Time for a new grill.
Our first three items are actually about baseball. And have also already been linked, but so what.
Latest all-star balloting. Donaldson still has a big lead, Cespedes barely ahead of Melky Cabrera and Adam Jones, Norris still in second. Finishing second to the injured Wieters would not guarantee that Norris gets his spot, but in practice it would make it hard to leave him off the team.
Astros trade discussions leaked.
[Athletics GM Billy Beane] offered [Luhnow] Anderson for two of Deshields, Peacock, Stassi.
“(But please keep Chris Carter)”
And the Royals signed Raul Ibanez. Because they’re the Royals.
Oakland’s home prices are soaring. Which also means property taxes revenues are going up, leaving the city with a $29 Million surplus. No doubt they will spent it wisely.
And now onto the grillitics portion. After all, our blogfathers fought nobly for the right to a blog where we can discuss politics.
Really nothing should surprise me anymore about the decade-plus-long clusterfuck that resulted from invading Iraq, but, still, wow:
Just weeks before Blackwater guards fatally shot 17 civilians at Baghdad’s Nisour Square in 2007, the State Department began investigating the security contractor’s operations in Iraq. But the inquiry was abandoned after Blackwater’s top manager there issued a threat: “that he could kill†the government’s chief investigator and “no one could or would do anything about it as we were in Iraq,†according to department reports.
Who could possibly have predicted that outsourcing a war to accountability-free mercenaries was a bad idea?
And finally (speaking of bad ideas) the Supreme Court has ruled that corporations can have sincerely held religious beliefs. I mean, they are people after all, right?
The always trenchant Charlie Pierce talks about the history of the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” that forms a key part of the ruling, and explains how something that purported to protect a diversity of religious beliefs has instead been used to seemingly give privileged status to just one.
Amy Davidson also explores that angle, while summarizing concisely the main issue I have with the ever-expanding granting of the same rights as individuals have to corporations:
Can a for-profit corporation even have religious beliefs—can it be a person acting out of sacred conviction, in the sense of either the First Amendment or the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (a law Hobby Lobby cites)? Alito doesn’t see why not; it doesn’t seem fair to him that the owners of a business should have to forgo either identifying its religious rights with their own “or the benefits, available to their competitors, of operating as corporations.†But corporations create a legal separation between owners and businesses that protects them in many ways; why is the upside a presumptive right and not any downside?
But (with apologies to our own witch) I’ll give the final word to Ken Jennings:
My corporation was Wiccan for 1-2 yrs after college and would only cover hyssop for purification and yarrow flower to dispel negative energy
— Ken Jennings (@KenJennings) June 30, 2014
yeah, that is not unexpected and so fucked up.
My hope is that there will be so many micro suits over trifles that the whole scheme comes crashing down.
I don’t know enough about it to know if that is possible.
I seems like if I owned a small business, I could call myself an X religious based business and apply for tax exempt status. And I still wonder, despite previous rulings, that if we’re willing to allow businesses tax free status (particularly churches) why those of us (see: all) with religious beliefs shouldn’t receive that as well. Particularly in conjunction with this decision.
BP currently gives the A’s a 98.9% chance of making the playoffs. And there’s this gem:
I know people have widely differing opinions on the meaning or even the desirability of seeing A’s players in the All-Star Game. For me, I am just delighted that this team is being taken seriously enough by a widespread audience to garner such impressive vote totals. Playing the role of underappreciated West Coast no-names was fun for a while, but all things considered I do prefer the admired and feared role. The respect the team and we fans enjoy now is worth some of Lew’s money in the arbitration years, I say.
It means that I may watch more than an inning of the game for the first time since Extrainninggate.
It is nice to get some recognition. Then I read the first list in this and realize that very little has changed.
Worse his is asinine explanation for the list and why some guys are off of it.
you mean
Where the FK is Jeter?
He’s there, didn’t you see “Trout” there? Or should we start calling him God’s Goldfish?
Hobby Lobby invests in birth control and abortion pill pharmaceuticals. Their moral outrage truly is entirely fabricated. They want to control women and make money.
I wouldn’t sign on to that (it’s easy to play the “but you invest in…” game with any organization that carries cash). I would say that the religious beliefs of the owners of Hobby Lobby do not confer religious beliefs on Hobby Lobby
It’s easy to play that game, but that’s probably why most corporations don’t make a habit of suing the government to get out of following a law requiring them to do something that they also invest in.
I’m with BFN here — Hobby Lobby staked out a pretty extreme position re: the contraceptives mandate, so I would expect them to maintain equally extreme positions in other areas.
They didn’t really, they just objected to a few things (which is not to say that I agree at all. I don’t.)
Also, I suspect this winds up hurting their business (I suspect a lot of women there are trying to leave, and women buy the vast majority of their products). So unless I’m way off, that’s at least some indicia.
I’ve read somewhere that HL provided exactly the same things voluntarily pre-Obamacare, which would be evidence they are full of shit. But the investing thing doesn’t strike me as meaningful. Directing investments is actually really hard (unless you actually manage individual stocks, which is crazy), so you can almost always say “organization X invests in industry Y that they dislike”. My church recently tried to avoid that problem, and it just wasn’t feasible.
There are “socially-responsible” mutual fund options, some of which are religion-specific, if this is important. Examples:
Fund ABC “avoids tobacco, alcohol and gambling stocks. It also excludes nuclear power companies and defense contractors, and only invests in companies that meet its standards for social and environmental responsibility.”
Fund XYZ invests in “companies which must pass Catholic values screens and be ‘morally responsible,’ according to the fund’s advisory board. The fund avoids companies with a role in contraception, abortion or stem-cell research and it excludes businesses that donate to Planned Parenthood.”
It’s true that there are niche products, but they’re always frustratingly vague about their requirements (excepting that Catholic one, presumably, but that doesn’t apply) and you’re stuck with the categories that someone else feels like creating.
