Tiger337

They can catch the Red Sox this week. Then they just need to catch one of their central brethren. It's not likely with their depleted staff, but doable.

Do you live in Spokane?

I think science involving variation between inividuals is never fully settled. There are always going to be pitchers who don't fit the norm.

Yes, they have suggested caveats which make it reasonable in theory.

I had mentioned the three three three rotation. I believe Tango was the first to suggest it. Your three best starters are used traditionally and then you have two bullpen days where the three pitchers pitch three innings apiece. There are also three traditional relievers to finish things off. We may very well be headed in that direction or something close to it. Requiring starters to to pitch six innings per start would put an end to all the recent experimentation. I don't think that's a good idea. I do like watching traditional starters pitch deep into games, but I also don't like to see rules put in place that limit strategy.

Every young woman I know thinks that Trump is disgusting and stupid.

The 65+ group is probably afraid of losing SS/Medicare benefits.

If you know any young woman, remind them to vote this year!

Win Shares

I agree and I am going to put together a team of the most talented players possible. Cutchness exists to an extent, but you just can't predict when it's going to happen. If you try to do it basd on past performance splits you will always being dealing with small sample sizes arising from too many variables.

Vierling is batting .263/,302/.422 with the bases empty and .229/.279/.458 with RISP in limited PA. So, he does not seem to have excess clutchiness. I think clutchiness exists in certain players, but that it's so minor that you can't rely on it on a regular basis. You can't plan around it. Match-ups do matter in the playoffs and throughout the season and I think managers such as Hinch know how to take advantage of them, but you can't know who you are going to face in the World Series. You can't build for a championship. You can only build a talented team that makes the playoffs multiple times and hope that things go right in post-season.

All three of their recent championship teams were like that. Conventional wisdom would say that a team like that would be good during the season but wouldn't be built for a championship.

2 WAR is an average player, so if you had a team of "2 WAR" players including pitchers you'd win 81 games. So, if you have mostly 2 WAR players and a few really good players (4+ WAR), you've got a contender.

He is boring because he is pretty good at every aspect of the game, but not great at any one thing. The sum result is an average player and an average player is a good player.

This is an intresting topic to me because every year I show my students how to make a life expectancy chart in Stata from 1900 forward and then have them discuss the results. One notable pattern is that the gap between women and men has increased since the 1940s. One theory is that women are taking care of themselves better - better diets, fewer risk behaviors and regular doctor appointments.

Men went fro 46 to 75.

What he said makes perfect sense. Go for the playoffs, but make sure you've got a team that can win before adding a closer. The closer is the last piece. You can add one at the deadline if things go well.

Wait...You want to trade Olson. McGonigle and Briceno for an injury prone reliever who has never pitched 50 innings in a season? I know he's good but that's the kind of haul you get for an ace. And I don't think you are stupid, in general. I think this proposal is stupid.

He's not trading a top prospect for a reliever. That would be stupid.

Yesterday, there was a picture going around showing Walz in a pose that they thought made him look effeminate. They are really desperate.

The average life expectancy of a female born in 1900: 48 years The average today:79 years. Is that normal?

The new Willie Mays. That would help.

Harris's speech was brilliant. I really was not expecting it to be so good. I got nervous the first minute or two because she sounded a little flakey, but after that she took off. She showed strength and normalcy, there was no sign of any radicalism and she hit all the right points. She nailed it. You know I don't like politics the way most of you do. I am generally skeptical even of the Democrats, but I've heard some great speeches the last few nights. I feel a lot better now than I did a few weeks ago.

Trump has never thanked anyone in his life. Just doesn't understand.