text:
Can you believe this? I leave the office for a few hours and Douglas and Manjula immediately break out the booze. Pretty sad state of affairs at Vermont Woods Studios, isn't it?
You'll notice Rebecca and Dennis aren't too impressed.
OK, actually we were celebrating meeting an impossible goal we set for ourselves at the beginning of the year, so we thought we would indulge in a little champagne that day. And some key lime pie that Dennis's wife, Susan kindly made for us (thank you Susan).
We even pulled Ken away from his post-surgery routine and sat him down to celebrate too. No arm twisting necessary.
Now it's back to work and I have to say that for the most part, we have fun doing it. I'm so impressed with our team (Douglas, Manjula, Rebecca, Dennis, Shannon). They are brilliant and creative and determined — so much so that I feel certain we'll have another reason to be drinking on the job again soon. Thanks, Everyone!
Oh… I guess I should say that if you look real close, you'll see the second bottle in the photo is sparkling grape juice… just so I don't get any of our teatotalers in trouble :))
Already following our Blog? For more info sign up for our e-newsletter
This blog is written by your friends at Vermont Woods Studios. Check out our Vermont made furniture and home decor online and visit our showroom and art gallery at Stonehurst, the newly restored 1800s farmhouse nestled in the foothills of the Green Mountains.


text:
Hi everyone,
I am a 25 y/o male from Southern Louisiana. I have a B.A. in International Studies and I'm currently working on my Master's degree in Mental Health Counseling. I've been very interested in Buddhism since a teenager and have done a fair share of meditation through my own personal practice. I've sat in on Shambhala and Vipassana groups here and there, but I definitely don't have a formal commitment to any tradition (yet). I look forward to getting to know everyone here and to learn and share with you all!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
BLURR wrote:Anybody else notice the stability difference between the one's that are marked *D and SDS on the bottom? All the SDS Destroyers I have are quite a bit more overstable than the old *D marked one's. Anybody else have the same experience?
Every *D I have or have had has been pretty flat. Perhaps your old *D were flatter, and maybe your newer SDS are domier like the Echos and Pros?


