I'm going to read off of my phone just so I get it correctly. I had it texted to me so I have it down pat. So updated information injury wise. Masahiro Tanaka had arthroscopic surgery on his right elbow to remove bone spurs. This procedure was done by Dr. David Alcheck at the hospital for special surgery yesterday. He is expected to be ready for spring training. Luke Voight has had surgery to repair bilateral core muscle injuries by Dr. William Myers in Philadelphia that occurred this morning. He's expected to be ready for spring training. And Aaron Hicks will have UCL reconstructive surgery on his right elbow October 30th by Dr. Neal Eletrage in Los Angeles. His rehab is expected to be eight to ten months. So that is the most updated medical information for the roster. And I'll take questions. We've got the wireless mics of course who has the first question. Bruce in the front row. Cash Aaron Judge called the season a failure after game six of the ALCS. How would you judge the season? I mean we failed in our ultimate goal and dream of a world championship. I wouldn't but that you know wouldn't dismiss all the tremendous things that occurred you know during the journey though. I'm real proud about a lot of the things our operation has accomplished. You know you know and with the crew we accomplished it with that's with our manager our coaches our players having to to plug and play and adjust along the way and and obviously become American League East champions you know knock out a tremendous foe in the Minnesota twins that were just as capable of moving forward as we were and and unfortunately you know ran into Houston in the ALCS and so you know we failed in our our final goal but we did we didn't have a failed season in my opinion. Dan and Andy. With Hicks is the surgery because of him coming back. Did that have anything to do with with having to get Tommy John? Yeah it's getting Tommy John because he needs it. That's the bottom line. I think you know obviously he was feeling it regardless of getting back you know the again you kind of I think we tried to address this in the past but you know when he had the in-season injury you know there was a rest and rehab process that was put in play that process failed because the pain immediately came back so then he went and saw Dr. Elatraz who put you know who concurred with Dr. Ahmad about the significant of the injury and that it was a probable Tommy John but if the player didn't want that which he didn't understandably so he put in a longer rest and rehab recovery time and then which lead it would lead him into missing the entire postseason and then trying it sometime in the winter probably closer to December. December January ranged with the throwing program and see how he you responded then and if that failed to be Tommy John obviously we know the narrative now which he you know that's why he returned home to Arizona and he decided to start a throwing program behind the scenes in a more truncated time frame you know and felt that it responded well enough to get him back going but obviously once the season ended he played great force in the postseason obviously but but once it ended the you know the feeling of there's something here that's still not right the the follow-up doctor exam etc. it was again the you know led to the ultimate decision we got to get this thing fixed or it's just going to blow you know March February March April so how does that impact your outfield plans going forward we'll see our pro scouting meeting start Monday Tuesday Wednesday of next week obviously you know our current outfield alignment that we have that doesn't include free agency you know what the depth happens to be and obviously it's just an area that we're going to have to you know evaluate and discuss and factor in but I don't have any you know answers to those to that specific question on on personnel at this time Andy had Tanaka been managing that particular elbow situation for a while and did you learn anything new about is about the ligament through this process or is it status quo status quo on the ligament and and I'd say you know from my perspective no one like we were there was his maintenance was his routine so I think this you know was an end result of end of the season just evaluation if there's something going on in the air that anything like that that needs a recommended cleanup like it's had done in the past and then we would address it or it would get addressed and that's all this is but there wasn't anything where start to start what are we going to get here we have an issue that's pending and you know and you're holding your breath and hoping that something doesn't go wrong it wasn't like that at all it was just an end of the season you know examination that with an MRI just because of his history of the elbow and and if something just you know displayed itself then just go ahead and get it addressed and and move forward so it's I don't think it's a complicated procedure or simple procedures one he's had I want to say several times before so it's part of I guess the winner program for him Christie and Wally just to be clear on Aaron Hicks it started out as a flexor strain when did the UCL get damaged the flexor strain is always a precursor typically so when is you in the media or following typically I'd say I don't know what the time time table is is the 80% 90% the flexor strain muscle usually is a precursor to a unstable ligament and so he he had a damage in the ligament you know obviously and I don't know what was announced at the time and you know if it was announced as a flexor tendon strain it would be at the request of probably the player not wanting the full medical out there so he heard his ligament with the flexor strain if you're telling me that the strain was what was announced he heard his ligament with the flexor strain at the same time and just comes down to PRP injections and things of that nature you do the conservative treatment see how they respond if it's not an obvious full tear if it's a partial tear in his case it was a partial tear I don't have the percentage off the top of my head but I want to say it felt feels like it was 51% or maybe I'm wrong to say it but it it's it wasn't a small it wouldn't be a full but it was something that was this is big enough problem so but typically you know when you hear a flexor tendon strain it usually means some bad stuff might be happening in the future so you you had a series of injuries you had injuries happened during rehab this year you said you were investigating it can we expect any changes to your rehab or medical staff I I guess if and you know there's no doubt that I have addressed with our media corps here for our fans you know our focus on and concerns on how our process has played out this year and and the numerous injuries that we had the failed rehabs that we had in some cases you know some are the the area focus is going to be in the area that might have been preventable clearly and determination being is are they preventable are these something that we're missing is there something that in our process that is faulty and I can assure you that that has been a laser focus and as I described it as the CSI the Bronx that is has occurred has been occurring and if there are any changes you'll eventually be made aware of them I'm not here to address any of that outside of acknowledging that that is a process that is ongoing and between now and spring training if there anything that gets changed or adjusted or hired new hires or any of that nature eventually that would be revealed so I guess stay tuned if there's something there to be dealt with in the future you know when all those proper boxes are checked and people are discussed with and and the final conclusions are in or if there any new hires or what have you then we'll be in a better position to discuss that well cash over here with Hicks out at least half the season next year maybe the whole season does this increase the likelihood that you bring back Brett Gardner next year and at this stage of his career do you think he's capable of playing center field on a pretty much regular basis for you I can't predict again how we approach the winner yet because we our first step in this process is those free agent and pro scouting meetings that will start taking place next week which I talked about but in terms of Brett Gardner I don't think there's any question about what his capabilities are yet it's tremendous season both sides of the ball offensively and defensively including playing center field so you know and obviously he's a free agent so but so if I guess the main questions can he handle playing center field in 2020 both offensively and defensively I don't think there's any question based on the performance before this year and in past years so I forgive me on this one but is Ellsbury an option for you next year you know it's hard to say uh based on how things have played out you know so right now he's not someone that's in a position health-wise to for me to be answering anything in the affirmative at this time uh jack over here to the right brian I know you said you have the pro scouting meetings looming but you were pretty adamant leading up to the trade deadline about wanting to add a starter and not being able to find a match as you sit here now how aggressive do you anticipate being and trying to add an ace type starter for 2020 I think we're always we're always aggressive and trying to attack areas that need improvement and it just comes down to what's available in the marketplace and and unfortunately I think if as we were you know revisit the summer you know those type of players weren't available and and obviously weren't moved so so all the players we targeted uh they wound up staying put and um you know in terms of front end rotation stuff and and uh and so that you know will continue to engage the marketplace to uh evaluate what's available in the free agent marketplace and then make the phone calls to the 29 other clubs to see what's available in the trade marketplace and then you know act accordingly uh last year last winter that led us to paxton for instance and I you know if I was sitting here right now I didn't even know paxton was available you know at this time last year it wasn't until the GM meetings occurred out in carlsbad so um that that I learned that and then a month later we were able to pull that down and uh you know uh and I think people were pretty satisfied with what he did the second half of the season and what he showed his capabilities are in the post season when our backs were against the wall against a team playing currently in the world series and the Houston Astros so you know we'll continue to do that dance and see where it takes us and and uh if there's something that's available that uh you know that we seem to be able to match up with and push through on you know we'll be aggressive we'll go to the left dave and then sweeney cash i mean every year how how invest on your left over here cash every year how to invest a significant amount of money in your payroll obviously do you think because there's been a long time without a championship relatively speaking for you guys that you'd be more willing to kind of blow through that type of budget lines or just because there are going to be some pretty significant free agent help out that this year you know i don't want to speak for house dimer and i think he's his you know uh the proof's in the pudding i mean he i think he's been blowing through a lot you know along the way you know he he and his family um you put big coin on the on the table to to invest in this club and and even in scenarios where you know sometimes it may be from the outside people scratch their heads on whether it was a dj lamehu where it looked like why would they invest that type of money for a player that's there's no obvious fit even though we felt that there was uh uh war or wanton canarcy on that we brought in from seattle you know in season that turned out to be our biggest in season acquisition um you know so all of that costs money and um and because of that you know uh those are just examples and reinforcements of how he's willing to step up and entertain anything and we entertain obviously some big ticket items last winter and hosted