gehringer_2

Author of paper Trump admin used to justify tariffs completely rejects their mis-interpretation and mis-application of his findings: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/opinion/trump-tariff-math-formula.html

TBH, I also don't see that the Tigers have ever owned up to the fact that for two years they were constantly telling him he had to be more selective about getting 'good pitches to hit', only to realize last year that his real problem was not covering enough of the zone. IIRC it was Harris that started the shift in that conversation.

Clark will just have to hit enough for the both of them.

Amazon is an almost rationally priced stock at 30 times earnings. Bezos owns about 10% of Amazon which is valued at about 2T so there is his ~200B net worth. Tesla is not a rationally priced stock, even with the recent drops, it's still selling at ~120 times earnings. At this point the odds of Tesla improving its earning by the factor of 4 needed to make its price reasonable seems unlikely at best. But enough people disagree with that assessment to keep the stock bid up to where it is. Musk owns ~400,000,000 shares of Tesla at ~$250 which is about $100 billion, and then he owns 40% of SpaceX. SpaceX is valued at $350B but it's not publicly traded so we don't get to know it's financials in much detail. The last thing I saw estimated SpaceX's revenue for 2024 as $13B (that's revenue, not profit), so a valuation of $350B is pretty rich there as well. But in any case, that adds ~$150B, and 'X' is supposed still worth ~40B. So that gets you to around $300B. Of course If Musk tried to cash out it would probably tank the value of either SpaceX or Tesla. Bottom line is Musk has more net worth because more investors have believed/do believe he was going to generate, or at some point will generate, a whole lot of revenue that actually hasn't been generated yet.

don't look for your invite to the annual Pitcher's Benevolent association ball this year.

Phyllo dough, honey and nuts.

Oppo on a cold day no less.

he was actually part way there when he came back from Toledo - at least in terms of being more aggressive earlier in the count and trying to cover more of the strike zone. Because it's hard to move averages late in the season I think people tend not to realize he did hit at an OPS rate 200 pts better than before he was sent down. I would guess that once he decided that covering more of the zone was an imperative, he also knew an adjustment to his stance would be needed, but that would be an off season task. I think it's also possible that once they told him he had lost his starting gig, he stopped worrying about a lot of things, like whatever baggage he had accumulated with the Tigers - he probably figured - like a lot of us, that he was destined for another organization

Definitely happy for Ibanez since he is off to such a bad start with the bat. Ending that inning would have been a very bad day for him.

Fair enough - but if there is a difference it's that JV's FB was so live he could throw a lot of it - guys could maybe foul it off and stay alive and drive his pitch count, but he didn't walk them that much. Jobe needs his breaking ball more (doesn't everyone today?) so if guys stay alive against him the probability of the walk goes up because he's going to throw more spin, and his walk rate has been his problem in these two starts. Or the short way to put it is his still has to improve his command, but by nature that is harder throwing more spin than throwing more heat.

Games all moved up in the day to make sure the Yankees' torpedo bats torpedo bats don't freeze.

He was 'only' 1/5 today but had three 95+ EVs

Yeah - quite the change from last season to be able to say we had the guy we wanted at the plate to win the game and it be Torkelson. But Sweeney playing really well also. Sitting at 800 OPS.

IDK - In 2006 JV had one rough start in April but finished May with a 2.55 ERA. Jobe has some work to do to duplicate that, but here's hoping. (If you are comparing to JV two poor starts in 2005, then that comparison means Jobe should be in Toledo.) But the other side of the question is there anyone at Toledo that is likely to be any better. Neither Manning or Montero off to particularly impressive starts.

rule 2 is pretty much ignored - it's quite hard to get an error on an untouched ball other than maybe the specific between the legs case, and probably exactly because that case is mentioned. I think the issue is from where you come to the discussion about scoring; from the pitcher's view about earned runs, or a more general hitter's view, and thus whether you think scoring only exists to validate earns runs, or whether it has intrinsic value of its own outside of earned run calculation. If you approach it from a pitcher centric view, the rules should absolutely recognize more or FTM all mental errors on outs that are there to be made. From a hitters perspective, I am out often enough when I hit a ball well, I deserve a hit if I hit a ball that fools an OF as much as if I hit it over his head. I'm in the pitching camp. If the pitcher threw a pitch that should have resulted in an out and it wasn't made, I would always rules to call that an error.

the theory of 'competitive advantage' has largely been shown to be a fallacy however. It may be true of a few things where global resource distribution make a difference, and it has some truth for labor intensive industries, but even with labor, with modern tech application of capital can largely negate labor cost differentials. Most nations with active economic policy create (or don't create) favorable environments for the industries they want to drive and these policy actions by governments over time do far more to create (or not) whatever advantage is seen in reality as compared to any 'naturally' exiting conditions. Plus, it is simply true that for a large segment of the the most valuable products - particularly high tech manufacturing, the existing order of production around the world is virtually 100% created/synthetic. There is no place in the world where such work is advantaged by nature. OTOH, the relative environmental irresponsibility allowed in in the developing world is an issue. I think there is absolutely a place for a trade regime that demands that environmental or safety externalities avoided oversees be charged back to the price of goods, but I've yet to see an implementation of it.

Meanwhile, today in the Peoples Republic of Ann Arbor, the best we could do was the annual deadbeat be-in known as the Hash Bash. 🙄

If they were to reduce the taxes on SS, I think it should be done in such a way as your marginal tax rate on what you earn on top your SS is still taxed at a rate based on your total income including SS. So if you had 60k SS income and 40K outside income, I would tax the 40K at the rate for 100K income. This would not be the same as just dropping SS from your AGI, which would leave you at a much lower tax rate on your other income which would just be another freebie for upper income people.

Clark with a hit and 3 more walks tonight.

right - and in this play the fact that no-one advanced an *extra* base on the missed throw is, I think, the difference. If you try an extraordinary play and everyone is just safe where they are, that's one thing, but if the missed throw had been bad enough that the runners advanced beyond the out not made, I think they would have assessed the errror.

white Sox forget to cover 1st?

this - and every economist worth their salt makes this point: NO ONE is going to make investment decisions based on the policies of guy as mercurial as Trump, especially when he's driving the economy into a ditch - making a political reversal likely even if he didn't change his mind. If you want to persuade investors you are serious about US manufacturing, you need to start putting law and tax policy on the books that makes a commitment to its well being. But of course that requires serious people who have some idea how to formulate serious policy and how to get it into law. Good luck with that in this Admin.

4 even strength goals. Where has that been?

But that's the funny thing SB, everybody hears the DOW number every night on the news and they *do* think it's the economy. Don't ask me why.

LOL - Right from the get go you have to let go of what should be vs what is when it comes to MLB scoring. Seriously, if I had to guess, you get to the no error ruling based on an assumption by the scorer that if Javy had taken the time to stand up and set for a throw (i.e. ordinary effort play), the runner would have been safe. So by attempting the DP he went beyond ordinary effort and it's just a failed FC (and no-one got an extra base on the throw so no error was charged) even though he might have been able to take more time and go to 1st for one. Funny thing is that if had gone to 1st and made a bad throw, for certain the error would have been charged. But that's just another measure of how goofed up scoring is. And of course, the error in judgement to attempt a DP that isn't there isn't an error either. 🤷‍♂️