gehringer_2

Since the SO did 30 yrs at the big 'U' she has TIAA, and when I did a stretch of time there as well I also ended up with a smaller piece there. They used to be sort of the gold standard if you had the good fortune to work where it was available. More more recently they have connected to Nuveen as their prime investment placement agent and I'm less certain, or at least still less knowledgeable about them.

So, I'm less concerned about Torkelson, just because I think the situation will resolve itself more clearly. Bad starts in a second full season are sort of a common outcome - either he shows up in spring and has left it behind or the 31 HRs in '23 was just a fluke. Either way, I think the answer will become evident pretty quickly. With pitchers there are so many ways to go before you know if you are ever going to get anything: add pitches, drop pitches, move to relief, that I think it could end up being a more ambiguous decision with more chances to go wrong. But as noted above - I'm sort of resigned that if we can get Will Vest V2.0 out of him, maybe that's the end game.

I think it's getting worse even at the upper levels. When I went through Engin School we got the whole nine yards on investment economics, time value of money, ROI, depreciation, economy of scaling factors, all in the Engin school plus a 400 level macro economics course at the lit school. The students in the program today can get through without seeing any of that.

expect two waves, the 1st taking out air defense assets, and the second to hit the objectives.

So on the heels of the WaPo and LAT stories, the NYT OP-ED today has a multi-segment multimedia take down of Trump on the theme of "He says horrible things and you need to believe him" that goes on for 8 sections. This is about the 3rd big anti-trump piece the Ed Board has run on the OP-ED page. This piece is a full on direct argument for against voting for Trump. There is no shading of the editorial board's position, yet the piece never even mentions who the alternative is. Only mentions Harris' name once and that only in relations to political enemies Trump has threatened. Will they leave it at this or will they write a Harris endorsement tomorrow or hold it for the Sunday, or do nothing else? Stayed tuned for the next installment of "As the MSM turns"

If a newspaper doesn't want to do endorsement, that's fine. The problem is that WaPo has already made endorsements in all the other VA and MD federal office elections so instead of a principled decision to change a policy before an electoral cycle stared, you have an obvious putsch by ownership to overrule his own staff and cut off a process that had already run nearly to completion for this election cycle. So instead of being a expression of principle, it's simply an admission of that Bezos is willing to prioritize his other business interests over the editorial integrity of his newspaper. A guy like that should probably sell to someone else - unfortunately for the public, newspapers don't make enough money for anyone likely to be editorially independent to be interested.

Just remember, if the Braves call about a pitcher, say, “NO.”

The changes in registration patterns is another factor. Dems used to out register Repub but then voted in lower numbers. Now it's more chic for the college educated to claim independent status even though they becoming more reliably blueas voters, and since the college educated also turn out more reliably, that shifts turnout outcomes on the blue side. So all of these trends are in motion simultaneously in addition to the attitude (and availability to consider places beyond NV) changes in early voting.

and everyone is still guessing. Early voting is too new and too much in flux in too many states to have established patterns, especially when the last presidential election took place in a once a century black swan setting. The whole polling/EV exercise this year continues to strike me as a bunch of otherwise smart guys trying to figure out a way to solve for N variables with N-1 equations.

This is funny because I had thought that is exactly why they soured on Blashill - they were playing so basic/safe a style that they couldn't produce, and when Lalonde got here I remember posting that I though they were playing a better possession up tempo style, but you hit it on the head - they are playing so conservative north/south again that they refuse to reverse the puck to hold possession - they won't risk going cross ice in their own zone so their outlets are always bottled up on the boards or dump and chase and they don't have the speed for that on the secondary lines. Nor does it help that ~80% of Petry's clearing attempts are directly to the other team and 90% of Veleno's rushes also end in possession change. Those two guy alone give the puck back enough times to kill production. So either Lalonde thinks he has a worse roster than 2 yrs ago or he's turned into Blashill. But it's the passivity - mostly by Wing forwards when on D in their own zone that really drives me crazy - either pressure the puck in your own zone or go get some players that can and coach that will coach it. OK - so all that said, it's early. Maybe they are going to look better against different competition - the Rangers may make a lot of teams look bad, and maybe the Devils are going to have a good season.....maybe.

he went the IL middle of July. Pitched only 9 innings across 3 starts in September for the Hens so his 2nd half was pretty much a loss.

Jack is lucky they are good enough friends that Ras just skated away.

This game was an object lesson on what the Wings offense has to work on. Devils players moving constantly without the puck, someone is always open to take a pass. On the other side, the Wings still can't close out on anyone in their own zone. They constantly look down a man at even strength.

I thought Raymond played a decent game tonight - did a lot of hard work on the boards.

Ras showing a little fire there.

Taking too many penalties.

They've already endorsed the Dems for House and Senate MD and VA, they (read:Bezos) would look at least as silly as LAT to withhold a Harris endorsement now. Especially since the editorial stance of the paper has already been strongly anti-Trump, their op-ed people like Rubin have even taking the liberty of laughing at the NYT's false equivalencing.

I wonder. I imagine Manning will still get a look, I think they just have nothing more to say about him. He has to produce. If he does, they'll find him room.

Yeah - I think he gets another shot at starting, but you and Hongbit may have the long term idea. If he goes short maybe he can push his his velo nearer triple digits and throw one breaking ball and maybe you have yourself another Will Vest. That's might be a defeat at some level for a 1/1 but you can't let yourself miss your best chance over sunk cost fallacies.

It's been fun watching how good Keith has gotten at turning DPs, he is quick and his arm in general is strong and accurate, his hands seem fine as well. The problem for Colt is range, and as he gets older it's hard to imagine that big body is going to get any quicker. Because of the arm and the turn, he's OK at 2B now, but sure, it's easy to imagine a significantly better defender coming through the pipeline like Lee. You would like to see more ISO if you had to move him to 3rd or esp 1st, but that may come - don't need to worry that for now.

Apparently the LA Times had a no endorsement policy over much of its history, and in the abstract I don't have a problem with that, but even if Soon-Shiong's motives were pure - and I don't think for a minute that they are, this is the wrong point in the wrong cycle to try to re-establish that stance.

Here's hoping! 🤞

I think it's ironic that the Internet was supposed to make news 'democratic' and free, but the fact is that driving the cost to zero also drives the quality and trustworthiness of the information to zero. We've seen that broadcast and cable news, which was always 'free' (i.e. advertiser supported) was of good quality as long as it was highly curated by the monopoly of the three US networks, but though it took a long time, that system has inevitably broken down, and value of broadcast news in total is a fraction of what it once was - can even be considered to be negative once you add in FOX. The best hope for the future is getting people conditioned to paying for their online news sources the way they always paid for newspapers in the past. Once you pay for it, the standard you expect from that source will go up, and since you are paying for it, the independence of the source to provide the standard goes up also. I am put in mind of this by the fact that today Reuters announced they are putting up a $1/week paywall. I think they are a pretty good source, I will probably pay it.

Yup. GOP really needs to hold their NY Congressional seats seats to keep a majority.

Dems can win Tx if they could ever get out the vote. They have the supporters, just not the voters. Odd, but it is what it is.