text:
BP Comment Quick Links
|Strength of Schedule Report
May 14, 2013
Manufactured Runs
Listen to What the Heyman Said
As that old pop song goes, "oops, he did it again." Sports Illustrated's Jon Heyman is asking questions about WAR:
If this sounds familiar, Heyman asked a similar question about Starling Marte and Bryce Harper roughly two weeks ago. There was a predictable dust-up on Twitter, then and now, and a few articles were written. And while much noise has been made, very little has been said, and that's sad for a number of reasons:
1. Heyman is actually right on the merits here,
2. These aren't edge cases or weird outliers but examples of a fundamental problem with the construction of certain WAR metrics and with several of the underlying components,
3. These are problems that have been identified for some time now, and solutions actually exist for them already,
4. And finally, that the response to Heyman is indicative of a larger problem with the sabermetrics movement.
Now, I am not a huge believer in sabermetric evangelism. I'm wholly grateful that there's a community of people interested in sabermetric analysis—it lets me make a living doing this, if nothing else. But primarily I like preaching to the choir. And why shouldn't I? The choir shows up every Sunday, they've been reading the New Testament and I don't have to spend a lot of time explaining why sometimes he's Paul and sometimes he's Saul, and we can get down to business and move forward into new territory rather than being constantly stuck at the beginning. Now, there are certainly people out there who are interested in sabermetrics but haven't had a lot of exposure to it, and you don't want to leave them out. And there are certainly people who have closed themselves off to sabermetrics and are spreading falsehoods about the field as a result, and you want to respond to that (although sometimes we—and when I say we, I certainly include myself—engage in it a little too often).
And sometimes there isn't much you can do. I wrote what I did about Hawk Harrelson and The Will To Win because at some point, you have to come to the conclusion that someone isn't worth talking to anymore. Hawk's problem wasn't that he was wrong, it was that he was stuck in a frame of mind that starts from conclusions and will, when it cares to, circle back around to find some evidence to support it. And that, in insisting on perfection from sabermetrics but not from his worldview, Hawk was simply not engaging with the questions in an intellectually honest way.
But I get the sense that people are viewing Heyman in much the same light. And I think this is dangerous, for several reasons. One, I think he's being honest in his questions. I admit this is the weakest point of my argument (because I can't really know his intent), but it's also the least relevant, and it's also the weakest part of the opposing case (because anyone else can't really know his intent). Two, I think his question is useful to consider even if it's not meant in a sense of honest inquiry, and that we do ourselves a disservice if we ignore useful questions just because of where they came from.
And I think we have to beware of the idea of sabermetric tribalism, that there's an "us" and a "them" and that we are right and they are wrong. "We" are going to end up being wrong some of the time, and "they" are going to end up being right some of the time (and sometimes all of us will be wrong). Treating the search for truth as a set of rooting interests diminishes it; if you want to cheer for something to win, cheer for a baseball team, not a way of studying baseball. At the same time, we shouldn't shy away from internal disputes in order to avoid handing ammunition to outsiders. Yes, someone who isn't looking at sabermetrics as a scientific process can misinterpret and misrepresent internal dissent. But avoiding treating sabermetrics as a scientific process as a result is not a defense but a surrender.
So first I'm going to handle the common responses to Heyman and point out where they are wrong, and then I'm going to loop back around to showing why Heyman was right, in a way that is intuitive to people who regularly discuss sabermetrics. The problem with bad arguments in defense of WAR are multifold, listed from least to most harmful:
1. Bad arguments are unlikely to win many converts, because they're bad arguments. (In fact, this is probably a good question that more sabermetricians should be asking. If you're talking to an audience that is educated on the subject of baseball but not in sabermetrics and they don't seem to take your point, is it because they lack the education (or open-mindedness) to understand what you're saying, or is it simply that they lack the formal knowledge to explain to you why you're wrong in terms that you understand?)
2. Bad arguments allow us to overlook good questions that would lead us to improve our current metrics.
3. And most severely, bad arguments indicate that many sabermetric proponents have misidentified the key lesson of sabermetrics, and are passing on that misunderstanding to others, devaluing the term sabermetrics in the process.
One of the common sabermetric notions trotted out to defend WAR from Heyman's line of inquiry is that of sample size. Those of us with long memories (at least, long memories for this field, which isn't saying much) may remember the rather pithy formulation of Voros' Law, named after Voros McCracken of DIPS fame:
"Any major league hitter can hit just about anything in 60 at bats."
The thing is, can is not the same as has.
When sabermetricians talk about sample size, they're basing their arguments in what's known as true score theory or classical test theory. (They are not precisely the same thing, but for the purposes of our discussion the differences do not matter.) What's important to realize is that true score theory talks about how reliably our measurements over a sample period measure the true talent level of the subject in question. It's a question about ability, or framed another way it's a question about the repeatability of the performance. And it's a discussion framed largely around random variation, or if you want to talk about a loaded word, "luck." This really doesn't translate well to this discussion, though—the question isn't whether or not that's the talent level of the two players being compared (Russell Carleton addressed that question today), but whether or not the performances are really equivalent.
A related argument is to make a similar comparison using a traditional stat, like saying that Yuniesky Betancourt and Chase Utley both have 24 RBI, so why isn't Heyman asking questions about RBI?
Which, fine, if you want to treat WAR and RBI as equivalents, go forth and prosper. If you want to call yourself a sabermetrician, though, that's a patently silly argument. At the risk of going all "thing shaped like itself" on you, what RBI purports to measure is the number of runs batted in, given the rulebook definition. We can argue about how well that captures a player's offensive value (not all that well) or how well it measures total value (even less well). But those are questions about how useful that definition of the term is; it's not being debated whether or not those players actually have those RBI totals. These debates are sometimes had historically, but those are debates over recordkeeping—not to belittle their importance, but that doesn't undermine the idea that RBI totals are "facts" any more than someone claiming that 2+2 equals five makes rudimentary addition controversial.
WAR, on the other hand, is an estimate, not a mere recording of fact. This is why two people that ostensibly agree both on what is to be measured and the underlying recordkeeping can come to two differing estimates. This is because sabermetrics isn't content with just counting things. We attempt to build models that relate what's being counted to how runs and wins work on a team level. I would argue that's far more useful, but it also means that sabermetrics deals in estimates while "old-school" stats deal far more in the counting of facts.
Sabermetrics shouldn't be afraid of estimation—it isn't a dirty word. But it should admit that's what it's doing, instead of trying to treat estimates like facts. Which is why defending WAR by comparing it to RBIs is simply a false equivalency in this case. WAR is not a fact, and RBIs are. That isn't a value claim, and it is not a point in favor of RBIs, but if sabermetricians will not defend the practice of estimation then we shouldn't be surprised when others shun our estimates.
Another defense of WAR is that it correlates with team wins, and it has a higher correlation with defensive metrics included than with them excluded. Both claims are factually true, in that there is a significant correlation between team wins and team WAR, and that WAR with defense included correlates better with team wins without it. But while true, they don't really contribute anything to WAR's defense.
Let's play devil's advocate for a second. Can we construct a metric with an even higher correlation to team wins than team WAR? We certainly can:
That gets a correlation of 0.95 on 2013 data, higher than the correlation Dave Cameron found between WAR (defense or not) and team wins. So why don't we use pitcher wins and RBI instead of WAR?
We can draw parallels to the ecological fallacy, which cautions us to be careful about applying inferences drawn at the group level to the individual. Similarly, we know that pitcher wins and runs batted in sum up to team wins and team runs scored respectively, but in practice each has deficiencies in how it goes about attributing those wins and runs at a more granular level. Pitcher wins will, for instance, credit a relief pitcher who happens to be the pitcher of record when the go-ahead run scores, even if the reliever pitched poorly (and maybe even surrendered a run to put the team behind), rather than the starting pitcher who went six scoreless innings to keep the team in a position for the go-ahead run to in fact cause the team to go ahead. Similarly, RBI will reward the player who hits a sacrifice fly to drive in a runner on third, but completely ignore the contribution of the batter whose double allowed the runner to advance from first to third.
So instead of pitcher wins and RBIs we turn to WAR, which may not reconcile quite as well at the team level but, we think, does a better job of describing how each individual player's performance contributes to wins.
In that light, using the correlation with team wins to defend WAR in general, or any particular implementation detail especially, is hypocritical. Once we subscribe to the notion that correlation with team wins tells us something, we're led down the path to RBI and wins. And once we turn away from that path, we cannot chose to venture back down it only when it suits us.
Nobody disputes that when measures like UZR and DRS are summed at the team level, there is a correlation with team defense as measured by things like DER. And at the team level, when you add in DER (or some proxy for it, like team UZR or DRS) to a DIPS measure like FIP, you will increase your correlation with team wins. But that tells us absolutely nothing about how DRS or UZR are apportioning that defensive credit to individual players, which is the exact thing being criticized.
What all of these arguments have in common (well, among other things) is that they don't really get at the heart of the matter and address the issue that Heyman is bringing up. Up until now, they share that with this column. At this point I suppose it's only fair that I stop slinking around the pole and pouting and actually start to take some clothes off. I started off claiming Heyman was right, so let's get down to brass tacks and explain why.
Let's start off with a simple spin off linear weights, based off Estimated Runs Produced:
It's a simple formula to be sure, entirely linear with a set of constants and a bunch of inputs. Each of those constants, of course, is an estimate. And so associated with each of those constants is a certain amount of measurement error. It's small enough that normally we don't have to deal with it (especially since we use the same constants for every batter), but it's there.
If we want to get batting runs above average, we can take the above formula and do:
ERP is figured using our formula above, PA is the player's PA, lgR is the total number of runs scored in MLB and lgPA is the total number of PA in MLB.
Now, let's compare to the fundamental formula behind all of our defensive metrics:
Where "league" refers to all other players at the same position.
It resembles our formula for figuring batting runs above average, yes? Except in our batting runs formula, the only estimated quantity is ERP. The rest is all factual data. For our defensive measure, on the other hand, Plays Made and League Plays Made are our only factual data. Everything else has to be estimated.
Or to put it another way, we have a record of every plate appearance, which batter took it, and what the outcome was. All we have to do is estimate how those outcomes relate to runs. For our defensive metrics, we know the outcome, but we not only have to estimate how it related to runs but we have to estimate which player it was a fielding chance for.
All of which is to say that our estimates of a player's contribution on defense are much less certain than our estimates of a player's contribution on offense. Having said that, let's look at the players Heyman cited Saturday night, as well as the Baseball-Reference cards for each player saved on that night:
We see that Reynolds has played more, which is reflected in his four additional runs attributed to the replacement level adjustment. He's 12 batting runs ahead of Johnson, and behind him two runs on position and one run on baserunning. They're even on double play avoidance. So that's 13 runs between them on things mostly measured by the OPS cited by Heyman, their playing time, or their fielding position, in Reynolds' favor. And yet they're in a dead heat in WAR, entirely because of a 12-run difference in their estimated fielding prowess in Johnson's favor.
And the question Heyman is asking is, how confident are we that the 12 runs on defense reflects what actually happened (not the talent level of each), compared to how confident we are about the 13-run difference comprised primarily of offense?
You know, I know, everyone knows the answer to that. We are more confident that the gap between their offensive production (measured by OPS, linear weights, or anything in between) is meaningful—that is to say, reflective of what actually happened—than the difference between them in DRS. If you don't believe me, you can ask John Dewan, who runs Baseball Info Solutions, the organization that collects the data and runs the calculations behind DRS. At SABR Analytics, he was asked about the reliability of those measures, and said:
So, given what we know about the reliability of offensive metrics versus the reliability of defensive metrics in terms of how well they convey what actually happened in-sample, the logical conclusion is that Heyman is right. It is likely that Reynolds was better than Johnson, or that Harper was better than Marte, over the period Heyman was examining. And WAR would be better if it would show that, instead of treating them as equal. We treat one run in DRS equivalent to one batting run above average, but there's absolutely no reason that we should (or that we have to). Heyman has brought up an area where WAR is "wrong" and it would be useful to make improvements.
It turns out that there is in fact a very large body of work about how to add two quantities of varying reliability. It involves estimating the amount of confidence (or uncertainty) you have in each estimate. It has use in things like polling, for example. And it can certainly be applied to measures of fielding; we've used it to regress our FRAA, for example, to account for random error in our estimate of fielding opportunities. It's nontrivial to apply this kind of thinking to metrics like DRS and UZR that aren't built from the ground up to be used this way; there are a lot of sources of potential systemic bias in those metrics that make it much more difficult to regress them based on the amount of statistical power you have. But there is absolutely a way to combine quantities of differing reliability together such that you're putting more weight on the more reliable estimates. And if other WAR implementations were to do so, that would fix the problem Heyman is bringing up.
But instead of taking this as a challenge to improve what we're doing, it seems like people are mostly taking this as an opportunity to circle the wagons around the way things are now, responding to Heyman's tweets with dismissive, condescending tweets of their own. If nothing else, if we want to be able to sit around at MVP time and snark about mainstream writers ignoring defense and baserunning when it comes to Mike Trout, it would probably help if we didn't have people telling them to go back to community college to learn math when they ask questions like these. Because if we want to convince the world that sabermetrics manages to incorporate defense into its evaluations in a useful way, then trumpeting Heyman's findings as a triumph rather than as a flaw hurts our case. How can we be trusted to get Trout right if we're not only wrong about things like Marte versus Harper, but we're unwilling to admit it?
But that's not the main reason I'm upset here. No, I'm upset because sabermetrics is about asking questions and seeking honest answers, no matter what the conventional wisdom is. The people who have self-selected themselves as sabermetricians have a conventional wisdom that Heyman is questioning, and so reflexively he's getting attacked. Our sabermetric community is standing in the way of sabermetric progress to the extent that Jon Heyman is being a better sabermetrician than many people who would call themselves one. And that's a real problem.
This low-rent knockoff Fire Joe Morgan nonsense has to stop. It is well past time for us to stop letting the default mode of communication between baseball researchers and baseball reporters be the one established by sitcom writers. Science involves competing hypotheses, attempts to duplicate each other's work, and debates that gel into consensus because the weight of evidence eventually becomes too great to ignore. But that kind of healthy debate is increasingly missing from our field.
So the enemy isn't them. The enemy is us. We are the ones establishing what sabermetrics will be for this generation and the next, and we seem to be increasingly doing it by abandoning our principles in pursuit of popularity. Each day, new questions are piling up about our purported ability to measure fielding, and we show less and less of an interest in answering them. And in the process, we're committing some of the same sins we're so quick to point out in others.
Colin Wyers is an author of Baseball Prospectus. Follow @cwyers
51 comments have been left for this article.
BP Comment Quick Links
I think this is a good article, but Jon Heyman makes a habit of trolling saber-people every month or two. He's actually reasonably good at it, judging from the Twitter rage that invariably ensues.
May 14, 2013 05:30 AM
So your response is basically, "He started it!"
May 14, 2013 06:02 AM
No, just that I don't think he is actually interested in the answers to the questions he poses. That tends to make a meaningful conversation a tough difficult.
May 14, 2013 06:05 AM
Colin's point is that, even if he is trolling, he has a point, and if we ignore his point because we think he's trolling we're inhibiting ourselves and out pursuits with regards to baseball. Whether we have a meaningful conversation with Heyman or just with ourselves about what he brings up is irrelevant if we're leaning something about the stats we use and the problems we take on.
May 14, 2013 08:28 AM
Pat Folz
This is all true and agreed, but the reason the reaction to Heyman is so snarky is that he IS a troll. He "asks" these "questions" all the time and gives zero indication that he's actually trying to learn from them. Case in point: the Reynolds-Johnson "mystery" is EXACTLY THE SAME as the Marte-Harper one he was grousing about a few weeks ago. I really don't think trying to engage with him is at all different from trying to engage with Hawk.
May 14, 2013 10:00 AM
Except that a lot of sabermetric types are asking these questions (and the right way, unlike Heyman, who just goes "I don't get it, so I'll presume it could only be completely wrong") already. We're trying to perfect our estimations of WAR, and the best ways to measure and regress defense.
May 14, 2013 10:23 AM
In actual fact, many of us *in* the sabermetric community have simply stopped asking these questions, because we get the same barrage of ad hominem, sub-FJM abuse that Heyman gets when we ask them.
May 15, 2013 07:03 AM
Russell A. Carleton
BP staff
Even if he's trolling, it's a teachable moment. Even if Heyman doesn't take the lesson, there will be others who will read and understand. Even if he's trolling, he brings up a reasonable and important question, and it's one that needs to be addressed, and we need to honestly address it, even if it means that the answer is "We don't know yet and you are correct."
May 14, 2013 12:02 PM
I said this down below in response to another comment, but I think it's important enough to repeat.
May 14, 2013 20:24 PM
There are two separate issues here. One is whether there are legitimate questions to answer about how WAR is constructed. The answer to this is clearly yes, and these should be discussed. The other is whether there is value responding in a manner such as this to someone who is obviously trolling. I'd imagine that Jon Heyman is delighted to have caught such a big fish with his little troll right now. Ignoring him, and looking at issues with WAR at another time, and in a way not related to his trolling, is a much better option.
May 15, 2013 04:28 AM
Exactly. Colin wrote a great post, but he screwed up one important part - "I think [Heyman]'s being honest in his questions"
May 14, 2013 09:43 AM
Heyman has to start looking at other forms of WAR/WARP. The Reynolds / Johnson argument does not even come into play if you input a heavily regressed defensive stat like UZR, instead of DRS.
May 14, 2013 05:54 AM
Looking at the data on Fangraphs as of Saturday night (I saved the leaderboard from when Heyman made his comments in case I needed the data for this), the SD of DRS is 1.75, compared to 1.78 for UZR. Don't really think that UZR is any more regressed than DRS is (I don't think either of them are regressed, really).
May 14, 2013 07:13 AM
A beginning note: of the 12 defense runs Johnson is awarded above Reynolds, 2 aren't even because of his performance but rather simply because of where he is standing on the field.
May 14, 2013 06:04 AM
"we're not only wrong about things like Marte versus Harper, but we're unwilling to admit it?"
May 14, 2013 06:23 AM
Yeah, this article felt like preaching to the choir some more. Then again, I didn't see the Tweets.
May 14, 2013 06:27 AM
Cameron, among others, wrote a rebuttal to Heyman; I think it misrepresents him to say he pretty much agreed. (I don't think Cameron's rebuttal was correct, as I mentioned in the section dealing with the correlation between WAR and wins. But I don't think your characterization of it is reflective of what he said.)
May 14, 2013 06:46 AM
Yeah, I didn't write that clearly enough.
May 14, 2013 09:55 AM
Excellent article, but can you please put your clothes back on now?
May 14, 2013 06:54 AM
I usually don't try to argue about WAR. As Colin said it is an estimation. I can't defend it with numbers (I don't know the formula well enough) or therefor logic, and it is difficult to get non-saber involved people to understand that.
May 14, 2013 07:26 AM
If one stat doesn't tell the right story, make another one (stat that is).
May 14, 2013 07:58 AM
Excellent article Colin, it's great to hear someone so mathematically gifted also able to speak so eloquently and persuasively in plain English. Hopefully people out there agree with you.
May 14, 2013 08:33 AM
Reynolds war for six weeks into the season has to be a record considered he is utterly and completely unable to see.
May 14, 2013 08:47 AM
Pat Folz
I think "WAR Mystery of the Week" would be a pretty fantastic weekly Unfiltered feature, actually.
May 14, 2013 09:36 AM
A lot of fans don't have the appetite to digest concepts like estimation and confidence levels of components, etc. However, Heyman is a smart person with a prominent role in the industry. Despite the fact that he has received negative tweets that may present bad arguments for WAR, he has undoubtedly also heard the same good arguments you raise for and against WAR. I bet if you pushed him in private, he could articulate much of what you say here. It's hard to infer meaning in tweets, and I respect people's ability to play off that. Consider him a successful troll. But he's not raising new questions here. He's prodding, and maybe the sabermetric community needs prodding. I do think there is a point we can start dismissing tweets that go no further than shallow observations.
May 14, 2013 09:53 AM
You have not tried to have a discussion with Heyman. I can say this without a doubt. Heyman is not a "smart person", at least in regards to this. He may not be dumb, but a conversation with him will reveal that he cannot actually articulate much of what Colin says here, or really do much more than repeat ' doesn't make since to me, thus advanced metrics must be useless'.
May 14, 2013 10:29 AM
I think in a nutshell Heyman is saying, "let's not talk about WAR when it is not a meaningful number, let's talk about something else"
May 14, 2013 10:20 AM
While I'm pleased you took Heyman's point and ran in an interesting direction, his initial question seems like an Intro to Logic question:
May 14, 2013 10:22 AM
Actually I have heard announcers praise Reynolds contribution on defense at 1B last year in replacing Chris Davis and the overall improvement to the team defense with Machado replacing Reynolds at 3B. The overall takeaway is that Reynolds is significantly better at 1B than he was at 3B.
May 14, 2013 20:21 PM
Kudos to the editors to keep this out in front of the paywall. It needs to be read by many.
May 14, 2013 11:39 AM
I've said this many times: I don't like the idea of combining UZR and offensive metrics (to get WAR). It is combining apples and oranges. It is a little like OPS (a false combination), but a lot worse.
May 14, 2013 12:24 PM
That's actually an interesting philosophical point -- do you use a player's fielding data from other seasons as part of your regressed estimate of what he actually DID? I can see arguments on both sides (although currently we don't do it like that).
May 14, 2013 12:59 PM
Yes, you do. Of course you do. If a player is zero for his career, and he has a +15 per 150 in half a season, it is likely that we overestimated the difficulty of his chances.
May 14, 2013 18:15 PM
MGL is correct. Which is why 99% of the people won't accept altering the quality of a SS's performance in 2013 based on how well he was estimated to play in 2011-2012.
May 15, 2013 08:56 AM
Moral of the story: Don't combine two numbers when one is regressed or does not need to be regressed to tell you what you think it tells you, and the other needs to be regressed to tell you what you think it tells you or want it to tell you.
May 14, 2013 12:26 PM
Great article...
May 14, 2013 12:36 PM
Well, would the error bars actually be all that different? Beyond the issue of sample size for Johnson vs. Reynolds, I'd think they'd still have the same level of error. A +10 defender and a +1 defender in the same amount of innings should have equal amounts of uncertainty, for the most part. This isn't nearly as useful as regressing them, as that would shrink the contribution that UZR or DRS has on total WAR.
May 15, 2013 00:10 AM
I'm fine with the idea that WAR needs improvement and that the analytical community needs to be more introspective. And, I completely agree that the Fire Joe Morgan knockoff stuff is lame. It's really just a comedic attempt that has completely run its course, and fighting with anti-SABR trolls seems pointless anyway, since statistical analysis has won the battle pretty convincingly by now.
May 14, 2013 16:15 PM
It doesn't really matter whether Heyman is trolling or not, though. It's not like people just ignored him, people actually replied to him, some of them in-depth -- they just gave him the wrong answer. If people were just ignoring him, that'd be one thing, but they were saying wrong things instead.
May 14, 2013 17:11 PM
Excellent article. Colin basically makes the point I tried to make in my comment on the harrelson-kinney dustup, only much better. Both sides have valid points, neither side is 100% right and neither is 100% wrong, and the debate is best served by making rational arguments rather than those of a straw man or ad-hominem nature. I would like to see all supporters of advanced analysis adopt the tone of Brian Kinney and Colin where as well as their cause.
May 14, 2013 17:02 PM
I think that this argument would be better if you explicitly addressed Cameron and/or other professionals. Sean Forman, for example, talked about the Heyman Tweet on Keith Law's podcast. He specifically broke down the small number of plays that Marte made that Harper didn't make. Going after anonymous amateur sabermetricians is kind of like shooting fish in a barrel. I know that specifically addressing Cameron and Forman may create social awkwardness, but talking directly to them is really the best way to facilitate progress in sabermetrics.
May 14, 2013 20:55 PM
Thanks for the interesting article. Looking at the formula for batting runs above replacement, I realized that it basically weighs each outcome with a certain value. It doesn't take into consideration that all outs or hits are not equal. For example, hitting a ground ball to the right side with no outs to move a runner from second to third is way more valuable than striking out. A 13 pitch at bat is worth much more than a first pitch GIDP. And that's not even talking about the different "hit" values. While WAR can be a useful tool, I believe the problem arises when people don't recognize its limitations and think it gives a complete picture of performance is the only statistic needed to measure a player's performance.
May 15, 2013 01:08 AM
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!


