chasfh

They’re obviously AI paid actors giving fake news endorsements.

And the frosting on that cake is that weed and abortion are on the Florida ballot.

I don't necessarily agree, but this is a defensible post.

How was I to know, Kamala, that you were with the Iranians, too?

Thanks for the link. Yeah, they had a emotionally-starved and structure-free childhood, and that's very sad. Also, I am seeing Dweezil in concert at the Riv next Wednesday.

The real question is, is he gaining more people with his schtick than he's losing people with it, or losing more than gaining with it? What's the net change in which direction?

From the story: "Mr. Trump has a history of claiming he will provide evidence to back up his claims but ultimately not doing so." This has always been a schtick of his: make a claim, say you have evidence, get the claim in the paper, then drop the subject assuming just getting it into the paper will be enough to convince people. This has worked for a lot of years because it's a tactic we'd rarely seen before in this country, so people weren't sophisticated enough to catch on. But we're getting smarter, Trump knows it, and he's sing-songing his way to irrelevance this November.

Well, he is a young guy and at the assistant level, so he probably has fewer barriers now than he will a decade from now.

So I just had an opportunity to have a brief exchange with a fella named Josh Ruffin, who works in analytics for the Minnesota Twins (I am up here for a conference). I asked him, the information we can access on Baseball Savant, how close is that to the information they have in-house at the Twins, and is there a huge chasm? And to my surprise he replied that the Savant information is not all that far away from what they use. He specifically mentioned that the bat speed data that was recently added to Savant by Baseball was released to the teams and to the public at the same time. And of course, they have greater depth of information, such as Savant information for Dominican Rookie League, that we don’t, and they also have additional things that are proprietary such as biomechanics, which itself may come to Savant in a few years. But by and large, the information on a player’s Savant card is really close to the information they use, and he even said he occasionally looks up an opposing player’s publicly-available Savant card to get a quic overview on the guy.

That satanic thing at the end. Nothing that happened in the move prepared me for the fantasy sequence. And since I don't believe in Satan, I don't buy that's who he always was.

In fact, when I get a low liner like that, something that is about shin high, speaking only for myself, I've found that I am more successful if I slide down unto my knees, like kneeling, and catch it about belt high at that point, versus diving forward for it like Vilade did. But that's just a personal defenisve quirk.

It's not just major league fields, either. I played a hardball league championship in the Schaumburg Boomers stadium maybe a dozen years ago, and standing in left field, what startled me as how far back the backstop was from the plate. It completely ****ed my depth perception, and I had a really hard time judging balls hit to me because I simply wasn't used to the depth. On your question, though, I might put it in terms of probability percentage for the play Vilade just missed. An average major league makes that play maybe 95% of the time; an average AAA makes it maybe 80%, average AA maybe 70%, and so on. An average D1 guy makes it maybe maybe 40% of the time. I could make that play maybe one in five. I could be completely all wet on the numbers, but that's how I would frame the difference in this particular case.

Yes, this generation of very rich and powerful doesn't want "win win", and they don't even want "win". They want "win lose" because they want to vanquish and humiliate the opponents-cum-enemies. Humiliate is a big part of it because they are the Mortal Kombat generation.

If I had seen you post something like this ten or twelve years ago, I would have thought someone hacked your MTS account. 😉

All due respect, let's make sure Trump loses this election first, then let's contemplate this. Because first things first, or it won't matter.

I can vouch for this firsthand. Vilade made the right play, he simply botched it because he is not major league good.

This is definitely not implausible.

While on-duty at taxpayer expense?

Meaning he’s taken the loot and skipped town?

This is definitely J.D.’s biggest sin. Dead man walking.

If those are the three guys, they’d need to figure out whether Riley could cover the vast expanse as well as Parker, so they move Parker to right. If Parker is way better patrolling left, then they might have to live with Riley in right. If Max is a five-tool player, then by definition he has a strong arm.

He might end up moving to left for Max Clark.

It's true that CF has priority, but if the RF is camped under it, CF should not make him move just because he calls it once. That what the reaffirming call is about. I get that it sounds too complicated, but it works.

I don't rate her terrible for voting against the infrastructure bill. If she also said something objectionable about it in the process, though, I'd reconsider that. I haven't seen where she classifies Jews and "good" or "bad". I do remember about the "all about the Benjamins" comment and she was raked as antisemitic for that—is that what you're talking about? Because that comes from a hip hop song that to my knowledge has nothing to do with antisemitism.

The center fielder must take control if he is certain he has the ball, especially if he is right under it. The etiquette is, if CF calls the ball first, it’s his. If RF calls it first and CF says nothing, it’s RF. If RF calls it first then CF calls it, RF has a choice of yielding, or reaffirming a second time “I’m on it!”, meaning, he is basically right under the ball right then which, if he is, he should be allowed to catch it. Then, if CF calls it a second time over RF, RF must peel away even if he is under it, moving to his left to avoid the collision. But really, if RF calls it, CF calls it, and RF reaffirms, then CF really should peel off at that point. There should not be a big ****-waving fight over the fly ball. Am I making sense?