"Major League Baseball, they’re all after those people. They don’t play around. They let the players know how tough they’re going to be," White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen said. "They say, ‘We’ll be checking you guys, we’ll be monitoring all this stuff.’
"People think Major League Baseball plays around because they have a past," the outspoken Guillen added. "If you get caught, you should be punished, because now we know for the last five or six years they’re after this. Any players who do that are taking a risk, a big one, because they even check me. I’m not even playing. I’m glad they’re after this."
That’s Ozzie Guillen wording about the Manny Ramirez situation. Now, I’m not here to make fun of Ozzie today (end times!). I’d just like to ask one little question: is Ozzie Guillen correct — for once — when he says that MLB tests managers for steroids? What the hell is the point of that? Afraid that dirty coaches will be able to fill out lineup cards unnaturally quickly? That maybe they’ll be able to kick far too much dirt on the umpires?
Also: what does Ozzie Guillen have to do with anything, anyhow? I love how he’s such a crazy mouth creature that anytime anything happens anywhere in baseball, somebody interviews him about it.
So maybe I made fun of him just a little bit then.
April 8th, 2011
Posted by
Darien |
Baseball |
no comments
You know who sucks right now? At the baseball, I mean? The Ft. Louis Fatinals, that’s who. Well, seems some members of the baseball media had the damned audacity to ask Tony La Russa — High Potentate of Baseball Brilliance — what the problem is. And, in characteristic genius fashion, he flipped out at them, yelled a whole bunch of nonsense words, and then stormed out of the press conference. Let’s pile on!
Face red and arms gesturing, La Russa said it was unfair to compare this season’s start to last year’s second-half woes.
Stop picking on me, you meanies! Unfair unfair! So what if my team sucked then and sucks again now? Totally different.
La Russa took a long pause after a question about the team’s offseason efforts to improve the lineup. He then went on a closing rant that clocked in at 50 seconds by appealing to viewers that it’s way too early to be drawing any conclusions.
Yeah, just because their best pitcher’s out for the year and nobody on the team’s hitting a lick? Way too early to decide this is a shit team.
For everybody listening out there, do you think I’m being unreasonable?
You’re screaming at the reporters, Tony. So, yes, we all think you’re being unreasonable. You’re being an ass, in fact.
Now you’re going tell me that Yadier doesn’t drive in big runs?
Ah, starting with clurch. Good ol’ Tony. Never mind that Yadier is an execrable hitter — he has an entire wardrobe full of his National Clutch League Clutchatron Awards. Dude must be super fucking clutch.
Yadier Molina, career WPA: -3.07
Oh. That’s pretty fucking bad. So, yeah, Tony, I am going to tell you that Yadier doesn’t drive in big runs. Turns out he’s even worse in the clutch than he is all the time!
Are you going to tell me Albert can’t hit?
No, this one I’ll give you. Your team does have the best player in baseball, even if he did make eight (eight!) outs on opening day. Good job mentioning him second.
Are you going to tell the second baseman and shortstops haven’t hit?
Tony, seriously. Your second baseman and shortstop are so bad you don’t even know what their names are. Here’s how I imagine Tony La Russa fills out his lineup card:
C – Y. Molina
1B – A. Pujols
2B – S. Baseman
3B – D. Freese
SS – F. Last
LF – C. Rasmus
CF – C. Rasmus
RF – C. Rasmus
DH – M. McGwire
But seriously, Tony, I envy you. Because if you did know who your middle infielders are, you’d probably get so drunk you fall asleep in the middle of an intersection. You know, again.
Your second baseman is a fellow called Skip Schumaker. Here is what he has done so far this year (small sample size, obviously, but it’s what we’re talking about):
.278 / .316 / .333 / .649, 83 OPS+, -1 TZ, -2 DRS
That’s pretty bad. But I imagine his career numbers are a lot better, right?
.291 / .348 / .383 / .731, 95 OPS+, -14 TZ, -17 DRS, 3.9 (career!) WAR
Wow. Okay, but I’m sure your shortstop is liquid awesome, right? Well, Toni, you know I wouldn’t lie to you. Your shortstop — and I use the term in the loosest possible sense — is one Ryan Wilhelm Theriot. Yeah, the same guy the Cubs replaced with a fourteen-year-old illegal immigrant who makes a hundred errors a year. What kind of quality play are you getting from the Riot?
2011: .211 / .318 / .211 / .529. 52 OPS+, -1 TZ, -2 DRS
Zoiks. I won’t bother with his career numbers — seriously, they’re exactly the fucking same as Schumaker’s, except that Riot is an average defensive 2B. Which would be great, except that you’re playing him at shortstop.
Long story short: yes, I’m telling you these guys can’t hit.