I don’t endorse the “investing with an agenda” notion. My advice is always keep it simple, be diversified and keep leakage from investment costs to a minimum. For US stock investing that leads you to an S&P 500 fund or a Total Stock Market fund, and sure you own your proportionate share of Exxon Mobil and Walmart in there. I wouldn’t say holding an S&P 500 fund in your 401(k) diminishes your credibility as a liberal. Now going out and buying 1000 shares of Walmart in your brokerage account, that’s a little different.
Right. That’s the only point I’m making. Looking at a diverse investor and saying “ZOMG you invest in BP?!?!? Do you hate the environment?!? You have no credibility on environmental issues” is not persuasive.
Disliking something is not the same thing as filing a lawsuit to destroy it based on moral objections to its very existence. Hobby Lobby’s lawsuit was not founded on some minor gripe; they were arguing that providing contraception is morally unacceptable because it is murder.
yeah, if they are going to make a federal case about something, they best be consistent.
Here is the problem with that… Theoretically it disavows their sincerely held religious beliefs notion, but that wouldn’t prevent some other corporation from presenting the same type of cert case
My wife recently started reviewing books for an industry publication. Today they sent her this upcoming title to review, by a promising debut author:
From an introductory “Dear Reader” letter:
I assume that’s aimed at the middle school audience? Judging the book by its cover, I’d say it reminds me of the Tex Maule books I devoured when I was 12.
Yeah, “middle-grade” is the trade term. It just so happens that my wife (and her agent) are in the process of trying to sell a middle-grade book that involves a lot of baseball. Unfortunately it is harder to get a book contract when you aren’t God’s Puppy.
No other writer credited. It’s amusing to think of Jeter sitting down with his quill and candle and writing a book for tweens.
I’m imagining seeing a lot of Alex Rodriguez in the protagonist. But of course once Alex sees the Error Of His Ways and gets back on the Straight And Narrow he will heroically gets the big hits that lead his team to a come-from-behind World Series victory.
He’s not just writing books…
not gonna click.
I assume its selling jeans
“I’ll just smoke my way onto the 40-man,” he said.
Apparently it works both ways.
Accurate details on terms of A’s new lease.
Proposed new lease. No deal yet:
The current lease still has a year and a half to go. Seems like it would be better for all involved if this weren’t playing out in public.
Is it me or does it seem wrong for the City Council to order each person how to vote? What’s the point of even giving them a vote in that case?
They represent the city. And even if one of them were to get a sudden independent streak and vote yes, the lease needs the approval of the City Council anyway.
That’s common when elected officials are appointed to regional boards. Works the same for reps to the CA League of Cities, or the Asso of Bay Area Govts, etc.
Yes, this is unseemly, and stupid. I would also say that for a guy who absolutely needs a lease extension and has no real other options, Lew Wolff has been incredibly shrewd in identifying and exploiting rifts between the City and County.
Wolff doesn’t necessarily need this lease. If the city/county overplays their hand here, the A’s still have a year and half on their lease, plus a couple of years at ATandT. I’m not saying they will, but MLB does have the power to open up SJ to the A’s. Given Selig has actually spoken up about this one (albeit just as likely for the benefit of Wolff), but he is watching this thing closely. This is just as much a test of city & county’s willingness to capitulate to MLB as it is an attempt to provide the team with some location security. Nearly every other area has thrown money and land at the league (recently Atlanta), so the city/county are already in a poor starting position. Trying to get the better of the team/league may make MLB more willing to move the team (whether that’s SJ or out of town).
MLB has told the A’s to stop fucking around and get a lease extension done. That’s not speculation. Wolff absolutely needs this deal to get done.
Which it will, it’s in everyone’s interests, and that reality will overcome the (admittedly high) stupidity hurdle.
I’ve seen zero evidence that MLB has said anything of the sort to the A’s. Show me a source for that, otherwise it’s pure speculation. And quite frankly, even if they did, showing them his offer, getting their consent to it, then having all of this blow up on the city/county side only supports the notion that he’s given it a good faith effort and it’s failure (to MLB) isn’t on him.
The real issue here isn’t the city/county vs. A’s. The problem is we’re looking at two hydras fighting it out, with each head of each beast having competing wants/needs that contradict each other. Three teams versus two political entities in the midst of an election year just spells pure, unadulterated chaos. And if you’re actually right about them pushing Wolff (which I don’t think you are), that’ll only add more fuel to that chaos, not less. It can get done, but the city/county needs to start acting like adults and Wolff needs to prove his current act of being an adult isn’t merely a tween pretending to be one. And given both their histories, I’m far from certain that either can live up to that.
I know Wolff’s got a long history of saying and doing things that make him come off very immaturely, but it says a whole hell of a lot when he hardly has to do anything to look like the adult in the room compared to what’s going on between the City of Oakland and the County of Alameda right now.
That’s why I suspect it’s more a tween in adults clothing than him acting like an adult. He merely be acting on his best behavior so he can go back to mom & dad and tattle.
And now this:
This is, what, the third time in the last month or so that he has publicly declared that he won’t negotiate any more. Some adult.
It’s basically a message to the City of Oakland that says “Stop jerking the rest of us around,” and at this point I don’t fault him or the A’s for taking that attitude.
The A’s and Alameda County seem fine with the proposed lease. It appears fair enough from what I saw last night, and the City of Oakland continues to push for the best possible deal for themselves.
At some point they all have to make some concessions if this is going to work.
I’m more with andeux on this one. It’s one thing to say “I’m done.” Whole other thing to go public with that attitude. Especially considering this isn’t the first time he’s done so. While I agree with you about the message, keep this shit private and “No Comment” to the media.
There is that.
And yeah, if it takes 14 months to come to a lease proposal that seems well and good and the City of Oakland keeps trying to say “Now wait a minute…” I’m probably going to speak out about it too.
