chasfh

I have questions. Why are we cheering her saying she still defends Trump against the Epstein charges? Since when did iOS start hyphenating running text? Who’s Natalie?

The scaling part of it makes sense. That part is inside the question’s room. I’m having trouble getting through the question’s door.

That’s incredible considering how much better pitchers generally were 20 years after he started playing. Age 38, 233 OPS+ … talk about locked in.

Which basically tells us that the rate of success of getting away with it is super high, because even with the potential cost of getting caught, they all do it anyway, since they all deem the risk to be worth it. High rate of success multiplied by the benefit of succeeding usually explains behavior other people find inexplicable or even impossible due to the draconian penalties attached to it.

Dǐck Stuart is one of those guys who played within my lifetime (technically) who almost never registers with me as I think about players from his era. Talk about Dr Strangeglove: he had over 200 home runs and still couldn’t clear 8 WAR for his career. Amazingly, there are five other 200-home-run hitters who had even fewer wins even having hit 200+ homers, like Dante Bichette and Jose Guillen and Mark Reynolds.

My question is, how can the dWAR for DHs be anything but zero? How does a DH lose 1.7 games for his team without picking up a glove? The only way any of this comes close to making any sense for me is if 1Bs generally have negative dWARs and SS generally have positive dWARs because the average 1B loses runs for his team and the average SS gains runs for his team, taken against the average of all eight positions, solely by the nature of positional relativity. That would help explain the difference in dWAR between players at those two positions—but that still wouldn’t explain DH dWAR for me. I’m just trying to make the concept click for me mathematically to help me understand how individual players at positions contribute defensively to runs and wins on the field during games, versus accepting it as a purely economic concept applied primarily to roster management. We can just go ahead and drop it here since our going round and round like this is no fun for anyone, not even me. I can pursue the question on my own in my spare time.

Well, TBF, they didn't say he was "pro-life" ...

lol good one! The conversation wouldn't even have to be that opaque. It just has to occur in relative secret and not be on the record.

Saw this in one of my newsletters. Interesting that the Tigers let him go rather than move him to the hitting coaching team. Astros are hiring Anthony Iapoce as an assistant hitting coach, general manager Dana Brown told reporters. Iapoce, 52, was the Rangers’ hitting coach from 2016 to ’18, the Cubs’ hitting coach from 2019 to 2021, the Red Sox’s senior hitting coordinator in 2022, and the Tigers’ first-base coach the last two years.

Perhaps a leftover from an earlier era when 14-year-olds could get married under circumstances. I'm guessing it'll change at some point.

I was noodling this earlier: if they do go to some kind of salary cap, then teams that have significant long term deals on the books might get those deals grandfathered in and their caps adjusted to reflect that.

I'd be surprised if we ended up with a permanent DH, even from one side of the plate.

I’m not sure anyone is signing or offering a thing long term until they have a really good idea what the landscape is going to look like under the new CBA.

There's only one certain way to keep her quiet ...

And the snotty, dismissive look on her face as she says that last part—something that can't come across in print—is a real clincher for your point.

OK, I can see where this makes sense, so this brings us back to the original question: how can a DH generate -1.7 defensive WAR if it is not related to positional adjustment, and he doesn't use a glove the entire season?

All depends on whether you're voting for Most Valuable or Best Story.

OK, then let's make it -10 at 1B and +6 at SS. That works for me. The actual numbers don't matter to me. The principle does, and these numbers go in the same direction as the numbers from the old Fangraphs article. So, I come back to the question, does a slightly above average first baseman still lose runs for his team and a slightly below average center field still gain runs for his team, because of the positional run adjustments? EDIT: let's ask an even more basic question: you appear to be saying that Tango calculated his positional adjustments based on fielding runs saved or lost by players at these positions during actual games he studied. Do I have that part straight?

It's generally accepted that the Tigers offered the most money to Bregman last winter, which is the thing many people claim all the time is all it takes to get these greedy bastards to sign on the line that is dotted. 😁

I'm out of reactions today, but Like

Getting back to the hot topic at hand: can I just tell you how surprised I am that MAGA has not simply dismissed the trove of Epstein emails Democrats have released as being a forgery? I mean, how easy would it be to claim that Democrats doctored the documents to remove Clinton's name and add Trump's? Red hats would totally, absolutely, 100% buy that, and it also would sow enough confusion in the marketplace of ideas that independents, uncommitteds, and apathetics would throw up their hands and bail on the story not knowing what to believe. So why aren't the Republicans selling that? And why aren't they releasing doctored documents of their own that removes Trump's name and adds, I don't know, Obama or Pelosi or Newsom or Jeffries or somebody? I know that's a complex job, but I mean, come on, Russia does this **** all the time. They practically invented it! Is someone in St Petersburg asleep at the switch or something?

Man, is this ever ballsy. Tell you what: if the courts see fit to strike down the voter-approved redistricting plan in California while simultaneously upholding all the legislator-drive redistricting plans in all the red states, we are truly good and ****ed. Because at that point everything will be all but officially in the bag for the Republicans to finally realize their goal of make America a one-party fascist state, like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia or the Jim Crow South.

That's why I posted this back in June!

I'm out of reactions today, but Like. Did you know "Barely Legal" is still being published as a magazine by the Larry Flynt people? Unreal!

So I found the positional adjustment article on Fangraphs. They estimated at the time the various positions have the following positional run adjustments: Position Full Season Adjustment C 12.5 1B -12.5 2B 2.5 SS 7.5 3B 2.5 LF -7.5 CF 2.5 RF -7.5 Total 0.0 You can see how it all evens out among the eight positions. (Not sure why the P position is not covered here, but, some other time.) So assuming this table is correct, if two players each save 10 runs above average at their positions with their defense, if one is a first baseman, his fielding run value is 10 + -12.5 = -2.5 defensive runs overall, and if he is a center fielder, his fielding run value is 10 + 7.5 = +17.5 defensive runs overall. I guess the idea is that because first base is so much easier than center field, the former is expected to not make mistakes and lose runs with his defense versus a center fielder, which is so much more difficult to play. This would suggest that even a slightly above average first baseman (a couple runs more than 0 runs saved) loses runs overall with his defense for the team, because that's the nature of first base; and that even as a slightly below average center fielder (a couple runs less than 0 runs saved) would still produce a net gain of fielding run value for his team. Am I on track so far? Or off track? Please remember I not concerned about how the theoretical mathematical formulas work as I am trying to comport the data we have to reflect what's happening on the field itself.