them we in the end we chose not to play on it because we had other alternatives and uh and other strategies that we decided to to exploit um but uh his willingness and his desires are always to do what's best for the Yankees um in the near term in the in the long term but he wants a good sound process he wants to make good sound educated decisions uh with predictable outcomes and and um and so you know i i don't see this winter being any different uh is he going to be investing heavily in this roster as he always does the answers yes um i does he get the credit for doing that probably nowhere near as much as as he should because i i know how you know um ultimately the fanbase doesn't care about anything as much as the the final verdict which is a world championship and that kind of you know becomes the exclamation point and the end all and be all and but even though it's you know that holy grail is a lot more difficult to navigate than then i think uh you know uh gets credit for so um you know he'll be the same as he always is uh he'll he'll be honest to find the right mix of personnel and players and and uh at times he'll be challenged with tough decisions about you know it's going to cost this and he'll think about it with his family and and normally he always answers that call with a if you honestly believe in it if he believes that process is good then then uh and sound and it's been talked through you know he's always been there to say yes it's very very few times if at all that i can recall that so no does it for you guys the longer it goes on cash without you i mean this was obviously target as a championship year for you guys does every year kind of feel the same or each year that you guys come back without it does the pressure feel increased to get it done um you know i first and foremost did we have a championship team this was a championship caliber team uh obviously uh as we walk through what's going on here you have uh you have to reflect honestly objectively on what this roster looked like and what its capabilities were and and what it really was had accomplished and on the verge of watching a team that was a wildcard entry in the world series have a two game and to none lead currently it shows you that difficulty of navigating october every one of these teams that enter in one uh form or another obviously have a chance to take that final bow uh and clearly this uh the final chapter of the 2019 season hasn't been written yet um but just because we lost doesn't diminish diminish the fact that this was a championship caliber roster that was capable of winning the whole thing uh we just obviously struggled in certain categories uh in houston uh with houston during that series that you know denied us that ultimate prize um but again it's our job to be objective and and truly evaluate you know the strengths and weaknesses and added up and it was like this was this roster championship caliber and had a legitimate opportunity to represent uh the final team standing the answer to that question is yes so i'm not going to lose sight of that in my discussions with ownership and my recommendations of of where we need to continue to go and and so the winner program will be no different than others it's going to be the type that you would look at the areas of weakness uh with a hundred win team isn't as much you know that's why obviously turn him the clock back to to the summer it makes it more difficult to improve on teams that have that type of you know uh power uh meaning you know talent and so you know we'll look at where what's available and where you know it might fit for us relative to the current obligations and commitments and you know with the arbitrations etc that factor into play and and see if we can add to it if possible uh despite that being a difficult process um but not afraid of it not afraid just to to to admit that this was a great team uh not afraid to acknowledge that we won up against the great team in houston for instance and and uh you know so i think it's very important not to get emotional uh very important to be certainly reflective on areas that you can get better at but obviously objective and and acknowledge the areas that you've been really good at and excel at so the time frame of uh you know in this industry that's not guide the guiding principle for for us or for me personally i'll say uh i can just tell you that i'm proud of of all personnel we have and and uh and what we've done to put ourselves in a position to take our shot and disappointed that that at least in 2019 it wasn't enough but but i know that you know most teams would love to be in a position that we've put ourselves in and would love to have the roster players that we have and and and many in most cases the personnel that we have running it and and um so you know we'll we're not going to lose sight of those facts was as we navigate what's next whatever that happens to be so even if you aren't ready to announce any of the personal changes were there changes that you made to the process the evaluation process about the injuries and the rehab situations that you went through this year are there anything that you did differently during the course of the year that you can enlighten us on no no it's not something i'm going to address right now so uh did did did you actually do things or you're not i just not going to address any of that right now clearly a respect for the personnel working in in those environments uh just not going to address it clearly or as an area of focus and it's an area that we are looking into without question and it's a process that's ongoing and but i'm not going to address you know if anything was changed along the way but i just acknowledge that yeah there's areas of concern areas of problems areas of focus that we are looking into and have looked into and if we've made adjustments to certain things along the way in season i don't feel like i need to address that publicly there are several starting pitchers over the last few years that you passed on that are in the world series right now i didn't pass on them you didn't no i didn't pass on them how would you characterize it well i guess why would you characterize it that i passed on them were there opportunities to get some of these guys give me some specifics justin verlander garret coal patrick corbin justin verlander uh was a player what two three years ago that was in play that under our current if you recall the payroll structure they were under was not going to fit in our environment given the directives from above and that's not blaming ownership on that aspect at all but we had overspent to a level we're going to be under our payroll and and they're the ultimate goal was to get our luxury tax issues we're rewarding our opponents around the game you know back in check so so verlander was not passing verlander was not someone that was in play because of those protocols that were in place so that's one so what's the next one but that that that question had been answered several times over it's it's semantics then as far as what we're describing is why they're not well like if you talked about patrick corbin did we not make an offer for patrick corbin yes or no you tell me you know the answer do you not know the answer i was told no uh did you make an offer we made an offer in patrick corbin the washington nation nationals made us a more significant offer than patrick corbin so i don't know who told you no that would be false okay so has how or you expressed any regrets so would you categorize that as a pass i would categorize it as we're arguing semantics and they're currently not here all right and my question though is garrick coal was traded from pittsburgh to houston did we make an offer to pittsburgh for garrick coal yes or no yes okay did that mean we passed on it or he nor pittsburgh made a determination you did not increase the offer enough to get him did you houston made an offer that in pittsburgh's mind was a better offer than arms you know these are this is all ancient history but these are all facts but that doesn't mean we passed on anything my we made attempts to try to acquire my question to you is had as how expressed any regrets over any of these decisions that did not go in your favor over the course of the last couple years and or do you regret anything i would i don't regret our process and there's certain things in that process that that's controlled and some things that are out of our control in terms of knowledge of you know i have no knowledge in free agency of what an opposing team is offering until ultimately it comes out after the signings elsewhere so you know whether it's dallas kykel this summer or or patrick querman this past winter and you know it's not like obviously it's illegal to be calling the other clubs to find out what they're offering so you don't know until then so that in the kykel situation for instance which you didn't bring up but but i remember i used that that line of hair by you know we lost out by the hair of a chinny chin chin or something like that which is it was a very close number from where our offer was but how would i know that you know so uh so you put your best foot forward and you live with it i have no regrets if we have a strong process and we put our best foot forward based on a lot of pressure points and then you live with it um so am i living with that i'm living with that am i comfortable with with every decision and everything that we went through our process or i think we have a strong healthy process that leads us to to make whatever offers we're making at the time and for good reason and something we can be comfortable with and um you know so you know you don't get everything you want at all times but i think what we've done is was do a lot of great things along the way so you know i i can sleep at night with the process we have in place and it served us well and put us in a position to take a legitimate shot of the championship so far uh in the more recent years and and that's despite you know obviously you know some of the the options that went elsewhere um so Brian to the right and then clap cash uh two things first do you anticipate the entire coaching staff coming back for next year uh this press conference is ahead of the the protocols that we go through so me and Aaron Boone have to decide uh obviously what we want to do next if we want to make any changes if we don't want to make any changes that means reviewing with each individual staff member first and foremost their area of specialties and uh and then mapping out moving forward if that's the best fit for as we move forward so i can't i'm not in a position um to say yes or no on that because we haven't gone through that process yet so second uh this team was really built on power hitting and power bullpen did anything that happened in the alcs change your opinion about that that can work in october no i mean no i mean this team this team uh had a lot of strengths uh ultimately we just didn't hit in a timely manner um compared to our opponent in that particular series we out home or the astros um you know uh they just got you know a big home run for instance a more timely manner than we did we had obviously without naming names we just sort of you know had some serious struggles with runners in scoring position that you know ultimately decided the outcome of that series they were able to um you know step up and and put us down when it counted the most when those important times came came into play and that was with some seriously talented gifted hitters um that have a history of uh of track record and performance but um so you credit them but in terms of how we approached pitching the opposing team that we faced how we approached all aspects but i thought we we did a tremendous job and and even though the the pitching is a highlighted of why you know going back to swinney's question about regrets pitching is not what cost us that series with the astros um at least that's my opinion i i felt that our um hitters hitting with runners in scoring positions what sent us home um that's ultimately when you peel the union that's the the true fact of the matter of what decided the ultimate outcome of the houston astro new york yankee series clap to the right against the right