Where has the city been for these past 14 months? And is it really 14 months or does the last 2 or 3 months just feel like 14?
wondering about the terms here. does proposal mean negotiation in this case?
in my world a proposal is unilateral and you present it to someone who may or may not accept it. you can make it palatable for them, but it’s still unilateral in that one side proposes something. so this “we worked on it for 14 months” doesn’t say much to me. (other than you should get better or faster at writing proposals…) then one side presents it, the other side went meh. now the other side makes a counter proposal and negotiation begins. no biggie (if you do it privately like you should).
however, if they’re talking about a negotiation that’s been going on for 14 months and then one side goes oh wait, let me back out entirely and start again… yeah, that seems odd.
so i’m confused because they keep using one word while acting like it’s the other.
It SEEMS like there must have been some back-and-forth going on to arrive at some of the terms that are in it, but I obviously don’t know that for sure.
Except that’s not an accurate or fair account of what has been going on.
There are three parties involved. Just because the team and the County agree to something that’s unfavorable to the City (and FSU has already explained how that’s the case with at least one major issue), there’s no reason that the City should be bullied into accepting it.
My question is why the city hasn’t been more involved to the point that they could have a “final” agreement to vote on without knowing full well that the city isn’t okay with it. It seems to me (and this based without any foundation since we don’t really know) that the city didn’t get involved until after the agreement was made. And that seems both odd and foolish.
Yeah, if that’s the case…very bad.
I don’t think its bad on the city.
they are protecting their interest and they should. They aren’t on a deadline.
If the a’s can’t pay what they owe, they should get nothing and like it
how ’bout a fresca?
It’s bad if negotiations led to the lease as it is now, and the city suddenly waffled.
Again, I don’t know if that’s the case.
Really? That they don’t involve themselves until the last minute to be part of a negotiation that requires their approval wouldn’t be bad on the city? (Assuming it was them not participating and not the other two leaving them out, which is possible). We’re not talking about approving a bad deal. We’re talking about not being involved in the conversation at all.
bad how?
Like they won’t be able to negotiate with the other MLB team that is locating in Oakland?
last minute?
not even close to the last minute in muni time.
they “look” bad?
to who? why does that matter?
Why should they negotiate with an organization that has been in major breech of contract?
It’s poor organization to be in negotiations with someone and have one of the parties not show up to express their views until the other two parties have come to an agreement. If I’m a business looking to potentially get involved with Oakland and see this is how they work, it would absolutely give me pause.
Look, if you *DON’T* want to negotiate with someone, so be it. There’s nothing wrong with that at all. You don’t even need cause not to want to. The very fact that they don’t like the agreement doesn’t bother me in the least bit. It’s absolutely their right and they’re (presumably) doing what’s in their best interests. But if this thing has been going on for 14 months, they could have easily told their reps within the JPA to stop at any time. Just like they could have easily been at the table making whatever demands they have and not allowed it to reach a point where there was any kind of agreement to begin with.
Goddammit Lew. Can you stop fucking the dog just once?
I think Wolff has played his hand rather cunningly in the last month or so. The one thing I’m not sure about was the wisdom of having Selig say the deal was essentially done when it wasn’t. If Selig is in on Wolff’s strategy, all well and good, but if Wolff was faking him out, as well as the public/press, that might not have been wise. Still, Selig hasn’t been much help to Wolff, so risking his displeasure may not be much of a risk.
That’s definitely the part I don’t get. I could understand “leaking” a done deal similar to the other PR gaffs they’ve done by playing this in the media. But having Selig speak about it just seems odd. And like you, I’m not sure I understand the motivation. It’s either a push by Wolff on his behalf which pretty much gains you jack shit, but not beyond his childish stupidity. Or a move by Selig to say “MLB likes this deal, commit and play ball or else” which I’m not sure I buy Selig’s willingness to involve himself in this struggle let alone willingness to “or else” in any part of this.
Assuming anyone shows up to the meeting.
Oakland already plans to nix this one too because they want a lease that’s more beneficial to the city & county. Whether the lease favors the A’s or not is somewhat irrelevant. If you treat it like a contest or a game and play to win, you lose any chance of mending the riff between the city/county and the team. Sometimes the better part of valor is to suck it up and take the hit (so long as it’s not back breaking and these terms aren’t) with an eye towards the future.
I also hope the city reps don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. But it would be easier to do that if the JPA members didn’t have the triple-decker concrete legacy of the last time their predecessors said “oh, what the hell, let’s sign it” staring them in the face every time they show up for a meeting,
Definitely. It’s one thing to be willing to allow the other side to have slightly more favorable terms with an eye towards creating goodwill you can build on in the future. Whole other thing to open up the vault, back up the Brinks truck, leave the keys and go out of town for a few weeks.
GAK!!!
FK. 1st and third no outs, Vogt and lowrie pop up.
NOw freiman has to get a hit.
HBP, still as good as third out for .
well, he didn’t strikout
so, no ones gonna alert me to the Dr. K?
I though we were friends.
high-level education conference materials, like for policy-makers working with the common core, and i quote:
Didn’t know that sticking your finger up your butt was a team event.
Managed by Bob Geren, isn’t it?
If there’s a more appropriate man, I’ve never met ‘im.
Urgent, urgent emergency: Foreigner and Styx tour buses catch fire in Philly. Bands now plan to come sail away to next gigs.
They just rocked too damn hard.
too much hot blood. not enough cold as ice.
Here are the details of the lease that is about to be voted down:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/kal3nx5knk5zb4w/3July2014meeting.pdf
Angels lose.
SILVER LINING!!!
Mark Mulder is live-tweeting his first viewing of “Moneyball:”
He’s gonna be bummed when he finds out he’s not in it.
So, am I getting unduly optimistic to believe that marijuana legalization is really inevitable? I never thought I’d see the day.
I don’t think so (that you’re unduly optimistic). It’s like same-sex marriage though less of a court thing and more of a social push as it’s driving force.
And the more factual examples there are of $$$ from it the more borderline conservatives it pushes over Im sure.
I don’t know about inevitable, but it sure is looking more and more likely. I’m looking forward to seeing this brave new world up close as I’ll be going to CO in a couple weeks, and intend to contribute to those revenue figures.
No, it’ll happen by 2030 or so.
I doubt it goes past 2020.
For federal legalization? I don’t know.
