iamshack

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Aug 12, 2009 -> 06:52 PM) that might be a reference to boers & bernstein often playing a clip of Marcus Fizer saying this word Ahh, my bad... I live out of state and don't listen to those goofs.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 12, 2009 -> 06:09 PM) I think this has a lot of Jay Cutler deal written over it. People think Cutler's overrated, somewhat of a douche. People think Rios is overrated, expensive, and also somewhat of a douche. Bears have never had a QB as good as Cutler. Sox haven't had a CF like Rios since Aaron Rowand. Most Bears fans love the Cutler deal, everybody else around the country seems to hate it, not knowing the circumstances of the Bears. Most Sox fans love the Rios deal, everybody else around the country says he sucks and is expensive, not taking into account he's only 28 and the White Sox have a terrible OF that needs defensive help. I think the initial reaction to the Cutler deal may have been the way you describe it, but I guarantee you now that we are far away from the draft, most people think it was a good deal for the Bears. I'm out here in Vegas, and I can tell you people out here like the deal for the Bears, that's for certain.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Aug 12, 2009 -> 07:14 PM) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There is no good reason why quentin can play left field without it being an injury risk though right field is. The amount of chances in left field and right field is almost identical. I could see if there were substantially more balls hit to right rather than left... and people were worried he would be tested more out there. There is no reason to be concerned about any sort of adjustment period considering he has played right the majority of his baseball playing days. If dye is sitting, and your starting outfield consists of podsednik, rios, and quentin, the logical outfield rotation would be podsednik in left, rios in center, and quentin in right. Quentin is supposed to be a better right fielder than left fielder, rios is our best outfielder defender by far, and podsednik is a better defender in left compared to center (though it is pretty minimal considering podsednik has throwing woes in left compared to center). Suppose podsednik a wash in left and center, if we could upgrade at two positions defensively, even if it's only a handful of times, it's never a bad idea. While it is unlikely for this scenario to come to frutation, it's the right one. Frutation? I know what you meant. Honestly, you're probably correct on all accounts. However, the fact is he hasn't played there in a while, so he may take a few games to get accustomed to the angles, and perhaps they are concerned he will get a bad read, take a misstep, and inujur the foot again. Who knows. The prudent thing would be to have him shagging balls in RF and get him in there when he is comfortable. However, we all know, Ozzie likes to do things in his own, illogical and peculiar way, and we just have to put up with him...

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Aug 12, 2009 -> 05:28 PM) 1. Pods, CF 2. Beckham, 3B 3. Rios, RF 4. Thome, DH 5. THQ, LF 6. AJ, C 7. Alexei, SS 8. Kotsay, 1B 9. Nix, 4 Ugh.... I know people are going to be disappointed with Rios playing in RF and Pods staying in CF, but I doubt Ozzie wants to put Q in RF suddenly considering his health status. My guess is we see Rios only in CF this season when Pods is not playing, when Q is not playing, or perhaps as a defensive replacement late in games. Hopefully they will address Q moving to RF next season, however.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Aug 12, 2009 -> 11:57 AM) Isnt it unlawful detainment if the Kanes gave him the money? They paid him, the dispute started with the change. Well, it doesn't appear as though the issue was false imprisonment. I don't know exactly how things occurred (I am not sure anyone does except those involved), but it doesn't seem as though they were demanding to be let out of the cab, and after not being allowed to, they attacked the driver. It seems as though they attacked the driver because he would not give them correct change. However, the fact that we have become aware that the driver "may have locked the doors" seems to imply as though the Kanes' did try to exit the vehicle and could not. The whole situation is a mess. One would need to know the exact chronology of events in order to really work out any legal theory. Did they try and exit the cab after paying their fare, but prior to committing battery on the driver? Did they demand to be let out of the vehicle? Or did they simply attack the driver because he did not have correct change? Who the heck knows.

Wow, this is tough. Can't really find anything on passengers being detained in a taxi. As Badger has stated, a reasonably analogous situation would be a shopkeeper's right to detain someone based on suspicion of theft. It seems as though by locking the doors in the cab, prior to any reasonable suspicion that the passengers were not going to pay their fare, the cab driver is subjecting the passengers to a false imprisonment. Since the common practice amongst passengers in a taxi is to pay once the destination has been arrived at, there was no reason for the driver to suspect the passengers of seeking to avoid paying their fare, or stealing his services. Then, after the passengers did pay their fare, there is clear proof that the passengers did not steal from the driver. If the driver refused to unlock the doors then, it would seem as though he was subjecting the passengers to false imprisonment. I guess this also depends on the sequence and chronology of the events as they occurred. It doesn't appear as though the Kane's became violent because they were being held against their will, but rather because the driver did not have exact change. Therefore, they were not reacting to being subjected to false imprisonment, but rather, because they felt they were being cheated out of money owed to them. Probably best that this is being handled privately, as opposed to proceeding to a court. And I am glad this fact pattern was not a question on my torts law exam.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 4, 2009 -> 07:20 PM) Good Op-ed piece in the WaPo by a guy from GE and a venture capital guy. I agree with the Bjorn Lomborg approach: Dump all the money into R & D. The only way to make a dent in the problem is to make renewable energy economical enough for people to actually replace fossi fuels with it. Otherwise, we're just kidding ourselves and throwing money away.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 12:49 PM) It wouldn't surprise me to see KW try and trade Linebrink's bad contract for Juan Pierre's bad contract this offseason and put Pierre in LF Interesting thought...I like the idea. I cannot imagine us trading those contracts at face value, so my guess is LA would have to include about $7 million back, or else they would have to give us a few prospects that we like. No one lights out, but perhaps some high-ceiling A-ballers we really like...

