Can_of_corn

Minnesota has no native earthworm species. Probably due to glaciation.

Except when they play in Minnesota.

I'm not disagreeing but I think the Podcast market has pretty much peaked and will start declining soon so I'm not sure how good a long term play that will be.

I don't recall the last time I woke up in the morning and thought, I feel fully healthy. There is always going to be something.

I hope they'd change the name if that did happen. How about the Nashville Egrets?

Come into a marketplace flush with money from investment capitalists, further disrupt an already struggling sector and then a few years later, start the cuts. But hey, the original crew managed to get a fat payout when they sold out to the New York Times.

Britt managed to turn herself into more of a national reporter than a local beat writer.

Figured they would do this at some point. Was one of the reasons I never supported the endeavor. Hire up all the best talent, drive the competition out of business, cut all that expensive talent that no longer has other options for employment. Shame for Dan.

So since the White Sox do a poor job of leveraging their market they shouldn't be grouped into the teams that have a large market and can leverage it?

Have you looked at the owner? Who was the manager last season?

I've heard the White Sox don't and they are in a large market.

They average 18K. The Lightning average 19K. I'm not sure hockey attendance is a good reference point.

At first glance it looks like what Schoop did a decade ago.

Do you think a team in Vegas is going to average 27K a game once the novelty wears off? I don't.

What did I say that wasn't clear? What I heard (and it might be incorrect, I can't vouch for the source) is that a small number of teams that don't pursue analytic research are the ones pushing for this. The Rockies in particular were mentioned. You have large market teams like the Yankees and Dodgers that want to spend as much they can on it and you have small market teams like the Orioles and Rays that feel that spending on this is essential. There is no real divide between large and small markets on the issue that I can see.

As a team you might, but MLB needs folks that draw eyes.

From what I read about this yesterday it is certain teams that don't spend (Rockies) trying to curb the spending of those that do. It isn't a big market vs small market struggle.

Kinda like telling guys they can only stand in certain parts of the field on defense.

That's hilarious. Talk about cherry picking stats.

I mentioned Nick Esaky earlier as a worst case scenario. He got vertigo as a result of an ear infection. The vertigo persisted after the infection was gone. At that point I would consider it an injury and not a symptom.

Sure we question him. It doesn't mean we think he's anything but smart.

You aren't a Plus member. You should look into it, it's nifty.

Oh I thought he was trying to get his closer another save opportunity.

Mullins is at .835, what's the up to the at bat number for Hays and Gunnar?