Stick to baseball, 1/16/16.

I traveled to Puerto Rico this week to see the MLB draft showcase in Cayey, featuring likely top-5 pick Delvin Perez, so I haven’t written much anywhere, with just one Insider post, on the Wei-Yin Chen and Gerardo Parra signings. Klawchats will resume this upcoming week, and no, I haven’t seen this week’s episode of Top Chef yet. I did finish The Executioner’s Song on the flight home, and that has to be one of the most addictive books I’ve ever read.

And now, the links…

Top Chef, S13E05.

Sorry this is a bit late, but I spent the entire workday Friday on the phone working on the top 100 prospects package, which will run right after the big hand-egg match in early February. I missed the Lazarito workout because my daughter had pneumonia (she’s better now), but it sounds like it wasn’t a great look for the 100+ scouts who were there.

* Quickfire: Dates! I miss Arizona Medjool dates. The natural-foods grocer Sprouts was my go-to spot for Medjool dates, which are just … better, I don’t even know how to describe it. I carry dried dates with me on the road a lot because they’re so good and high in both fiber and sugar. I also love them Firefly (Las Vegas)-style, stuffed with almonds and wrapped in bacon, with a balsamic glaze and a little sprinkled bleu cheese (although I could skip that last bit). Anyway, the chefs can choose from three specialty varieties here.

* Chrissy Teigen is introduced as the guest judge (did someone really call her “John Legend’s wife,” as if she has no individual identity?) and is showing award-show level cleavage.

* Teigen says, “Dates are sweet and succulent and sticky,” to which Padma offers the forced-risqué line, “Like you.” Slutty talk from Padma seems to be an ongoing thing here but it does nothing for me, sorry. The chefs’ challenge is to tell a story of the best date each of them has ever had in a dish that highlights dates.

* As much as I love dates, I don’t think I’ve ever cooked with them, because pitting and trimming them is among the bigger pains in the asses in the kitchen. Olives are up there too, as are gooseberries (did that once – never again).

* Giselle is somehow struggling with burners, but it’s not clear if it’s her fault or she’s getting edited to look the fool because they’re trying to offer us some #foreshadowing.

* We get a bunch of stories from the chefs, with the longest story coming from Jason, but overall these people had some boring dates. I don’t think I could do any better, though; my other half isn’t a foodie and hates dates (the fruit, that is).

* Angelina has no date story, apparently, saying, “My boyfriend is the restaurant.” That’s … hot.

* Worst dishes: Chad’s pan-roasted halibut with orange salsa verde, pine nut, and zahari date froth, because the orange was bitter. Phillip’s tuna crudo with peaches and zahidi dates didn’t have enough date flavor. Carl made a date milkshake, which I’ve had at Joe’s Farm Grill out in Gilbert, Arizona. They’re really good, but not exactly the kind of thing to win a Top Chef challenge.

* Favorites: Jason’s roasted baby carrots with Deglet Nour dates, brown butter, cumin, lime, and pine nuts; Padma loved the char on everything. Isaac’s chicken ballontine (hey, Ruhlman has a recipe for that!) with medjool date sauce thanks to crispy chicken skin. Giselle’s date salad with pork sausage, arugula, watercress, and spiced walnuts showcased the date particularly well. The winner, however, is Jason, which they kind of foreshadowed with long story about the date he went on with his long-term partner.

* Elimination challenge: Art Smith, who appeared on Top Chef Masters a few years back, is the guest judge, and will be renewing his vows with his partner as one of 25 couples getting married in a mass wedding ceremony. Yeah, it’s a gay wedding, but do we even need to say that any more? It’s not like it’s an alternate-universe wedding. A gay wedding is just like a straight wedding, amirite?

The chefs will prepare the entire meal as one team, but will be judged individually on their dishes.

* Padma got ordained that morning to officiate the wedding, which … um … okay.

* Kwame is making sauces for two different dishes, which seems ambitious, although he has been the most impressive chef so far.

* Giselle is struggling to understand a dish in the discussion on the way to Whole Foods, so they’re clearly setting her up for elimination in the editing. When she says she doesn’t like the sound of Wesley’s idea for their dish, saying, “for me it doesn’t go (together),” Wesley mansplains her down with, “It doesn’t matter, it’s unbelievable.” I get defending your own recipe, but to say that to another professional chef’s face is beyond dismissive.

* Isaac is buying peeled garlic? What?

* A yoga instructor comes to the house to do yoga with the chefs in the morning, other than Isaac and Wesley, who do what I would likely to and go laze around in the shade instead. I’d probably have a book, though. I have nothing whatsoever against yoga, but don’t namaste me, bro.

* The editing of this episode makes Giselle look both incompetent and hapless. She may be below the others in skill – although even assuming that seems like a stretch – but she can’t possibly be as bad as she looks here, or she wouldn’t have made the show in the first place. She’s squabbling with Karen, her partner on the vegetarian dish, but we get Karen’s perspective on their disagreement without Giselle’s. Is Giselle too needy, or is Karen just not communicating well? I feel like a defense attorney this season.

* Angelina doesn’t seem to grasp Jason’s dish (they’re working together too), which, again, would be his fault as much as hers. They’re not on the same page, which means he didn’t adequately communicate his vision to her. What isn’t helping is that he keeps calling it “capunet,” which I think means capuns, a Swiss-Italian dish that sort of looks like what they’re making but usually contains dried beef and/or sausage in the filling, not braised chicken, and is finished by boiling in seasoned milk. What these two are really making turns out to be more like niños envueltos, a dish with which I was not familiar before this episode, a sort of stuffed meat roll but here wrapped in a chard leaf like capuns would be.

* Phillip is making what he keeps calling “mashed potatoes” but is spraying it out of an iSi canister to try to create a foamy sauce, which I can only imagine will make it gummy by overworking the starches. Maybe (this is pure speculation here) he could have whipped cream and folded it into loose mashed potatoes? I don’t know if this would work but it would avoid the gumminess.

* Isaac semi-brags that, “I should probably come with a warning label that says ‘does not play well with others'” yet everyone likes him, so I think he’s all bluster. He’s just crazy, but he doesn’t seem to be getting on anyone’s nerves.

* Padma is dressed almost demurely as the instant minister, although she did have her one look-at-me element with hot purple lipstick.

* Has anyone heard how many heterosexual marriages across the country fell apart after this episode was aired? I feel like the entire institution has been undermined here.

* Enough of that – let’s talk food. First up is Amar/Chad: Sherry-glazed pork belly with smoked orange marmalade, pickled fennel, onion, and smoked salt. It’s a huge hit and of everything in this episode, this is the recipe I’d most want.

* Jeremy, working solo: Citrus roasted carrots with harissa yogurt, shaved radish, and baby kale. He got some kind of color on those carrots, unless my television was on the fritz. Tom and Art both rave.

* Wesley/Kwame: Pickled shrimp with cucumber onion salad, citrus vinaigrette, cashews. Kwame’s nuoc cham, a Thai fish sauce-based dressing that must have been in the vinaigrette, is an immediate hit.