They’re starting to see huge amounts of money that can be gained from it. 5 years may not be quite enough time, but I don’t see it taking much longer than that. Certainly the biggest dominoes towards it should fall by then.
get the door.
If the Democrats take the House and hold the Senate, then sure. Even if a Republican wins the Presidency, I think one Republican can be convinced. But you have faaaaaaaarrrr too many safe Republican seats in the House for the GOP to agree to legalization.
You have to remember that legalization will automatically be seen as a win for Democrats, liberals, progressives, centrists, and even moderate Republicans. The modern Republican Party no longer makes decisions based on anything but political calculus. With a Republican-held house, the rank-and-file simply will not go along with even bringing a legalization bill to the floor, therefore the Speaker won’t bring it to the floor thanks to the Hastert Rule.
You don’t need federal legalization, though, you just need non-criminalization, and let the states decide. Just as there are still alcohol-free cities and counties, I would imagine there’d be plenty of smoke-free jurisidictions.
The recent news that the DEA is formally re-evaluating the Schedule I classification is potentially another important next step for the feds.
Yup. And even Republicans are capable of seeing the value of dollar signs.
Not the kind that get elected to Congress. At least, not marijuana dollar signs.
taint corn.
Oh man, I LOVED Bloom County.
Well, that escalated quickly.
And this: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Selig-permits-A-s-to-leave-Oakland-prompts-last-5598201.php
Selig has basically played his card and is going to force Oakland to accept the lease terms or else.
That is a strangely worded email. What’s with all the quotation marks?
it’s not too many quotes. it’s too few paragraph returns. s/b one after “negotiations.” and one after “MLB.”
otherwise correct for extended quote with ongoing paragraphs. (which are added by the editor. they wouldn’t appear on the original email.) open quotes at the beginning of each paragraph. close quote is only at end of the whole thing.
*which are added = quotations marks, not paragraph breaks.
Yeah, someone butchered the formatting there.
oh minor stuff. probably someone wrote it in word and used tab to make a new paragraph in two cases (my pet typing peeve!), and when they copy/pasted the article the character didn’t translate to web typography.
ie, someone got their thumb nicked by the cold cut slicer at the butcher shop, tops.
Not familiar with using tabs for new paragraphs. But then I try to avoid special formatting where I can because I have to copy to ascii a lot and it really fks things up there when you have non-standard special encoding.
authors / people who only see text in word do it a lot. to them it’s just about getting the next paragraph to start on a new line. FKs me up in conversion all the time. have to make complicated search/replaces to not delete actual tabs used correctly. and have to guess how many tabs mean a single return and how many a double break. only to find out they also hit the space bar 100 times and all other manner of WTFs to fake paragraph returns.
Ooof. Yeah, I know what that’s like. PITA.
What seems weird to me though (besides some of the tortured phrasing) is that it’s not really an extended quote, it’s a reproduction of a written document. It would seem that introducing it as such and using all ital to delineate it from the body of the article would be sufficient, and actually clearer.
(link has changed so i’m going from memory.)
i don’t know the particular rules of all the different styles by heart, but as long as it’s consistent within the work i can live with it. (and i do know that chicago has that as a trump rule. they basically say if you follow the rules strictly but it looks a wild mess, bend the rules to go with consistency. such as the sentence, “there are between twenty and 131 items here,” which IRL should break the official rule and be both in numerals.) so that’s what i saw, the inconsistent bits.
and i don’t know what AP would call for at all. chicago i think would indent the block without quote marks. but sometimes the web brings in HTML workarounds, (is it a pain to do paragraph indents online? hence they did it all in ital?).
and sometimes redundancy is a workaround on ambiguity. like in your thought to do it in only itals… couldn’t itals without quotes (and without indentation) also mean that it was something she wrote that is really, really important? or what if in the middle of her only-italicized block quote, she herself wanted to break in with something really, important to say of her own — how would she signal that?
we’d have to go from content clues to sort that out (ie, when she says, here’s some text i am quoting form an email), and punctuation/format fails when you have to read content first to figure it out. the content should confirm what you already suspect from having glanced at the shape of the thing before you started reading it.
The two things that bother me the most about this is that they’re scrambling to “negotiate” still and how serious is Selig? Part of me wonders if this isn’t still a bluff on MLB’s part. And part of me wonders where they have in mind to move to if it isn’t. SJ’s legal move all but temporarily takes them out of the equation. And if they move to ATandT the concession is likely “out of the bay area.”
My feeling is if the City of Oakland manages to screw this whole thing up when their own vote comes, San Jose will be back on the table with a quickness one way or another.
I’m not so sure on the latter. Unless they drop the lawsuit or win something big in the appeals, they’re still off the table. It’s not terribly much different to the situation Oakland is in. It’s just a different arena.
If Selig suddenly decides Oakland is well and truly dead, it could spell an actual shift in the t-rights issue – that’s my thought.
Of course it’s a bluff. Or at best posturing.
Besides the lawsuit, SJ is irrelevant for the present discussion because
1) Selig (or Manfred, or the committee) is not the one with the power to alter territorial rights. Only a vote of all the owners can do that. That has always been the case.
2) Even if permission for SJ were granted immediately, a new stadium could not possibly be ready for 2016, when the current lease expires, or probably even 2017.
A move outside the area has the same issue: where exactly are they going to play that will be able to accommodate a major league team 21 months from now?
Anyway, they got their vote from the JPA. It wouldn’t surprise me if there is some more grandstanding (from both sides) before this gets Council approval, but one way or another a deal will get done.
You’re forgetting the stadium across the bay. And there has already been talk of that as a potential temporary gig. If push came to shove, that’s where they’d go while they sorted of the rest of it. And the Giants are on record as willing to host (depending on the circumstances). It may still be a bluff, but none of the things you mention have anything to do with it.
I’m sure the Giants would stand to make a nice little profit if the A’s spent any time playing there, so if it came down to it I think that’s what we’d see.