um you mentioned a moment ago that it's important not to get emotional about the way the season ended but your players understandably took took that loss very hard in houston considering how abruptly it ended i'm wondering how you yourself reacted to it uh are you over it do you still think about it or is everything that now at this point forward directed everything's forward directed um and even when the postseason is playing out it's forward directed so you know that i get a lot of questions constantly after for instance the trade deadline in september hits like what are you up to like we're dealing with 2020 and like really i'm like oh yeah like you know damon oppenheimer flew up with the his amateur scouting department and went through the the debriefing of the 2019 amateur draft and we're moving forward there and and that goes on with all similar departments department so despite as we're entering postseason and getting you know the first round with who's going to be our opponent turns out to be minnesota and we're preparing for the advanced scouting stuff behind the scenes with various baseball ops departments that you know they're in season has been completed you know we start the 2020 process of mapping out where are we weak where we need to be better what's the you know challenge our process here there and everywhere unfortunately when you walk into that clubhouse post elimination after 10 minutes or 15 minutes or what have you of of the raw emotions of what happened yeah you got you're going to get you know some you better get really if you're as you walk into that environment those emotions that's obviously you know so you get a chance to interview an Aaron judge and you get a chance to talk to obviously the manager and the coaches and the players and their immediate you know massive disappointment of having their season you know abruptly end sooner than they wanted it to and um obviously this press conference feels like it feels like 10 days later even though it's not 10 days later uh so i'm in a much better position um you know to be you know objective and less emotional about what happened uh but it's you know it's the nature of the beast have been around a long time where you know there's only going to be one team gets the pound on the chest pound their chest um and then everybody else comes up with excuses of why they weren't good enough uh everybody else come and some have more legitimate re excuses and others um but you know we're happened to be in that category of finding reasons why it wasn't us when eventually one team is going to be and it's down now down between the washington nationals and the houston astros one team is going to be crowned all the glory for better for worse whether they have deficiencies or not you know i remember every year we've won the world series i knew going into the postseason i'm like you always wish you could have done done a you know a better job here had one guy or more guys healthier there and is it going to be good enough and it was standing but when they win all those questions and concerns or areas of weakness that that you know would be picked apart get forgotten because ultimately you overcame them and uh unfortunately obviously in 2019 you know we over we overcame a lot but not enough when it counted obviously in the alcs to take that next step and and take the final phase and the final shot so so we're in that category of doing what we're doing to hear and we'll do all winter and get dissected by by everybody um and we'll just we'll dissect ourselves at the same time but again while doing so we don't want to make mistakes and and and get emotional and uh so then when you start addressing areas you start making mistakes because you're emotional and so that's you know that's a challenge but it's one that we're up for one other follow-up in terms of dissecting i'm just curious at this point how would you evaluate gary sanchez's body of work i thought gary sanchez had a great season obviously outside of the injuries um you know gary is is part of the solution uh you know i think he listen what we did against their offense in terms of compressing their offense was was as much to do with our pitchers and as gary sanchez but gary's a big part of that he follows the game plan he executes the game plan um you know uh he limited the astros the two storm bases the whole series and they're a very aggressive base running team uh so he shuts down the opposing running game and again if you if you look at the offense that they produced and what they're capable of you know you you know as i said we didn't lose assists this series because of pitching and then i when i say our pitching did a great job during that series um gary's a big part of the reasons why and how he uh you know called those games and you know how he kept changing the signs obviously to to try for instance to to make sure that we're protecting our our pitch selections and i just thought he did a remarkable job uh but i don't think he gets the credit that he's due um i obviously on the offensive side you know he didn't swing the bat as much as he's capable of but he's one of the biggest difference makers at that position in the game and uh so uh i think gary's been a big plus for us and one of the reasons why we've been able to excel um so i'll take a few more pete in the back right brian um in hindsight would you have done anything differently regarding uh statins racha spot in the alcs and was incarnacion a completely healthy player for you in that series uh i'll take the incarnacion first uh was he a completely healthy player the answer is yes at least uh as far as we know and you know and the way he was swinging the bat as hard as he was and i would say hard slash violent whatever you want to call i mean he was taking some huge cuts uh so i would say that based on what we witnessed there that i would have severe doubts that that there was any injury issue lingering with him with the rib cage um he had a tremendous series of thought against minnesota one of the reasons why we advanced and and we played great baseball during that series and he him included um yeah he struggled obviously against uh the houston during the houston series and that was a surprise um so the question line incarnacion was he healthy i believe a hundred percent the answer to that is yes uh switching on the stan um stan had a grade two a low grade two uh strain um and obviously if this was in season he would have been put down but in the post season it's all a different category and there's a penalty if you put him down he wouldn't be available for the world series and so um right or wrong uh you know i made the determination that to keep him in play for the for the potential uh next stage you know i weighed that as being more valuable than replacing him with somebody else on the roster uh to come in who would then sit the bench and and you know so whether it was for instance luke void who i talked about is having surgery now or or if it was somebody else um was that person going to go in and then be starting immediately and the answer to that was no somebody else was going to be taking that those reps and so uh you know because obviously you know um you know talkman wasn't a hundred percent finished off yet he was at about 85 so talkman was available for the world series but not for the alcs um so as we navigated our legitimate choices and then if whoever if we did replace stan out the long uh the framing it properly would be that would be for a bench player that i didn't see how many how much if at all he would get a role so i thought the upside of waiting on having this healing process kick in and have stan available for the next round if we were fortunate enough to get there that overshadowed replacing stan with a bench player somebody was going to not have an everyday role for us during that astro series uh right or wrong but that was the the essence of the decision mark and bradford cash we know chatman has an opt out date coming up do you anticipate talking to his agents at all before that opt out date to see if something can be worked out and if he does leave do you look at zack britain as a guy who could close well i'm sorry repeat the question again chatman has an opt out date coming up do you anticipate speaking with his his agents prior to the opt out to see if like when you did with cc adding something to the back of his contract to prevent him from opting out and if he does leave do you look at britain as a guy who could step in and be your closer if he does appreciate the question is you know so it's a sensitive aspect of it he has an opt out clearly we all acknowledge that um he'll have decisions to make i don't think it's in it's healthy for me to openly talk about whether um we intend to have discussions if discussions are currently happening or any of that nature prior to then so ultimately uh you know dates coming um and uh you know we'll see what happens between now and then or or obviously at that date um and i don't want to you know um speculate on alternative options uh when i currently don't have to because i don't think that's either it's healthy to the process either um so i respectfully duck bradford second row on the right hey brine um pitching staff of course was very good cumulatively against the astros um but players didn't mention an immediate aftermath of the game six being uh overexposed tired um specifically i think uber exposes when one pitcher said you know do you believe that the construction of the rotation and the starting staff and anything to do with the overexposure and do you plan on addressing that well i think i think we thought we we took a big hit when we lost one of the best starters in the american league in late september you know and that had a cascade effect so as we entered entered october i mean obviously the loss of domingo herman was not you know you lose people for various reasons injuries would have you but herman going down but tanzas going down you know players that we were actually anticipating and expecting to be a part of the october process disappeared on us in the last two weeks of the season so uh with that um it had a cascade effect that's certainly you know worth in on us um and yeah i would say that um it forced us to be more even in the we're utilizing our our weapons out of the pen and plan to do that regardless but we had to lean on that even more because we lost certain you know players along the way that that had us reconfigure and uh you know that's all part of you know uh you don't you just like you lose stanton in the middle of the alcs uh you know or in the beginning of the alcs it's just injuries happen or circumstances occur that that force you to stay away from certain guys um britain had a hamstring during the red sock series the previous postseason and and which affected decision making on how you can deploy the rest of your roster um that comes with the territory um but those are just facts that you can't ignore either so uh john right right a couple more at triple a you guys had a lot of players who were ready to come in and be major leaguers or had been major leaguers philosophically at this point with all the injuries and everything and also the 26 man next year is the number changing for the number of major league players you need to be acquiring in the off season i don't know i mean obviously next year we're gonna have a 26th man so it's gonna certainly be a new wrinkle in how to construct rosters because you'd be at 26 and 40 not 25 and 40 so um so how that works out and and how people determine to utilize that it'll be interesting because it'll be a new world order there uh and a new focus to to dissect on who's doing it better than others and um but yeah i'm proud of the fact that we assembled enough quality alternative talent that we had to tap into or that we wound up acquiring elsewhere uh that could help plug gaps along the way and we do feel that we have you know whether it was a what my mic forward or a or a clint frazier uh you know Tyler Wade or you know all of them have various levels of abilities uh and ceiling uh but they all impacted us in the positive way at one time or another and and certainly had to utilize that you know Nestor Cortes that pitching side of it in in many times because