* Angelina/Jason: Niños envueltos – Swiss chard rolled up and stuffed with braised chicken, pancetta, cauliflower, and a sauce made from braising liquid and caramelized honey. Angelina called it “like a dolma,” and Jason gets pissed off and very condescending because it’s not dolma at all. (Dolma are Greek or Middle Eastern dishes of stuffed vegetables or rolled grape/cabbage, which Wikipedia says can also be called sarma.) leaves Judges love it.

* Isaac: Dirty rice and smoked chicken and jalapeno sausage. Tom says it’s “right.” I’m a bit surprised they didn’t ding him for making something in his comfort zone.

* Karen/Giselle: Charred eggplant puree with asparagus, smoked mushrooms, citrus vinaigrette, and kumquats. The asparagus is undercooked, the farro (I missed that in the description, apparently) is underseasoned, and the mushrooms were soggy. Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

* Phillip/Kwame: Center cut NY steak with potato “cream” and tomato-eggplant relish. Shockingly, the potatoes suck: they have a gummy texture and a raw taste. The relish is good, of course, and Padma says it “saves Phillip’s dish.”

* Tom and my sister were married on the same day in 2011. Not to each other, though. That would be weird.

* Marjorie/Carl: Grilled apricots with cherries, mascarpone, and hazelnuts. (Stop calling it “mascarpone cheese,” and please stop calling it “marscapone.” It’s “MAHS-car-POH-neh.” It’s like cream cheese, but good.) Apparently this whole dish is fantastic, which will be totally forgotten the next time someone is eliminated for dessert and people start talking about a “curse.”

* Judges’ table: “Today was a proud moment in Top Chef history.” Okay, okay, don’t hurt yourselves patting your own backs. The winner was Wesley and Kwame’s shrimp dish. Kwame added tangerine and ginger juice to the nuoc cham, and used all of the juices in the sauce to pickle the shrimp, so it had big flavors but was very cohesive. The individual winner is The Man We All Know and Love, Kwame.

* Worst dishes: Karen/Giselle and Phillip/Kwame. Kwame acts like he might actually be eliminated, which is positively Swiftian (Taylor, not Jonathan) in absurdity. Phillip explains his dish to the judges as if this was the result he wanted, but then Jason chimes in, “I don’t think that’s how the dish was described to the team.” Marjorie piles on with, “you said mashed potatoes,” so the editors didn’t mislead us here – everyone thought he was doing steak and potatoes. No one is talking about the steak, by the way, which is in and of itself odd since that’s the main component of the dish.

* Giselle said the dish did not include “her” flavors, so Karen retorts that she found it “hard to collaborate” and, more insulting, “at least I was trying.” Will nobody ever learn that these arguments in front of the judges do nobody any favors? Suddenly, Giselle says “it’s shocking that Phillip doesn’t recognize his flaws,” while she and Karen understand what they did wrong … which is sort of like saying the apology is more important than the mistake. Phillip defends himself by saying that was indeed the dish he wanted to make, but Tom says he was “going for something we didn’t care for.”

* Jason is really pissed, even after judges’ table, which might make sense if he were directly affected by the elimination decision.

* Giselle is eliminated. While she was the weakest chef up for elimination, Phillip made gummy potato sauce and I kind of have a hard time with him staying – as if perhaps he stayed on reputation. The only good thing on his plate came from Kwame.

* LCK: Chefs have 20 seconds to look at the cart of ingredients, then have to write down two dish ideas they can execute in 20 minutes. Tom picks one for each to do – Giselle has to do lamb, fig, and pistachio, while Grayson has to do shrimp and jalapeño – but the women negotiate and end up doing their first choices, Giselle’s chicken with summer polenta and Grayson’s lamb with fig and mustard. Tom is having way more fun in LCK this season, and the women both seem to join in by acting a little goofy. The main show could benefit from some of this silliness. I also love how Tom comments on specific cooking times (Grayson’s rack of lamb should take twelve minutes max) or plating (he tells the camera Giselle is plating too soon, with five minutes left, so she changes her plan). He’s a highly successful and respected chef – I want more of his commentary.

* Grayson’s lamb rack comes with a fig and port sauce and a take on aligot potatoes (a French dish of mashed potatoes blended with certain low-fat cheeses). Giselle’s chicken comes with a corn and tomato salad and polenta. Chicken appears to be perfectly cooked but the polenta might not be hot enough. Grayson wins although it appears to have been very close.

* Rankings: Kwame, Jeremy, Jason, Marjorie, Isaac, Carl, Amar, Wesley, Karen, Phillip, Chad, Angelina.

Stick to baseball, 1/9/16.

No new Insider content this week as I was mostly busy with phone calls for the top 100 prospects package, which will run the week immediately following the Super Bowl. I did hold a Klawchat on Thursday, and I have another new game review up at Paste, for the family-oriented game Skyliners, which I thought was kind of mediocre overall.

And now, the links…

  • That TV show about a “special victims unit” is hot garbage, but this NY Times piece on a real-world sex-crimes police unit is gripping, if disheartening, reading.
  • Rakim discusses how John Coltrane influenced his vocal flow in a brief clip with KRS-One.
  • Remember that whole “CDC Whistleblower” meme that the vaccine deniers liked to throw around? Well, a review of the actual documents from that scientist showed there’s no whistle to blow because there’s nothing scandalous or untoward here.
  • A harrowing first-person piece from the brother of the Unabomber, on realizing that the mail-bomber terrorist was actually his sibling.
  • Kevin Folta, who was hounded offline by anti-GMO and anti-science shills claiming the scientist was secretly in the pocket of Big Ag, is resuming his biotech podcast next month.
  • Bill Gates has a blog! Okay, it’s a blog where he posts book reviews and only a total dork would do that.
  • Sports Illustrated ran a puff piece on child-abuser Adrian Peterson, who seems to want no part of the redemption effort.
  • Why the U.S. – and other countries, of course – should stop bidding to host the Olympics. I wouldn’t be opposed to a law that prohibits any U.S. jurisdiction from paying an international organization (like the IOC or FIFA) for the “rights” to host a global sporting event. They’re negative-ROI deals that tend to be boondoggles for the organizers.
  • Eater covers how Texas restaurants are dealing with the state’s open carry law. In a related story, I’m very glad I don’t live in a state with an open carry law. If I’m eating dinner in a place where there’s even a moderate chance I’ll need a gun during the course of the meal, I probably should eat somewhere else.

Klawchat 1/7/16.

Klaw: Don’t laugh – I heard it happened before. Klawchat.

Eric, Arlington, VA: Hi Keith, how the hell did David Eckstein get two votes for the HOF? I don’t know what’s more absurd, him getting two or him getting twice as many votes as Garret Anderson, who is probably 10x better.
Klaw: I have two problems with these votes. One is that they show those voters aren’t taking the responsibility and privilege of voting very seriously. If you don’t want to respect the vote, fine – abstain. Surrender your vote. But don’t throw away votes on the Ecksteins or the Jay Bells of the world. The other is that voters might vote for clearly unqualified candidates rather than voting for candidates with better cases. Chaz Scoggins voted for Eckstein; his ballot was otherwise quite good, with 8 players I’d have had on my own list of 10. But he could not possibly argue that Eckstein was the 10th best player on the ballot – better than Edmonds or Trammell, to name two guys he omitted. So he voted for, say, the top 9 players in his opinion, plus someone who was definitely not the 10th-best … and that 10th-best guy would have benefited far more from the vote.

