Stick to baseball, 7/25/20.

I wrote two pieces for subscribers to The Athletic this week – a season preview, with breakout candidates and team predictions; and a look at the top 100 prospects who made Opening Day rosters. I held a live Zoom Q&A via The Athletic’s Twitter account on Thursday.

For Paste, I reviewed the new flick-and-write game Sonora, where players flick discs on to the same board, possibly knocking each others’ discs out of the way, and score on their personal scoresheets based on where the discs end up.

My book, The Inside Game: Bad Calls, Strange Moves, and What Baseball Behavior Teaches Us About Ourselves, is out now. You can order it anywhere you buy books, and I recommend bookshop.org. I’ll also resume my email newsletter this weekend.

And now, the links…

Comments

  1. Brian in ahwatukee

    I enjoyed the evangelical women piece and thank you for sharing.

    I grew up in that environment and have since rejected it entirely by for different reasons. I am familiar with all of the anti-women positions the movement largely takes but in transparency have never considered that would be a reason for women to leave. But yeah, duh, makes perfect sense.

  2. By the logic of the Esquire piece, we are always liars as parents.

    Everyday life requires parents to act as filters on the information that flows to children. Just like we keep them safe from things harmful to their physical body, we must also keep them safe from things that can be harmful to their mental and/or emotional well-being. There are better and worse ways to do this and the child’s age plays a huge role in determining if/when/how to do this.

    What makes right now different is how obvious and explicit the process is. We typically do this without a ton of thought or on topics that seem obvious to shield children from because we’ve always shielded children from them. The unprecedented nature of the pandemic and how it impacts our lives is making visible things that tended to happen invisibly.

    • A Salty Scientist

      Same as it ever was Kazzy, even if the explicitness is a unique experience for many of us. I was a young kid growing up in SoCal during the summer of the “Night Stalker” murders, and one miraculously survived attempt occurred in my town. Of course my parents told me nothing about it, and I only learned about it later when I was a teenager reading retrospectives. And I now do the same thing today for my own kids with the worst of the pandemic news, who are incidentally almost exactly the same age I was in the summer of ’84.

    • I was in the sixth grade when Laurie Dann murdered one boy and took five others hostage at another area school, about 10 miles from the one I attended. That day, teachers told us we couldn’t go outside for recess because it was an “ozone day”.

  3. The New Yorker is a good interview and shows the sort of nuanced and open-minded discussion we too often avoid. The interviewer does a great job of challenging certain positions while remaining respectful. And I think the interviewee — whether you agree with them or not — shows why we should more deeply engage with ideas that challenge us. Even if you disagree with him (and I did in many spots), he was able to offer nuance that could be further examined, which is exactly what the interviewer created space for. We need MUCH more of that these days.

  4. A Salty Scientist

    While I appreciate the idea of rapid peer review for journalists, I doubt it will help much. The good ones like Ed Yong already talk to experts before commenting on preprints, and the bad ones will sensationalize anyway. I will say that one of the good things about preprints is that there are far more eyes on the ones with large claims than happens with formal peer review (generally only 2-4 reviewers). Bad papers slip through the cracks in peer review, and then have the veneer of respectability. Vocal preprint critiques make it less likely that formal peer review will miss those same flaws.