Klawchat, 12/1/16.

You can preorder my upcoming book, Smart Baseball, on amazon. Also, please sign up for my more-or-less weekly email newsletter.

Also, my latest boardgame review is up for Paste, covering Grifters, a “deckbuilder without a deck” that I thought played a little too mechanically.

Klaw: Klawchat. To stimulate then activate the left and right brain.

Greg: Keith do you like Atlanta’s thinking in the Alex Jackson deal? Your writeup talked about potential mechanical fixes, do you think those would bring him back close to where he was?
Klaw: I do like their thinking – trade two arms well down their prospect depth chart, get a guy who was at one point a potential 1-1 pick, still young, might need a change of scenery. Definitely a risk that he never pans out, but the reward here makes the high risk worth taking.

Frank: How does the Alex Jackson breakdown happen? It seems like everyone universally loved his swing, he hit against good comp as an amateur. What happened?
Klaw: I don’t think there’s a single answer to that. He didn’t click with the Mariners’ coaching staff. A mechanical issue he flashed some in high school got worse. I am not sure if the position switch affected him. He probably was pushed to full-season ball too fast in 2015, but that can’t really explain 2016.

Cory: Archie Bradley and what else can get Brian Dozier?
Klaw: Why would they want Dozier?

Nick: Could the Braves actually acquire a star like Chris Sale without dealing one of the core players already on their MLB roster (Swanson, Smith, Inciarte, Folty, etc)? Is it even worth it for them to do more than address a couple obvious holes for right now?
Klaw: Other than Swanson, why would you say no to dealing any of those other guys? Hell, you might even include Swanson if he’s the anchor of a trade. Sale’s a 5-win pitcher. Those aren’t easy to find.

Paul: Klaw – thanks for the write-up on great kitchen gifts. It left me wondering – what is the one expensive, non-functional item in your kitchen you alluded to?
Klaw: The espresso machine. Over $600 and it does one thing. But it does it really fucking well.

Fuzzy Dunlop: Do you think the Braves will/should hit the “reset” button so to speak with Alex Jackson and try to put him back at C? He could fall short of his best case scenario offensively and still be a hell of a value behind the dish; however, you don’t want to yank him all over the place and make him readjust again positionally.
Klaw: Although I think he could catch, at this point, I would not want to ask him to do two things (develop as a catcher and re-learn how to hit) at once.

James: University of Missouri has 128 confirmed mumps cases on campus. If we only had a way to prevent such outbreaks.
Klaw: Or a President-elect who didn’t pander to vaccine-denier frauds and morons.

Ceej: As a Pirates’ fan, what should I hope in exchange for Cutch, and is Meadows ready?
Klaw: Robles has to be in the deal. If I’m Huntington I’m asking for Robles and one of the young arms – and yes, I’m including Giolito. Ask for the sun, settle for the moon. I do not think Meadows is quite ready.

Pete: Hey Keith, big fan of your work, just preordered your book! Do you know if there’s a way to be an insider without having the paper magazine? I just think it’s a huge waste, when I was an insider, I never touched them. I would very much prefer to have an option of only receiving the magazine online. Thanks!
Klaw: We do or did offer a digital option.

Jon: Keith, what prospects (hitting/pitching) do you see making a big jump in 2017? Thank you
Klaw: That’ll be something for my top prospects package in January. I haven’t started work on that yet.

Dale: Do you see A’s prospect Frankie Montas long term as a starter or as a reliever?
Klaw: Reliever. Knee and size problems, poor command, inconsistent secondaries. 80 fastball though.

Charlie: Would you give up Robles for McCutchen if you were Mike Rizzo?
Klaw: It depends on what else is required. I’d be open to it.

Mack: Thoughts on Nick Allen? I’ve seen him play 3 times and all that little sh*t does is hit.
Klaw: That’s the perfect summary of him. I will see him again in the spring and Chris Crawford will probably see him a few times. I’m going to try to get to SoCal for a longer stretch than usual because that’s where the players are.

Jack: Keith, what have you heard about Ramon Laureano? Huge statistical season (albeit partly at Lancaster) but got some positive buzz in the AFL.
Klaw: Saw him, wrote positive buzz about him. I think he’s a legit everyday prospect.

Jason: Keith, what is the upside on Sandy Alcantara?
Klaw: Upside is ace. Long way to go to get there, but it is the right-tail outcome for him.

Bob: Now that you’ve been living in the Delaware Valley for some time, thoughts on Wawa and local obsession with it? Going out on a limb to guess you’re not a fan of the coffee.
Klaw: It’s a nice convenience store. I wouldn’t get coffee there with so many better options (Brew Ha Ha, which is a Delaware chain and roaster, is better and you’re never far from one here).

Nats Review Charlie: Robles for 2 year of McCutchen seems pretty fair, but do you think the Nats could do better elsewhere if they’re willing to deal Robles?
Klaw: Maybe. Probably, now that I think about it. But could they get someone who fits their needs? This is a pretty complete team right now. What’s the other big hole? Put Turner at short and then you’re just down an outfielder.

James: Traveling today and getting my questions in early – Would Hellickson and Walker have accepted the qualifying offer under the new conditions? The easy answer is no. I know hindsight is 20/20, but didn’t their agents know the union was pushing for a change in the system?
Klaw: I think the changes come into effect a year from now. Walker probably still accepts given the surgery. Hellickson maybe not. One year and $17 million is pretty good though. I don’t think he gets that AAV on a multi-year deal.

Tye: Opinion on $5M cap on international free agent spending?
Klaw: I’m waiting to get some more details on this – we’ve gotten half-stories so far. If that’s true, the union should be kicking itself for fighting a draft that would have paid the players more.

