You know that things called zoning laws already exist, right? And that they mostly do things like limit dense development and building heights, and mandate excessive amounts of parking?
But I guess those sprawl-encouraging laws are just WHAT PEOPLE WANT, while any push back in the opposite direction is ZOMG GOVERNMENT RELOCATION CAMPS.
I think there is a pretty legit argument to be made that this regulatory approach is prone to unintended consequences. Back in the thread where this discussion came up before, I think a lot of the people on the pro-urbanization / anti-sprawl side were arguing for cutting existing incentives that might encourage sprawl and cutting regulation that discourages more people from living in cities.
On the other hand, maybe if this particular bill is well crafted, then it could work out well. Like andeux says, there are already plenty of regulations in place for new development, some for good reasons, some for dumb reasons. Adding one more regulation doesn’t offend my inner Thomas Jefferson all that much (but if there are hurtful unintended consequences, then that is bad, of course).
I don’t have any particular problem with regulations, if they are honestly presented. However, when governments hide regulations by tying them to other activities, then that is wrong. For example, I don’t like the feds to with hold highway moneys, if states don’t “toe the line” in school/social programs. Then this does become coercion. This is usually done when they know their “goal” is either unpopular/wrong, yet it fits an agenda. This is the dishonesty that permeates our current political landscape.
From Mike’s link, I don’t really have any idea whether this is a useful, well-crafted regulation, or a stupid and harmful one. Even if someone linked to all of the actual details, I don’t have the legal / policy know-how to understand it.
Yeah that has nothing to do with controlling where people live. It has to do with regulating what people can build where. There is more than enough sprawl for anyone that wants to live there now. Just look at the exurb real estate market.
In play, run(s)! Talk dirty to me gamecast, talk dirty. - Nevermoor
You did see where it’s limited to new construction (i.e. building houses on open land), yes?
I have no idea what the regulation’s details are, but it appears to implement some sort of environment-frendliness requirement (presumably things like low-flow toilets, double-pane windows, etc)
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want"
The bill would enact the Healthy Neighborhoods Act of 2012 and would require the Energy Commission to prescribe, by regulation, standards for reducing vehicle miles traveled by occupants of a building that would be applicable to new residential and nonresidential buildings and modification of existing residential and nonresidential buildings.
And I have to say: mikev is one of my favorite people on here
-slusser.
What that means to me is that, if you are modifying your existing building, then you have to bring it up to code (with these new additions to the code, of course).
1. Applies only in metropolitan planning orgs (pg. 8)
2. Does not apply to remodels unless you’re adding units (pg. 9)
3. Most importantly of all: the remedy is not telling people where to live, but things like adding bus service (pg. 10)
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want"
It’s totally relevant in context, and the title of the article invites comparisons. The guy that pointed out that the Bonds years in the featured graph were PED years was right on. It’s part of the sport.
Both Fangraphs and THT have been covering up too much for Braun, trying to place the PED era in the past, which it is not. What can people turn when the ‘cutting edge’ websites go all establishment?
There’s always a lot of crappy comments on the interwebs. A little Bonds back and forth, tedious and necessary.
Downsizing the portfolio. Getting lean for getting low?
One something confusing in the A’s stadium drama is the role(S) of the A’s team entity in real estate purchases, vs. real estate purchases by the ‘A’s owners,’ or those by ‘Lew Wolff group.’
They bought the property knowing that they couldn’t convert it to condos, then tried to convince the Supes to let them do it. When that failed, they sold.
I guess the “trend” is said to be up because the lowest recent announced total attendance was in 2009 and the numbers increased very modestly from 2009 to 2010 and again from 2010 to 2011. I would say the trend is “flat”.
However, they should be up decently this season because of 7 home games vs. the Yankees and 6 vs. the Red Sox, with 9 of those on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays and a tenth on July 4. Last year they had 3 NYY, 2 BOS and 0 weekend dates (though they did have Memorial Day vs. NYY which was the only >30K crowd of the five).
-Hornsby’s 1925 checks in at nicely at 12, Paul Waner first appears at 722.
-Enjoyed reading this Bondsfest much. Fell off at the idea that a player’s relative distance from the year’s league average stats well frames top players’ efforts vs. each other across eras. The accounting for each year’s ‘width doesn’t measure compared to stuff like it was a white only game for half the study, or that Babe Ruth was obviously better than so-and-so.
But thanks article very much.
