gehringer_2

this bit was interesting from Henning's article. This is Henning quoting Ryan Garko,

HaHa - maybe we have mutual friends. I'm not a big Taibbi follower by my impression is also that he has shifted to more radical positions, though not necessarily MAGA radical. To me just more a guy getting older trimming his sails less so we see more of what he probably thought all along that we might not actually have agreed with before if we had seen where he was coming from.

Could be, but on the other hand, I'm not sure what the value of the *number* of accounts is in any case. The fake/bot accounts can generate traffic far out of proportion to their account population, especially if we assume (with justification) that many of these accounts are operating as paid policy agents of foreign governments (or corps FTM) with the resources to keep them running full tilt. So whether it's 1% or 5% doesn't really tell you much does it? You need posting or RT ratios -or some kind of actual traffic data, and I haven't heard them talking about that - so to me an argument about a number whose relevance may be questionable in the first place is what smacks of a shadow play. But it's not my field of expertise at all - that's just my impression.

good question. You'd have to have some analysis of the where the supply chains for the infrastructure projects were. They may not have been nearly as constrained as a percentage of project cost as consumer spending. And a lot of infrastructure outlay goes directly to wages, which can also be inflationary. But maybe the biggest potential swing and biggest unknown is that if BBB had passed, it is certainly possible the Fed Reserve would have started tightening much sooner. But of course that is purely speculative. I can say that when Bernanke was Fed chair, he often talked about how Fed monetary policy has to take Federal fiscal policy into account, but I don't really have any sense or knowledge of Powell's leadership on the issue and certainly not the other board members(!), only that at least one Fed chair in recent years had it on his dashboard. The Fed was looking for signals in the confusion of the pandemic and erred seriously on the expansive side to get us where we are. Would big federal budget outlays have been the signal that would have gotten them ahead of this curve - maybe doubtful but certainly possible.

So - I don't buy the mental/physical distinction. The only real difference is a mistake made early or later in the process. He could have fielded that as a single with ordinary effort - period. Whether he blew it by moving his leg wrong on his 1st step in the wrong direction and didn't get there, or by moving his wrist wrong at the last second for it to clank it off his glove, is still the same thing - it's still his brain that did not do the right thing with some part of his body in both cases, and it's still obvious that he failed to execute ordinary effort. If you take on the mantel of doing scoring then it's because you have the experience to draw that line. I think that play would have been pretty easy for instance. If you throw up you hands and say you can't judge ordinary effort unless it clanks off a guy's glove just fold up the process and quit scoring because that's such a trivial standard for mistakes that it's meaningless. After all, the actual point of the exercise to supposed to be to determine if a run was earned, so by rights the quality of the struck ball should also figure into it. That would be the key to making a judgment on that play, not only what the fielder did/didn't do, but that that ball was hit in such a way that it only merited one base given a competent fielder. That said, it's purely an aesthetic argument. Scoring doesn't make any difference to anything in the game play so in the end nothing is affected by anything the scorer does, and as long as scoring is fairly uniform on team's player's stat are not dis- or ad-vantaged. And good modern stats bypass. scoring. I remember the Tigers we actually one of the last parks that kept scoring tougher when things where shifting and I imagine they got pushback from the team about it. But it's good fan grist.

Nice

Miguel still getting some hits but making a lot of easy outs. So which Soto do we get tonight?

right. In a sense they are giving him credit for trying to make a harder play and failing, but shouldn't responsibility for that fall on the fielder if they don't do it? Seems unfair to ding the pitcher. But it's not going to change. C'est la vie.

I'd call it a single and an error. The single is what 'ordinary effort' by the fielder would have resulted in most of the time.

right, which makes no sense to me. Every physical mistake is mental too, what is the difference if you make the mistake far enough in advance that you don't get close enough to make the other kind.

I don't think you can make an OF error in modern baseball unless you drop a ball you already caught. That's about it.

Didn't completely see how much angle he was running at, but that could have been one of those plays where the dive was ill-advised. Stay on your feet, try to basket catch it and if you don't get there you at least probably block it out in front of you.

Tork's 1st walk in 6 games. As good a sign as the double was.

can't say Meadows looks much more in command at the plate so far....☹️

Wenceel Perez with another good night, 2/4 BB. OPS at 889.

waste 2 leadoff doubles in one game. Bad look.

is this what they call a 'Rally'? I've heard tell of such a thing.

Tucker with an early Christmas present.

they have gone back and forth with Tattis. At one point he was going to have surgery, then decided not to for the time being. My friend put it off through his most of his 20's but it didn't get any better and he had it done when he was still young enough to enjoy playing rec basketball.

Meadows looks like he's still fighting it in the OF

rah!

OK Jonathan, you owe us one here....

Hitters. Harold chases a curve after taking a middle middle FB at 91.

Seeing Mize on the mound gives me a sad....😢

Meadows should have gotten there , but didn't.