Mike: Hi Keith, as a new parent I’ve been debating the merits of buying organic produce. I recall a few months ago you said you try to buy organic when possible. What research or reasons led to seek out organic?
Klaw: Organic food is not any more healthful or safer than traditionally-grown food, and there is too wide a range within what you can legally call “organic” anyway. But organic agriculture in its original sense, as proposed by Lord Northbourne and others, is probably much better for the planet. Such practices develop healthier soil, sequester more carbon, and use less water. There’s research to back that, while research on organic ag’s health benefits have found nothing. For dairy and meat, I am most concerned with antibiotic-free husbandry rather than organic feed.

Mark: From what has been published so far, what do you think are the best and worst changes in the new CBA?
Klaw: Again, what we have seems to be incomplete and I’m trying to get some more details. If this bit Jeff Passan tweeted about the IFA age limit going up to 25 is true, then MLB just cut off its nose, lips, and eyelids to spite its own face. God forbid you spend some of your billions to pay better players.

addoeh: Thoughts on new season of Top Chef? Graham Elliot as a host, equal number of new chef-testants as returning chef-testants.
Klaw: Haven’t seen Elliott before, but not a fan of constantly recycling old contestants.

Ron: HI Keith- Nice to see Terry Ryan get a scouting job with the Phillies. Maybe having the analytics and tools to be a modern day GM kind of passed him, I would still bet he is one hell of a scout as far as finding talent and breaking down the physical parts of a prospects game. Good luck to him! Have you had any inter-action with him on the scouting circuit and what are your thoughts? Thanks!!
Klaw: I’ve talked to Terry a few times and I think scouting is really a passion for him too. I’m glad he’ll get to do that and be in an org that will let him have a voice at the table.

Bruce: Any recommendations for meals that can be made on the weekend to be consummed 3-4 days later?
Klaw: Serious Eats has a recipe for pressure cooker green chicken chili that would be great for that if you don’t just eat the whole thing at once like we seem to do.

Andy: Here’s a handy way to teach the Monty Hall door “problem.” You have 100 doors, there’s a prize behind one. Pick one. I’ll open 98 other doors. The prize didn’t move. You can switch doors or you can keep your current door and get beaten over the head with a pipe wrench.
Klaw: That escalated quickly. I’ve explained it this way before: You have doors A, B, and C. The car is behind one. You pick door A. You know, right now, that the odds of the car being behind door A is 1/3, B is 1/3, and C is 1/3. Thus, the odds of the car being behind door B or C is 2/3 (add B and C, or just do not A). Monty opens door C to show you a goat. The odds of the car being behind door B or C have not changed – the car didn’t move – but now the entire 2/3 is shifted to door B. The odds of the car being behind door A remain at 1/3, so you should switch.

Nick: Is Bobby Dalbec legit? I know he had some struggles at Arizona in the spring but he went on a tear in the minors to end the year.
Klaw: We’ll see. Lowell is a step down from good D1 pitching. Dalbec has power, but the strikeout rates in college were as high as we’ve seen for a big-name prospect.

Lyle: Did you see the 10 day DL proposal coming? I don’t recall seeing anything about it beforehand but I think it’s a great change for MLB.
Klaw: I didn’t, but I think we’ll see a lot of shenanigans with teams using it to cycle through extra pitchers.

Lyle: Dipoto seems to be willing to trade any time, any player but I just don’t see that he has the players to make a trade for McCutchen realistic. Probably have to start with O’Neill and Gohara and maybe add Leonys? Leaves the cupboard bare again.
Klaw: That doesn’t get close IMO.

Barry: Climate change. True or false? There are highly respected climatologists on both sides of the issue. Most of the noise is advocacy, not science. Mann of Penn State, Jones of East Anglia, and the falsifying of data. Why the silence? Global cooling, global warming, climate change. Why the difficulty in naming the problem?
Klaw: Anthropogenic climate change is real (true). You’re playing with words to create a false sense of balance (gotta hear both sides!). There was never a global cooling theory. The data and research showing the earth is warming and the oceans are getting more acidic are overwhelming. Grist has a great series of responses to climate deniers: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/

J. Kruk: Do you envision Rhys Hoskins or Dylan Cozens being anything more than MLB platoon players? What would be your realistic projection of each?
Klaw: Hoskins I think is a regular. Cozens I’m not sold on, and the makeup issue returning is a real concern.

Mike: How much of a scout’s ability to spot issues with a swing or throwing motion is innate, and how much is learned? When I watch the video clips that accompany write ups on scouting sites I struggle to see the flaws that are mentioned except at the extremes…and when I watch games live swings and throws inevitably happen too fast for me to form any opinion.
Klaw: I think it’s learned. You watch enough, focusing on certain things, you learn to observe different things. It’s how I can watch a delivery and then forget what the last batter did – I just watch the game differently now because I’ve learned to and because I have to.

Brian: Should Mets take advantage of interest and trade both Granderson and Bruce? Conforto is full time, go after Fowler possibly for CF, or trust Lagares and sign a platoon mate.
Klaw: Yes. I see no spot for Granderson now. If they won’t play Conforto every day, I think they’re beyond help.

Mike: Best rum for a Christmas gift? Maybe a top ten list of gift drinks?
Klaw: Ron Zacapa 23 is still the best rum I’ve tasted.

Jeff: I saw you recommend the propornot plugin for chrome a while back, have you seen these follow up articles about it? https://theintercept.com/2016/11/26/washington-post-disgracefully-promotes-a-mccarthyite-blacklist-from-a-new-hidden-and-very-shady-group/
Klaw: That wasn’t me.

