I know that to some degree the no-hitter is a statistical fluke, not an indicator of much besides one pitcher having a good night and one team having a bad night. But I still love them. Even if the next start, the pitcher who tossed the no-no is likely to be a lot more mortal, as Mr. Musgrove showed.
Mets still just barely doing much with the bats, outside of Nimmo and Dom Smith, but I always prefer starting pitching doing its thing. Today we have a scheduled day game, but it's going to rain again.
At the end of the day, I can't really say I care much about the Wilpons being conned by Madoff. Unlike many, they didn't lose everything, and I don't know how much sympathy I have when rich people lose money but are still rich. Madoff's biggest crime wasn't making the Mets mediocre. It was taking the endowment of my alma mater, Yeshiva University, and swallowing it whole in his ponzi scheme. A lot of Jewish and NYC nonprofits were harmed badly by his deeds, and unlike the Wilpons, there is no way to sell your charity to recoup your loses. He was the worst.
I read LA Confidential at some point and didn't care much for it. I suspect that many of the flaws you point to weighed on me at some level. I haven't read any more Ellroy. But some years later, I saw the movie, having forgotten I read the book, and loved it. The seeds of a great story were in place, but needed to be edited in some way. And maybe also handed to a stellar cast (his crimes aside, I rarely like Kevin Spacey but liked him here, God help me, and I still don't know why Guy Pearce isn't as big as star as Russell Crowe).
1. The Twins continue to free fall. Local press is on Sano, and sure, he's an easy and legit target. But it looks more like a roster problem. Eddie Rosario has hit more-than-OK for Cleveland so far, including 2 HRs. Maybe the team shouldn't have cheaped out and cut him.
2. "Wet my beak" is one of the greatest sleaze phrases ever written. Conveys everything in 3 words. Genius.
Just as we all expected, the Nats win the series behind the pitching of stalwarts Erick Fedde and Joe Ross and drop the start of unproven journeyman Stephen Strasburg.
I think it's great MLB is testing a mound move. But wouldn't it be easier if the pitcher just threw from second base? That way if the DH strikes out, all foul balls can count as fair until the seventh inning.
Seriously, isn't MLB/Manfred messing with the "action/reaction" elements of the game? Isn't there a larger and longer process here in which batters will be forced to hone their mechanics, improve reaction time and increase swing speeds? It seems to me these changes disturb the natural evolution of the game in the name of instant gratification. I'm a fan of leaving well enough alone, I guess.
All I want is a) for the the Phils to finish above .500 and b) to remember to put the coffee pot in the coffee maker when brewing coffee. Why are the Mets doing this? Could they try a little less hard to win?
PS I would also like the lipstick I ordered to arrive. And maybe world peace and an end to voter suppression.
Gambling in sports seems to really get under your skin, Craig. But it seems inevitable that it will become a more prominent feature of sports consumption. You know this but you can't help but fight back and attack it every chance.
Completely disagree with your take on the Double-Hook. How often do relievers currently bat in the NL? Once or twice a week, if that? This is what you’d be adding to the AL, while completely eliminating starting pitchers batting in the NL. I feel like you were hunting for a reason to dislike this rule change, and ended up with something that didn’t really exist.
In fact, you made an argument in favor of the Double-Hook while discussing the mound move. Some AL teams are currently carrying 12 batters and 14 pitchers, since there’s almost no need for a bench. (And one of those batters is the backup catcher!) By needing a bench to deal with all the late-game pinch-hitting & double-switching, you’d be cutting down on the number of available relievers, which in theory would make relievers work more often and pace themselves more.
Social activists and Democrats are using controversial political issues to subvert and manipulate corporations and it seems to be working to some degree. But corporations are adept at assimilating culture fads and events, making them mainstream and neutralizing them. Americans are wholly dependent on big business for everyday life and ultimately accept whatever corporations give them.
This may be nothing more than a slight rewording of Craig's point about looking at rule changes through the dual lens of (a) what problem are we addressing and (b) will this work ... but my approach is that nearly any change must start from "what level of scoring do we want?" before moving to "what style of scoring do we want?"
