gehringer_2

Shep made a conscious decision to maintain a position of complete intellectual inferiority to his color ex-player. There may a certain kind journalistic truth in that, but it meant he would never engage his partner as an equal, and that made for a terrible broadcast in the end. Plus the fact that he simply wasn't that good technically - too much mangled syntax, losing track of what was going on, etc. Shep has a good voice, but that was about his only virtue. And of course almost any one in the booth would have suffered for the absolutely terrible overall production by Bally. Johnny Kane especially had descended into some kind of drooling idiocy that never should have been allowed within 100 meters of an IP feed.

About as surprising as the Sun rising in the East. If we can assume Harris is generally going to demand a higher level of performance/accountability than Al did, there was no way that broadcast was not going to be re-constituted.

Yup. The calculus the Dems have to do is how do you get out of the girdlock once you let it start, who gets blamed for it, and what is the likelihood that if the GOP does manage to come to a resolution by itself, it's any better than the status quo ante. None of those answers are very clear. In a rational world, after a dozen or so more inconclusive Speaker votes, a dozen or so Repubs in blue districts would cut a deal with Jeffries, change parties and simply flip the House. But it's a measure of the lack of intellectual imagination that Repubs just can't make the break. The Tribal Identity trumps all logical analysis. Just like all the other never Trumpers who just can't bring themselves to leave the GOP even though this GOP long ago left them.

If they considered Keith a 3B, then he wasn't excluded, he was just beaten out (barely) by Coby Mayo, who also had a big year.

who knows if Jeffries has the kind of skill over his caucus that Pelosi did, but the Dems can't let McCarthy stay without getting something, especially the acknowledgement - because the atmospherics do matter. It would be a huge unforced error to let him stay for free. And especially after he was so ungracious after the CR vote as to go out call the Dems obstructionist. Plus in reality McCarthy is so untrustworthy that anything he pledges is worthless anyway. That's the one thing Gaetz is correct about!

sure

He would probably get bored with it and be completely ineffective but totally obstructionist. OTOH, better there than the WH? Of course Trump would demand to be both.

well, if that's the case, they have no-one but themselves to blame if they let up. The snap could easily have come before the clock ran down, they had to be ready for a play until they heard the whistle.

In terms of governance, the only concession the Dems should demand for McCarthy to keep his job is an end to the Hastert rule (and a pledge neither party will ever bring it back). If something has majority support, it passes, regardless if it's with a minority of the majority party. That rule has done more to screw up US governance than any other single thing besides maybe Citizen's United and corporate campaign money.

I think the more time that goes by, the more Dems will remember all the reasons they don't care if McCarthy goes down. If Gaetz had gotten his vote immediately after the deal there might have been enough good feeling about the deal made for Dems to think about saving him. I think that's already fading. Of course it still hinges as much on what the Dems can see as the outcome after a McCarthy 'vacation.' (That is what you get if you are 'vacated', amirite? )

One of the issues for Faedo was that he had a problem with blister development when he threw a lot of pitches. That might have been part of the motivation to move him off starting. He is having minor corrective surgery on a nail to try and fix it. https://www.mlb.com/world-baseball-classic/news/tigers-injuries-and-roster-moves?sf103584339=1

I was bummed Corcoran didn't pan out. For about 10 minutes I thought we had something there.

Irony is officially dead: Microsoft CEO Nardella complaining about Google monopoly power....... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/02/technology/microsoft-ceo-testifies-google-search.html

Over the last few seasons, Miguel's ISO has pretty much tracked directly with how often his right knee allowed him to pick up his front foot and drive off the back leg. He's been able to do it progressively less often each year to where this year he pretty much only tries to hit flat footed. It's a measure of his strength and ability to square up the ball that he can still get balls to the OF at all doing that. Not many guys could.

no half measures, sign Snell.

TD to LaPorta against the Falcons was a nice toss. Would be nice to see more of that.

Erod faded in the 2nd half, I'm not clear why, but if the Tigers think it was for reasons beyond bad luck maybe that's another explanation (beside his other history) of why they are not pursuing him harder.

Beside recency bias and the extra drama of being a HR hitter, I would put part of the difference in perception being that during Cabrera's peak years, he was putting up almost 45% OBP's - you almost couldn't get him out, he was hitting every ball hard somewhere. Kaline was never quite that dominant. He had few 400 OBP seasons, none quite as good as Miguel's best, and they were more scattered across his career. And part of that was the ball, the bats, the mound, the 'era' for sure. Mostly the HRs make the difference though I think. When Kaline was playing, he was often the 2nd or 3rd HR threat on the team (Maxwell, Colavito, Cash, Horton, Northrup etc). He only led the team in HR a few times in his career. What can you say, Chicks love the long ball..... Kaline and Beltre were sort of similar in being very good on both sides of the ball for a long time without having many 'led the league in something' seasons.

There are enough exceptions to the general trend though - so what can you do as a GM? If you passed on a chance at Dave Winfield or Frank Thomas you'd have looked pretty dumb!

Tigers are in a weird place for position players because you have some guys you need to play even though you are not sure about them, primarily Parker Meadows and (eventually) Cole Keith. It sort of narrows down what you are willing to spend for. As you said - a RH OF with a better bat than Vierling - absolutely go for it. Catcher - go for it, but the chances there are poor - they aren't any out there. Infield, again, you're sort of stuck with Baez. I suppose you can bench him but you know that will be some kind of last resort, they aren't going to sign a SS to play in front of him - at least not this season. If you are holding one spot for Keith, that leaves you only one spot to pursue another player. so one OF, one IF. That doesn't project to be a lot of new faces. The can spend some money on the pitching front though.

Yeah, hard to believe Cabrera didn't have a glove just for playing catch and warming up. I'd guess more likely Miguel appreciated the symmetry of using Torkelson's glove at his 'end' after giving Tork his at his 'beginning'

She's right.

so basically a repeat of last years strategy. Signing pitchers is OK - as they are not really core - they come and go. And sign mostly 'fill a need' utility level position players waiting for your home growns to take over. Great strategy *if* your home growns turn into plus players. Damn big "IF"

its all speculation but you can't separate carrying the extra weight and better flexibility conditioning from the risk of injury in all activities, especially the extra weight. Most forces your knees/ankes experience are proportional to your body weight.

Parker will still be a rookie but has 1800 professional AB, he may not have the hitting talent in the end but his depth of experience should help him. The other two likeliest callups are Keith and Malloy and each is right about 1000 MiLB AB. Ups and downs certainly more expected there. The other guy who we might we see that also has a lot of time in already is Wenceel - over 2000 pro AB.