EricVA: Can Jerad Eickhoff build off last year or is he the same guy moving forward?
Klaw: I think this is what he is and it’s pretty good.

Aubrey: Question on your FA rankings/Comments: An example, when you say on Encarnacion that you’d stop short of 4 yrs/$80 million, is that what you think his value should be somewhat in a vacuum, or you’re saying if you were a GM (avg market size, potential Division contender), you would always pass on the player if the market demanded you pay more than that?
Klaw: I say right at the top of the list, in the intro, that this is what I would pay.

Nolan LeMond: I’ve seen nothing but glowing reports and aggressive projections on Ronald Acuna, despite limited (albeit productive) experience in the low minors. Should I be getting excited or are folks getting a little carried away? What player would be a realistic comp for his big-league projection?
Klaw: I raved about him last winter and spring. I think he can really hit.

James: How do you drink your rums? Mixed or straight? If mixed, what do you mix with? Looking to explore some more rums and appreciate insight.
Klaw: Aged rums I drink straight, preferably chilled and strained (neat), or at most mixed with sparkling water or seltzer. I’ve had the Cruzan single-barrel, and it’s a little rougher than other rums aged that long (Appleton, Zacapa, Barcelo) so I would mix that with some sparkling water. If you want a rum for mixing in cocktails, get something like Appleton XV or Gosling’s Black.

Jesse B: McCutchen for Robles and Fedde. Good trade for both teams?
Klaw: Insufficient for Pittsburgh.

Dave: It appears like we’re not getting draft pick trading again. Shouldn’t this be a simple thing to implement? Seems like something they should have ironed out weeks ago before the big issues came to the fore.
Klaw: It’s nobody’s priority, unfortunately.

Craig: I was very PLEASE with the Mike Hazen signkng as GM for my Dbacks… and then I saw he was keeping around some of the garbage from before like Mike Butcher the pitching coach… because “great morale with players” or some crap. Odd right?
Klaw: I don’t think it’s odd that a new GM would choose to keep some people rather than try to hire an entire front office and coaching staff at once. Some now, some in a year.

Slint: shouldn’t more AAAA players consider going over and playing in the KBO if Eric Thames can get a 3 year deal?
Klaw: He got three years but $15 million, which isn’t even starter money. I don’t think he’s going to be very good at all – he was awful before he went to Korea, and the KBO is crazy hitter-friendly – but it’s not like he got a ton of cash. Ditching Carter for him was weird, though.

Tim: Could Reds actually get value back by trading Billy Hamilton? They could be trading at his peak – but what if he has another gear (5 win player rather than 3)? Could he fetch a guy like Conforto? (who’s stock is down and not an up the middle player)
Klaw: He hasn’t really developed at all as a hitter, and if you believe the main issue is lack of hand and wrist strength, then trade him now because that’s not likely to get much better.

Tom: Hey. I upped our family’s board game game using your recs: Ticket to Ride, Pandemic, Splendor, 7 Ronin, Pandemic, Agamemnon, and 7 Wonders. Thanks!
Klaw: That’s a strong collection.

Ben: In your write-up of the Cespedes deal, you suggested the Mets go out and get a true CF. That doesn’t seem like it’s happening. Given these remaining options, which do you think would be best: 1) Trade Bruce, have Lagares/Grandy platoon in CF with Conforto/Grandy in RF; or 2) Trade Grandy, have Lagares/Conforto in CF, and then Bruce in RF?
Klaw: I don’t think Granderson or Conforto can play CF. Conforto just isn’t that kind of fielder or athlete. Granderson hasn’t played it regularly since 2012 and wasn’t good then. So … I don’t know. Lagares is an elite defender but there’s no stick there. That’s why I wrote what I wrote – if they’re even thinking about Cespedes playing another 500 innings in center, they’re making a mistake.

Benjammin: What do the Mets do with Rosario after he torches Vegas? Move Cabrera to third? Also, is Cecchini going to make it at 2B? Thanks!
Klaw: Yes, move Cabrera to third or to New Jersey or something. He’s not a good defensive shortstop, hasn’t been for years. Cecchini’s throwing in the AFL was so bad I’m not sure where he can play now.

Tim (KC): Thoughts on New CBA?… personally I am disappointed that they dealt with only a few issues. But there is no more All-Star winner getting home-field.
Klaw: I’m on board with this.

Mikey: Are you as down on Giolito as some others are?
Klaw: Not at all. People like to be very reactive in this business.

Owen: No question here, just a longtime reader who would love to meet you at the winter meetings, time permitting.
Klaw: I’ll be there Monday to Thursday. If you see me, flag me down. I’m happy to say hi.

MJ: Keith have you seen the movie Zootopia? I watched it yesterday with my daughter and thought it was one of the best kids movies I’ve seen.
Klaw: Loved it. I’ve watched it twice. My daughter has watched it five times, at least. It’s brilliant, it’s a little sweet, it has a fantastic message, and of course it looks great. Jason Bateman’s voice work is incredible, too.

J: Do you consume all your music digitally or do you buy any cd’s or vinyl?
Klaw: All digital. I have a few vinyl records I’ve gotten as promos but I haven’t bought any.

Sean: Over the last few the weeks the local media (Philly) have promoted Scott Kingery. Is a potential long term solution at second for the Phillies?
Klaw: Yes, if he develops some more patience. Didn’t walk much in college, didn’t walk much in high-A (where he should have started last year – that was another strange decision).

addoeh: For Pete asking about not getting a paper magazine, do they still have the option of sending your magazine to a member of the military?
Klaw: I was told they discontinued that, which is a shame. Seemed like a nice way to send even a token gesture of support.

