Musings on Sports, Politics and Life in general

Latest

Joba: Back to the Future


Well folks, according to Joel Sherman of the NY Post in this article, Phil Hughes gets the nod as the Yankees #5 starter, Joba Chamberlain becomes Mo’s heir apparent, and Sergio Mitre and Alfredo Aceves are both now in the long relief/emergency starter role.

As I commented in this earlier post, this move should have come 2 years ago. Joba has never had the mental make-up of a MLB starter, and it’s doubtful he could successfully grow into that role. Yogi said it best, “Baseball is ninety percent mental and the other half is physical.” Joba has never lacked the physical stuff to be dominant and certainly has succeeded in the late innings reliever role. But he’s never looked comfortable as a starter.

Just think back to last year. One of the “Joba Rules” that rarely gets discussed anymore is how the Yankees coaching staff had Joba warming up in the bullpen whenever the Yanks were at home. I can’t think of another pitcher who has had to resort to such zaniness to try and mentally prepare for an outing. And despite all of that, he still had trouble throwing strikes as a starter.

Consider: according to Baseball Reference, Joba has pitched to a .759 OPS, .266 OBA, and 1.480 WHIP in 221 career innings as a starter. He has also pitched to a .512 OPS, .182 OBA and 0.983 WHIP is 60 relief innings. The experiment was tried, and it failed.

So Hughes moves into the 5 hole. If he continues to progress (and assuming his change-up is as improved as has looked this spring, no reason he won’t), then the Yankees have somebody pitching out of that spot who would be better than most teams #3. In fact, he might well be as a good as most team’s number 2. Joba moves into the 8th inning, where he can prep to one day take over from Mariano as the closer. Aceves demonstrated his value last year, by being a rubber-armed guy who can pitch multiple innings on consecutive days.

The guy I most worry about in this alignment is Mitre. His best pitch is a sinker, and I don’t know too many sinkerballers who are effective relievers. Especially when they’re not going to get very much work, as will be his case, being the 12th arm in the pen. He has gotten rave reviews from scouts and opposing hitters this spring – it’s always possible the Yankees trade him at some point for an outfielder, I guess.

Anyway, see the poll and chime in!

HCR: Winners and Losers


As with all battles, the recent fight over Health Care Reform left us with winners and losers. But due to the sheer size, scope and complexity of this legislation, deciphering who won and lost isn’t easy. Certainly, those of us who feel that government is too large, consumes too much of GDP and has overreached the boundaries established by the Constitution feel he nation lost. Despite that, some groups will undoubtedly see a financial and/or services benefit from these new laws. Others in our society have just been given a swift kick in the nether regions. I’ll attempt to break this down as simply as I can. But, this is nearly 4800 pages of legislation – even I can get something wrong here.

The Winners:

Uninsured folks (well, some of them, anyway): The legislation promises to extend health insurance to 32 million Americans who currently go without. Some will receive direct government subsidies to help aid in purchasing, others will be enrolled by their employers (see more on this below) and the rest will be shoved into Medicaid (more on this, too).

Medicare Part D recipients: You now have an additional $250 in prescription coverage.

Drug Manufacturers: They get an increase in patent protection, from 7 to 12 years. That basically freezes out competition from generics, which gives the manufacturer more time to recoup their investment in R&D. Also, with so many more people enrolled in health plans and no change to the fee-for-service payment model, expect doctors to write more prescriptions than ever.

Try as I might, I can’t find anyone else who actually benefits from this…

The Losers

Small Business: Businesses with more than 50 employees will receive a tax credit to help enroll their employees in a health plan. The exact amount of the credit is ambiguous, but it could be as much as 50% of the per-employee cost of the plan. Sounds great, but if you don’t currently offer insurance to your employees and fall in the 50-200 employee range, you’ve just incurred a new expense.  And don’t think of enrolling your employees in any government sponsored plans: there are BIG penalties for even trying.

Medium Business: If you have 200 employees or more, congratulations! You’ve just been promoted to being a “Big Business” and as such, you are now required to offer insurance to all of your employees. But you don’t get the tax credit  – you just have to enroll them or pay ginormous penalties for failing to do so.

Insurance Providers: This may sound counter-intuitive, but insurance companies stand to lose in this deal. After all, they’re getting 30+ million new enrollees, most of whom (conceivably) are hale and hearty. But “insurance” will become a misnomer; these companies have now become de facto 3rd party payers. The policies they underwrite will no longer be able to exclude people with pre-existing medical conditions, nor will they be able to cap total per-patient expenditures. Ordinarily, a company would respond to these realities by raising premiums – but with the creation of a federal oversight board, insurers will face limits on how much those premiums can be raised. If insurers were operating on normal profit margins, most could probably withstand these non-competitive pressures. But most are working with razor thin margins already; this legislation could easily see a consolidation of the industry into 3 or 4 companies that have enough reserves to withstand he initial losses.