Bruce: Are you starting to load up on stock (or index funds) right now, or waiting to see how much further the markets will drop?
Klaw: I don’t try to time the market. I invest in index funds (basically just my 401k … we’ve put money into renovating our house rather than investing) and just add every month.

Nick: Hi Keith… I have made my way through all of Chandler’s and Hammett’s works and am currently about midway through MacDonald’s Archer stories. Have a recommendation for what should be next for a hard-boiled fan?
Klaw: Big fan of Rex Stout’s Nero Wolfe novels, although they don’t have the violent aspect of the other two. You might also like Jim Thompson’s noir crime novels.

Jason: With Oakland trading Lawrie that Donaldson trade looks really really really bad for Beane doesn’t it? I mean one prospect for Donaldson is crazy.
Klaw: It’ll never look like a good deal for Oakland but Barreto might be a star and is at least a damn good prospect.

Jeff: I don’t understand the love for Hoffman and not for Edgar Martinez. How can you bash a guy for not playing defense but applaud a guy for only pitching one inning?
Klaw: Because otherwise rational writers and fans remain obsessed with the save statistic.

Justin (DC): Re: Raines and Bagwell in the Hall of Fame, Raines and Bagwell got very close this year, but do they have a shot next year? I worry that both (particularly Raines) were helped a great deal by the voter purge, but the voter pool will not change as much next year. Without change in the voter pool, will he get the 6% he needs to join?
Klaw: Raines will benefit from his last year on the ballot; I don’t think any player has gotten as close as those two guys did without getting in. We should see those two and at least one of Vlad (whose reputation exceeds the value advanced metrics put on his career) or Pudge (who will probably get blacklisted by some voters over PED suspicions). It’s not out of the question we get Hoffman too.

Mitch Cupcheck: Can you help settle a chili debate? My wife likes to saute the peppers and onions we use before they enter the dutch oven with the meat and other ingredients. My thought is, with chili being more of a stew, throwing them in raw and letting the whole thing simmer for 90-120 minutes will soften them plenty. Which side are you on?
Klaw: Sweat them, don’t saute them.

Mitch Cupcheck: By the way, how is your daughter feeling?
Klaw: Thanks for asking. She feels better, and the fever has been down for over 24 hours now, but she’s still coughing like she’s had a pack-a-day habit since birth. I think she’s also got a little cabin fever since, with the pneumonia and the holidays, she hasn’t been in school in over two weeks.

Michael: What do you think of Vlad Guerrero’s case for the HOF? His fWAR is a lot lower than I would have guessed.
Klaw: I think he’ll get in anyway, but his “analytical” case is a hard one – he gets crushed for bad defense once his legs started going. It’s a bit of the Sheffield argument, although Sheff is also hurt by PED suspicions. If Sheff had been a full-time DH his whole career, he’d have much more support from the online/analytical crowd.

Derek Harvey: How do you like the Chris Carter signing for Milwaukee. Of the 1B FA out there, which would you have taken were you the Brewers?
Klaw: Solid scrap-heap signing. Type of move they should be looking to make while they wait for the farm system to spit out more big leaguers.

Elton: Paul DePodesta to the Cleveland Browns is not a move I would have ever expected but (as a Browns fan) intrigues me a lot. Curious that he would leave baseball though, no?
Klaw: No, I think Depo’s a brilliant guy who enjoys intellectual challenges, and will certainly find one there, probably exceeding anything he was likely to find in MLB.

John: Are you shocked that Edmonds fell off the ballot?
Klaw: No, but I wish he had not. He was at least a borderline candidate, and someone I would have likely checked off if I had a ballot and had more than ten slots.

Anonymous: Rank these sketch comedy show: Python, SNL, Kids in the Hall, Mad TV
Klaw: Python over everyone.

Tom: What was AJ Pollock’s perceived ceiling when he was drafted? It wasn’t this high, right?
Klaw: Right. I don’t think anyone saw this power ceiling. I absolutely did not.

Johnny (Woburn, MA): What is the ceiling of Rafael Devers on the Red Sox? More of a Wily Mo Pena type, or Miguel Sano? Thanks!
Klaw: I think his ceiling is more that of a white guy.

Tom: Not a question, but I did want to tell you that your review of Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell caused me to purchase it on iTunes. I loved the book, and I was unsure if the series would live up to it. Thanks!
Klaw: Glad to hear it – hope you enjoy it as much as I did. If you hate it, please don’t fire walnuts at me.

JT: Does the Brewers return for Gomez look better now because of the saturated outfield market in FA?
Klaw: I think it looks better now because Houser looked so much better after he got to Milwaukee.

Nick: I’m getting more and more excited about JP Crawford. If he reaches the upper quartile of his potential, do you think he could be a .300/.400/.500 type of guy? Essentially what I’m asking is if you think the power potential is there for something like that.
Klaw: Don’t think he’ll have that kind of power but I do think he could peak at .300/.380/.450. The guy you described is a runaway MVP.

sam: no question this time, just a thanks for the chats, and a comment that (based on the chats & this blog) you’re an interesting dude.
Klaw: You’re welcome, and thank you. I hope to be interesting because it keeps me employed. Plus I don’t want to ever be boring.

BirderBob: Trey Mancini strikes me as a guy whom the prospect analysts don’t love, but who simply gets it done. Am I crazy think he’s the Orioles starting 1B by the end of the year?
Klaw: Scouts don’t like him either. Yes, I think you’re crazy to think that.

Brian: Matt Strahm in the Royals system. Do you like him as a prospect and do you think he is a starter or a bullpen guy? If a starter what kind of upside do you see? Thank you.
Klaw: Chance for a starter but much more likely a quality reliever. Has thrown harder in the past than what I saw from him in the playoffs.

David: So with the recent voter purge for the HOF, I found it odd that the ex-Rockies’ beat writer for the Denver Post published his ballot today, giving full disclosure that he no longer covers baseball and instead has been the Denver Broncos’ beat writer for the last two years. I knew this already since I read him in the Post daily, but just wondering why he didn’t lose his vote… wasn’t the point to eliminate everyone who doesn’t cover the game regularly any more?
Klaw: They eliminated voters who were at least ten years away from covering the game, I believe. I think it’s a great first step although I’d be fine with further pruning.

dlf: I need advice from a coffee snob – how does a moka (not mocha) compare to an espresso and is getting a small moka pot a good addition?
Klaw: Espresso is brewed at a much higher pressure (at least 9 bar) than coffee from a moka pot so it’s a totally different product. A moka pot is a lot cheaper than a real espresso machine.

Jason: Is franklyn kilome a top 100 type prospect?
Klaw: I don’t think so, although I haven’t started assembling the global 100 yet (I do that last).

