chasfh

Exacerbated by the fact that no one around him can say no to him.

I will say this: he does have slightly above average velocity and well-above average spin. Maybe that's what kept his head off the chopping block. maybe the new team coming in thinks they can do something with that.

Did he? The topline numbers look OK, but he was still a bit ragged under the hood. Low strikeouts, low BABIP, high LD rate, more pull. I simply don’t see how he fit into Harris’s control the plate dictum.

Follow-up tweet:

All due respect, sounds a bit like wishful thinking.

If Brieske is our #2, then kill me now

Meet the new boss … 😉

Matthew Boyd for 10 bills plus incentives? Wow. Um … OK … Hopefully Harris knows something about him we don’t.

Sounds very familiar!

There a long industrial train track tunnel right next to the south side ballpark, and woe to you if you have to walk through it past the multiple bucket drummers encamped there to get to your car after a game, as thousands of people do, unless you’re already deaf.

I think the difference with Africa, with respect to how European nations acted there versus Russia in the Baltics et al, is that Europeans didn’t want to occupy the African land. They wanted to basically enslave the native population to help them extract and then abscond with the natural resources there, so they couldn’t genocide the population there. This, versus certain European nations wanting to wipe out other populations in other European countries so their citizens could take over their lands for a bit more lebensraum.

I think in general it’s because independents are less politically-engaged than those who identify as R or D, and people who are less engaged won’t act if they want things to continue as they are, but they will act if they want things to change. I think that got upended this year as independents were uniquely motivated to keep things as they are.

OK I see how that can make sense from a technical standpoint.

Are you sure? The minute the season ends he’s retired, and the buyout is intended as a negotiated hedge against a team not exercising an option, which I believe becomes a non-factor if he retires. So I don’t understand how he still has a claim on the buyout money.

Since Miggy has announced that he will retire after 2023, does that mean we are no longer on the hook for the $8 million buyout? Seems to me that would be the case.

I would have liked for Candelario to have stayed I think he's a good bet to recover to at least a 2-win player, which is worth seven million bucks. I don't think the lineup is necessarily stronger with Miggy than without him, but I don't know if he's even going to be on the field for much of next season.

Probably goes without saying, but they are obviously locking down people for reasons other than COVID. What they're finding, though, is that there can be a high cost to doing so as even the most pliant population will reach a point where they feel they have little left to lose by pushing back.

It's worth reiterating here that TV and radio stations are bound by FCC rule to offer political advertisers, including candidates, the lowest rate for a given daypart that any advertiser pays that station during the defined campaign season. That might make it sound like political advertisers get dramatic bargains when they buy time, but in reality, it's more of a boondoggle for the stations not because they offer candidates super-deep discounts on rates, but because they get to charge all the other advertisers elevated rates under the guise of not being able to offer their customary rates because it's running during "politicals". It's why we see almost 100% of prime-time local spots being political during the season: few other advertisers can afford to run at those elevated rates. So they either rush into other, cheaper dayparts; shake up their media or station mix for the time being; or just go on hiatus until it's all over. Steady advertisers like QSRs and dealer groups, who run promotional pillars basically 52 weeks a year and can't afford to go dark for even a week, simply budget double-digit CPP increases in the short-term and just deal with it.

Spoiler alert: Fangraphs likes the sign.

This one is a little cleaner ...

Well, as long as we're not "keeping it clean" anymore ... 😏

It’s a little amazing that we even have a version of universal health care for old people, since Ronald Reagan anchored the public conservative position against it more than 60 years ago. They’ve been fighting it on every detail ever since, and had to be shouted over to even get Medicare passed. It was voted down multiple times until LBJ dragged it across the finish line on his coattails in 1965. What’s not as amazing is how it’s been subsequently watered down in the way CMRivdogs has noted.

is it the right answer from Mitch, though? He didn't say he wouldn't support him. He talked only about the party in general terms. He left himself some wiggle room here, I think.

Not at all. I was pushing back on the implication that the reason we do not have European socialism in America today is because ultra-liberals ruined the possibility for us.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but they are definitely not the reason even a little that we don’t have European-style socialism.