caulfield12

Hulk the Red Haired Viking...yours sounds too much like Mandy Patinkin.

Palka and Narvaez are the most pleasant surprises on the position side.

But also Madrigal, hitting sixth. Nevertheless, probably yet another NC rainout tonight.

850 would be much better, but the biggest issue all season has been the pitching.

Madrigal already has the best fundamentals in the entire organization. Merrifield is a better comp, with a big less pop. Barney was only a decent hitter for one season, or 1 1/2 years.

Phillips was halfway or 2/3rds of the way to third when the ball was caught... So the ball wasn't caught but Dozier left the field?

No, he wasn’t that high on Madrigal for most of the draft watch...

How can Phillips be on 3rd if he didn’t tag up?

Almost 700 at bats and likely to fall by 0.1 after today’s debacle....

Stick a fork in him. And if Hahn’s not smart enough to read the writing on the wall, he should be gone, too.

Bullpen was going to blow it anyway. 1 back for second pick. That curveball the ump missed set up the homer, but whatever. Started out 7-3 against KC, likely to be 7-6 now. Reel them in, baby!

Dozier is a waste because he will be too old in 2021-23....and he’s much better suited for playing second than third.

Kipnis and Brantley, A. Miller and Cody Allen.....but they still have the core members of that starting staff, not to mention Lindor and Ramirez alone making them quite dangerous. As long as they don’t have any major pitching injuries, the division is theirs for the taking, at least one more year and probably two left to go. https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/cleveland-indians/yearly/payroll/

Ozzie on the Score this AM said he disagreed about pulling Anderson for lack of hustle, would hold back Jimenez debut until September 1st. Three called strike threes for Moncada, now leading all of baseball in K’s. Sigh.

Pham would have cost a lot for an outfielder who basically forced his way out complaining about playing time the last three years, then followed it up with an MVP type year...followed by Moncada’s numbers this year. On the wrong side of the aging curve, too. Who would you have been willing to trade for him? Avilan or Cedeno can still go. Frye’s value has eroded, obviously. And Abreu/Avi have been subprime assets that can easily go over the offseason or trade deadline next year. They still might be wavering on keeping Avi if he can rebound...stay healthy...and be somewhere between his 17 and 18 numbers. His asking price for a three to four year deal has to be much lower, as well.

His lack of concentration and focus on defense the last two months would be one big reason, and concern about ever hitting over .200 against lefties.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/08/01/qanon-trump-rally-foreman-lead-pkg-vpx.cnn Q-Anon leaps to the top of Trump conspiracy pushers...

They could have traded Abreu and given you Skole or Delmonico every day for the remainder of the season at 1st.

They should all give fans an In-N-Out Burger when they leave the park for each home loss by more than 3 runs...bring in 5 food trucks and a massive prep crew from the West Coast.

Chris Volstad’s family should be out picketing at the front gate tmrw, lol...

Another Cubs’ World Series title might be the absolute bottom before the Era of These Kids Can Play III begins in earnest.

Need more pitchers who can excel up in the strike zone and fight back against the trend of severe uppercut swings (especially LHB)...Covey five years too late.

