Starting at 1 pm. My ranking of the top 50 prospects in baseball is now up for ESPN+ subscribers.
Keith Law: I try to hear the music but I’m always losing time. Klawchat.
Greg P: Loved the Mid-Season 50 and I DID read the intro. I already knew you hated my team. Is service time really the only thing keeping Bichette in the minors?
Keith Law: Thank you. I don’t know that for a fact, but I don’t see any good reason he’s not in the majors; he’s better than the team’s current options at SS and 2b.
Trevor: KLaw – Missed the chat 2 weeks ago but wanted to mention the #SmartBaseball move from Michigan’s coach to bat the previous day’s SP 9th as a DH then pinch hit for him with the batter of his choice based on the situation. I don’t ever recall an AL team trying this
Keith Law: I missed that entirely. I like the idea.
barbeach: No question today. Just thank you so much for the chats and the content–so awesome.
Keith Law: You’re quite welcome. I’m just relieved I got the top 50 out given that my fever hit 101.3 *again* yesterday. (I think it’s gone now.)
Greg P: As others have said before, you are the only reason I keep ESPN+ and if you leave, I leave. So, is Lou Bob (I love that nickname you gave him) going to get to Chicago this season?
Keith Law: Credit to Eric Longenhagen for the nickname. I think he will, although I am not basing that on anything from the team.
Nick: Can Alec Bohm potentially play corner outfield at all?
Keith Law: I highly doubt this.
Dana: Do you think the Yanks should bring up Deivi in September/playoffs and use him out of the bullpen?
Keith Law: I think he could help them, but don’t think that he needs to be recalled this year to keep developing.
Brian: Gurriel Jr. looks real (and even decent in left). Biggio seems to be able to get on base, but strikes out a ton (and can’t play D). What do you make of the young Jays?
Keith Law: Don’t think Biggio is anything … he can walk, but that’s it. Gurriel’s power is out of nowhere (juiced ball?), and he has just average bat speed; he’s killed sliders this year, and I wonder if teams will start pitching him differently since he doesn’t handle velocity well. The young guy you didn’t mention, Vlad Jr., is still going to be a star IMO even with the slower-than-projected start.
Jeff: Do you have a sense of why the Padres haven’t called up Urias yet? Is he still working on things at AAA or are they just waiting to clear roster space (e.g., Kinsler)? Thanks
Keith Law: The only thing I’ve heard, and this was secondhand, was that there were concerns about his swing – he may be too power-happy, and of course AAA/El Paso isn’t exactly the place to un-learn that.
Jeff: Given the Padres current/future middle infield depth, do you think either or both of Abrams and Edwards wind up in center field?
Keith Law: Abrams could. Really depends on how he looks over the next ~year at short. He’s physically able to play it, but also looks like he hasn’t had much coaching there.
David: Could Ke’Bryan Hayes get called up in September or is early next summer more likely? What would you do?
Keith Law: Should be up in September.
Trav: It feels less and less likely each day that we make it through Nov 2020 with our democracy remotely intact. No question, I just want to remind everyone that we’re not powerless until Election Day.
Keith Law: Agreed. Never too early to get involved or make your voice heard.
Andy: The players are in serious trouble in the upcoming CBA. There’s a whole lot of things they should want: Higher minimum salary, sooner free agency, no draft, better minor league pay, more on the revenue split. But they have little to negotiate with. Do they have to agree to a salary cap to get any of those? They’ll obviously punt on the minor leaguers/draft issue to help the current MLBPA members more, but that may not be enough. The only actual threat the players have, to increase their revenue vis a vis the owners, is a strike, which will be tough to gather enough momentum for.
Keith Law: Your last sentence is the key. They can strike. They may need to do so simply to remind owners of their willingness to take collective action for the long-term good of the union even if it hurts them in the short term. And striking for a higher minimum salary and for a greater share of industry revenues to reach players is as good a reason as there will ever be.
Brian in Austin: Keith, has Sam Huff put himself in top 100 consideration with his play this season?
Keith Law: No.
Kevin : You are the Astros GM- trade Tucker for pitching? Is a Tucker- Boyd trade good for both teams?
Keith Law: I think it’s fair.
Key Flaw: After actually seeing Vlad Jr. play third base, it certainly feels like he is a DH (he defense was ugly in the O’s series). With the Jay’s out of contention, it makes sense to keep running him out there. But how long does that last, and is there any chance that he actually improves enough to play 1st base, let alone 3rd base?
Keith Law: I really think his body is going to make him a full-time DH.
addoeh: You’ve talked about both recently. Who has better frozen custard, Culver’s or shake shack? Valdosta had your go to Concrete Mixer order and it was pretty good.
Keith Law: I like Culver’s a lot, but Shake Shack seems to have a better product – I don’t know if they use better inputs, or if their blending/freezing process is faster and produces less overrun.
Todd: Where does Robert Puason fit into Oakland’s prospect rankings right now? And if he develops at a typical pace, how long until we start seeing him in Top 100 discussions?
Keith Law: Eyeballing, I would say in the 6-10 range. He’s a LONG way off from the top 100.
Liam: About where on your top 50 would Carter Kieboom rank if he were eligible?
Keith Law: He is eligible. He just doesn’t have that kind of upside.
Kevin : Liberatore in the rotation for Tampa by June 2020?
Keith Law: He’s in low-A now on a tight innings limit. Think about it: Even if he’s promoted today to high-A, the season ends in less than eight weeks, and he’s not going to double-A until at the absolute earliest next April. There’s just no way this happens.
