Letters to the Editor
JTD
Published Letters: 18 Editor's Choice: 6
-
PRV is good
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks for PRV. The facts may prove me wrong, but I'd guess PRV's more relevant than you're giving it credit for.
Forget about the top ten. How does it change the look of the NL #3 starters? If we look at pitchers ranked 33rd to 48th by ERA and compare to the same range ranked by PRV, I bet we see a lot of changes.
My other comment is that it'd be nice if PRV was made comparable to ERA -- an adjustment to ERA instead of an apples oranges new stat. For that you'd want a replacement level RC/9IP as a point of reference, so that you adjust ERA up for the sure outs at the plate and adjust down for the "sluggers".
I think ERA - RC/9IP + replRC/9IP is the idea. Where's that math professor?
-
good PRV two
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So, I was curious about PRV for the middle group of NL starters. As compared to ERA there wasn't a big change, but more than was seen with the top ten.
I looked at NL starters with 100 IP (I had to expand the pool a little) and approximated the #3 spot with ERA ranks of 33-48, then resorted by PRV. The results: Ricky Nolasco was promoted to the #2 group, replaced by a demoted Brett Tomko, and Tony Armas dropped 5 spots to the #4 group, replaced by Livan Hernandez who promoted by 6 spots.
Now, those group boundaries are arbitrary, but it serves the point -- hitting is relevant for pitchers, and probably more so for middle-of-the-pack players. Thanks again KK.
-
Rome hasn't quite convinced me.
[Read the article: History that hurts]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think it's good TV, and I'm watching it. But the special charge that comes from a portrayal of a people at a mental remove from ourselves -- that I got from Deadwood, not Rome. I'm afraid I can't put my finger on it, but I'm convinced that the pre-moderns Bullock, Swearengen, and Charlie Utter would be more out of place than the ancients of Rome if they appeared on our streets today.
It's great to see Rome reaching for characters who's sensibility we don't entirely recognize. And often it succeeds. But other times, I only see meaty drama in costume. Deadwood (obviously I'm a big fan) reached and always grasped. In that crude, overflowing town I never saw my neighbors in costume, but I did see their ancestors. I hope someone can help me understand why.
-
for me, it's the decision making
[Read the article: Ask the pilot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What I see most of all is a overwhelming disincentive for airlines to cancel or reschedule flights. For the airlines, if there's a 20% chance of flying and saving themselves millions of dollars, that's a gamble worth taking. It's a very bad bet for the passengers, though.
I was once trapped in a terminal (not a plane, thankfully) for 6 hours during a snowstorm while the airline (a respected European carrier) hoped against hope that the weather would clear. At about 2 a.m. they gave up and announced they'd try again tomorrow. Now, maybe they really were surprised that they weren't able to fly... but I doubt it. Take away the cost, and I have no doubt that by flight time they would have made the same decision they finally made 6 hours later, in the middle of the night.
We need a system that really allows (requires?) airlines to reschedule when it's prudent to do so. Penalties for trapping people past some point is one way to go. But there should also be some other ways to get there from here. What do the economists say?
-
more
[Read the article: I left New York for San Diego and now I don't know where I am]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There've been lot's of good comments already, but as a San Diegan who's moved away and back a few times, including a couple of years in NYC, I hope I can add something.
First off, for me, Cary is right. Leaving home then returning home is a great thing to do. Great at least if you learn something about yourself and home and being away in the process. (Of course, not every home is so great to start with, so it's easier if it's a place like NYC or SD you're talking about.)
It's funny to me how it can be hard to see home clearly. A lot of what you say about San Diego is true, but I have to stop to see it. SD doesn't handle negativity well (if at all). The official culture is militaristic out of proportion even to the military presence. The city's dreams rarely exceed comfort. But day to day, I notice none of this.
In my experience New Yorkers don't see New York so well either. It seems like competition seeps into every interaction and gesture there. That remains foreign and perverse to me. And I think there's also a willful lacunae for the very heart of the city: Wall Street and Midtown. The corporate mega-money of those places is seen as apart from Williamsburg et al if it's remarked on there at all. I suspect that the boundaryless competition results more from that money and attendant neurosis than it does from the city's density. There are lots of dense cities.
You have to get away to see those things and you've done that. Now, if you choose to go back you will see your home there better than you did before.
A last word or two of SD advice. It sounds like the beach culture, seductive as it is, isn't quite you. Try another part of town (though I don't at all like another writer's suggestion of Uptown or the Gaslamp). There are many beautiful parts of SD that are much more down to earth. And understand about the beauty of SD, that's cultural too. The city has made choices, and on balance, has done a decent job preserving or enhancing the city's beauty. It's important to us -- how and why is a good story -- not just something we lucked into. Which either makes us shallow or deep, depending on where you're coming from.