"We have had it at home, we have had it on the road, other teams have had it, it's a fairly common problem that didn't affect the outcome of the game --- in no way. That's just part of it. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't."
In fact, the Patriots sometimes stick with the old-school method of taking photographs and printing them out. Belichick told reporters that they use the photos as a "backup," calling them "more dependable" than the tablets.
Wow. The story says both that he was placed on administrative leave and that his position as coach was terminated, so maybe he is a regular school district employee, not just a basketball coach? If so, where is the union?
other stories (STRIB) suggest that maybe the admin leave preceded the termination, suggesting that he's an off-campus coach, not a regular employee. At-will assignment. But still. Wow.
By itself, I'd say no. (Though I question the wisdom of confronting a student like that in the hallway. IMO, he'd probably have been better off letting an administrator give him the what-for.)
But we also don't know the context surrounding the incident. Were there other minor incidents that made people concerned he was going to do something stupid with his players?
Mostly likely the firing is just a CYA, but who knows.
Yea, if he did indeed grab the kid preemptively (as suggested in the story), that might be enough to get him fired. Even if the "choking" claim by the mom is false.
This is a pretty neat article by Trueblood. About looking at players' strengths instead of weaknesses. I think the last paragraphs really sell the idea. Plus, he mentions my sister.
I read that article with interest last night, since strengths-based approaches are also common in my field.
While I get the point of the approach Trueblood is advocating, I wonder in practice how reliable it is for strengths as quick to decline as those in baseball. I agree that a player's track record can be a valuable illustration of his strengths and the way he might enhance a team's roster. But what makes me a bit more reserved in my embrace of this idea is the variability of strength durability in the player population, particularly in relation to age.
Almost every assessment of a player is a risk-based assessment, looking at a player's strengths and making inferences about the durability of those strengths over the term of a given contract. Those kinds of assessments necessarily engage the negative characteristics of a player's skills (or his "weaknesses"), even if those are as mundane as longevity or injury risk. (Of course, risk can be positive value, too.)
I like where the approach is coming from. I just wonder if the transitory & somewhat volatile nature of athletic skills is the best fit for a predominantly strengths-based approach to roster creation.
I think what struck me about the article wasn't the player-assessment as player-assessment portion (where I think your point is spot-on), so much, as it was the way he started to get into the way strength-based player assessments work well from a roster construction point. He mentioned KC specifically, but I think about the Moneyball A's as a good example. There's that scene where they're telling Hatteberg that he doesn't have to be Giambi, or however that went, they're just really seizing on what he is, and what that means to the team, and looking at what the team as a whole needs.
For me, from a whole-roster creation standpoint, that's a compelling approach.
(I'll concede, of course, that there are always risks of decline, and that those affect whole-roster construction too. But if you're looking at "here's what we need from this player that they do well" and you get that from them... that's kind of the right return on investment.)
Yeah, from that aspect I agree. I might have missed the turn in that, or not put together what he was saying about roster construction with what he was reacting to in the way these signings are assessed as a media analyst/colleague of Gammons.
Eh, I think he didn't really get that whole idea out in the article, just started getting there, so "missed" is probably too strong. If anything, I'm giving him too much credit.
Mid-market is fair, but in the Metrodome, the team was going to be low-revenue. They shouldn't have any real disadvantages relative to market size at Target Field, though.
Still going to be fourth in their own division as far as payroll this year.
This has been a fantastic Wolves game. Also frustrating at the same time because of lazy passes and mental mistakes.
Hey Twayn, your bro was part of a nice instrumental tribute to Glenn Frey as the offertory yesterday AM.
Not sure how it works, but big bro got almost all of the musical talent among us kids.
AMR, I nearly didn't recognize you without the braces!
Like I ever smile anyways.
The Twins and Trevor Plouffe settled on a contract 1 year $7.25 mil.
The Twins have money laying around, they should have paid him more.