“You can’t compare players across eras.” – Bill King
-Albert Belle first checks in at position 1993. For me, easy to recall Belle at his peak being visibly better than everyone else for a couple of years going, whatever the circumstance (PEDS as per the Mitchell Report).
-A-Rod first checks in at spot 119.
-The last couple years of Big Mac with the A’s – when he finally got back to playing – yeah, that was like watching Babe Ruth. Or was it?
I definitely wasn’t trying to say that Bonds was better than Ruth. Just that Bonds dominated the 2004 season more than Ruth dominated 1920. Any other comparison would be silly, since like you say, there’s SO many changes over the years. Integration, rule changes, etc etc etc.
Thanks reply. Ruth: 60, Bonds: 73. Miguel Tejada’s 2004: 3567.
Yes, Bonds/Ruth poking holes: Since there were more total players in 1920 vs. 2004, wouldn’t that mean that there was a higher percentage of average players in 2004, and therefore this makes Bonds look relatively better?
I like the explanatory style of this article, as I don’t believe this subject is ‘like a science,’ but more something to pass the time while waiting for the team to get a FKing 3rd baseman.
Sort of like speaking slow in front of a crowd, fully explaining these concepts a la the unfortunate Howard Cosell guy sitting next to you at the game is usually very helpful. I think this article could go deeper into nerd, I guess I’m saying.
It’s the 3rd decade of the modern stats, the sport is very popular and enthusiasm for understanding is high. But with so many new measuring stats, more than a half-dozen popular systems, it’s good to understand a portion of the readership for this type of article is in fact expecting every park factor permutation and all other variables to be factored in, going back to the beginning of time (1900), fully packaged into a complete equivalent, and hopefully very correct. It’s a tall order.
Yes, feel glad to be ‘with it’ enough to know who Tango is (not Stallone). I just wanted there to be more after the picture graph bringing the standard deviation explanation back to the players.
Okay, I read the Tango Article – you touched off a lot of comments with your z abuse.
His Pele argument is off – among the historical soccer freaks, Pele does not hold a Ruthian status. Even I know that…I had never heard of the pitchers getting worse at hitting Rosetta Stone thing.
==
Okay right now, for 2012, given the choice would ya take Barry, or Manny?
Peer review is awesome and helps refine future tasks.
Stupid Yahooligans turning things into a steroids flame war sucks ass.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
This whole saga raises important questions. Although we are always being told that “replication is the cornerstone of science”, the truth is that the “top” journals are simply not interested in straight replications – especially failed replications. They only want to report findings that are new and positive.
…
Given the high cost of paper publications and the high submission rejection rate of “top” journals, it might be argued that rejecting replication studies was defensible in the pre-internet era. But what would prevent such journals from adopting a policy of sending reports of replications, failed or otherwise, for full peer review and, if accepted, publishing the abstract of the paper in the journal and the full version online? Otherwise, publication bias looks set to remain a major problem in psychology and science in general.
Our failure to replicate Bem’s results will, no doubt, not come as a surprise to many readers as they will have assumed from the outset that the alleged paranormal effect was not real.
Well yes, given that the a priori probability of this effect being real was approximately zero, one marginally “statistically significant” study really doesn’t move the needle at all. Bayesianism FTW.
Once we think we know in advance which effects are real and which are illusory, true scientific objectivity flies out of the window.
I disagree. Reasonable people can disagree on exactly how likely a given effect is to be true, but if you don’t start with some sensible view of the world then a combination of the “thousand monkeys parapsychologists” effect and publication bias (not to mention the possibility of cherry-picking by people like Bem to begin with) will cause all sorts of spurious bullshit to get published.
How on earth did they do a workout this week and it’s just being leaked now? I assume cameras have been on PM around the clock. Was Harbaugh in a UPS drivers uniform?
From what I understand, California Common is a style essentially created around Anchor Steam. Anchor Steam Trademarked their name and as a result other breweries can’t call it steam beer. Hence California Common.
It’s worth noting that a Anchor Steam sued a canadain brewery for using the term steam beer, but lost because Anchor Steam hadn’t been marketed in Canada to that point.
Pretty interesting! That symbiosis accounts for dogs’ success as a species — what worked as human societies evolved also works in baboon troupes. That said, I’m guessing that the primary contribution of many of those puppies is “dinner.”