text:
Are you an Educator?Click here to switch to TIGed.org
Are you an TIG Member?Click here to switch to TIGweb.org
About TIGed
My Classes
Professional Development
What inspires you?
I watch everyone trying to deal with difficult situations. In the end they will always get by, it might not be easy but it works well. Try hard and live long!
Tell us about an issue that matters to you and how you became aware and involved.
In 2004 I did a movie presentation on child soldiers and it had turned out extremely well. I am so grateful for my teacher to have given me that project. She made me realize that I was not the only human on this earth. Children my age and younger are taken from their family, stripped from their education and forced into war. Everyday children's rights are being neglected. This will be stopped.
Share your perspectives on what makes a good leader.
Communication is key. A good leader listens and cares about everyone's wants and needs. In my opinion a good leader should be respectful and understanding. They should take the time and investigate problems and situations they might encounter. Relate to the public and you are a good leader.
Do you think TakingITGlobal can help you achieve some of your goals? Have we already? Please tell us how.
TakingITglobal inspires me. I love drawing and TIG will give me a chance to show what I have to draw. I wish to connect with other people who have the same concerns that I do.
© 2015 TakingITGlobal


text:
As banks continue to suffer through website outages due to distributed denial of service attacks, regulators are warning bank executives to take these attacks very seriously. In an alert issued to the entire banking industry, officials at the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency last week requested that banks evaluate their risk management processes for dealing with cybercrimes.
"Banks need to have a heightened sense of awareness regarding these attacks and employ appropriate resources to identify and mitigate the associated risks," the alert states.
I'm guessing banks are already very aware of the implications of these attacks. While account holders may be frustrated by the inability to access their online banking statements, those behind these attacks may be looking to do much more than annoy customers. The report highlights that these attacks give thieves breathing room to gain access to accounts while banks work to fix the problems.
Still, while banks are constantly working to protect their mountains of confidential information, they have not been very proactive in educating account holders about these attacks. In some recent cases, banks have simply issued canned statements that their websites are experiencing delays, and they are working to fix the problems.
I can understand the hope to avoid a swarm of account holders with concerns that a group of hackers in Iran or Russia is targeting their money, but these attacks have become so commonplace that consumers do have the right to know about them. Regulators are asking financial institutions to shed some light on the situation for their customers.
"As part of their contingency planning process, banks should be prepared to provide timely and accurate communication to their customers regarding website problems, risks to customers, precautions customers can take, and alternate delivery channels that will meet their banking needs," the alert declares.
How do you think banks should handle customer notifications during cyberattacks? Has your bank sent you any messages about cybercriminals targeting its website?


