tmwiese55

I ran through it a month or two back and my recollection was that he checked out as an above average defender everywhere except SS. SS he was fine/average/slightly below average. He played there a lot last year with Correa out so he can't be too bad

Hmm, probably would've done that over Moose and I'm not very high on Gonzalez. Guess we just had no interest in a 2nd year. Or maybe Twins have clearer PT for him without a top prospect coming so he liked that better(I don't know much about Twins). Personally I think he'd have got plenty of PT here with 2B open now, potential at SS if Arcia can't hit, Braun injuries so I'd guess it was MKE not wanting to pay. His versatility seems so much more important to an NL team, surprised one didn't get him.

I thought it was pretty cut and dry. I thought the standard was you needed .3 to touch and shoot? Given that it was .2, the only potential thing that would have not resulted in a shot clock violation was the jump ball going directly to the rim? Smart "touching" it wouldn't have stopped the shot clock violation or stopped the clock with any less time. Smart had to "possess it" and even then, couldn't possess it quick enough in .2 to do anything about letting more time run off the clock. I don't think I explained myself well. I didn't think the shot clock should have started when Giannis tipped it. Then I thought Lopez's tip would have been done under .2. Thus it shouldn't have been a violation, so then I was trying to drum up ideas that they could have done to burn more time. In fact, I would have whipped the ball as high into the air as I could with about 1 second on the clock. That would have killed enough time, right? Hard to say in looking back, but yea, I thought the Lopez tip should have been a play on. Yea i posted the explanation a few posts ago. You're exactly right, by rule that should've played on. Refs botched it. I'm surprised by the rule myself, but apparently it shouldn't start until possession. Therefore, since Lopez never had possession and it was a tip it should've counted. Looked to me like that was the plan by the Bucks, they knew the rules and the refs didn't.

Bucks didn't cover last night, like I said in that post probably one you could avoid since Bos is good. Wait until Saturday vs MN. If they're below 10 pt faves just do it and live with the results. Although, Giannis was listed probable with knee soreness so i'd wait until late to make sure he plays. Actually the next several games are vs blah opponents they should be favored in the 5-10 pt range. Do them all and should come out ahead.

Watching it live, I thought best to tip at the hoop or just hit it high in the air to kill time as I assumed shot clock started as soon the ball got tipped. So I didn't see the controversy. Turns out we're both wrong as it was clarified today that the refs botched it. Shot clock doesn't start until a team would've gotten possession in this case no one got possession so it should've all stood and played on, game over basically right there. They apparently tried to rule that Lopez had possession and it started then as to why they ruled it off, no way he had possession though. Even if they did botch that aspect, they still only took .2 off the clock when they should've took the time from initial tip plus .2 after Lopez's 'possession'. so it should've been at least like .6 off the clock.

Essentially the Bucks have been winning almost all games (when they win) by above 10 points and have been remarkably consistent and focused all year. Seems like a good idea to just keep riding them whenever they're under a 11 pt fave vs mediocre to bad teams. Games tonight vs Bos as 5 pt faves is up in the air since it's a good opponent, but I'd still just do it an live with it. Quick google and it looks like Bucks have covered 63% of games. Another trend is 12-2 ATS after a loss. Pretty much the only time to not bet them is in a B2B and I'd say if they get a 15 type point line when you just don't know what will happen at garbage time. ETA: Just ran through game logs and looked at game when they were 10 pt fave or less, including when they were dogs. Overall 32-17-2. In the losses you'd have easily been able to avoid the game when Giannis sat vs WAS, the game Giannis sat vs Orl in a B2B, the B2B vs MIA, two games vs Indy (good opponent like Bos tonight), and one vs Tor (though they covered all other vs Tor I think). So the Indy/Tor ones maybe are like tonight when you just do it and live with it or just stay away since it's a good opponent and just wait until they're a 7 pt fave vs Det, BKN, etc and clean up then. But take out the obvious avoided games in the no Giannis and Miami and you're at 32-14-2 and it's 70%. And it's even more drastic lately as they've covered 8/9.

Yup going up 2-0 would've been huge too. But blown saves and homers to great hitters like Turner happen in baseball. it doesn't automatically mean someone was gassed or anything managerial was done wrong, it's baseball variance and the other team is trying to beat you too. Hang a curve and he hits out but if he's a millimeter off it's a fly out to the wall. I think in that game Grandy hit the one to the wall at the end, fraction different trajectory and it's gone. Thinking about I'd say the biggest risk of a heavy bullpen system is that you obviously use many guys and you never know when someone just 'might not have it that day' and the more guys you put out the more likely that could happen. However, math shows that still better than letting a starter go through 3 times. Big pic though in that series, the Pen pitched a ton of innings and gave up few runs.

