illinilaw08

QUOTE (raBBit @ Mar 24, 2017 -> 10:37 AM) They were in support of those being supposedly threatened and accurate in hindsight. The dissenters were inaccurate, over the top and more hate-fueled than logic based. I don't understand what you are saying here. Are you saying that Jewish communities who were scared by bomb threats, and were alarmed by the President hand waving them away as a hoax were wrong to want a stronger condemnation of the threats by the President? Once again, the point here is that the President's words matter. The President's role in a situation like this is NOT to make an unsubstantiated (at the time) assertion that maybe the threats were coming from inside the community. It is to condemn the threats, and condemn hate against a group generally. His response did nothing to calm the legitimate fears of people in those communities.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 24, 2017 -> 07:43 AM) Because of the first two deals, the Sox have to get a top position player as a headliner in this deal. Really they should be at least the top two players. More pitchers just puts the rebuild further behind. SSK, what would you think about a deal with the Pirates that was Glasnow, Bell, Keller and Hayes? You don't get the position headliner, but you get 3 position players that would all be in the top 5 position players in the Sox system immediately. I doubt that deal is on the table, but if I'm Hahn, that's a deal I'd jump at. I guess my point here is that the Sox don't need a position player as a headliner, but they do need the majority of the return to be position players, and position players that are top 150 or so prospects.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 09:29 PM) I missed that but you are one of the fair posters here so I'll give credit where it's due. Funny the same people who called trump names for his comments had no reply to you but had more names for Trump right after your post. So, the problem with that argument is that it ignores the context of what was actually happening at the time Trump made his comments. People in Jewish communities were scared. Notwithstanding the threats, the Trump administration's rise has coincided with an increased visual presence of white supremacists, etc. The critique of Trump was more about his response not taking the concerns of those communities seriously. Even assuming Trump knew that the threats were hoaxes from within the Jewish community, coming out and saying that without supporting evidence doesn't do anything to help the communities who are actually scared. Trump later came out with a more forceful message condemning any acts of hate against Jewish communities, but the President's words, taking the context into account, were still bad and not helpful.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 03:51 PM) Can you guys let me know if I have this right? If damning info is released about a republican, we are only to look at the damning info and pay no mind to how it was obtained or leaked. But if damning info is released about a democrat we are to ignore the actual info and only complain about the methods used to collect or release it? Wikileaks reveals lies and corruption of epic proportions, must ignore and investigate wikileaks Two times Trumps taxes are illegally leaked, ignore the crime and focus on the taxes Mike Flynn is illegally unmasked and his call with Russian ambassador is made public, ignore illegal unmasking and force Flynn out Trumps phone calls with Australian and Mexican leaders are leaked, ignore the leak and focus on the calls Obama admin is using the IC to spy on political opponents during transition, Comey lies about it under oath, Trump and his transition team are illegally unmasked on "incidental surveillance" but we should ignore that and investigate Nunes for not covering it up. Does that about sum it up? We have very different definitions of "damning info." I'm not sure what "damning info" came out of Wikileaks that revealed "lies and corruption of epic proportions." At its worst, Nunes said that the Trump transition team was caught up in incidental, legal, surveillance. There's nothing that says Comey lied under oath, that the Obama administration was actively spying on the Trump transition team, or that Trump and his transition team were illegally unmasked. Contrast that with the "damning info" that would be a presidential campaign colluded with a foreign government to have said foreign government interfere with the United States Presidential election on its behalf. One of those things is damning info. The others are definitely not.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 11:27 AM) The problem is the talented positional players aren't here yet by and large. I don't see enough guys here to even replace the players we are going to lose in the near to mid-term. The longer it takes to get these guys here, the longer the timeline pushes out. If we have to wait until the draft picks get here it pushes out even further. If we were the Yankees or Boston and had positional talent in the minor league system, sure you can start to apply some narrowing of the expectations of guys getting here. To a wide extent, we don't even have that much. I can point to five positions on the field and have close to zero answers for who could play them in 2019. I don't see how you can start to talk about the playoffs when you can't even point to a guy and say this guy should be our CF/3B/RF/LF, etc. From a position player standpoint, the Sox system is much further along today than it was 9 months ago. Moncada and Collins speak for themselves, but Basabe, Call, and Fisher all have high upside as well. I can't point to any of those 3 and say they will be there in '19, but with a good year or two in the minors, they could be. Add to that whoever the Sox grab at #11 in this draft (and in subsequent rounds in this draft), and you might start to be building a pipeline of position talent that you can look to in '19. Today, yeah, the Sox system still needs a lot of work on the position player side, but this year alone, there's still a draft and a bunch of trades to be made to keep adding to the position player side of things. Note, I think '19 is pretty optimistic to talk playoffs. But it's not out of the realm of possibility to talk playoffs in '20 or '21.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 11:00 AM) I haven't seen one person mention the 2017 or 2018 draft picks when it comes to being ready to compete in 2019. Nobody knows the timeline of these guys(except you apparently) but there's a chance they have an elite rotation in 2019 and if that's the case they're going to be adding offense through free agency. Not to mention they've already acquired 3 guys via trade in the offseason who are pretty much ready to play so if you don't think they're going to acquire some more guys who can play by 2019 then you're just being ridiculous. Like I said, I don't freakin know what's going to happen between now and then but the possibility to be competitive in 2019 is definitely there. This. If everything goes right on the rebuild, the Sox will have a top of the line rotation, and one of the better middle infields in baseball locked in, and the influx of top end talent isn't close to done yet (Q trade, next 2 drafts).

