unclevlad

It might be better in principle, but there'd be infinite argument in practice.  I mean, just look at us here.   The virtue of the system that exists is simplicity and consistent applicability.  Heck, just look at the vagaries of hit vs. error calls.  This might well be worse.

I've got my own conceptual stat for offense.  Call it the Move the Line stat.  In every at bat, determine how many bases the batter gained OR LOST as a result of the AB.  A grand slam?  10 bases.  A line drive to 3rd, doubling off a runner there?  -3.  The harsh version?  Make the 3rd out with the bases loaded...-6.  (A single, scoring 2 and leaving 1st and 3rd, is +6.)  There are base running situations that are more problematic.

Speaking of base running, I'd love to see Runner's Errors.  Like last night, Yankees-Braves.  Harrison Bader got picked off 1st...down 6 runs.  Or a runner, with 2 outs, trying to stretch a play to get to 3rd...and getting tagged out.  

Note that the reliever has a stat...percentage of inherited runners stranded, IIRC, altho it might be the converse, that scored.  That's at least as important to stat-heads, I think, than just ERA.  

Truffles......white, black, chocolate, it doesn't matter...............

Side thought on the 14th Amendment article.  Note that I don't think any of us is even remotely qualified to ANSWER the questions, so this is really more of a thought experiment.

Let's take this chain of events.

1.  While the cases come to trial, it's a long process.  Trump becomes the nominee before this.

2.  At least one of the trials comes to a conclusion BEFORE the election, and Trump is convicted of charges that would appear to trigger the 14th amendment.

Can Trump be summarily removed from the ballot at this point???  The 14th amendment triggering events happened before he was placed on the ballot, so it shouldn't be ex post facto to disqualify him.

3.  Instead, let's say the conviction happens AFTER the election.  

Same point.  Can the election itself be nullified????  If so, then who's president?

4.  Latest:  say the trial isn't a jury trial...jury selection is gonna be a complete MESS in all of these...and instead, it's a judge.  The trial wraps up in early January, 2025, BEFORE election certification.  NOW WHAT???

5.  Same, but it wraps up AFTER certification.  NOW WHAT???  

I'm going back to the point before.  The disqualifying incidents happen before the nomination.  The nomination is thus invalid, and from that, it's not at all hard to say the election is invalid.

IF Trump is elected before arguments are finished...at least for the federal charges...he can maybe compel the DoJ to shut down the cases altogether.  A 14th amendment case might be manageable, but who has standing to bring the case?  I don't know.  If Trump is elected after arguments are finished, tho, it's in the hands of the judge or jury.  Even if Trump pardons himself and everyone else, a pardon does not vacate the conviction...so a 14th Amendment case still feels strongly supported.

An aspect of the Georgia case is...Trump can't stop it, not on his own.  And the charges certainly look to be sufficient to disqualify him.

6 minutes ago, Old Man said:

Not a fan of trying 19 people at the same time. Seems like too much opportunity for delays and shenanigans. But IANAL and Fani Willis is, so I’m sure she knows her job better than I do. 

True, it can only slow things down.  I'm thinking that several of the named defendants that we don't recognize immediately, are tied to specific charges, and tie back to the major players via one form or another, ergo...conspiracy charges.  They're charged because that's the criminal path to get at Trump, or Rudy, or Eastman, or Powell. 

EDIT:  Oh, and some of it might be to put pressure on the more incidental defendants, to try to get them to turn on the major participants.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/14/live-updates-trump-indicted-on-rico-charges-in-georgia-election-probe.html

Has a copy of the indictment.  I'm not gonna go over it in detail...it's 91 (!!!) pages.

19 defendants.  Many will be quite familiar, like Powell and Guiliani.  

41 total charges.  RICO, multiple charges of soliciting an oath violation from a public official, false statements/writings, forgery and conspiracy to commit forgery, witness tampering, and even some computer fraud/hacking charges.  And all tied up in a bow with a perjury charge, as the last one.

And ya gotta figure that the phone call alone would seem to be prima facie proof of QUITE a few of these.

Youch...

The A's probably won't end up with the most losses ever, or worst record in the modern era...but they're on pace to have the worst run differential in history.

By a LOT.  

119 games, -286.  The record's -349 by the 1932 Red Sox.  Projected out?  At the current pace, the A's will be -389.

