TheLeviathan

jorgen nailed it - I need to see them demonstrate mastery through dominance and then they need ample opportunity to adjust at the big league level. As for the last pitcher that went back and then came up - we haven't exactly had a boatload of prospects develop at all the last few years so I'm not sure that question is particularly fair to the argument. One could stretch an answer into Arcia or Perkins but I'm not sure the question is really all that important.

I like the plan jay mentioned, but I'd really like to get Santana into whatever position he is bound for long term. Sooner the better.

I'm not sure 2B is that big of a need. They just moved Tyler Clippard for Yunel Escobar.

Speaking of pitching for outfield trades....I feel like this should have been the sort of deal we were after for LF this year instead of Torii.

How about some for us by slicing concession prices in half?

For me it's not overvaluing what we have because I despise what we look to be marching out in CF at this point. For me it's about the fact that Charlie Blackmon isn't the right kind of player to fix that issue. As I've said with Bourjos - I'd be ok with a .650 OPS if the dude covers CF like a blanket. Blackmon can't do that.

Sometimes it's scary to compare what we view as hateful/wrong here to what is done elsewhere in the world.

Sure, they aren't bad stats to have, but they aren't great evidence for dismissing some pretty dramatic splits. As others have pointed out, those stats appear to be inflated as well. If you want him instead of Hunter, I guess I can't hate that idea, but Blackmon isn't good enough to play CF at an elite level and isn't likely to hit well enough to be a good corner guy. He's just not the right fit.

By what fangraphs is showing for both eye test and defensive metrics he doesn't appear to be the kind of fielder to warrant such attention either.

An .800 OPS in the minors hardly justifies his .800 OPS in the majors. Everything about those splits screams Coors effect. Is he an awful player? No, but no one worth trading for when he is so highly suspect away from his hitter's paradise.

We have multiple seasons of data and a HUGE spread in his splits, I feel confident that data is valid to dismiss him.

One look at those splits is all I needed to see.

Diehard, you're falling victim to the same traps this conversation always seems to lead to. This not about Islam being bad, it's about Islam having a disproportionate amount of extremists and how we can help that religion heal those problems. 1). You imply they had the intention to murder and then found religion as a way to cover it. That's not the reality here and it irks me we choose to be in denial. These men found religion and then through it developed the willingness to die as martyrs for their prophet. They didn't find religion as an excuse, their religion emboldened murderous vengeance. Was it a deeply perverted take on their religion? Sure, but their religion was a deeply intwined, causal part of their actions and both how and why they carried them out. 2). As I said in my first reply, I'm not someone that believes if religion was gone there would never see violence and we'd have some utopia. Something else would take its place, but that's not the reality of the world. We live in a world that is deeply divided and nothing divides as deeply or passionately as religion. If you want just one example....when Israel was first setup up and attacked, nations with deeply rooted hate still banded together in the name of Israel's destruction. Not even nationalism can compete with religion. Just the nature of religion and the power it has. Religion is the strongest fuel for that rotten core of human nature that exists today, but I'm not calling for the end of religion or Islam. But it seems so silly to be in denial about the role of religion in this problem. It is central to the problem and the solution, but you won't get a healed Islam pretending it isn't central to the issue.

Great article. It amazes how many people stilly underplay the impact a bad defense can have on a pitcher.

That Tyler Clippard move by Oakland is fantastic.

How does identifying religion in this case (and the many like it) eliminate identifying other factors in other cases? These extremists are using the Islamic faith to drive and justify their actions. If they had run into Charlie Hebdo with a war cry about Buddhism or Neo-Conservative politics.....well, then that would be part of this issue. But they didn't. So they aren't. I'm genuinely baffled by the apparent NEED people have to look the other way of intimately causal components of these actions. These attacks do not happen without the Islamic faith (perverted though it may be). Of course other violence happens for other reasons, but those situations aren't really relevant. I would imagine had they wanted to come peacefully the French government would've been happy to get their hands on them to find out more about what they knew and any other possible attacks. You are insinuating they went out to kill these men, but that seems like a very dubious claim. And sure, this is about human nature, but one of the core things we know about humans is that when you combine god, fear of death, and the allure of everlasting paradise and use it as motivation - people do all sorts of crazy ****. Religion has a profound way of influencing behavior for both good and bad. I'm not sure what good comes out of ignoring that. These men did what they did because of what they thought their religion commanded of them. You can't separate that from the story.

I do think this has to be part of the conversation too. But there is no question he has transformed himself beyond most expectations.

No. No it would not.

That's my concern as well. This won't sit well with some but I have to honestly ask it - is anything but death going to end the hatred and violence for some of these people? I'm not sure what other recourse there is. That isn't to advocate we drop bombs on them (I too side with the idea of getting the hell out of there altogether) but I'm not seeing how they stay alive and peace is achieved. And if we let them stay alive, will it die off or is that a naive hope?

Good post ashbury, I was struggling how to articulate that this kind of satire isn't just reducible to racism, even if the content is offensive. You did a nice job of that.

That's just it, so many of these situations abroad scream for intervention but nothing we do ever makes a damn bit of difference.

Absolutely, I understand not supporting the paper for their tact and for more directly contributing to their families. I think that's a reasonable position to hold. This publication does use ridicule and exaggeration to make its point and I understand why someone would be offended by that. Where I disagree, fiercely, is in trying to constantly drag assesments of this issue into the realm of "racism" all the time. If there is anything either side of this issue needs to keep as a paramount priority is to both avoid rushing to racist conclusions and avoid rushing to the notion that a conclusion is racist. Sometimes the truth isn't pretty and we have to be willing to confront that honestly.

I think that question is relevant and I'm someone who is usually vocal about the limits of free speech. I'm pretty sure between here and BYTO I've made that plain on issues especially surrounding speech at schools. We do have responsibilities with it and I'm open to the suggestion that some of what these guys did was provocation merely for the sake of provocation. I know that is something that causes a backlash, but it's a reasonable point you bring up. That said, the support this paper is getting now isn't because it was racist and that distinction is extremely important and one that the earlier author utterly ignored in his zeal to make a point.

Brian Dozier is a great player to have, I have some doubts about him sustaining that great play, but you can absolutely win championships with a roster full of players like him. And that's coming from someone that finds it utterly preposterous to hand him an extension right now.

Just like you can be for free speech, buy the magazine, and still not be endorsing racism.....no? Especially since the proceeds are going to the victims. But hey...who am I to use facts and common sense and get in the way of shouting "Islamaphobia!" and "Racism!" until the conversation is over?