Fear The Chorizo

It's important to continue investing/contributing to retirement accounts consistently through peaks and valleys of the market - eventually it does rebound and even if your account is losing money during a downturn, you're at least buying shares at discounted prices that will realize bigger gains as the market rebounds at some point. I shifted a pretty large chunk of my retirement account to essentially a money market stable value fund earlier this year when it was apparent both the bond and stock markets were going to suck for an extended period of time. Granted that fund is getting dinged by inflation like everything else, but its dollar value hasn't changed and at least it didn't get further crushed by being in a stock or bond market diving firmly into bear territory. I'm not going to try and be perfect predicting the true bottom and best time to shift that part of my portfolio back into stock funds, but the way things are shaping up economically I don't have an immediate sense of urgency to pull the trigger, either.

Reminder that q1 gdp was already negative, so by the end of June we are probably already in a recession by its definition of 2 straight quarters of declining activity. Also, the monthly inflation rates are based on year over year comparisons of each month - since inflation really started ramping up after the last covid stimulus package printed a few trillion out of thin air again last summer, the inflation numbers will probably start dropping into the 3-4% range as early as when July gets reported simply because they have nowhere to go but down when they've been setting fresh 40 year highs...but even that is too much for this economy.

Wages aren't up anywhere close to actual inflation. I'd much rather get a 3% wage increase when the CPI/inflation is 2-4% compared to a 6% raise when inflation is 8-10%. Give it a month or two - there will still be "now hiring" signs left in the doors of businesses that close down. Most of those positions companies are looking to hire are the result of staff switching jobs and leaving openings, not due to economic expansion as we reached a post-pandemic equilibrium. Tech industries are already starting to announce layoffs. The labor participation rate remains on the low side historically, too. Not too many of us have been around long enough to experience a US economy that truly is experiencing stagflation, but unfortunately I think we're all about to find out how much it sucks.

Bad news: Inflation, gas prices That list is about to get a whole heckuva lot longer - they basically have to force a bad recession in order to get a handle on inflationary/supply chain and energy pressures coupled with deficit spending and dramatic low level wage hikes conducted over the past few years. Home sales are about to come to a screeching halt due to rising mortgage rates and while I don't see home values plummeting like 2009-2011 because housing market isn't going to be the reason for the incoming recession, removing that economic contribution is going to hurt many industries. Consumers are indeed still spending but are needing to burn through savings or even worse use run up credit card debt to cover basic needs - discretionary spending will take a big hit later this year, too. I saw that the average family is having to pay roughly $1,000 more per month to cover basic living expenses (gas, utilities, food, shelter) now than they were at the start of 2021....the exact figure varies from state to state, but it's just not sustainable to shift that much money to things without sacrificing/limiting other discretionary spending. The entertainment/restaurant industry is going to get hammered again once the initial pent up pandemic-related demand wears off this summer with trips that were pushed back the last few years. Specific to what the market will wind up doing, I think it's going to get worse before it gets better, because there really isn't a safe haven to turn to when you have high inflation, stumbling corporate profits, and yet to be resolved supply chain/energy production issues. In short, I feel very fortunate to be nowhere near retirement age right now...and even more fortunate to not already be on a fixed income retirement like my parents.

If GB wants to target a WR in round 2, they have plenty of ammo to package one of their 2nds + a mid/late round pick to move up and get their guy at the start of another run at that position. Without even looking at who's left on the board and current draft order for round 2, I'd expect the Packers to go receiver and O-line/TE with their two 2nds and then BPA left on their board with their 3rd round pick - assuming none are used as part of a trade. However, there are some very intriguing edge/OLB options that will likely be available at 53 if the Packers have them rated super high and just want to troll Twitter with another defensive front 7 pick.

Any time a draft goes on a run of players at a certain position in Round 1, you don't want to be on the end of that big run and wind up reaching - the better option is to identify what that run opens up in terms of talent at other positions falling into your lap. That's exactly what the Packers did last night. It wouldn't surprise me if GB winds up signing for a veteran WR and even using draft picks today to trade for an impact veteran WR. After Brown got dealt yesterday, there are still several wideouts looking to be traded/paid that GB could go after, too. You don't have to be a 1st round pick to wind up being a great wide receiver in the NFL - the Packers of all teams know that all too well. Thinking there's going to be a day 2 pick that knows how to run some pass patterns who will wind up being selected tonight. As of this morning, GB's defense doesn't have a weak spot.

Putting Wyatt next to Clark in the middle is a pretty solid way to build a defense from the inside out

Gute's favorite fruit is most definitely a peach - by the bushel baskets

For one, Walker has 4 inches and 20 lbs on Dean and is a much better fit in GBs scheme

Packer defense has consistently struggled to stop the run and cover TE's in the passing game. Walker is a solution to both problems and he's got some bonifides as an occasional edge rusher or blitzer.

