gehringer_2

In 1956 American didn't blink twice before re-electing a man that had just had a major coronary - in an era before statins, beta-blockers, stents or bypass surgery options, and his VP was 'effing Richard Nixon. Go figure. I guess the fact that he was a Republican speaks for itself.....😉

Sounds like Hinch is setting up to be able to make a little bit of a distinction without a difference doesn't it?

Part of the thing in baseball is that because of the CBA structure, a lot of guys don't come to market until they are already close to their sell-by dates, and hitting is a skill that can disappear in a hurry when father time flips the right genetic switches for a guy. Enough guys start falling off the cliff at just about 32 that anyone over 30 might be a risk at over 2 yrs. A good number of hitters do get to 35 OK, but then past that anybody still performing well with a bat is going to be an outlier. Pitchers go a few years longer, but with them the constant risk is already so high that age doesn't add as much additional risk as for hitters.

no doubt

It's the damn twitter/tik-tok culture run amok. Everyone is compelled to cook up some statement to drive their personal click rate. The more 'seriously concerned' you can sound, the better to burnish your credential as a person of gravitas equal to the situation you are commenting on, despite the reality that you're just another piker with a smartphone.

Also, they knew the not so distant history of the Catholic/Protestant Civil Wars that had devastated England across every social class. Few Englishman in the New World had any desire to copy the old in that regard.

I'm pretty sure it has been reported that Hinch's assistants are not available for interviews. I suppose the managers at the various MiLB levels must have more leeway, but they are running a pretty tight media ship.

It's unbelievable that we have arrived at a point where you see a quote from a presidential candidate and if you didn't know the names your first assumption would have to be that it was something George Wallace said in 1968. This is so totally sick racism that any decent person should find it revolting. I know it doesn't help anything to call out Trump supporters who lap this up as being scum, sure - they love their kids too, but they sure have developed one helluva case of amnesia regarding basic right and wrong.

If you are light skinned and you live past middle age without aid of a plastic surgeon, you will look exactly as good or bad as the amount time you've spent in the Sun, and Sun Tans were a very in thing when the boomers were of the age to get them....

yeah - unless coaches are talking - and under Hinch they are not allowed, we don't get much look under the covers. In Tork's case - looking at his AB's it would *appear* he is being at least a little more aggressive in the K zone - but even whether he had figured that out on his own, or is working at a specific request, or isn't doing it as much as they want, who knows? Of course it means nothing because you really can't tell by looking anyway, but I always thought Manning needs to pitch a little angrier. 😡

If you have made a good faith effort to enter the country and INS holds you up, that's more or less 'force majure' and I would imagine contracts recognize that. Getting yourself convicted and put in jail for the term of your deal is pretty much straight up permanent non-performance of your end of the bargain! I don't think a team would have much problem getting out from under either way. And in all likelihood, the standard contract has clauses for the more obvious sources of "it's your own fault" non-performance - like ending up in jail. The Rays will save the money but you know they'd rather have the performance!

the last one -- no way. It was in his glove and he dropped it.

Best of all possible worlds it that Miller picks up the slack. He's the guy with the resume.

the only thing they did right was to get a good set up at the end - with the ball going to Vierling - probably the fastest defender, chasing the runner back to third, so the other runner couldn't risk trying to get there. Of course if Vierling runs him down the 1st time he has the ball that's much better, which might have happened if Matt had come off the base toward the runner a little before Jake made the 1st throw or if Jake waits another step - but Vierling is an outfielder after all....🤷‍♂️

yeah - any Manager who says he isn't managing to win the most games in the season is probably lying, and to do that you definitely will occasionally have to decide to save your staff when the odds against comeback get steep..

Clark and McGonigle combine to be on base 8 times and steal 3 bags in a Lakeland romp. McGonigle 898 OPS, Clark 799

at least!

well, that's where the discussion more or less started - has Kelly shown he's significantly outpaced Jake's production rate? The question is certainly debatable, but my initial question was about how far you go to keep Kelly if you believe he will be a better catcher/hitter going forward

But there is another way to look at it to consider. Maybe he is only a 1 War player, but if the best you have behind him is -1 WAR, then losing him 'costs' you 2 WAR. I think you can get into a lot of pain making player decisions without considering the context of the current team. IMO, it's something the Tigers have done way too much of in recent years - moving guys they didn't think were 'worth' what they would have cost only to leave behind an completely empty hole with a seriously sub replacement player getting playing time. Not arguing for Kelly in particular but just raising the point that I don't like player decisions made "in vacuo" because they never really are.

You get it if it was close enough to have required a perfect play - but that wasn't. On that basis Gio's was more defensible -that was a very good throw.

I don't know where you are going with this. MB has already given you the black and white chapter and verse. Presidents *always* go to Walter Reed for an annual - it's pretty much tradition over decades if nothing else (well maybe all except Trump who didn't want his being subject to any official view) https://www.audacy.com/connectingvets/articles/walter-reed-why-do-presidents-go-to-a-military-hospital

I think this is ultimately what will eliminate the Ray's liability for paying him. If he's in jail, he has broken his end of the contract by not showing up, and that will break the contract. MLB contracts may be 'guaranteed,' but I'm going to guess there is still a requirement that you show up if the team is willing to have you unless you are legitimately medically unable to play. Sort of like with Cabrera - he didn't want a buyout, the Tigers probably didn't really want him, but they had to pay him only if he kept coming to the park willing to play everyday.

So he and Jake are basically the same guy in that respect. So what are you willing risk for a possibly higher level of performance? That's a question that never goes away. If you're willing to risk nothing, you probably never hit any winners either. If Dingler is better than both of them and will play 80-100 games next season, then by all means stay with Jake since he's cheaper and the role is backup. So if I'm the GM what I want to know is what do I have in Dingler? Get him up here to see some MLB pitching. It will be a roster dislocation but if he's not willing to do that his year I think Harris needs his head examined.

There's a big if there, which is that as an 8 yr pro, he would have to agree.

I don't know why you think it strange that a lot of people are employed at the White House, and a lot of them are at pay grades where it's a lot more efficient to bring personal services to them occasionally rather than to have them schlepping around a half gridlocked DC, especially since some of what is going on here is mandated by the West Wing admin.