Jesse B: Are Daniel Lynch and Spencer Howard both still in the 50-60 range? Both have looked good but they’ve both had minor injures. Seems like since they’re both 22, they could move quickly if the injures don’t crop up again.
Keith Law: Lynch would have made it had he come back from this shutdown, but Howard’s issue is his shoulder and he’s been out too long.
Brian: Hey Keith, thanks for the insightful new prospect list this morning. I was a little surprised Heliot Ramos did not make your list (19 years old and performing well in High A). Do you see him as a top 100 prospect at this point? What pd
Keith Law: Probably top 100.
Carl: Is Yordan Alvarez still not a top 100 prospect for you?
Keith Law: He’s ineligible, since he’s in the majors.
Eric: Thanks for the chat, and the top 50 Keith. I know you’ve been a big Isan Diaz fan in the past. What are your thoughts on him after his big season so far? Too much question with the AAA ball to get him in the 50?
Keith Law: It’s the lack of recent performance and then he goes to AAA and hits like this … so is this the real Diaz, the guy I hoped he’d become maybe three years ago when I ranked him pretty highly, or is this a juiced ball mirage? He’d have been in the next 50 guys if I’d ranked 100.
Eric: What are your thoughts on George Valera? Chance for big helium and a spot on the offseason list?
Keith Law: I hear good things but he has barely played around injuries.
Andy: With all the tributes to Jim Bouton, I am reminded that Bowie Kuhn is in the HOF, but Marvin Miller isn’t. That was my biggest takeaway from the book, having an asshole in your corner is really good for the labor side.
Keith Law: Yep. Bowie Kuhn did more to destroy the game of baseball than anybody since Judge Landis. The Hall honoring him is a sick joke.
Keith Law: Oh, and by the way, the BBWAA still hasn’t removed Jim Reeves – who wrote an article just two months ago defending a former player accused of serial sexual assault of a child – from the Spink ballot. What a fucking joke.
John : Are Brady Singer and Daniel Lynch Mlb starters? Add Jackson to make up KC rotation by 2021?
Keith Law: Lynch, if healthy, is a very good starter. Singer still looks like a reliever to me between the low slot and lack of a weapon for LHB. Kowar’s probability is somewhere in between the two. Bubic has a low ceiling but his starter odds are higher than Singer’s for me. Haven’t seen Bowlan here yet.
Rick: Afternoon KLaw, non-prospect question for you. Jake Arrieta seems to be quite the curmudgeon. His willingness to “be a team leader” in Philly (ie throw teammates and coaches under the bus when things don’t go his way while getting batters out at a replacement level clip) hasn’t exactly endeared him to either teammates or fans in the city. My question is was he always like this and just wasn’t held accountable in Chicago because he actually got batters out? His temper tantrum over an equally washed up Todd Frazier this past week was a bad look that didn’t portray either him or the organization in the best light.
Keith Law: I think your assessment is accurate – and I don’t see how MLB can avoid suspending him for threatening Frazier (“I’ll put a dent in his skull”). You can’t say that. You can think it, but MLB has to put the clamp down on public threats.
Pat D: Something that is annoying me mightily right now from the great cesspool that is NYC sports talk radio is the assumption that because Bumgarner was great in the postseason 5-7 years ago, he’ll be great in the postseason now, and for that reason alone, the Yankees should acquire him above anyone else. Is there any way you can even hope to present a counter-argument to someone entrenched with that belief?
Keith Law: No, probably because the basic premise is flawed, and you won’t convince someone one of their core beliefs is wrong.
Liam: What’s wrong with Thor?
Keith Law: Here’s one guess: this year’s super-smooth baseball is killing his slider.
Adam: At this point, would you rank Luciano, Ramos and Bishop ahead of Bart in the Giants farm system?
Keith Law: maybe, yes, no.
MJ: Fantastic work on the list, Keith. Any brief thoughts on Tyler Freeman? Seems to have some of the same plate/OBP skills as Alek Thomas and Nolan Jones, albeit without the athleticism of the former and potential pop of the latter.
Keith Law: He’s more in Thomas’ vein – and he’s pretty small, so his impact is really likely to be limited.
Keith Law: Nice player, though. Probably top 100, not close to this.
Denis: Surprised to see Gavin Lux at #5. If he switched to 2B is he still in the top 10? Also, if you are the Dodgers, who would you keep out of Smith/Ruiz? Does Ruiz still have the higher ceiling?
Keith Law: Ruiz has the higher ceiling but I’d keep Smith because he’s ready now. Not that either is a wrong choice. no reason to bump Lux from SS.
Ridley: Just to expand on Trav’s point, now that the Supreme Court has decided that gerrymandering is beyond their reach, there’s no better time to get involved at the local and state levels to ensure that independent commissions are in place to ensure that neither party abuses redistricting.
Keith Law: Right, because if your state is gerrymandered next time around, it may become de facto permanent.
SGz: What is the rationale for Jesus Luzardo missing the Top 50? Thanks.
Keith Law: What is the rationale for him making it? He’s 21 with a pretty lengthy list of injuries already.
Rick: As a constitutional conservative who didn’t vote in the 2016 presidential election (both candidates made me physically ill) I can’t see myself going to the ballot box in 2020 [again]. Trump is Trump, and the takeaway from the Dem debates so far was: keep southern border open for potential votes and cheap labor, expand healthcare to illegal aliens, pay off existing college debt, offer voting rights to felons and mid-teens. This is supposed to motivate me to vote? Still waiting for the voice of sanity to step up.