Anonymous: How do you think Domingo Acevedo’s offpseed pitches progressed this year and has your opinion of whether he can stay a SP changed at all?
Klaw: No shot.

Darren: Hi Keith, What are your thoughts on Dorssys Paulino. He seems to be able to hit, but not with a lot of power. He was also moved to the OF. Do you see him being able to play the infield or developing enough power to be a starter?
Klaw: Used to play short. Got too heavy. Not sure there’s much value there now.

Paul S.: Do you think Thames will be worth $5-$6 million per year? (Not counting the beard, which definitely has its own value!)
Klaw: I do not.

Van: I know it’s early, but who would you say are the top 3 offensive prospects in the 2017 draft?
Klaw: Chris and I ranked the top 30 prospects for the draft here: http://klaw.me/2gL6mFe

That One Guy: Carrier in IN: Trump success or roadmap to tax breaks?
Klaw: Roadmap to corporate extortion.

EC: With Top Chef I’ve heard that a lot of actual top chefs don’t allow their employees to participate. I’ve heard Jose Andres doesn’t allow.
Klaw: Doesn’t seem like they’ve struggled to get talented contestants so far, though.

Matt: I know I sound stupid in not understanding the Monte Hall problem, but isn’t it two independent decisions? You make your first choice, not there. You then have two doors, and a 50/50 chance its behind either door. By choosing “not to change,” you are actually just making the decision to choose that door again. I don’t see this as a case of conditional probability, but of two independent events. I feel completely dense!
Klaw: They’re not independent events, though. Hall has given you information on your first decision by opening that door. He hasn’t changed the game – the car hasn’t moved. He’s essentially told you that you can revise your first choice to A or to B+C, in which case you’d always choose B+C.

Scott: Does Conforto to Phillies for Herrera make any sense for both teams?
Klaw: It makes sense for the Phillies if they want to rob the Mets blind.

Jimmy: What are your projections of TJ Zeuch? Reliever or potential back end starter?
Klaw: I think more likely reliever than starter. Maybe 60/40 odds. Don’t love the delivery or the track record.

Greg: What do you think about Max Fried? He looked dominant down the stretch. Is their #2 potential?
Klaw: Yep, I think that’s just right.

Jerry: Is the lack of playing time for Conforto due to the manager, a disbelief from the front office that he is an every day player, or a little of both? Is he potentially a guy who is traded for a modest package that makes the leap once he is in a new environment playing every day?
Klaw: I hear it’s largely the manager, coupled with Conforto himself developing some weakness on the front side because he was only facing RHP. Easy fix – play him every day and send Collins to manage Columbia for a year.

Ryan: Klaw, do you think a valid argument can be made that an over-prioritization of political correctness played a part in Trump’s victory? I saw you linked to the Colin Jost joke story, and as someone who considers themself socially progressive I still think his point is not wrong.
Klaw: I highly, highly doubt that that was a factor at all in Trump winning a few swing states. Is there any evidence whatsoever that people voted on that basis?

Joe: Using $/WAR has become the default method to evaluate free agent signings on the internet. But do teams actually look at free agent contract value through a similar filter? It just seems so overly simplistic, and the assumption that a team is always getting good value if they pay the correct $/WAR amount to a player just seems like a dumb assumption to me–it’s too far removed from any context.
Klaw: Don’t use $/WAR. Just don’t. It’s so flawed that I never use it, because value isn’t linear (roster spots are a scarce resource, scarcer than money) and because the utility curve for each team is going to vary wildly. An additional win is worth more to the Yankees than the Rays, and worth more to a team at 88 wins than a team at 68 wins or 98 wins.

Jimmy: What are your thoughts on Bo Bichette?
Klaw: I think he can really, really hit, and that he’s going to play somewhere in the infield, second or third.

Paul: Going through wedding registry items. Any good cooking knife recommendations?
Klaw: My gift guide for cooks is here: http://klaw.me/2gGVCUD

Anonymous: Thank you for chat, Keith. Possible that Jahmai Jones of the Angels makes your top 100 prospect list next year? How do you like him?
Klaw: Possible. Best prospect in their system.

Justin: Aside from Reyes, who do you view as the top SP prospect in the Cardinal system? Flaherty?
Klaw: Flaherty over Fernandez, yes.

Steve: Any tips for increasing reading pace? I’m about 40 pages/hour, and would love to increase that in order to increase the number of books I can read each year. Also, solid Outkast quote to start the chat.
Klaw: I wouldn’t worry about pace. Read at the pace that is comfortable for you, where you’re enjoying it and are able to retain what you read. It seemed like the right day to quote that song.

Patrick: was Nick Williams’ multiple benchings for lack of hustle overblown? is he still a MLB regular or just a guy with tantalizing tools?
Klaw: I thought his manager handled it poorly, making it such a public issue.

Dan (Oregon): Just moved to the Portland metro area and trying to navigate through all of the coffee options here. What are some of your faves from Oregon? Thanks!
Klaw: heart coffee is one of my favorite roasters in the country.

Joe: What do you think about these dum-dums who say things like, “if I see you burning a flag I’ll beat the crap out of you” – an actual Senator or Congressman actually said that recently. It’s really just cloth, people. And it’s freedom of speech. And going to jail for assault does not give you a higher patriotism score.
Klaw: It’s freedom of speech, protected by the First Amendment and multiple court decisions. And yes, it’s just a piece of fabric. Also, if they start arresting people for this, I will join what I hope would be thousands or millions of others burning flags and uploading videos of it. Arrest us all. We know what the Constitution says.

