chasfh

If y ... Naaaaah ... never mind. Carry on.

I don't think anyone will ever bail on Trump. He's not called "Orange Jesus" simply because of his bronzing routine. Once **** starts going upside down, everyone around him will get the blame, but not he. Never he.

Flurry of what-ifs and whatabouts notwithstanding, my conclusion is that a perfect game as applied to a baseball pitcher makes a hell of a lot more sense than a perfect game as applied to a football quarterback.

Worms have little if anything to do with intelligence. Some of the smartest people I know got the worm.

And by the time the economic trouble calcifies into permanence, red hats will have forgotten all about it and will have moved on to some new cultural outrage.

Wait, what?? Are you saying that had RFK Jr said he wants to ban Diet Coke before the election, that would have driven your vote to Trump?

This one—that the anonymous source says Trump is making picks in large part for shock value—I will take at face value

I believe the difference is that in baseball, batter outcome as it relates to change in base-out state is germane to the disposition of the game in a way individual pitches are not. If a pitcher throws a ball outside the zone, that does not change the win probability of the game in any way. Win probability changes only when base-out state changes. In football, throwing an incomplete pass does negatively change win probability. IOW, in a baseball perfect game, every batter disposed of raises the win probability for the pitcher's team, because it never goes down. But even in a quarterback's "perfect game", when he throws an incomplete game, win probability drops. That is, practically by definition, imperfect.

Vogt and Quatraro did not have to win using paper clips, rubber bands, and bubble gum like A.J. did. A.J. had to actually manage, and to an extremely significant degree.

I can’t help but wonder, had Skubal not given up that grand slam and the Tigers had won that Game 5, would Vogt have still won manager of the year? Did it really come down to that?

Technical point taken. I didn’t mean it in that way. I meant released.

And that's not idle political forum speculation—that was their actual goal! https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/14/politics/trump-controversial-cabinet-picks/index.html Trump’s latest round of Cabinet announcements stunned much of Washington. But the hair-raising nature of Trump’s picks was intended to be a feature, not a bug, say people briefed by the team. “People being in a state of shock was the goal, that’s exactly what the MAGA gang wants,” said one Trump ally, requesting anonymity to discuss private deliberations with the president-elect’s team. “They want people who are a total challenge to the system.”

Do you mean "his court", the people like Stephen Miller and Elon Musk who buzz around Trump at the White House? Or do you mean "the Court", as in the justices? Because I think the Court could easily reinterpret the law and the Constitution to neuter Congress or even the President and make themselves truly supreme. Who's going to stop them? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? They have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom etc. etc. etc.

I have a Football 101 question here: just how legitimate is the idea of Goff, or any other quarterback, having a "perfect game" based on QB rating? I get that Goff had a rating of 158.3 this past Sunday, and that's "perfect", but is it really perfect? Sure, he threw for a lot of yards and a bunch of touchdowns, but what makes it "perfect", other than an arithmetic calculation? After all, he didn't complete all his passes. In fact, when you review the list of all the QBs who have had "perfect games", which has now happened 86 times, literally every one of them had at least one incomplete pass, and a couple of them whiffed on seven of their passes. And Rich Gannon was said to have had a "perfect game" in 1992 against the Lions, when he went 8-for-10 for 146 yards and 2 TDs. Doesn't seem like quite a standing ovation-type of performance. This isn't so much me asking for help understanding how the calculation works, or why the calculation came to be what it is. My real question is, do you buy the idea of "perfect" in this case?

So who's the lady at the end of the two bottom videos? Is her breaking into NFL videos a known thing I'm just now learning about?

One thing Scott will absolutely positively not do is outright Tork, at least before he reaches free agency. We on the board may be down with him, but he’s not worthless to the market yet.

Yes, and then, what do we do after a year? What’s the plan at first base? The one distinct downside to signing a first baseman is that it tanks the market for Tork. That may not be the absolute worst outcome, necessarily, but If we’re going to risk that, then I’ll want something more than an older copy of Tork for a single year.

They don’t seem like the egg white type, so yolk’s definitely on them.

The projection is strong. Someone accusing another of something there is no evidence for is frequently a cover for that someone’s misdeeds. And the louder the accusations, the more blatant their own misdeeds. There must be a Murphy’s law that contemplates that.

The crime is dissent, and it will be seen whether that means merely exile, or something more.

Joke's on them—eggs ain't coming down in price.

Ick.

Do we even have time to wait for that to happen? I don't think our window is very short, necessarily, but I wouldn't want to waste any of it on a substandard player at a position who's costing us three or four or five wins a year. The $64 question is, is Tork done done as far as we're concerned? I think I'd be a little surprised if we gave him all the way through his arb years to break out of the sub-1.0 WAR ghetto he's been in.

So all of a sudden Trump is a light, cheery, jolly soul that everybody loves and wants to emulate now? Barf.

They apparently have a protected religious liberty to force children to watch Christian videos and pray Christian prayers during class in schools that are supported by taxpayers who are not Christian or religious.