text:
Circular Cyclocoagulation Using HIFU With EYEOP1 Device in Glaucoma Patients
This study has been completed.
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
First received: February 13, 2013
Last updated: June 15, 2015
Last verified: February 2013
- Full Text View
- Tabular View
- No Study Results Posted
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
No Study Results Posted on ClinicalTrials.gov for this Study
|Study Status:
|This study has been completed.
|Study Completion Date:
|June 2014
|Primary Completion Date:
|May 2013 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)


text:
The Marjorie Barrick Museum invites you to come experience art with your little one(s) in tow.
These guided tours are for moms, dads, and caregivers and are designed to allow you to be mindful of your young ones as you look and talk about art with other adults.
Stroller tours will take place on the first Friday of each month, 1:30-2:15 p.m.
Tours meet at the lobby reception desk.
Museum Hours:
Mon. - Fri.: 9 a.m.–5 p.m., Thur. until 8 p.m.
Sat.: Noon–5 p.m.
Closed Sundays and state and federal holidays.
The cost is free to enter the museum
Suggested voluntary contribution:
$5 for adults
$2 for children and senior


text:
This game was classified by the community with the following category scores - Violence=0/3, Sex=0/3, Mature Content=0/3. Don your thinking cap to save the Atlanteans from their sinking islands! Grab a life jacket in sympathy to those chucked in the sea! Put on climbing gear to help them to the highest mountains! Now take all those props off, as they just get in the way of the TV. Aah Little Atlantis is a quick-to-play strategy game made for a competition in 48 hours, and then spruced up for your console enjoyment.
Buy Xbox content on Xbox.com. Your Xbox 360 console will automatically download the content next time you turn it on and connect to Xbox Live.Learn More


text:
Burton Women's Base Layer Midweight Wool Crew
Warm up to wool with this quick-wicking, quick-drying crew for total comfort in cold conditions.
Like your favorite trail or your go-to trick, the women's Burton Midweight Wool Crew is a reliable choice when you're not sure what the day will bring. Its drirelease® wool blend sucks away sweat from your skin and dries far faster than cotton, leaving you warm when winter wants to blast through every layer you own. This long-sleeved layer hugs your upper body for a next-to-skin fit and is perked up in comfort with chafe-free Softlock Seams. Plus, an extra-long profile and Thumbhole Cuffs keep your skin covered while strapping in or grabbing tail.
drirelease® Wool Blend: 84% Polyester,11% Merino Wool, 5% Spandex
drirelease® Wool Blend: 84% Polyester,11% Merino Wool, 5% Spandex
Drying faster than cotton, drirelase® is a technical blend of polyester, Merino wool, and spandex that pulls sweat away from skin without chemical assistance. Soft, itch-less, anti-pilling, and environmentally-friendly, this technology utilizes push-pull fiber mechanics that won't wear down or wash out. FreshGuard® neutralizes odor, only adding to the supercharged performance.
- Superior Wicking Action and Next-to-Skin Comfort
- Ultra Fast-Drying and Highly Breathable
Chafe-Free Softlock Seams for Comfort
Chafe-Free Softlock Seams for Comfort
By eliminating overlapping fabrics, this stitch creates smooth, chafe-free seams for maximum comfort.
Thumbhole Cuffs
Thumbhole Cuffs
Place your thumb in this loop on the cuff to keep your sleeves locked in place when strapping in, shoveling, or tweaking that grab.
- Extra Long Body: Strap In Without Your Shirt Un-Tucking
1-Year Warranty
1-Year Warranty
This Burton jacket is backed by a one-year warranty from date of purchase. Our W48 Warranty Program ensures that should you have a problem, we'll have your claim repaired or replaced and on its way back to you within two business days of receiving it.


text:
PAJARO -- A small, largely Hispanic community has its first park, and it's not just any park.
The 5-acre, $6.3 million Pajaro Park boasts a bandstand, baseball and soccer fields, a track, basketball and volleyball courts, play structures and picnic areas.
The eight-year project represents a victory for the dozens of local politicians, committees and nonprofits who worked to bring the park to the 3,000 residents of the 1 square-mile unincorporated neighborhood.
"It's just been a grassroots effort," said Nick Nichols, civil engineer for Monterey County's resource management agency, one of the project's leaders.
More than 400 people attended the Brooklyn Street park's grand opening Sunday, which featured sports clinics, a barbecue and mariachi performances.
Construction was completed in January and Watsonville's YMCA has already started exercise groups at the park on weekdays, averaging 250 people per day, said Stephany Soto, YMCA community program director.
Jonathan Martinez, 10, shot hoops for nearly four hours while his father volunteered at the event. Jonathan said he's been to playgrounds before, but none as good as this one.
"It has every kind of sport," Jonathan said.
Harry Wiggins, board member for the Pajaro/Sunny Mesa Community Services District, the group charged with maintaining and operating the park, said he believes the park will serve as a catalyst for more neighborhood involvement.
"We don't have any government so we're doing it on our own," Wiggins said. "I think the community will start coming together."
Assemblyman Luis Alejo, who helped secure state funds for the project, spoke at Sunday's event.
"The most beautiful part of this historic day is the people of Pajaro," Alejo said.
The migrant worker neighborhood has always been a melting pot -- Brooklyn Street, where the park sits, was once home to a large Chinatown, he said.
Today the street is lined with apartment complexes, used car dealerships and garages and a taqueria.
We needed something like this, said Leonor Fernandez, who lives nearby. Before, we didn't have anything but now we're happy, she said.
Guillermo Valtierra has brought his wife and four children to the park twice a week since January. He plays soccer, while his wife walks and the children climb on the playground.
Valtierra said he used to bring his family to Watsonville parks, but those felt dangerous.
"Here, it's going to be safe," Valtierra said. "They have a place to play, that way they're not on the street. Everybody's happy around here."
Follow Sentinel reporter Kara Guzman at Twitter.com/Karambutan


text:
BP Comment Quick Links
|Strength of Schedule Report
September 11, 2013
Fantasy Fool's Gold
Second Base Prospects
Our first two editions of Fantasy Fool's Gold made much ado about power. Covering the catcher, first base and third base positions, a common critique of the players profiled in our first two installments revolved around a lack of pop.
Thankfully, such expectations are not foisted upon men who occupy the keystone. That's good, because with the players listed below, power is once again in short supply.
In this edition, we bring you five second-base prospects who, like so much in life, may ultimately disappoint you from a fantasy perspective. Per usual, many of the observations below come from the BP minor-league team.
Cesar Hernandez, 2B, Phillies
In 104 games and 440 PA in Triple-A, Hernandez hit .309/.375/.402 this season, marking a continuation of two of his most prominent trends: he can hit for average and he can't hit for power. Hernandez' BABIP of .384 is obviously unsustainable and brings his average into doubt, but he walked at a 9.3 percent clip, meaning he's not solely relying on his line-drive-producing stroke to reach base. Hernandez also went 32-for-40 in stolen base attempts, though he projects to be more of a 10-15 stolen base guy in the majors. A good defender, Hernandez could be a no. 2 hitter with a decent average and not much else if it all comes together, but that's not really enough for fantasy relevance.
We can now address the elephant in the room as well: Chase Utley recently signed an extension that will see him in Philadelphia at least through 2015, and possibly several years beyond. Utley is undoubtedly a much better player than Hernandez, but the move is disappointing in that it likely relegates Hernandez to a backup infielder role, unless Ruben Amaro Jr. decides to trade him for a Proven Closer or for Michael Young's Soul or something. Hernandez may be able to serve as a viable NL-only two-trick pony (AVG, SB) if Utley goes down at some point next year, but that's really his ceiling.
Micah Johnson, 2B, White Sox
That's only a good idea if you're playing in a really deep keeper, though. Despite Johnson's speed, there are two major obstacles standing in his way: he's not very efficient on the bases and he's going to have a tough time sticking at second base. While Johnson has swiped 84 bases, he's also been thrown out 26 times this season, which meshes with previous reports on Johnson, indicating his 70-grade speed plays a grade lower in games. Johnson has also made 29 errors as a 2B, and Mark Anderson wrote that Johnson "has hands of stone," and that a move to the outfield is likely.
Johnson is certainly one of the more intriguing prospects in a very shallow White Sox system. But, it would take a perfect developmental storm for him to get on base enough to steal, steal efficiently enough to be let loose, and for the SBs he will accumulate to come with 2B eligibility. He's perhaps more likely destined for a pinch-runner/fifth-outfielder role, which nullifies much of his fantasy value.
Joe Panik, 2B/SS, Giants
Yet despite his first-round pedigree and the shallowness of the MI position, Panik is best ignored in fantasy leagues. As Jason Parks described in this write-up back in May, Panik is a "gamer" who does a lot of things well despite a lack of elite tools, and as such he's likely to force his way into a starting lineup. But offensive tools are really all we care about, and Panik lacks a single one that can be described as plus. He hasn't hit for any meaningful power yet, he's been thrown out in a third of his steal attempts this year, and while Panik doesn't strike out much, he's not a real threat to hit for a high average either.
It's convenient to peg Panik as the second baseman and no. 2 hitter of the Giants' future after Marco Scutaro's contract ends post-2015, but that miscasts Panik as a player capable of batting near the top of the lineup. Instead, he should serve as a no. 8 hitter, where he doesn't figure to score or drive in a ton of runs, hit for any more, or steal many bases. Best case scenario, some good BABIP fortune lets him hit .280 or so, but that's a sad best-case scenario. It should also be noted that the first person who inevitably makes their fantasy baseball team name "Panik! At The Disco" in a year or two will not be going to heaven.
Jose Ramirez, 2B/3B, Indians
You have to be impressed with what Ramirez has done this year, and he's certainly solidified his status as a future MLB contributor, but his rapid ascent through the minors shouldn't be confused with future fantasy stardom. Ramirez' ability to hit at such a young age has been impressive, and a .290 BABIP and his nearly identical K% and BB% all portend sustainable success. That being said, Ramirez has no power in his bat, and that's something MLB pitching is going to be able to exploit. His stolen-base total also suggests that he has plenty left to learn before he can be viewed as a reliable stolen base threat, although scouts do credit him with plus-plus speed.
Ramirez should spend most if not all of 2014 in the minors despite his impressive 2013 campaign, yet that's not why I'm most concerned about his future fantasy value. The Indians had Ramirez play 53 games at shortstop, 50 games at second base, and eight games at third base this year. At the major-league level, Jason Kipnis is entrenched at second for the next few years, Asdrubal Cabrera will eventually give way to Francisco Lindor at short, and Ramirez lacks any semblance of a normal 3B profile. There's a possibility he's being developed as a speed-first super-sub, which would make him fun to watch if deployed effectively but wildly frustrating from a fantasy perspective. Let's watch how the Indians' depth chart and Ramirez' development play out, but don't count on him for any meaningful fantasy contribution in the short term, and be leery of what he'll provide long term as well.
Alex Yarbrough, 2B, Angels
There's a key word in that last graph that relays why Yarbrough shouldn't be considered a great fantasy prospect, though, and that word is "modest." Yarbrough's best tool is probably his bat, but he doesn't walk much (4.4 BB percentage) and is unlikely to reach base enough to profile as a top-of-the-order guy. While he's hit 11 homers this year his power is very much in question, with some thinking it may only play at grade 30 in games. And Yarbrough isn't a burner either, meaning modest stolen base totals are in his future. Add that all up, and you get a second baseman who isn't contributing enough in any one fantasy category to be a starter.
It also must be pointed out that organizational depth is a fickle mistress. Despite the Angels' underwhelming MiLB system and a lack of talent at some MLB positions, Yarbrough finds himself blocked by both Taylor Lindsey and Howie Kendrick. With the latter signed through 2015 and the former arguably now the best prospect in Los Angeles' system, Yarbrough's ascent through the upper minors is likely to be a slow one, baring a trade. That ETA, coupled with his lack of upside, makes Yarbrough better left in your free agent pool. That being said, he's worth flagging in case the power he showed this year is exhibited in Double-A next year, too.
Ben Carsley is an author of Baseball Prospectus. Follow @bencarsley
5 comments have been left for this article.
BP Comment Quick Links
What about Hernandez's chances at sticking in center for Philly? Has looked pretty good out there so far.
Sep 11, 2013 04:29 AM
Ben Carsley
BP staff
Whether Hernandez can stick in center is a question better left for someone from our MiLB team, but if that's a move he does make his fantasy value takes yet another hit. He'd still only be relevant for AVG and SB, yet that would come without the 2B eligibility.
Sep 11, 2013 07:14 AM
I picked up Panik in a scoresheet league as a less important part of a trade. I figured he was worth a shot as the next coming of Ben Zobrist. Panik has not done well at AA, but similarly Zobrist was pretty awful when he first hit AAA and was pressed into early service with the Rays. If I keep Panik in the offseason (read: I'm not in contention this year anymore) he'll cost me a little bit of bench depth (roughly a 5 VORP player). I don't mind a bit of risk, but would also welcome a slap in the head if I'm being delusional.
Sep 11, 2013 06:51 AM
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!


