He means exactly what he says, that refs shouldn’t be affecting the game by calling cheap fouls on the best players, the players whose performance will determine the outcome of the game. I mean, you can quibble with whether Steph’s fouls were cheap, or whether refs should call the game differently for stars, but I’m…

I think they think losses and ejections feel “weird” because they happen so rarely, but sure, it could be because they are the rich man’s Harlem Globetrotters or whatever the hell point you are trying to make.

Uh, do you know what “dozens” means? Because that list looks like he beat about 6 HOFers.

Yeah, the fact that you typed that second sentence, apoarently unironically, invalidates anything else you have to say.

“How can players say no to this?”

“Cubs just got laughed out of Washington field.”

But why? The doomsday scenario you presented if there was no draft already exists.

Each professional league in this country has a draft, and you could probably count ten to fifteen teams, easily, that are consistently in the bottom half of the league and have been for a decade or more. If drafts truly worked to eliminate the possibility you are talking about, you wouldn’t see shitty teams staying…

I would bet it’s pretty strong the more valuable a player is, because a player can only make so much due to max contracts. Teams can’t differentiate due to money so the best players will always decide based on the attractiveness of the franchise (whatever that criteria might be).

Wait, what? How does that (dubious) fact in any way counter the point?

It never comes up in the CBA because no one at the table has any vested self-interest in changing it. Owners don’t want to pay high salaries, and current players don’t want to give away a larger share of the pie to current non-members. Possible future players have no seat at the bargaining table, and thus no ability…

“Ughhh....I had to stay up nearly until EIGHT O’CLOCK to watch that shit!”

It’s like you’re trying real hard, but your screen name is still an accurate description of your takes. You couldn’t even bother to come up with a more original argument than the one right in the article?

Ahhh....yes. Yet another mark of the idiotic sports fans...the guy who treats meaningless preseason predictions as some sort of grave insult that must be avenged, instead of just enjoying it when his team does well. Truly a Baltimore specialty, like shitty piss beer. I can’t wait for the near-riots that will take…

Jesus Christ there may be no more insufferably, inexplicably defensive fans than Baltimore fans. Shut the fuck up.

Eh. Vick’s not the best example since he actually has been somewhat redemptive. But I’ll bet there were plenty of stories lazily and inappropriately tying his very serious off-field conduct, and the lessons learned from the very serious consequence, to some sort of on-field redemptive story (“Just like Vick learned…

Yeah, you have to do better than that if you are going to try to weave the allegations against Winston into a narrative about his evolving personality. If the allegations were credible, then there’s not much of a redemptive story here, at least not one where “maturation” is sufficient. He committed a horrible crime…

I generally like extra innings. I like the tension and high stakes and, since I like baseball generally, I like more of it. Sometimes it gets boring or drags on. If so, I change the channel or leave. I’m amazed by people who go to an event for entertainment, then when the event becomes non-entertaining, act as if they…

Yeah, no shit. There are a number of ways these shows can be successful - by having guys on who have good chemistry, like Wilbon and Kornheiser, or by having a few smart panelists and a reasonably smart moderator like Around the Horn. Or, to the extent “success” can be defined as getting lots of attention, you can…

That is good fucking Kinja.