Fitzy: My theoretical ballot for next year: Bonds, Clemens, Bagwell, Raines, Schilling, Mussina, Edgar, Walker, Pudge, Guerrero. Does this make sense to you?
Klaw: Yes, mine would probably look quite similar.

Joe: How often do you read books a second time? Do you think rereading a book is a waste of time that could be spent reading a new book? Soooooo many books, so little time!
Klaw: I have read about 1100 books in my life and I think I’ve read fewer than 20 books twice. I read mostly fiction and if I already know the plot it’s hard to maintain my interest in reading a novel a second time around.

jay: Can Connor Greene fill a bullpen role in the big leagues this season? or should he be left in the minors?
Klaw: Leave in the minors. Rushing Castro didn’t do him any favors.

Jon: Anderson Espinosa future ace potential?
Klaw: Sure, although at 17 he’s got a lot of physical/health hurdles to clear.

Dustin: What are your thoughts on the Rangers/Marlins talks of Chi Chi for Ozuna?
Klaw: Don’t see why they’d want Ozuna with Brinson close to ready.

Mike: I believe Bagwell/Raines should get in, but it’s a joke that so many people would change their vote. They are either HOF’s in your opinion or not. Just as dumb that Piazza had to wait four years. Also, when I read your tweet yesterday I thought it said Baines will get in next year.
Klaw: I think most of the voting is dumb. We have way too many voters who don’t take the responsibility seriously. That’s how someone like Raines, who was obviously a HoFer when he played and whose career, evaluated objectively, more than meets the established standard, is going to take ten years to get in.

Scott: Can you compare the bats of Jesse Winker and Josh Bell? I know Bell changed positions so the comparison may make a little less sense. But I’m curious about their career paths. Is it as simple as Winker safer floor lower upside and Bell the more pop but average might not stay? Both take their walks. Does Bell give up switch hitting? Thanks very much.
Klaw: Bell has more upside but I don’t think his floor is that different; he has exceptional hand-eye coordination and great plate discipline, but has untapped power Winker can’t match.

Matt: What would be a reasonable stat line for Hector Olivera this season?
Klaw: I’m just not on it – he may have some power but the approach isn’t great and every scout I’ve spoken to about him has killed his lack of athleticism.

Ray Grace: Assuming the deal goes through what is Maeda’s ceiling for the Dodgers?
Klaw: Fourth starter type. Doesn’t seem to be real physical or durable and he’s already had some little arm issues.

Ray: Can Ian Happ handle 2b on an everyday basis? Can he be a .275-20 HR-20 SB type hitter for the Cubs?
Klaw: I think he can although they’ve also considered playing him in CF. He’s a pretty good athlete despite a body that doesn’t immediately look it.

Michael: I don’t think either should be in, but how does Hoffman do so much better than Wagner? Shouldn’t voters who value closers dig a little deeper and see they were pretty similar?
Klaw: Saves. It’s entirely about saves. That one stat weighs far too heavily in voters’ minds.

White haired clown: Obviously, frank isn’t the #1 in Boston, but when I saw the David Price contract all I could think was here we go again with the reckless spending philosophy and long term structural problems. Any comment?
Klaw: I don’t agree – no problem with that contract, and I don’t think Frankie Troglodytidae is making the calls there.

Sam: Your thoughts on jeff Kent as a HOF? Numbers are ver favorable to biggio but no where near the amount of support. Why do you think that is?
Klaw: Poor defensive player with makeup questions and unfair suspicions of PED use?

Colin: Thoughts on Alex Gordon deal?
Klaw: Very good deal for KC. Salary is in line with or even below what offense costs right now, and while I preferred three years given his age, four isn’t unreasonable.

Michael: The Dodgers are really accumulating talent in their front office. Is that a little bit of a market inefficiency?
Klaw: Or they’re trying to reenact the opening credits of “Too Many Cooks.”

Steve: Have any of the people who did not vote for Griffey been identified yet? If so did they explain their logic?
Klaw: No, of course not. There is zero enforced accountability in this process.

Roddy: What is the most optimistic callup time for Benintendi?
Klaw: Schwarber and Conforto reached the majors about a year after signing. I don’t see why Benintendi couldn’t do the same.

Jeff Chisholm: Do you agree that the Oregon “protestors” should face felony charges once their temper tantrum ends?
Klaw: They should face charges but I don’t know what the applicable laws are.

Marshall: Longenhagen, your co-pilot on ESPN for scouting/draft articles, had a great point about the potential growth in popularity of baseball in Korea. Just as comment, wouldn’t it be awesome to baseball take hold as a major sport in Korea, or in a place like Germany should Kepler pan out?
Klaw: Yep, I’m always rooting for players from novel countries – did you know the Twins had a GCL pitcher this year from Moldova? – to succeed for this very reason.

Steve Culber: Just curious…..why are you so high on BBC shows and rarely speak of the (in my opinion) superior HBO shows?
Klaw: Perhaps I don’t think those superior HBO shows are superior? I do find British shows in general focus more on plot and dialogue and less on action or violence to move things along.

Mike: Captain Jetes the first to 100%?
Klaw: I still say no one does it.

Lee Snyder: My favorite porn star is Savanna Samson…who is yours?
Klaw: Find me one who wasn’t previously a victim or rape or sexual abuse and maybe we can talk.

Tom: For all the (well-deserved) criticism that the D-Backs’ front office receives with regard to prospect valuation, is it fair to say they do a good job with prospect development? It seems like they are bringing up a good number of their prospects and that they exceed expectations more than would be expected.
Klaw: The current regime has only been there a year, so I think it’s way premature to credit or blame them for player development results.

jay: who would you prefer over the next five years Dalton Pompey or Kevin Pillar
Klaw: Pompey has much more offensive upside and is a good defender. Pillar is a lot like Kiermaier for me – you have to place an enormous amount of trust in single-year defensive metrics to believe they will continue to be as valuable as their WAR totals from 2015 indicated.

Tyler: Did the John Hart make a mistake by publicly saying he expects the Braves to be back in contention by 2017? At this point, that seems rather unlikely, right?
Klaw: Unlikely given where the Mets are and where the Nats could be. Not totally outrageous given the state of their farm system at the moment.

Corey: If you were made the HoF czar, how many players roughly would you take out (Fingers, Rice, etc) and how many players do you think you would add in who are off the ballot now (Trammell, Dewey, etc) ?
Klaw: Trammell, Whitaker, Edmonds, Evans all would go in. I’d take a lot more out – Rice, Sutter, Catfish Hunter, Lloyd Waner, Maranville, Hack Wilson, Lindstrom, and more.

Patrick: Which sitcoms are you watching these days? I know you were a big fan of Parks and Rec and its great cast. I’m finding Brooklyn Nine-Nine’s cast very good as well.
Klaw: Brooklyn Nine-Nine and Masters of None are it.

JC: Will the Mets hit enough to really contend next year? They’ve lost their 3 and 4 hitters with not much replacing them.
Klaw: But they’ll also get a full year of Conforto, Walker to replace Murphy, hopefully a healthy Wright, even a healthy Lagares would be an improvement.