Keith Law: If that’s your takeaway from the debates, I think you went into the debates having already decided what you want to hear. A non-vote in 2020 is a vote for Trump. It means you’re fine with a status quo that is imprisoning children, mistreating them, exposing them to trauma, just because they’re brown. It means you’re cool with the world’s largest economy still pretending climate change isn’t real – even though huge portions of our economy and our country will be adversely affected by it. People will die needlessly because of this. It means you’re fine with a government that turns its back on democratic allies to support autocratic governments that assassinate political opponents, including journalists, because it suits short-term political aims. It means you’re fine with the kleptocracy that ignores rampant conflicts of interest, enriching officeholders across the government, because you just want low taxes and a ban on abortion. Yeah, you’re a Trump supporter. You just lack the courage to admit it.
John: Has Seth Beer impressed with his performance so far?
Keith Law: Really needs to show he can hit LHP.
mark: Dinelson Lamet recently returned to the Pads after TJS. What kind of upside does he have… #3 starter?
Keith Law: Two-pitch guy who’ll end up in the pen if that doesn’t change.
Paul: I’m sure some of my fellow Braves fans are bitching about Waters’ omission; already saw one person on Twitter. Not here to do that, but am curious what you think of him? BABIP is absurd (.457) with an alarming K-rate and not many walks. Something he can fix or overcome with the rest of his game? And likelihood of him doing that? Thanks for the chat!
Keith Law: Solid prospect but he’s a corner guy long term. The K rate isn’t alarming on its own, especially since he’s young for AA, but the combination of low walk rates his whole career and rising K rates is concerning. Again, like a lot of guys folks are asking about here, he’s a top 100 type, but this is just a 50, and that means I’m only ranking the best.
Justin: When players makes their major league debut why is the note that the player has been recalled by the team? Shouldn’t that be for players that were demoted and then brought back?
Keith Law: If a player is recalled, then he was demoted when he was optioned in spring training. When a player is recalled, it means he’s already on the 40-man; if he’s already on the 40-man, but was in the minors, then he was in major league spring training (the entire 40-man comes) and was sent to the minors on optional assignment before the spring ended. If the player isn’t on the 40-man, his contract is “purchased,” which means he’s added to the 40-man at the time he’s brought to the majors.
romorr: Hall and Rodriguez both have a reliever chance, Halls BB% is going the wrong way, and Rodriguez has funk in the delivery. But if you had to pick to stick in the rotation, would it be Rodriguez still?
Keith Law: It would not, and I think my ranking of them today and in the winter makes that clear.
addoeh: Two prospects from Wisconsin (Kelenic and Lux) in your top 8 and one from Chicago (Thomas) at 45 and I may have missed others from the Midwest. Along with Priester just being drafted in the 1st round, will the fear of prospects from cold states start to subside?
Keith Law: I don’t think it will, but I’m sort of okay with that. Some is just structural: we get fewer looks at high school players in cold climates. It’s also a reason for MLB to do more (and they’re doing some) to give those players chances to play in front of scouts against better competition.
Liam: My apologies if there is an obvious example I’m missing but have we ever seen an administration so blatantly go against a supreme court ruling as the current admin plans re: citizenship/census question?
Keith Law: Did Nixon? This is way out of my area.
Keith Law: Again, that’s another thing that anyone who abstains in 2020 is supporting: An overt rejection of the rule of law that has defined our system of government for nearly 250 years. You can even hate Trump’s opponent, but if you don’t vote him and his swamp dragons out, then you’re saying you are tacitly okay with what he’s doing.
Todd: With the news that Bubba Starling is getting called up to KC, do you think there’s even the tiniest chance he’ll spend time as a true big league regular?
Keith Law: No.
Ben: Why would anyone listen to sports talk radio? Have you ever encountered a decent STR station throughout your many travels across the country?
Keith Law: I don’t listen to terrestrial radio, ever, so I have no answer to that. I appear on a few sports radio programs and I know they treat me well by asking good questions.
Ron: I was surprised that Lewis even made your top 50 beings his first half was poor and his mechanics changed. Although he has started to heat up. Did he make any changes that you know of back to how he was before? Thanks!
Keith Law: I addressed that in the piece.
SGz: You had Luzardo at 31 on pre season rankings and he’s been very good when playing this year. Health was the knock in the pre season, so it seems like a reasonable question to ask why he was omitted.
Keith Law: Health was the knock and he’s been banged up again.
Joe: Justus Sheffield has put up good numbers after being sent to AA. Still the same guy he was before the season started in your mind?
Keith Law: I want to know why his velocity dropped off this year.
John: One concern about Dustin May – even to those who like him – is the results haven’t always matched the stuff. How legit is that concern for you?
Keith Law: I don’t think that’s accurate. He’s been outstanding this year.
mike sixel: Royce Lewis…..is his fall mostly that your fears of him at SS are confirmed? A year of not hitting in A+? Clearly his change to his hitting is not going well. Did he do that on his own? Thanks,
Keith Law: Much more about not hitting/visible changes to his mechanics. I have never bought into the claims that he’ll stay at short: He’s not good there, and he could be very good in CF, maybe a 70 or better defender there. Most organizations would probably have moved him but the Twins have an 80 defender in center in the majors, so that may be one reason why they haven’t.
Devin: Thoughts on Kristian Robinson? Candidate to crack your top 100 next year?
Keith Law: He was on my top 100 in the winter, so yes.
Tmh: What is Rutchman”s ETA?
Keith Law: I would say end of 2020 if they want.
romorr: Having a hard time getting a read on if Keegan Akin is ready for the majors. Orioles are starting guys they pick up off waivers like crazy, so it seems Akin needs to work on some things before a promotion.
Keith Law: I agree that seems to be the implication, although I’m not sure what they think is going to change in his profile, either.
