gehringer_2

And it's such a ridiculous double set of double and triple standards anyway. We are supposed to be outraged that someone is trying to influence Joe Biden by doing favors for Hunter, but just blow off putting the wife of the Senate leader in the Cabinet? COI needs to either apply to everyone in a household, or no-one but the individual themselves. I would strongly prefer the former but if it's going to be the latter, which is what Washington has chosen, than discussion about Hunter is pointless.

But he wouldn't unless he accepted. Isn't that the point?.No-one can be held responsible for what other people may offer - that is wholly out of their control - only what they accept, and isn't that the fundamental question here - whether anything was ever accepted?

LOL. really. But I also think there is a little 'chicken little' effect going on - and maybe on purpose. I listened to it and if I hadn't read how much reaction there had been already, I would have thought what he said was pretty stock stuff. But aside from that, he also made a point of noting the long term expectation polling data. So that gives you a clue that there may also a psyops component to it all. The Fed believes that the more aggressive he can make people believe the Fed will be, the less aggressive the Fed may actually have to be. Bottom line, if I recall he more or less said to look for them to get to 4%. That shouldn't be the end of the world. US economy did pretty well in the post WWII era with interest rates in the 4-5% range. My personal view would be that when all the stress from Ukraine and Covid fade to the back burner, the population will still be getting older and so aggregate demand will still be slack and rates will end up floating back down.

for a rookie, to even not hit a wall and fall off after a couple of hundred AB is probably a good thing.

YES! This is a great point. In mechanics you'd call it 'impulse'. The energy provided to the ball is the integral of the force applied over the time it's applied. You might think of it like having a person pedaling a bike vs a motor turning the pedals. The person only produces force in the middle half of the down stroke of each leg, the motor supplies force continually, thus the cranks on the bike will see roughly twice as big a moment being pedaled by a person as they would being turned by a motor to produce the same energy output to the bicycle because the person supplies the energy in half the time. (This comes into play in a big way also with diesel engines. They produce a hammer blow every time a cylinder fires, so the power train for a diesel has to be rated for much more torque than that of a gasoline engine that produces the same HP more smoothly.) In theory, two guys who are the same size can throw the same velo and have different peak stress on the joints depending on how evenly their arm generates force throughout the pitching motion. It's what people are getting at when they sense from observation that a guy has a 'violent delivery." But as you note, since physiology is so particular to the individual, the actual maximum loads inside the joint, and how much load each person's ligaments can bear, can be hard to pin down based on what you see/measure in the gross motor output. (and Max Scherzer says 'Hi").

a 'torque' is just the moment that a rotating member is capable of generating. They are the same quantity. Some would say the distinction is that moment refers to something static and torque refers to something dynamic (i.e. a beam experiences a 'moment' while an engine produces 'torque'.) so it depends a little on what branch of physics vs mechanics is your thing. In either case it's the vector product of a force times the distance from some available axis of rotation. But as a practical matter, if you have a beam connected as a radius to a shaft, mechanical stresses on that beam are the same whether the shaft is rotating to produce torque 'X' or is at rest with a moment 'X' being applied to it.

He seem to have enough uppercut in his swing plane - at least tonight (!), maybe just has to find more of the bottom half of the ball - i.e. figure out major league sinkers and sliders a little better.

I think he may have a future in this game.

And to Edman's basic point, I wouldn't argue that throwing flat out all the time isn't a bad idea. Our poster boy for longevity, Verlander, has always added and subtracted from his FB through the course of a game, saving his max effort pitches for when the need is greatest. But the key thing there is that in order to do that, your stuff has to be good enough that you can get an out at enough ABs without having to throwing your hardest to take that load off your arm.

the poor AB by Baddoo looks worse in retrospect.

Riley have a night!

At the beginning of the broadcast Dickerson was optimistic about Cabrera because he was hitting the ball hard to left in BP. Another hope goes a'glimmering.

RILEY DITTO!

You could't even make it up.

the other half of the equation is that Norris has already failed repeatedly working in relief. It just seems to me if you are going to bother bringing in a guy who you think might be able to turn it around a little based on starting, then you should start him. Norris' problem has always been repeatability. It seems to me extended outings are far more likely to help a guy maintain body discipline than putting him back into relief. Granted Norris was a low probability play from the get go, but if you make the play, and he has two decent starts, why do you pull the plug on it? It's just more indication to me that the people running this team are just ad hoc'ing everything. I just see no sense of commitment to any kind of planning/strategy.

still irritated they didn't give Norris the opportunity to keep starting and slide Tyler back to the pen. That scheme might have failed, but this one was guaranteed to. Tyler's OPS against 565 as reliever, 791 as starter

At the end of paper they get to an interesting conclusion about velo normalized stress which points up how complex that analysis might be. My other question would be how well the stress measurement sleeve actually models the distribution of the overall stress on the individual components within the joint. If you put one stress on the elbow that is borne by bone and another that creates a riser on the UCL, the question is whether your external measurement is able to capture that difference.

you may have a point there! 🤷‍♂️

I think it could be as simple as that he made hand written sharpie notes on a lot of them that are probably embarrassing if viewed by historians/researchers later. You have to keep in mind how vain the man is. I would never assume a grand motivation for Trump when a venal one is just as good an explanation.

yeah - whatever they see in Zadina must show up in practice because you sure don't see it in the games. Maybe he was doing a little better as a forechecker in the course of the season, otherwise still a disappointment. I have a memory burned in my brain of a Wings power play when Blash apparently decided they were going to force feed 'Z' and they set him up for something like 7 consecutive shots from the right side slot and he missed or hit the goalie in the chest 7 out of 7. It was doubly frustrating because it was so rare to see the Wings be able to sustain possession like that and then just to waste it all for guy who couldn't make good play with the puck.

I assume this was not part of a re-enactment event. I wouldn't hold wearing the uni again someone if they were part of a historical play event, which is probably why some people might own a confederate uni in the 1st place.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fire-biggest-us-midwest-refinery-185900197.html BP trying to burn down their Whiting refinery again (largest in the Midwest). They have to be the most incompetent operator in the industry. One company I'd love to see just go away.

The GOP way to steal an election.

LOL. "...Carl Rove, with *his* thoughts on that....." Don't don't break a leg running away from any association with a Trump critical opinion!

Market taking a beating based on Powell's hard stance on anti-inflation in his comment today. S&P down 2.5% and haven't hit much support yet.