Yup. I’m sure they’ve already stated their demands internally. I’m sure MLB wouldn’t want to meet those demands, but if they were caught between the city & the Giants, they’d hands down take the Giants. They’d be able to control the story and give the appearance of unity.
And the Giants could easily position themselves in public as looking like a good neighbor toward the A’s, whether they like it or not behind the scenes.
ATampersandT has its own problem, which you have already noted yourself: the only reason the Giants might want to make that accommodation would be as a prelude to an A’s move out of the Bay Area altogether (as opposed to a move to SJ).
And despite these “SJ or we will be forced to move elsewhere” threats being made every year or two, Wolff and Fischer have never actually made any moves at all in that direction, nor have any cities made serious pitches that we’ve heard about.
So, while a temporary move across the bay is not impossible (unlike basically every other option for 2016), it is still pretty damn implausible, especially compared to making a few more minor changes to the Coliseum lease to make Oakland happy.
It’s far less implausible than you think. They’d have a year+ to figure out the logistics. And then however long it takes for a city to pursue them. Right now both Montreal and San Antonio have people kicking dirt around the idea (both wrt to the Rays) and while neither are likely viable *today*, MLB has shown a staunch willingness to play the long game. And knowing that the A’s would be out of the bay area as the result, the Giants would likely be willing to comply with that even if it’s longer than they’d like. And sharing stadiums has plenty of precedence within MLB.
Also, a temporary stadium of some kind can no doubt be built outside CA if it absolutely had to be while something more permanent is built somewhere.
When it comes to moving a team, there are always ways to deal with things in the short term.
All of which are still orders of magnitude more complicated than making a few more changes to the sweetheart lease they have here.
The point is, even if Wolff’s frustration with the current negotiations is genuine, rather than just posturing, working it out and staying in the Coliseum still makes way more sense than any other short-term fix.
Of course.
Depends. The A’s & MLB have had a year and half to plan ahead. The Raiders & Oakland have been discussing the tearing down of the Coli for that long. Given the city’s tendency to bend over backwards for the Raiders, it would be absolutely foolish for the A’s & MLB not to have come up a contingency plan for that scenario. And that plan, whatever it may be, is easily accomplished whether the Coliseum is still standing or not. They’d absolutely prefer to work with the city and not have to resort to it, but they’re not going give in beyond what they feel is an appropriate lease which may or may not be “fair” wrt to being balanced. They’ll likely set the “price” to a point where the trouble of their contingency is less trouble than the negotiation. If there were a lot of room left, I doubt they’d have resorted to laying down this sort of threat.
and if the giants happen to know the A’s aren’t moving out of the bay, would they really want the team showcased at the same convenience for giants fans as the giants? that seems like a way to bleed fan base for them. it’d be like fabio goes homeless, so you bring him home for a year which you’ll spend half of on business trips, introduce him to your wife, and he’s all, check out my jeans and my DH.
Meh, their stranglehold on the bay area baseball fans is pretty firm. And I suspect as any part of a deal for them to host the A’s would involve the A’s leaving.
How can MLB credibly threaten that? There’s nowhere to go, and don’t franchise relocations require a vote of the owners even where territorial pissing isn’t involved?
That’s assuming there haven’t been plenty of discussions within MLB for the past 14 months (or 5+ years). The threat is likely moving them into ATandT with major concessions to the Giants for them allowing it (which means the Bay Area to themselves) while they do what they did for the Expos. It’s very much in MLB’s best interests to cabal up in this sort of situation.
There’s always somewhere to go if it comes down to it.
Really? This is all it would have taken, all these fuckin years? One actual threat from Bud Selig and the deal to basically ensure the A’s stay in Oakland gets done.
Unbelievable.
This lease is nothing remotely like a deal to ensure the A’s stay in Oakland.
If they leave town after agreeing to pay for ten years of the Coliseum lease whether or not they’re still playing in it, they were never gonna stay at all.
Yeah, that’s seems to be the biggest problem with people’s interpretation of this thing. It keeps the team in it’s current status quo and provides Oakland some level of financial security if the team were to leave in the next 10 years. Nothing more.
Still needs City Council approval, and I haven’t seen reports about how close the split was there, or about what modifications may have been made.
Ball’s in the city’s hands now more than ever.
It’s got to be a little disconcerting to Oakland that in any new stadium negotiation with the A’s, MLB is (and always has been) willing to go nuclear on them with the threats that will always sit more favorably to the league than the city. That’s not really a kind of business I’d want to be involved in when there’s such a severe lack of trust on both sides. It really may have been better to call that “bluff” and let the chips fall where they may. You’d probably lose the team, but you still have a second party that you can work with that’s already ready and willing to work with you.
It’s the price of playing in the big leagues, so to speak.
No, you’re not looking at it like a politician. Nixing the lease and having the team say they’re leaving, even if it proves to be a bluff, would be a terrible black eye for the incumbents, especially the three currently running for Mayor. I think the City overplayed its hand here, and at the very least badly lost this particular public relations skirmish. In the course of a week we went from Selig was saying Oakland was the place for the A’s to find a permanent home to Lew saying MLB would let him leave. Even if both of those statements were lies, that’s a PR rout for team over City.
Chip Johnson has it about right I think.
Oof, yeah.
If the city had not been passionately and zestily fucking the dog on this issue for the better part of twenty years now, I’d have some sympathy for them.
Anyone else going to the game tonight?
no
What about Past Ed?
I’m sure there will be plenty of people there. It’s a fireworks night.
I try not to watch the A’s attempt to hit knuckleballs if I can avoid it. Watching Dickey from the front row would have been interesting though.
could you hear anything on the protests?
Why does Canada always come to Oakland over Fourth of July?
Where else would you rather be?
At least Brandon still has his sense of humor:
It talks about how he is trying to stay stronger, both by lifting in the off-season and by resting more right after a start. His velocity is up. Isn’t there some conventional wisdom about sinkerballers being more effective when they’re a little tired? (OTOH, his GB% is actually up.) Maybe he’ll find some happy medium. I’m actually liking him more as a buy-low opportunity after reading this.
