Your 2012 Cleveland Indians

Was sitting around the ol' water cooler today talking with a co-worker about the projected 2012 Cleveland Indians starting line-up, wondering how the players came to be on the Tribe's roster.

Actually, that's not true. We started trying to figure out how many starting players came as a result of CC Sabathia (2008) and Cliff Lee (2009) trades. When we came up with the number "1," we figured that couldn't be right.  It's just not possible that you could trade away consecutive Cy Young Award winners and only get one starting player out of the deals. So, that led me to trace the "origin stories" of the Tribe's (projected) starting nine:

Starting Pitchers (with the 5th spot in the rotation still up for grabs, I took the liberty of including all of the candidates):

1.	Justin Masterson	Traded by the Boston Red Sox with Bryan Price (minors) and Nick Hagadone for Victor Martinez
2.	Ubaldo Jiménez	Traded by the Colorado Rockies for a player to be named later (Drew Pomeranz), Joseph Gardner (minors), Matt McBride (minors) and Alex White
3.	Josh Tomlin	Drafted in the 19th round of the 2006 amateur draft
4.	Derek Lowe	Traded by the Atlanta Braves with cash for Chris Jones (minors)
5a.	Jeanmar Gomez	Signed as an amateur free agent
5b.	Kevin Slowey	Traded by the Colorado Rockies with cash for Zach Putnam
5c.	David Huff	Drafted in the 1st round (39th pick) of the 2006 amateur draft

Position Players:

Catcher:	Carlos Santana	Traded by the Los Angeles Dodgers with Jon Meloan for Casey Blake and cash.
1st Base:	Casey Kotchman	Signed as a Free Agent
2nd Base:	Jason Kipnis	Drafted in the 2nd round of the 2009 amateur draft
Shortstop:	Asdrubal Cabrera	Traded by the Seattle Mariners for Eduardo Perez
3rd Base:	Jack Hannahan	Signed as a Free Agent
Left Field:	Shelley Duncan	Signed as a Free Agent
Center Field:	Michael Brantley	The Milwaukee Brewers sent a player to be named later (Michael Brantley), Rob Bryson (minors), Zach Jackson and Matt LaPorta for CC Sabathia
Right Field:	Shin-Soo Choo	Traded by the Seattle Mariners with a player to be named later (Shawn Nottingham) for Ben Broussard and cash

Well, it's true. Michael Brantley is the only player received in either the CC Sabathia trade or the Cliff Lee trade to be starting for the 2012 Cleveland Indians. Abysmal.

Note: All transaction information provided by Baseball-Reference.com

Monday Morning Rant

Ok, so, three things ticked me off over the weekend, in no particular order:

1. The GE Works ad during the Super Bowl.

Hey, I'm all for manufacturing in the US and it's great that the GE appliance division is doing so well.  But, I don't need a company in which 54% of its workforce lives and works outside the US telling me how great it is to do business in the US.

And don't get me started on how GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt favors a tax break for companies to bring their foreign profits back to the US.

2. The Clint Eastwood "Halftime in America" Chrysler ad during the Super Bowl.

On a related note, really, Chrysler? You want to use your comeback as an example of a resurgence in America? In your case, all it took was your second bankruptcy, getting taken over by a foreign company (Fiat owns 58.5% of Chrysler Group, LLC) and gutting your workers wages, benefits, and retirement plans. Sounds like a winning formula to me.

3. Charles Schwab's op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal.

Technically, this didn't happen over the weekend, but I saw it first thing this morning and it set me off.

Business and consumer loan demand remains modest in part because there's no hurry to borrow at today's super-low rates when the Fed says rates will stay low for years to come. Why take the risk of borrowing today when low-cost money will be there tomorrow?

Really, that's why consumer and business load demand "remains modest," because of low interest rates? You mean it has nothing to do with 8.3% unemployment and millions of American's owing more on their homes than they're worth? Consumer spending makes up 70% of the US economy. Without jobs, without equity in their homes, consumers aren't spending. As a result, there's less demand for goods and services. That leads to companies not investing in property, plant, equipment, and employees. So, they have no need to borrow money, because they're not boosting production to meet non-existent demand.

Somebody really ought to "Talk to Chuck," like an Econ 101 professor.

Ah, I feel better now.

Well, that's pretty satisfying

As I noted earlier on this blog, I recently got involved with Actors' Summit, a professional  theater located in Akron, Ohio, as a member of their Board of Trustees.

Shortly after that, the artistic directors, Neil Thackaberry and MaryJo Alexander, asked me to design the set for Bully: An Adventure with Teddy Roosevelt by Jerome Alden. Well, the reviews are in and they are extremely positive:

• 'Bully' showcases actor's talents
• Actors' Summit stages 'strong' production
• Bully for 'Bully' at Actors' Summit

Now, I'm thrilled for Neil, Peter, MaryJo, Kevin, and Daniel that the show is getting good reviews, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't extremely happy and surprised by the mention of my work:

Rory Wohl’s handsome set is dominated by rich wood panels, a leather chair, desk and large portrait of Roosevelt at center stage, nicely lit by Kevin Rutan. Wohl researched Roosevelt’s study at his beloved Sagamore Hill home on Long Island, a National Historic Site, to re-create the gracious space. ('Bully' showcases actor's talents)

Rory Wohl (set design) brought to the stage one of the most visually exciting sets Actors’ Summit has offered. Wohl’s set has several levels, with steps and platforms. The set included a life-size painting of Roosevelt, the heads of two animals and painting of flowers. These items represent the interest of Roosevelt’s life. Wohl included large carpets, which looked expensive and kept down the sound of the actor walking around on the platforms.

