IlliniKrush

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Apr 13, 2013 -> 01:05 PM) The players haven't been executing at all. That's the only reason this thread exists. This thread easily could have been started (and I think there were similar threads) last year. So false.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 13, 2013 -> 01:17 PM) They wanted the Sox brand on all the jerseys. The diamond sock still is on the black unis because the SOX is on the chest. Forgot about the black initially. But the Sox brand is on all the jerseys, you mean the specific Sox logo. Looks very odd on the arm.

Bump. Steve, I'm looking to try to hammer out this tip. When I try to follow exactly what you said, it seems awkward. I'm just raising my shoulder only? Tilting my body with it? I'm with Hurt, I have a terrible slice on every drive, irons are usually fine. I have to line up at about a 45 degree angle off the tee, and I can nail the middle of the fairway. Also got my own set of clubs for xmas this year. Nothing fancy, just a good starter set. I don't need great equipment, I'm just a rec golfer and just really starting to get into it a bit more. But it's still cool to not use my Dad's old school ones. *********** You guys ever play Top Golf? It's really fun if you haven't. And Steve it's our your way. ************ In other news, interesting news at Augusta this morning with the Tiger Woods penalty etc.

Good luck shack. Don't have experience with this...it's got to be tough to try to sell your place and buy a new one and time it perfectly. Do people generally try to secure a sale, then figure out where they are going to live and purchase? Or do they buy something and then figure out how to sell? Obviously you try to keep people in the dark on your situation so you still have leverage either way. That's great that they'll let you rent for a bit.

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 11:16 PM) Saw him play a lot in the Big East, and he's a solid player but I see him as more of a 6th man for Illinois. He'll be a good fit for their perimeter based offense as long as he doesn't have to make a lot of decisions with the ball. It appears he can shoot, and we don't have a lot of guys on this roster that can shoot right now, so I'll take it.

One thing's for sure, he's an awful manager when the rosters open up in September.

QUOTE (MEANS @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 03:14 PM) I don't think they should have removed the SOX diamond logo but to say it's a nice logo is way off, it should have been re-designed. It's a nice secondary logo for an arm patch. It's simple, no need to re-design something that's been there since (I'm not sure when, early 90s?). Way off, lol.

First of all that's a terrible injury, feel bad for him. I haven't seen anything but what you just posted, what was the situation? It doesn't like look a steal since he's looking in like it was a hit and run or a possible ball 4 situation. He looks like he's going in slowly to begin with, and then decides oh there's a play here, I need to slide, and forces the awkward slide. I know you can get hurt during any play, but I think if he's running normally and doing a routine slide that he's done thousands of times, he probably doesn't get hurt there.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 03:06 PM) Presuming to know what somebody's intentions are is not stating a fact. My original post you quoted stated a fact. Do you know Greinke? How do you know that his intentions were to hit him? Can't talk about what you think someone did unless you know them. Duly noted. Hey witesoxfan, unless you know Greinke, you shouldn't talk about him either! This is a message board where we talk about opinions as well, right?

I don't care either way about the stripe, but I'm still miffed why they changed the arm patch from the diamond to the normal sox logo on the gray's. Makes no sense. I'm sure people watching on TV had no idea it was the White Sox even though it said "Chicago" across the front. Once they see the Sox logo on the shoulder, they get it. It's a dumb move by Brooks. He took a really nice secondary logo and made it obsolete. The Sox logo on the arm looks so odd.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 02:20 PM) And he hit 6 of the previous 1600 guys he faced. This isn't a guy that's wild and accidentally loses one. Next, when Quentin stares him down, all he has to do is give a slightly apologetic wave or circle the mound or ask for a baseball from the ump - anything to avoid making eye contact with Quentin. Pitchers do this thing all the time. His demeanor after hitting him tells me he had intention of doing so, and the fact that he immediately went into fight mode, rather than trying to defend himself, further cements that idea in my mind. Regarding Quentin charging, it's not acceptable. I never said it was. If Joe Blow is 5'10'', 150, and drunk, and he starts messing with Randy Bobandi, who is 6'2'', 220, and sober with a short temper, are people going to feel sorry for Joe Blow when he was the one that stirred the pot? I don't. I mean, what Randy did wasn't acceptable, and he should have kept his cool, but sometimes you lose it in the heat of the moment like that. It's not right, but I understand it. EDIT: I misread that last part. I have no idea why it's acceptable. I think it's a territorial thing of home plate, and then guys come out to defend their teammate or break up the fight. Then other guys get riled up and it gets worse. It's stupid. RE: your edit. Yeah, that wasn't meant towards you, just a separate conversation. It happens way too often. I feel like you can see this once a week on the highlights - at least benches cleared, not always charging the mound. It really doesn't make a lot of sense why it's "OK" to do it.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 02:47 PM) This is neat. Explanation and time-lapse video of how they change from ice to hardwood at the United Center. Good link. I've seen this far too many times at Allstate (just in reverse of the article), where they'd have to do very quickly after a Depaul 1:00 game in time for a Wolves 7:00 game. Talk about chaos. The just don't have the seat conversions like the UC has.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 01:55 PM) I typically respect the "pay mind to the situation" argument, but that looked as blatant as anything I've ever seen in my life. You argue what you want to argue; I think you're wrong. Of course a ball going towards someone's head looks intentional. It's hard for it not to. That's why you use the other context clues. You have to respect the "situation" argument as it's part of painting the whole picture. On another note, why is it "acceptable" to charge the mound and clear the benches in baseball?

