chasfh

I view this as a question different from, "how many wins did he contribute to?"

Player's individual accomplishments do contribute to run totals, runs do contribute to wins, and there's good research indicating that ten marginal runs contributed by a player results in a win, so I think it's valid to express it in wins.

And she's certainly free to, and she will be shat upon for political reasons and not her loose cannon antics, and we will be one step closer to how the world of politics should run in the first place. No serious person on "teh left" is expecting anything different from her.

Can I just tell you how funny it is that they're trying to hang what MTG did in the service of Trump, MAGA, and the red-hatted rank and file on "teh left", after she specifically repudiated that same behavior that she did on behalf of Trump et al? Talk about lazy.

You mean back when she was a card-carrying MAGA flamethrower? Yes, that checks out.

This is a really underappreciated argument against the efficacy of voter fraud as a potent weapon to steal elections: it's just too damn succeed doing so at a granular level. How do paranoid people actually believe that someone could effectively go from precinct to precinct on Election Day impersonating other people in order to steal their votes in their place? How many could a single person even manage to pull off? Six? Eight at the most? That's nowhere near enough to swing an election that's starting out tilted against you to go your way. Doing that would take a person literally all day long to accomplish. And how many people would you have to enlist in such a scheme to have any chance of swinging an election in a particular jurisdiction away from a sure Republican winner to the Democratic side? Hundreds? Thousands? And multiplied by how many jurisdictions to steal a whole congressional district, or senatorial race, or presidential election? And how could you keep such a conspiracy quiet, never to be found out? They odds against pulling off something like that are so astronomical that it barely rates trying to even seriously calculate it. The whole idea of voter fraud of this type is just so illogical that it crumbles at the merest examination. This is why the concept bottoms-up voter fraud is literally no threat to elections. To cheat at winning elections, you'd need to do it at a scale massive enough to swing the election. Doing so requires top-down elections fraud, the kind people with institutional connection can arrange through dodgy tactics such as mid-term redistricting, or the kind of onerous voter requirements that favor people of means over people without. Elections fraud that neutralizes votes, or that invalidates the ability of a qualified eligible voter to even vote in the first place.

It is, in fact, and institutional form of voter suppression by the party in power for the specific purpose of hurting the out-of-power party at the polls. And that party in power is always the Republicans, and that party out of power is always the Democrats. I challenge anyone to provide an example of when Democrats attempted to enact a voter ID law and the Republicans objected. I'll just wait here.

She's offered her apology and declared her intention. That's a good first step. Now comes the next part: backing up her words with action. That's going to take a lot of work and, frankly, a long time. Probably longer than between now and the election. I won't handicap her chances of succeeding, but I'm willing to give her room to prove it.

I don't have any world.

I get that it's de rigeur here to virtue signal contempt for the New York Times, but this is a really solid piece.

Who the everloving **** is Alex Wilkins?

So you're going to raise prices to include taxes, meaning the number on the menu is going to be higher. Bold move. I honestly hope it works well for you because I'm a big fan of that idea.

I don't know where you're getting this one, but I have told nobody anything of the sort.

Would you please share with us the data you have at your disposal proving the US electoral system is besieged with widespread voter fraud necessitating voter ID laws? None of us can find any. Anything you can share on this, we'd appreciate. Thanks. Also, reminder: anecdotes are not data.

No, it doesn't make sense any more than your supposition that agents never have backchannel conversations with teams because they are afraid of getting caught.

I think you're right on this although I would bet that average minor league fielders are a lot closer to average major league fielders than average minor league hitters are to average major league hitters.

I did not realize that. OK. If they could spool that out to tenth of a point, I could see it being paired with something like oRAR to arrive at something close to what I'm looking for. There may be some fatal flaw in this but I'm probably done thinking about this topic for a while.

WAR is replacement based and DRS is average based so that’s a mismatch. It would be closer to say WAA = oWAA + DRS. I dont know whether that would be the answer either.

So much for Dan Campbell, sooper genius.

We're not actually losing the penny—it will still be legal tender—but rounding cash transactions anyway is probably as good an approach as any at this point. Two questions for you: Why are you choosing to round all transactions down instead of to the nearest? Why round $45.59 down to $45.55 instead of up to $45.60? If you start including the sales tax in the menu prices, will you be raising prices six-plus percent to cover it, or will you be mostly absorbing the difference?

In the absence of any evidence that there is widespread voter fraud stemming from lack of ID requirements, I can only conclude that the real reason people insist we must have vote ID is that they want fewer eligible voters to be able to exercise their constitutional and statutory right, because that helps the party they prefer win.

And there's no punishment for him doing it. And that's that. Neither you nor I can envision how he would get disciplined for it, so I'm having trouble seeing what the problem is. Besides, didn’t you say on the page before this that tampering isn't something that's done by GMs and agents? Isn’t that how this whole sidebar started?

I guess you had to be there. 😏😉

In your example, a GM gets fired, he's bitter, Boras makes millions per year, and ... then what? That's where your hypothetical ends.

What I am talking about is not simply the ability to play the position. It's about the value the player is producing on the field with their actual defense. I get the concept of positional adjustment for a CF over a 1B, that the value of a CF's defense is higher than 1B, because the average CF provides more value than an average 1B, and that a typical CF does more with his defense to win games over a season than a typical 1B does with his defense. That reflects value accrued on the field during games. Understood. I also get that when a team is constructing a roster, a CF who provides better defense provides more value to winning to the team with his hitting that's the same as the 1B's and his position-average defense, than a 1B does to the team with his hitting that's the same as the CF's and his position-average defense. IOW, hitting being equal, the difference reflects that estimated value between the two based solely on each player's defense at their respective positions for the purpose of roster construction. Also understood. What I don't get is the idea of looking back at a DH's defensive contribution, as reported on his card by defensive WAR, as being a negative number, because DHs do not contribute to defense at all during games. Since DHs provide zero defense, the numbers for defense on a DH's card should be zero, or blank, or n/a—take your pick. My understanding of the difference is one of measuring actual defensive performance for the purpose of providing an accounting looking back at the games played, which is what I am talking about, versus the estimation of potential defensive performance for the purpose of constructing a roster looking forward before the games are played, which is what you are talking about. Therefore, I am advocating separating the measurement of defensive runs accrued on the field as a result of actual defense performed, as a backward-looking metric, from defensive runs estimated when constructing a roster, as a forward-looking metric. Does that work for you?