CheezWizHed

I've never had MLB.TV do that to my Roku. But Amazon Prime does it too often. Hulu on occasion. I think it is more a Roku issue than MLB. TV. I've read that uninstalling, rebooting, and reinstalling fixes it, but I've not tried it yet.

He explained it in the post. So essentially the math is something like 90 pythag wins in 2023, minus 4 wins from SP, minus 6 wins from RP and plus 6 wins from offense comes in around 86 wins in 2024. Frankly, last year wasn't projected to go over 90 wins either but we did. This year's variation is going to much higher too given all the youth we have playing this year. Anything between 75-90 wins isn't all that unlikely.

Yes, this is the main point people miss when looking at W/L and our starting rotation. Yes, pitching will be worse. But our offense will be better. And 84 wins is pretty significantly lower than last year. So it isn't like people expect this rotation to match last year's either.

Fresh, clean air with lots of oxygen. Remember that last year's rotation rarely included Burnes, Peralta, and Woody. It was often in shambles and held together with spit and bubble gum.

As will the Brewers themselves. For those with MLB.TV, I noted that last year (or maybe the year previous?) they added the feature of watching the game, but listening to the Radio broadcast instead. They sync it up pretty well even though the graphics and discussion don't match. But it is totally worth it to listen to Ueck call the game.

Agreed. Just a nice bonus if you are already on Tmobile.

I think us arm-chair GMs types have our "ideals" of what we want to do (e.g. my preference for drafting premium positions in the 1st round), but then there is the reality of running a draft live and being able to execute things under pressure. If the Packer's draft Cooper or Wilson, I guarantee you will see many fans jump out and complain they could've traded down an gotten that player 4 picks later (or whatever number, but I saw someone complain like this while wanting to move down 4 spots 🙄). But the reality is that often the team can't figure out a trade partner and are left drafting a player half a round (or full round) higher than some random online rating board simply because we knew he wouldn't last until the next pick. And we felt they were the best player in the next 32 picks. So you draft him higher and people complain they are a "reach"...which often they are not. Sometimes you simply don't have the option to get them a few picks later.

For those like me struggling to visualize it... here you go: https://x.com/ChrisVannini/status/1772613847473365036?s=20

Yes, I think Tom is actually better suited (size wise) for LT. So unless you plan to grab Alt or some other prototypical LT, I'd have Tom compete with Walker at LT and compete with a rookie at RT. Then pick the better pair. I tend to prefer picking the key spots in the first round: CB, WR, EDGE, OT, and QB. Picking a S, LB, DT, G, C, TE or RB in the first typically means the person has to be "special" to bring back the same value at that position. Surely, a DT with heavy pass rush capabilities will do that. Or a TE that moves like a WR. But those are pretty few and far between. It is much easier for people at those other spots to produce immediate value. So our need at those spots looks like: QB: almost nothing. Certainly not a 1st rounder WR: Could use that "#1 stud" type, but we have great depth and young talent Edge: Have 3 strong DEs, one good one on IR, and one decent development candidate. Hard to spend another 1st round here. CB: Alexander and Valentine is a good starting tandem. Assuming he can stay healthy, Stokes provides more upside than Valentine (or at least competition and a quality backup). You can always use more CBs, but we have decent depth. And last first round CBs (Kool-Aid and others) look pretty strong too. OT: We have Tom and Walker. Tom is pretty set at one position. Walker was good last year and may continue to grow and develop. But he is replaceable. And there is zero quality depth (some development pieces that might hit, but odds are low). So of those "key spots"... if I'm going to spend 4 draft picks to move up to the top of the draft, I'm going after someone like Alt.

I heard (but can't confirm personally) that they block you completely if they detect a VPN. So I suppose you need a VPN that can randomize their IP addresses so they aren't obviously a VPN. However, even without a VPN, you should be able to watch away games on MLB.TV.

This isn't an ad as I don't receive anything from T-mobile. More of a service to our forum to alert you to a good deal if you use Tmobile. You have from March 26th to April 2nd to claim your free season of MLB.TV. This can be claimed in the "T Life" app. Enjoy!

