Cool Hand Lucroy

Looks like 1.9 in salary with a 625k buyout or 4.1 million option for 2019. 3.2 in incentives. High ERA last year, but FIP thought he was much better. Considering his salary the last two seasons, this seems like a smart gamble. Hope he bounces back from injury and continues to get Ks.

Two winnable road games coming up. Need to take care of business at Rutgers tonight. Crazy to think this team has been giving serious minutes to Schlundt and Moesch, but that's where things are. And the funny thing is, I look at the rest of the league and, outside of MSU, Purdue, and Minnesota (who I don't think is that good but is definitely talented), I don't see any team I don't think the Badgers can beat. This could be a fourth-place B1G team again, though OSU is much more athletic and talented to my eye (still say that game at the Kohl was the worst performance I've seen from the team in a decade). Looking forward to Friday night Big Ten basketball.

I've really enjoyed the competitive nature of the BEAST so far. Not inconceivable that conference could get 7 or 8 teams ('Nova, Xavier, Seton Hall, Creighton, Providence, Marquette, Butler, St. John's?). I mean, that would be an 80% participation rate. Crazy. Marquette looks to me like a team that will go as far as their guards take them, especially w/r/t three-point shooting. A fun team to watch, for sure.

Steamer has Cain projected as worth 3.3 wins. That would probably make him the most valuable, PROJECTED player on the 2018 roster by WAR. I'd jump on a 3/45 deal. He'd only need to be worth what? 5.5 wins in three seasons to justify the worth? 4/60 is probably fair too. He's a really good player, and if the worst case scenario is having to lug around 15 million for one year in 2021, sign me up. I'd take that risk. Granted, it's probably got to come with moving at least Broxton and probably Santana for pitching. So, I guess, I'm a yes if. IF the price is right (capped out at something like 4/60) and IF it comes with other moves.

Hard to say much about the last few Badger games, but wins are good. The Chicago State performance was ugly. The thorough handling of Mass-Lowell yesterday was better. Obviously, neither of those teams are that good. Curious to see how the B1G goes. Home v. Indiana, road v. Rutgers, and then road v. Nebraska. I could really see anything from 3-0 to 0-3 and not be surprised. If they can win these winnable games, that might build some confidence heading into Purdue.

To those talking about PetCo as hitter-friendly, you may find this of interest: https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/mid-season-park-factor-update/ The idea is basically that PetCo is "misunderstood." It's perceived as being pitcher-friendly, but the San Diego marine layer sometimes aids offense rather than defense. Take it for what it's worth, but I think it adds another dimension to this...

Feels like this move is getting outsized attention because it's the first move by the Brewers in a flurry of Winter Meetings activity and it involves a name we all know. I doubt the FO thinks this is a big move. I'd be shocked if it was a lot of $. Maybe he sticks, maybe he doesn't, but it's certainly possible Yo can still get MLB hitters out. It's also possible he's bad. I don't see a lot to complain about or get excited about. Just another move that seems bigger because of timing/name recognition. Certainly hope Yo finds it again here. We'll see.

I'm with you. If the foul is on Davison, the signal is the same as for a moving (illegal) screen. That's what he's doing on the baseline, setting a screen. To call it a charge would indicate a change of possession. That said, the block motion is confusing down there. I don't know if it's technically the right call, but you'd think a push-off or elbow motion would be better. It's getting into the weeds of officiating mechanics, but it didn't look to me like there was any way that foul could have been called on Davison.

Yeah, we'll see what the next classes bring. With Trice out, this really is a freshman-dominant team, Happ excepted. Just haven't seen much from Iverson, Thomas, etc. A couple of random things: 1) Gophers got beat by 20 at Arkansas yesterday. I think the B1G is bad. Like actually not very good. MSU and Purdue are legit, I think, and the Gophers do have a boatload of talent. But who else is really good in league? I think Iowa looks bad. Northwestern seems to have regressed somehow. Maryland, OSU, and Michigan have potential but are pretty mediocre overall. Then there's Bucky, Nebraska, Penn State, Indiana, Illinois, and Rutgers. None of those teams are scaring anybody. 2) Jeff Levering been doing Play-by-Play for BTN. Nice to see him getting other work, though he's much better as a baseball guy IMO. Still, I've heard plenty worse.