In a vaguely related vein, Robert Sapolsky (A Primate’s Memoir and others) was on Forum the other day. It’s a good listen — I aspire, without hope, to attain his level of verbal clarity and creativity in making his points. Just a great educator, and I’m guessing his research on the health effects of stress will prove to be invaluable. Thanks, MB!
The meaning of life is not so much found, as it is Made. -- Opus
What is this font in the body of the blog that looks like typewriter or something, and what is a better, nicer looking, easier to read font that I can recommend to change to?
And I have to say: mikev is one of my favorite people on here
-slusser.
it’s hard to just up and rec a font on something already existing. and i’m not sure courier is the offender here. the font they used on the nav bar is kinda dated 90s grunge/distressed. sure, it doesn’t work with courier, but the 2010’s being about “clean” courier is more in line with current trends than the other one. i’d change the nav bar to something still heavy but cleaner, like crete round.
but i hear you. you just want me to tell you a name. OK, from the traditional web-safe font options: 1) go with Georgia to match the serifs of the nav bar. 2) keep it clean with trebuchet or verdana. and from the new style of free web fonts, go to 3) clean but cute and slightly quirky imprima. 4) concise karla.
*i’m* AV. alex vause. put this loon in psych before she hurts someone.
i’m allergic to courier. it’s the font that things default to when you print and the correct font is not installed. so when i see it, it means something’s way wrong and troubleshooting lies ahead.
*i’m* AV. alex vause. put this loon in psych before she hurts someone.
I understand how difficult it can be for an African-American in today’s society. In fact, I can relate to black people very well indeed. My ancestors once owned slaves, and it is in my lineage to work closely with the black community. However, just because they were freed over a century ago doesn’t mean they can now be freeloaders. They need to be told to work hard, and the incentives just aren’t there for them anymore. When I’m president I plan to work closely with the black community to bring a sense of pride and work ethic back into view for them.
And I have to say: mikev is one of my favorite people on here
-slusser.
If Roxy Bernstein is available this would give him a chance for that A’s radio booth tryout I called for on AN a few years ago (as a prospective Cotroneo replacement).
His play-by-play work is OK but he’s a general sports reporter and I always find myself thinking I know more about the AL in general and the A’s in particular than he does. But that will be the case with any temp they bring in including Bernstein.
I just wish there were enough Negro League stats to find a way to fit those guys in too.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
So, about that whole thing about controlling where people live, etc
ahem
Thanks, and go As.
You know that things called zoning laws already exist, right? And that they mostly do things like limit dense development and building heights, and mandate excessive amounts of parking?
But I guess those sprawl-encouraging laws are just WHAT PEOPLE WANT, while any push back in the opposite direction is ZOMG GOVERNMENT RELOCATION CAMPS.
I think there is a pretty legit argument to be made that this regulatory approach is prone to unintended consequences. Back in the thread where this discussion came up before, I think a lot of the people on the pro-urbanization / anti-sprawl side were arguing for cutting existing incentives that might encourage sprawl and cutting regulation that discourages more people from living in cities.
On the other hand, maybe if this particular bill is well crafted, then it could work out well. Like andeux says, there are already plenty of regulations in place for new development, some for good reasons, some for dumb reasons. Adding one more regulation doesn’t offend my inner Thomas Jefferson all that much (but if there are hurtful unintended consequences, then that is bad, of course).
I don’t have any particular problem with regulations, if they are honestly presented. However, when governments hide regulations by tying them to other activities, then that is wrong. For example, I don’t like the feds to with hold highway moneys, if states don’t “toe the line” in school/social programs. Then this does become coercion. This is usually done when they know their “goal” is either unpopular/wrong, yet it fits an agenda. This is the dishonesty that permeates our current political landscape.
From Mike’s link, I don’t really have any idea whether this is a useful, well-crafted regulation, or a stupid and harmful one. Even if someone linked to all of the actual details, I don’t have the legal / policy know-how to understand it.
Yeah that has nothing to do with controlling where people live. It has to do with regulating what people can build where. There is more than enough sprawl for anyone that wants to live there now. Just look at the exurb real estate market.
You did see where it’s limited to new construction (i.e. building houses on open land), yes?
I have no idea what the regulation’s details are, but it appears to implement some sort of environment-frendliness requirement (presumably things like low-flow toilets, double-pane windows, etc)
That’s not the way I read it:
The bill would enact the Healthy Neighborhoods Act of 2012 and would require the Energy Commission to prescribe, by regulation, standards for reducing vehicle miles traveled by occupants of a building that would be applicable to new residential and nonresidential buildings and modification of existing residential and nonresidential buildings.