Jebediah: Do you have an opinion on the relative worth of a Baking Steel to make pizza? Winter may be fast approaching outside, but the Steel evidently makes for oven spring!
Klaw: I use a stone for pizza and bread.

Wade: What is the best and most useful presents you remember getting from your wedding? (Hopefully it wasn’t veteran.) Trying to add stuff to our registry, but we are both in our 30s and already have a lot of things that you “need.”
Klaw: Stand mixer. Didn’t ask for a food processor, got one a year later, still using it. I think by now we’ve replaced most other stuff, but bear in mind that’s 21 years ago for us.

Frank: With regard to the 5M cap, I think it should allow small market teams to be much more competitive for talent as once the money is spent by others the team with money left will be that much more attractive to the player. I agree it’s not good for the players but it should help the small market teams a lot.
Klaw: That may be true, but why should the union help the small-market teams? Tell the large-market teams to do it.

JR: Did you ever finish the Night of, or did it fall of your radar?
Klaw: I have three episodes left. I just got caught up on a bunch of other things, then ripped through the OJ documentary, and now am trying to sneak in some top movies since it’s the month when all the good ones come out (screw you, Hollywood).

Owen: Also, I promise I won’t pants you a la Jake Peralta with every member of the Knicks.
Klaw: Oh God, it happened again!

John: The flag is just cloth, yep. And your wife’s wedding ring is just metal, so no biggie if she takes it off when she goes out at night.
Klaw: That’s correct, it’s just metal and compressed carbon. And she’s not my property, so if she wants to take it off, she can do that.

Mikey: Really? I get Flaherty over Fernandez, but Fernandez over Alcantara?
Klaw: Yes. Command, delivery, etc. – these all matter.

Nats Review Charlie: In reference to my earlier question – the only reasonable place for the Nats to improve (I say reasonable because I’m guessing Zim stays at 1B) is catcher – not sure if even Robles and Giolito gets you one as good as McCutchen is though
Klaw: Good point, and … good point too.

Ron: Would Dozier bring back de Leon from the Dodgers? Take more or less or would you not trade Dozier?
Klaw: I would include De Leon in a deal for Dozier, but I doubt that’s enough. Dozier’s really valuable.

Max G.: Klaw, any thoughts on how the Astros are going to play Bregman/Guriel(sp?)/Correa? (Other than what they absolutely should but won’t do, i.e. move Correa to third)
Klaw: You stole my response. Bergman at 3b, Gurriel in LF? I still haven’t given up on Reed as 1b.

Nick: Would a deal between Phillies/Cubs based around Velasquez or Nola for Schwarber be reasonable?
Klaw: Nola finished the year hurt, and Velasquez, while good, has yet to have a full healthy season in the pros.

Hugo Z: Do you think a hard cap on international spending will have a similar effect to what happens in the NFL with quarterback salaries vs. everyone else’s?
Klaw: You’re going to have to explain this like you’re talking to an idiot, because when it comes to the NFL, I’m an idiot.

Jeff: Thanks for being so outspoken about politics and Trump specifically. It’s a scary time, but you have a diverse reader base that need to hear someone standing up for basic ideas and principles that everyone should follow. You’re doing more than most journalists are doing, and it’s more their job to do than yours.
Klaw: You’re welcome. It’s funny – someone last week commented under the chat about keeping my “liberal agenda” out of it (even though this is my personal blog). My liberal agenda includes things like equality and civil rights, science-based policies, environmental protection and ensuring companies cover such externalities. I mean, I’m practically KLaw Marx.

addoeh: 21 years of marriage? Congrats, hope you two got drunk on your anniversary like a 21 year old would.
Klaw: No but for our 20th we went to St. Thomas by ourselves and got drunk on Cruzan for five days.

Mikey: Follow up on Fernandez/Alcantara….Not shooting down your assessment, more just shocked given the Alcantara “ace” potential comment you made earlier. Thanks.
Klaw: I understand now, thanks. I think Fernandez has a higher probability to be a valuable major-league starter, but Alcantara has the better “best case scenario” of the two.

Ryan: Thoughts on Eddy Julio Martinez after his first full year in the states.
Klaw: A little disappointed that he didn’t hit for more average in year one, but I’m hopeful that both he and Yusnier Diaz will make leaps in 2017 now that they’re here and acclimated.

Joe: Re: Monty Hall problem…I think it’s easier to understand it when you realize that there was 100% certainty that one of the doors you didn’t pick was always a loser. So when they selectively (not randomly) show you a goat, you don’t really have any new information probability-wise. They just showed you something you already knew was true, but tricked you into thinking it was new information.
Klaw: It’s a little bit of new information, in that beforehand you knew one of B or C was a loser, but not which one. It’s not new information in that you already knew at least one was a loser when you knew the odds of door A (your pick) were 1/3.

Quinn: Should the twins trade Dozier and what type of return could they get for him, that contract is nice.
Klaw: Yes, I don’t see any reason to keep him when they’re ready to rebuild now.

AAtown: If dodgers don’t resign hill, then don’t they come out big losers in the trade for he & Reddick? For what they gave up?
Klaw: No – they acquired two months of Hill and two months of Reddick. They didn’t acquire any rights beyond 2016.

Michael: Texas v. Johnson was a 5-4 SCOTUS decision. It’s not as cut and dry as you say.
Klaw: Isn’t this like the “first-ballot Hall of Famer” distinction? You’re in or you’re not. The plaque doesn’t change. Unless we get another SCOTUS decision, then the ruling and precedent are the same as they’d be if the decision had been 9-0.