I agree in the sense the this team looks way less athletic and capable of scoring than the teams they've played so far. It's tough for any of them to get their own shots. Folks mentioned the Junior class earlier, and that seems to be the trouble from my angle too. How much of that can be pinned on Gard? Who knows? Technically, that was Bo's last group, though GG was obviously part of the staff then and thus part of the process. Still, King, Davison, and Reuvers were all 4-star recruits. That was a highly rated class the Badgers got, and I think it's worth being patient. If the rest of this year fails to bring improvement and the team's in a similar spot next January, then I'll start to worry long-term.

Missing Trice and King today, maybe for a long time. Marquette shooting it really well and looking much athletic and skilled than the Badgers. Good for them. Hope they can stay competitive in the BEAST, always the most fun basketball conference for me. As for Wisconsin, looks like it's going to be a development year. It's funny how basketball works. Team played really well against Xavier, I though, and came awfully close to wins against good Baylor and UCLA teams. But you lose those and then struggle to refocus and suddenly you look real bad. Bottom third of the B1G bad. Still a long season, but it's hard to see how this turns into anything but a so-and-so took positive steps kind of season.

Good to get a road win in league last night. We'll see if Bucky can keep it up in Philly tomorrow. I'm not a huge believer in the "learning how to win" cliche, but it did seem to apply to the Badgers last night. They had a big lead, couldn't put PSU away, and then really had to luck into a win down the stretch (though they did show some defensive effort and come through with some hustle plays). Iverson had a great first half but disappeared a bit in half #2. Some big shots from King down the stretch were nice to see. Kobe in particular needs to get a bit more confident and assertive, I think. He looks a bit afraid to make a mistake sometimes, and maybe that's on the coaching staff, which tends to have a very short leash with freshman. FWIW, KenPom has UW with the 12th highest SOS so far this year (24th NC). He's also got the Badgers as one of the "unluckiest" teams so far with a 323 "luck" rating (yeah, I don't know if I buy this metric, either). 45 overall, which is higher than I would have thought. We'll see if they can rattle off a few to restore some faith. I was wrong about this team's skill level coming into the year. Now I'm trying to figure out if they're as bad as the OSU game or how much of this is the result of youth, a tough sched., lack of cohesion, etc.

This is one of the worst UW performances I've seen in the last ten years. I remember getting blown out by Maryland in the second round of the NCAAs in 2002, I think, but that team went on to win the NC. There was the loss to SW Mo. St. and blowing a lead against Georgia St. in the NCAAs too, but nothing where the team just failed to even look competitive. I guess I could be missing some crappy regular season game because these are by nature forgettable, but yeah. Ugly. It's probably best to try and consider this a development year at this point. The really disappointing thing right now, especially the last two games is stretches where there is so little effort, especially defensively. I trust Gard enough to make sure this team doesn't end up at Rutgers level of B1G embarrassment, but you have to wonder where the points are going to come from. I was wrong about this group, the guards in particular. Hope they advance, but it's clear from the early portion of the schedule that they're not ready yet.

I've been as optimistic about this team as anyone, but yeah, I'm starting to severely lower expectations. I really thought Trice was a better player than he's shown lately, and the contributions from anyone not named Happ (or Davison, last night excepted) have been near-null. It wasn't just the offensive performance last night (though it was horrible, lots of teams get stymied by the Virginia D), it was a lack of defensive rebounding and an inability to run effective sets in the halfcourt. Way too many TOs, lots unforced, in the second half. Pretty ugly all-around showing. I think folks are right about the Junior class. Khalil showed flashes in March last year, but he looks real limited right now. Thomas doesn't seem to have any offensive skills. AI is a no show, as is AVV. Pritzl is a horrible defender. Plus, no one can make shots. Of course, there aren't any profile-killing losses out there (I'd argue NW's drubbing vs. TT is way worse than any of our dings), and there are still chances to get non-con and conference wins (plus our noncon SOS is going to be real high). Downside is the Big Ten looks really mediocre this year (though maybe that gives the Badgers a chance to pile up top 100 wins rather than top 50 losses). Getting those wins is going to take a lot more cohesion, however. It looks like Gard is really trying to see who rolls well together out there and is coming up snake eyes. The staff will earn their money this year if things improve.