Thanks, and go As.
What that means to me is that, if you are modifying your existing building, then you have to bring it up to code (with these new additions to the code, of course).
And how does your driving habits have anything to do with housing? Other than via limiting where one is allowed to live.
I assume you’re miffed about the vehicle miles traveled part.
First, a PDF with the full text.
Now as I read it, that part:
1. Applies only in metropolitan planning orgs (pg. 8)
2. Does not apply to remodels unless you’re adding units (pg. 9)
3. Most importantly of all: the remedy is not telling people where to live, but things like adding bus service (pg. 10)
I see no problem with this. It’s like requiring enough parking spots for a business, so as to not overload the public/street parking.
I’m not “miffed” at anything at all. It seemed topical so I linked it because that other discussion was only a short time ago.
Thanks, and go As.
My bad then. Misread you.
most probably do. I care very little about most of this stuff, and a lot of it is way over my head anyway (ignorance is bliss? lol)
It’s interesting to follow along though and chime in my 2 cents when I can
Thanks, and go As.
Related
I clicked over to AN this morning and couldn’t stop laughing when I saw what was on top of the front page. Go if you dare.
When I logged onto my yahoosports page, the first few AN FP posts are shown – I saw that and decided I didn’t want to bother, if it’s come to that.
LOL, the photo!
The photo was even worse on my phone….it got cropped to the top of MU’s head with part of one eye.
Wow. Just Wow.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Bless his heart (mrod), it is a good one.
HAH. Oh god.
AN is going through their power era?
why log onto THT and complain about steroids?
Yeah, that was rather annoying. If it was one guy, fine, but three or four who just wanted to say that Bonds took steroids?
Also, you don’t need to log in. Just need to put a name in the field.
It’s totally relevant in context, and the title of the article invites comparisons. The guy that pointed out that the Bonds years in the featured graph were PED years was right on. It’s part of the sport.
Both Fangraphs and THT have been covering up too much for Braun, trying to place the PED era in the past, which it is not. What can people turn when the ‘cutting edge’ websites go all establishment?
There’s always a lot of crappy comments on the interwebs. A little Bonds back and forth, tedious and necessary.
steroids were available to everyone and more than we know used them.
Black people in the 20s on the other hand….
what I mean is navagate to the site to read nerdy maths about baseball to complain about steroids
This will be the plate du jour until Bonds makes the Hall of Fame. It’s gonna go on for a while…
http://twitter.com/#!/ggreenwald/status/180685454448930818
Lew sells Fairmont
Downsizing the portfolio. Getting lean for getting low?
One something confusing in the A’s stadium drama is the role(S) of the A’s team entity in real estate purchases, vs. real estate purchases by the ‘A’s owners,’ or those by ‘Lew Wolff group.’
In other words, will Lew Wolff own the land upon which the A’s build their SJ stadium?
And who owns the Fremont / Cisco land? The A’s baseball team?
They bought the property knowing that they couldn’t convert it to condos, then tried to convince the Supes to let them do it. When that failed, they sold.
asvd
Next hipster trend: I need some seed money to start a cardigan-sharing program
Try kickstarter.
asvd
I have to ask…. what does asvd mean?
annika sorenstam venereal disease (golf clap)
I am not sure if this one was intentional. MB’s link was about mopeds.
Sheesh, if you’re going to get FKing technical …
ASVD
I swear, the Telegraph Hill Neighbors have got to be the worst citizens in SF
This is how Lew’s gonna move the Coli to SJ
They are primarily solitary animals but will come together as a group when food, water and shelter are in abundance.
“Up Flat”?
I guess the “trend” is said to be up because the lowest recent announced total attendance was in 2009 and the numbers increased very modestly from 2009 to 2010 and again from 2010 to 2011. I would say the trend is “flat”.
However, they should be up decently this season because of 7 home games vs. the Yankees and 6 vs. the Red Sox, with 9 of those on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays and a tenth on July 4. Last year they had 3 NYY, 2 BOS and 0 weekend dates (though they did have Memorial Day vs. NYY which was the only >30K crowd of the five).
1.
-Hornsby’s 1925 checks in at nicely at 12, Paul Waner first appears at 722.