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 05:23 PM) Thats not the lineup. I just put the players according to what position they will play. The lineup is lower in my post. Stephen A. is a god among men in the sports analyst business. Where has Stephen A. been lately?

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:24 PM) OMGZZZ FANTASY YO! Blah. Let a man be happy. Jeesh. Such bastards in this place...

I had both Matt Kemp and Alexei both batting on my fantasy team with two men on at the same time. I'm thinking, I know Kemp is going to be the one to go yard here, even though I need it to be Alexei... Sure enough, Kemp goes f***ing yard, 3 run bomb. Thinking, I knew it... Then Alexei goes yard too! Finally!

You know, Danksy pitched a great game tonight, but I am not going to feel sorry for him... He's let this offense down too a few times recently. Everyone needs to get on the same damn page...

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:05 PM) - Konerko will strike out on a 3-2 slider that's a foot off the plate. He will then shake his head back to the dugout as Stoney talks about how Aardsma didn't use to have confidence in that pitch - AJP will hit a deep fly to Ichiro in right field. Hawk will yell stretch 5 times on a ball that lands 10 feet in front of the warning track. Hawk will then talk about how Griffey Jr. told him the ball doesn't travel well here, and that he was one of the most exciting players he's ever watched. - Quentin will get hit by a fastball, and Hawk will freak out that Aardsma should be tossed and that something needs to be done about this. They will cut to Ozzie in the dugout who is chewing his gum and looks like he's thinking of how excited he'll be to see Hineybird with the Tribune in a few weeks. - Alexei will foul off two fastballs from Aardsma, and then he'll K on a slider 2 feet off the plate. Yeah, that s*** is hilarious...I almost want to print this and carry it around with me for when I am having a s***ty day...

QUOTE (Friend of Nordhagen @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:06 PM) You watch a lot of White Sox baseball. Yes, I do...and the sad thing is I am paying for it because I live in Vegas (Extra Innings package)... Honestly, can anyone even begin to explain how this happens to us so often? Even with different players? This August swoon where we can't do a damn thing?

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:02 PM) True...let's predict the 9th inning You know Paulie will ground weakly to ss, flip his bat in disgust, and mope on down to 1st base at a snail's pace and get thrown out by 2/3 of the baseline. AJ will fight off 7 pitches that are all balls before grounding out sharply to second base. Q will fly out meekly to center field and scream f***!! at the top of his lungs.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 10:57 PM) As a White Sox fan, if you try to sleep with a girl that you've never been with before, it's sure to go very bad. Yeah, you'll find yourself a bit impotent...

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 08:43 PM) Maybe if you were really Dick Allen instead of some dude. Hah!

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 09:53 PM) Wow, that comment is both productive and sure to add more civility to this thread. Nice, real nice. Just trying to lighten things up a bit, didn't mean to insult anyone...

Not that I'm not very frustrated with this team too....but I think some people in this thread would be better served to take a game off and get laid...

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 09:36 PM) No. ...but I agree. And I think we need to hire Tony Robbins or something. And maybe we need to get Kenny to hang stupid inspirational posters all over the dugout and clubhouse too. Like the "Success!" and "Reach for the stars!" s*** that they have in fast food restaurant training rooms to help motivate the pregnant teenagers working the drive-thru. Hah, thanks for cheering me up...

Ok, it's still 1-0. We're going to come out of this next inning with a crooked number.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 09:08 PM) I said when the rumor about the waiver claim came out that if the Sox got Rios, I really thought the clubhouse morale would get really bad. Let's hope that doesn't happen. That's too f***ing bad for them. How could they possibly not understand, given how much they s*** their pants down the stretch every year? I'm ready to put Dye's ass on waivers at this point. Sit him for a f***ing week for all I care.

I'm not sure I am ready to lump Thome into this bashing...seems to me he has been fairly productive lately...is that perception incorrect?

Ours hasn't been too stellar as of late either...

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 07:05 PM) My guess is that the law states you can use "reasonable force" to detain. Which would be determined by the circumstances. This is interesting, I dont really know that to be true, but its an interesting opinion. I personally think businesses should have the right to protect themselves from theft, and that once you have committed theft the store can use reasonable force to detain you. I dont like to guess on this stuff, cause its not always logical. Not that this has anything to do with Patrick Kane, but here is what a quick search pulled up from google regarding store theft: http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com/stor...ity-part-2.aspx Once the merchant has grounds to search you, then the merchant may conduct a search in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable amount of time. What constitutes a reasonable search or a reasonable time depends heavily on the facts of the situation. For example, a court in Louisiana held that a merchant acted reasonably when it detained a customer for 25 minutes in a back room and emptied her purse and pockets of her jacket after an antitheft alarm went off. By contrast, a court in Mississippi held that a store acted unreasonably where an assistant store manager grabbed a customer whom he suspected of shoplifting by the arm, and demanded that she pay for the deodorant that she had hidden in a paper bag that she was carrying, all of this occurring on some steps inside the store front and in front of all the sales people and customers in the store. The court emphasized that, although controlling theft was important to the store, that this kind of rude and embarrassing conduct would not be tolerated.