Persons with pre-existing conditions: You’ll need to wait four years before being assured you can receive medical insurance. Until then, you can still be frozen out. Worse yet, you may be forced into Medicaid – which would mean lower quality care than you may be receiving already.

The uninsured: This may seem like a misprint; after all, how can the same group both win and lose? It’s not so difficult. If you’ve chosen not to have health insurance due to cost or just because you don’t see the necessity. you are now royally screwed. Either buy it, or pay a penalty – of up to 2.5% of your gross income. Of course, you may just decide to say to hell with it and pay the penalty – if you make, say, $50,000 per year, the penalty amounts to $1250. Good luck finding coverage for less than that.

The Insured: If you’re part of the 90% or so of the nation that currently has health insurance, get ready to pay more and receive less. As mentioned, insurers will certainly need to raise premiums and co-payments to stay in business. At the same time, the number of medical providers isn’t dramatically increasing. If you thought long waits at the doctor’s office were the norm before, well…imagine even more patients cramming into the waiting room. Even emergency rooms can expect to feel the pinch: in Massachusetts, which unveiled it’s own version of insurance-for-all last year, emergency room visits have actually gone up, not down.

States: Ever wonder why the “Cornhusker Kickback” was demanded by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb)? It’s because of the increased number of people that are going to wind up on Medicaid, which is the medical insurance program paid for by the states. Yes, the federal government throws some money into the pot, but not nearly enough to cover the people already on Medicaid. Take a state with a relatively dense population, high medical costs and high unemployment, and this becomes a recipe for disaster (can anyone say “CALIFORNIA?”). Watch your state capitals closely – most states are going to need to raise taxes or create new revenue streams just to cover the costs.

Doctors & Hospitals: If you  were a doctor or hospital, you might think this was a great thing – until you read the fine print. Yes, you’ll get more patients who can pay, but what are they paying? Undoubtedly, one of the key items not spelled out but certain to happen will be reduced payments for services. Why? Medicaid, Medicare and private insurers will need to pay less per procedure in order to  stay solvent. The pot of money they have isn’t really getting bigger, but the amount they’ll need to pay out will be. Unless somebody has changed the laws of mathematics, that necessitates a reduction in per-service fees rendered. So, doctors will work harder and get less money. Also, without any effort at tort reform, malpractice liability insurance premiums are likely to increase. Talk about getting squeezed by both ends – no wonder medical school enrollments are down, for the first time in several generations.

The Upper Class: First of all, congratulations! Your rolls have now been swelled to include families making more than $88,000/year. I suppose in some parts of the country, that’s considered wealthy. But in most of our urban centers, $88k doesn’t get you much. Regardless, that is now magic threshold at which government assistance for medical coverage ends. Additionally, you now get hit with an additional .9% increase in Medicare taxes and a 3.8% tax on investments. (And yes, that includes Roth IRA’s).

Banks: What on earth do banks have to do with health care? I answered that, as well as why they now stand lose billions, in a previous post.

One final thought: there is another group that stands to gain from this legislation: trial lawyers. Considering the number of challenges being filed (as of noon today, there have already been 13), there are going to be more than a few making some big $$$.

Where’s ICE?


Today, while most of the nation is focused on the Health Care Reform bill, upwards of 10,000 people are anticipated to protest the United States’ immigration policy on the Mall. As these folks gather, I’m left to wonder: where is ICE?

For those who don’t know, ICE is the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, the arm of Homeland Security tasked with enforcing US immigration policy. That includes rounding up those who are here illegally and sending them back from whence they came. Yet, despite having thousands of illegal immigrants in one place protesting the fact that they are not even supposed to be here, it’s doubtful that a single ICE agent will be found in attendance. The reason is incredibly simple: this administration, like most of its predecessors, selectively enforces immigration laws.

It’s a political consideration. President Obama, rather than risk alienating the Hispanic community, has decided that rounding up and deporting illegal immigrants is not wise policy. Never mind that the executive branch of the government is Constitutionally obligated to enforce the laws passed by the Congress. Never mind that most of those on he Mall today readily admit that they are law-breakers by residing in our country. The President has calculated that were the law to be enforced he would lose more votes than if he were to enforce it.

Rather, the administration is concentrating on immigration “reform.” If you think you’ve heard this before, it’s because you have. This isn’t the first administration to talk about most of the ideas being bantered as “reform” for America’s immigration system: universal ID cards, amnesty for illegal immigrants already here, tougher enforcement of whatever the new laws might be. The same ideas have been tossed around Washington for at least the last 15 years, taking different forms and with different aspects being emphasized.

Enough already. Enforce the laws we have, Mr. President. And you can start today – by simply visiting the Mall and rounding up a few thousand criminals.

Still 50-50


At latest count, there are 209 nay votes and 208 yeas on the Health Care Reform bill. Which means there are 14 members who haven’t committed yet.