QUOTE (raBBit @ Mar 21, 2017 -> 11:41 AM) It's released that there's no evidence of Russia fixing the election but the talk is still impeach Trump. This Muslim ban is scary though. I'm worried my friends from Indonesia aren't ever going to be able to come visit. Incorrect. Comey testified that there was no evidence he was aware of that Russia directly manipulated voting machines. Ie, there's no evidence that Russia hacked election technology to turn a vote for HRC into a vote for Trump. That is very different from whether Russia tried to swing the election to Trump by hacking the DNC or otherwise, and whether they worked directly with the Trump campaign to do so. That is still being investigated.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 21, 2017 -> 08:46 AM) So you can bring an iphone but not an ipad? What does that even accomplish? And it's some airlines that fly into those cities and not others. I really do not understand what the purpose is here.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 21, 2017 -> 08:50 AM) So I guess Trump said last night that he likes new stories. If he repeats them as fact, and they are wrong, he isn't wrong, they are wrong. I guess that is how he will eventually roll with the wiretapping. This. I don't know how this isn't a bigger deal. Any time the President says anything incorrect, he just says, "well, it was reported in the news! Don't blame me for not knowing it wasn't true! Blame them!" The fact that the President cares so little about whether what he says is true or not is just staggering...

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 17, 2017 -> 12:42 PM) Scott Drew keeps popping up as someone who would be interested in the Illinois job, I'm torn on him. He is a fantastic recruiter, decent coach, and turned that Baylor program into something. As far as coaches go, he would be a great fit for those attributes. But, his somewhat gray past/reputation (whether fair or not) still stands out, and would go against what Whitman would look for in a coach. Scott Drew has a high floor in terms of on-court results. He hasn't gotten Baylor over the hump, but I'd love to get back to the days of 2-4 seeds and frustration over not getting past the Sweet 16/Elite 8. Scott Drew seems very gettable for Illinois, and, unless Indiana swoops in (unlikely), he'll be there if Illinois misses out on the Marshall/Bennett/Archie Miller tier. Strike out on those guys, and I think Scott Drew should be the next coach.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 12:55 PM) The connection is there, but I agree that leaving UCLA for IU is tough. I hope it happens though, I love to hate on Alford. This. I'm definitely Team Alford to Indiana. I'd be surprised if the resident Indiana fans on this board agreed.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 10:50 AM) The rumor around these parts about a month ago was that Alford would leave UCLA for only IU. No idea how true that was. I'm actively rooting for Alford at this point. Let IU have a guy that doesn't overlap with the Illinois search. I'm very happy to see a stacked IU team with Kris Wilkes added in exchange for them not screwing up the Illinois search...

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 10:34 AM) Bizarre timing. Sucks for Illinois but may not matter if they have guy. But hope would be IU didn't hear some coach was receptive to leaving that they liked, decided to grab instead. Yeah, I'm skeptical of any reports that Illinois "has" their guy because obviously any coach still in the tournament can't sign anything binding. And with equal money, I'd have to imagine that Indiana is the overall better job (as much as I hate to admit that). So if Bennett or Marshall or Archie Miller are the guy, I have to imagine Indiana throws a wrench in things. But I also assume Indiana is shooting a bit higher than that (Stevens, is Alford on their radar), maybe Illinois is able to lock down their top guy if they exit the tournament early, and Indiana isn't ready to pull the trigger yet... Also, I doubt that Bryce Drew is on Indiana's radar, and I'd love that hire for Illinois.

Crean fired. Don't like that from the Illinois side of things.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 15, 2017 -> 01:35 PM) I wonder where he places in the Illinois top 5? I don't think Martin is in Illinois' top 5. Now, some of the candidates in Illinois' top 5 might be pipe dreams, but I think Martin was considered a fallback.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 15, 2017 -> 01:24 PM) Sounds like Mizzou is about to land Cuonzo Martin for an eye opening 3.5 per. This means either two things (or both): - The prices of coaches are inflated this hiring season due to a number of schools with money to spend (u of I, mizzou, nc st) - Mizzou way over spent on Martin, a good, solid, not spectacular hire now being paid like the best in the game. That feels like insane money for Martin, but I'm reasonably sure he is going to recruit very well down there. Feels like, with $3.5M to play with for Martin, Missouri could have waited for schools to start getting eliminated from the tournament and throw that same money at better options. But it's also possible that Missouri wants Martin and decided to overpay to get it done (I'm assuming he can't say no to this offer) before Illinois falls back to Martin in the event that they miss on their top options.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 03:25 PM) Also "not historically bad" is a hilarious defense of the offensive talent. "Historically bad" was inelegant phrasing on my part. The point is that the Bears offense was ok down the stretch last year with Matt Barkley at QB, Alshon suspended, and Josh Bellamy actively trying to knock down every pass thrown his way. Assuming that Glennon is an upgrade over Barkley, and some combination of White, Wright and Wheaton are an upgrade over Bellamy, the offense could be decidedly mediocre. It's not a ringing endorsement, but it's not terrible.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 02:46 PM) trying to sit back and imagine how bad this offense will be. Why would it be any worse than the Bears' offense was down the stretch last year? I mean, that wasn't a good offense, but it wasn't historically bad. QB has been upgraded (Glennon over Barkley in this instance). Everything else is the same right (since Alshon was out)?