Per game...Red Sox were -2.27.  Through 119, the A's are -2.43.

25 minutes ago, slikmar said:

any time a pitcher has an error, the runs should still count against them.

At first glance, I agree.  But...let's take this scenario.

7th inning.  Starter gets one out, but then single, walk.  Runners on 1st and 2nd.  Starter gets pulled.  

Reliever comes in, let's say, gets a strikeout.  Then tries to pick the runner off 1st because it looks like he's drifted off too far.  BAD throw...goes down the line.  Runner on 2nd gleefully scores.

Under current scoring rules, the starter's charged, but it's unearned.  Under what you suggest, should the run be charged here *to the reliever*, and if so, should it be earned?  The reliever wasn't responsible for the runner on 2nd.

Full text will be released some time this evening, but a Georgia grand jury has returned an indictment in the election fraud case.  The clerk of the Fulton County court says worst case, 3 hours, then they should be released.  Wow, that's one BIG document, it sounds like!  

On 8/11/2023 at 11:09 AM, Ninja-Bear said:

And Resistant Defenses of some sort even if its Heroic Luck. Golden Age have a LOT more Killing Attacks!

Good point.  Guns are ubiquitous, for all the obvious reasons...norms are soft and squishy, punching someone HURTS most norms.  And you have to get Up Close and Personal to hit someone.

Note that many of the weapons don't have particularly high damage ratings.  A quick cross check shows that several of the Pulp Era Rifles, in the Military section (HSEG 65) can be found on Wikipedia's WW II infantry weapons used in the US.  Good enough.  They're still only 6-7 DCs.  Now, OK, the Browning M2...that's a .50 caliber, tripod mount...that's 3D killing, so 9.  

1 hour ago, Doc Democracy said:

I think we can all agree that the gameplay is the thing. How the player experiences the power.  If the Hulk player gets a Huge Punch power and told they can lift the Empire State building, and gets to add 12 to rolls related to feats of Strength, I reckon only the last bit feels abstract.  It will feel mighty when they compare that to the 5 being added by the Spiderman player.

 

Therein lies the disconnect in a nutshell.  Because Grail and I might accept your "gameplay is the thing"...but what you appear to mean by it, and what we mean, are not the same.  There's a cognitive dissociation that's a Bad Thing...particularly with STR, which is a very concrete, measurable, comparable value.

But we've beaten this to death, brought it back, and beaten it some more.  

If people can't understand the rules, then it's a gameplay issue.  

If people can't make characters with which they can connect, it's also a gameplay issue...because they'll play a different game.

We don't know why UNC, NC State, FSU and Clemson voted no;  it's also reasonably likely different schools did it for different reasons.
But I'm fairly sure UNC, at least, is a lot like Stanford in fielding MANY NCAA-level programs.  IIRC, they've got national titles in women's soccer and field hockey.  The negative impact, both logistic and financial, clearly increases with the number of programs involved.

10 minutes ago, Logan D. Hurricanes said:

This supreme court?

Doesn't matter.  It isn't a question of whether we'd LIKE the ruling, it's a question of who has original jurisdiction.  If you're going to disqualify someone from running for President, then at least, it's a higher level federal court.  I'm thinking of some cases related to Watergate, like the issue of releasing the tapes.  That became an issue of presidential privilege, and thus, IIRC, immediately went to the Supreme Court.  This feels similar to me.

There's generally only 3 levels...district, circuit, Supreme.  Circuit courts are typically appellate;  district is the trial courts.  But district courts fall into a jurisdiction trap;  the decision by one district OR circuit court isn't binding on any other district/circuit.  That's unacceptable here, so it would be MORE disruptive to hear it below the Supreme Court.  (Several of the abortion restriction laws are running into this.)    

I do buy that Trump has done things that should disqualify him under the 14th Amendment.

But yes, I can't buy the rest of the argument.  Self-executing is, IMO, indefensible.  It denies due process.  If a local official can invoke it, it allows local jurisdictions to override federal law.  That invites total chaos.  Now, if a competent court agrees that a violation has occurred...THEN, at that point, it's self-executing.  Nothing more's needed, barring appeals...and for a presidential election, I'd tend to believe the Supreme Court would be the proper venue.

<whaps Mr. P>
 

You skipped K.  