This exceptional set, combined with Kevin Rutan’s excellent lighting, provided an appropriate backdrop by the telling of Roosevelt’s story. (Actors' Summit stages 'strong' production)

Rory Wohl's handsomely appointed and well-placed office setting keeps the action flowing and the transitions seamless. (Bully for 'Bully' at Actors' Summit)

The show features after-performance discussions with Plain Dealer television critic, author and Roosevelt scholar Mark Dawidziak.

So, do yourself a favor, go see some live theater, support local artists, and have a really enjoyable evening.

A thought for Verizon Wireless

Dear Verizon,

You've had a very bad year-end. Your state-of-the-art 4G network has had four outages this year with three of them being in December.

You've taken a beating from the press, customers, and even the FCC over a plan to charge $2 convenience fee for every online transaction. It was so bad, in fact, that you scrapped the plan less than a day after announcing it.

People now say the word "Verizon" the same way they say the word "Netflix," with a small chuckle combined with an eye-roll.

Now, I understand why you want to move folks off of one-time, online bill payment transactions and on to automatic, repeating payments; it costs more to process the one-time payments versus the automatic payments.

But, instead of punishing those who choose the one-time payment, how about incenting them instead? AT&T offers a $10 gift card for customers who sign-up for autopay. Dish Network waives certain upgrade or service fees for customers on autopay and paperless billing.

May I humbly suggest that you give away something that you charge $2 per month for now, like roadside assistance or cell phone insurance? Certainly, it doesn't cost you $2 to provide those services, so it's not like you'd be losing a lot of money. One would think you'd make it up on the processing fees.

It's bad enough you've taken away the "new every two" promotion, shrunk the return window from a month to two weeks, and changed your upgrade policy from 13 months to 20 month on a two-year contract, so how about a "give back?"

Just a suggestion from a guy who won't upgrade his smartphone because he doesn't want to lose his unlimited data plan.

Another way in which Conservatives and Liberals are different

Much is being made and reported of Newt Gingrich getting emotional and tearing up when talking about his mother the other day in Iowa. I understand that; I still get pretty teary-eyed when talking about my father, who passed away about the same time as Newt's mother.

But, it's the quote by Newt which is most telling to me:

And my whole emphasis on brain science comes in directly from dealing -- see, I'm going to be emotional -- of dealing with, you know, the real problems of real people in my family.
And so it's not a theory. It's, in fact, you know, my mother.

(emphasis mine)

See, with Conservatives, issues are only important when they directly affect them. Here, Newt cares about brain science because it directly affected his mother, so he's all in favor of spending government money for research. Things that don't affect him, like unemployment compensation, he's not so concerned about.

Liberals, on the other hand, are generally able to see issues that affect other people, realize that it's in the greater societal good to do something about them, and then actually do something about it. See empathy, compassion.

If you're a Conservative, then when you need a helping hand, it's OK (a farm in which Michelle Bachmann has an interest received over $250K in federal subsidies), but when someone else needs a hand, then it's "pull yourself up by your bootstraps." See hypocrisy.

A Better World

 

(http://www.americanprogress.org/cartoons/2011/12/120611.html)

The GOP’s not even trying…

…to pretend that they give a hoot about average Americans.

For the last 30 years, the Republican stance on taxes has essentially been:

Lower taxes will lead to people having more money. They’ll use that money to buy more stuff. As they buy more stuff, employers will create more jobs and the economy will grow. As the economy grows, the government will still take in the same amount of money because even though tax rates are lower, the economy is bigger.

So, tax cuts are good and pay for themselves (smaller tax rate, but larger economy).

Let’s over-simplify that some more:

If the economy were a $100 bill and the tax rate were 10%, the government would get $10, leaving $90 for everybody else. The Republicans argue that if you cut the tax rate by 20% the economy would grow (let’s, for argument sake, say by that same 20%). So, now the economy should be worth $120, the tax rate is 8%, the government gets $9.60 and everybody else gets to keep $110.40.

Now, there’s not a one-to-one relationship between the tax cut and economic growth (that is, if you cut the tax rate by 1% you don’t automatically grow the economy by 1%; in reality, the economy grows by less).

Obviously, even in this most optimistic of scenarios, the tax cuts don’t pay for themselves.  But, the GOP believes that they do, except when they don’t. Which is now:

“Like many foes of the payroll tax break, [Rep. Allen West, a freshman Republican from Florida] said he opposes the way it reduces the revenue stream to Social Security -- even if those funds are replenished with spending cuts elsewhere in the budget.”

The conclusion that one is left to draw is simply this: tax cuts are good when they help the 1% and bad when they help the 99%.

Black Friday Starts on Thursday, For Some

I know I'm a little late on this, but apparently both workers and consumers objected to stores like Target, Macy’s, Best Buy and Kohl’s opening at midnight on Thanksgiving. If only there was some way for workers to organize and, oh, I don't know, collectively bargain for work schedules and benefits. And, if only there was some organization charged with ensuring that those employees who suggest such a thing would be protected from retaliation. I know, how 20th century of me.