of the the ability with the options and stuff and so Nestor came in and really did an amazing job for us along the way and and i can't i'm gonna miss so many because we had to be tapping into that scranton shuttle to such a degree um and in almost in every case it really paid off for us you know in one time or another or for extended periods of time that allowed us to not just tread water but to excel um i don't know if it would change the equation i think your main question is is that a new focus i think everybody desires and hopes to have massive deep talent uh and it's just not typically realistic or possible uh because you got 29 other clubs and the the uh talent uh pool isn't really as deep as you prefer it to be you know that exists in the baseball industry so uh that you can at least tap into for a major league ready plug and play type uh you know circumstances but you know we're going to try about we'll have to go about that process again this winter and see if we can line up as much depth you know as we possibly can you know because i know as the season started you didn't see geo coming you know and ohara supposed to be your third baseman and thankfully geo was sitting there waiting in the rings and boom you know um one of the amazing year he had for instance and that's a really prime you know shiny example of of something special and then obviously talkman along the way and amongst others so it's probably hard to replicate that you know um that's why you know we thought we're on a magic carpet ride with all the good things going our way but it uh that ultimately you know ended in houston we're going to take two more back and brendon sorry i know there's more hands Ryan as of today where does her mind fit in your short and long-term picture uh in his circumstance we have to wait for this whole process still to play out you know um i don't have any answers to where they are in this process is between major league baseball the players association and domingo herman um uh so i and we're not privy to anything on that process so so i can't speak to it and am i allowed to speak to it's not not by choices by you know by directive as well brendon cash out on your left side thank you the fillies are reportedly or reportedly hiring joe giordi what kind of manager are they getting got a great one you know joe was here for 10 years for a reason um you know i obviously did an interview process back to replace a hall of fame manager and joe tory uh and and so that led me to you know an amazing candidate and joe giordi um and that was obviously a difficult process to go through you know obviously i had to add some huge names in that mix don mattingly tony panier who had been a uh an american league manager of the year with the cancy royals but ultimately joe giordi prevailed in that interview process and ultimately you know had a massively successful run here with ultimately a world championship uh in 2009 so uh anybody who's ever asked me which they have trust me every team that's done gone through this interview asked me about joe giordi and and uh you know to me if you're going to marketplace and he was available in the marketplace you could find no better candidate and so he's going to represent their franchise well um you know he is going to be all in as you all know whoever covered him and see the passion and the fire that he possesses in that dugout and and he's been a winner one of the things that gravitated me to joe back then was uh you know i i had the perfect uh had a great relationship with him as a player you know i was a general manager here when he was a player he was a coach for me then he ultimately managed for me um he was a broadcaster for yes that's not has anything to do with me um but um you know uh he's been a winner his entire career and so i would expect nothing but the same that's going to continue there in philadelphia so um so wish him luck i thought they had a great selection uh and um rather it be not the american league east i guess that's the biggest compliment i could give thank you brian we'll be back in a minute or two with erin boone thanks cash thanks


Welcome to the CSS podcast where we cover all things CSS from accessibility to Zindex. Today we're talking about nesting. This is a highly requested feature for CSS that's existed in preprocessor tools like SAS for almost a decade. So it's really exciting to talk about and it's really great that the CSS Working Group has been working super hard on making this a reality. And the first working public draft for nesting is inching towards completion with an implementation behind Canary 109 that you can try today. No preprocessor tools needed. The spec is still settling on final syntax though, so this episode is subject to change. Adam, for those people that don't know what nesting is or haven't used it, can you give us a breakdown? I can, but we're gonna play a game first now. We're just gonna play with some words because nesting is funny and it sounds like birds should be sitting in this CSS feature, but they don't.  Okay, so when all the kids are gone, what's that called? Oh, leaving the nest. An empty nest, yes. Oh, empty nest. I mean, that's pretty close, good.  Or she, I don't know. Oh, I don't know, I don't know this. If I do this, does he give you a hint? No, what was that? This is a crow's nest, it's a crow's nest. A crow's nest, thing I learned. All right, anyway, okay, I'm not gonna be very good at this. It's more fun that way. Okay, a kind of chocolate. Oh, Nestle. Yes, Nestle, that one's the trickiest of them. I think you got a nice, okay. Do not try and get honey out of one of these. Oh, a bee's nest. Bee's nest, yep. Okay, you wake up, you got bed head, you slept for 12 hours, your hair looks like a. A bird's nest. Rats nest. Rats nest, I guess I could add some better clues there. Okay, this one's a movie, Jack Nicholson, one flew over the. Cuckoo's nest. Okay, that was all I got. Okay, that was, I did okay. You did okay. I said that was a C, plus. I definitely didn't wanna stump you, I was just like, you know, maybe I was looking at nesting too long and I was like, it needs a joke, it needs a nest joke somewhere. Those were good, those were good, I like that. Okay, cool, so a silly intro out of the way, let's talk about nesting and what is it? Cause there are a substantial amount of people that have no idea what nesting is as it's come to, I've come to find out. So let's talk about it. It's when style rules can go into other style rules. That's it at the basics, but it's also like thinking of it like inheriting or continuing a parent selector context. So think of like a field set and a legend element or like a UL and an LI. These usually move together in HTML and your CSS. But in CSS, we have to repeat the parent element over and over again on our selectors. But with nesting, you can open up the UL selector, type some styles, then nest LI selectors and continue to style them. You've now co-located your list item styles with the list container, making it easy to find the related styles as well as not repeating that UL over and over again as you add more styles to different list items. It can feel a lot like nesting objects in JavaScript or HTML, but it's in CSS. Just carrying that selector context with you to a new selector. Totally. So this is like a DevX improvement, like a developer experience improvement. It reduces redundancy of like writing code. It helps you write drier code. And it's something that we've actually seen in a lot of different ways through a lot of different strategies. So there's been things like SAS nesting, hugely popular, less stylist, CSS and JS nesting. And there are more than that, but native CSS hasn't been able to adopt any of these strategies because there's a lot of ambiguity that the CSS parser just can't match that something like SAS can. But give it time and a few brains and a solution can emerge. So Adam, what has emerged? Where is the spec today and what does the syntax look like? Yeah, it's funny. I wonder was it Lesser SAS that did it first? Do you remember? Lesser was the first pre-processor. Lesser was the first. I don't remember. I feel like Lesser had the same feature set as core SAS, but SAS had an easier integration with CSS with the SCSS syntax. And that's why SAS became more popular. Where you didn't have to have .less files. You could just use .scss and use the same syntax as CSS. Right, that TypeScript upgrade thing. Yeah, I feel like Lesser had it first, but SAS kind of gained the popularity and did it better. Another funny thing too about that ambiguity is like, it's not that CSS can't do what SAS has done. It's that SAS is handling this ambiguity and just no one knows that it's there. So like you can do certain combos and SAS is generating tons of stuff. And it's just sometimes throwing things away for developers, they just don't know it. After all these years, selectors that you've written using nesting have been thrown away because they're like, we're pretty sure the developer didn't mean to do these other 10 versions. SAS does a lot of really smart stuff. And I mean, there is power in being a pre-processor that looks at your code and transforms it into a different format that we just can't do with native CSS, dynamic CSS on the fly. With SAS, you have some benefits that you can't do the same kind of abstract syntax tree parsing because it does transform things before they get out there. But I'm saying also that it's like not a benefit. It's actually been baggage in a lot of ways. There's been developer ergonomic issues with it. There's been difficulty in maintaining it. So it's like, we'll get into an example later where the native nesting or just like the built-in nesting that we're gonna have could do this certain nesting scenario that would have exploded into like 27 versions in SAS, but it's only three in the nesting spec. So it's kind of like, it's an evolution I'd say. And it's sort of a little bit more precise. Anyway, we'll get into all that stuff. Okay, so first, what does this new nesting syntax looks like? I'm gonna start with a warning, which is the syntax just underwent a really big change. It became more relaxed and that's a good thing. And it became more relaxed in the usage of the and character. So if you've been following the spec for like the past four or five years, you'd be really familiar with the and character. And if it originally required and pretty much everywhere, well, not pretty much, it did require it everywhere. And anytime and wasn't gonna be at the front, you had to use at nest, which allowed you to put and somewhere other than at the beginning. But that requirement has been relaxed recently just a couple of weeks ago, actually. And and is now optional in many cases. And there's also no at nest style anymore. So the tool I'm gonna read is that you aren't required to use and as often, hence the verbiage of it being more relaxed, but it is still required in certain situations. In fact, it might be many situations. And we'll cover some of those in this episode. Yeah, so also I will use the term ampersand in relating to that little and symbol because I think it's a little bit more clear. And I just, I don't know, I'm used to calling it ampersand. I love ampersands. Yeah, they're a cool symbol. Okay, I'll call it an ampersand too. What did I call it, the and symbol? Yeah, ampersand. But it's the same thing. So let's talk about some essential rules to know with this new syntax. So first to be safe, you can always use an ampersand if you want to. You can always start your nesting line with an ampersand. And when you're nesting, if you want to visually think about it, it's say you have like a div and then you have your open curly brace and then on the next line, you might want to have like an indent and an ampersand and an element. Like that's nesting. That's where you have things nested inside of one another in your CSS. So you can always have an ampersand. And ampersands are great because I like to think of them as anchoring mechanisms. So they anchor to the top of the rule set where if you have an ampersand in a space and an element, now you have the top of the rule set characters so say div space and then the element. So that's what I do. If you don't have any space between the ampersand and the element, then it anchors directly. So you could have a class under it if you had ampersand with no space, div.class. So you can do that. You can always have ampersand if you want. But with this new syntax, you can get rid of the ampersand if you have something that is not an indent value. So if you have some sort of syntax and if you want to nest with a space between the topmost element of the rule set and the nested elements. So that means that you could do this with anything that is not like a alphabetical character, essentially, like adopt to indicate a class or a greater than sign to indicate a direct child or a colon to indicate something like a hover functionality. Although you'd probably want to use ampersand, colon hover because you'd want it to be directly on the parent. Yeah, that'll be in the got you this section. Yep. But another solution is to use like colon is or colon where to wrap a direct element without using the ampersand for nesting. So for example, you mentioned field set and legend at the earlier in this episode. So both of those are elements or idents in CSS language land. So if you were to start with a field set and then you wanted to nest a legend inside of it, you can do that in one of three ways. First, you could do field set, open curlies, ampersand, space, legend. So then you're using the ampersands, clear that you're starting to nest there. Another way to do that is field set, and you have your curlies, greater than space legend. And now you add the direct descended character to nest the legend from the field set. So the parser knows that nesting is occurring. And the third way is you could do field set, open your curlies, and then colon is and then in parentheses, legend. So this wraps legend and is selector, so that no longer starts with an ident. It no longer starts with just like a basic element.  