LEO PANITCH: All the more frustrating. But it also indicates that he’s sitting on top of the Democratic Party and a Democratic Party establishment that is very much part of the problem. PAUL JAY: And he’s very much involved in actively managing- I was saying off camera, I’ve been told by many people who know the story that when Perez was fighting with Keith Ellison for being head of the DNC, Obama was actively working the phones to defeat Keith Ellison. Did not want the progressive candidate to be head of the DNC. So he’s not just out there as, you know, [inaudible] and all this. He’s, he’s in the pits fighting. And Thomas Frank, the author who did What Happened to Kansas, he made an interesting comment in one of our interviews where he says, you need to understand, the corporate Democrats don’t dislike the left of the party. They hate the left of the party. Yes. And this is because this is a class contradiction. It’s not just some difference of opinion. LEO PANITCH: Well, it’s because they’ve decided that they’ve got to be pragmatic with capital. They need to live with capital. They think that socialism is a bad thing. They think that capitalism is the best of all possible worlds. Although they think you can- stupidly, they think it can be a humane capitalism. PAUL JAY: Well, actually, let me, let me play a clip of Obama right here, that he speaks to the point you’re just making. BARACK OBAMA: But we can learn from the last 70 years that it will not involve unregulated, unbridled, unethical capitalism. It also won’t involve old-style command and control socialism from the top. That was tried. It didn’t work very well. For almost all countries, progress is going to depend on an inclusive market-based system. One that offers education for every child. That protects collective bargaining, and secures the rights of every worker. That breaks up monopolies to encourage competition in small and medium-sized businesses. And has laws that root out corruption, and ensures fair dealing in business. That maintains some form of progressive taxation. So that rich people are still rich, but they’re giving a little bit back to make sure that everybody else has something, to pay for universal health care, and retirement security, and invest in infrastructure and scientific research that builds platforms for innovation. It involves promoting an inclusive capitalism both within nations and between nations. PAUL JAY: So this seems to be the nub of the problem with President Obama. The rich, and one should say the super rich, can still be rich and super rich. And if only they give up a little everything will be OK. LEO PANITCH: You know, I keep referring to these guys as pragmatists. And it’s true, they are. That that’s what drives them. They’re pragmatic, unlike me and you who are, indeed, idealists. That said, you listen to those words and you think, what a romantic. What an idealist. You cannot have what he’s talking about within capitalism. The room for reform within the system as it’s evolved does not allow for that any more. That is what one needs to learn. And we’ve seen the failure not only of his but of Blair’s and the Third Way’s politics, of Schroder’s, et cetera. Of a whole range of them who said that we can have all these things while riding with the wind of global competition and accumulation. And that’s simply proven not to be the case. And much of his speech makes that case. So for him to then turn around and say, well, we want to have all these things within an inclusive capitalism, there’s no grounds for it. He’s standing on no ground. And in that sense, I think the fact that he points to how this has all evolved in such an ugly way, in my view this actually helps make the case of the socialist left. Moreover, insofar as he says we’ve tried top-down socialism and it didn’t work, that leaves space to say, well, we haven’t tried bottom-up socialism. We tried social democracy, but we haven’t tried democratic socialism. We’ve tried authoritarian communism, but we haven’t tried democratic socialism. And the first thing we need to do in democratic socialism is turn the financial system into a public utility. The second thing we need to do is fundamentally transform the institutions of the state so they aren’t organized and structured so as to reproduce private property, and reproduce the power of the very people that he says are the greedy bastards they are. So I think one can do something with this. And I think- you know, we were saying this off-camera as well. His rhetoric in the run up to the 2008 election, and then the disappointment that it was already felt by 2010, is what I think contributed to creating Occupy. And what created Occupy, since Occupy with its anarchistic impulses meant you could protest forever but not change the world, quickly lead- the bridge was very short- quickly led to the candidacy of a democratic socialist within the Democratic Party that almost turned American politics on its ears as much as the Trump one did. PAUL JAY: But I think the speech and Obama as the preeminent spokesperson for this whole class of meritocracy, and billionaires in the tech sector, and Wall Street who are somewhat liberal; if that class gets to pick the next president after Trump, and again we get lots of nice words over here but even more growing inequality over there because that’s how the system is built, to create such more inequality, then the problem is going to be the next round will be another Trump except this time it won’t be a clown. This time the deep economic crisis, the challenge, the threat of the climate crisis, and the geopolitical rivalries that are being spurred by the current state of capitalism, it’s going to be a far more dangerous situation. Which makes this 2020 election so decisive. https://therealnews.com/stories/obama-says-inequality-led-to-rise-of-the-right-but-takes-no-responsibility-for-it-2-2

Other than Merrifield, they haven’t developed any position players...Cuthbert had an impressive rookie year, then fell back. If Mondesi is for real, it has taken 3-4 years of failure to become a legit starter offensively.

But Getzie left KC for the Sox...!