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 01:30 PM) How well do you know Zack Greinke? How can you know so surely what his intentions were? I don't need to know him. He didn't say anything until Quentin started walking towards him. Observing a fact.

I guess it's the right thread for this http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/teen...X09mZg--;_ylv=3

BT to discuss possible basketball divisions in May (for when they go to 14 teams). I think this would make sense, instead of a terrible unbalanced schedule. Without it you'd play 5 teams twice and 8 teams once (currently 7 teams twice and 4 teams once).

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 12:49 PM) He has hit 25 batters since 2005 and three of them have been Quentin what is so ridiculous about thinking they have a history and it was intentional. Looks to me that without a doubt he was trying to come well up and in on him. The status of the game against a horses*** padres team means nothing. Grienke tried to defend Kemp, got to up and in and paid the price. Grienke wasn't backing down and was more than willing to go after Quentin. You hit a guy, let him say f*** you and be on your way. You hit a guy mouth back after hitting him twice previously and now there is a story. How is the Padres being a horses*** team relevant whatsoever? It's not. All that matters is the game situation. Quentin gets hit by everyone, so doesn't really matter to me if he's hit him before.

Props to the camera guy for following the ball and not just following along to the hoop.

He only "mouthed off" (we don't even know what he said, but it was really brief) because Quentin stared at him and started walking towards the mound. Prompts a "wtf are you doing" reaction from Greinke, because again, it's ridiculous to think that was intentional.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 08:45 AM) That looked as intentional as it gets to me. 3-2 count, don't wanna make a mistake, want to put him on 1st base anyways, have recent issues with him...may as well just hit him and send a message. Wouldn't be surprised if some of it is about Quentin crowding the plate, but Quentin obviously feels it's his plate and he's willing to fight for it. I realized 2 things when I watched it - #1, Quentin looks good; #2, I miss TCQ Cmon now. Yeah, let's put a guy on in a full count in a one run game with no outs. You're forcing him to hit his way on. For Quentin to think that was on purpose - that's just the height of baseball stupidity right there.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 06:52 PM) http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/438/...e/p2p-75352816/ Link doesn't work, but I think I know what you are linking to. HEY WHAT DO YOU KNOW, WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY THIS ORIGINALLY?????? Had to have someone smarter than him draw something up. Thanks for posting though, you were silent after the last few things that were brought up in either thread.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 03:02 PM) I love how Hawk was like "what I need is some guys who want to win baseball games..." That is where the problem lies here...the real answer is something in between the numbers and the unquantifiable...but both sides seem to want to outright dismiss the other... It was beyond stupid. You want guys that want to win baseball games? No s***. Don't most people want to win baseball games when playing and put in a competitive situation? Not to mention wanting to win/trying harder does absolutely nothing in the middle of an at bat. Stone completely owned him by pointing out the fact that most MLB teams have a guy in their office (if not multiple) who is a "saber" guy. Things change, Hawk. There are better ways to evaluate talent. Avg/HR/RBI used to be it. Adapt or die, eh? Hawk probably still uses a typewriter, too.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 12:16 PM) I don't think fathers ever truly approve of the guys "doing" their daughters. They just accept it, with great reluctance. As I will be forced to do. I think they chose to ignore that reality, even when grandkids are produced, they convince themselves a stork brought them, versus this creep violating their innocent daughters. I wouldn't call it "violating" if you're married and it's wanted, and you're producing a baby too, but that's just me. I'm not a father yet, but I feel I'd rather have a daughter married to someone I approve of and getting "violated" rather than the guy of the month she brings over every holiday. The quicker that happens, the better for all of us.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 12:10 PM) I bought this one last spring. It's really sturdy, was always well reviewed, priced right, and I've ridden the hell out of it since. It's still as good as new. http://www.diamondback.com/2012-edgewood And here I thought I was in the hookers thread.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 11:38 AM) Like I said, fake respect. Basically, you're saying unless you know for sure he's going to say yes, to not bother asking. That, once again, goes back to my original point. Are you going to break up with this girl because you know the father doesn't approve? No, you aren't. IMO, it's "respect" in the lightest, shallowest meaning of the word. You only asked because you knew the answer was yes. This is a dog and pony show of respect as far as I'm concerned. Had his answer been no, are you telling me you wouldn't have married her anyway? If you claim you would have broken things off right there, I don't believe you for a second. No, I'm saying that if her father doesn't approve of you, you have a bigger issue at hand. I didn't have to worry about it, it was 0% chance he said no. It was more of what shack said above.