So the prior syntax the working group resolved on was a way to always use the ampersand. And as Adam mentioned, this syntax is more relaxed. You could still always use the ampersand if you want to, but you don't have to if you have some sort of non-element or a non-ident character that it starts with. And if you're wondering why this weird rule, like why can I use, not have to use ampersands for nesting a class, but I have to use them for nesting an element, the answer comes down to this, yes, parser. So imagine you have like a card and you wanted to nest a div if you had like dot card and then open Curly's div, the parser needs to determine whether that div is a div element and you're beginning a nesting scenario or the beginning of a property value pair. So as it starts to look at every character as it's reading the CSS, it sees something that could possibly be a property and could possibly determine some style for that parent card, but that's not what you mean. You want to start a nesting. And CSS can't like look back and forth because that would really greatly degrade performance. It looks forward and you don't want to do that because it would be just super, super slow. So while we'd love to have parity with something like SAS with the beautiful nesting that doesn't require any sort of syntax, it just doesn't work in CSS. So that's why we have to have these weird rules for certain things, but again, you can just be consistent and use an ampersand if you want. Nice, excellent introduction there. So cool, let's cover like some more examples. We've got like, let's come back to the rule of just don't start nesting with an IDENT. Let's cover some really basic use cases to develop a mental model of the syntax where we're not using IDENTS. So let's talk about some classes. Let's say we have grid, a grid class and some item classes. We'll start our grid selector with dot grid. We'll open up our curly brackets. We can write some styles. And then we can just say dot item and open up curly brackets and write some more styles. And this nesting example is the same as if you'd write written dot grid, open up curlies in the grid styles, close your curlies and then dot grid space dot item, open up your curly item styles. Because the parser saw the dot before the item and knew that a class selector was coming. It then continues the item styles as if there was a space between the grid class and the item class. So it's just like how many preprocessors work where nesting like this is assumed to put a space or like a descendant child selector between the classes. Let's say you wanted to merge two classes together instead of having a space between them. This is where you have to use ampersand because how else would you know that you wanna do this really? So this is also kind of going back to that anchor example where you might have something like dot grid and open your curlies. You can have some grid styles. And then if you have ampersand dot item with no space in between the ampersand and the dot, then when you nested that, it would be dot grid dot item. So what this would tell would mean is I am styling something that has both the class of grid and the class of item. I'm not styling an item class inside of a grid class parent. I am looking for something that has both classes. So the ampersand tells the parser exactly where the previous selector context should go, no assumptions or magic about it and you're in full control. Yep, that ampersand becomes like a signal just to be really, really clear about where you want it to go. And yeah, it gives you that optionality and it's really nice. And just to be like well-rounded, let's cover using the direct descendant selector like we did with field set and legend, but this time we're not introducing the direct descendant character, the greater than sign, to disambiguate an identity. We're gonna use it to just target nested item classes inside of a grid class. We have like dot grid, open up your curlies, write some grid styles, then you direct descendant space dot item, open up your curlies, write some more styles and close your curlies out. And you've got yourself say dot grid set of styles and a dot grid direct descendant dot item set of styles. And it can be really, really nice using these. So it's almost like there's a new advantage to kind of keeping and using these direct descendants and various things, these little non-idents that will allow you to kind of avoid any collisions or things that you're unexpected. Yeah, good call. And another cool thing is that you can nest media queries and this one comes in super handy as you don't need to completely navigate to another part of your file, like all the way down the bottom to see what the dark mode styles are or what the large view port styles are. You can actually just co-locate them right with the rest of your styles as you write the base styles for your element. Oh yeah. So it's great. I feel like this is really useful for components like cards or sidebar or footer sections. Super, super useful. So you could open up something like a dot card and then have the styles there and then inside of that put at media. And then in parentheses, width is greater than or equal to 720 pixels, for example, and then write the styles there for what that card would look like if it was on a tablet or larger. And that would be the same as writing the opposite way of doing like at media and then the media query and then within that the card styles. So it's just a super handy thing to do with nesting. Super handy. One of my favorite use cases is adaptive colors or building light and dark themes. You got colon root, you open up, you put all your light theme custom properties, then inside of that root, you nest at media prefers color scheme dark and then you write your dark custom properties or you overwrite those light ones with their dark values or whatever it is you need to do but you can nest them all right next to each other right in the same selector context. It's really great. But I have a question. So for these two with the at media for either size or prefers color scheme, do you need a trailing ampersand to specify that you're actually putting this ahead of the top of the whatever you're nesting within? Nice. So what we've done here with our two examples are the basic use case of nesting media which implies an implicit and that's placed for you but you can continue nesting further inside of a media query if you want to. So you could have like dot card at media prefers color scheme dark inside of there you could say and dot active and you'd be saying it's a card dot active in dark mode. And so you have that ampersand character comes with you inside of an at media allowing you to build more selectors and to nest even further inside of that context. So could you also do something like say you have dot card and then you have like dot meta ampersand at the end of the line because in SAS you can do that. And what that would do is this example makes no sense but say you have like a dot card and then dot highlight ampersand that's a better example. So what this would do in SAS is it would create a selector that is dot highlight space dot card or would flip it kind of like what this is doing implicitly is that still an option with the nesting spec? Yes. And I think we'll get into these examples there where we're not just continuing to build out a selector to the right. So what you're describing is take the parent context and allow me to place it somewhere other than the beginning whether it's the middle or the end of a new selector. And so yeah, you've got like dot dark is a good example. So you have a card, let's say you don't wanna use the prefers media query you wanna use a class name that's on your HTML. So you've written your dot card styles you've written a bunch of styles then you say dot dark space and and that would make a new selector called dot dark space dot card and then you could write your dark card styles in there. So it's essentially kind of like a parent selector mentality where you're starting fresh with a new selector but you get to take the context of what you're nesting inside of and put it anywhere you want. So that ampersand character kind of feels like a macro or like a shorthand for the context that you're working with and whether or not you're inside a media query you're inside of other nesting that ampersand always represents that for you and allows you to put it anywhere that you want. So the and can go in the beginning to save you from not having to do a space or you can say dot dark and then put your ampersand anywhere that you want. So it is just like SAS in that way. Very cool. And then with these media queries would a trailing ampersand be the same as not having it because it's implicit? Yeah, you can do that if you want. So the original spec didn't have implicit media query nesting. So like we gave this example of root. So we had root light properties and then app media prefers color steam dark dark properties with no additional selector in there. It just assumes you wanna put those inside of a root selector. But if you don't like the assumption you can open up app media prefers color scheme dark open up your queries say and open up your queries and be very explicit that you're bringing in root to here inside of this media query. And then, you know, you could hit enter after that and do and space something else or do dot dark space and and so you have that full power of putting and somewhere where you need it. But media queries are the only scenario where it's kind of optional. It's kind of implicit. As long as you don't write more styles inside of there. So there's kind of an edge case, but yeah. Okay, cool. That's super useful. Thanks. You're welcome. Well, let's get into some of the gotchas cause, well, I mean, we're kind of just talked about a few, but right. But like one of the main ones here is it's it's SAS like, but it's not SAS. And I think this is gonna be a gotcha. So the whole concept of avoiding IDents doesn't exist in SAS. So if you're copying and pasting from SAS and you'd be like, oh, nesting is it's built into the browser now. I'm just going to paste all my styles over there. You're going to need to add ands here and there where IDents were used. So if you were targeting divs, if you were targeting field sets, targeting sections, mains, any of that stuff, you're going to have to put an and in there to be explicit about what you meant because the