Stick to baseball, 11/9/19.

My ranking of the top 50 free agents this winter went up on Monday for ESPN+ subscribers, before the actual start of free agency and thus the deadline for some player options, so a few players are on there who ended up staying with their teams (J.D. Martinez, for one). I held a Klawchat on Thursday.

Over at Paste, I reviewed Silver, the new deduction/take-that card game from designer Ted Alspach, who set this new game in the same ‘universe’ (loosely speaking) as his One Night Ultimate Werewolf games.

My second book, The Inside Game: Bad Calls, Strange Moves, and What Baseball Behavior Teaches Us About Ourselves, will be released on April 21, 2020, and you can pre-order it now. We’re working on some bookstore events for late April as well, with Boston, New York, DC, and Harrisburg likely in that first week after release.

I also have this free email newsletter, you may have heard about it, it’s kind of cool.

And now, the links…

Comments

  1. Hello Keith, long time reader and now first-time commenter as your link to the Louisiana DA story is actually the ‘porch pirate’ link. I was raised there so I am curious as to where this happened. Thanks!

  2. I can’t get the Citations Needed podcast to open, so I’m not sure how they address this, but while Twitter Nate indeed does get pundit-brained, I think calling into question his predicting track record is off base. They nailed the midterms, and 538 had the best analytical model of the 2016 elections, even pointing out the likelihood of the specific path Trump wound up taking

    • The podcast doesn’t really discuss that but instead focuses on how he launders his ideology through his reputation as a numbers guy. Basically makes the case (quite well) that “telling it like it is” is a fundamentally conservative ethos, at least in the realm of politics.

    • Sure, drag away at Twitter Nate. I guess I was just taking issue with the idea that 538’s track record is fading. They took a ton of guff for 2016 when they had it better than anybody, and 2018 was a really strong showing for them.

    • A Salty Scientist

      Yup, I thought Nate actually did well in 2016. He pointed out that Trump was a *normal* polling error away from winning, and that polling errors were likely to be correlated. Which is why Nate gave Trump an ~30% chance of winning versus the 1% from other places that wrongly assumed that Hillary’s polling advantages in individual states should be treated independently. Pundit Nate may be a contrarian (and sometimes troll), but Stats Nate still does a good job with poll aggregation.

  3. Here’s a link to what I believe is an important article from your former colleague Gregg Easterbrook:

    https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/november-december-2019/the-pundits-who-get-it-wrong-and-pay-no-price/

    I’m a big fan of his because in his TMQ columns he got political, but always saw the viewpoint of both sides of the fence, calling either side to task when he found folly.

    One of his points he’s been making for many years is included in this article: Climate change articles will often make terrifying claims of things that will happen in 20 years, which is an amount of time that seems fairly close, but is long enough away that no one will remember when it does not, in fact, happen. This is a common occurrence, and in my opinion is a big reason for a lack of consensus on climate change.

    • Exactly. He also is one of the few “optimists” about climate change, as he notes in the end of his article that whenever there has been a crisis, (& he lists a handful of things that were doomsday scenarios going back 40
      + years) people have worked together to get the job done.

    • Easterbrook is a bit of a pollyanna, though; for example, while we may have more trees than we did 30 or 40 years ago, we’ve lost a lot of biodiversity and old-growth forests, which means that the forest cover we do have now is probably less effective at absorbing CO2.

    • Thanks for reading the article and responding, Keith. I do feel that your response is picking nits, akin to saying Zack Greinke still gets outs at roughly the same rate as he did as a younger pitcher, but not with 95 mph fastballs, rather with more off-speed stuff, and therefore he’s not as good.

      Regardless, the greater point I wanted to highlight, and that I think people should remember, is the one he’s been writing about for years – so often there are climate articles that make doomsday claims of events close enough into the future to frighten people, but far enough away that nobody remembers to take the author to task when the event doesn’t happen.

      If you were to write up every prospect that had a good game as the next superstar, you’d lose credibility, and even if you made a lot of good points, it would be reasonable for people to end up dismissing your work on the whole. Similarly, extremely dire climate predictions that don’t come true makes some people question whether any of it is true.

    • A Salty Scientist

      Drew, I do get some of Easterbrook’s point. Sensationalism makes for profitable journalism, but not necessarily good policy. I also think it’s fair to and appropriate to put error bars around predictions. With that in mind, some predictions have certainly worked out much better than others, and I think we as scientists are better at predictions the closer we get to mechanisms of causality. For example, past climate models have very accurately predicted what global temperatures should be depending upon CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Predicting the effects of warming on precipitation patterns is much more challenging. We do have a shining example of science informing policy and having an environmental benefit–the ozone layer is recovering following phasing out of CFCs. While the exact effects of a warmer earth are difficult to predict, it’s largely a question of how bad.

  4. “A digital adaptation of the acclaimed co-op game Spirit Island is also on Kickstarter, and just got funded this week.”

    Correction: Indiegogo, not Kickstarter

  5. I hadn’t played a RPG in a while but got Red Dead Redemption 2 last year and spent probably a couple of months playing it. I didn’t finish it 100% but did get through the entire story and I think ended at about 90%. One thing about those games: you can have fun just wandering around doing random things that have nothing to do with the story. That just adds to the amount of time it takes to complete them.

  6. I was hoping to see something about ABC News & the Epstein article withholding & then how ABC “found” the whistle blower & got them fired from CBS..only to find out they had the wrong person. The diametric difference in how they handled Epstein vs say, the Kavanagh hearings is profound & politics is a big matzo ball sitting out their as to the difference in treatment.

    Maybe Keith can’t comment due to working for Disney, but, ABC is acting like Trump in this case..& that’s not a compliment.

  7. “America (You’re Freaking Me Out)” seems like a decent musical suggestion for this week’s links roundup. Caught The Menzingers Friday night…they kill it live.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5Y5wPiY0L4

  8. Keith, since I know you often take the opportunity to expose various pseudosciences, I think you may find the below article about a former astrologer interesting.

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/nov/06/i-was-an-astrologer-how-it-works-psychics

    As a bonus, the writer includes the word “woo” in her article.