text:
Ever Consider a Bear Put Spread?
Posted on Tuesday, April 15, 2014 at 1:14 PM
The market has been on quite a run lower lately since the S&P 500 hit its all-time high earlier this month. Maybe the market will reverse and move higher at some point but traders need to be prepared like Boy Scouts just in case there is another move lower not only now, but for in the future as well. Options give traders a plethora of options so to speak for a trader with a bearish bias. Bearish directional option strategies are certainly an option but sometimes buying a put option can be a little bit more risky than maybe a trader wants because of potential price swings. A bearish option trader may want to be a little more cautious especially in this current volatile atmosphere.
An AlternativeA better alternative than the long put may be to buy a debit spread (bear put). A bear put spread involves buying a put option and selling a lower strike put option against it with the same expiration. The cost of buying the higher strike put option is somewhat offset by the premium received from the lower strike that was sold. The maximum gain on this spread is the difference in the strike prices minus the cost of the trade. The options trader will realize this maximum gain if the price of the stock is lower than the short put's strike expiration. The most the options trader can lose is the cost of the spread. This maximum loss will occur if the stock is trading above the long put's strike at expiration.
An AdvantageAn advantage of a bear put spread is that if the stock pulls back, the spread will lose less than just being long puts because of the spread typically has smaller delta and initial costs due to being long and short options. The trade's delta is smaller because the positive larger delta of the long put option is somewhat offset by the smaller negative delta of the short put option. For example, what if XYZ stock is trading at $40 a share and an option trader purchases an ATM put option ($40 strike) with a delta of 0.50. For every dollar XYZ goes up or down, the put option should increase or decrease by $0.50. If a bear put debit spread was created by adding a short put with a lower strike price of 35 and delta of 0.20, the delta for the spread would now be 0.30 (.50 - .20). Now the spread would gain or lose $0.30 for every dollar the stock went up or down.
Trade-OffIt is probably obvious to a great many of you how a smaller delta might be a disadvantage for the trade. If the trader is correct on the movement and the stock decreases in value, potentially a larger profit could be realized with just being long the put option because of the potential higher delta. But once again a trader needs to determine if a lower overall cost using the bear put and possibly a lower overall risk is worth the trade-off versus the long put.
FinallyUnderstanding current market conditions (especially now) and applying and managing the proper options strategy is crucial for success at all times. Deciding when to implement a bear put spread instead of buying puts for a bearish bias is just one example of this.
John Kmiecik
Senior Options Instructor
« Previous PostDouble Your Pleasure Next Post »Stop Loss or Trailing Stop?
Comments have been disabled for this post


text:
Subtotal: $36905.80
Soap Stamps are a great way to customize your soaps without molding your soaps into individual shapes.
Basic instructions for Soap Stamping:
1. Center the stamp on the bar of soap.
2. Lightly tap the stamp into the soap.
3. You're done!
Giraffe Soap Stamp
We're a friendly group who love social media. See you 'round the web!
Quantity: 1


text:
Added to Digital Art and categorized in Creative Graphics — 2 months ago
Note: This content is private. Change privacy to "public" to share.
Get updates on new themes & plugins plus special discounts
Meno Istorija - History of Art, История Искусства Copyright © 2017 All rights reserved
To use all the features of this site you must be logged in. If you don't have an account you can sign up right now.
We use our own and third party cookies to improve your browsing experience and our services. If you continue using our website is understood that you accept this cookie policy.


text:
'); var yuipath = 'clientscript/yui'; var yuicombopath = ''; var remoteyui = false; } else // Load Rest of YUI remotely (where possible) { var yuipath = 'http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.9.0/build'; var yuicombopath = 'http://yui.yahooapis.com/combo'; var remoteyui = true; if (!yuicombopath) { document.write('
If Bird has issues with the team and the owner, why is he still hanging around?
So the Pacers only chance was land D. Will who was never coming here, or EJ, who we met with? And we didn't land these guys because of Simon?
You don't burn your bridges if you are smart and Bird is very smart.....
I believe he leaves August 1.
I don't think not landing the superstars is an issue, they were never coming here. However, I hate that Simon is so strongly against the thought of the luxury tax. That is partially the problem when it comes to the Pacers not getting some free agents, because we have to lowball everyone.
"What you do is so loud, I can't hear what you say" -Andrew LuckJunior at the University of Louisville
"If you turn the other cheek, I'm gonna hit you in the other cheek, too" -Charles Barkley
"Ego is edging greatness out" -Rick Pitino
Greenfield-Central High School Alum '14
Follow me on Twitter @steagles1
1000th post - 4/16/12 2000th post - 6/24/12 3000th post - 3/8/13
Of course Dwill isn't Simons fault. But Gordon yes if we offer him a fair deal and make him our fotf Right now his quotes would be my heart is in Indy.
What did we offer EJ?
Because he agreed to be with the team through the ORL summer league he said that on draft night.
So basically this is all because people are assuming we didn't offer enough money to EJ, who hasn't been able to stay on the court?
And you can't assume that he opted to play in Indy either.
Playing in Arizona EJ is closer to his brother, there isn't state income tax, and I'm sure he can benefit from the Suns' legendary med staff.
He's not the boss anymore. Significant difference. And he said he'd be here through the summer league.
Something doesn't add up.
And the New Orleans will say 'We have fifty-eight million reasons why your heart will relocate back to the bayou."
"Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel
"And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "
Don't eat everything that is put in front of you, especially when it comes out of NYC.
I'd actually be glad if Simon said 'No' to going after Eric Gordon. Not worth the money.
There are a few of us that have felt this way for years. My opinion hasn't changed because of anything that has occurred this offseason - it has simply been reinforced. I don't believe it is purely a money issue. I believe it is a money vs risk issue. The team has historically paid there own - guys that you know who they are and how they fit. I don't believe Herb has much interest in large FA contracts or risky / aggressive maneuvers. I don't think Herb has a burning desire to win a title. If you look at how the Simons came to acquire the Pacers I don't believe it is a stretch to believe they see the team as more of a civic duty. I think they want the team to be good, something the city can be proud of. But in no way do I believe the team or the Simon's priority is to win a title.
Exactly. Keep in mind Lawrence is competing against ******** Boy Peter Vecsey.
"Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel
"And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "
What players were not spent on specifically that caused you to believe this?


text:
Mission Matters
Bigger than all of us
Baseball Coach Dan O'Brien goes old school. He wants players—and fans—to rekindle a love affair with the game.
When Dan O'Brien took over the SCU baseball team last June from longtime skipper Mark O'Brien, players naturally looked for a way to distinguish one Coach O'Brien from the other. So the team jokingly dubbed the newcomer "OB2." But judging by Dan O'Brien's cerebral approach to coaching—and his early victories in the 2012 season—"Obi-Wan" might prove to be a better moniker.
|The old ball game: See photos of SCU baseball through the years and watch the Broncos baseball video "Timeless Pasttime."
Scoreboard: The full game schedule and latest scores are on the Broncos Baseball website.
Certainly O'Brien has a Jedi Master's belief that success comes from a force inside. His early focus has been on connecting with an ancient tradition and changing his players' attitudes, sometimes through ways that have no obvious connections to the game. How many other coaches would lead their players on an exercise talking to the grass to build a relationship with the field?
He also rented a theater to show his team the movie Moneyball, which he feels captures the love affair with the game that he shares. He outfitted the team in baggy throwback uniforms to convey the old-school attitude he preaches. He studded the halls and offices with photos from SCU baseball's more than century-long history to tie players to the team's heritage. And the email that went out to fans for the season home opener in February urged: "Fall in love again ..."
"We don't go a day without meeting as a team to talk about why what we are doing is bigger than all of us," says O'Brien, 40, who counts Steve Jobs and UCLA basketball coaching legend John Wooden among his inspirations. He's as likely to browse management books as tomes on coaching.
O'Brien developed his bag of tricks during 14 years as head coach of his alma mater, U.C. San Diego, a position that he assumed when he was just 26. Despite scant scholarships, he turned the Tritons into perennial winners—first at the Division III level and then at Division II—leaving as the most winning coach in school history and as a two-time National Coach of the Year.
Success seems to have followed him north, as he takes on responsibilities coaching at Division I Santa Clara. The Broncos opened the season with five victories in a row. At press time, they had broken into the top 50 teams nationally—not bad for a team picked to finish last in the West Coast Conference. Nothing second-rate about OB2.
Spring 2012
Table of contents
Bucky Bronco Confidential
Who wears the costume today may be classified information. But here's one secret revealed: how Bucky came to be.
Why women professors?
Marking 50 years of coeducation at Santa Clara—and recognizing that it's not just the composition of students that has changed profoundly.
Mission Matters
Here comes the sun ... and our solar decathletes
The 2013 Solar Decathlon is on! Santa Clara is competing for the third time, after third place wins in 2007 and 2009.
Bigger than all of us
Baseball Coach Dan O'Brien goes old school. He wants players—and fans—to rekindle a love affair with the game.
Opening new doors in the Philippines
Introducing Casa Bayanihan—a place to learn, work, and be changed forever.