-Enjoyed reading this Bondsfest much. Fell off at the idea that a player’s relative distance from the year’s league average stats well frames top players’ efforts vs. each other across eras. The accounting for each year’s ‘width doesn’t measure compared to stuff like it was a white only game for half the study, or that Babe Ruth was obviously better than so-and-so.
But thanks article very much.
“You can’t compare players across eras.” – Bill King
-Albert Belle first checks in at position 1993. For me, easy to recall Belle at his peak being visibly better than everyone else for a couple of years going, whatever the circumstance (PEDS as per the Mitchell Report).
-A-Rod first checks in at spot 119.
-The last couple years of Big Mac with the A’s – when he finally got back to playing – yeah, that was like watching Babe Ruth. Or was it?
I definitely wasn’t trying to say that Bonds was better than Ruth. Just that Bonds dominated the 2004 season more than Ruth dominated 1920. Any other comparison would be silly, since like you say, there’s SO many changes over the years. Integration, rule changes, etc etc etc.
Thanks reply. Ruth: 60, Bonds: 73. Miguel Tejada’s 2004: 3567.
Yes, Bonds/Ruth poking holes: Since there were more total players in 1920 vs. 2004, wouldn’t that mean that there was a higher percentage of average players in 2004, and therefore this makes Bonds look relatively better?
I like the explanatory style of this article, as I don’t believe this subject is ‘like a science,’ but more something to pass the time while waiting for the team to get a FKing 3rd baseman.
Sort of like speaking slow in front of a crowd, fully explaining these concepts a la the unfortunate Howard Cosell guy sitting next to you at the game is usually very helpful. I think this article could go deeper into nerd, I guess I’m saying.
It’s the 3rd decade of the modern stats, the sport is very popular and enthusiasm for understanding is high. But with so many new measuring stats, more than a half-dozen popular systems, it’s good to understand a portion of the readership for this type of article is in fact expecting every park factor permutation and all other variables to be factored in, going back to the beginning of time (1900), fully packaged into a complete equivalent, and hopefully very correct. It’s a tall order.
4th decade.
Definitely. And thanks. Tango actually posted a pretty decently long response to it on The Book’s blog, and he’s not wrong about any of it.
Also, I gotta say, it’s even flattering for Tango to rip one of your article up a little.
Yes, feel glad to be ‘with it’ enough to know who Tango is (not Stallone). I just wanted there to be more after the picture graph bringing the standard deviation explanation back to the players.
Will be playing with the spreadsheet with thanks!
Okay, I read the Tango Article – you touched off a lot of comments with your z abuse.
His Pele argument is off – among the historical soccer freaks, Pele does not hold a Ruthian status. Even I know that…I had never heard of the pitchers getting worse at hitting Rosetta Stone thing.
==
Okay right now, for 2012, given the choice would ya take Barry, or Manny?
Peer review is awesome and helps refine future tasks.
Stupid Yahooligans turning things into a steroids flame war sucks ass.
Speaking of peer review…
Well yes, given that the a priori probability of this effect being real was approximately zero, one marginally “statistically significant” study really doesn’t move the needle at all. Bayesianism FTW.
I disagree. Reasonable people can disagree on exactly how likely a given effect is to be true, but if you don’t start with some sensible view of the world then a combination of the “thousand
monkeysparapsychologists” effect and publication bias (not to mention the possibility of cherry-picking by people like Bem to begin with) will cause all sorts of spurious bullshit to get published.Interesting…
Was just coming to post that.
Thanks, and go As.
I just read that Alex Smith and Peyton Manning have the same agent. Are there no conflict of interest rules that apply to these guys?
How on earth did they do a workout this week and it’s just being leaked now? I assume cameras have been on PM around the clock. Was Harbaugh in a UPS drivers uniform?
He borrowed Theo Epstein’s gorilla suit.
Or this kid’s monkey bacon tuxedo
Beer!
Where is the popcorn in that flowchart?
I was given a shirt version of that as a present recently.
Why do they call steam beer “California Common”?
From what I understand, California Common is a style essentially created around Anchor Steam. Anchor Steam Trademarked their name and as a result other breweries can’t call it steam beer. Hence California Common.
Got it. Stupid trademarks.
It’s worth noting that a Anchor Steam sued a canadain brewery for using the term steam beer, but lost because Anchor Steam hadn’t been marketed in Canada to that point.
Empires!
” width=”400″ height=”225″ frameborder=”0″ webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen>
Visualizing empires decline from Pedro Miguel Cruz on Vimeo.
