last few decades) as if that's going to really matter. Local change is where it's at. Local and state level authority was intended to be the most important. But that's not how it works today and that is probably the number one problem we have in our government: too much emphasis on Washington. Not enough at home.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 07:39 AM) This was about pissing the powers at be off, not about winning a championship. He could have easily rested them in a throwaway game against the Hawks at home, but chose not to. The nba is an entertainment business. He's consistent about it. That was the second game of a back to back. I don't have a problem with it. Spurs being good in the spring is more important to the NBA than guys playing in week 2.

His mom denied it on twitter, fwiw.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 01:50 PM) I don't consider them a title contender. They're top 3 in the West IMO. I think that's enough to put them in the contender short list.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 01:50 PM) Their playoff success with this team isn't exactly inspiring. Again, not saying they aren't a good team, they are, but they can't play D when it counts and that is a huge issue. I think they get a pass last year for the Sterling stuff.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 01:33 PM) Have you watched the Clippers? They don't play defense and have actually been pretty lousy this year (and throughout the preseason). Again small sample size and while I'm not saying the Bulls will win, If the season were to end today, I'd take our chances with any team in this league and feel that we would have a fair shot at winning it all. Not really worried about them. They have a good coach, a bunch of veterans, and basically the same team as the two playoffs teams that won 57 regular season games.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 01:31 PM) From all accounts, LBJ's basketball IQ is off the charts. I think part of it is, you can hear something 100 times but until you really see it, people struggle to change. I think in this case he looks at it as, when everyone realizes it won't work, everyone will buy-in to the bigger picture much quicker and more long-term. http://deadspin.com/report-lebron-and-kyri...dium=socialflow FWIW apparently Lebron did talk to Irving about passing the ball....after the Portland loss, and before Irving shot it 20+ times with 0 assists. Clearly the message got through.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 11:12 AM) You're really going to toot your own horn after 4 games? Ok. I'll be the first one to give you props if they don't make it to the ECF's. But once again, no chance that happens. Even if they get to the Finals, I don't think either one has much of a shot against the West. If healthy, the Spurs will dissect both of these teams. The Clippers will out run both teams. The Warriors will out shoot them (an especially bad match-up for the Bulls, who let teams shoot jump shots. The Warriors make jump shots).

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 11:17 AM) Sounds like a Phil Jackson strategy. He would often use such tactics. Interestingly Shaq mentioned this in the preview of the Knicks/Bulls game last week. They went like 10-8 to start a year because no one wanted to really learn the triangle. Then they did, and they dominated. I still find it odd that Lebron would do that. Why not, ya know, have a conversation with Irving? "Hey dick, pass the ball. Do you know who I am? Do you know who Love is?"

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 09:20 PM) Imagine what happens when they are healthy and start clicking Yeah they are definitely still figuring things out. Execution is not very good. Lots of weird turnovers.