Moving the mound back, without any other changes, will almost certainly increase scoring. We can get someone like Alan Nathan to give a precise formula, but pitches will be slower and less well targeted if they are thrown farther. Do we really want more runs per game? Some data:
Scoring per team:
This year: 4.43
Last 10 years: 4.42
Last 20 years: 4.55
Peak Selig era ('95-'00): 4.95
1980s: 4.29
1970s: 4.15
1960s: 4.05
1950s: 4.45
Jackie-Today: 4.40
Personally, I would like to see us stay at the present level of scoring, a level that is almost exactly what has been the norm for the lifetime of nearly anyone reading this.
I don't like the style of scoring, but the changes other than Ks, aren't nearly as dramatic as the chattering class would have us believe. Truncated version of similar data
The legislation to have MLB reimburse Georgia is one more data point showing that the leagues simply use better lawyers than do cities and states. If there was a contract for MLB to hold the ASG in Cobb County, the tax payers could be reimbursed for a breach. But if I hear an announcement that Acme Dynamite is going to build a new Roadrunner destroying plant next door and I spruce up my Coyote Emergency Vet Clinic in anticipation, I don't get to sue Acme if they decide to relocate to the desert.
We saw a small example of this when Cobb County was shocked - shocked I tell you! - that they were obligated to provide security and police protection at the new stadium, a cost that wasn't included in county budgets as they didn't read the documents closely enough.
“American Tabloid” is a goddam masterpiece. I went on a similar journey as you with Ellroy in the mid-90’s, but I tapped out on him about 50% into “The Cold Six Thousand.” I’ve always suspected that the progression of his novels reflects the degree to which he was actually being edited. Ellroy isn’t alone in this, there are plenty of established writers, filmmakers (cough-Tarantino-cough), etc, who, in the later stages of their successful careers, would greatly benefit from actual editing. Ellroy is probably the most racist, though.
Tying the Starter Pitcher to the DH seems designed to kill the concept of the opener. You could lose the DH before he even bats.
I know that to some degree the no-hitter is a statistical fluke, not an indicator of much besides one pitcher having a good night and one team having a bad night. But I still love them. Even if the next start, the pitcher who tossed the no-no is likely to be a lot more mortal, as Mr. Musgrove showed.
Mets still just barely doing much with the bats, outside of Nimmo and Dom Smith, but I always prefer starting pitching doing its thing. Today we have a scheduled day game, but it's going to rain again.
At the end of the day, I can't really say I care much about the Wilpons being conned by Madoff. Unlike many, they didn't lose everything, and I don't know how much sympathy I have when rich people lose money but are still rich. Madoff's biggest crime wasn't making the Mets mediocre. It was taking the endowment of my alma mater, Yeshiva University, and swallowing it whole in his ponzi scheme. A lot of Jewish and NYC nonprofits were harmed badly by his deeds, and unlike the Wilpons, there is no way to sell your charity to recoup your loses. He was the worst.
I read LA Confidential at some point and didn't care much for it. I suspect that many of the flaws you point to weighed on me at some level. I haven't read any more Ellroy. But some years later, I saw the movie, having forgotten I read the book, and loved it. The seeds of a great story were in place, but needed to be edited in some way. And maybe also handed to a stellar cast (his crimes aside, I rarely like Kevin Spacey but liked him here, God help me, and I still don't know why Guy Pearce isn't as big as star as Russell Crowe).
1. The Twins continue to free fall. Local press is on Sano, and sure, he's an easy and legit target. But it looks more like a roster problem. Eddie Rosario has hit more-than-OK for Cleveland so far, including 2 HRs. Maybe the team shouldn't have cheaped out and cut him.
2. "Wet my beak" is one of the greatest sleaze phrases ever written. Conveys everything in 3 words. Genius.
Just as we all expected, the Nats win the series behind the pitching of stalwarts Erick Fedde and Joe Ross and drop the start of unproven journeyman Stephen Strasburg.
(Can’t predict ball, man.)
I think it's great MLB is testing a mound move. But wouldn't it be easier if the pitcher just threw from second base? That way if the DH strikes out, all foul balls can count as fair until the seventh inning.
Seriously, isn't MLB/Manfred messing with the "action/reaction" elements of the game? Isn't there a larger and longer process here in which batters will be forced to hone their mechanics, improve reaction time and increase swing speeds? It seems to me these changes disturb the natural evolution of the game in the name of instant gratification. I'm a fan of leaving well enough alone, I guess.
