Neither of those do the same thing, though. They both come across as sincere. She’s sarcastic and relatable and down to earth, while he’s cool and relaxed and stylish. Neither ham it up that much. They do silly, sure, but it’s not the same thing.

This didn’t show up, but I stand by it.

I think you misinterpreted that criticism. It’s not that she tries too hard when acting, like a method actor. It’s that she tries too hard off screen, as in she always seems like she’s acting to the situation - playing a character - and comes across like the stereotype of a theatre kid hamming it up.

I feel like he wouldn’t use it because he’d know it’s considered awful, except he’d have no idea why it’s considered awful.

He doesn’t really write anymore unless it’s a mailbag or ranking, so it was hard to find examples to back this up, but the thing that has always bugged me is that he ends every piece the way a cheesy local news reporter wraps up a field story - a short sentence that either references some metaphor/analogy/story that…

Do Rolling Stone have the money to try and set up their own Grantland? That seems like a name that would appeal to Simmons.

“But he’ll just land at Fox Sports with Horowitz now for the same money.”

Guessing this works out really well for Katie Nolan, at least in the short run. (And that’s a good thing.) Longer term she’ll realize she has to work with Simmons every god damn day. (And that’s not so good.)

More like Los Angeles Slippers. Boom! G’night, everyone!

Extremely minor quibble:

Right. If this was ‘who is the best player in the NBA?’ then LBJ would win. He’ll win the GM poll, he’d be the first guy any GM would pick to start a team (unless they look to the future and go with AD), and he’ll be at the top of the ESPN player rankings this summer (if you put any weight on those).

I haven’t heard the Diana-is-a-ghost theory. Is it real? If so: didn’t Roger interact with her in her first scene? And the neighbours in the elevator? And then the ex-husband talked about her? I’m very confused about this theory.

Yeah but Curry’s team was much better, and was largely so because of Curry. If Curry wasn’t on that team they also wouldn’t be a contender, and likewise there are other teams he could’ve been on that would’ve been contenders if they had him. LBJ doesn’t automatically win because he moved teams.

“He transcended the ‘non-playoff team’ argument, no?”

With the exception of the song/idea being awful, Britney’s Charli XCX impression isn’t entirely unconvincing.

Yeah, I’m on Chrome. Same issue on Safari, though, so they must do the same thing.

Awesome! I had to go two levels, but that worked perfectly. Thanks.

I think he’s saying the contract specifically says “we pay you $6m if we market these HR milestones” and not “we pay you $6m if you reach these HR milestones”. In particular, he’s not saying that it’s the latter but now they’re arguing that it should be void because they can’t market it, he’s arguing that it’s the…

Well that’s a nice try but 1) I’m on a mac and 2) this isn’t my first time on a computer. But boy is that some cutting-edge stuff!

Ah, interesting, I was starting to wonder if it might be something like this - the slider is right at the bottom, and as kinja@work said it shows up in fullscreen, so it’s unlikely it’s inherent to MLB embeds. Seems to be unique to deadspin, too.