I really want him. he has pitched much better than the 5 ERA
Looking at his numbers, yeah, I’m in. I mean, I was in before, but I’m still in. He’s been better by WAR than Milone.
when I looked, he had given up something like 15 HRs. 7 at home 8 on the road. home is a band box and 3 of the roadies were at coors.
HAPPY HOLIDAY!!!! I am back at last from my NYC holiday with a birthday post commemorating one of the finest American songwriters, also born on the Fourth of July. His name is Bill Withers and he is responsible for a bunch of the greatest songs of our lifetimes. He is 76 today, as in 1776! As you party today, please enjoy and share in this half-hour set recorded for BBC-TV way back in 1973 :D
Thanks for continuing these, they’re fun to explore and/or revisit. Not related to Bill or today or anything other than I found that this was the most downloaded show this week on the Archive, it’s clear why this Little Feat performance is racking up the listens. A blistering set by Lowell and the gang, beautifully recorded.
no worries man
any weird music you want, just request it and I’ll put it up
Here’s a laugh: N*** acting dismissive of someone claiming to have an “inside scoop.”
I do not like celebrating fireworks because the are desensitizing us about what its like to be bombed the fuck out of. I can’t image what its like in iraq, or Europe in the 40s or how my dad handled the war in 48, but damn, this shit is pretty.
Good news! Its like trading for an Ace!!
What.
http://deadspin.com/target-field-now-has-self-serve-beer-machines-1601222256
It’s a damn shame there’s no local beer in there – if not Surly Furious, at least some Grain Belt.
Right … do you really need Piss and Piss Light?
What suprises me is that Goose Island is only 2 cents more an ounce.
It’s a solidly not-bad beer.
It was a lot better before they sold it.
Yep. But I stand by my characterization above. I’d still pick it over basic Sam Adams.
Piss light sales are to other beers’ sales as Rickey is to other leadoff hitters.
So I can’t say I blame ’em.
That chart makes me sad.
Sure, but if you only had one of the two available you’d still get 99.99% of their combined sales and have room for a real beer that would sell at a premium.
For those who might appreciate such a thing:
http://deadspin.com/target-field-now-has-self-serve-beer-machines-1601222256
Uh, forget the duplicate link, LOL.
Oh, Grant. We still hate you and your face.
He makes this confession every year, doesn’t he?
yes
The part about the Coliseum is beautiful though.
he is a good writer
it is. The part about him having been jealous of it is so real.
This commenter doesn’t realize that we win any and all pissing contests because of the sheer efficiency maximization provided only by trough technology:
And *THAT* is why they fail.
A’s fans are awesome and Giants fans suck, everybody knows that, what an idiot typical stupid Giants fan.
That along with the dumbass who’s bothered that an A’s fan can’t “adequately” explain why they hate the Giants who can, no doubt, not explain his hatred for the Dodgers. Let’s totally ignore a lot of history between our teams or how their management actively wants our team out of the bay area and all of that.
i’m pretty sure in all of baseball and in the majority of the sports-world, the A’s have one of the most articulable and adequate reasons to dislike their neighbor rival.
Agreed. It’s a failure to listen and intellectual idiocy that stands in their way from understanding.
What does he think he’s better than us or something?
Well, better at glomming on to fleetingly successful institutions like he’s been with it all along so he can therefore feel himself to be successful by association, anyway.
I’m imagining this person’s idea of a pleasant conversation as braying about gamers while wearing a panda hat.
I don’t think we took this possibility into account when evaluating the trade.
Please. We’ll just blow his nose with sewage and it’ll all be better.
It’s so precious to see them defend pitchers having to bat.
There is no defense. It’s absolutely horrid.
If my team had Hunter Pence leading off I’d panik too.
meh. belt can keep pence up.
nah, it’s morse for posey than functional.
no sir. chastity belts are ALL function.
oops. misread that. you said “posey.”
It’s Monday July 7th, and the forecast is for fusion with a chance of free-funk. Yes, today would have been the 82nd birthday of the one and only Josef Zawinul — keyboard kingpin, Lord of the Ring Modulator, synth savant and original Weather Reporter — so lock your Doppler radar onto the blog for a vintage 1971 German TV set featuring WR augmented by a few Eurojazz heavyweights of the time.
Sometime in the 90s I was having lunch at a big round share-table in a San Francisco Chinatown restaurant and was overhearing the conversation by three of the other guys at the table. It was clear they were musicians in town for a show, so I started yakking with them and ended up asking where they were playing and what band they were in. Yoshi’s with Joe Zawinul, they said, and I responded enthusiastically. They were so surprised and delighted that I even knew who he was that they left me comp tickets at the door. Great show.
NICE!!!!!
…no. HELL NO.
tee hee. it says ASS.
actually it says ASS F.
which i think is pronounced:
—”you wanna buy this hat?”
—”ASSSS IFFF!“
I’m hoping that thing is rigged up so that if you try to pull one off the shelf you get a mild electric shock.
“Mild,” he said.
If so, and if further it is hooked up Stanford Prison Experiment-style, then I be shocking some fuckers to death, no matter how agonizing their screams. In fact, more so.
I hope people are texting with their service issue.
have we scoffed at this san antonio montreal thing yet?
Scoff.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the threat is about a 50% bluff. As in it’s technically a bluff for all intents and purposes, but one that they’ll follow through on if they have to even if they desperately don’t want to. It’s like going all in with a pair of 2s with a potential flush, straight, and high pairs available after the river. They’re committed to it, but they really hope their opponent folds.
Don’t worry, Larry Reid is an idiot.
That’s Mr Idiot, please.
I think a good case can be made on both sides of the validity of the threat and the various options the A’s may or may not have wrt to moving. What I think we can all agree on is that, in a vacuum, there’s no better option for the A’s than to remain right where they are in the Coliseum in the mid/long term future. But on my way into work, I got to thinking. What happens if MLB gets tired of Oakland’s politics (something that this could be a precursor to). More specifically, what would the other 28 owners not in the bay area think if MLB and there OutToLunch Panel came back to them and said something to the effect of we can’t work with Oakland.