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:27 AM) I also just think with their injuries this year, the Rockies are even less likely than the Braves to grab an ace pitcher. on EW podcast they asked their Rockies writer to give a win total and they said 74, before Desmond was even injured. It isn't a go-for-it year anymore. Bettis' cancer coming back didn't help an already thin rotation, but the Rockies' offense looks stacked. The question is whether their young rotation can continue to improve, and if they can get any meaningful contributions from Marquez and Hoffman at the back of their rotation. I wouldn't be surprised if the Rockies won 70 games. I wouldn't be surprised if the Rockies found themselves in contention come the trade deadline. But if they aren't in contention at the trade deadline, there's no reason for them to be a buyer for Q.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 12:33 PM) I do, I think he'd be a really good fit here. I love that he turned around a terrible program into 25+ wins in 2 of 3 seasons. He also knows the recruiting game very well, I think he would do well. I'm also a little stunned that NC St hasn't swooped in yet on him. I'm assuming that Archie Miller is No. 1 on NC State's list.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:45 AM) This brings up another point, very annoying Mizzou and Illinois are looking for coaches in the same year! And both have new ADs looking to throw around money! Ugh Yeah, definitely looking at a lot of the same guys (other than Crean). I have a feeling that Martin is going to be the guy at either Mizzou or Illinois, but he's a Plan B or C guy at both schools.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 10:58 PM) I wouldn't. I see Frazier and Rutherford as high upside bats, whereas I'm not that crazy about Tapia. Granted, Rutherford was probably my favorite in last year's draft after Corey Ray. Yeah, I agree with this. I love Rodgers and think he's going to be great, but he's also pretty far away, and Tapia's ceiling seems to be everyday OF but nothing special. If Pint can stay healthy, he's a really interesting prospect, but the Sox are also loaded with pitching prospects. For the Sox's needs, I think a package centered around Frazier and Rutherford is a better fit. High upside bats all day.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:31 AM) Assuming Illinois can't get the top targets (the Millers, Marshall, etc), I'm really hoping for Bryce Drew. Martin is a good fall back plan if those guys don't show enough interest right away. Do you have Keatts in the top targets? I really, really like the idea of Keatts if Illinois misses on Miller and Marshall.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 06:26 PM) So Trump said 2-3 million illegals voted for HRC or whatever. What happens if he's right? What happens if he's wrong? What is the endgame? He isn't right. That's the point. Every study ever done on illegal voting shows that it's statistically insignificant. The endgame is to continue to make it harder for lower income minorities to vote.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 06:12 PM) Whatever motive you attribute to them is irrelevant. The information is real. That's all that matters. The left will split hairs when the leaks paint their people in a bad light but that doesn't change the cold, hard facts. Michael Hastings, a liberal who would have laughed at the idea of Trump being president, was reporting on the CIA's surveillance at the time of his death. If he never died would his leak have been partisan? Would he be considered a friend of Putin? This stuff isn't new, it's been happening for years. I was called a right wing conspiracy theorist when I have talked about it in the past. The world is better off that WL has shed light on the truth. The motive is extremely relevant. Wikileaks' information is undoubtedly true. But if they are intentionally only telling one side of the story, then the information is biased and that impacts their overall credibility. If all that matters is that the info is real, then why do you think lies from the President of the United States don't matter? I don't have time at the moment to get into your lengthy response, but I will say that the President of the United States enacts policies that impact the entire country. If his administration starts enforcing federal marijuana laws in states where it's legal based on a falsehood that marijuana use leads to opiate use, that's tens of thousands of lost jobs because of a falsehood. If the President uses the falsehood the 3-5M people illegally voted to make it harder for low income minorities to vote, that's impacting people's lives based on a falsehood. If the President uses a false statistic that the murder rate is the highest it's been in 47 years to increase the militarization of the police, that's policy impacting people's lives that's based on a falsehood. If you care about truth, care about the whole truth. Not selective bits of the truth. If you care about facts, then don't handwave away policy based on falsehoods. Politics isn't gossip - it has a tangible impact - positive or negative - on millions of people's lives.