Cool Hand Lucroy

Totally right about getting them in foil trouble and then really committing to getting to the basket. Good coaching by Gard. This was the most impressive win I have seen since last year @ MSU. Never panicked, played together, outlasted them down the stretch.

Just a really good game from the Badgers. Tonje got to the basket at will. UCF never got into a groove (despite what I thought was a pretty friendly whistle in the first half at least). Defense made them take tough shots, and they couldn't finish. McGee really sparked the Badgers early. That was nice to see after a tough one on Monday. Posting this with the Badgers in front by 23, five minutes to go, so if things get crazy, my fault I guess. Pitt will be a great neutral court test early. Guessing the Badgers will be underdogs, but it's the kind of game you hope for in these MTEs.

I hate those games. They had the same thing at the Bahamas tournament last night. Great Saint John's-Baylor game, but a weird environment, especially lighting-wise.

Agreed, but, weirdly, it might be better positioned in March than it was last year. UCONN, Creighton, Marquette, and St. John's should all compete for a top-5 seed. Xavier looks like they could be pretty good. If Providence can join them, that could mean 6 teams in pretty good shape come tourney time. Villanova being in a down cycle hurts, and Seton Hall looks pretty bad out of the gate. I don't have a lot of faith in Butler. Could Holtmann do something at DePaul? Maybe, but that's a BIG ask. Point is, I think there'll be a clear top 5 or 6, and that's better than the muddle going into the tournament last year. Makes it easier to separate teams close to the cut line.

They'll have to deal with a loaded McNese (Will Wade coached) roster to get out of the Southland, but yeah, I agree. They look like a difficult matchup. Back to the Badgers, the Greenbrier interests me deeply. I think UCF is the kind of team that can give UW fits. They've already got home wins over Fla Atlantic (who should be decent, despite a lot of departures) and Texas A & M. Both at home, but that's a tournament team if they can do anything at all on the road in the B12. Badgers should be favored, but I bet it'll be by just a possession.

Yeah, I took a look at UTRGV's games against Nebraska and Creighton, and it made me feel a bit better about the Badgers clawing out a win. That team has sped up everyone they've played and kept first halves tight against decent competition (down eight at Creighton, who's going to contend in the BEast). They seem legit tough to defend. Creighton beat them by shooting 60% from 2. Nebraska beat them by turning them over 20 times (and UTRVG shot less well from deep). I guess my thought is that a low-end outcome seems like the Badgers could be a poor man's Creighton. Neither team turns people over. Both can be extremely efficient offensively. Creighton is more comfortable playing quickly, and they have Kalkbrenner, who brings rim-protection and improves the defensive efficiency quite a bit. A more optimistic outlook is that the Badgers just get better defensively and end up as comfortable in 65-possession games as 75- or 80-possession ones. I'll be hoping for that. The FT shooting is a HUGE difference maker compared to the last couple years. Having a team that can convert at the line, especially when it seems like games are being officiated tightly, at least early on, is going to help them put games away more easily than in the recent past.

Essegian was on the bench as Nebraska trailed Saint Mary's by three in the dying seconds on Sunday. Tells you a little bit about where he stands when he's not on the floor even when his best skill is the thing his new team needs most at the end of a game. Not trying to be snarky there. It's just maybe a little bit of evidence for why Gard seemed to trust Essegian so little last year. I wasn't sure about it at the time, and I'm still not. But maybe he's just a more limited player than he appeared at times as a Badger frosh.

Avoided the let down. Lots to work on before a tough one on Friday.

First half tonight against Rio Grande Valley is a big part of why I am still unsure about this team. Can they defend? That's going to be a big question. They don't really make it difficult on teams on that end of the floor, which is an adjustment as a fan. Fully expect they'll come back and win, maybe by a wide margin. But they do need to find a way to create turnovers. That's long been a struggle under Gard.