John MN: What do you think of the game theory voters: I think there are > 10 HoF on the ballot and Griffey is getting in no matter what, so vote for the 10 next.
Klaw: The only rational argument I can see for omitting him – but if that were the case, wouldn’t these three voters have spoken up by now?

Matthew: I have quite athletic 7 & 8 year old boys who really love sports, but they are pressured at this early age to pick a sport and specilize in it all year long (especially here in Hawaii). I don’t want to force them to pick one this early, as I think it will most likely lead to burn out, but if I don’t, they won’t develop. How important is it to develop skills specific to a sport, versus letting them play different sports and increasing their overall athleticism, for future sports opportunities?
Klaw: I don’t have a good, informed answer to that, but several sports-medicine experts have decried such early specialization.

JC: Do you workout?
Klaw: Girl, look at this body.

Steven Avery: Any interest in Making a Murderer?
Klaw: No because it will likely infuriate me. I’m sure it’s an excellent series, but that this shit goes on in the United States – probably all the time – is beyond depressing. We can’t make a ten-part documentary about every single miscarriage of justice, so you know most of them go unpunished.

Anonymous: With minimal salary on the books in the next year, would you look into any of the better free agents left if you’re the Phillies?
Klaw: Yes, but only if they were players likely to either 1) offer trade value in July or November or 2) to help the major league club in 2018.

JC: You should watch New Girl. It’s great.
Klaw: I tried, but I didn’t find it funny.

Marshall: What would the workload/expectations be for Brady Aiken coming into the year? I am not a Cleveland fan, but hate to see young players have their careers stopped by injury, so I am hoping for him.
Klaw: Guessing he doesn’t pitch at all till extended spring, which would be about 13 months off surgery, maybe not till June, which would be 15 months. Can’t rush him given the history there. I want to see him healthy, and for everyone who suspected the TJ surgery wouldn’t work out the same as it would for most pitchers to be wrong. But we won’t know much until he’s ready to throw at full strength and I see no reason for Cleveland to rush that.

Eric: Would you ever entertain an offer to run a team in a sport other than baseball?
Klaw: Can’t see myself enjoying that.

Mike: Why do competitive balance picks exist? The “disadvantaged” D-backs just signed Greinke for almost 200M
Klaw: They’re yet another terrible policy holdover from the Selig years. Both those picks and free-agent compensation should be axed in the next CBA. Just sever the draft from free agency. I will be curious to see if either side tries to alter the top of the draft to discourage “tanking,” however.

Mike P: I understand and agree with the arguments against Hoffman’s HOF candidacy. But I think it’s hypocritical to use the “HOF as a museum” argument to vote for PED guys (which I’m in agreement with) and not apply to Hoffman who succeeded at one stat, that while incredibly flawed and arbitrary, has been celebrated by the baseball establishment. Should “saves” be represented in the HOF? (Again, wouldn’t vote for Hoffman, but I’m not losing sleep about people who did for this reason)
Klaw: The problem I have with that is that the media invented the save (well, one mediot in particular), then celebrated players who racked up a lot of them. It feels awfully self-congratulatory, all while the stat in question has no real meaning.

Eric: In theory, if you could take a dominant reliever like Betances and stretch him out a bit so that he usually pitches 2 innings each time out and maintains about the same effectiveness over 120-130 innings per season, could that be as valuable as say a good #3 starter?
Klaw: Yes, I think it could/would be, although you would probably have to give that pitcher at least one day off after each outing.

Joey: Speaking of players from “novel countries” do you see any hope for Gift Ngope to have a major league career?
Klaw: Could see him get a cup of coffee but that’s probably it. Same as happened to Alex Liddi. Heck, MLB should even encourage a last-place team to do so some September so they can market it back in South Africa.

Tom: Hi Keith, enough with the HoF “controversies.” I’m wondering specifically about Benintendi, and how you see him profiling. Assuming he stays in CF, does he have 60 potential? More? Less? And if he were to move to RF, does he become a bit less, well, special? Thanks.
Klaw: Absolutely stays in CF for me – above-average runner who played CF well in college. It’s star upside, just without a whole lot of track record coming into 2015.

MIke: How much of C. Gonzalez’ salary will the Rockies need to eat to get some kind of meaningful prospect in return for him?
Klaw: I feel like someone would want him at $12 million a year for the next two years enough to give up a prospect for that, which would leave them paying $13 million of the $37MM he’s still owed.

Marshall: The medical community has made great strides in fixing injuries that used to be career threatening, like torn ACL, patella tendon, meniscus, etc. TJ surgery has seemingly even had an increased success rate in the last decade. But it seems like shoulder surgery improvements haven’t quite caught up yet, and maybe that is only my perception as a not-doctor. Maybe the rotator cuff muscles are just more delicate?
Klaw: The shoulder joint is substantially more complicated than the elbow joint and I doubt shoulder surgeries will ever become as routine as TJ.

Ciscoskid: Susac for Ozuna, is there equal value despite the stated desire for SP by all the reports?
Klaw: Probably, although I think I’d rather have the six years of Susac than four of Ozuna, although the Giants don’t have the need for Susac and they have a real short-term need for a RHH outfielder.

Adam: Are you a believer in Ender Inciarte?
Klaw: I believe he exists, yes.

Ciscoskid: If I am the GM of the Rockies I stop chasing the unicorn pitcher who can be dominant in Coors and build the best lineup that bludgeons teams. Is this the better way to build that roster and then hope you find a unicorn of a SP?
Klaw: It’s closer to the approach I would take in that job – build the best lineup possible, without totally ignoring defense (we know the damage allowing a high BABIP can do there), and toss the traditional pitching model entirely. O’Dowd tried to do this but frankly I think he had the wrong manager for it … well, Tracy was the wrong manager on a lot of levels, but especially for implementing an entirely new pitching paradigm.

Rob: In the years Hoffman was a primary closer (1994-2009), he averaged about 36 saves a year. In 2015, 11 pitchers saved that many games. Ten more pitchers saved at least 30. It’s just not that special of a skill–putting Hoffman in the Hall of Fame is basically rewarding him for staying healthy for 15 years.
Klaw: In a role where staying healthy and effective has been difficult. I don’t argue that he was better than many closers, but he was not exceptional in any aspect of the game except for the saves. Hoffman had 28.0 career rWAR in 1089 innings with a 2.87 ERA while pitching most of his career in great pitchers’ parks. K-Rod has 23.9 career rWAR in 892 innings with a 2.69 ERA while pitching part of his career in the AL. Is K-Rod a Hall of Famer? Because if Hoffman is, K-Rod is going to be too.

Paul: Does Addison Russell have another level to him? Does take his game up another notch?
Klaw: Several. I think he’s going to be a star. You don’t see hands like that come along very often in baseball.