John: Alexander Canario just hit his 8th hr in under 80 abs. Will he be a legit prospect for the org?
Keith Law: He is one.
Keith Law: He’s a legit prospect, I mean.
Rick Sanchez : Worried about Mize at all?
Keith Law: Not yet.
Keith Law: yeah I just triple-checked, the MLB.com story says there were no setbacks last night. After I sent that response I thought I might have missed something.
OC Joe: Newcomb and Touki have thrived in relief this season. With all of the starting pitching depth in the high minors for Atlanta, should they stay in the pen?
Keith Law: I think that’s Newcomb’s role, but Touki still has starter potential.
Rick: In regard to Liam’s comment on the Supreme Court this pains me as a holder of a BA and Master’s in History. Did your school system teach you literally NO AMERICAN HISTORY? Andrew Jackson’s response to the court’s ruling in Worcester v. Georgia: “Justice Marshall has made his decision now let him go enforce it.” Christ almighty I understand that you may have serious issues with this White House and it’s actions but try not to be completely ignorant on history when making “all encompassing” claims. When Trump says that then we can call it the greatest attack on the Supreme Court in our history. Until then its not on the medal stand.
Keith Law: I admit to having forgotten that entire case until I saw your quote from Jackson (it’s a good line by a terrible person), probably because it happened 140 years before I was born.
Matt M: Would Nico Hoerner crack your top 100?
Keith Law: Probably. A lot of people asking why he’s not on the top 50 and … again, why would he be? He has barely played this year due to injury and it’s not like he’s a huge tools guy: His value is in the expectation that he’s going to hit.
Valentin: Hi Keith. big fan from Bern, Switzerland. have you ever heard of Prospects coming from Switzerland? Kind regards
Keith Law: The Swiss have fielded teams in youth tournaments in Europe for a while, but I’ve never heard of a player signing from there. The most likely places for teams to find European prospects right now are Germany, the Netherlands, and Italy, i think.
Tim: Vavra has been outstanding this season. Has he passed Vilade for you yet?
Keith Law: Vavra is two years older than Vilade (who is performing) and a level below. Both are prospects, but there’s not a strong argument right now for Vavra over Vilade – and Vavra is yet another college D1 product who should NOT be in low-A.
Jason: Harris or Warren?
Keith Law: I was about to ask what team. I might not be fully recovered yet.
John: Were you a big mixtape guy? I don’t know if you ever listen to my favorite local Seattle station (KEXP) or not, but they’re running a cool little mixtape contest. Given your affinity for music and playlists, seems like something you could have some fun with.
Keith Law: A little bit, yes – I would nearly always choose to listen to my own tapes and later CDs rather than listen to full albums or put on the radio.
addoeh: Have you ever heard of a player have a similar journey to the majors as Robel Garcia’s?
Keith Law: No, and I mean that literally: I don’t know of another player who went from Italy’s semipro league to the majors. It is movie material if he’s any good, maybe even if he’s not. Those are my people but the quality of baseball in Italy is not good.
Johnny O: Yankees seem to develop mid draft and int’l players well (#woo) but their first round picks have been questionable among the consensus and also aren’t panning out (Judge as the outlier in more ways than one). Volpe probably a reach, Siegler, Schmidt, Rutherford, Holder, Kaprielian, Clarkin. If Yanks are good at development, why are the missing on so many 1st round picks?
Keith Law: They are good at development, and they’ve had some very successful draft picks after the first round. Perhaps their process up top is different? Many teams approach their first picks a bit differently, and the Yankees often draft late in the round, where the types of high-upside players they value (they’re not looking for soft regulars – they want stars, or guys they think they can trade for stars) are either gone or carry some high risk.
Jeff: Stranger Things S3 thoughts?
Keith Law: Never seen the show. I need to finish Good Omens this weekend.
Keith Law: Well I never even got to announce this on Twitter – sorry, I feel bad about that – but I jumped right into it and forgot to post the tweet. Thanks to you diehards who saw this on my Facebook page or just checked the dish since it’s Thursday! I’m going to wrap this up before I pass out. I believe I will be back to chat again the next two Thursdays before taking a week off (Gen Con!). Enjoy your weekends and the return of baseball tonight.
Keith, I am stealing/copying your response to Rick (re: not voting in 2020) for future usage. I hope you don’t mind if I use (I may forget to credit you).
Go for it.
A bit ironic that someone is bitching about knowing history after trying to pass off an apocryphal quote (“let him enforce it”) as real. It’s not even clear that there was anything to enforce except with respect to Worcester himself.
That dude’s comment didn’t even make sense. Keith’s claim wasn’t all encompassing. He even prefaced it by saying it’s not his area of expertise to know if there’s been more blatant examples. And why did he put “all encompassing” in quotes? Who said all encompassing?
That guy came here for one reason only; to show that he knows an obscure quote that may or may not have happened. I hope it made him feel good.
If this quote didn’t happen, what are the other attacks on the Supreme Court from the President that occupy the other two spots on the medal stand that Rick alluded to? Are they also as dubious?
Also, he rolls in saying “as a holder of a ba and masters in history” he is shocked, shocked I tell you, that Keith might not know this thing (that might not have been said). Like, I have a ba and masters in music and I don’t have a meltdown every time someone doesn’t know some obscure thing about music theory or whatever.
Not to mention that Andrew Jackson having done something doesn’t really help prove that thing isn’t all that bad.