I think the Badgers shooting 44% from 3 to Arizona's 17% is the story of this one, even beyond the fouls and FTs. I'm not going to get TOO excited about this one just based on it being at home and in some weird/fluky circumstances. That said, it's going to count as a high-quality Q1 win, and, as others mentioned, the ability of the team to respond after 65-65 was incredible. If these guys can have that kind of identity all year, we're going to be better than people think. I LOVE John Blackwell. I think he's going to really shine this year, and one thing I really like is that this year's team is probably going to more athletic than last year's. I know Storr was a serious athlete, but Blackwell, Tonje, and Amos bring a lot to the table on that front too. Honestly, it's harder to defend that backcourt than one that involves Chuckie, as much as I liked Chuckie. His strength was on the defensive end of the floor. Klesmit should get a lot of open looks, and if he shoots it, look out. It's really hard to win in this version of NCAA basketball without a lot of very good, very athletic guards. The Badgers being better and deeper on that front is going to help. Who knows how they do in the Big Ten (which is going to be good), but this is a great win to bank and build on.

Nice for fans in major Midwest blackout territory, though I think I'll still be blacked out from games vs. the Cubs, Cardinals, and White Sox (so, like 30 games a year). Worth it for me, though! As others have said, since we start from the lowest TV contract value (or one of), this hurts less and allows for some opportunities. Let's hope we innovate with this like we do with everything baseball-related!

Sometimes it really does feel like whoever the Brewers draw becomes the magic team in the playoffs. The Mets sure have it right now. Of course, the Brewers played better than the Phillies have these three games. Small consolation.

Judging teams by small sample, playoff success is so intrinsic to American sports, but it's a big part of why I enjoy following soccer. Generally, everyone understands that the system is unfair. And teams know they're competing for different things. Brighton is just not going to judge their year by whether or not they win the Premier League. That would be crazy. You judge your year by a) whether you finish high enough to qualify for European competition (the playoffs), b) whether you make a deep run in a domestic cup competition (sort of like winning a division title), or c) you avoid relegation. The goal, really simply, is to have more good days than bad. American sports aren't set up in that way, but baseball runs closer to that model that just about any other professional league (even the MLS!). I think that's a difficult thing for folks to accept, but it also feels true to me. The "October defines you" narrative seems like a bad story to me. Buying into it seems more logical in a sport like the NFL, which is really about the perpetual present because careers are so short, and the revenue system is more egalitarian. In baseball, buying that story just seems to undercut the nature of the sport, which is all about long-haul, large-sample, daily outcomes.

The catch Profar just made in the Dodgers-Padres series was pretty awesome. Leaps into the stands, pops back out and starts jawing with the fans, and the broadcast is showing the "Home Run" graphic while Mookie runs around the bases. Of course, Profar caught the ball. Kind of love that his first reaction isn't to show the catch to the umpire, but to give the business to the Dodgers bleacher fans.

I imagine we'll pick up a few "change of scenery" bulk guys to compete, and you know we'll be running a six-man rotation for a good chunk of the year. Let me say a word on behalf of Hall. I think he's going to be more of a candidate than people think. His injuries this year really kept him from getting in any kind of groove, but I thought I saw some flashes there, and he's a lefty. I would guess Ashby is going to be a bullpen piece, potentially a piggy-back or multi-inning guy, a la the old Hader, and I would bet the Brewers put him in that role. That means Hall's going to be given every chance in the rotation. And he's going to be in the pitching lab, and guys with his prospect pedigree usually manage to be more than just a guy. I'd be in on Joe Ross as an FA if the price is right. He's a good signing for Milwaukee. I doubt there's a huge market for a 31-year-old with his pedigree, and you'd figure he'd just as soon stick with a team like the Brewers than get only slightly more on a mediocre team. We're going to win with pitching depth. A lot of guys who keep you in games equals a lot of wins with this much offensive talent on the roster.

For what it's worth, I think Andre Jackson is going to have a breakout year. He'll defend too.

I have no idea how that call at first (Mets-Phillies Game 1, 3rd inning) stands while Marte is ruled safe in our series. That was a much closer play, and it was overturned. I don't understand MLB replay. Seems like soccer where different review crews have different standards. It just seems weird that it ends up so inconsistent, even in super important games.

Somehow, the Guardians only went 8-5 against the White Sox. But the Twins, Royals, and Tigers were all pretty flawed teams bolstered by winning like 12 games against the Sox, so yeah. I mean, we got Colorado in 2018, so definitely helped us then, but this year I think the NL is clearly the stronger league on the whole. Still, I like Vogt. I don't begrudge Cleveland any success.

I second this. I'd probably rather have Bryse at 1.5 than Milner at nearly twice that, despite Milner being lefty. I like Hoby, but he seems like "just a guy."