Marshall: KLaw you raise an interesting point in regard to manager’s not be willing to implement more radical or “non-traditional” approaches to in game situations. We have to be getting close to a time when a GM’s are no longer forced to choose former ballplayers as their skipper’s, right?
Klaw: Doesn’t seem to be improving much. If anything we are devolving into a time where more MLB executives are hiring their friends than are conducting full searches for the most qualified candidates. It’s a negative trend for the sport overall and particularly damning for minorities working in the sport.

Dave: Some High School players are now being asked to hit the ball of a tee to measure exit velocity…is this really a good way to measure bat speed? Do you use this method.
Klaw: While exit velocity is interesting I have seen no studies that link it to anything we might care about, such as some sort of increased production. Right now it’s a fun toy.

Dana: What is Starlin Castro? A 200-hit per year All-Star or one of the worst offensive players in baseball?
Klaw: He might be both. That’s all for this week’s chat. I may be traveling next Thursday, in which case I might cancel next week and chat again on the 21st; I’ll make sure to tweet and post on Facebook if I am indeed chatting. Thank you all for reading and for all of your questions.

Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell (miniseries).

I read Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, Susanna Clarke’s 2004 best-selling novel and winner of the Hugo Award, in November of 2008, an experience so immersive and enjoyable that I can remember specific places where I sat and read it. It’s as perfect as any contemporary work of fiction I’ve encountered, with numerous complex characters; a soaring, multi-faceted plot; and the highbrow British-English prose style appropriate to its early 19th-century setting. I’ve read at least a half-dozen novels of a thousand pages or more, including some considered among the greatest novels of all time, but I’d still take Jonathan Strange over all of them, not least because there isn’t a wasted word among the over 300,000 in its text.

That experience with the book raised my expectations for the BBC adaptation of the book to unreasonable levels, even though the network chose to adapt it as a seven-hour mini-series rather than trying to cram its bulkl into a single two-hour film. The resulting series, available on iTunes for about $20 (it’s not streaming anywhere I can see; amazon has the Blu-Ray for $25), is one of the best TV series I’ve seen in years, better even than season one of Orphan Black or Broadchurch, even on par with The Wire for giving viewers so many well-acted, complex characters intimately involved in the central plot.

The titular characters of the novel and series are magicians in the early 1800s who endeavor to restore English magic, which has been lost from the land for about 300 years. Mr. Norrell (Eddie Marsan) is the mousy, pedantic, egotistical magician of learning who sets off the book’s events when he restores a dead noblewoman, Lady Pole (Alice Englert), to life by summoning a creature known only as The Gentleman (Marc Warren), making a bad bargain that reopens the door between England and the otherworld where magic resides. Jonathan Strange (Bertie Carvel) is the young prodigy whose innate talent for magic draws the interest of Norrell, who wishes to tutor Strange in book-learning rather than in “practical” magic, only to set off a rivalry between the two when Norrell’s acts exact a very high cost on Strange and his young, beautiful wife Arabella (Charlotte Riley). Meanwhile, the Gentleman, having regained access to this realm, lays his claim to Lady Pole, enchants the servant Stephen Black (Arikon Bayare), the “nameless slave” who is to become king under the prophecy of the fairy/magician known as the Raven King, who appears only briefly on screen and looks like a refugee from a Norse black metal band.

The series is remarkably faithful to the original text, preserving all of the essential characters, including many I didn’t mention above such as Norrell’s servant (and occasional practitioner of magic) John Childermass (Enzo Cilenti, whose voice I wish to steal) and the vagrant street-magician Vinculus (Paul Kaye), while limiting diversions from the book’s plot to minor changes of convenience. Yet the series is powered primarily by the command performances of its two leads, Marsan and Carvel, with Marsan playing Norrell as a sort of upper-class Peter Pettigrew, simpering yet also dismissive, while Carvel imbues Strange with the passion and exuberance befitting his character’s youth before the character’s disillusionment drives him to madness. The great performances extend to the actors I’ve cited here, playing secondary roles, particularly Warren as the predatory charmer The Gentleman, with clawlike fingernails and “thistledown” hair, and Kaye apparently having the time of his life as the staggering, filthy Vinculus.

The demands on the editors of this series must have been huge, with a variety of sets and settings and impressive special effects for a television series, leading to many potential points of confusion as the focus shifted from Strange to Norrell to the King’s Roads (the “otherworld” of magic and fairies) and back around. I’m of the lay opinion that editing is a lot like umpiring in baseball: you notice it far more when it’s bad than when it’s good, and if it’s really good, you forget it’s even there. It was only while watching the final episode that it occurred to me how seamless the transitions from scene to scene or even shot to shot were, even though the pacing had increased in the final two hours of the series. Once Strange has entered the King’s Roads and descended into the madness that drives all of the related subplots toward one huge conclusion, the story starts flying and the use of more magic within the story could easily create confusion for viewers unfamiliar with the story, but strong editing and camerawork ensure that the viewer never loses the perspective required to keep pace.

One of you mentioned some dismay that Strange’s time serving as the official army magician under Wellington was given relatively less time on screen than on the page, an understandable disappointment at a choice that was likely made either for budgetary reasons or because the writers didn’t want to bog the story down in a segment where Strange and Norrell are completely apart. I thought the portrayal of the sycophantic fraudster Drawlight (Vincent Franklin) was too much of a caricature, and the relationship between Strange and Flora Graysteel in Venice required some more on-screen explanation. On the plus side, the series did a better job portraying the book’s ambiguous conclusion than Clarke herself did on the page, and while I still wanted a happier ending, at least the series turned the vague resolution into clear images the viewer could take away.

I would still suggest anyone interested in the series start with the book, both for background and for the sheer pleasure of the experience. The novel has much dry wit that can’t translate to the screen, as well as copious footnotes that mostly add humor to the story, and Clarke’s prose sparkles in ways that will never come through on film. But the adaptation here is so thorough that I believe any viewer could approach it without the background of the book and still follow the entire story without any trouble, which, for a work this dense, is a major achievement. I know in the time of “peak TV” there’s tremendous competition for your eyeballs and nowhere near enough time to watch everything you want – I might see a tenth of the series I’d like to see – but if you’re going to binge anything this offseason, put Jonathan Strange on your list.

Paladin of Souls.

Lois McMaster Bujold has won four Hugo Awards for Best Novel, matching Robert Heinlein for the most wins by any author, winning for both works of science fiction and of fantasy. Her most recent win was for her 2004 novel Paladin of Souls, a high fantasy work that seemed to me to have an extraordinarily strong religious or spiritual component, but one that was fully integrated into the story rather than one that beats you about the head like a certain large feline, sorceress, and armoire may have done.

Paladin of Souls starts about as slowly as any fantasy book I’ve read (disclaimer: I haven’t read that many) and appears to be another one of them ol’ “let’s take a long long time to get from one place to another” sort of books, which has to be the most overused plot device in fantasy or sci-fi. Ista, the dowager and former queen (royina, in the book’s vernacular) of Chalion, is bored with her fate as shut-in, having recovered from the curse that inflicted madness upon her for many years (apparently covered in the preceding book, The Curse of Chalion), and sets off on a journey with the requisite motley crew of associates, with no particular destination in mind. The group includes the portly and slightly fatuous divine dy Cabon, the courier turned lady’s maid Liss (who was the most interesting character by a mile), the warrior brothers Ferda and Foix, and a bunch of guards. The group first runs into a raiding party from the neighboring state of Jokona, then takes shelter in the town/castle of Porifors, only to find that entity fall under siege by an incredibly powerful Jokonian contingent. But there’s a mystery afoot in Porifors, and it turns out that the gods are not done with Ista – one god, the Bastard, in particular seems to have further plans to use her as the vessel to save Porifors and stop the Jokonians’ Hitlerian plans for expansion.