David Freese, you don’t think he’s going to hit?
You’re just reading down the lineup card, aren’t you, Tony. Classic. Anyhow, David Freese hasn’t had a full season in the majors, but in limited playing time he’s accumulated a career OPS+ of 105. So, I guess he can literally hit, sure. But he’s not really much better at it than your average non-Fatinals hitter.
You think Matt’s (Holliday) going to hit?
No I don’t. Because he had an emergency appendectomy and can’t play right now. Shouldn’t you know that? Looks like he’s recovering surprisingly quickly, though! Ever noticed that about the Fatinals? How they seem to recover from injuries much more quickly than everybody else? I wonder why that is.
You think Colby’s (Rasmus) going to hit?
Probably about 5% better than Omar Infante, yeah.
You think (Lance) Berkman’s going to hit?
Yeah, probably. He’s fine. Old, but fine. Probably get 120 OPS+ out of him. He’s going to give it all back on defense, though; you’re seriously playing the guy in the outfield? Good luck.
Oh, and, Allen Craig? Tony says fuck you. He doesn’t know who you are, or remember that you’ve been doing a damn fine job hitting for Matt Holliday while he megadoses on HGH recovers surprisingly quickly yet all-naturally.
The answer’s no to all those things? I mean, did you accomplish your goal?
Did I, personally, accomplish my goal? My goal was to make fun of you. So… yes. Thanks for thinking of me, Tony! Makes me feel even worse for poor Allen Craig, though.
Three or four times you ask, so I get excited, get upset? I mean that’s not fair, that really isn’t.
Poor baby. I guess we all forgot that you work pro bono teaching these poor kids from the mean streets how to play baseball so maybe they can make something of themselves one day. We should save our goddamn "questions" for guys who make millions of dollars to get $80 million worth of baseball players to play baseball correctly and clearly aren’t getting the job done.
April 6th, 2011
Posted by
Darien |
Baseball |
2 comments
I bumped into this whilst bonking around the ‘tubes this evening, and I found it rather interesting. The gist of it (for those of you who can’t be arsed to follow the link) is as such: a blind man learns to recognise a cube and a sphere by touch. If a cube and a sphere are placed before him, and his sight is miraculously restored, would he be able to tell them apart just by looking at them?
John Locke and William Molyneaux said no. I’m assuming that Peter Molyneaux also says no, but fuck him. Darien, on reflection, says yes. Here’s why.
First, we need to lay down some fundamental assumptions; ground rules, if you will, that were left vague in the original problem statement. Feel free to call me out on any of these if you think they "cheat" the problem in the man’s favour; to my mind, they seem to stack it against him, but what do I know anyhow.
• The only two objects the man can see are the sphere and the cube, so he can’t see (for example) the cube-like corners of the table and infer from that that the one that feels most like the edge of the table and the one that looks most like the edge of the table are the same object.
• The man has not done any complex study or preparation. He unerringly knows the difference between the objects by touch, but does not understand the mathematical principles of "sphere" and "cube," so he can’t cheat by falling back on any theoretical knowledge.
• The man has been totally blind since birth; no hazy memories to be drudged up.
Even given these strictures, I still think the man can do it. The reason is that there is one fundamental property that I believe he can translate from the tactile to the visual, and that property is regularity. The sphere looks exactly the same from any angle of view, and feels the same from any angle of touch. The cube does not, and does not. Note that this answer does not rely on the man having any preconceived notion of what things "should" look like — only the ability to recognise when two images are not identical (without which the whole experiment is moot anyhow).
Now, it is the case that this answer relies on a peculiarity of the sphere; I concede that he probably cannot, under the same conditions, distinguish a cube from an octahedron. But I don’t think that’s disingenuous on my part; those were the conditions of the problem as stated. And I do believe I’m correct. Any thoughts?
April 2nd, 2011
Posted by
Darien |
Bullshit |
no comments
The following line honest-to-God exists in this game’s Steam listing under "key features:"
Features a gripping storyline that unfolds organically through the gameplay (doesn’t rely on cutscenes to move the story along). The ratio of gameplay to cutscenes is better than 13:1.
I swear I did not adulterate that. On the one hand, it seems ludicrous to consider 13:1 a good gameplay-to-cutscene ratio — that’s still way too many cutscenes — but come on. When was the last time a game had enough balls to try to minimise the damn things?
Now if only they’d make the game itself look more interesting. Oh good: we get to alternate between a browner version of Call of Duty and a browner version of Assassin’s Creed. Can’t wait.
I just described a video game as "a browner version of Assassin’s Creed." If I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes, I never would have believed such a thing could exist.
April 2nd, 2011
Posted by
Darien |
Games |
no comments
