After 30 years running various businesses, I returned to school to get my education degree (Social Studies).
The last thing I want is for the Nationals is to become the Philadelphia Phillies with old players and big contracts. I hope the Nats develop a policy of trading the great players after year three if they won't sign a long-term, team friendly deal.
My hope is the Nationals trade Bryce Harper and Jordan Zimmermann this off-season, and perhaps Ian Desmond as well. Harper will never be worth more than he is now because I'm thinking he'll not turn into the player we all thought he would, which is Mike Trout. So let someone else hope for the best.
Finding a left-fielder who will hit .280-20-80 isn't too hard, and all the team really needs is a just-above .500 pitcher to keep the team playoff bound. We've all learned that 97 wins in the regular season is no better than 90 wins because that difference lies in the arm of one pitcher you can't use in October. And think of all the prospects the team would get in return. A starting 2nd baseman for sure, that left fielder, and 5-6 prospects, half of which would be on the cusp of being "can't miss."
How about Zimmermann for Cespedes with some prospect both ways? There is your left fielder. Harper could bring Howie Kendrick and prospects from the Angels. There is your second-baseman. There are countless other possibilities.
The Nationals just have to be strong enough to make those choices.The question is will they?
2 weeks, 2 days ago on Conversation @ http://thenatsblog.com/
I think what you're going to see over the next year or so is that the media smells blood and is going to go after the Obama Administration, feeling he let them (Democrats) down. Also, leftist writers (and there is nothing wrong with that -- I'm not using the term pejoratively) are going to keep writing these kinds of stories for awhile and it will take time for them to understand that outside of a small percentage of the acolyte brigade, people are going to get angry that they are still being lied to.
1 month ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120251/jonathan-gruber-obamacare-comments-get-aca-history-wrong
@ramparts70 @IgattaFlangMosheen You don't have a right to a college education. The more people who have one cheapens the value of the degree. Twenty of my graduating class of 500 got a degree back in 1974. Those were golden tickets. Now, because so many people go to college who really shouldn't, they have lowered the requirements to get it. I went back to college and graduated at 55. I dug my old high school stuff out of a box and in many ways my high school requirements were far more rigorous. And now the left has reduced tech and trade schools because of the "unfairness" that those kids don't get to go to college. Those kids who just weren't college material not only don't have a college degree (because they couldn't finish it) but don't have training for a trade.
And for those who keep blaming Republicans, it isn't us who keeps closing down alternative schools in the inner cities so minorities can have a better education. We want the unions and bad teachers to get the heck out and give those kids a chance. But no, one of the first things Pres. Obama did was to pay back his teacher union supporters by closing down those schools in DC, schools that had years-long waiting lists.
1 month, 1 week ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120027/not-kind-girl-review-lena-dunhams-callow-grating-memoir
@ramparts70 No breaks. If you're a boomer like me, you know that we learned right from wrong, and good from bad, by having our parents and teachers metaphorically--and sometimes literally--whack us on the top of the head and scream in our face. My dad would turn off the TV when I was watching the Washington Senators play baseball and say, "Go join a Little League team. You be the star player and then you can watch them play. I did. We didn't care what others did; it was all about us and whether we added to the value of American society. This generation lives vicariously through these social-media darlings, doing little while watching others.
No. Sorry. I can't give her a break. If someone had taught her that sexual intimacy with her sister was a no-no years ago she wouldn't be in the trouble she is now.
I came of age in the early 1970's, just so you get a feel for where I'm coming from. Lena Dunham was the kind of girl that would "satisfy the itch" on a drunken Friday night during your junior year in high school. But you'd never admit to it, because she just wasn't the kind of girl you'd bring home to meet your parents. Back then, there were two kinds of girls, the ones who would keep you from being lonely and the kind you'd marry, the ones who always said 'no.' Not that it was fair, but it was true. Now, women are just as filthy as we men are (the result of gaining equality), and I'm glad I won't be around to see another generation or two of what comes next.
I think the takeaway from all of this I think is that she wrote in her memoirs that she had multiple sexual engagements with her younger sister and that she--and her acolytes--are surprised at the dust-up the revelation caused.
I thought it was a very important part of the story. How many people have wondered how the other players have reacted to his full-frontal-honesty regarding his orientation? I thought that his trying to shower alone--if true--showed a lot about the man, that his homosexuality wasn't an arrow in his political quiver, that he was just another guy trying to live his life.
But no, the thought police are saying that isn't an integral part of the story. Really???? The very reason that society for more than a century has shunned gays on sports team--and in the military--isn't pertinent?
I picture some lesbian somewhere sitting at a desk (with a sign above that reads: "All the news that I think is fit to print") with a virtual red pencil, striking out sentences and paragraphs of stories she deems to be "offensive."
Pretty sad. I think most of us are libertarian in our views until someone tells us our views are unacceptable. Hey, censors, you're making things worse for your cause. You're turning those of us who don't have a dog in the hunt to get a little grumpy.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119237/espn-report-michael-sam-shower-habits-was-delinquent-journalism
Everyone should click on Rebecca's name and see the last dozen or so stories she has written. Talk about a one-track, blinders-on thought process. But hey, at least for now, the 1st Amendment still applies, so that's a good thing (and she writes well).
I too write for a living, but I'm a Dragnet Joe Friday "Just the facts" kind of reporter. I don't try to come up with a way to twist the narrative to justify my politics.
I guess that's why I write for a paper in Idaho's third-largest city. Just not good enough for the big time.
3 months, 3 weeks ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119240/obamas-climate-accord-would-avoid-senate-treaty-ratification
Unlike Democrats, I love the 1st Amendment and every voice--even a dissenting one--is good for the nation's soul.
That said, America will never recover from the liberal "winter" until subjective opinions are no longer considered as objective facts.
As a member of the "whacko right," I want the environment to be clean and safe every bit as much as liberals, but I want it because it's the right thing to do, not because of false and misleading information used by the left.
If Dems would have allowed a slow, careful process towards change--instead of a tantrum-like "give me all and give it NOW!" attitude, we'd be a third of the way there.
Electric cars will be part of our society when 1) they are as affordable as gas cars, 2) they are just as fast and powerful, and 3) the people want them. Being force fed an inferior product just don't work.
First, superbly written story, both in terms of mechanics and knowledge of the two teams. Thanks!
Were I the Nationals' GM and you Baltimore's, this is what I would say to your trade proposal.
"You can have Moore and Smoker, no problem. Moore will be a low average, high power first baseman in time, but we already have Michael Morse ready to return to first when Adam LaRoche is traded/not renewed next winter. And Smoker has made the transition to relief pitcher pretty well but we have lots of quality relievers.
But in Milone, Peacock and Rosenbaum, you have three pitchers who will all become strong major league starters. Adam Jones isn't worth all that. We will give you Peacock and Rosenbaum, perhaps throw in Eury Perez, but not Milone, Peacock and Rosenbaum. Perhaps we'll add a mid-level prospect, maybe two, but you then have to give us back a mid-level of your own.
Also, we'll need a 48 hour window to see if we can extend Jones a few years. If you do that, and it works, we may be willing to throw an extra mid-level prospect in the package."
How does that work for you?
3 years ago on Could Washington and Baltimore matchup on a deal for Adam Jones?