So much variation in what could be this year. It wouldn't shock me to see the team be under .500 given the youth we are leaning on and developing. But they could also be on par with last year's team if that youth adapts well. Several starting pitchers are going to be inning limited and there isn't a strong depth at this point. I'll say 84-78

Not to mention Wiemer at AAA and Bauers is able to cover the corners in a pinch. OF is one place we really could cover injuries well.

I tend to prefer the "more bites of the apple" approach. I know nothing about Mitchell, but you really have to be confident to give up that many "bites" for him. CB is a need, but not that big of one, IMO. If you were going up there for an LT that might make me rethink it.

Playing with draft simulators makes me think of a few things: - There are a lot of decent safeties and RBs in rounds 2-4. Off ball LBs are a touch less, but still decent depth. - Not many OTs outside of the first round. - Guards seem sprinkled around, but not plentiful.

I didn't say they'd all succeed in the role... 😉 And for my "optimism", I'm assuming a down year... a perfect time to develop younger talent. So maybe more a lemonade from lemons approach. If I were truly optimistic, I'd be expecting a 27 K game from Hall-to-Megill-to-Uribe! 😂

WTMJ 620 doesn't have the Packers? (I've not lived in the area for 20 years, but if not I'm surprised)

Sort of true... but this season, why wouldn't you try out a few guys and see who handles it well? No one likes to see Williams hurt, but might as well make the most of a bad situation and develop a few guys in that role instead of piling it on one.

It would be nice to see it charted by month too. By memory, I remember yelling at the TV during kickoff FAR more frequently in September than in December. Initially, I think last year's accolades either made him press more or made him feel like he was invincible and it resulted in really stupid KR attempts. That got better as the year went on and he looked much better late - with bigger legit returns too.

Since agents have multiple clients, it is really hard to verify that they are talking about one player vs another. Someone would be stupid to text or email a question like that. But a "hey, I got a question" on the phone after talking about another player would be hard to verify. You are right about the ethics of "if you do it for me, you will do it against me"... but that used to happen regularly. I would be surprised if it never happens now.

By 2024 BDay buddy = Carlos Maurera... younger than 3 of my 6 kids.

Congratulations to the winners! I hereby resolve to be more salty in this coming year to ensure I can compete for next year's prize!!! 😅

Maybe I'm wrong, but the tampering rules prevent the two sides from talking. Sure, teams will have a game plan of who they will target, the budget for those FAs, and a contract proposal. But you can't negotiate, send proposals, feel out how much they want, etc... It seems like many of these contracts are signed so quickly that it infers there was previous discussion already happening to get the two sides to a mutual understanding. Maybe the Vikings reacted quickly by reaching out to Rosenhaus and he gave a demand. Or maybe Rosenhaus reached out earlier and asked a "what if" question to know what the Vikings would offer if Jones was cut. Frankly, I find it a little weird that Jones didn't try for two years instead - unless Rosenhaus already knew people wouldn't offer it. Either way, just saying it doesn't happen because it is "illegal" is a bit silly... Yeah, New England didn't spy on other team's signs either. 😅

A) Rosenhaus knew he was being asked to cut Jones' salary. 2) Rosenhaus doesn't need to use another offer to negotiate the pay cut with the Packers. Just to know if he wants to accept it a pay cut or not. D) They created a "legal tampering" period because of all the illegal tampering that occurred. Yet, every year people sign massive contracts on the first day of legal tampering... do you really think people aren't illegally tampering again?

Maybe Bradbury improved, but he was getting run over 2 years ago. Packers (i.e. Clark) continued to just crush him. And the OL overall didn't give anyone time last year. The main reason Josh Dobbs was so successful was that people had to respect his legs. The OL let people rush through like wet tissue paper last year. Josh made them pay for it. Then Defenses realized they didn't need to rush him, went to containment mode to eliminate rushing lanes, and Josh couldn't throw well enough to win. Maybe individuals are decent on the line, but the sum total of the product continues to be bad.