If I didn't answer a Q here it may be because I think it would be better answered in a column. Or maybe I just missed it.
Are the Nats dealing Desmond?
I don't think so. With 2B a big question mark and no immediate replacement ready, losing Desmond would arguably be the biggest blow to 2015 (I'd argue Rendon #1 then Desmond). I think they let him walk but I think he's here in 2015
How many times can I refresh MLBTR before it breaks?
If you could make one trade, given the budget restrictions on the Nats, who would it be and who for?
"What trade would you make" opens up a can of worms. So many possibilities. Let's just stick to realistic possibilities. I would put forth Zobrist for a package. Right now I can see that package headlined by Joe Ross. Ross and Voth? Ross and Skole and Goodwin? Something like that. Or maybe just Cole? They probably hope to get more for Zobrist but for a year guaranteed I don't see it. I think Cole is generous.
Where do the younger outfield crop fit into the Nationals plans?
Easier Q post-trade. Taylor in line to replace Span after this year. Goodwin insurance on Taylor, probably future bench guy.
Nationals sign reliever _______ to a one year deal
"...did I just say sign? Sorry the Nats have no plans to sign any reliever, even"
How do they beat the dodgers/cardinals?
Same with any playoff series, pitch great and hope to catch the breaks.
Instead of finding some out-of-the organization, cheap, "waste of space," doesn't Souza just open a slot for T Mo on the 25-man?
Ah so a IN-organization, cheap, "waste of space" Look, Tyler Moore has had two GOOD chances to prove his first shot at a bench role wasn't an fluke and both times he flamed out spectacularly. You can argue maybe he needs more regular at bats but you can't argue he needs another shot to do the same thing he spent 2013 and 2014 failing at. Could he take that spot? Sure. I'd even say he's got a decent chance to. But I don't like it.
What if the Nats tore up Desi's deal for next year, and gave a very large AAV for the next two years?
To make it large enough for him to take would raise payroll super high. You have to think - with a decent 2015 he could get 6/120 easy. If he gets hurt or crashes in 2016 under the above plan then his value takes a nosedive. So what 30 mill a year?
How about Strasburg, straight-up for Beltre?
Are you a Rangers fan? Beltre is great but if all you can get back for Stras is a 36 year old with same control and much bigger price tag then you aren't doing it right, even WAR or not.
Perhaps Ian Desmond for Miller straight up?
Others said it but doesn't make sense for the Nats (see Q1 response) doesn't make sense for the Ms (Miller has more value than a rental)
Christmas Movie Reviews
Back to Christmas or Correcting Christmas
X(Mas)-Factor: Ever present plot point but you can imagine the movie without it
Kids acting: Nope in fact it's got movie Jan Brady grow'd up.
Watchability: Santa would laugh : "Low low low!"
"Hey it's"! : I already gave you movie Jan Brady. The bad cop from Veronica Mars? oh the fake Dean from Community (or the VP from "Phil of the Future" for those with refined taste)
I hated this movie. In a different way then I hated Christmas Town, and probably in a more meaningful way. Christmas Town was just bad. Poorly written, poorly made, etc, but in the end its heart was in the right place and if you wanted to spend two hours with the right people picking this movie to pieces you can have a grand old time. Back to Christmas just angered me by the end.
Let's start though with the minor problem. Girl goes back in time, gets chance to fix broken relationship, realizes she should let that guy go (he works too much doing "business" and doesn't love Chirstmas) and be with old neighbor (he is a contractor and volunteers and loves Christmas). Very standard stuff, but the way they present the boyfriend you have NO IDEA why she is with him. He's mostly a jerk and is totally wrong for her in obvious ways. I think they try to explain it away early on by saying what we see isn't how it went down last time. Huh? I have a funny feeling this movie was written straight but needed a hook to sell it. "Santa splits them up?" "Been done." "Christmas wish?" "No kid." "Time travel?" "GOLD!"
But that's just bad writing. If I got angry at everyone of these with bad writing I would have been dead from a coronary long ago. The major problem is how they define the current boyfriend. They take pains to say that he's "not a bad guy" but make little effort to show it. He's quick to anger, pretentious, oblivious to his fiancee's wishes (though some part of it is that apparently she spent their 5 year relationship lying about what she wanted out of life - "my bad") and a jerk to the neighbor who he (rightfully) sees as a threat. Despite what they say, they clearly want you to believe he is a jerk. How then do they drive that point home?
He doesn't want children and he doesn't see the point of getting married.
That's how you know a person is ultimately bad. All you people out there happy being unmarried and childless. You are THE WORST. Stop ruining Christmas for the rest of us. Just go off to an island somewhere and die. Manhattan probably from what I learned watching these things.
Side note : grown-up movie Jan Brady had a hateable role but I didn't hate her. Good for you! I HATED the brother and I was supposed to like him. More grown up movie Jan Brady!
This also get no nothings.
A Very Merry Mix-Up
X(Mas)-Factor: Necessary, though I suppose it could have been Thanksgiving
Kids acting: None. You know these movies are a lot less kid dependent than you'd think.
"Hey it's"! : The detective from Criminal Intent that you were like "She's not very good"
What? Ok. It's a mix-up movie and nearly every mix-up movie can be easily solved by a conversation early on and usually don't make sense if you think about it. (Why hasn't she met his parents? Why doesn't the wrong family know more about their son? Why doesn't she keep trying to call her real boyfriend?) But the movie makes some effort to get around this (her phone breaks, the pictures at the parents house are all of the brothers as kids -which as a parent I can attest is totally possible) so you can get past it if you want to and why are you watching this if you are going to get stuck on something like that? Nicole Eggert went through a washing machine to another world for Christ's sake.
Otherwise the leads have decent chemistry, and the movie makes a pretty big step in making the ex not terrible. Oh he works too hard at business because OF COURSE and he doesn't understand her love of he dead father's store because OF COURSE ON TWO LEVELS but he seems to try. Like he understand she's bothered by the fact that she's losing her store so one of his "presents" (which his family doesn't normally do because SEE: OF COURSE) is a lease on a new place that could be her store that would be totally better store-wise. And his parents may be cliches, his father a work-a-holic like him, his mother... I'm not sure what... modern new-age health-nut?... they are at least nice to her.
Is it creepy the brother and the girl go readily along with their obvious attraction? Totally. Is there a car crash that when you think about it must have had something to do with part of the movie that ended up rewritten out of the script? Yep. Don't think about it then! You are trying to waste time at the in-laws not study a movie for your film criticism class which by the way was a total waste of credits. Way to go.
This movie gets 4 gingerbread houses with gumdrop roofs. Tile that mother with gumdrops! I'm not getting gumdrops for another 12 months.