Or they could use that laying around money on better pitching.
Good, cheap option on the trade market...?
I made the mistake of reading the Strib comments on an article about the Vikings. The 5th comment was a rip on Mauer.
The wayward NYC travellers are at their gate, so it looks like they dog and my quiet time is soon over.
Microsoft Surface getting lots of solid press after yesterday.
This is so stupid.
If the facts are true here, does this warrant a termination? http://m.swnewsmedia.com/lakeshore_weekly/news/public_safety/police-department-releases-report-in-carr-incident/article_be3fabff-21a8-5c48-9b33-880bbed280d1.html?mode=jqm
The student?
no.
Wow. The story says both that he was placed on administrative leave and that his position as coach was terminated, so maybe he is a regular school district employee, not just a basketball coach? If so, where is the union?
other stories (STRIB) suggest that maybe the admin leave preceded the termination, suggesting that he's an off-campus coach, not a regular employee. At-will assignment. But still. Wow.
By itself, I'd say no. (Though I question the wisdom of confronting a student like that in the hallway. IMO, he'd probably have been better off letting an administrator give him the what-for.)
But we also don't know the context surrounding the incident. Were there other minor incidents that made people concerned he was going to do something stupid with his players?
Mostly likely the firing is just a CYA, but who knows.
Yea, if he did indeed grab the kid preemptively (as suggested in the story), that might be enough to get him fired. Even if the "choking" claim by the mom is false.
This is a pretty neat article by Trueblood. About looking at players' strengths instead of weaknesses. I think the last paragraphs really sell the idea. Plus, he mentions my sister.
I read that article with interest last night, since strengths-based approaches are also common in my field.
While I get the point of the approach Trueblood is advocating, I wonder in practice how reliable it is for strengths as quick to decline as those in baseball. I agree that a player's track record can be a valuable illustration of his strengths and the way he might enhance a team's roster. But what makes me a bit more reserved in my embrace of this idea is the variability of strength durability in the player population, particularly in relation to age.
Almost every assessment of a player is a risk-based assessment, looking at a player's strengths and making inferences about the durability of those strengths over the term of a given contract. Those kinds of assessments necessarily engage the negative characteristics of a player's skills (or his "weaknesses"), even if those are as mundane as longevity or injury risk. (Of course, risk can be positive value, too.)
I like where the approach is coming from. I just wonder if the transitory & somewhat volatile nature of athletic skills is the best fit for a predominantly strengths-based approach to roster creation.
I think what struck me about the article wasn't the player-assessment as player-assessment portion (where I think your point is spot-on), so much, as it was the way he started to get into the way strength-based player assessments work well from a roster construction point. He mentioned KC specifically, but I think about the Moneyball A's as a good example. There's that scene where they're telling Hatteberg that he doesn't have to be Giambi, or however that went, they're just really seizing on what he is, and what that means to the team, and looking at what the team as a whole needs.
For me, from a whole-roster creation standpoint, that's a compelling approach.
(I'll concede, of course, that there are always risks of decline, and that those affect whole-roster construction too. But if you're looking at "here's what we need from this player that they do well" and you get that from them... that's kind of the right return on investment.)
Yeah, from that aspect I agree. I might have missed the turn in that, or not put together what he was saying about roster construction with what he was reacting to in the way these signings are assessed as a media analyst/colleague of Gammons.
Eh, I think he didn't really get that whole idea out in the article, just started getting there, so "missed" is probably too strong. If anything, I'm giving him too much credit.
I've said all along that the Twins are a mid-market team, not small-market.
http://milwaukee.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2016/01/25/the-minnesota-small-market-con/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Mid-market is fair, but in the Metrodome, the team was going to be low-revenue. They shouldn't have any real disadvantages relative to market size at Target Field, though.
Still going to be fourth in their own division as far as payroll this year.
This has been a fantastic Wolves game. Also frustrating at the same time because of lazy passes and mental mistakes.