'VIEW' RINGS 'BELLE
By DON KAPLAN
Sherri's race mistake.
January 15, 2008 -- 'VIEW" co-host Sherri Shepherd went flat- earth again yesterday. Seems she forgot that legendary soul singer Patti LaBelle is black.
During yesterday's talk-around - the first few minutes of "The View" where the show's co-hosts chat about the news of the day - Shepherd mentioned that over the weekend she had attended the Stellar Awards, an awards show for gospel singers. At the show, she met Shirley Caesar, another legendary singer, often referred to as the First Lady of Gospel Music.
"There is a picture of me with Shirley Caesar, who is like the black Patti LaBelle," bragged Shepherd.
There was a second of stunned silence before her co-hosts, Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar and even Barbara Walters piled on.
"Patti LaBelle is black!" said Golberg.
"But this one is blacker," joked Behar.
"It's a good thing you're not running for office," said Walters. "Because you'd be considered bigoted right now."
"I'd be in so much trouble," squeaked an embarrassed Shepherd.
Shepherd, who replaced Star Jones this year, has been dropping increasingly strange comments since she began appearing on the show in September.
In one instance, she insisted Christianity was older than ancient Greece, and even Judaism. Earlier, she said she didn't know if the world was flat or round.
The problem with the clutch argument every time is that it's the most anecdotal, least statistical thing in baseball. It's the stories you tell your grandchildren that grow in the telling. Until there's a way to compare one situation with another, and one performance with another, the argument won't solve anything.
Until then, clutch is just the absence of choke.
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
~ Mark Twain
Tangotiger wants to know who we want up with the game on the line.
"Reality tells us there are no guarantees. Except that some day Jon Lester will be on that list of 100-game winners." - Peter Gammons
There needs to be an option worse than "poor" for Juan Castro.
is this the same topic as these threads?
"On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that great to me."
Of the many excellent presentations at last weekend's SABR convention in Cleveland, one of my favorites was the study by Pete Palmer and Dick Cramer, on clutch hitting. I have to admit that the subject has been done to death (notably by Palmer and Cramer themselves). And there are probably a lot of people like Chris Jaffe, who is "sooooooo very tired of clutch hitting studies."
So this study could be accused of beating a dead horse – other studies, I think, have already convincingly shown that clutch talent doesn't exist – but, on the other hand, on a controversial issue like clutch, you can never have too much evidence.
Thus the results of the original study (1) are yet again confirmed, this time by every analysis we can devise and based mostly on fifty seasons of major league play. Over this period there is no convincing evidence that any fluctuation of any batter’s performance in tense situations had any cause beyond random variation. Furthermore, because batting performance is unaffected by game situation overall, there would be no honor in being identified as a clutch hitter. Why shouldn’t a major league batter give his best effort regardless of the game situation?
The conflict continues between the feeling of tension in critical game situations, expressed even by many of the most experienced and successful major league batters, an the actual outcomes.
Last edited by westofyou; 07-03-2008 at 02:32 PM.
Question. Why do we have to put a number on something to validate it?
There is no doubt in anyone's mind that with the clock winding down you would put the ball in Jordan's hands. We always see the ones he made but what about the ones he missed?
There is no doubt in my mind that there are players that you do and don't want to face with the game on the line. There are also players who want to be in that situation and ones that dont. I just find it odd that since we can't put a concrete number on a clutch stat that it can't exist.
To separate the stories about Icarus from the ones about Alexander.Question. Why do we have to put a number on something to validate it?
Thats beside the point because you can't have who you want up in a clutch situation. Its way too hard considering the 4-5 men on your bench are in all reality lesser players than the starting 8. Each manager will tell you the exact player/s he wants up in a crucial situation. He will also tell you the players he doesn't want to face. He will make decisions around that certain player. Maybe its the best or maybe its the one who hits well against your club. Your telling me that in a close game Dusty wouldn't be concerned where Pujols was in the order. He wouldn't manage a little different knowing that if he 1-2-3, 1-2-3 in the 8th and 9th inning that he wouldn't have to face Pujols?
Look at Big Papi. The guy seems like he continues to come up with big hit after big hit. Is that just him and his game or is that because he is very comfortable in that situation and the pressure doesn't effect him.
Michael Jordan wasn't great because he was so good in clutch situations. He was so good in clutch situations because he was Michael Jordan.