Hawks Injury Thread 2022-2023

[JayBirdHawk]

Back to our regular scheduled programming before getting sidetracked (apologies Squawkers!)

 

If Bogi is out - more Mathews?

[Spud2nique]

9 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Back to our regular scheduled programming before getting sidetracked (apologies Squawkers!)

On this thread only right?  I’d like to apologize for the sidetrack on the other thread… and so would @Sothron 

[Sothron]

1 minute ago, Spud2nique said:

On this thread only right?  I’d like to apologize for the sidetrack on the other thread… and so would @Sothron 

Sometimes you can't help a "that's what she said" from happening.

[swanlee]

So back to under .500 tonight?

[RedDawg#8]

1 hour ago, swanlee said:

So back to under .500 tonight?

That Spurs loss is going to haunt us.

[Gray Mule]

1 hour ago, swanlee said:

So back to under .500 tonight?

Allergies, you know.  Can't breathe the air over .500.

[Gray Mule]

Wonder how many free throws the Hawks miss tonight?  Any will be too many!

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I'm fully expecting Bogi to be out tonight.

I'll say this though, road games are won by superstars.

 

Get it done tonight Trae.

It doesn't mean take EVERY shot, but your shot volume may have to increase, especially if you have it going.

 

It wouldn't hurt if Hunter and Capela had 20+ point games as well.

AJ simply needs to be solid, and make them pay attention to him on defense.

3+ threes from Bey would be nice.

And we need Holi . . . I mean A-HOL to play decent basketball tonight.

 

Definitely not an impossible task tonight.

Just have to get it done.

[sturt]

20 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Seems to be a you issue more than anything.

Keep nudging that spotlight, Ahol.

I mean, Jay.

 

20 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Not the first time you've mentioned me being female.

I don't keep track of those kinds of things, but if/when I've mentioned it, I've probably also been one to mention that I'm among the few here who treat you like you're just another guy. Again, I don't make a point to track it, but I don't even remember the last time I saw someone pin your logic to the wall and ask you to defend your thinking.

You hadn't noticed that?

Funny you wouldn't have noticed that.

(Or, not really.)

I'll continue to take pride in treating you like anyone else, regardless. Your female-ness has no bearing. For me. Maybe a handful of others, but I really can't tell because the ones who might be in that handful are posters who almost never question the logic of anyone anyhow.

 

20 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Never asked to be treated differently or asked any poster here to intervene on my behalf.

True, you've not.

But.

Total strawman.

Never suggested you did ask.

Have only suggested you seem very content that people do intervene on your behalf.

"Seem" being the operative word because I can't read your mind, of course. All I can offer in that vein is that it's never been my own practice to "like" another poster who came to a thread to take my side. So, when I see that happen as much as I have seen it happen in your case, it is not unreasonable to see that as a kind-of implicit "thank you" in that that you send.

And/but, absolutely true, it's not your fault that they do.

It's also not their fault if they feel validated by those implicit thank yous.

It's no one's fault. It just happens that way.

hehehe... reminds me of...

 

(Just call me Leonard. I won't mind.)

 

20 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I handle 'discussions' myself or I bow out. I state MY opinion and decide when it's time to move on or not or just ignore.

Nice "roar."

Yeah, speaking of that...

Did you just think you could keep doing this deflection thing and the only one who would notice is sturt? Because I dare say there's some fairly intelligent people here who also get it that you continue to respond to everything but the question posed...

On 3/22/2023 at 7:51 AM, sturt said:

Would you call Okongwu "Kong?"

Why not?

Because even though you know you yourself would have no ill-intent by using that term, HE quite possibly would take it as a name only a jerk would decide to use.

Am I surprised I have to lobby so much just to get Jay to be more considerate? Absolutely. It's not consistent with how you otherwise are. Why?

 

[JayBirdHawk]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

Keep nudging that spotlight, Ahol.

I mean, Jay.

 

I don't keep track of those kinds of things, but if/when I've mentioned it, I've probably also been one to mention that I'm among the few here who treat you like you're just another guy. Again, I don't make a point to track it, but I don't even remember the last time I saw someone pin your logic to the wall and ask you to defend your thinking.

You hadn't noticed that?

Funny you wouldn't have noticed that.

(Or, not really.)

I'll continue to take pride in treating you like anyone else, regardless. Your female-ness has no bearing. For me. Maybe a handful of others, but I really can't tell because the ones who might be in that handful are posters who almost never question the logic of anyone anyhow.

 

True, you've not.

But.

Total strawman.

Never suggested you did ask.

Have only suggested you seem very content that people do intervene on your behalf.

"Seem" being the operative word because I can't read your mind, of course. All I can offer in that vein is that it's never been my own practice to "like" another poster who came to a thread to take my side. So, when I see that happen as much as I have seen it happen in your case, it is not unreasonable to see that as a kind-of implicit "thank you" in that that you send.

And/but, absolutely true, it's not your fault that they do.

It's also not their fault if they feel validated by those implicit thank yous.

It's no one's fault. It just happens that way.

hehehe... reminds me of...

(Just call me Leonard. I won't mind.)

 

Nice "roar."

Yeah, speaking of that...

Did you just think you could keep doing this deflection thing and the only one who would notice is sturt? Because I dare say there's some fairly intelligent people here who also get it that you continue to respond to everything but the question posed...

 

Last Word....Again? You sure now?

Here is MY LAST WORD!