Youth showing in Kansas City. I think the starting lineup change shows Gard and Co. (including the players) are still figuring things out. I am trying to remember that Trice is just a sophomore. I expected him to a major contributor, and so far he hasn't really been there when they've needed him. And Iverson threw the ball away twice late tonight, which cost them. Plus missing free throws. Not a good week or so from him. I still think this is a good team. It's so early, and there are still good games on the schedule. Still a few chances for a big nonconference win or 3. Temple went undefeated in Charleston last week, so that road game becomes another opportunity. And of course the B1G schedule will give them lots of chances to prove they belong. I'm a little reminded of the 2015-2016 Badgers who started 8-8 with a home loss to Western Illinois and then rattled off a bunch of conference wins in a row to end up a possession away from the Elite Eight. 5 of the next 7 are against major conference teams (if you count the AAC, which I think deserves it with the addition of Wichita State), 3 of them on the road (true roadies too), 2 in conference. I don't know what's a reasonable expectation, but there'll be lots of chances to get big wins. 2-3 right now, and if they're even 7-5 heading into a stretch of what should be three Ws (GB, Chicago State, and Mass-Lowell) that's fine. The Nonconference SOS number will be high for the Badgers all year, which should help with the committee supposedly putting new emphasis on KenPom and other advanced metrics. In conference, they get Purdue, Michigan State, Northwestern, and Minnesota (probably the best four teams in the B1G, though NW might be overrated) all at home (plus roadies at MSU, Purdue, and NW). This is a TOUGH schedule, so if they learn lessons from this tourney, they're going to end up alright. Looking forward to being by turns annoyed, frustrated, optimistic, and thrilled, I suppose. Loving what Davison brings. Looking forward to King and Ford progressing.

Though it's never fun to lose, I thought the Xavier game should good progress for a young team. I wouldn't have laid points against a top-tier Big East squad, even at home, especially with only one proven scorer on the roster. Positives: Happ was awesome, passing, scoring, and generally impacting the game defensively. Brad Davison looked like a real competitor and quality secondary option. The chemistry between Iverson and Happ on give-and-go plays was evident. Negatives: Free throw shooting, of course. Van Vliet and King were both non-factors, failing to make any real impact during any possession. I would have given AI more minutes in the second half, as he played really solidly in half #1. He just seems more ready to contribute than AVV, who looks really, really soft to me. He's got skills but needs to be hitting shots or be isolated in the post. Trice was off. He missed open looks and didn't look like the guy who provided such a spark early last season. Pritzl was horrible defensively early. Overall: This team is going to be fine once it finds some balance. There are a lot of good role players right now, including Trice, Thomas (who looked strong against Xavier), Davison, etc. Lots of people capable of contributing. One or two of them need to step up to complement Happ. This stretch is a nice little test, with the MTE next week. Badgers get Baylor then UCLA/Creighton. Other non-conference tests looming in road trips to Virginia and Temple and the home dates with Marquette and perhaps even Western Kentucky. There is no lack of effort. I think this is a Sweet Sixteen contender with typical in-season growth and matchup luck.

Dominating performance against Yale. I'm surprised. Yale was missing one of its best players, but that's a solid Ivy League team, a team you'd expect to beat by 10 or 15 so wow. Excited for the big test against Xavier on Thursday.

Had a chance to watch the Stout exhibition. Granted, you can't tell much from a game like that, but a couple of observations. Van Vliet looks improved. Looking forward to seeing how he handles tougher competition. King is both talented and athletic. He could be really good. Ilikanen is in the doghouse, for sure. Davison can shoot, but his ballhandling looked really shaky, even against the Stout press. This team is going to be thin at point guard again, which is scary. Getting Trice healthy is going to be important. Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if Yale beats Wisconsin without Trice. With him, I feel much better about the Badgers' odds. Pritzl, King, Iverson, and whoever else plays the 2 or 3 are all going to have to hit 3s off the double. Happ is going to be doubled a lot, and this team probably goes as far as jump shooting takes them.

I want no part of Arrieta. I don't like the dip in velocity, and I worry about this year's HR rate, especially at Miller Park. Granted, everyone's giving up more homers now, but I'd rather spend the payroll flexibility elsewhere. Arrieta is a good pitcher and would be probably be solid for at least half of a 4 year contract, but is he the guy you want to use the cash on? I just think 4/100 can get something (or multiple somethings) with more aggregate value at a time when the team is closer to being WS contenders.