text: Your all probably wondering why i'm writing an annual review of the WWE when we still have one major PPV to go and a certain briefcase still in hand. The reason is I feel it's the way WWE go about things (see Greatest Pay Per View Matches 2012) so I thought i'd go by that. Instead of sub-heading by Month i'm going to do it via Pay Per View. I feel it will have a more familiar feel to it. So here we


text:
The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication : Volume I (Illustrated)
eBook (ePub)
Price: $1.99
The object of this work is not to describe all the many races of animals which have been domesticated by man, and of the plants which have been cultivated by him; even if I possessed the requisite knowledge, so gigantic an undertaking would be here superfluous. It is my intention to give under the head of each species only such facts as I have been able to collect or observe, showing the amount and nature of the changes which animals and plants have undergone whilst under man's dominion, or which bear on the general principles of variation. In one case alone, namely in that of the domestic pigeon, I will describe fully all the chief races, their history, the amount and nature of their differences, and the probable steps by which they have been formed. I have selected this case, because, as we shall hereafter see, the materials are better than in any other; and one case fully described will in fact illustrate all others.
Available in ePub Format
Ratings & ReviewsLog in to review this item
There are no reviews for the current version of this product
There are no reviews for previous versions of this product
Product Details
- 9781304474100
- Copyright
- Pinnacle Digital Press, LLC (Standard Copyright License)
- Published
- November 20, 2013
- Language
- English
- File Format
- ePub
- File Size
Formats for this Ebook
|Required Software
|Any ePub Reader
|Supported Devices
|Windows PC/PocketPC, Mac OS, Linux OS, Apple iPhone/iPod Touch... (See More)
|# of Devices
|Flowing Text / Pages
|Flowing Text
|Learn more about ebook formats and e-readers
Your notification has been sent
Lulu Staff has been notified of a possible violation of the terms of our Membership Agreement. Our agents will determine if the content reported is inappropriate or not based on the guidelines provided and will then take action where needed.
Thank you for notifying us. We will email you with the results and/or actions taken as a result of the investigation if you chose to receive confirmation.
We were unable to complete your request.
We were unable to complete your request.
Listed In
More From
Age Verification
The page you are attempting to access contains content that is not intended for underage readers.
Please verify your birth date to continue.


text:
BP Comment Quick Links
|Strength of Schedule Report
October 23, 2012
Playoff Prospectus
NLCS Recap: Giants Win The Pennant
Guess the MLB.com headline!
a. Gritty By The Bay!
It's probably the one you're not thinking of. Answer at the bottom.
Now that it's over, let's be honest: That was probably the worst seven-game series of our lifetimes.
The average margin of victory was 4.9 runs. The average game reached a 90 percent win expectancy with two outs in the bottom of the fourth inning. There was one lead change in the entire series, and it took place in the third inning. There were two saves. No game was tied later than the fourth inning. There were few true heroes -- imagine the Cardinals had won the series, which they very nearly did; now tell me who would have been the series MVP? Can you?
Furthermore, it was a matchup between two teams that had just won the World Series, two teams whose fans could elicit no sympathy from the general population, two teams with top-10 payrolls. One team had Brian Wilson's beard in the dugout; the other had, somehow, become the villains of the National League. It was almost impossible to get into this series.
And yet it was incredibly fun. Baseball can't be ruined. That's the takeaway here. Baseball can't be ruined. Gosh, we're lucky.
• Pete Kozma! (And to a lesser extent Daniel Descalso!)
• You can not kill the Cardinals.
• Offense would be way up, as the league's two best offenses face each other.
• The Giants rotation is all over the place.
Lightning round:
Chris Carpenter is an ace! Chris Carpenter is Curt Schilling.
Carlos Beltran is a god. Carlos Beltran is Babe Ruth.
Marco Scutaro is the best trade Sabean has made since Vogelsong (HA!) for Jason Schmidt.
The Giants don't die.
Tim Lincecum is back into form.
Kyle Lohse is a True Ace and he's going to get $75 million as a free agent.
Jon Jay is probably Sam's favorite player.
Somebody is going to need a closer to help finish this Chalupa.
Super slow motion can not possibly be overdone. This is rain falling from a dugout, nothing more, and I'm grateful for it:
I don't want to get everybody too excited, but there is going to come a time, and it's probably not too far from now, a decade perhaps, when every camera angle of every game is going to be available to you in perpetuity. Every game, every camera angle, and probably at every level of slow-motion. There will probably even be panoramic cameras that you can control and move around, after the fact, to see whatever you want to see. Hate on Fox all you want, hate on ESPN all you want, but at least they invest their Taco Bell income into truly spectacular camerawork.
Sam Miller is an author of Baseball Prospectus. Follow @SamMillerBB
13 comments have been left for this article.
BP Comment Quick Links
"And the Giants didn't steal any bases" - I have read this on more than one series summary, but it isn't true. Brandon Belt swiped one in the 8th inning of game 5. In any case, you did a marvelous job of recapping the series for this long-time misplaced Giants fan.
Oct 23, 2012 05:08 AM
I'll admit I was rooting for a Cardinals rematch, not because I wanted revenge for '06, but I felt that Giants would be the tougher team. They're one of the few teams in the playoffs with starting pitching as deep as Detroit's. Combine that with a more solid bullpen, and the loss of the DH in national league parks (and SF pitchers aren't as useless with the bat as most) and I'm not sure you can call the Tigers the favorite.
Oct 23, 2012 06:17 AM
Couple of observations... Rafael Furcal's loss really showed in this series. Kozma looked fairly uncomfortable out there defensively. Telephone Company park looked monstrous with all of the Cardinals' fly balls. My gut tells me the Cards were at a 50% FB rate and the Giants were at a 50% LD rate. Aside from Posey, if seemed like every Giant was swinging like they knew what pitch was coming.
Oct 23, 2012 09:15 AM
The Phone Company Park is only really only exceptionally large out in right center. The high wall in right turns a lot of line drives in that direction from home runs into doubles but the Cards rarely hit any that way. Molina has the right sort of line drive swing for the park, and he did well.
Oct 23, 2012 10:08 AM
I had the same reaction to last night's x-mo cameraman, who really ought to be working for Michael Mann instead of Fox Sports.
Oct 23, 2012 11:13 AM
I think that this year's World Series could turn out into a classic 7 game classic, where one turn at bat, one pitch, can decide who will be the World Series Champion.
Oct 23, 2012 11:55 AM
How could Pence's "Triple Double" be scored a double? I initially thought it was E6 + E8 ... then saw the slo-mo of how/why Kozma got fooled ... so it was obviously single + E8 ... just a nit ...
Oct 23, 2012 14:03 PM
I don't think there is any mystery about what happened to Kozma. Even playing left field in softball my first reaction would be to the location of the pitch and the timing of the batter's swing. On an inside pitch with an early swing, the batter is going to pull the ball. That's almost certainly what Kozma was reacting to and, if the bat hadn't broken, he would have been right.
Oct 23, 2012 17:24 PM
It also occurs to me that the play illustrates what's wrong with Pence's swing; he isn't accelerating the bat head enough to get around on an inside pitch, hence, getting the ball near the handle instead of the bat head. If so, perhaps he should try a lighter bat for the series.
Oct 23, 2012 17:27 PM
His swing is just flat out awful. In fact, I've never really watched him before and I've been struck by how ugly his entire game is, from his swing to his throwing motion to his posture to his general mannerisms to his crazy eyes and hobo beard. He has to have one of the ugliest games in the majors, and definitely the ugliest among guys who are actually good. I'm not trying to be mean; it just startled me to watch him play.
Oct 23, 2012 18:58 PM
Oct 23, 2012 19:38 PM
Pence looks like he's doing everything for the very 1st time.
Oct 24, 2012 06:50 AM
Sam - please risk inspring the wrath of Jason Parks by writing an article decrying Tom Verducci's 'don't swing for the fences in the postseason' mumbo jumbo.
Oct 24, 2012 08:21 AM
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!