1) As of now, the TR concern is absolutely serious. In five years, if it weren’t or had any cracks in it, the A’s would already be in SJ.
2) There are plenty of places out there that have zero TRs established. (None of which as of yet are viable.)
3) Assuming the TR remain, there are 28 other teams at risk of having the A’s invade their turf. Not today. Not tomorrow. But potentially in the next 10+ years. Do the Texas teams want to risk having a second competing team near by in San Antonio? Do the NYs/Penn teams want another in their corridor in Jersey or upstate NY? Does Seattle want someone in Portland or Vancouver? Does Toronto and the northern central teams want a team in Montreal? If it’s open season, who knows who might eventually pop up someday and say they’re ready.
4) Bluff or not (and mostly bluff), MLB has somewhat backed themselves into a corner. If they fold here or give in, all future cities will know they can play hard ball. There are teams looking at new stadiums (TB, Atlanta) and a few that are/may be looking at renovations (Chicago). It’s in their collective best interests to maintain a unified (cabalish?) front and not give in.
5) Selig is leaving after this season. And the wealthy teams that are controlling MLB aren’t seeing eye to eye on who his successor should be.
So given all of that (and again, *assuming* MLB reaches a point where they feel, whether Oakland itself is viable or not, working with Oakland isn’t), if you’re one of those 28 other teams who much prefer to maintain the status quo than to risk any change, at what point do you say it’s better to give up the Giants’ Territory Rights, make the bay area a shared market like all other shared markets, rather than risk the A’s siphoning off your territory while turning the bay area into biggest single team market in the game. In the midst of power struggle between the haves and have nots, that kind of power shift would be potentially earth shattering.
It seems like a powder keg ready to go off one way or another if Oakland votes no or tries to play hard ball in any way.
To be clear, I do believe that mlb’s threat to let the A’s look elsewhere if the lease extension fails is a real threat. That is a much different thing, though, than saying that Montreal or San Antonio (or Vegas or Charlotte or Dixville Notch) are prepared to swoop in.
Well, i think it’s a real threat for sure. I just think that it’s a real threat that they *really* don’t want to follow through on. Personally, I think it was a huge mistake to make this threat here and now. The repercussions could be potentially huge if Oakland chooses to call their “bluff” so to speak. Both sides of this have handled it so fking poorly it’s really kind of disgusting. I feel bad for the city itself because under proper management it has the potential to really far and away eclipse SF, but their political landscape is so messed up it’s holding it back in a bad way.
“i’m warning you. if you shoot yourself in the foot, i see no other choice but to shoot myself in the foot.”
I was thinking of posting this earlier:
Oh baby, you are so good. And they are soooooo dumb.
Yup. That about sums it up.
The problem could be exactly as you say. SEA, NYY, NYM, LAA, LAD, BOS, TOR may not want to set a precedent of allowing a team to encroach another’s territory. They may feel that allowing the A’s to move will have future consequences.
Pick your poison. Turn a situation that should never have existed (a split market) into a shared market like the others, but in doing so encroach on the sacrosanct T-Rights? Or allow the region to be a single team market and risk that team to move in next to you thereby encroaching on your own region. It’s really no wonder they’ve stalled that one for 5+ years and would continue to do so if given the chance. It’s less about them not caring about the A’s (or the Rays for that matter) and more about caring about the repercussions of any choice they make.
Precedent was already set when the Nationals moved into Orioles territory.
Thanks, and go As.
That’s not working out well at all. They’re currently fighting over the deal they had. Which in itself should give others pause of having another team need to leave a perfectly good market if properly shared versus move in nearby.
Apparently we asked about Valbuena in the SubMargarine deal
Thanks, and go As.
Milone for Valbuena, straight up.
This documentary looks like it might be pretty good. It goes back to the days when independent teams operated alongside MLB affiliates in the same league; the San Jose Bees were such a team in the 1980s before they became the San Jose Giants.
Now that looks like a fun movie! I will absolutely see this.
Just read a different article about this while up there in some free weekly paper. Going to find it tonight. I loved an independent minor league team and wish we could go back to more of them. I know it wont happen but it could change so much about how we see the game. (Of course I also wish the PCL would have had 1-2 more forward thinking owners in the 30s-50s so we would have the Oaks and Seals as MLB clubs today.)
And I remember the Bees having a story in SI I think as they were getting guys like Mike Norris and maybe Stever Howe to play while coming back from drug issues. The SJ Giants only became that because the beloved Fresno Giants could not get a better stadium and we lost MiLB here for years.
was it the stranger?
Fuck those guys
Another of Ed’s random old grudges, of which I’ve come to believe there are hundreds scattered up and down the west coast.
Portland merc is owned by the stranger people. They get a fuck them, enven though Wm. Stephan Humphries ™ is funny.
(Bed has no idea what Ed is talking about cheers him on anyway) Fuck those bastards!
Only thing I know about the Stranger is Dan Savage.
especially fuck that libertarian jack ass
I hate libertarians…if you want a book go buy it.
only thing i know about the stranger is his mom died and he didn’t care.
A soulless murderer, clearly, just like Dan Savage.
Everything I know about Existentialism I learned from The Cure.
or portland mercury, I mean, fuck those guys?
Willamette week? meh.
Yeah, fuck mercury unless we’re talking about Dan or Freddie.
Now I’m feeling bad for leaving it as the Day’s Inn in Fife, WA. I dont know how embarassed I should be.
On a related note, if you ever stay in the Day’s Inn in Fife WA you should be embarassed. It made me long for some of the worst parts of Fresno.
hey, its north of tacoma, you are good
if it was in Fife, it was probably the Seattle weekly
No you were right the first time. I picked it up in Portland but didnt read it and dispose of it until Fife.
so it was either the Willamette week or Portland merc.
I’m reading this in a Motel 6 on the east side of Portland. Hell, at least Days Inn gives you the mini shampoo bottle.
When did Portland take over the national leadership in people with cardboard signs begging at intersections?