Paul: Speaking of pizza, I made Kenji’s quick cast iron skillet tortilla crust pizza last night (made 3 of them in about 20 minutes). Wow was it good and extremely easy.
Klaw: You could do a lot worse in the kitchen than to listen to Kenji, Alton, and Ruhlman for all the basics.

Eddy: Does Derek Fisher ever make his debut with the Astros? Seems crowded. How does his offense profile?
Klaw: Probably trade bait. Has power, speed, but I’m concerned he won’t be a high contact guy. Also not a good outfielder.

JR: IIRC, Jon Singleton and his agents took a lot of heat for the club friendly contract he signed. With hindsight, sure looks like he made the right choice.
Klaw: Correct, and no doubt. You might argue the contract let him go to seed like he did, but from the player’s perspective, he got a successful outcome.

Stephan: Keith, as a Cubs fan can I be excited about Trevor Clifton?
Klaw: Yes, you have my permission.

Hugo Z: Sorry, should’ve been more clear…I think a hard cap wouldn’t hurt the Maitans of the world because some team will gamble the lion’s share of it’s money on them, but lesser players will get squeezed.
Klaw: Yes, I agree with that. Maitan still gets close to $5 million. The $1-2 million guys might get the shaft. But also there’s no Morejon deals any more – if you’re really worth $10 million, the cap appears to preclude that entirely.

Jake: I think one of the most unfortunate things of the many to come out of this election is how clear it is one party wants to keep people from voting and one wants as many people to participate as possible. And the side who wants to keep people from voting only offer anecdotal information when claiming there is widespread fraud. We have to stop this.
Klaw: I’ll end with this question/point, because it’s a great one. If you believe at all in a democratic system of government – and yes, we’re technically a republic – then this should disturb the hell out of you regardless of ideology or party affiliation. I was appalled when a few readers would respond to my tweets about states reducing polling stations or early voting by saying it was easy enough to vote anyway, so what’s the big deal? Either you want as many citizens to vote as there are citizens who wish to vote, or you do not want us to live in a functioning democracy. If you think your candidate’s or party’s path to victory lies in suppressing part of the vote, then I would suggest that the problem is the candidate’s or party’s platform. Let everyone have their say, and if you don’t like the outcome, then you try again in the next election. You don’t change the rules to make sure only people who think like you, look like you, pee like you, or pray like you get to vote.

Klaw: That’s all for this week – thank you as always for reading and for all of your questions. I will chat either Thursday or Friday next week depending on my travel back from the winter meetings.

Comments

  1. Michael Conforto

    Trading me would be a huge mistake right? How do you think I’ll do being the full time right fielder next year (in theory)?

    • Terry Collins

      Who put you up to this post Michael? Was it Sandy? Now get back on the bench until the press hounds me to start you.

  2. LOL Michael, many SCOTUS decisions are 5-4. Just to pick a relatively recent example completely at random, DC v. Heller. Do you consider the issue of whether the Constitution protects an individual’s right to own a gun not “cut and dry?”

    • Actually, many people would disagree with whether the Constitution protects the right in Heller. Read the dissents or the hundreds of law review articles on the topic. That’s the problem with the “SCOTUS said so, so the Constitution says so” argument. SCOTUS gets plenty of cases wrong, and 5-4 decisions are the most likely to be overturned someday.

      I happen to agree with the Texas v. Johnson decision, but 4 very intelligent justices disagreed. That’s what makes it not cut and dried.

  3. Where are you eating when you’re at the meetings? Ed Lee has a spot at National Harbor that is solid, although the dirty fried chicken had way too much of the gochujang honey, I seriously needed 4 or 5 napkins to get through that. The collards, kimchi, and country ham side is great (and is included in his cookbook). If you can fit a meal at Woodberry Kitchen on your way through Baltimore, that is a restaurant that you would really enjoy. Don’t know if you’ve been to Volt – great experience, but probably too far out of your way.

    Regarding Jose Andres and Top Chef, I think he stopped letting his chefs compete after the show took both Mike Isabella and Michael Voltaggio for Season 6. I’m not huge on recycling old competitors either, although I don’t think any of the ones for this season had the baggage that Josie did, although Tesar was pretty crabby. Doing recaps again? Really looking forward to those.

  4. The answer to the question about the expensive kitchen item (early in the chat) did the “klaw about an hour ago” thing. For those of us who also wondered about that, could you re-answer here? Thanks!

  5. Regarding the question in the chat about climate change, I had brought this up in a previous chat that it doesn’t matter anymore just how much evidence there is when it comes to proving the certainty of this issue. There is a very large faction of people in this country (thanks to certain media outlets, the internet, and politicians who spew lies because they are heavily influences by very rich and powerful entities) who consider FACTS arbitrary or even useless. Worse, if these “facts” come from outside their bubble of information, they reject it outright as actually being nothing more than propaganda for an ideological agenda.

    I admire Keith for standing up and calling out people who give in to lies and deceit, but I’m afraid that posting data that proves an issue is a waste of time. We are living in increasingly dangerous times. Something else has to be done.

    • There is a very large faction of people in this country (thanks to certain media outlets, the internet, and politicians who spew lies because they are heavily influences by very rich and powerful entities) who consider FACTS arbitrary or even useless.

      I know. I’m “friends” with several of these people on Facebook.

  6. Re the Monty Hall problem

    I totally understand the logic of “you’re trading the 1/3 probability for 2/3.” But that’s still wrong, isn’t it? When the goat behind door 3 is revealed, the probability of door 3 hiding the car is zero. You now know that. It’s silly to pretend that there is STILL a 2/3 likelihood of the car being behind the combination of doors 2 and 3. Door 3 added no value. You THOUGHT it did until the goat was revealed, but you now know that it did not. So it was never 1/3, 1/3, 1/3. It was always 1/2, 1/2, 0 — YOU JUST DID NOT KNOW THIS. At this point, the car is either behind door 1 or door 2 — that’s a 50/50 proposition no matter how I try to argue otherwise. I know it’s counterintuitive (this argument has given my friends and I hours of enjoyment) but arguing that switching your guess somehow increases your odds doesn’t really hold up.