Ista’s madness does not return but she regains some of the powers she held during that earlier period, including her “second sight” that allows her to see souls as light and shadows on their possessors – including demons, who figure heavily in the plot, and souls damaged by the ill usage of others. Ista must learn how to utilize this ability and its related power to manipulate souls so that she can save Porifors, and Chalion by extension, while also granting salvation to several of the people around her, including those posssessed by the novel’s many demonic forces. While I know nothing of Bujold’s religious beliefs, I found it impossible to read this as anything other than a metaphor for the Christian notions of dualism, redemption, and salvation through Ista/Christ. Ista becomes the only means of saving one character whose soul is otherwise doomed to damnation because of a demon’s trick that has given him physical life beyond death – I’m being ambiguous on purpose here to avoid fully spoiling it – and also must find ways to save the various characters directly possessed by demons, a sort of absolution by exorcism that comes at the end of personal battles between man (or woman) and demon for ultimate control of that person’s soul. Whether you find that angle compelling may depend on your views of religion or of dualism; I think it works on two levels, one a spiritual one, but the other a compelling way to give a story a climactic battle scene with somewhat less bloodshed than normal and without relying on ill-defined “magic” the way so many fantasy stories do. And, unlike George R.R. Martin’s Game of Thrones novel, there’s no gratuitous violence toward the women to try to up the plot ante or otherwise depict the world as brutal and dark.

Ista herself is a less than stellar protagonist, however, because she’s strong but plain: She wishes to fight her role as Chosen One, accepts it, and powers through the final showdown on her intelligence and her strength of will, but there’s little or nothing inherently interesting about her persona. Her handmaiden, Liss, appears less frequently on the page but has more depth to her character: A well-born courier who chose that career for its potential for adventure, she spends more time helping execute Ista’s plans for battle than helping her lady dress or fix her hair, and her generally badass nature reminded me of the character Medea from Atlantis, played by Amy Manson, who now portrays Merida (with a silly wig) in Once Upon a Time. Manson’s Medea was indeed badass in several ways, and gloriously conflicted between Pasiphäe and Jason while fighting like you’d expect a stock male warrior to fight. Bujold injected Liss with that fierceness, and with that anti-feminine nature, but then gave us far too little of the character while embroiling her in an out-of-character flirtation with Foix.

The weak characterization of Ista combined with the slow start to the apparent journey plotline meant that the first third or so of Paladin of Souls plodded along without much promise, made worse by my lack of familiarity with the backstory. Once Ista reaches Porifors and the mystery starts up, followed by the intense siege and subsequent battle, the pacing was much more satisfactory and in line with better genre works (which I always find read faster than more literary and/or hifalutin works), but it didn’t leave me with the same wonder as better Hugo winners like Hyperion or Among Others, or even novels that were more clever but a bit less successful in plot like The City and the City.

Next up: Graham Greene’s England Made Me.

December 2015 music update.

I published my rankings of the top 100 songs of 2015 and top 15 albums of 2015 in mid-December, which is nearly always a dead month for new releases anyway, so in past years I haven’t even bothered with a new playlist until the end of January. This time, however, there were about a half-dozen tracks I wanted to mention before we got too far along in the calendar, so I’ve put together this shorter-than-normal playlist to tide everyone over.

Animal Collective – FloriDada. This song reached me in time to make my top 100 for 2015, and it’s one of my favorites from Animal Collective alongside “My Girls,” but even more accessible. I’m still trying to piece together some of the lyrics, but I love the way the music, including the layered vocals, seems like it’s always about to veer off the road into the wild grass.

School Of Seven Bells – Open Your Eyes. SVIIB’s final album is due out in February, their first and thus only release since the death of co-founder Ben Curtis from cancer in 2013, including parts he recorded before his passing. I found their music beautifully melancholy to begin with, so I can only imagine how this record will feel knowing that Curtis is gone and the band is finished.

Bloc Party – The Good News. I’m mixed on this song; it seems a bit too much like Four, but after the promise of the first single from their upcoming album I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Wild Nothing – TV Queen. Good Wild Nothing tracks manage to sound upbeat and depressing at the same time, kind of like Joy Division and early New Order. This isn’t on par with “To Know You,” which I still say was practically lifted from Talk Talk’s “It’s My Life,” but still would have fit well on 2012’s Nocturne.

St. Lucia – Physical. Included because it’s St. Lucia and I have liked just about everything he’s released to date, but I don’t like this track anywhere near as much as “Dancing on Glass” or the bulk of his first album.

DIIV – Under the Sun. Zachary Cole Smith, who records as DIIV, is putting out a double album on February 5th, which seems to have a lot of the music press excited, but I’ve yet to see evidence Smith can fill a single album with enough worthwhile and non-repetitive material. Part of the problem is that every DIIV song I’ve ever heard sounds like it’s just a clone of the one original DIIV track, so if there were some sort of Panama disease that affected that one song his entire catalogue would be wiped out. This track is pretty good, though.

Conrad Keely – In Words of a Not so Famous Man. This quiet, pensive track is about the last thing I expected from the lead singer of …And You Will Know Us by the Trail of Dead. There’s still a hidden tension in the song, as we get from most Trail of Dead material, but where his main project creates huge shimmering walls of sound, this track is almost intimate by comparison.

(The London) Suede – Outsiders. They’re never going to make another “Metal Mickey” or even another “Beautiful Ones,” but Suede have settled into something comfortable for their middle age, with this track, released in late September, continuing in the same vein as their solid 2013 comeback album Bloodsports.

Killing Joke – Euphoria. I whiffed on Killing Joke’s album Pylon – I didn’t hear it until I’d already gotten well into writing my year-end posts and didn’t get to spend any time with it until after Christmas, but it should have slipped into the last spot on my top albums list. It’s not quite vintage Killing Joke, which was more punk than anything else, with many of their best-known songs (“The Wait,” “Eighties”) running long for punk but about the norm for radio-friendly rock; it’s more like an album full of longer, dark songs like “Love Like Blood,” six minutes and up, heavier, driving music that I’d call metal but might only qualify as “hard rock” by today’s standards. Whatever you call it, it’s fucking boss.

pop. 1280 – Pyramids on Mars. I admit I knew nothing of this band before hearing this track, and still don’t know much about them other than that they’re named after a great noir crime novel; this song is sort of noise-rock experimentalism with hints of early gothic new wave stuff like Bauhaus.

Stick to baseball, 1/2/16.

Happy New Year! I’d say it’ll be a great one, but there’s an election coming up so damn it all to hell.