I'm really interested in the Big East this year. It's usually the most fun conference to watch (I love that it's all basketball-first (and usually only) schools). With new coaches at Georgetown (I think it'll be ugly in DC this year) and Butler, St. John's heading into "let's see how real you are" mood, and all the returning stars at Seton Hall, 'Nova, and Xavier this should be a fun season. Have to think Villanova is the run-away favorite, but after that, I can see almost any team from the next tier giving them a run. I think Seton Hall is going to be really good, perhaps even pushing 'Nova for the league title. And I haven't even mentioned Providence and Creighton, and both look plenty talented and capable. Nonconference will be huge for Marquette. They get Maui games and the UW rivalry, and if they post a couple of big wins there they'll have lots of chances for quality wins in league. Better improve defensively, but should be fun to watch both major Wisconsin schools this year.

I'm just happy there are places where we can talk about baseball without falling into Hot Take Syndrome. Whenever I hear sports commentators talking, especially about the NFL, the quality of the evidence and arguments presented is way too often subpar. Even if some folks still want to go old school and have bean wars in baseball, it seems there's always a vocal, visible segment of people and publications willing to dig deeper. I'm not saying you have to use advanced stats to do so, but the quality of discourse around baseball feels so much higher to me than it is around other sports. If I accidentally hear one more talking head claiming the NFL is turning "sissy" I think I might go crazy. If "millenial baseball" means pitch counts, studies on rest, a willingness to look at macro statistics (without being guided by them all the time and in every situation), a concern for players' long-term health, avoiding flinging a hard object 100 mph in the direction of another human being, and trying to enter into complicated strategic discussions about what's best in various circumstances, sign me up.

As others have said, I don't see the downside. Sogard, as much as I kept expecting him to cool off last year, maintained an ability to get on base and produce consistent, quality ABs. Especially given the all-or-nothing proclivities of much of the rest of the lineup, I see nothing wrong with having a guy like Sogard available as a pinch hitter and semi-regular. Could he regress? Sure. Is he young and exciting? Probably not. But John Jay was the absolute most annoying Cub to me this year with a .296/.374/.375 slash. Sogard was .273/.393/.378. Granted, that's one year (SS alert), but I'm more than fine with a 2.4 million dollar gamble on a repeat. Sogard was a 2 win player last year by B-ref WAR, so I see no downside given a free agent win-above-replacement costs what? 8 million? This and Anderson seem like smart signings to me. Not to mention, I find it easy to root for both guys.

The pitch clock is supposedly on the way, which may help "pace of play" (certainly more than the no-pitch IBB). I think we just need to be realistic about expectations, given that postseason games are just going to be longer than regular ones. You've got longer commercial breaks and additional pressure and all that. It's just a matter of determining how much is too much. 10 percent longer seems about right, with average game times around 3 hours and 20 minutes. Keep it under that, and it's probably fine.

It's never good to lose a guy like Herro. However, the incoming class looks promising, so maybe they can weather that a bit. I'm interested in how this team develops this year. In particular, will Happ's rumored jump shot become a real thing? Can Trice manage the load as PG, or will Davison have to play significant minutes as a frosh? Which big man emerges as a secondary threat (Reuvers, Illikanen, Van Vliet, Thomas)? Is Iverson's game more complete and balanced? This feels like the first real Gard year to me, if that makes sense. This team is going to present challenges, so we'll see how the staff handles it. One thing I'm excited about is the non-conference schedule. It seems to me like a really good challenge yourself without setting up for failure sched. Yale and Western Kentucky are good mid-major games (though the latter would have been better without their recent departures), and going to Temple is never easy. @ Virginia for the ACC challenge, Xavier and Marquette at home, and Baylor and Creighton/UCLA in the MTE. There are a few "guarantee" type games, but that's pretty good, even if I'd like one more true road game. The guy I'm probably most interested in is Trice. Really looking forward to seeing the kind of player he is this year. He showed flashes last year before struggling at the end.

Agree with this. I think the sense of stagnation is what's so frustrating about soccer in the US. There has supposedly been all this momentum since the World Cup in '94, and it seems to have produced a fairly successful domestic league and not much else. And even the MLS has, arguably, been better for countries like Panama, Honduras, and Costa Rica since it provides a hemispherically strong professional spot for player development. This is a great thing for CONCACAF as a whole. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great thing period. I just wish it translated to more success grooming talented US players. Ideally, you'd have a situation where MLS would regularly groom US talent, send some of that talent abroad for a few years (before those same players returned to the US late-career), and keep the USMNT well-stocked with exciting players. Fans would tune in to MLS games to watch not just local teams but future European players and national team stalwarts. Whatever structural problems are preventing that need to be dealt with. Probably that means finding ways to grow the game that don't involve so much expense being borne by individual players and families.