    • The fact that Monty knows where the car is does not alter the probability of you choosing the right door at the beginning: 1/3. The crucial point is, Monty does not randomly select a door. He knows which one to select.

      There are a number of online simulators of this problem. Assuming they are properly programmed (establishing the winning door before the player makes a choice), they will demonstrate the validity of this. I tried one, switched everytime, got the car 66 times out of 100.

    • “I know it’s counterintuitive (this argument has given my friends and I hours of enjoyment) but arguing that switching your guess somehow increases your odds doesn’t really hold up.”

      It does, you just don’t get it yet.

    • That’s incorrect. The probability of door 3/C hiding the car has changed, but that ‘extra’ probability all goes to door 2/B. Your odds of picking the right door were 1/3 at the start and they’re still 1/3.

      Play it out from the start. You picked door A.
      You stay with A, car is behind A, you win.
      You stay with A, car is behind B, you lose.
      You stay with A, car is behind C, you lose.
      You switch to B/C (the door Monty didn’t open), car is behind A, you lose.
      You switch to B/C, car is behind B, you win.
      You switch to B/C, car is behind C, you win.

      Switching yields a win 2/3 of the time. Staying yields a win 1/3 of the time.

      Here’s the letter to American Statistician that first laid out the problem and its (correct) solution; I tried to shorten the enumeration of the solution above. Here’s a longer explanation. Here’s Marilyn vos Savant’s famous explanation, which launched the problem into the public eye and got her no end of grief for being right (and, for being a woman who was right, too).

    • It’s because you, intuitively, think that the probably is evenly distributed based on the available number of options unknown to you. You see two options, so it must be 50/50. In this case, it is not 50/50 because there are still three choices, you just happen to know one is wrong. When Monty reveals that one of the two doors you didn’t choose has a goat, it doesn’t help the odds of the door you choose, it only helped the odds of the one you didn’t. Basically, there is more information available to you about the doors you didn’t choose, but you didn’t learn anything new about the door you did choose.

  7. Keith, the flag thing…in calling it “just a piece of fabric”, you are essentially disavowing the concept of symbolism. Ask 100 people on the street to name an object that has symbolic power, and I’ll bet many if not most of them will answer “a flag”. I’ll admit the sight of the American flag doesn’t stir much in me, but nor do I think everybody who claims a conditioned emotional response to it is just making it up.

    • I’m a little surprised Keith said he would burn the flag as an act of civil disobedience if the government started arresting people for it. That seems a little extreme, especially with how much flag burning bothers some citizens, specifically veterans. It’s not a perfect analogy, but I support the Westboro Baptist Church’s right to hate speech and funeral protests. If they got arrested, I certainly wouldn’t pick up their signs and march though. There are better ways to protest than engaging in the prohibited act, unless you condone the message that activity represents.

    • No, but if they were arrested for their speech (as opposed to, say, harassment), I’d defend them.

    • I’m a veteran. I swore to defend the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution protects speech and protest and burning the flag is a form of that. If people start getting arrested for that, I will be one of those burning the flag.

    • And I support your right to do it. The simple fact, though, that doing so rises to the level of speech elevates the flag above being merely a piece of fabric.

    • I’d equate it, as speech, to burning a T-shirt with a specific logo or someone’s face on it.

    • I guess I’m stunned that people like Keith and Jeff would actually burn the flag as their form of protest when it offends so many Americans, not to mention the fact that it is kind of, you know, dangerous.

      I support idiots to dress up like Native Americans at Cleveland games. But if a legislature criminalized it, I would not dress up as my form of protest. There are other ways without engaging in the suppressed activity, especially when those activities hurt a lot of people’s feelings.

    • If the only kind of protest you engage in is the sort that nobody finds disagreeable, then I doubt it’s much of a protest.

      And burning a flag is dangerous? So, are barbecues dangerous, too? After all, open flames.

    • People usually barbecue in contained pits or grills, making it less dangerous than those holding a burning object in a crowded area. Just Google how many protestors lit themselves on fire at the conventions this summer.

      Again, I’m just surprised people here would actually burn the flag as their method of protest. Speeches, marches, boycotts, Internet posts, non-violent things like that seem more appropriate to me, unless you agree with the message burning the flag sends.

    • If flag-burning is made illegal, the “message it sends” becomes a protest of a law restricting freedom of expression. If people obtusely cover their ears and claim they’re taking a different message from it, that’s their own damn problem. When somebody burns a flag (or, say, kneels for the national anthem), maybe listen to what their message is instead of assuming you know what message they’re sending.

    • If the flag symbolizes the freedom we all have, why would that symbol be more important than the actual freedom?

  8. Nick, that’s just not the correct way to look at it.
    You can run the experiment- it’s simple enough. For any particular door, you have a 1/3 chance of getting it “right” on the first try. Guessing right is the only possible scenario where you lose by switching. So 2/3 of the time, by switching (because you only guess right 1/3 of the time,) you win. This isn’t an opinion, or even a thought exercise. Mathematically, you win 2/3 of the time by switching.

  9. On your last point, don’t forget that the Democratic Party is every bit as aggressive as the Republicans in imposing cost prohibitive and Byzantine ballot access laws to prevent third party candidates from even getting on the ballot. Various forms of vote suppression is not limited to one party, but rather what sustains our awful two party system.