I wrote two Insider pieces this week, one on the ethically-challenged Yankees trading for Aroldis Chapman and one on how obvious it should be that Trevor Hoffman is not a Hall of Famer.

My latest boardgame review for Paste covers the complex strategy game Orleans, which was one of two runners-up for the 2015 Kennerspiel des Jahres award.

And now, the links…

Beyond Einstein.

Some great boardgame apps still on sale, including Splendor for $0.99 (iOS or android) and Ticket to Ride for $2.99 (iOS or android).

I enjoyed physicist Michio Kaku’s book Einstein’s Cosmos, a biography of the founder of relativity theory that didn’t skimp on details of Einstein’s work, so when I spotted another of Kaku’s books, the 1995 work Beyond Einstein: The Cosmic Quest for the Theory of the Universe (co-authored by Jennifer Thompson) for half price at Changing Hands in Tempe during my annual AFL trip, I picked it up without a second thought. The book covers a little of the same ground as the Einstein bio, but is primarily a history of superstring theory and the search for a “grand unified theory” (up to 1995, of course) that would bring together the four fundamental forces of physics, building the reader up from the mid-19th century forward through various stops and starts that included the proposal, discarding, and resurrection of string theory from the 1950s to the 1980s.

Strings, in particle physics, are theoretical subparticles that would constitute all types of matter and energy in the universe: the hundreds (or more) types of subatomic particles known to physics may all be manifestations of strings, with different vibrations of the strings showing up to our devices as different subatomic particles. String theory would solve a large number of problems with our current understanding of the nature of matter and energy, from the existence of the aforementioned four forces (gravity, the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, and electromagnetism, although the last two have been shown to be the same thing) to the origins of the universe itself. Most theoretical physics has rested on the assumption that the universe is orderly; the complexity involved in having hundreds of fundamental particles, or even in having four independent forces, has in and of itself led physicists to try to unite these under a single umbrella, with string theory the leading candidate and quite possibly the only game in town.

Where Kaku and Thompson succeed is in guiding the reader to a basic understanding of string theory by gradually working their way through the various milestones in physics research over the 120 or so years before string theory became widely accepted as a serious candidate for the “theory of everything.” That means we get our fill of Maxwell and Einstein, but we also get Feynman diagrams (which apparently are rather a big deal, but were new to me as a lay reader) and the best concise explanation of Schrodinger’s cat paradox I’ve come across. Kaku also explains symmetry and supersymmetry, the suspected nature of dark matter, and the connection between Lie groups (from group theory) and quantum field theory, without ever drowning readers in math unless you go to the footnotes. I wouldn’t say that the book taught me enough about string theory – I think I’ll have to get Brian Greene’s best-selling The Elegant Universe for that – but it gave me more than just a superficial explanation along with plenty of the mind-bending stuff that makes theoretical physics seem fun to someone like me.

There are some sections at the end of the book that seemed to me to go beyond science and into the highly speculative, although some of you may be able to tell me that my impression is wrong. Some of it is just strange, like the argument that the universe was originally in ten dimensions but collapsed into two separate universes, ours with four dimensions and another, minuscule universe that held the other six (are dimensions really additive?). Some seemed borderline metaphysical, like the argument that the universe came from nothing in a sort of quantum leap, even though sudden state shifts like that don’t occur … well, ever, or wouldn’t we stand in constant risk of winking out of existence (or perhaps into another, parallel universe)? Kaku’s book leaves lots of questions unanswered, but I suppose it fits, since theoretical physics has yet to answer many of those same questions.

Next up: Lois McMaster Bujold’s Paladin of Souls, another Hugo Award winner.

Hyperion.

I reviewed the boardgame Orleans for Paste this week, and my latest Insider post breaks down the Aroldis Chapman trade, including my disdain for the Yankees’ decision to trade for someone with an unresolved domestic assault accusation attached to him.

I decided last year to start working my way through the list of winners of the Hugo Award for Best Novel (there are now 64 winners, and I’m through 27) because I’m obsessed with lists, but more importantly, because it seemed like a good way to find the kind of big, immersive, ambitious novels I enjoy most, works that stick with me long after they’re done. The Left Hand of Darkness was one such discovery; To Say Nothing of the Dog was another; Among Others totally blew me away. There are duds, like Red Mars, but I’ll take a couple of those along the way when some of the winners are as amazing as Dan Simmons’ 1989 novel Hyperion, winner of the Hugo in 1989.

Hyperion is one of the most remarkable sci-fi books I’ve ever read – a highly literate, ambitious novel with an unusual structure and a delightful habit of defying reader expectations at multiple turns. Modeled after Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales and presaging the very similar structure used by David Mitchell in his nested novel Cloud Atlas, Hyperion follows seven pilgrims on a journey to the planet of the book’s title, where they go to meet the mysterious creature known as the Shrike, a trek from which most pilgrims do not return. The fate of their requests of the Shrike may connect to the fate of humanity, which has spread itself around the galaxy and spun off a splinter group of violent rebels called the Ousters as well as an independent entity powered by artificial intelligences that became sentient and seceded from man.

The meat of the novel is those pilgrims’ stories, each told in a different voice and different style (as in Mitchell’s novel), from the priest who reads from the diary of his friend who died on Hyperion to the private investigator whose story unfurls like a detective novel to the Consul whose paramour, Siri, is the original time traveler’s wife. Simmons infuses each of these characters, some of whom are, shall we say, less than entirely sympathetic, with depth and complexity, enough that any one of them could have carried an entire novel by him/herself. The story of the father who makes the journey with his infant daughter is just heartbreaking, and while Simmons probably pushes one sorrow button too many, his description of that father’s experience watching his daughter’s pain is stunning and never forced.

Simmons has also created, in one book, a literary universe the size and scope of that in Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series, one that Simmons revisited in three subsequent novels (about which I’ve gotten mixed reviews from all of you over the last ten days). His vision of a distant future is bleak in spots, but he hasn’t given up on humanity entirely, while his incorporation of unrealistic or impossible scientific advances (such as interstellar travel using “farcasters”) at least brings the veneer of realism – and many of these technologies are critical to the book’s stories. Simmons created a mind-boggling world, then put his characters through grueling life tests within it, showing us their reactions and their development in response to these trials.

However, Hyperion doesn’t deliver what I expected most from it: an ending. The journey is the story; the pilgrims do not reach the Shrike at the end of the book, and the resolutions of their various stories come in the sequel, Fall of Hyperion, which I understand departs from this book’s narrative technique. Simmons leaves so many questions unanswered, from Rachel’s fate to Hoyt’s real purpose to the Consul’s ability to achieve his goal, that even though Hyperion is an immensely satisfying work on its own, the ending felt too much like a cliffhanger to think of it as a completely self-contained work. “All Prologue” is fine and good up to a point, but giving us all back story and virtually no present works against the power of the book as a whole.

Next up: I’ve finished Michio Kaku’s Beyond Einstein, a 1995 book on the history of superstrings, and just started another Hugo winner, Lois McMaster Bujold’s Paladin of Souls.