We got to see a couple of street performers at Voodoo Donuts, which was a nice upgrade to the normal sitting onthe corner with a dog show we get at home.
And I should say I was happy with the Days Inn in Gresham. And overall you are right, we got shampoo and a breakfast. Now the breakfast varied by location, but it was better than a kick in the head.
On Powell?
Also, to answer your question, probably since 2008, when not only did we have the usual local unemployed, we inherited the rest of the nation’s unemployed who keep reading the NYT and watching that damn show.
The 6 was on Stark @ 205. I’ve stayed at the one on Powell before; I like it because you can get pretty bombed at Hopworks and still stumble back to your room. As to the signholders, sure they’re in every urban area and we even see a couple of them at Tahoe, but in Portland they are at Every.FKing.Offramp. They neither bother me nor receive any of my money but it’s just not what you want to be one of the first things visitors mention about your city. The “dog as a prop” bit seems less prevalent in Portland than elsewhere, but the “Veteran” schtick and the “God Bless” cliche are universal.
I may have told this story. When I lived in LA, there was an offramp off the santa monica freeway (the 10) on sanra monica blvd that always had at least one person with a sign usually about 50 feet from Santa monica on the offramp. At the time they all said “will work for food.”
Anyhoo, one day a I was sitting waiting for the light at rush hour, I saw a guy with the sign get tapped on the shoulder by another homeless looking fellow. they chatted briefly, then the shoulder tapper took the sign and the original sign holder walked to the corner, stopped pulled out a cigarette and light up. He just stood there watching traffic “go” by. It was nice that the work in shifts.
A few weeks later, as I came home from a show at 2 AM or so, I saw the sign, in the 50′ up spot sitting by the fence, with a flannel shirt tied to the fence right above the sign. that seemed like bullshit, like the homeless people really needed to unionize to prevent panhandling automation.
Next thing you know, they’ll be out-sourcing the work to a panhandling center in Bangalore.
I truly think it’s a matter of economics. All of the good downtown corners were taken, so people were starting to find other places with less competition. It was probably ~2007/8 when I started noticing people at Stark/205 and Glisan/205. Also, Sandy/39th have been popular since then. I can’t think of anywhere else, though, outside of downtown and it even seems like there is less of it downtown this year than there has been in years, which I guess speaks to general economic recovery.
We did have the “dog as a prop” here, as well, but I’m now seeing more “kid as a prop.”
I stayed in a Motel 6 in Fife when I covered a couple games in Tacoma.
As I have no sincerely held beliefs am I allowed to post in this grill?
“Sure,” said FSU insincerely.
Excellent.
I have a sincerely held belief that all beliefs should not be held sincerely.
the winter meetings 2011
Jim palmer and gary thorne are busy absolving hardy of any fault for the error (they sun was directly behind his hand and scoop didn’t see the ball at all. it was a routine throw).
But they seem to only blame scoop, not the unfortunate placement of a hole in the stadium letting the sun in
I’ll chase you round the Moons of Anaheim and round the Detroit Maelstrom and round Perdition’s flames before I give you up!
this comment has defeated me
I feel like this game is a treasure hunt. And the outcome is only known by you.
I remember in elementary school we would take the class dictionaries and make these hunts in them. Go to page 465. Turn back 17 pages. Go to 861.
In the end it always was the definition of some bad word. We had a lot of time on our hands…
Heh heh, you looked up fart!
my first “i don’t have full command of english yet so i’m an easy target to get picked on by the cool kids” experience was in 5th grade, during small group, when someone said i smelled like a fart, and i said “what’s a fart?”, so they all made fun of me for that, and then when the class reassembled i asked the teacher for the definition in front of the whole class.
but i’m cool with it now. [farts]
You should have later on approached one of them and said “You smell like a [shit]” and see how their grasp of your language was.
got my secret revenge in 6th grade when the teacher made fun of that same kid in front of the class for still having a sticker collection. cool was very ephemeral back then.
I like that you asked for a definition!
Also the language of origin, alternate pronunciations, and for the word to be used in a sentence.
I have always believed that my school path got determined in Kindergarten. The school had built a big wooden play fort/castle type thingy in our playground. Since it was brand new every kid wanted to be on it; so much so that they actually had to limit our time and have us go in groups. I was upset that my time was over and dropped an F bomb on the student teacher supervising us. Had no idea what it meant, dont know where I had heard it, andto this day am still pretty sure I used it wrong.
I got sent to the principle and had the shit scared out of me. And thus a timid dork was born.
another early english-learner memory… first time i used it in anger, i said “shut up the fuck!!” nobody did shut up.
I got detention somewhere around 3rd or 4th grade for saying “damn” out on the playground. Nobody believed me when I tried to convince them I meant the thing that holds all the water in.
And now you’re photographing reservoirs just to prove them wrong? Let it go, man.
He’s pretty dam obsessive.
Some things take years to reach the payoff.
Once when I was six and my little brother was four, the whole family went out to dinner at our favorite Chinese restaurant in Minneapolis (which I would later learn was not only the oldest Chinese restaurant in Minnesota, but one of the best). As we were waiting for the check, my dad repeated the old saw about it being polite in China to burp at the end of a meal, to indicate your appreciation for the quality and plenty of the food. My older brother, who was 16, said it was a good thing we hadn’t gone to the well-known Polish restaurant across the river, or we would have had to fart at the end of the meal. This was the kind of joke that my dad might have liked if he’d thought of it, but he became incensed by my brother’s vulgarity in front of his mother and sisters and the little kids. My mom and sisters were trying hard not to laugh. Unfortunately for my dad’s point, my little brother and I were unfamiliar with the word “fart”, although we must have understood the concept, so we both demanded to know what the word Peter had used meant, and why the joke was funny. And all the way back to Saint Paul, two little voices were piping up in the way-back of the station wagon, “But I don’t understand, what is a fart? Daddy, what is a fart?”
Beautiful response.
When I was a kid my sister and I called our parents the Martyr and the Farter.
In my family, the “martyr” is the Farter.
very cute.