    • I think money sustains our two-party system more than anything else. The Libertarians, Greens, and the other parties you’ve barely heard of don’t have the cash to compete. They don’t field many downballot candidates – I think we had two total on the ballot here in DE outside of Johnson/Stein – in part because they don’t have the money to support them, which means they don’t get the donations to field more in the next cycle. If you want a multiparty system, which isn’t necessarily superior because then you have fragile coalitions much of the time, then step one is to get the money out.

  10. Michael: “Actually, many people would disagree…” is not really responsive to my comment. Many people disagree with lots of things, including Supreme Court opinions. I was asking: do *you* give less weight to Heller *because it was 5-4* or find the constitutional right to gun ownership less settled or something *for that reason.* Because if you do, you are in a very, very small minority of thinkers. 5-4 decisions are often controversial; thats why they end up 5-4 (note that the causation is that way, not the other way around though). But that doesn’t mean they “settle” the issue any less. And I’ll agree with your (perhaps implicit) point that SCOTUS is not the only arbiter of constitutional norms, but thats equally true for 9-0 opinions as 5-4 opinions.

    Also your point about 5-4 opinions being more likely to be overturned, in addition to being beside the point, is far from obvious. Especially with respect to opinions that have survived for as long as Texas v. Johnson has. Do you have any evidence of that?

    • From a practical standpoint, of course what SCOTUS says is law, whether it’s a 5-4 decision or a 9-0 one. No one was disputing that, which is why it is sort of ridiculous to even bring up possible arrests for flag burning because that would never happen without an amendment or SCOTUS reversing itself.

      I think I was objecting to Keith’s statement that “We know what the Constitution says.” I would have preferred, “We know what SCOTUS says the Constitution says,” because as you can see from the dissents in Texas v. Johnson, legitimate arguments can be made that the First Amendment does not protect flag burning. As I said above, I dislike the “SCOTUS says so, so the Constitution says so” statement. That’s why I brought up the part about 5-4 opinions being overturned. Has the First Amendment changed at all if SCOTUS changes its mind on flag burning in 100 years?

      I did some quick research and I’m not sure there are enough data points to draw conclusions on which SCOTUS cases get overruled. But I stand by the point that 5-4, 6-3 decisions are on flimsier ground than 9-0 decisions and are more likely to be overturned going forward. My overall point was that I don’t think it’s right to say the First Amendment automatically protects flag burning. SCOTUS has said that, but maybe that case was decided incorrectly.

    • Jim Rice is a Hall of Famer because the voters said so. That does not mean he should have been a Hall of Famer.

  11. I dunno about Alton Brown. The guy puts ketchup in his bolognese.

  12. Shows how out of it I am that I just realized the Winter Meetings will be right up the street from me. Too bad your book isn’t already out or I would bring one to be signed. But don’t be surprised if I bring my copy of Ruhlman’s Twenty for you to sign! 🙂

    • FYI, I’m not the Mike trolling about “anti-Semitic” comments. So if I do see you at the WM, remember Mike is a common name!

    • Fortunately I can see your IP and email addresses are different!

  13. “Screw you, Hollywood “? Anti-Semitic remarks in your chats now?

    See how silly that criticism is?

    • No, because the context of the comment makes it quite clear what I’m referring to. Nice trolling attempt, though.

  14. Keith, I think that your comment was equally as anti-Semitic as Arrieta’s…which is to mean that both of them were 0% anti-Semitic.

    I also think my “criticism” of your comment was equally as valid as your criticism of Arrieta’s (again, 0%)

    • I think you’re trolling. I also know that you’ve said before you don’t value my work enough to pay for it, so you’ll have to forgive me if I conclude my part in this conversation now.

    • This was a really unproductive reply. You’re saying that words can have different meanings and calling out Mike as uneducated because he said, “that word probably didn’t mean what you thought it meant”.

  15. If pointing out what appears to be incongruity in your criticism of others vs. what you say is trolling then I’ll happily plead guilty.

    Not sure what my personal point of view on paying for sports writing content has to do with anything in this case. You are right that I’ve said that, but I also said (probably in the same paragraph) that I think your work is top notch. I just don’t choose to pay for any sports commentary content.

    We’ve had several exchanges in comments on this site and I’ve not resorted to attacks. It won’t hurt my feelings if you don’t want to engage in this conversation, but don’t paint me as an asshole.

    • I don’t think I’ve painted you as such, and I will apologize if you or anyone else thinks I did. There is no incongruity, as I’ve explained, and that is the end of the matter for me.

    • You do understand, Mike, that words can have more than one meaning? Even when they are being used metaphorically?

      For example, “Hollywood” is sometimes used to refer to a specific place in California just west of downtown, and is sometimes used to mean “the entertainment industry.” In other contexts, say Breitbart’s “Big Hollywood” section, it’s used to mean “liberal and/or Jewish propagandists.”

      To pick another example, “chick” can be a man’s name, or a type of pea, or it can mean “baby chickens,” or it can be a moderately dismissive term for women. If I was somehow teaching an agriculture course at my university (not my field) and I had a lecture entitled “How to handle chicks” there’s no problem. Same lecture in the comm department (one of my fields) and I’m being called before the Academic Senate.

      If you are an educated person at all, you should know this. Which means, to me, that you are telling us that (a) you’re not educated, or (b) you like to be disingenuous. Not sure which.

  16. To Dan in Oregon: Stumptown coffee is great, especially finca el injerto. 🙂

  17. If I burn a rainbow flag and the government arrests me for it would you start burning rainbow flags?