When the Packers have traded up early in the draft, from what I remember there's been no rumors about it until you'd see the Packer helmet surprisingly show up in the 'on the clock' graphic right as they were announcing the trade. Having 2 first rounders at the start of this draft is a different animal (particularly with 9 more picks in later rounds behind it), so I'm expecting an active first two nights from Gute - if he does trade up and make a move that reduces the 4 picks in the first two rounds I think it's going to be way up. Otherwise it could be a bunch of deck chair shuffling with trades as other teams move in and out around them and they wind up with two-three mid to late 1st rounders between #18-32.

I'm hoping the Packers pick 3 times in Round 1 by the end of tonight - using a mix of 2nd/mid round draft picks and perhaps a player. I'd be happy if they wound up picking 4 players in the first two rounds, but would be ecstatic getting 3 first rounders with that 5th yr option in their contracts. Also wouldn't shock me if after tonight they picked twice in round one but no longer have some of their 2nd/3rd round picks or a backup quarterback - because they just dealt Love and draft capital for an impact veteran pass catcher. The exciting part to me is how many different ways tonight could go that wind up with me being happy at decisions made - seems like a really good year to have a bunch of picks in the top 60!

Given what is going on this offseason with stud WRs who were drafted after the 1st round demanding market-setting contracts or wanting to be traded headed into their 4th NFL season, if the Packers hold onto that #28 pick I can see them going WR or somewhat of a talented but raw player that would benefit the team greatly to have that 5th year option on their rookie deal. Because of this, it also wouldn't surprise me to see the Packers package one of their 2nd rounders with a player or future draft capital to move into round 1 for a 3rd bite at the 1st round apple. That 5th year option gives the late 1st round picks a ton more value than the top half of round 2 simply for contract/team control certainty.

Gotcha - my main point is this time of year there are always a handful of media draftnick darlings that rocket up boards due to measureables. Sometimes they pan out to be great NFL players - but many times they flame out, particularly if part of the physical advantage they have playing against inferior and immature college players evaporates as soon as they walk into their first NFL minicamp. Specific to Raimann - watched some game tape of him in a 2021 game against a very average Miami of OH defense, and it was apparent that he struggled with pass pro against speed on the edge. Despite his frame and wingspan he seemed to block much more with his body/size advantage against lineman that won't be playing on Sundays (and any other day NFL plays) than with hands behind extended arms. Initial punch on pass blocking was more like absorbing the lineman instead of stopping his momentum with his hands. If a lineman in the NFL lets a defender get into his chest, he's beat either for a holding penalty or he's going to give up pressure. His athleticism makes him very intriguing - but Raimann is very much a project.

I didn't realize a 24 yr old converted TE has already made the NFL's all pro team after playing a couple seasons of offensive line at central michigan. He's projected to eventually be a good starting tackle in the NFL, but he's still very much a development prospect and could just as easily bust out of the league than become a perennial pro bowler. With all the picks GB has in the late first-mid second, Raimann is an intriguing option if he falls in their lap with their late 1st round pick. Any team that drafts him in the first round has to view him as a development project that probably shouldn't be starting his 1st season despite the fact he's already in his mid-20s - which would burn at least one of those rookie contract years up.

Raimann is the type of player that can rocket up draft boards late in the game, and then wind up either becoming a great player or bust depending on what type of coaching he receives and whether his mentality/commitment to get better allows him to realize the potential his physical tools project. Would I be happy to see the Packers draft him late in Round 1 or Round 2? Sure - but I'm guessing there are lineman with a similar athletic profile needing a bit more development that aren't getting as much helium who could be mined out in the middle rounds should the Packers place a higher value on players at other positions to pick in rounds 1 and 2 in this year's draft. Regarding O-line draft prospects, one good way to get quality talent in the middle rounds is if you have scouts that can identify toolsy players who don't have the established on-field pedigree or game tape to prove they are going to be quality NFL players. Bakhtiari was a perfect example of that, as he was a 4th round pick that scouts viewed more as a development project who probably came out 1 year early.

Use those extra picks on players, not on positioning to move up. Doing so also frees up a bit more cap space this year to go get veteran receiver talent on shorter term deals without further screwing their cap situation up 2-3 years out.

I'm going to substitute OT for TE. Kelly is a FA. Nijman is a RFA (not exclusive rights) and I think he played well enough at LT that someone will make an offer that the Packers won't be able to fit under their cap. Turner is in the last year of his deal and might have to be a cap casualty if they manage to retain Nijman. And Bakh has questions surrounding his health and ability to get back on the field. Point being, Kelly and I think one of Nijman or Turner aren't back. I don't know if the Packers view Newman as having RT potential, but if they lose Nijman they will need to draft a tackle to develop. As for TE, they have Deguara who was for all intents and purposes still a rookie last year plus Dafney and Davis. I think Tonyan will be back because coming off of the injury and starting the season on the PUP there won't be a strong demand for him as a FA; I think he'll be back relatively cheap on a one-year deal. I get the viewpoint of needing more lineman, and agree - but I still feel TE is a bigger immediate roster hole than OL with the uncertainty of how soon Tonyan is back healthy with that knee. I'm basing that off an assumption that Bakh is ready for the 2022 regular season - a big assumption but frankly one the Packers have to also make considering his huge contract. Also hoping Jenkins is able to be back at some point next season. I do hope Deguara takes that next step, but I'm anticipating Lewis is gone, and they need another TE that is an effective run blocker on the roster.