Kinda silly to have to go back to Andrew Jackson nearly 200 years ago and debate whether his relationship with the USSC was worse than our current POTUS, whose disdain for Courts, Congress, the Free Press, and pretty much anyone who doesn’t do his bidding is clear whether or not worst ever, but as long as we are in the historical trivia stage …
While the “let them go enforce it” quote may be made up, and the decision itself was implemented in the Georgia matter, Jackson’s fealty to Court decisions was pretty clearly limited. His actions vis a vis the National Banks was contrary to the John Marshall decisions in McCullouch. Similarly, he stated on multiple occasions that the USSC was not the ultimate arbitor of what the Constitution provided but rather than responsibility was equally shared by all three branches. That is, if the Court said something was unconstitutional but the Pres disagreed, Jackson’s interpretation would be implemented as he controlled the Army.
Related … I’m not sure that DJT (subsequently not implemented) suggesting to collect Citizenship data via the census didn’t exactly contradict the Roberts decision as that was very narrowly crafted to hold that Wilbur Ross’s rationale was a sham so, at least in theory, a different rationale could have been advanced that would have supported the collection. Personally, I think it **highly** unlikely that there was such a legitimate rationale, but the Court didn’t eliminate that entirely.
Actually I was talking about Liam’s original ignorant post – not KLaw’s response. Since you no longer need to actually read endless numbers of books, or peruse Encyclopedia Britannica to either confirm something about history or actually learn it (Google is a wonderful thing) maybe Liam should’ve have spouted off about how this most recent presidential soundbite was the most “blatant” example of an administration going against the Supreme Court. Think this is a perfect opportunity for those who aren’t well read in either American History or Civics to visit Google and do some research. Cheers.
Keith,
Missed the chat so hoping you might have a minute to answer another question. Can you comment about the factors beyond statistical performance that go into promotions at the lower minor league levels for the super young, high ceiling type players? Nolan Gorman’s recent promotion made me curious about the non-performance based factors teams consider while making these decisions. ***Blatant scouting the stat line warning*** His overall A ball performance was very good considering his age, but we also see a guy that started out 325/389/650 over his first 21 games and then went 199/323/348 over his next 46.
Teams now have a lot more data – they have trackman data, like exit velocity, that could factor into the decisions too. Perhaps that .199/.323/.348 included a lot of hard-hit outs? Perhaps he met goals they’d set for, say, offspeed recognition, or they felt like he wasn’t seeing enough good velocity. They just know more than we do, which is a bit unfortunate because it could shield them from fair criticism as well.
Re: batting the previous night’s pitcher as DH. Earl Weaver did this for a while in 1982, but then MLB outlawed it. My memory is that the O’s knocked out the other team’s starting pitcher in the first inning one night, and ended up pinch hitting for their platoon DH in his first at bat. A fan (I think a female fan) wrote him and suggested DH’ing the previous night’s pitcher, he thought it was brilliant, and started doing it right away.
Correct – this is no longer allowed, the DH has to bat at least once unless the other team has changed pitchers – so I guess you could potentially do it against an “opener”.
It was actually 1980.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BAL/1980.shtml
Keith,
Always enjoy the content but missed the chat today. What are your thoughts on Cal Raeigh with his recent insanely hot streak? I know you were higher on him coming out of college than most. Does he have a chance to make a couple all star games in his career?
Thanks
Keith, I have read your chats for many a year now and while I disagree with your politics I do love to learn and have a thirst for knowledge. I seriously would love to discuss with you via email many issues that are going on in our World today. Not to change your mind or for you to change mine. I have tried to debate people from the left before many, many times and none can debate intelligently and back up their views. I know that you are a busy person, but if this is a possibility I would love to hear from you. Stay Blessed.
I’m pretty sure Keith wouldn’t describe himself as a “leftist” by any means, as he’s said he was basically a Republican, if I’m not mistaken. But why in the world would he take you up on his offer after you say, “I have tried to debate people from the left before many, many times and none can debate intelligently and back up their views?” Seriously, why? You’re basically implying that he can’t, either.
I wish I was wrong, but I thought Rick’s assessment of the debates was spot on. I don’t agree with refusing to vote, but that isn’t my issue. You admitted to not watching their debates or being interested in watching them, so why are you so dismissive of what the main issues discussed were? You should actually watch them, collectively the democrats did a great job making Trump seem somewhat sane, unfortunately.
“Let’s do something about global warming before it is too late,” “America’s healthcare system is broken,” and “What’s happening at the border is horrific.” Yeah, those are such *crazy* ideas they absolutely make Trump sound sane. (eye roll)
Keith is right: If you listened to a bunch of Democrats discuss ideas that would be considered centrist in any other Western democracy, and you concluded they were nutso, then your mind was made up before any of them opened their mouths.
I agree with Mark. Charles, your quotes softened greatly what the candidates said in the debates. While certainly your quotes cover some of the issues they talked about, I felt that the debates were almost a race to see who could be furthest to the left on those and other issues.
John Delaney was the only person who seemed to be trying to appeal to more moderate leaning people, even at one point saying he wasn’t going to be like the other candidates and promise things that they know will never happen, like abolishing private medical insurance. Otherwise, it often was each candidate trying to be more extreme than the next. Good strategy in a room with a left leaning audience, not a good strategy to try to appeal to all of America.
First of all, since this was a “getting to know you” debate, it was actually kind of thin on policy prescriptions. Particularly the first night.
Second, there were a sizable number of candidates whose whole shtick was tacking toward the center. Delaney, Joe Biden, Tim Ryan, Amy Klobuchar. Heck. John Hickenlooper specifically declared that he does not want the party to become the party of socialism.
Third, it is true that the lefty candidates (Bill de Blasio, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren) had…wait for it…lefty ideas. But if you think something like “let’s spend $600 billion so poorer college students don’t graduate in crippling debt” is LESS sane than what’s come out of the President’s mouth, I don’t even know what to say.
