gehringer_2

No doubt.

This observation is spot on. I person may be a nut but have more personal courage than a pilot fish like Mike Johnson.

Indeed. And further, observing this from within a University setting, I believe it is also true at AA tends to helps those who least need the help. For instance, If you are a minority that gained admission to UM, you very likely already had the advantages of a more stable family and a level of social capital there that simply isn't available to too many minority youth, and once there, any additional boost you get is largely superfluous. AA has been effective at normalizing the presence of minorities at higher success level in society, and that absolutely has value, but it has not done much to change conditions for the majority of the black underclass, because they still can't access the first rung. And before the rebuttal comes back that this is basically a class and not a race problem - while there is truth to that, it is also true that as a class, no white American cohort has had to bear the repeated concerted efforts to destroy their social capital that black Americans have. From Jim Crow, to Wilson destroying black civil service opportunities, to the interstate hwy system preferentially destroying stable black neighborhoods, to mortgage red lining, to the "War on Drugs" (read: "young black males"), to the misguided efforts to 'ensure' minority legislative legislative 'representation' that in reality effectively neuters minority voting influence, to the national abandonment of central cities in after 1970. It's a long and dismal list. It's actually cruel irony that as white Americans have as a general rule become less personally racist, they have become ever more blind to how institutionally racist their society has been and in too many places continues to be structured, and of course segregation is as deep as ever. In fact what you get today is the white reactionary who just gets mad when the whole issue is raised because they say "Don't accuse me, I'm nice to black people" as they go vote MAGA.

so you're saying that in 1957 no one thought to notice if Ted's head was getting bigger? 😉

As far as I have always been given to understand, increasing the probability of getting caught deters prohibited behavior much more effectively than increasing the severity of the penalty being caught. But I would guess there is another thing at work here - which is that within the MLB administrative law system, 'tampering' has a formal definition as well as a set of precedents on past rulings - i.e. it's part of a typical English system of jurisprudence. So GMs and agents know pretty well where the lines not to cross are, and there are still going to be many modes of communication available that don't formally cross those lines or that might but are too difficult to prosecute, but still get a lot of signaling done.

it's taking longer than it ever should have, but when you draw a lot of terrible people together around an even more terrible person, sooner or later they will start eating their own.

I think it could be fine. It gets rid of the brutal wall on Atwater that has almost no set back from the sidewalk. It may be less symmetrical in aerial shots but could be a lot nicer at ground level - of course assuming they do a better job than Portman did in the 1st place.

what does his age have to do with it? The point is that Briceno demonstrates that the AFL is an easier league than AA - much easier. I'm not knocking Briceno - just using him as a yardstick

She was also into policy by Astrology. Which is sort of a good match for the level of expertise that the Trump Admin applies to policy.

Not at all. The take away was to remember that just because a player tears up the AFL is no particular indicator of whether they are close to an MLB call-up the following season -- or not. As you posted, Briceno followed a great AFL with a strong performance at......AA.

Jose Briceno. Just for a little perspective.

'Clips' and 'Magazines' redux.

the rise and fall of the shift would seem to be reason to re-evaluate everything regarding fielding. Ironically, even with the modified shift, good fielding corner IF's may have had their value rise since they are often left with a lot more ground to cover than back in the day.

I really hate that kind of crap. You almost wish as soon as he got on the ice, a wing had just taken his skates out from under him and sent him flying. AFAIAC, that's all guys like that should get in the NHL

I guess this was Pete just finding out about it.

yup. That comparison sounds easier to describe than it might actually be to do. 🤔

LOL - that reminds me that Carlos Guillen had been a shortstop but was a disaster at 1b - couldn't manage the footwork at all. Of course he was playing 1b mostly after he was already shot as a fielder anywhere. But that raises a more serious question, did Tango normalize for age comparing guys who changed positions? Or only compare data in single seasons? He may have the same name, but a SS that goes to 1st at age 35 is not the same fielder that played SS at 24. And nobody goes from 1st to SS so there's going to be a lack of reciprocity in a data set like that.

I don't there are many players who don't have at least some reluctance to leave their first team, esp when it's the team that drafted them and brought them all the way to the majors. The question is always how 'some reluctance' does or doesn't translate into actually being willing to take any less than the highest bidder's offer!

Sense, yes. But does that work in terms of getting to the right totals? I've always assumed -and I'm sure you will correct me if not () that the whole system is normalized so that a teams total WAR connects to their win differential. If you only make fieldling adjustment positive, would the system then need to be normalized somewhere else to come out right?

IDK, I'm not that good an observer, He does still seem to spend a fair amount of time sort of in between deciding what he's supposed to defend, but OTOH, I have seen him do nice job bodying up a guy at least a couple times recently which I thought was a good sign. Maybe he's taking some lessons from Stew.

like many of the 2nd Tuesday's in November.

but when only 45% of the people vote, 33% might still et you pretty close to a majority of an election.

I don't know his personal story, maybe he'd just spent too much time with the grandchildren and was in 4 yr old overload? 🙃

to be fair, the use of 'my friend' in a construction like that is an old English (and Spanish for that matter) trope that doesn't necessarily imply any actual relationship - cf the tag line of the "World's most interesting Man" (Dos Equis) "Stay thirsty. my friend." - a statement to a general audience. OTOH, the fawining "steadfast", "you deserve" is another matter. 🙄

I've certainly never heard Boras be that incoherent.