IDents were going to confuse it. Another thing that folks love to do in SAS is kind of concatenating selectors together, treating them like strings. So we do this in BEM all the time where you have like this partial of a selector, whether it's like a dash-dash modifier or maybe you're combining underscores. So you have like a block underscore and another underscore like for an element. People loved to build their selectors like there were strings. And that's not going to work in the built-in nesting. And that's because SAS did treat selectors as strings, but the CSS part or parser treats them as objects. So you'll need this mental model shift of thinking about selectors as live lists of stuff and not strings. And this is why you saw like an example that's like dot some dash block and underscore underscore modifier or dash-dash modifier. These won't work because modifier looks like an identity. It looks like an element. Maybe it's a custom element. It didn't start with a dot. It didn't start with a direct descendant selector. It didn't start with an and. And again, these things aren't strings being put together. These are live selectors. These are rich objects. And so you have to treat them that way. And it's going to be kind of a mental shift for people. Wow, that's a really good call because I definitely remember writing selectors this way where I would use the ampersand to write out values in selector when the BEM model was how I namespaced. I think that we have more advanced namespacing now with things like CSS modules. So I haven't really done that in a few years, but yeah, it's really key to note that these are not strings. These are objurnus. Yeah, that quest for dryness where you're like, I just don't want to type stuff over and over again. In some cases, you will have to because these aren't strings. Yeah, another interesting fact is that is powers things under the hood when you want to have a comma in your parent selector and target multiple items. So for example, if you had something like input comma button open curly is dot active and then some active styles, this would convert to colon is and then in the is selector input comma button and then curly is then dot active and then the active nested styles. So this might sound innocent enough or maybe it doesn't, but it can mean that the way that your brain thought you were nesting isn't the way that the cursor understands it. And you may need to be conscious about the abilities of is especially the specificity. So it might be worth brushing up on episode 47, which is all about is and where. Yeah, and if you're wondering right now, well, why does is power this? There's a couple of reasons. It allows arbitrary grouping, which is required for nesting to work for scenarios like let's say you have field set, open up Curly's and legend comma and input. And then you have inside of there and hover. So you've kind of gone triple levels in your second level had a selector list, right? There was a comma, there was legend and input there. So what that de-sugars to is field set space colon is parentheses legend comma input and parentheses colon hover. And the this shows the power of grouping in the middle of a selector, right? This is one of the value adds of is in general is that it got rid of all these like repeated selectors that we had to do because we can now group things in the middle, beginning or end. Well, that power comes into here as well. It's not just a power. It's like a heavy reduction of complexity as well so that you can nest a selector list inside of something else and then do a selector list again. And essentially the rule is if you're making a selector list where you've put a comma, expect an is to wrap that. And this grouping also reduces the amount of work on just de-sugaring as it doesn't need to expand all the cases like pre-processors do. So think like three selectors with three nested selectors with three nested selectors in that de-sugars to in this built in strategy is three selectors space is three selectors inside the parentheses space is three selectors. So it's just three select and it looks it's like it fits on one line but in a pre-processor, it literally de-sugars to 27 created selectors and they're hideous and confusing. But that's the reality of what you wrote and the cool reality of this new CSS future with is is that it can be succinct and elegant. So it's kind of cool. I don't know, I like it. That's really interesting. There's so much under the hood that is like clever. So another gotcha that I mentioned earlier is when you were nesting with pseudo classes and elements. So you might think that intuitively, you know, something like hover, it doesn't start with an identity. It's not an element. I could just nest that directly but what you would be doing by doing something like button and then nesting colon hover is it would output as button space colon hover which doesn't mean anything. You need to connect the two so that you are telling CSS that you're looking to apply a state or a style when the button is in the hover state. So you need the ampersand there and you want to write ampersand colon hover so that it converts to button colon hover and there's no space between the nesting context button and the hover pseudo selector. So this is the same case with pseudo elements like before and after. You need to do ampersand colon colon before ampersand colon colon after and it is a good reminder that you can always use the ampersand if you just want to be really explicit about your intent for if you want to space between the nesting context or if you don't. Yep, all those cool pseudo classes we have in CSS they're going to need an and in front of them almost always. So yeah, that's the gotchas. You're going to want to write it without it but you're going to realize something's not working and you got to put that hand in there. Another gotcha is around order. So like what happens if you add more styles after you nested something?  Then you do some nesting like ampersand space dot item. So now you've got some item styles in there.  What happens?  And well, don't worry about it. It turns out that the more grid styles get hoisted up to where the other grid styles are. This is a lot like JavaScript variable hoisting if you're familiar with that. So like, because otherwise in general nesting that occurs after other nesting like hover and focus within like these follow normal cascade order. So the last one to be defined is going to win over the earlier ones. But the case with just sort of more styles after nesting, those are going to be hoisted up. So you might try to leverage that in some way to like get an advantage of maybe I wrote the styles and they're going to win, but they don't. They all get hoisted up and grouped together in the beginning. So you can also nest in different contexts. You can nest in a cascade layer. You can nest in scope or you can nest in both. And Adam's been doing a ton of work around nesting, exploring it, kind of being one of the folks that are leading the headspace behind nesting. So we've got a demo for you in the show notes if you want to explore that a little bit more. So I guess to wrap, what's next for nesting? Yeah, it helps when I'm doing all these explorations that I'm a spec editor. So that definitely, you know, I know all the context and know what to try to go poke. I'm like, ooh, maybe the engineer forgot this one. Okay, so what's next for nesting is we need to settle on a syntax. The syntax that we just described is, well, I don't know, we could change it probably won't, but maybe it will. I don't know, I thought the previous syntax wouldn't change and then it did. So who knows, but- I feel like this, so we already have gone through so many options. I can't imagine it changing too much at this point. So the next thing about what's next for nesting is there's a lot of edge cases now. The new syntax created a lot of edge cases. Whereas the previous when ampersand was always required, a lot of stuff wasn't ambiguous, but we've introduced this partial ambiguity, right? That's when now we're having to talk about like idents and remembering that you can't just nest a div without an and that's introduced a lot of potential parsing errors and just errors in general. So we're gonna have to work out a lot of these edge cases and write tests for them since we kind of complicated the syntax a little bit. We made it easier for authors, but we complicated the implementation details. What's next is also we need folks to try it out. So and participate in the conversations, which people have been good at participating in the conversations. You can try it out with post CSS. You can try it out in Canary. So a lot of tools have already updated their spec following nesting preprocessor transformations to work with this new spec, which is kind of cool. We also need to teach DevTools how to look at it, which I was just jamming with a DevTools designer today working on what that's gonna look like to have DevTools represent nesting. Whereas right now it just sort of is in the styles pane all crossed out looking silly. So if you try it out today and it looks like it's not working in the styles pane, but your styles are applying, that would be because the DevTools are completely inexistent for this feature so far. And what? Yeah, yeah, we're working on it. Depends on what you're listening to this show. That's true. Hey, maybe by the time it comes out we'll have some DevTools, we'll see. In November, 2022, everything breaks in DevTools. And then the last thing that's next is we gotta find more ways to have it be as enjoyable as we can. So we've articulated today this relaxing of the syntax that this is just nesting version one. You could expect a nesting module two to come out later and nesting module three, each iteration, adding features, more sugar, it's sweeter, it's more enjoyable to use, all that sort of good stuff. So we're not done just cause nesting one is heading towards completion. It doesn't mean we will be done. So that's where nesting is headed. Yeah, that's a good wrap. And thank you, Adam, for bringing nesting into our lives. I just poured water on it. Tab had planted all the seeds, it looked solid and it just was kind of a little dormant. And I was like, Tab, can I show up and just help you carry this? Love. But that's all we have for our rundown on the current state of CSS nesting. Thank you for joining us. This was a fun episode. Yeah, if you have any questions we'd love to answer them on the show. Tweet us with the hashtag CSS podcast. I'm at Yuna, that's at UNA. And I'm at ArgyleLink, A-R-G-Y-L-E-I-N-K. Your question can help a lot of people. A lot of people are gonna wanna know about these nesting edge cases and gotchas. So go ahead and ask away. And if you like the show, please give us a review on whatever podcast app you're using or share this podcast with a friend or a coworker because those reviews help other people discover our show. And that means that we get to spend more time making it and delivering cool stuff for you in audio form. You know it. Thanks y'all. Look forward to your questions. We'll see you next time. Bye. Bounc. Bounc. Bounc. Bounc. Bounc. Bounc. Bounc. We have some outro music I think we do. Something like that.


Welcome to another update, I'm Karen from Carleton, Beijing, Trader Relations. US jobless claims edge lower by 10.2 uptick in filings. We found out that the UK manufacturing output contracted at the fastest pace in almost seven and a half years, and that the eurozone manufacturing downturn deepened during December. On Friday, we have the German unemployment change and consumer price index, as well as the ISM US Employment and Manufacturing for December. Today, I'm looking at the dollar yen pair, which has been dropping sharply for the past five trading days, and it just tested the lower band of the daily Ichimoku Cloud. While the drops can be supported here, a break below the Ichimoku Cloud will confirm a medium-term downtrend towards 107 and 106 respectively. Of course, trading in the financial markets involves a risk of loss, and it should only trade the money that you can afford to lose. If you liked this video, give it a thumbs up and subscribe to the Tick Mill YouTube channel. I'll get back to you with more updates next week.


