Stick to baseball, 12/16/17.

The MLB winter meetings were a bit slow this year, but I did have five new Insider pieces this week, covering:

The Dodgers/Atlanta salary swap and the Matt Moore trade
The Santana and Cozart signings, plus the Galvis trade
The Piscotty and Kinsler trades, and the Shaw/McGee signings
The Marcell Ozuna trade
A quick take on a few interesting Rule 5 picks
The Giancarlo Stanton trade

My ranking of the top ten new board games of 2017 went up at Paste on Sunday evening. My latest game review for the site covers Ex Libris, a fun, light strategy game that’s extremely well balanced, and made my top ten as well.

The holidays are upon us! Stick a copy of Smart Baseball in every stocking.

And now, the links…

Comments

  1. I’ve been known to write a little bit about American politics from time to time. I read the Chait article, and I don’t find it to be particularly compelling. His argument boils down to: “There’s nothing that Trump won’t do, and the GOP is scared to stand up to him.” He has no particular case beyond that.

    While it is true that the members of Congress have been willing to look the other way on just about anything and everything The Donald does, it’s also the case that they were doing so in order to get tax “reform” done. Now, that’s (almost) over. At the same time, Trump’s base is fraying. I think that if the choice is between Trump and Constitutional crisis, there’s very good reason to believe the members will toss The Donald under the bus. And even if they don’t, there’s at least some chance a different Party will be in control of Congress in 11 months.

    • I don’t know. I watched the Rosenstein hearing, and the GOP congressmen spent their time basically arguing that Mueller is completely biased, and the investigation compromised. Until they stand up to Trump, I see no reason to believe they will actually conduct meaningful oversight of the administration. I’m also not sure I’d say this is all to pass tax cuts (or reform, as the GOP describes it). I suspect the GOP is aware of the Faustian bargain it made to gain the levers of power, and now has no clue how to control what they’ve unleashed.

      I’d also argue that this is a party that doesn’t seem overly concerned with causing constitutional crises. Case in point – refusing to seat, or even meet with, Merrick Garland. The GOP held open a seat on the Supreme Court for nearly a year in a (successful) effort to steal a seat. And several member of the senate, such as Ted Cruz, openly talked about holding the seat open indefinitely, until a GOP president was elected. These are not the actions of a party that concerns itself with uncomfortable constitutional questions.

    • Ok, here is a considerably better written version of that editorial:

      http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/17/opinions/mueller-investigation-attack-opinion-zelizer/index.html

    • Yeah – that is absolutely a better distillation of the viewpoint.

  2. Hello Keith,

    I’m in the market for a new laptop myself. What laptop did you buy?

  3. Fine, I signed up for ESPN Insider again so I can read your content!! Chats and the rest weren’t enough. Dangit Keith, when are you gonna get your own platform and just rake in all that $ for yourself? ;-p
    Happy Holidays and thanks for all of the great content.

  4. Not to be petty, but it is a flu shot not a fly shot. Thanks for these links every week.

    • It’s not petty at all, but in our autocorrect-enabled world, it has become a part of writing life. Thank you.

  5. So in the 200 plus years before Obama took office, we were under the rule of the American Taleban without the policies Obama put in place? Do you hate the orange boogeyman that much?

  6. How so? The rhetoric in that article is the rhetoric of a fringe kook and not a rational person. Does that person who wrote the article know what the Taliban did and stood for?

  7. I know salon plays to a certain audience but they could have made the point better to a wider audience by not comparing Republicans to the Taliban

    • First of all, sometimes a point is best made with an eye-opening comparison, even if the comparison seems a little strong.

      Second, there is much in common between Taliban governance and current Republican governance, including disrespect for gender equality, disregard for democracy, war against “liberal” culture, imposition of legal standards informed by religious texts, efforts to silence or discredit dissenting opinions, and disdain for science. There may be a difference in degree, but I’m sure the Taliban was less aggressive at the start as well.

      I think we have reached the point where it is apropos to sound alarms like this one, as the United States is currently headed down a very worrisome path. A path more worrisome than anything we’ve seen since the 1850s, I would say.