We are less than 72 hours from the vote (unless Ms. Pelosi needs more time to dream up a new scheme). As I understand it, the phone lines have been jammed and we’ve crashed the House switchboard a few times. GOOD JOB!

However, the battle is not yet won. If you love freedom, despise tyranny and want the government out of your personal decisions, then now is the time to act. Call, write and email every representative and make certain they know how you feel.

This is healthcare?


It seems the Democrats are have now put an amendment into the healthcare reconciliation bill that would authorize the federal government to own Sallie Mae, thereby enabling the federal government to directly provide student loans (rather than guarantee loans made by private lenders).

Regardless of the merits of the proposal (more on that in a bit), I’m a little lost in seeing how this is related to healthcare, healthcare reform, or medicine in any way. There’s a reason for that.

It isn’t.

The idea here is that since this proposal is slightly more popular than HCR as currently constituted, adding this rider will make the HCR bill more palatable to liberal House members. Of course, death by lethal injection is also more popular than the current HCR bill, but I don’t see anyone lining up for their lethal shot cocktails. But I digress.

Now, back to those merits of direct government lending to students.

The way the system currently works is this: student needs a loan to help pay for college, say $25,000 over four years. Student has no credit history. Student’s parents don’t have $25,000 in collateral to put up, nor do they have the type of credit rating to effectively cosign the loan. So, the federal government steps in to insure the loan – if the student reneges on the loan, the government pays and then assumes the debt. As part of this trade-off, the government insists that interest and other repayment terms are kept within their guidelines.

Despite occassional glitches, the system works. Millions of people go to university and learn. They repay their loans. Life goes on.

Of course, Dems say this about improving affordabilty. They just can’t explain how that works. And by sneaking it into healthcare, they can attempt to complete the take-over of the finance industry along with the healthcare industry.

Code Red


Time to step up an let ’em know what you think: Click here for current list of reps & where they stand on HCR:

CODE RED

Joba, the new Goose


For the better part of two seasons, debate has raged about Joba Chamberlain. Should he be a reliever or starter? The debate has concentrated on two trains of thought:

1. As a starter, Joba can develop into a prototypical top of the rotation stud. He has a plus fastball, slider and curve. He just needs time to get stretched out and become dominant.

2. Out of the pen, Joba just rares backs and makes ML hitters look foolish.

Well, we’ve been waiting for two years while lesser names like Clayton Kershaw and Cole Hamels have blossomed. And its beginning to look as though, party line not withstanding, Brian Cashman and Co are now leaning towards putting Joba into the 8th inning role.

The thing is, there’s precedence for this debate – one the Yankees only need to dust off their copy of Baseball Almanac to find.

Back in the mid-1970’s, the White Sox had a young right hander with a plus fastball, slider and curve. But he never found success as a starter. He was, at best, inconsistent. But coming out of the bullpen, he became the original Mr. Nasty. He let loose with a 95+ fastball, spitting fire and daring hitters to swing. For him, it was all about attitude and not having to think on the mound. His demeanor was, you know what I’m going to throw. Everyone here knows what I’m going to throw. I double-dare you to try and hit it.
Joba has the same attitude when coming out of the pen. And likewise, he tends to overthink and overanalyze when starting. For both, the mental side of the game had the potential to prematurely end promising careers.

That guy in the mid-70’s? He went on to post 300+ career saves and a plaque in Cooperstown. His name? Goose Gossage.

This is how it all begins…


Hello, and welcome to the first installment of “Political Baseballs.” I’ll be divvying up my posts into three general categories: Sports, Politics and Tech. Why these three particular categories?

Well, the explanation is pretty simple, really.

First, I’m a sports junkie. Admittedly, this can (as all addictions) consume way too much of my time, causing my family to wonder if I’m alive or if the keyboard noises coming from my office are merely on Memorex. (If you’re old enough to remember that commercial, then you’ve come to the right place.) In particular, I’m a New York Yankees fanatic – the kind who would, if I won the lottery, buy an entire section’s worth of season tickets. But I also get nearly as hyped for the NFL and NCAA, although I have to admit the NBA has left me wishing for the days of Jordan, Laimbeer and Ewing.

Secondly, I’m an unabashed Libertarian. As such, I find a lot very wrong with American politics these days and can’t really find myself trusting anyone from either major party. As you read on through the coming days, you’ll notice I’m an equal opportunity slammer. I guess you could say I was a Tea Partier before there was a Tea Party – which, by the way, I don’t really trust, either. Too many Newt Gingrich’s involved with it for me to really consider it a “grass roots” uprising.

Finally, tech is my life (and after my wife) my biggest passion. Some people are early adopters. Some people make stuff so others can adopt early. I fall into the latter category. I’m especially involved with mobile web integration – for the uninitiated, that’s bringing the World Wide Web to you, wherever you are. So if you’re into mobile devices, the internet in general or just want to get your inner geek on, read on!