gehringer_2

this is nice. Russia rejoins grain deal

well, tbh, if I had googled something and then walked into the early voting station and they handed me a different ballot for my precinct, I would tend to assume it was what was on-line that was wrong. Prolly would try to look into it once I got home though.....

LOL - somehow, someway, he'll be back in the org somewhere by July.

It has always amazed me that a voter would ever think they would get competent government by voting for people who hate government.

I think they prefer to play teams they can beat. Reality is they could still have an outside shot of getting into a playoff with one loss to a #1 OSU, which couldn't happen if it were the 2nd loss. Everyone hated the computerized SOS ranking system, but using a hard-core system like that's the only way a 2 loss team ever gets in, which means it's not worth the risk to schedule anyone you could lose to. All the tut-tutting at this point in the season about SOS is just that, on the last weekend wins and losses will carry the day.

all I would add on the debate about Chris Ilitch is the question of how much resource he is willing to commit pales in proportion to the question tof whether he has put management in place capable of winning with any resource level. Going all the way back to when Tom Monaghan bought the franchise from Fetzer, FO competence has always been a bigger road block than ownership resourcing.

I'm thinking the 40% is that it goes more like this season all over. A decent start - hits a few long balls in ST. Every body feeling happy. Then the power will disappear but the average will be good and he'll hang just below 700 OPS with a decent OBP - a month, 2, maybe even 3, but then at some point everything is going to start to hurt again, the output will plummet, and the only question will be how many months does it go on before the Tigers stop waiting for the Spring version of Miggy to return and make the needed move.

yeah - I think this is the point that's significant. No it doesn't matter to wins and losses per se when you score your points in a game, but in football it's the teams that make adjustements and finish strong that tend to win the most games. It's an indication that your guys pushing the buttons are a step ahead of the other guys, and that your players are wearing down the other players and not vice versa, and that's what you want/need.

Don Cooper? I think he was let go when LaRussa arrived? Wiki doesn't note that he's attached to any team now. Now 66, maybe he's hung 'em up.

deck chairs

It's not just that it's up and down though, it's that with only a single exception, the sum of his ups and down over a full season don't amount to a good full season. Ups and downs but still finish with a +OPS over 500-600 PA is what you want. I don't think Jeimer has shown he can ever do that.

I agree on all but Jeimer. He has actually never put up >250 good AB at a stretch so I tend to think that of all of them, his prior performance peaks are most likely to have been fool's gold. Escpecially since his calling card in his best year was doubles, which always seem to be the least reprodicible accomplishment for a hitter..

191 eFG%. Who thought it was possible he could be shooting worse than last season?

The Buck 3 pt shooting at the end was the difference, though the Pistons also did fall into standing around watching Cade a little too much on a couple of the last possessions.

This is Brazil right? Simple equation: He went to the Generals and the Generals said "No"

His arm is certainly an unknown, but his bat is a bigger one. He still hasn't played enough at the MLB level (255 PA) to have any confidence he can keep his head above water against MLB pitching.

and the 2nd round pick is rehabbing instead of playing CB. Decisions have consequences. We all loved the Williams pick but there is no free lunch. This is part of the price

right, but if they had scored on only one of them it would have been the difference. I'm not arguing your point that the D is beyond hopeless, only that as soon as you fix the D the inconsistency of the 'O' is still going to leave it questionable if they can be a winning team.

Yes, the defense is horrible while the offense is at least good enough to be terribly inconsistent. 😭

it's true, there always are a lot ways to criticize a losing team. 🤷‍♂️

it probably would. Good coaches and coordinators can use half time to address their own recognized vulnerabilities and plan to expliot vulnerabilities recognized in the opposition. Teams that under perform in the 2nd half are likely either failing to meet that coaching standard, or are underconditioned, which is just as bad an indictment of a coaching staff. So just as a general principle, I do think I'd rather see a team that wasn't consistently worse in the 2nd half.

So far I'd rate Soderblom, Chairot, Kubelik, Copp and Maata as all better than the guys whose ice time they have replaced. Vrana has hardly played for the Wings so in term of the comparison to last season they are basically down Bert - but on balance I think still better a better team than last season even with him out. Of course that was not a very good team so the bar is low on that question! I'm a little curious about what LaLonde might get out of Givani Smith. Seems under Blashill he was pretty much under orders to just go hit people. The other night night he looked to be playing a little more of a skill game as a forechecker and didn't look bad.

There is probably a lot of personal/family dynamics history/baggage that can come into play here. How determined is SHF to prove she isn't her father (or even mother)? Would she make a move just to prove the organization is serious about perform or go, or is she her father's daughter, at heart a 'softie' who is loath to fire someone she likes that she thinks is trying? My completely uninformed guess is that those peronsal dynamics for SHF will have more to do with whether Campbell keeps his job after a sub 6 win season than the object facts of the record itself.

they missed their chance to get me on the way to the mailbox. (say yes to voting by mail!)

I read a piece that made the excellent point that one should remember that from an economic standpoint, since twitter is an advertising supported service, the correct way to view it is that the advertisers are the customers, not the content generators and readers - they are actually the product. Thus the service either has to be run to the wishes of the advertisers, or it has to be turned into something else completely. It seems Musk would prefer to move it to a subscriber based system exactly to break that paradigm, but he will destroy twitter's mass market presence if he does that because consumers in general will not pay for much for internet content and the generators certainly will not pay for the right to put their content on a web platform when they can do it for free in too many other ways. If he can't make the economics work as a subscription service, then he can't really change the moderation system much, other than maybe make it MORE restrictive, because his advertisers demand a much higher lever of moderation that he apparently wants to have. He can't maintain his advertising revenue and go to a largely subscription service because the advertisers won't pay as much to reach the smaller audience. It's always dangerous to assume (as Musk has) that a management is failing (Twitter only made money in the occasional year) because they are incompetent, sometimes they've just been trying to sell a product that isn't very profitable.