Kumquat Marmalade

And of course then for O...why not Orange Marmalade.  No, I don't care to think hard right now.

Actually, there is a closed-form solution to the problem P(X=R) where R =  the sum of N 6-sided dice.  It's just...pretty messy, as it gets into combinatorics.  Scroll down about halfway to point 6, which gives the form:
https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice

With a larger number of dice, another approach that'd be accurate enough would be to use the normal distribution;  as the number of dice grows, the sum of them gets closer and closer to being normally distributed.  The mean and standard deviation on Nd6 is easy.  The mean is N * 3.5;  the standard deviation is SQRT( [N * (6^2 -1) / 12] )  or SQRT(N*35/12).  Then, Google Sheets has a NORMDIST function:

NORMDIST(R, Mean, SD, Cumulative)

R is the number to roll

Mean and SD are the distribution mean and standard deviation from above

Cumulative is False here, we want the probability of rolling exactly R.  Cumulative would be, I believe, < = to R.  

So
=normdist(D6, 3.5*$E$5, sqrt($E$5*35/12), false)

Where E5 has my # of dice to roll, then in my test sheet, column D has R values.  

To cross-check?  AnyDice.com has a great calculator that does it exactly.  The differences were small on my 12d6 test;  they'd be somewhat higher on, say, 8d6, and probably excessive if you drop down to something like 6d6.

Note that in a loop?  You can save some time by starting the loop at DEF+1.  At DEF or lower, the stun is gonna be 0.  Plus, for a reasonably large number of dice...say, 8 or more...the probability of reaching 5*N is TINY...that's 40+ on 8 dice.  Even 4.5*N, 36, is a pretty extreme outlier...AnyDice says 36+ on 8d6 is only about 6%.  In most cases, what you're looking at isn't how this adds to being KO'd...it's the risk of getting stunned.  But this should be fast enough that you can run the loop from DEF+1 to full max N*6 readily enough.  (Best rolls I EVER saw...11d6.  19 BODY, 58 STUN.  And once, a perfecto on 6 dice...all 6's.  The latter is pretty obviously 1 in 46,656;  the 11d6 roll is about 0.01%, or roughly 1 in 10,000.)

A rough gauge for this, tho, might be to say how many strikes before KO, using 4 per die as the average?  That's what I use for my personal estimations.  The low damage rolls, as you note, do nothing.  The VERY high damage rolls, I'll worry about Probability of Being Stunned...which you can also estimate here.  

Given DEF D, and CON C, then it should be

1 - (D+C+1, Mean, SD, true)

Note, I was thinking he had 2 forms of his own...a regular one, and one inside the computer.  Note that the other body could, at this point, even be an android body.  

If it's Ghost in the Machine, and he's possessing someone else's body to return?  I'm not a fan.  I'd need convincing...what's the player trying to achieve?  But that'd be true even from the jump here...I kinda get that the concept's cool and all, but it's got serious playability issues. 

Well, it's a tad early, as training camps don't open for a while but...

In what some are calling explosive but I'd call predictable...

James Harden *blasts* Sixers GM Daryl Morey and vows never to play for an organization of which he's a part.  Even doubled down on it, in case people didn't get the message.

ESPN story says he's upset about not getting a long term max deal...poor baby.  Only signed a $35M extension...in order to facilitate a trade, but he turns 34 this month.  Consistent comments from analysts during the playoffs were, he's lost a step.  He was completely MIA in all 4 losses to Boston...12 for 55 from the field, 3 for 24 from 3...and had 2 terrible games against Brooklyn.  2 good games, as well, but that isn't good enough when you're talking $35M.  

And his consistent petulance can't be ignored.  Well, OK, too often it is...but what's he got left, in the *best* case?  Plus, given that he says "Clippers or bust"...there's no leverage to make a deal.

If Harden doesn't play another minute this season, I'm fine.  If he never plays again...I'm ecstatic.

1 hour ago, DentArthurDent said:

Hashbrowns

 

mmmm....Frank's Finest.  With bacon and onions, topped with a couple fried eggs........

I scream, you scream we all scream for ICE CREAM!

12 hours ago, Asperion said:

A: This is what we get when we divide infinity by zero. 

Q:  WHAT IS THIS???  I look at it at different angles and get something completely different every time!!!