Lol. Yeah, forgot about them! I still think the point stands that it is REALLY HARD to win titles these days, even for the big market teams.

Good point about the '57 Braves. That was 30 years before I was born, but I think these windows are narrower than we realize. We put a lot of feeling behind "we'll never win one," but I think if we did, it would only be 20 or 30 years before we turned to "we'll never win one again." My wife is a big Twins fan. She was in middle school in '91 and elementary school in '87. Her most salient memories of the Twins are a) winning that awesome game 163 against the Tigers and b) utter Yankee heartbreak. You just really have to have the team win one in a certain age range for it to feel like it fixes anything, and even then, it fades quicker than you realize. The Cubs won about the most consequential championship anyone ever could, and it sure doesn't seem to have made the Cubs fans I know much happier (same goes for Cardinal fans, for all their success--they hate how much the Brewers have won the Central). And the Packer fans here know that 2011 feels so long ago. I don't know if this Milwaukee baseball team will win a World Series anytime soon. But it is also just way harder for a team like Milwaukee to do so now. Sport is such a massive business, and free agents are much easier to sign (both financially and culturally) in the big, coastal cities. I mean, look at the Bulls futility since Jordan's exodus, and that's a marquee NBA franchise. The Bucks winning was itself kind of a mini-miracle and happened because of a singular player and a shrewd trade for Jrue. The Brewers have broken my heart regularly, but they've also provided a TON of great memories and moments, especially recently. And Wisconsin sports really have had their share of success, despite a lot of disadvantages. If you're winning one title a decade in our market, you're doing pretty great. The whole state of Ohio has one title in the last 30 years, and that's with like 7 franchises. The Rangers won their WS last year, but how many other titles have Texas teams won since the 90s? I believe it's just the Dirk Mavericks. It's just crazy to think about how rare titles are even for the marquee teams like the Yankees and Dodgers.

Let me throw the "chemistry" bomb in here. I think the Brewers did have good clubhouse vibes, and I think that helped them a lot. Losing Adames will hurt on that front, BUT two things make me optimistic for a repeat: 1) Hoskins having a pretty bad year at the dish means he's likely to re-up. I know others will consider that too pricey at 18 mil, but between him hopefully bouncing back and seeming to be a well-liked presence, I think it will be a net positive. 2) Murphy seems like a guy who approaches managing like teaching. Sure, he wants to win, but he also knows when to challenge players and seems to me to look toward long-term player development, even sometimes in ways that may lower the team's chances in a given game. I get frustrated by these moves as much as anyone, but I think I sort of see the strategy and appreciate it. CC was the right guy for this franchise for the start of this run. Murph might be the right guy for this roster, especially when it's so young. I was worried we'd regret missing out on Vogt (and maybe we will), but you can't deny the fit in the clubhouse, and as these guys age and Murph slides out, we'll hopefully have Rickie to come in and keep up the pace. Baseball is so random and aggregated. The best Brewer team of my life, 2018, had to have so many things go right to make their run. One of the best rotations, 2022, got let down by poor hitting and some unexpected bullpen blowups and didn't even make the playoffs. But we have consistently beaten our projections, and the answer to "how did the Brewers win so many?" is, more and more, "because they're the Brewers." Let's keep that rolling.

Sticking with the Orioles, what about Devin plus for Urias, who I like quite a bit?

I think you're really onto something about scouting and development. This is part of why the Brewers regular season run is so impressive. Literally everyone (okay, maybe not Colorado) has a smart front office and good scouting. Some teams have massive checkbooks too, due to the TV contract situation that creates such baseball inequality. Honestly, MLB is lucky the Brewers are so good. They help buck the payroll-winning correlation in ways that are probably helpful. That won't last forever. As others have said, it's probably going to be involved somehow as the next CBA gets negotiated. I'm in for a Devin-centered package. I like LouisEly's proposal, though, man, both Lara and Black seems like a lot. Still. Probably worth it if we could do it.

2008 was sort of gravy for me. I wish we'd have hit in Philly. But CC was just on fumes, and Sheets was hurt, and that Phillies team was excellent. Honestly, I'd sort of feel like that this year if not for the Wild Card round element. We won our division, had an overachieving year, and playing a full, 5-game series would have been enough. Oh well. The most fun parts of this team will be back (minus Willy, and good luck to him)!