Trends are changing every year, but video trends are changing by the month and us creators have to keep up Whether you're an online video creator or have video clients. This video is for you Let's be honest here. Our generation's attention span has been reduced to a 15 second cat video on tiktok Because of this social media platforms know that they need to prioritize short form content to keep their viewers entertained Now how can all this information be applicable to your content creation game, right? So the thing is short form vertical content actually drives traffic to your longer form content It's similar to how movie trailers do for the next big blockbuster Why wouldn't you want to be making the short form commercials for your longer form video? If you haven't started already here are some tips to get you started with short form content Repurposing old videos a secret that a lot of people don't think about is that you don't actually need to produce new content You probably already have like 10 pieces of short form videos in the videos you've already created There's got to be some sort of golden there somewhere When you're writing a script for your main video Keep in mind also to write a short snippet for your shorter form videos to give your audience a bit more of a taste Of what the long main video can be with that said it would really help improve your videos if you learn some vertical filmmaking Okay quick question for you guys Have you been implementing reels shorts and tiktok into your content creation workflow? And if you have hasn't been showing you any positive results If you haven't started but you're thinking of starting then go ahead and check out our playlist over at art list Where we have tiktok style music the links in the description below now Let's talk about our next trend mobile filmmaking Because smartphones are becoming the primary tool for creating and viewing videos vertical content isn't going anywhere Vertical videos will become the new standard because the new generations will grow with them Can't believe I'm old enough to say that on top of that They might even perceive horizontal videos as the weird thing which is also it's that's weird for me to think about For those of you that have video clients most likely They're gonna want to take advantage of all the new trends and short-form videos and smartphone filmmaking modern marketing is moving more towards being Authentic and genuine with your end user or your audience regardless if you create original content or you have video clients Check out which plan works for you on our list Mobile filmmaking isn't only democratizing shooting your videos, but also editing them as well Your phone is literally now a full film studio from concept to production and all the way through the edit Here's a short list of some of the apps that you can use to start and finish your videos using just your phone That's insane to me. We have studio binder and shot list for pre-production filmic pro for production Luma fusion and premiere rush for editing the next trends a little bit out of my skill set So I sat with my friend Tom Cowles from FX home to talk a little bit about some motion graphics Here's how that call went. Okay, so let's talk a little bit about predictions for motion graphics trends Do you think that in 2022 people can use to more optimize their videos and ride that wave? Yeah, the big ones I think are gonna be around this year are glitch transitions that camcorder overlay that you see quite a lot Kinetic typography specifically with Likrifying typography and making it look like sticky and slimy and as well as I think fish eye might be kept making a bit of a Comeback as well in terms of like a filter making that look as wide and as crazy as possible They're also gonna be the the type of tutorials that we're gonna be doing on our channel the FX home and You know, they're they're all for our video software hip film as well as emerge our photo editor as well So come and follow us everyone Next I sat with Jonathan Vardy the creative director here at Artlist He's responsible for all the banger commercials you guys have seen 3d is becoming more and more available and more and more Is it easy to get into today? Anybody can do it. We're probably gonna see a lot of animation done by dying using like a real engine Crazy render in real time With like link to facial capturing and motion capture and what steps do you think I could take maybe something a bit more of people Like me who don't really know what they're doing are kind of it's kind of scary It's kind of daunting you have to make a choice there Which tool will you be using because you're not gonna learn all the software? I think that I would probably go with blender probably choose blender and I'm relaunching And if you're looking to get into 3d for your videos that go check out our grid where we have some pretty awesome 3d clips The links in the description. Hello behind-the-scenes Ezra again I have another question for you guys. What trends have you been seeing in 2022? And which ones do you want to be using for your own videos or films? It could be connected to music styles, camera movements, gear or no gear whatsoever Let's help each other down in the comment section and make this 2022 the year that we let our freedom flag fly Try saying that five times fast. Thank you guys so much for watching and we'll see you in the next video. Bye


Hello and let's talk about the so-called reform in the banking sector. Last week, the internal working group of the Reserve Bank of India submitted a report which has alarmed experts in the field. A key recommendation in this report was that big corporates and industrial houses be allowed to be promoters of private banks. Now this has led to an outpouring of criticism in an area which few noticed otherwise. For instance, former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan and former RBI Deputy Governor Viral Acharya in a joint article called it, perhaps a bit politely, a bad idea. We are staring at the prospect of some of the biggest business houses in the country which already have monopolies in many sectors, being able to enter the field of banking and have a control on the flow of credit as well, something that might only strengthen their monopolies. So across the world, as the chorus rises against the crimes of big private banks, India sets out to set up more of them. We talked to journalists on India Chakravarthy on this issue. Thank you, Arindu, for joining us. So first question, we saw the RBI's latest announcement. A very basic elementary question. Do we need more banks right now? We can come to what the private sector does. But right now, is there a need for actually more banking infrastructure, so to speak? Banking infrastructure, yes, in the sense of having more branches in maybe rural areas and the smallest of urban centers. But do we need more banks for that? I have no idea whether that is needed. Considering that the government actually thinks that merging public sector banks is a good idea. So they want to reduce the number of public sector banks, why they need more private sector banks, I don't know. Exactly. So that's the most interesting or maybe scary aspect of the announcement, the fact that the private sector is being brought in big time into this. And we know that for a long time, I mean, at least in the 70s and the 80s and then at least until the mid 90s, bank nationalization was considered like one of the most significant things the Indian government had done. And whereas what we saw over the past maybe 15, 20 years, is that there's a lot of, say, scorn port in the private sector. This whole thing about, sorry, public sector, that they're inefficient. Oh, it's government. It's not at the cutting edge of technology, your methods and stuff like that. But what service exactly and how would you, for instance, even keeping today's context distinguished between the kind of services the public sector banks provided. Whereas what the private sector banks have been doing. So I think when we talk about private sector banks being more efficient than private sector public sector banks being inefficient, you go there and they say, which still obviously does happen. It's not as if it doesn't happen. But this is all, you know, things that people like us care about. Right. We go to a private sector bank and we have a service manager or something like that who help us maybe say, do you want tea and stuff like that? Right. And ultimately they'll be as efficient or as inefficient as anyone else. But it just isn't a condition environment. People look more smartly dressed. They address you in a better way and they charge you for that. Right. So your minimum balance is going to be much higher to get any of those services in a public sector, private sector bank. People tend to forget that that is effectively a certain amount of money lost out. Right. But forget about that. So you're paying that to that private sector bank to keep a minimum balance every month so that you get that service. Right. Now the question is why don't these private sector banks go and work, set up offices in the rural areas? Why don't they ever provide loans to risky projects? Why don't they give farm loans? We should ask those questions. The entire logic of nationalizing banks is precisely that because private sector banks, which are all there, 14 big commercial banks were nationalized in 1969. They were all sitting there. They didn't give any loans to farmers. They didn't give any loans to priority sectors. Private companies which were associated with those banks, essentially took loans and gave it to each other. Now, as Vivek Kaul has written recently and he's quoted a committee, I think which was overseen by Chandrasekhar in 1967. You know Chandrasekhar at that time, who became prime minister later on was one of those young Turks who was on the side of, who was considered to be left in the Congress. And Chandrasekhar's committee report showed that about, if you take bank directors, right? These directors were common. They were people who sat on bank boards and they sat on another 1100 odd companies, private company boards. And these same people, if you looked at the direct and indirect loans and advances given to these directors and their affiliates, that accounted for more than a quarter of all outstanding loans at that time. So if you think about it, that is what private sector banks were doing. They were nationalized because they were not lending to anyone other than their own cronies, right? Most of the loans were given to them. And we know what that means, right? Because you know Prashant, when I was a child, I used to think that banks are meant to keep your money safe, right? Because if you kept it at home, it'll get stolen. So you put it in the bank. So they'll keep it safe. So you don't have to worry about a thief or a robber coming into your house at night. And I was pretty surprised when I learned that, I think I was maybe seven, six, seven years old when I learned that interest is paid on what you put in a bank. So not only was the bank keeping your money safe, they were actually paying it for you. It's only later that I realized that it takes our savings and give it to someone else. They charge a higher interest rate on the loan they're giving and give us a lower interest rate on the money we are depositing. And that gap is what a bank earns, right? So that is when we talk about an individual bank. But think of the economy as a whole. Banks are an instrument or a medium through which all capital flows in modern economies, right? So our savings becomes the base on which banks lend money. There is a debate whether that is what the banks lend. I would say that that is the base on which banks create money to lend it up, right? But let that aside, anyone who controls the finances in the banking system has an advantage over anyone else. Like let's think of a company which has, you know, there's a tender route to build a four-way highway, right? Four-lane or a six-lane highway between let's say a 10-15 kilometer stretch, right? Now these are not things that a company has resources