text:
LANSING, Mich. - Twenty-one Michigan Republicans are calling on a state Republican national committeeman to resign after he posted part of an article critical of gay people on his Facebook page.
Grand Traverse County Republican precinct delegate Dennis Lennox is leading the group and calls the piece Dave Agema posted Wednesday "deplorable" and "indefensible." Among the statements in the article is that gay people "account for half the murders in large cities."
The group calling for his resignation includes leaders of Republican college groups and precinct delegates.
Agema also served as a state representative from 2007-2012. The Associated Press left messages for Agema on Thursday seeking comment.
Michigan Republican Chairman Bobby Schostak says he has "no point of view at all" on Agema's resignation, saying it's "between Dave and his family and himself."
More Headlines:
- Eyeballs found in trash at gas station
- Firefighter hurt battling pool supply store
- Teen cellphone ban while driving starts Thursday
- Sharpton in Detroit Thursday to join lawsuit against EFM
- Protesters rally in Detroit against right-to-work
- Spivey arrested, charged with assault
- Construction begins on Detroit's Whitney Building
Copyright 2013 by ClickOnDetroit.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


text:
|a Sunreef 80 Carbon Line Superyacht/2013
|11.6m (38'06'')
|23.99m (80')
|Charter Guest:
|Max Speed:
|2x240 CV YANMAR diesels
|Cruise Speed:
|8 knots
|More Yacht Info:
|Sunreef Yachts
|Charter Locations:
|Bahamas, Windward Islands, Western Mediterranean, Virgin Gorda, US Virgin Islands, Tuscany, Tortola, St. Vincent, St. Thomas, St. Martin/St Maarten, St. Lucia, St. Kitts, St Tropez, St John, St Barts, Portofino, Porto-Vecchio, Nice, Naples & Capri, Monaco, THE MEDITERRANEAN, Leeward Islands, Italian Riviera, Iles d'hyeres, Grenada, French Riviera, France, Elba, Cote d Azur, Corsica, THE CARIBBEAN, Cannes, BVI, British Virgin Islands, Bormes, Bonifacio, Antigua, Antibes, Anguilla, Amalfi Coast, Ajaccio, Aeolian Islands, Turks and Caicos
This document is not contractual. The yacht charters and their particulars displayed in the results above are displayed in good faith and whilst believed to be correct are not guaranteed. CharterWorld Limited does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information and/or images displayed. All information is subject to change without notice and is without warrantee. A professional CharterWorld yacht charter consultant will discuss each charter during your charter selection process. Starting prices are shown in a range of currencies for a one-week charter, unless otherwise marked. Exact pricing and other details will be confirmed on the particular charter contract. Just follow the "reserve this yacht charter" link for your chosen yacht charter or contact us and someone from the CharterWorld team will be in touch shortly.


text:
LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A University of Kentucky geologist said the 4.3 magnitude earthquake that shook eastern Kentucky over the weekend was too deep to be induced by the region's underground mining activity.
The epicenter was about 10 miles west of Whitesburg, in the heart of Kentucky's coal country, where underground mining and surface blasting is common.
Zhenming Wang, the head of UK's Geologic Hazards Section, said Saturday's quake occurred about 12 miles below the surface, far too deep for underground mining to have been a factor.
The earthquake occurred near the Eastern Tennessee Seismic Zone.


text:
My sources tell me that Derrick Williams completed the obstacle course in 14:08...a new record! No word on whether he made the plane to Indy.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
'); var yuipath = 'clientscript/yui'; var yuicombopath = ''; var remoteyui = false; } else // Load Rest of YUI remotely (where possible) { var yuipath = 'http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.9.0/build'; var yuicombopath = 'http://yui.yahooapis.com/combo'; var remoteyui = true; if (!yuicombopath) { document.write('
My sources tell me that Derrick Williams completed the obstacle course in 14:08...a new record! No word on whether he made the plane to Indy.
Last edited by LG33; 11-25-2013 at 07:05 PM.
Yes because all players would turn down a max contract/extension if they could. Most if not all players want to get paid anyone who says they wouldn't take that $$$ that was offered to them isn't being entirely honest with themselves.
Players take discounts all of the time. Kobe just wants to have his cake and eat it too. Sure, he's worth it from a financial standpoint for LA, but that's only one aspect of this signing. The fact that a 37-year-old is going to be making upwards of $25M two years from now is ridiculous. Not only that, but that will be close to half of the salary cap each of the next two years. Next year will probably be around $60M and the year after will likely be similar... The Lakers are going to have about $25M to fill 9 roster spots this summer. They're going to be in trouble unless they can sign-and-trade Gasol for multiple good players next summer.
They can only actually approach the tax through sign-and-trades, is my point. And the only guy that's going to give them much of a return in that regard is Gasol. So they're painting themselves into a corner.
According to Marc Stein, the Wolves are close to swapping Derrick Williams for Luc Richard Mbah a Moute.
Mbah a Moute will end up having the better career IMO. I never liked Williams, and I guess you can call it selling low, but Moute is going to help the Wolves this year come playoff time.
Unless something happens, the trade for Williams is close to done.
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- The Minnesota Timberwolves are trading former No. 2 overall draft pick Derrick Williams to the Sacramento Kings for Luc Mbah a Moute.
Two person with knowledge of the deal say the agreement was reached on Monday night. The people requested anonymity because neither team has officially announced the deal.
Good trade for minny Moute is a good to great defender
Derrick Williams is the second coming of Marvin Williams.
Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.
There's been some truly horrific #2 overall picks in recent years...
2000: Stromile Swift
2001: Tyson Chandler
2002: Jay Williams
2003: Darko Milicic
2004: Emeka Okafor
2005: Marvin Williams
2006: LaMarcus Aldridge
2007: Kevin Durant
2008: Michael Beasley
2009: Hasheem Thabeet
2010: Evan Turner
2011: Derrick Williams
2012: Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
2013: Victor Oladipo
By my count there's been at least seven outright busts (Swift, Williams (all three[!!!] of them), Milicic, Beasley, and Thabeet), one player who's giving off potential bust vibes, but it's too early to say for certain (Kidd-Gilchrist), a couple of solid-but-unspectacular picks (Chandler and Okafor), one very good pick (Aldridge), and one grand slam (Durant).
Edit: I forgot Evan Turner, who was speeding down the bust highway until this season. We'll see if he continues playing like a stud in Philly...
That's not a good track record.
By the way,
This is unnecessary and confrontational
Last edited by Lance George; 11-25-2013 at 10:31 PM.
To be fair Orlando is using Oladipo about as wrong as you can get
I just threw Oladipo in there to complete the set. He's actually looking pretty good early on. I doubt he ends up in the home run category with Durant, but he looks skilled enough to be in the Aldridge tier in due time.
Is that really how you felt it would be best to punctuate what was otherwise a thoughtful and well-stated post? Come on man...
Jennings on shooting struggles (36%): "I'm so into passing that I kind of forget I can score sometimes." Related: he leads team in shots.— Frank Madden (@brewhoop) November 25, 2013
this has to be one of the funniest things i've ever read
Of the 19 players selected by the Charlotte Bobcats in their 2004 expansion draft, only two remain in the NBA - Gerald Wallace and Zaza Pachulia (who never actually played for the team). The franchise needs to make a good selection this upcoming June so they don't tarnish the Hornets name.
Williams just can't play the three at all... kind of a problem when you're on a roster with Kevin Love, who can play 40MPG without much difficulty. I like the move for both teams.
I also think Minnesota is in need of another wing defender... a trade along the lines of Alexey Shved for Courtney Lee might make sense for both them and Boston.
I mean thats not so absurd teams were allowed to protect their what best 11 players? So literally the Bobcats were taking teams victory cigars for the most part.
Teams could only protect eight, but your point is valid. In fact, after taking a look at the pool of players to choose from, building even a moderately successful team would have been near impossible. The Bobcats tried to find diamonds in the rough (by taking younger players) but there wasn't even cubic zirconia to be had.
Here's the list of rules for the draft: http://www.nba.com/bobcats/news/draf...s_summary.html
- Each of the 29 NBA teams may protect a maximum of eight players on its roster who are under contract or are restricted free agents at the conclusion of the 2003-04 season.
The Bulls are obviously tanking. There is no other explanation for that.
Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.
Thibs may not say it, but his team is tanking. I mean, losing to UTAH?
"Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel
"And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "
The Bulls just has nowhere to go at this point than to blow up their roster. An OT game managing only 84 points and losing against Utah is just inexcusable for a team that's supposed to be the Heat's "rival." Not that I'm complaining since 1 less obstacle for the Pacers is always good.


