Jake

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Apr 15, 2013 -> 11:18 PM) I'm no terrorist, but wouldn't Al-Qaeda WANT to claim any event like this as their own? Isn't a perfect scenario for them one in which they can credit for an American attack, become feared and perceived as powerful and still relevant, and yet they didn't have to do anything at all? It just seems to me that we can't believe them if they claim they were responsible for this. They may have hesitated to claim past events like 9/11 at first because they didn't want plans in the immediate future to be sniffed out by the intelligence. As a terrorist group, you can only get the desired effects by eventually having credit, but you may want to control as much information as you can to keep your operations secure. This is basically the source of the problems with the Benghazi scandal, where the CIA wouldn't let the full story go out right away because it would have given away their wiretaps on those responsible. They had to wait until there was plausible deniability that they had obtained the full story by other means/no longer needed those wiretaps for intelligence gathering.

One has to wonder if he's being "guarded" because he in fact needs protection from people who might accuse the Arab man near the scene of being responsible.

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 15, 2013 -> 06:48 PM) Wait, he's trying not to swing at anything at the knees? Sounds like a stupid approach for someone who's notorious for being a low ball hitter. I've never found him to be a good low ball hitter. Outside and low sure, but he's worthless low and in where most lefties are. He hits belt high pitches best, which is why he's a mistake hitter.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 15, 2013 -> 12:24 PM) But all of those things take effort and cost money. Making those kind of evaluations takes people time and money, and so you get to choose which thing you want...do you want effective evaluations, do you want money in the classroom, or do you want higher taxes? The reason why people want to do this with just standardized tests is that it's easy. You put a pile of documents into a grading machine, plug the data into Excel, and 5 minutes later you know who to fire. Certainly, there is a convenience factor. Being cost effective can be a plus, of course, if you're using the tests wisely. I'm happy to have more money going into education, whether that involves higher taxes or maybe just taking some money from the Defense Department.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 15, 2013 -> 10:09 AM) Well you need to separate out what your testing and measuring: individual students, individual schools or individual teachers. Standardized tests are fine for diagnostic measurements of students, but I don't know that there's much evidence or support behind them being at all useful for evaluating schools or teachers. You don't need to have a replacement data-gathering method to abandon one that you know doesn't actually give you meaningful results. I think you can potentially evaluate all of those things -- but what is unavoidable of course, is confusing cause and effect. This is why you have other measures. We might see a teacher with a poorer performing class than others at his/her grade level, but before the conclusion is made that the teacher performed poorly, internal observations would need to confirm that. Was the teacher assigned students equitably? Is the teacher evaluated well in observation? Was the teacher qualified in the first place? etc.

I don't love standardized testing, but I absolutely desire some uniform measures to evaluate schools. We can't decide whether a school is in need of reform, attention, whatever, when we're just going by feel or extremely subjective and variable grades. I'm always sympathetic to the idea that we could end or reduce the power given to standardized testing, but I've never heard of a good alternative with which we can evaluate schools. EDIT: SS's quoted post seems fairly reasonable.

I'm not going to get caught up in sample sizes.

Feels dirty.

I lol'd at that quote, but he definitely has that killer instinct. I don't doubt for a second that he's pre-emptively pissed off about people questioning his eventual comeback.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Apr 13, 2013 -> 06:12 AM) Do you work in law somehow? That was an excellent breakdown. Sure don't. I could only dream of being like my heroes Badger and jenks

I think many arguing on Q's behalf are peeved by the fact that the media have tried to paint this as a "this is totally Carlos Quentin's fault" situation. First of all, intent is not the only factor here. You shouldn't be hitting batters, whether you can control yourself or not. Injuries have cost CQ countless millions and he has a right to be pissed off when people hit him with a pitch, whether he's good at getting out of the way or not. Hitting people with pitched balls, intentional or no, isn't a guiltless offense. Q starts walking toward Greinke -- this is where most interpret that he is to blame. This was certainly a step in escalation, after the hit batsman situation was the first. When Q walked toward the mound, it should have been over. This is when Greinke says something -- an "expletive," something bad -- and Q can no longer contain himself. His plans change at this moment, deciding to attack Greinke. This is not great thinking by CQ, but also represents an escalation on the part of Greinke. Greinke doesn't back off, try to take a glancing blow, but instead lowers his shoulder in an apparent attempt to go tit for tat in the upcoming collision. This is where Greinke is totally stupid. He actually would have been better off to receive the collision fully than resist. The "smart" thing was putting his left side forward, but that also earned him a broken collarbone. Despite CQ's rage, Greinke could have done things to diffuse the situation or at least minimize his own risk. It still seems flukey that he breaks the collarbone though, even though collarbone breaks always seem flukey since they are so easy to have happen. This is just two guys that lost their tempers and got into a fight. I don't know if Greinke lost it before or after the pitch that hit CQ, but I don't really care. It isn't fair that CQ has been completely villified as the only belligerent in the situation. Pay grade and body mass are the main considerations in these arguments. QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 09:28 PM) Ahhh, the curse of my fantasy team begins! Poor Jose, he looked poised for an awesome season in TOR. I avoided him like the plague because of his injury history. One of the bittersweet moments of being right, since someone has to suffer when you accurately predict something gloomy. It's too bad, because he is really an excellent player.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 11:18 AM) And then dropping the ball or falling down and letting the other team intercept He was still a valuable player.

LOL at the foul call on that defensive rebound.

QUOTE (Cali @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 06:12 PM) "Conner" and "Conor" are pronounced the same way. ???

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 09:24 PM) I'm gonna miss Nate He's a ton of fun. I hope we find a way to keep him around.

So...Rip Hamilton is supposed to suck? +14 tonight and leading the comeback. I like when his 5 games played per year are good.

What a play Hector! Where was Hawk on that call?

Dunn looked fine on that, somehow.

12 hits gets us 4 runs in 6 innings

Nice hack, Hector

QUOTE (flavum @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 08:12 PM) Looks like they'll have to squeeze in a doubleheader on May 13. This series starting tomorrow looks dry enough, but cold. Should quiet the bats enough to freak Soxtalk out

QUOTE (Capn12 @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 08:08 PM) Ah damn...the pitcher hitting is so ignorant, I forgot about it totally. I guess we do have to deal with it next inning, so Santiago won't be pitching long either way. Stupid N.L. baseball Indeed, I assume this is why we were trying to squeeze another out of Axelrod. It would have saved an inning of Santiago if we had another batter come up

QUOTE (fathom @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 08:00 PM) Infield defense will be fine, I'm not so sure Gillaspie can't contribute as much offensively as Beckham. Hell, I'd love to see Gillaspie hit well enough to bat 2nd vs RHP. I'd be shocked if Gillaspie isn't more valuable offensively than Gordon.

There are few circumstances where I pull my starter in the fourth inning before he's given up a run in that inning. EDIT: The mistake here is having him starting in the first place, and I have a feeling Robin has less say in that than we think. The GM will have a huge say in that, as well as the pitching coach. Hard to say whose vision it was for Axe to be in the rotation.

Needed innings from Dylan, not mad at Robin. Taking out your starter in the fourth inning is tough business. Shame on Dylan for throwing over the middle of the plate so much. Hope this is the last we see of him this year.