to build. So they'll have to take a loan. So let's say there's a tender route and four companies are competing with each other and one of them owns a bank, right? They know that they'll get an easy and cheap loan at maybe 6% to build this along-term loan at 6%. Their cost of financing, their cost of interest cost is lower than the remaining three companies. So when they file the tender, they can actually say that our costs are lower and win the contract. So we know what competitive advantage anyone who controls credit has in their economy. And we know that despite the fact that there are, you know, big corporates and big industrialists cannot own banks, right? I mean, despite that they get loans on priority. A farmer doesn't, right? A farmer can't repay a one-crore loan. Their house is taken away. Their tractor is taken away. They're threatened and you can't pay back a 2,000-crore loan. You live in Kensington in London. So that's the great difference. So we know despite all this, there is nothing that RBI or any regulatory system has been able to stop when it comes to cronies being given money, easy loans, right? And this exploded from 2011 to 2014 was a huge period. And there was big talk about this being stopped by and we know that this is actually increased in the Modi period. It's not reduced. The number of what is called bad loans, money which is not likely to come back, right? That has increased dramatically. Who has that money? These big corporates have it. Now you're saying these same people should be allowed to control public funds, public savings. I mean, it is ridiculous given that till now, the RBI is trying to take money out of these people. Exactly. Right. So in this context, what we are basically seeing also, I mean, what here is the logic, do you think? It's in the sense of like you pointed out, this is such a fundamental contradiction here on the one hand.  And this is of course a campaign issue. The amount of political capital, the BJP for instance made out of this was immense. And on the other hand, we have the policy direction, which goes exactly in the opposite way. So the logic, if there is any, hasn't been given in the report, right? So they've been pretty, what should I say, stingy with logic. They've kept it to themselves, the committee. Because all they're saying is that internationally, you know, industrial houses are allowed to run banks. There's no reason it shouldn't happen in India. These people who have big companies have the experience to run things efficiently. They should be allowed. They're so experienced that they've not been able to return 10 lakh crores or more than that. Right. To the banks that had taken loans from, but they can run new banks. What is ridiculous? And seriously, you know, anyone who reads the report would be surprised. Is that the report itself says that the experts, they consulted, except for one, everyone said that big corporate shouldn't be allowed to run banks. Exactly. Right. Each of the experts except one, right, said that big corporate shouldn't be allowed. Because India's corporate, Indian corporates, you know, if you look at Indian companies, corporate governance is very poor. Exactly. The experience of credit being given to them and not being returned is a lot. We know that they will pass it on to related parties, which means that their cronies, friends, and their own front companies, they'll give these loans. That's the danger. There's a danger if their businesses, if their businesses fail, then that contagion will infect the bank itself. Right. So all these objections have been raised and these are familiar objections have been raised to this RBI committee. And the RBI committee completely knows it and says that they should be allowed to... All it says is that the laws should be changed so that there can be more oversight, so that related party transactions cannot take place. Related party means that you can't give it to a company that you own or relative or whatever, that you can't give it on easier terms. Now, how difficult is it for four big corporates to own banks and lend to each other? Can you stop that? Exactly. If you have no industrial house, which owns a bank will ever get a loan? You can't. So it is...  Right. And there's another thing in there in the report, which is significant. So here is one part, Prashant, where public money, public resources is being essentially collected and handed over to the private sector. And we know that there is a word for that when you take public money and give it to the private, to the richest. Any public resource, anything that is owned by the public, when you give it to the richest few in the country, do you know what that word is? It's a famous English word. The word is economic... No, it's called economic reforms. Right. That's what it is called. I was a bit wise. Right. So when you have to give it to the rich, what you call it, you call it economic reforms. Because as soon as you call it reforms, we have 35 years of media bombardment saying reforms are fantastic. It's going to lead to growth. The poor will become rich. 35 years of the poor becoming poorer makes no difference to people. So the way to spin it is always to call it reform. You look at any newspaper headline, it says watershed reform in banking sector. Right. Massive reform in banking sector. What is this reform? This reform is essentially going back to the pre-1969 era where banks used to fail, where cronies used to keep all the money. But a few big companies controlled all finance in this country through the banking system. That is what is being called reform. So literally, in my mind, that is the first part that you're essentially handing over public savings and the ability to create, generate money because a loan essentially generates new cash to a few companies. You're saying governments can't do it. RBI can't do it. Let the companies do whatever they want. The second part of this process, of course Prashant, is to, you know, currently in RBI's guidelines say that a promoter cannot hold more than 15%. I think then exception has been made in the case of Kotick-Mahindra Bank where Kotick I think holds 26%. I might be wrong, but I think he's been given more time or an exception RBI has made. This committee says that that should be the norm for all private sector banks. Why is the 15% rule there so that control, even if a private promoter promotes a bank, they should not have massive control over it. Public control over the board. So the maximum they can have is one out of seven board seats, right? And maybe a, of course, control over management, right? But 26% means one out of four. Your control increases significantly, right? Public control reduces. The report itself says that in Canada, I think beyond a threshold, the entire bank becomes a public holding company. So I'm saying that these are inbuilt issues. The RBI's committee not only goes against what its expert says and says that private sector, big corporates, big industries should be allowed to promote new banks, but also said they should be allowed to hold 26%, not 15%. So not only do you give them control over the four of capital, you now give them bigger control over the bank itself, right? So essentially you're promoting monopolies. This is now becoming a country where every public policy is aimed at promoting a few monopolies. That is all it has become. Right. And it's really ironic because we've seen a lot of private banks in the recent past failing. And across the world, we see this, you know, this outrage that has developed against big banks, I mean. Yes, absolutely. It's not even a particularly leftist thing. Even in the right, big banks are just becoming an issue so publicly. We saw the 2008 crisis, of course, but even now, the kind of policies that these banks are creating, the amount of debt they're generating, it's become a sole point for people across the world. And in India, we're actually reversing the kind of policies which maybe prevented these more big banks from emerging. I think everyone in India, the India's capitalist class knows that there is nothing to be gained from making things of creating services, right? There's no demand in this country.  Also, they're not interested in buying Indian stuff, right? So if I have a lot of money, I don't want to buy an Indian TV. I don't want to buy Indian-made car. I don't want to buy anything that is Indian, right? So there is no way for you to actually expand that market. The only thing you can do is move into finance and that is why all these people who have reached the threshold of their growth have started contracting their businesses. This is interesting because Prashant, you know, this particular, the last quarter, which is the September quarter, right? Most of it was under partial lockdown, only a little bit had opened. India's manufacturing sector, right? India's listed companies, 4,000-odd companies which have been worked out by Mahesh Vyas of CMI. They've had their record profit It is the highest profit they've ever had since quarterly results have been a norm in India. The highest they've ever had in the middle of lockdown. Was it because they sold more? No, the sales are down. They've simply cut costs. They've simply reduced the number of people they hire, reduced the amount of things they use. They've tightened their belts by reducing employment all over. So the share of profit has gone up sharply. The share of wages has gone down. We know, again, CMI's data shows us that employment might have recovered, but income has still gone down below the April levels. So average incomes have gone down sharply. Wages and salaries have gone down sharply. That is going to have a multiplier effect on the amount of money you can buy. So what do you do? The best way for India's richest, the owners of capital, to continue to make money is either to get government contracts in the future. And I think there are only a few companies which are going to end up getting that. Two or three, you know, AA companies. Anything which starts with an AA will get it. And then go into finance. Move into finance. Finance is the best place to be, right? Because finance has its own life. Because in the stock markets, if a company sacks 15% of its people, its valuation goes up. It doesn't go down. So that's how it is. Money is flowing. So money is out there. It is going to go somewhere. It's going into the markets. It's going into the banking system. It's going to bond trading, trading of futures, you know, commodities and stuff like that. That is going to continue. That is one of the key reasons India's capitalist caste wants control over finance. That is why you'd see every time we hear not only a bank privatization, but also private big corporate being allowed to get into banking. This is what is happening. And in a very blatant manner. So just continuing the trend of policy where this is probably the most pro-corporate friendly government that India has ever seen. It's ever seen for that matter.  It is the most big business friendly, the most monopoly friendly, the most oligopoly friendly government that we've seen ever. It doesn't care about corporates. It doesn't care about the 4,000 companies. It cares about 40 companies, maybe four companies, right? It is a government which believes that only two or three companies. Maybe it is, I don't know, maybe somewhere in the head, they're thinking about the Japanese Zhaibatsu or the Korean Chai Ball. Maybe they want to build that kind of thing. I don't know whether that is the model, because that's not public to us, because the rhetoric is, you know, equality and access to everyone. So that's the rhetoric. So on the one hand, we see four or five big people controlling all public resources and dole being given to those who will vote, the bottom 30%, who are out of the economic system have always been. So those who are in this 70% are getting increasingly squeezed. And I don't know how long that can continue. Absolutely. Thank you so much for talking to us. Thanks a lot. That's all we have time for today. We'll be back on Monday with more news from the country and the world. Until then, keep watching NewsClick.