In short, it remains clear to me that Mark, Drew, and Rick (1) weren’t paying especially close attention to the debates, if they watched at all, OR (2) they went into the debates with their minds essentially already made up, such that when Sanders/Warren opened their mouths, it was confirmation bias for the whole Democratic Party, OR (3) both of these things.
Charles, I watched the debates. Otherwise I wouldn’t have weighed in. Please do not say it is clear that I didn’t. My mind isn’t made up about the candidates, as there are so many it’s tough to keep them all straight! As for confirmation bias – you are correct that they were “getting to know you” events, and the candidates mostly seemed to want us to know how far left they could lean.
Saying that you don’t want your party to be the party of socialism is only saying that you aren’t extremely far left. A lot of people aren’t for their tax dollars paying off other people’s student debt – the person received an education, why shouldn’t they pay the tuition they agreed to pay?
Again, the audiences seemed to love it, but if the candidates all keep racing to the left they will alienate a lot of more moderate people, who then won’t vote because they don’t like either candidate, or say screw it, the stock market’s up, unemployment is down, let’s vote Trump again.
I like baseball. Thanks for the chat, KLaw!
It’s ironic that one of the political viewpoints that is apparently now brilliant is helping fix student loan debt when the government is the main reason the student loan debt burden has gotten so out of control. The federal loan programs made borrowing tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars relatively cheap, so colleges were and are able to raise the cost of attendance every year knowing that the government will provide a constant supply of students due to “affordable” borrowing.
Everyone needs to go to college to compete in the work force, the government wants to promote education, so it provides low interest loans to make that possible, colleges see this and have raised tuition many hundreds of percent in the past 30-40 years, and now the government is going to solve the problem it created. Throwing money at it always works right?
You know, in a strictly capitalist sense most colleges and universities are not for-profit enterprises, so they aren’t bound by the edict of maximizing returns to shareholders. So it’s okay to reserve some blame for the rising cost of attending college to the entities that are actually raising the price.
If college tuition debt is paid for by the tax payer then let’s add in everyone’s credit card debt and mortgages as well. Heck, it teaches us all that signing contracts don’t matter.
Sounds good to me!
Heck, it teaches us all that signing contracts don’t matter.
I’m pretty sure the banking crisis taught us that – or, at least, that contracts (and rules) matter for some people but not for others.
The student loan racket is a huge wealth transfer of taxpayer funds to private universities and colleges and to the lending institutions. It made tuition hikes easier for the schools, and allowed lenders to make riskier loans because they were guaranteed by taxpayers. Unless your livelihood depends on one of those schools or banks, you should be fucking furious about how the U.S. government has used your money to enrich these people.
You had 6 guys from the 2019 in your top 50, that seems like alot more than other drafts. Is that more than usual and if so why do you think that is?
@Trevor & @KLawL: Bakich learned that DH move from Corbin. He’s been doing that for years. Think he got the idea from Stanford.
Hi Keith. I’m a 12th grade English teacher that loves your work, baseball and otherwise. Although I’m old, I’m fairly new to teaching and although I’ve scoured your book lists I’m looking for a specific recommendation. The theme for the year is perspective and stranger in the village concept. We read Othello and Pygmalion as part of the nonnegotiable curriculum, but I do have room for a novel. I’m looking for a contemporary novel that the students will enjoy from a narrative perspective and maybe even relate to, that also fits that stranger/outsider perspective. Any cultural elements would be great (or feminist or Marxist interpretations) but really I’m looking for a story that young adults might love and spark a desire to read. I feel that the static curriculum does a poor job of choosing texts that young adult students today connect with and I’m hoping that using resources outside of that curriculum can be part of turning students into life long readers, because I’m just not seeing that love of reading and most seem to despise it (or are scared). Maybe the school I teach at has skewed my perspective, but any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Joe
I’ll give this some thought but One Hundred Years of solitude came to mind immediately.
What about Housekeeping by Marilynne Robinson? She tackles themes of being an outsider and stranger in it and has absolutely beautiful prose. It’s not exactly plot driven might be a little slow for 12th graders but if there is any author that can capture the beauty of the English language, it’s her.
Yes! excellent suggestion.
How about Their Eyes Were Watching God? Beloved? The Color Purple?
Oh, I thought of another one – Pachinko by Min Jin Lee. This book reads easily despite its length (I think I read it a week or two and I consider myself a slow reader) and covers the theme of outsiders from the perspectives of multiple characters and across generations. It came out last year or the year before that so it would definitely fit as a contemporary novel.
“you should be fucking furious about how the U.S. government has used your money to enrich these people.”
Yes, I am. There is not a single institution that the Government runs that is competent, not a single one. Everything our Government touches turns to shit and the Left wants more of it.
OK, first of all, that’s just wrong, to an embarrassing extent. The interstate highway system was and remains entirely a government program. The postal system seems to keep getting mail to my house. The CDC has probably stopped a pandemic or two, in addition to all the tremendous work they’ve done or facilitated in vaccines, AIDS and cancer research, anti-smoking efforts, and so on. I feel like our armed forces should get a nod here or there. If you think everything our government touches “turns to shit” then you need to turn off Fox News.
Second, who in the actual fuck is “the Left?” See my earlier comments on Fox News.
And finally, you just completely abandoned your initial point to move the goalposts. The reason so many people ended up with crippling student debt was a government-subsidized program that had unintended (albeit foreseeable to anyone who took an economics class) consequences. First you want to blame the borrowers, and now you want to blame the government. In neither comment did you consider the actual economic arguments for forgiving some or all student debt (for example, it’s an enormous one-time stimulus to the economy by returning disposable income to people very likely to spend it on consumption, which the 2017 tax bill did not do). As far as I can tell, you’re just very mad online.