All I want is a) for the the Phils to finish above .500 and b) to remember to put the coffee pot in the coffee maker when brewing coffee. Why are the Mets doing this? Could they try a little less hard to win?
PS I would also like the lipstick I ordered to arrive. And maybe world peace and an end to voter suppression.
I saw jerking off to hate crimes open for Industrial Shithouse at Wembley.
Gambling in sports seems to really get under your skin, Craig. But it seems inevitable that it will become a more prominent feature of sports consumption. You know this but you can't help but fight back and attack it every chance.
Completely disagree with your take on the Double-Hook. How often do relievers currently bat in the NL? Once or twice a week, if that? This is what you’d be adding to the AL, while completely eliminating starting pitchers batting in the NL. I feel like you were hunting for a reason to dislike this rule change, and ended up with something that didn’t really exist.
In fact, you made an argument in favor of the Double-Hook while discussing the mound move. Some AL teams are currently carrying 12 batters and 14 pitchers, since there’s almost no need for a bench. (And one of those batters is the backup catcher!) By needing a bench to deal with all the late-game pinch-hitting & double-switching, you’d be cutting down on the number of available relievers, which in theory would make relievers work more often and pace themselves more.
Social activists and Democrats are using controversial political issues to subvert and manipulate corporations and it seems to be working to some degree. But corporations are adept at assimilating culture fads and events, making them mainstream and neutralizing them. Americans are wholly dependent on big business for everyday life and ultimately accept whatever corporations give them.
This may be nothing more than a slight rewording of Craig's point about looking at rule changes through the dual lens of (a) what problem are we addressing and (b) will this work ... but my approach is that nearly any change must start from "what level of scoring do we want?" before moving to "what style of scoring do we want?"
Moving the mound back, without any other changes, will almost certainly increase scoring. We can get someone like Alan Nathan to give a precise formula, but pitches will be slower and less well targeted if they are thrown farther. Do we really want more runs per game? Some data:
Scoring per team:
This year: 4.43
Last 10 years: 4.42
Last 20 years: 4.55
Peak Selig era ('95-'00): 4.95
1980s: 4.29
1970s: 4.15
1960s: 4.05
1950s: 4.45
Jackie-Today: 4.40
Personally, I would like to see us stay at the present level of scoring, a level that is almost exactly what has been the norm for the lifetime of nearly anyone reading this.
I don't like the style of scoring, but the changes other than Ks, aren't nearly as dramatic as the chattering class would have us believe. Truncated version of similar data
Batting Average
Last 10 .252
Last 20 .258
Post Jackie .258
Walk per game per team
Last 10 3.1
Last 20 3.2
Post Jackie 3.3
K/9/team
Last 10 8.0
Last 20 7.3
Post Jackie 5.8
HR/9/team
Last 10 1.1
Last 20 1.1
Post Jackie 0.9
SB/9/team
Last 10 0.6
Last 20 0.6
Post Jackie 0.6
The legislation to have MLB reimburse Georgia is one more data point showing that the leagues simply use better lawyers than do cities and states. If there was a contract for MLB to hold the ASG in Cobb County, the tax payers could be reimbursed for a breach. But if I hear an announcement that Acme Dynamite is going to build a new Roadrunner destroying plant next door and I spruce up my Coyote Emergency Vet Clinic in anticipation, I don't get to sue Acme if they decide to relocate to the desert.
We saw a small example of this when Cobb County was shocked - shocked I tell you! - that they were obligated to provide security and police protection at the new stadium, a cost that wasn't included in county budgets as they didn't read the documents closely enough.
My wife and I watch LA Confidential on Christmas night every year. It's a Christmas movie
“American Tabloid” is a goddam masterpiece. I went on a similar journey as you with Ellroy in the mid-90’s, but I tapped out on him about 50% into “The Cold Six Thousand.” I’ve always suspected that the progression of his novels reflects the degree to which he was actually being edited. Ellroy isn’t alone in this, there are plenty of established writers, filmmakers (cough-Tarantino-cough), etc, who, in the later stages of their successful careers, would greatly benefit from actual editing. Ellroy is probably the most racist, though.
Okay, Craig, noted: if you start wearing Hawaiian shirts and riding motorcycles, we can crowd-fund the intervention.