text:
Read New home sales up, foreclosures down in Southern California
You don't have to tell Jeff Johnson why rents continue to climb in the Southland. His family of four is living the reason.
They lost their home in Long Beach's upscale Naples area to foreclosure nearly five years ago when Johnson's wife, Shelly, lost her job. Since then, the Johnsons have been renting a house in neighboring Belmont Shore.
"We weren't left with many options," Jeff Johnson said. "We tried to refinance, make payments and work with our lender, but we lost the house. We found ourselves renting again, and our credit scores were hit hard, and almost five years later, here we are — still renting."
Like many others, the Johnsons were double victims of the housing market collapse. Not only did they lose their home, but they also found themselves at the mercy of a rental market where rates were climbing because demand was so high.
Today, qualifying for a mortgage has become difficult for many aspiring young buyers, keeping them in rental properties longer, real estate experts say. It's even more difficult for those with incomes or credit scores bruised by unemployment and foreclosure.
Rents on the rise
In Southern California rents have continued to rise, especially in Los Angeles County, where rent for multifamily housing had been forecast to increase 7.9 percent to $1,722 last December, with a total two-year growth expected to hit 9.6 percent by the end of 2013, according to a study by USC's Lusk Center for Real Estate. In 2011, the average rent was $1,596.
USC is releasing its 2013 report with the actual 2012 numbers in April.
The expected increases are part of a continuing trend, data show.
In 2011 rental prices rose in 39 of 40 submarkets in Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, according to the same study. That's in stark contrast to 2009, when rents rose in only three markets, and 2010, when 26 markets saw increasing rents.
In the Inland Empire, multifamily housing rent was expected to grow 3 percent year-over-year to $1,101 last December, with total growth expected to hit 3.8 percent by the end of 2013. In December 2011, the average rent was $1,069 a month.
In Orange County, rent was forecast to increase 3.3 percent to $1,573 in December, with an expected total growth of 5.1 percent by the end of 2013. In 2011, the average rent was $1,523.
In San Diego County, rent was projected to grow 3.4 percent to $1,424 in December, with an expected total growth of 5.2 percent by the end of 2013. In 2011, rent was $1,377 a month.
Landlords no longer have to "pony up in order to entice tenants," said Victor Calanog, chief economist with Reis Inc., a New York based real-estate data firm.
He added that rising vacancies suggest rents are "approaching equilibrium" but aren't likely to fall soon.
One of the biggest reasons for the rise in multifamily housing rent, Calanog said, is the "utter lack of supply."
During the housing boom, developers primarily focused on building single-family homes and condominiums. While some of those properties have returned to the market as rental housing, demand to buy new homes remains strong.
"The implicit demand for rental units will remain high as long as the for-sale housing market remains on the ropes," Calanog says in a real estate report.
The rising cost of renting is putting pressure on tenants at a time when many are still grappling with falling incomes or slow income growth.
In the third quarter of 2012, renters spent 24.1 percent of their disposable income on financial obligations, according to the Federal Reserve. Things such as rent, debts and auto leases. That was the highest level since early 2010.
This contrasts with living costs for homeowners, specifically mortgage rates, which have fallen steadily in recent years amid record low interest rates.
During the third quarter, homeowners, including those who don't have mortgages, spent 13.9 percent of their disposable income on financial obligations, the lowest share since 1984, according to the Federal Reserve.
Housing is just one of many costs in a consumer's annual budget. Gasoline prices have fallen from their record high, inflation has remained in check, and low interest rates mean lower monthly payments on auto loans and other debts.
But foreclosure rates and stricter mortgage-lending standards have helped make rental housing the best-performing segment of commercial real estate for the past two years, Calanog said.
The vacancy rate, or apartments available for rent, fell nationally for seven straight quarters from a three-decade high of 8 percent at the end of 2009, according to Reis.
This demand, said Johnson, the Long Beach resident, has given "landlords the upper hand."
A 36-year-old iron worker, Johnson said he is paying more than a third of his $60,000 gross annual income on a $2,000-a-month house he and his family are renting.
"Our credit score has taken a dive and I'm not sure if we will ever be able to buy again," he said. "And with so many people in the same boat, landlords have taken advantage. Rent has gone up and it is a real struggle."
Relief in sight
But there may be some relief in the form of construction.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, builders are making up for lost time, and multifamily construction is rebounding from a 50-year low reached in 2009.
Construction spending, according to the Census Bureau, climbed to $23.8 billion in 2011 from $15.6 billion a year earlier. During this same time period, apartment vacancies rose slightly, from 4.6 to 4.7 percent, the first increase since 2009, according to Reis's analysis.
Calanog said construction of new complexes may cause rent hikes to stall.
"The sector is benefiting from some of the lowest figures for new construction on record," he said. "By 2013, the influx of new units may begin eroding any benefit the sector derives from tight supply conditions."
In the long run, rising rents will encourage more families to buy, Calanog said.
This was the case for Sarah Beth Smith and her husband, Donny, who, after buying a home, lowered their monthly housing cost to $700 for the mortgage and taxes from the $1,250 they were paying to rent.
Smith, a stay-at-home mom, said the couple have used the majority of their savings to catch up on bills that were neglected while renting. She said the savings also allows for more family outings with their three children.
"We ran the numbers over and over again, and we just couldn't figure out why we were renting," she said. "We were giving money to someone else when we could save money and own our own home."
com, 562-714-2128, Twitter.com/KelseyDuckett
Rising rents
Los Angeles County - Average rent projected at $1,722 last December, up 7.9 percent
Inland Empire - Average rent projected at $1,101 last December, up 3 percent
Orange County - Average rent projected at $1,573 last December, up 3.3 percent
San Diego County - Average rent projected at $1,424 last December, up 3.4 percent


text:
The day Clark Aposhian was served with divorce papers, his ex-wife testified Monday, he took the woman's handgun and locked it away.
He leaned in close, she said, and asked her: "Do you feel threatened now?"
She was terrified.
The day Clark Aposhian was served with divorce papers, his ex-wife testified Monday, he took the woman's handgun and locked it away.
He leaned in close, she said, and asked her: "Do you feel threatened now?"
She was terrified.
"He has an entire arsenal full of firearms, and I have nothing," Natalie Meyer said of that day in April 2008. "I've been emotionally abused for years. And after you've been abused for so long, I didn't know what to expect physically."
It was the first of a years-long saga of threats, abuse and fear that Natalie Meyer said she's suffered at the hands of Aposhian, Utah's foremost gun advocate, since the pair's marriage dissolved.
On Monday, she sat before a judge and asked that he issue a protective order against her ex-husband. Third District Judge Andrew Stone will issue his ruling next month after both sides have had a chance to make closing arguments.
But Aposhian's attorney Morgan Philpot said there has been no legal or medical documentation of any ongoing abuse between Aposhian and his ex-wife.
He accused Meyer of "stringing together" unconnected incidents over the span of nearly five years in an attempt to prove that Aposhian had a pattern of threatening behavior. It's a reach, he said.
"You've never before mentioned abuse or domestic violence in court proceedings," Philpot said. "This does not rise to the level of requiring a protective order."
He pointed out that Aposhian had never physically abused Meyer or their daughter.
In her divorce filings, Meyer never mentioned any ongoing abuse emotional, verbal or otherwise and despite a mutual restraining order that instructed both he and she to communicate strictly through email most confrontations took place in person, with no documented or traceable evidence.
In nearly two hours of cross-examination on the witness stand, Meyer grew agitated. Her voice cracked as she spoke about the years of anxiety she felt over what her ex-husband might do next.
"I try to avoid contact with him, especially when we're in ugly situations," she said on the stand. "He's scary when he gets angry. .... Just him being there is threatening."
Her new husband, Ronald Meyer, testified at the beginning of Monday's hearing. He said Natalie Meyer became anxious and agitated whenever she had to interact with her ex.
"Every time she deals with him, she gets shaken and tearful," Ronald Meyer said.
Stone presided over the hearing Monday after 3rd District Court Commissioner Michelle Blomquist ordered the evidence in this case heard by a judge after declaring the case "highly unusual" and requesting that all evidence be re-examined.
It's a case Blomquist didn't want to take lightly, she said, because in addition to instituting a protective order that would keep Aposhian away from his ex-wife, with whom he shares a daughter, it may impact Aposhian's ability to access his arsenal of more than 300 firearms, which he uses to teach firearm classes and have been confiscated for the duration of these proceedings.
His attorney hopes that, if the judge denies Natalie Meyer's protective-order petition, Aposhian may be able to reclaim them.
A stalking injunction was issued against Aposhian by Ronald Meyer in August. It orders that Aposhian come no closer than 150 feet to the man lest he run the risk of further punishment, including criminal charges and jail time.
It was imposed by 3rd District Judge Terry Christiansen, who ruled that Aposhian committed two acts of stalking since 2010, the details of which were recapped during Monday's hearing.
In the first incident, Aposhian and Ronald Meyer had a confrontation in the middle of the road as Meyer left Aposhain's ex-wife's home in 2010.
The most recent of the two incidents happened on Memorial Day.
It was also the day that led to domestic-violence charges against Aposhian and the petition for a protective order by Natalie Meyer.
Aposhian is accused of driving a 2.5-ton military vehicle onto his ex-wife's driveway and threatening to run over Ronald Meyer's car. Aposhian has insisted that he used the driveway only to make a U-turn in the cul-de-sac where the family lives.
Later, Aposhian returned to the Meyer home, where he was met by police officers.
Officers testified Monday that Aposhian was uncooperative, boisterous and loud.
"I felt that at any point," testified Cottonwood Heights police officer Christopher McHugh, "violence was very, very probable."
Aposhian was armed at the time of his arrest with a gun and a knife.
He is scheduled to appear in Holladay Justice Court again next month for a pre-trial conference before Judge Augustus Chin.
Whether the gun lobbyist can get back his weapons may also depend on the outcome of that case.
Aposhian faces misdemeanor counts of criminal trespass, criminal mischief, domestic violence in the presence of a child and threat of violence.
Twitter: @Marissa_Jae


text:
Fairfax County to Receive Art Display Featuring Board of Supervisors Chairmen
Jan. 6, 2010
News Highlights
On Wednesday, Jan. 13, at 3:30 p.m., the Fairfax County Federation of Citizens Associations will present to Fairfax County a specially commissioned artist's display of black-and-white photos taken of all living Board of Supervisors chairmen under the current urban county executive form of government. The event will take place in the Conference Center at the Fairfax County Government Center, 12000 Government Center Parkway, Fairfax.
The display, the work of photographer Diana Adams, consists of six candid black-and-white photos, beginning with Jean Packard through current chairman Sharon Bulova. The six chairmen featured will be:
- Jean Packard, 1972-1975
- Audrey Moore, 1988-1991
- Thomas M. Davis, 1992-1994
- Katherine Hanley, 1995-2003
- Gerald E. Connolly, 2004-2008
- Sharon Bulova, 2009-current
Photos of three chairmen who served under the urban county executive form of government but are not still living will be shown next to the artist's display. They are:
- Frederick A. Babson, Jr., 1966-1970
- William S. Hoofnagle, 1970-1972
- John F. (Jack) Herrity, 1976-1987
In addition, the Fairfax County History Commission will present a framed list of all chairmen serving from 1870 until present.
Fairfax County's urban county executive form of government was established in the 1960s. The new form of government required more stringent ethical and disclosure requirements and called for the chairman of the Board of Supervisors to be elected countywide, or "at-large."
For more information, contact the Chairman's Office at 703-324-2321, TTY 711.
Contact: Merni Fitzgerald, Director, Office of Public Affairs
703-324-3189, TTY 711, Media Pager: 703-324-NEWS (6397)
To request this information in an alternate format, call 703-324-3187, TTY 711


text:
On a regular day in the summer I deal with food, weird entertainment and toilets. Who else can say that? The food and toilets…sure, but I'm going to throw rubber ducks into the mix now too. I mean, some times I sit at my desk and wonder how this happened. I jokingly call myself the official port-o-potty location picker of Morey's Piers, but in fact, I am! My last blog about the fancy parties I get to attend doesn't come without my share of trash clean up, toilet duty and drying out thousands of rubber ducks after they swim in the Lazy River (now called the Adventure River). I am not at all complaining because on any given day I'd take my job over any of my friends' boring office jobs, but I also didn't want to paint a false impression of the fabulous life of a special events planner either.
See you at the port-a-potty,