I think the next month needs to unfold before we all know what blatant roster holes need filling and exactly where the Packers are picking.... Having said that, WR, TE, DL, and LB are three position groups of notable need that I'd hope the Packers focus a good chunk of their draft towards.

If you have plenty of money to put down 20% and still have a ton of reserve funds I think most should avoid PMI. Sure - but if I were a 1st time homebuyer in my current neighborhood in 2016, that would have meant needing to come up with ~$60K at closing to avoid a PMI payment of roughly $115 a month on a 3.5% mortgage. Instead we put 10% down, dealt with the nominal PMI payment for a couple years that wound up totaling $3K in extra money out the door over that time, and got rid of it after the home appreciated in value by almost $200K. Now in our neighborhood, 20% down would be roughly $100K for the same home - had we stayed in our previous home and location, there's no way our current home would be affordable to us. I'd add the caveat that part of our move coincided with my wife opting to leave the workforce for a few years to enjoy as much time with our young kids (and one on the way at the time) as possible before they got older, so we opted to not make the perfect financial move in order to improve this time as a young family - different strokes for different folks, and as long as you're happy with the reasons why various financial decisions are made it's all good!

You'd be surprise how much lower monthly PMI is if you can swing 10% down vs just 5% - I think people trying to save at least 20% down before even thinking about buying a house may actually cost themselves in the long run when home prices are increasing in markets faster than people can save. If you're in the right market you may be better served buying the house sooner than later at a great interest rate without having a full 20% down, deal with the PMI payments for a year or two and after the home appreciates in value work with your lender to try and get PMI removed based on an updated appraisal.

I might win the prize for buying a home at the wrong time - we bought our 1st home in IL spring of 2008, with a 0 down, 6% 30 year fixed - after the fact we realized we may have been one of the last people to get a $0 down mortgage because it was right as the bubble started popping. The thing we did do right is we didn't listen to our realtor/mortgage broker when they told us we could afford a home in the $500K pricerange (lol), and instead shopped at the pricepoint just over half that much. Our loan terms were terrible (rates were much higher then), but we were able to make significant extra principle payments the first few years before our kids started showing up to plow through the worst portion of that 30 yr mortgage quickly. Doing that for just a couple years helped get the percentage of our typical monthly mortgage payment dedicated to principle elevated much quicker than had we just paid our mortgage on autopilot, and a refinance 3 years in got our rate down to ~4% on a 20 year term without changing what our monthly mortgage/PMI payment was. Would have loved to eliminate all PMI during the 1st refi but the house value just wasn't there due to the crash, but at least that amount was reduced. We were thankfully able to sell our home for the same price we bought it in 2016 and used the accumulated equity for a big downpayment on our current home in MN so we no longer have a mortgage with PMI and it's at a great rate - also picked the right time to leave IL, as the home value of our 1st place is roughly the same as it was when we bought it in 2008, and our current home has basically doubled in value ~6 years after moving here. At some point home values in this market will stop skyrocketing, but I agree that another housing crash like 2008-2011 isn't going to happen - rent prices are actually outpacing home value increases in most markets, so people waiting on the sidelines are winding up having to pay more for nothing while they wait to start building property equity.

He won't be DFA'd, simply because the September roster expansions will allow for him to stick with the club and be their option when there's multiple lefty hitters due up in the 6th or 7th inning of a tight ballgame. Unless Norris turns it around significantly or if a series matchup warrants, I doubt he sees a postseason roster at this point, though.

I believe that's very much the case with Olson...and I can see plenty of room on the Tigers' 40 man roster for him. Hell, the Tigers might actually just throw him in their own pen in Detroit next year. Looking at it that way, the Brewers traded away a promising arm they probably had little chance of retaining through this offseason because of the rule 5 draft issue for someone that bolsters their MLB pen. Falls right in line with some of the other recent deadline trades involving Brewer pitching prospects (Ortiz, Medeiros, etc).

Relief pitchers are going for way more than typical this deadline, it seems. It's the bats that teams are getting pennies on the dollar for. The fact that the Brewers seemingly gave up more value for Daniel Norris than they did Eduardo Escobar is somewhat crazy to me, but the market is what it is. Reliever rentals pretty much always get seemingly better returns in terms of value than hitter rentals at the deadline....to me this year's Rizzo trade to the Yankees is the lone exception, but my gut says the Cubs got actual prospect value from the Yankees because they picked up the rest of Rizzo's salary to keep them from exceeding the luxury tax payroll threshold so they can spend like drunken sailors in free agency this offseason again.