    • You do realize that conservatives were using the same type of rhetoric ( saul alinsky tatics, war on conservative culture, disregard for democracy etc. during the 8 years Obama was in office)?

    • Republicans think Democrats want America to be socialist China and Democrats think Republicans want to bring back Nazi Germany. Both sides are wrong about the other side. The rhetoric is so inflammatory that neither side works together to bring the country together. It doesn’t have to be this way. It wasn’t thar long ago that we could disagree on policy but still work together to better the country

    • Bothsidesism is not a valid argument about anything.

    • That conservatives used such rhetoric during the Obama years is not a counterpoint to the validity of such concerns today. Much as it may be tempting to claim “both sides do it,” that is demonstrably false in today’s political environment. The methods of the Democratic Party pale in comparison to the GOP of today. And, as a liberal, I don’t believe Republicans and conservatives want to make the US ito nazi Germany. I just believe that they have cast aside logic and morality (not to mention principles) in pursuit of further aggregating the nation’s wealth in the hands of the ultra rich.

    • So you genuinely believe the republican party is just like the Taliban but in America?

    • Again, strawman.

  8. You are not going to answer the question? What are you trying to say?

    • Speaking of not answering the question, are you going to respond to my remarks? After all, I did you the courtesy of answering your question. And let me say, before you answer:

      1. I did not read the article in question; I am responding to the general argument, which has validity. A badly-written article does not change that.

      2. It’s true that the GOP has been doing some of these things for a while now. It’s also true that their tactics have become more aggressive in the last three or four years. As others have pointed out, that does not in any way counter the basic argument.

      3. Similarly, and as others have pointed out, “Democrats do it, too” is not an argument. An argument is supported with evidence. Ergo, if you have evidence in support of your argument, please present it.

    • Josh is not going to accept that he was presenting a false equivalency and I doubt if there is anything someone can say here to drag him, kicking and screaming, towards that realization.

    • I am not trying to equate anything to anything. My point is that equating the republican party to the Taliban is irresponsible and quite frankly, idiotic. Thats the kind of crazy stuff you expect from Infowars and not meadowparty. Keith is usually well informed on his takes but I think this one goes way off the deep end. If that is where meadowparty is at now though, then I will just move along somewhere else

    • Since you just equated my site to InfoWars, yes, please, move along somewhere else.

    • If thats the price for objecting to being called a member of the American Taliban because I support the Republican party, which is probably close to half of the people who come here, then so be it

    • It would seem that the substance of Josh’s argument is: Nuh-uh!

      I have not seen him say a single word about my list of the parallels between the Taliban and the modern GOP. I take that as prima facie evidence that he has no counter-argument, and so is implicitly acknowledging that I am correct.

    • So you are calling republicans the american taliban too?

  9. The entire article is one big unsubstantiated crazy conspiracy theory with the only supporting evidence is that the author’s friend told him they will admit it off the record

  10. Josh, but not that one

    The GOP and Taliban have some similar approaches to governing — authoritarianism and reliance one religion as supreme to name two. Turning that statement into “Are you calling them the Taliban in America” is, indeed, a strawman, since that’s not what is being argued. But if you’re going to equate infowars and meadowparty, clearly you are trolling and not interested in a rational discussion. We’ll miss you.

  11. Scroll up to Keith’s post

    “Salon calls the Republican Party the American Taleban in response…..”

    He didn’t say compare, he said called

    • My god, man. Are you really hanging your hat on the choice of a single word? I mean, I’m sure it’s a fair bit of effort to compile these links posts, and that as Keith tries to summarize each of the links he’s sharing, he doesn’t pore over every single word choice like he’s Ernest Hemingway writing “The Sun Also Rises.”

      So, let us forget the article that is linked. Let’s even forget how Keith summarized the article. The basic proposition is this: There are concerning similarities between the Taliban and the current leadership of the Republican Party. I’ve laid out some of those similarities above, the other Josh has concurred. If you disagree, then I would like to hear why.

      If your next response is another nitpick about wording, however, or another straw man, then I will join the others in concluding you’re a troll, and will stop responding.