The French explosion in 1961 is incredibly satisfying to watch.
ICIP vielle a roue for The French Explosion in 1961
wish they’d started in in 1775 so we can track the US in respect to the blobs coming offa other countries.
TDF bait:
Pretty interesting! That symbiosis accounts for dogs’ success as a species — what worked as human societies evolved also works in baboon troupes. That said, I’m guessing that the primary contribution of many of those puppies is “dinner.”
In a vaguely related vein, Robert Sapolsky (A Primate’s Memoir and others) was on Forum the other day. It’s a good listen — I aspire, without hope, to attain his level of verbal clarity and creativity in making his points. Just a great educator, and I’m guessing his research on the health effects of stress will prove to be invaluable. Thanks, MB!
TRADE ZOOKS NAO
https://twitter.com/#!/Buster_ESPN/status/180731285067661314
Thanks, and go As.
We can get back KOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUZ! hehehe
Sure… AFTER we ditch Powell.
Who were the people around here besides Pam who knew stuff about fonts?
Thanks, and go As.
iglew
Helvetica is for Hipsters.
me.
K.
What is this font in the body of the blog that looks like typewriter or something, and what is a better, nicer looking, easier to read font that I can recommend to change to?
Thanks, and go As.
looks like courier.
it’s hard to just up and rec a font on something already existing. and i’m not sure courier is the offender here. the font they used on the nav bar is kinda dated 90s grunge/distressed. sure, it doesn’t work with courier, but the 2010’s being about “clean” courier is more in line with current trends than the other one. i’d change the nav bar to something still heavy but cleaner, like crete round.
but i hear you. you just want me to tell you a name. OK, from the traditional web-safe font options: 1) go with Georgia to match the serifs of the nav bar. 2) keep it clean with trebuchet or verdana. and from the new style of free web fonts, go to 3) clean but cute and slightly quirky imprima. 4) concise karla.
Yeah. Overall I like everything EXCEPT that courier font on the blog.
Thanks!
Thanks, and go As.
i’m allergic to courier. it’s the font that things default to when you print and the correct font is not installed. so when i see it, it means something’s way wrong and troubleshooting lies ahead.
Um, watch out for airplanes?
Thanks, and go As.
Also, helicopters. (this one apparently came alarmingly close to a friend who was running the trails out there at the time)
Lew with dinger
whoops sorry I didn’t resize
Too small now? (that’s height=400)
Caption: “Fuck me — I can build the stadium in San Jose, but I have to put low-flow toilets and double-pane windows in it?!?”
“If someone found a cure for cancer, California would only let it be used in cities”
I no see in Chrome. I’m assuming it’s something ribald.
FKing seroiusly, Romney?
Thanks, and go As.
Pretty sure that’s parody.
What’s scary is that it isn’t so far-fetched.
Nevermind. I’m an idiot.
Thanks, and go As.
I found it totally believable… which is probably no consolation to you, actually…
Dislike
Get well soon Ken. I guess I’ll be hearing more of Glen Kuiper early this season than I’ve heard in the last few years combined.
I hope we’re not in for a Bitkering.
If Roxy Bernstein is available this would give him a chance for that A’s radio booth tryout I called for on AN a few years ago (as a prospective Cotroneo replacement).
I like Roxy a lot. I’ve only ever heard him call basketball though, which requires a very different style than baseball.
Roxy did Marlins games on radio for a few years but he didn’t want to be a permanent resident of South Florida, so the Marlins didn’t renew him.
Maybe I’m misremembering, but I thought Bitker was ok. I’m pretty sure I’d prefer him to any current A’s radio or TV announcer except Korach.
His play-by-play work is OK but he’s a general sports reporter and I always find myself thinking I know more about the AL in general and the A’s in particular than he does. But that will be the case with any temp they bring in including Bernstein.
Nooooooooooooo. :(
Hopefully he doesn’t have to go the A’s medical staff.
This.
Oh hey, thanks for the link G_S.
You work hard and write well.
I just wish there were enough Negro League stats to find a way to fit those guys in too.
Nope. Chuck Testa.
” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>
heh
Susan FBed me today and said that she was heading here after this morning. Sorry I was not around all day, and been here to greet her.
Bleg: anyone have any local indoor mini-golf places to recommend for a rainy weekend?
It looks OK this weekend.
Spending money is hard
Hairston blows balls
‘zat actually permissible?
Not in most parts of the South.
So it’s OK if you stand on your head?