A:  I'm not sure.  I've never seen anything quite like it....

4 hours ago, Pariah said:

Cincinnati chili

.

We said delicious, not food abominations.  

G, huh?  Ganache.  Velvety, luscious, decadent...it's what's topping those eclairs, among other uses.  Eclairs done right are heaven on a doily.

I agree, there won't be anything better coming down the pipe.  And they can't wait.  Not just act in unison, but act *at all* from any halfway decent position.  If that's even still possible.

I also disagree that there's market space for those games.  The Pac 12 deal had a big problem;  their games kicking off around 7 local time, are finishing after midnight in the Central TZ...much less the East.  The viewership wasn't there.  Make it earlier?  Cool, fit it into the early-evening slot, game #3.  With USC or UCLA or Oregon.  Washington State vs. Fresno State doesn't look so hot.

And even a USC-Michigan State game would likely draw better viewership, even if the kickoff is more like 6:30 or 7 in Los Angeles.

Oh my.  A brief look-in on the Yankees-Marlins game wasn't looking so good.  Yankees were up 7-3, bottom 9th.  We join the game when the Marlins have loaded the bases with 1 out.

Then P Clay Holmes throws the ball away on a play at 1st.  2 runs score, runner to 3rd.

Just about the LAST person you want to see is next...Luis Arraez.  STILL hitting .365.  Rips one into the right field corner...2 run triple.  Game tied.
Walk.  Runner takes 2nd, defensive indifference.  

SINGLE!

Game OVER.  Yankee late inning relievers give up *5* in the ninth.  4 earned, 4 hits, 2 walks while getting only 1 out.

Luscious.

Meanwhile, the A's elimination number is down to 12.  They probably won't set the loss record at this point, tho, at least.

Half what the Apple+ contract was projected to pay.

1/3 or wose of the Big 12, Big X, and SEC deals.

PROBABLY lose the tie-in with the Rose Bowl.  PROBABLY lose *all* the high-end bowl deals...relegated to, at best, 2nd-tier bowl games.  Loss?  $2-3M per school.  So for the ex-PACs, it's still a disaster.

The point, tho...at what point does any buyout required to leave the MWC, make a paltry increase like this untenable?  $34M would be *7 years* before you actually see a dime in increased net revenue.

That's also assuming a media rights deal worth $10M can be developed...for a 7 team league?  Boise State hasn't been ranked in the top 15 in the final polls since 2012;  this isn't their heyday of upsetting Oklahoma any more.  San Diego State was 25th...in '21 and '16.  Both teams are getting bowl bids...but we're talking Frisco, Famous Idaho Potato, Las Vegas, Armed Forces, Hawaii Bowl...3rd tier, mostly.  Fresno State is similar.  I'm not saying they're bad teams;  I'm saying they're not teams from which to build a brand.  

And Stanford has a pretty solid history...but haven't been ranked the last 5 years.  Discounting 2020, in their last 3 seasons, they've won 4, 3, and 3 total games.  Cal?  They haven't been .500 in conference...a generally WEAK conference...since 2010, and only made 4 bowl appearances in that span.  And remember that close to 2/3 of the teams make one every year, so NOT making one most of the time is Really Bad.  WSU was somewhat better under Mike Leach...but he's gone.  And it's located in the middle of nowhere...Pullman's very close to the Idaho border.  Media interest?  Market?  Non-existent.  Oregon State had a decent year last year...made a bowl game the year before...but failed to do so the prior 7 years.  Corvallis is somewhat better located...but Eugene and Oregon are only about 50 miles down the road.

EDIT:  Yeah, ok, much of this applies to the MWC...but they could be branded as the plucky underdogs.  The Pac-4 are the lame teams no one wanted.

But note a big qualifier to grab from the Mountain West:  once the exit fee drops to reasonable levels.  San Diego State's was gonna be $17M.  $10M a year is only about $5M a year over what the MWC gives...so we're talking 3+ years to pay that off.

And, *can* that deal even be arranged in time for the '24-25 season?  Probably not.  If not...then what do the Pac-4 schools do for that season?  In ALL sports?  If you're a high quality recruit, who's in the class of '24...would you consider a school, a program that looks to be playing an independent-level schedule at best, at least for a year?  And I've noted the transfer portal for the existing players.