Firstly I actually agree with you about predatory lending on student loans. But does that mean we forgive a debt every single time someone is preyed upon by any time of lender? If that’s the case then there are a ton of mortgages that should be forgiven as well as most credit card debt. Yes, predatory or not I blame the ones that signed a contract knowing that the debt has to be repaid. This entire generation is going to go through life feeling there are absolutely NO consequences for their actions. Just let’s forgive everyone’s entire debt so we can all spend it as you’d like. Keith, why do you think BOTH sides of the aisle are wanting a Trillion+ for our infrastructure? I’m quite sure it’s because it’s all so safe to drive on and all the bridges are safe and secure. You are smart enough to know that our electrical grid alone is hanging by a thread. The Post Office? Now you crack me up. The same Post Office that posted a Fiscal year NET loss of $3.9 Billion? That Post Office. Yes, I’m sure as long as you get your mail on time it works fine. The CDC? Let’s agree on that one. So we found ONE Government entity that works fine. Oh, and apologies for making you feel like I moved the goalposts. Was not the intent. As for the mad comment? Why aren’t you? You have politicians from BOTH sides that have simply stopped caring about the constituents they represent and care more about the money in their pockets or how many retweets they get. And a thank you as well for at least engaging. A sincere thank you.
Wait, do you really not realize why the Post Office loses money? They are required by law to serve every address in the country. Other delivery services can simply choose not to serve any place that is too costly; the USPS doesn’t have that option.
As for this: This entire generation is going to go through life feeling there are absolutely NO consequences for their actions. That is merely old person drivel. Unless you have some kind of research to back this claim, I’m calling bullshit on it.
Besides, I’m pretty sure previous generations have gotten away with causing massive damage to the local and global environment without facing consequences for those actions. The youngest generation now will learn that in life, sometimes you face the consequences for someone else’s actions.
Since 2006 USPS has been required by law to pre fund retiree benefits up to the year 2056 to the tune of 5.5 billion dollars per year. This has been the major factor in the ‘financial crisis’ the post office has supposedly been facing. Costs have been cut; there are almost 200k less career (employees who receive benefits) employees since 2006, employee pension contributions have increased 3.6%, and there is a secondary pay scale for new hires that starts ~12,000 less per year than previous employees started at. I’m sure there’s more that I can’t think of at the moment. The post office has done all this while remaining the most popular agency in the government and servicing every single home in the US.
There are a bunch of things that the government does that is a net benefit. As a scientist, federal funding of basic research is near and dear to my heart. The U.S. scientific enterprise has been the envy of the world, and is a huge multiplier for our economy. And despite (legitimate!) complaints about costs, our public colleges universities are also generally excellent. Then there are lots of regulations that are mostly invisible that provide far more benefit than harm (consumer protections, workplace safety, infrastructure standards). It’s important to carefully look at cost-benefit analyses, and make changes when the data suggests doing so. I do think that the argument that the government does most things poorly is confirmation bias.
Thank you for making my point Joe. And thank you all again for engaging. I truly believe it will be dialogue between parties with differing opinions that helps us all get to what I would hope is a common goal. Salty, we can both point to individual parts of Government run programs that are both good/bad. My point was NOT that EVERY single run Government program is inept, but in general; yes I would make that argument. Dept. of Education, EPA, HHS, VA, IRS, OPM (that one is a joke in and of itself). We have differing opinions on the colleges and Universities. I feel it’s a breeding ground for liberalism and have many, many cases in which to back that up. As one of the richest Countries on the planet there should not be a single homeless person (although some do choose it). Also why I feel the Dept of Education is so inept is where our collective scores are (k-12) in relation to other Countries. IMO it’s that we now have and have had for decades a Government that is o friggin corrupt that it’s more than likely going to decades (or Anarchy) to fix it. And again, thank you for engaging in a civilized and respectful manner.
My point was NOT that EVERY single run Government program is inept,
That is exactly what you said, though. Your words: “Everything our Government touches turns to shit and the Left wants more of it.”
The EPA is inept? Try life without it.
Calling colleges and universities “a breeding ground for liberalism” is problematic on many levels. I think the salient point is that people’s political & social views become more progressive as education increases. The more time you spend in school, the more progressive you become. It’s a function of exposure to more people from more diverse backgrounds as well as to new ideas. The alternative, if you want to ensure kids grow up to have conservative or right-wing views, is to stop educating them.
And if government corruption bothers you this much, I’m glad we can count on you to vote against President Trump, serial violator of the emoluments clause, who has surrounded himself with Cabinet executives enriching themselves from government coffers, in 2020.
I’m a Biology Prof. in a conservative flyover state. Our students are probably on average quite a bit more liberal than their parents, but as far as I know we don’t have any of the bogeyman courses that some right-wingers lament about. Here’s what I see. We have students who are openly LGBTQ, and we have visible clubs on campus to support those students. That tends to liberalize the views of those who maybe never met someone who identifies as LBGTQ. We also teach evolutionary biology in our department, and some students who have been taught Creationism do feel a sense of betrayal by their parents and religious leaders. I believe this is a regrettable consequence of the religious right equating evolution with being incompatible with Christianity. I also see many conscientious professors trying to encourage their students to think critically. I also see them do this while conducting top notch research with undergrads, graduate students, and postdocs. And I see many foreign applicants from all over the world who would love the opportunity to get a top-notch education at an American university. If you have a university nearby, I would encourage you to try to sit in on some classes. I think you’d be pleasantly surprised.