I gave my opinion prior on 'Kong' maybe 2 years ago.  AGAIN, I GAVE MY OPINION AND LEFT IT AT THAT.  I have seen it posted on occasion and I have not interjected.  I am not BROW-BEATING anyone into not using it on this message board unlike what you are attempting to do.  If the Mods make a specific request, I will honor that.

If you want to call out other squawkers for their posts/likes as it relates to me and me vice versa 'liking' their posts...again, that is a YOU PROBLEM.  But as always, Do you Stu, do you!

 

 

[sturt]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Last Word....Again? You sure now?

I think you may have misread what I wrote...

  

On 3/22/2023 at 10:15 AM, sturt said:

Last post today on this topic

Had to author the essentials of a fairly-important-to-my-best-interests contract yesterday, so I was saying I wasn't going to revisit this issue. And didn't.

You okay with that?

 

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I gave my opinion prior on 'Kong' maybe 2 years ago.  AGAIN, I GAVE MY OPINION AND LEFT IT AT THAT.  I have seen it posted on occasion and I have not interjected.

Not sure what that opinion was, but I take it that your opinion was that we shouldn't use it.

Of the posters here who are regulars, like yourself, who has been the ass who kept using it like you keep using AHol?

I've not seen that. I take you at your word that it's happened, but by the same person over and over?

And you're proud that you didn't call this... dripping with irony here... asshole of a person(s) on it?

 

So, you would contend, the more virtuous reaction is to not  say anything when Someone A is using terms to refer to Someone B in a way that Someone B probably most likely conventionally speaking would not prefer. 

Okay then. This must be the tipping point of our disagreement. I'm not close friends with Onkeka nor am I close friends with Aaron, but they're people I cheer for, so I don't really see reason to apologize that I stick up for their probable preferences.

 

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I am not BROW-BEATING anyone into not using it on this message board unlike what you are attempting to do.

You're feeling brow-beaten? Well so am I.

You keep doing this, and offering no actual substantive reason.

Look. It's not an insignificant question. Why does a person who ordinarily seems considerate persist on this?

And, to the heart of the Kong matter, if it's okay to assume Aaron would be okay with AHol, how do you reconcile that with your opinion that it's not okay to assume Onyeka would be okay with Kong???

What you say makes a lot of sense usually. On this one, no, it makes no sense.

 

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

If you want to call out other squawkers

(You must think you're so very good at the misdirection thing to be so blatant with it as you've been in this particular thread.)

In fact, I called out no one.

I distinctly called out no one.

Precise words were...

3 hours ago, sturt said:

And/but, absolutely true, it's not your fault that they do.

It's also not their fault if they feel validated by those implicit thank yous.

It's no one's fault. It just happens that way.

Making an accurate observation is only making an accurate observation. Does not equal "calling out."

 

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

again, that is a YOU PROBLEM.  But as always, Do you Stu, do you!

You've tried so valiantly, so hard, to nudge the spotlight away... but when you do that, in the future... unsolicited advice... at least give other readers something  that actually addresses the meat of the question raised. The repetitive "it's a you problem" thing maybe sounds somehow strong to you. The repetitive "you do you" thing, same. But they're empty verbal jabs at a person, not substantive jabs at the question raised.

I won't apologize for being an asshole when the asshol-ism is prompted by someone who cares what Onyeka might... we don't know, but might... think... but then, doesn't care what Aaron might think. That position sucks. It's a bad position. And though I totally  don't expect it, believe me... I think most people would see it as admirable to see that position get walked back... would say something potent about your intellectual humility.

 

[Gray Mule]

23 hours ago, Gray Mule said:

Wonder how many free throws the Hawks miss tonight?  Any will be too many!

Only missed 3.  Lost the game by 1 point.

Note:  Please hit your free throws!!

[JayBirdHawk]

I guess DJ is off the injury list.

 

 

[sturt]

Amiright... Jalen was supposed to get a new exam today???

[JayBirdHawk]

We should have gotten an update today on JJ.

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

Oh no! Just when I thought Dre had gotten past the injury bugaboo! . Please don't be anything serious 

 

 

[benhillboy]

@sturt you have a solid debate or law background, no?  You’re longer-winded than an alphorn.

[sturt]

1 hour ago, benhillboy said:

@sturt you have a solid debate or law background, no? 

I'm an amateur, never professional. I dabble. It's a hobby. Might even say it's why I started HS (?), because I had all this pent-up sports rage that needed to get out.... hehehehe.

 

1 hour ago, benhillboy said:

You’re longer-winded than an alphorn.

Made me look. I now know what an alphorn is. And you realize, you just gave a wordy guy a whole new word to add to his vocabulary... what were you thinking?... hehehe

 

But yeah, just objectively speaking if it's not obvious, I really don't care. Word count means nothing to me. I say whatever I consider necessary to getting the point across. I laugh at this generation who thinks you can make a reasoned, logical argument out of a tweet or two... it's ridiculous.

And criticisms about word count are but shallow efforts at deflection that, to the intelligent, signal that the critic has no substance to offer, so they go with what they consider their next best weapon... a form of ad hominem... attacking the person because there's really no debating the person's message.

Just sayin.

Not sure why you ask, benhillboy. Unusual for someone to post something in that vein without there having been some preceding disagreement on topic X. Or, is this chivalry on your part, going back a few posts? Dunno. I mean, chivalry is fine and all, but just know that that's also just reaffirming an assertion I've made in the last week and a few times before that.

Call me Leonard.