I’ll also point out (at perhaps the risk outing my pseud and generally embarrassing myself) that I was an Ayn Rand-loving libertarian in college, voted for W. in my first election, voted Badnarik (LP) in the next election, and then Obama-Obama-Clinton. Despite being an (obnoxious) libertarian, I felt that my liberal arts professors were rather fair in their grading and critiques of my work.
I was always socially liberal (hence the libertarian) and under W. became disillusioned with the GOP’s stance on civil liberties, and then completely abandoned them after they embraced unscientific and anti-education positions. While I would call myself a liberal, I’m pretty far to the right of most Democrats on economic issues. Had the GOP not embraced anti-intellectualism, they would have been competitive for my vote. Now the damage is done, and I cannot imagine ever voting for them again.
I would actually love an intellectually honest conservative party. For example, one that does not simply deny the existence of anthropogenic climate change, but argues about the least economically disruptive ways to deal with the problem. Sadly, the policy wonks in the GOP are long gone, and so are the pseudo-wonks that replaced them.
Salty, I will try and reply more to this when I can. I’m not sure if Keith would allow it or not or if you’re interested but Keith has my permission to send you my email should you like to continue. I truly am interested in intelligent and civilized discourse and I have appreciated your engagement. It seems I simply piss Keith off . 🙂
Keith, if you allow it and Mr. Scientist is ok with it could you please forward him my personal email? I’d love to discuss several thing with you. Namely “open borders”, climate change, education and several other areas where I feel we can have a chance at building a bridge to how the other side thinks.
You’re not pissing me off, but you’re neither consistent nor logical with your statements here, and that’s very frustrating.
I’ll leave it to Salty to decide.
Jon, I don’t mind engaging you in comments, though I’m not really sure there’s a whole lot of common ground. I do prefer to keep my pseud life and my real life separate (and my real life private).
Keith, I lean conservative. Were you expecting consistent and logical? Let’s get those expectations lowered a bit for you. 🙂 Understood Salty.
Can we try borders next? I feel that most people on the left want “open borders”. I’m 100% for immigration as long as it’s legal. Illegal immigration I feel is unfair to those immigrants that actually had to wait in line and go through the process. And illegal is illegal, period. Shoplifting is illegal, period. A crime is a crime and when you cross the border illegally it’s a crime. That person has broken our laws. This could be fixed IMO in a nano-second if the morons in DC would put politics aside.
Jon, if you want to have a genuine conversation, please don’t put arguments into other peoples’ mouths. Did we have “open borders” during the Obama Administration? How long do you think the wait *should* be for a poor person from Central or South America and what is it in reality? That may provide some perspective on the desperation at the other side of the border. I disagree on the last part–I think the so-called easy solutions would frequently have massive negative consequences on our economy and the fragile stability of our southern neighbors.
Salty, please read what I wrote. “I feel”. Not putting anything in anyone’s mouth. Told you, not here to try and change minds. Just to try and understand better what “the otherside” thinks/feels about what I feel are important topics facing all of us today. Not trying to trick anyone, catch you “slipping up”. I just truly feel that if there were more dialogue and finding common ground then more could get done for the betterment of us all.
As for the Obama administration. They deported far, far more than has the current administration. Deaths at the border are also lower under the current administration as opposed to the last TWO administrations. I think we all know that the Obama administration is the one that actually built all the “cages” that everyone despises now. The wait IMO should be as short as possible so that people that LEGALLY come to this Country can contribute immediately. But that takes reform. More judges as an example. Illegal is illegal IMO. Congress makes the laws and it’s up to ICE/CBP to enforce them. If none of us like the laws then it’s up to us all to elect the people that will stop with the partisan shit and change the laws. And please don’t pigeon hole “the poor”. It shouldn’t matter economic status if one should want to come to our Country. Because I’m quite sure you’re not insinuating that we only allow “poor” people in. The asylum part needs to be fixed as well. If a refugee is truly seeking safety from their Country of origin then why would they not seek asylum in the first Country that is safe? Yes I’m speaking of Central Americans not seeking asylum in Mexico. Is Mexico not safe? I repeat that I truly feel most of this could be fixed if both sides didn’t have their collective heads up their own asses. That is why I say that these idiots in DC are NOT listening to their constituents. You and I both I think want the same thing and it’s not about winning/losing. It’s about doing the right thing for actual human beings.
My point in bringing up the Obama administration–which you would agree is not an open-border policy–was that he’s probably close to the median on liberal policy. Focus deportation efforts on criminals, catch-and-release instead of detention, a pathway for DREAMers, etc.
My point in bringing up poor Latin Americans was to highlight that the huge hurdles and decade-long waits for legal immigration makes their choices understandable. This desperation is the root cause of illegal border crossings and is not easily solvable.
I agree with you about deporting criminals, but I do not see that agreement coming from the left. Just this past week when ICE was trying to round up several thousand illegal immigrants that a judge had already denied entry and they had failed to even show up for their hearing, Mayors from the cities when on TV explaining to the community how NOT to get caught. Even Pelosi and Hillary did so. Where is the logic in this? Are these people WANTING illegals that have committed crimes in their communities? Haven’t we had enough of illegals murdering and committing other crimes in this Country? It CAN be prevented. No, not an easy fix, but one that BOTH sides should come together and look at without it being political. Just last night different waves of immigrants tried to rush a border crossing. We need to change the laws that are enticing them to come. The “Catch & Release” law being the main one. Damn right someone from an impoverished Country is going to come here knowing that they will get caught, be released into the Country, receive a driver’s license, medical care and social benefits only to never be heard from again. Who wouldn’t come? This has got to stop.