As much as I'm on the side that we can't play all year like Sept/Oct without it gassing the pan, and remember how burned out the pen was at the ASB after playing 20odd games in a row for example. I'm also on the side that it wasn't a gassed pen that cost them that series. Heck, they went to the pen earlier than it had all year in those games and still held a very good LAD offense down. Didn't that gassed pen get them to a 1-1 game in 13 or 14 innings. Jeffress' issue was if that neck injury was lingering, but more likely just randomness and small sample size that can happen for all relievers. The offense scoring 1, 2, and 1 runs in 3 of the last 4 games is what ultimately did it. Win that extra inning game to go up 3-1 and it's basically over.

The National League is going to be an absolute bloodbath. There are three tiers of legitimate playoff contenders this season and they encompass almost the entire league. TIER #1: FAVORITE NL WEST -Dodgers Likely to be the #1 seed simply because they are a cut above everyone else in their division and the other divisions have multiple competitors. TIER #2: DIVISION CONTENDERS NL CENTRAL -Brewers, Cubs, Cardinals NL EAST -Nationals, Mets, Phillies, Braves Would it really surprise you if any combination of these teams won their division? TIER #3: POTENTIAL WILD CARD CONTENDERS -Rockies, Padres, Reds, Pirates Not including the Division Contenders, I could see any of the 4 teams above contending IF all things broke right for them. The only teams I don't see having a shot this season are the Giants, Diamondbacks and Marlins. I wouldn't be surprised if 88-90 wins gets you both the NL Central and East. The talent is spread relatively evenly. Going to be a fun 2019. Yup, NL is gonna be crazy. Especially with SD adding Machado so they can be moved up a bit. Basically you only have one truly awful team in Miami. The rest are all at least ok. I saw throughout this collusion talk it mentioned about all this open tanking happening now and I just don't see it. It's one team in the NL. AL of course is worse with more bad teams and disparity but I don't recall ever having a whole league have only one bad team. Now I know other teams besides MIA will have a poor record because someone has to lose these games, but teams like AZ, SF, SD aren't awful teams. At least relative to most bottom 4 teams of a league over recent baseball history.

Certainly a fair concern. However, I've been saying to people we shoudl expect a bit better from this year's starters than what we got last year. Should get a few more innings and better production. On paper as of now at least, who knows what happens in reality, just like last year with the injuries and Anderson regressing. Going in, you expected fairly stable results/innings from Anderson/Davies and frankly didn't get it. This year, adding back in Nelson, Burnes, healthy Davies, possibly improved Anderson (can't be much worse really?) it should really improve on what we put out last year. Key word, should. Basically, if they think Nelson is good to go I don't think they're crazy at all to think they're fine or at least better than last year at SP.

There is actually a slightly higher correlation between team SLG and runs scored than team OBP and runs scored. Moustakas' .459 SLG last year versus Dietrich's .421 neutralizes the OBP difference. That's a fine argument. Just not what was made though, it was saying nearly 40% in OBP is an insignificant difference. That's what I'd say if it was 317 vs 309, not close to 40 or whatever it was when I looked it up. Yea I don't deny Moose is better or anything, but is he so much better to be worth 5X as much and to not have that extra money to spend elsewhere if needed. That's the question. Also, if you go to OPS like you're venturing DD is higher and higher vs RHP. Though from quick glancing it seems Moose is better the last couple years, his career stats are hurt by some of them crap years early in his career. I'm of course fine with Moose, he improves the team, his lefty power is great in MP, and we're going for it and it's not my money. It was just to patently deny as if it was a ridiculous argument that seemed off. I'd say it was very debatable and could go either way and I'd be fine with and see the argument either way. If later on they hold off on an IDK Soria, Granderson type move it could've mattered.

The weird thing about Pritzl that I don't think anyone would've predicted when he came in as that he's been pretty darn solid on the hustle, D, rebounding, type aspects of the game while not at all being the shooter he was supposed to be (in games anyway). Coming in the worry was that he'd only be able to shoot, and be weak at everything else. It's been the opposite.

Good post by Lathund. I know I come off as a hater a bit pointing out Manny hasn't been thaaaat crazy good of a hitter. But he's still a very good player and the big boost is playing 3B/SS. Most importantly it is the age thing being only 26 so it isn't in the same ballpark as the laughable contracts like Pujols/Cano got in their 30s. As long as Manny is healthy and doesn't reduce his training/effort (does seem a legit risk with him that I don't see with harper) this contract itself should be fine, or at least much better than the ones we've all mocked for years. Also, if that opt out stuff is true they might get out of the last few years of the deal and someone else will pay him on his decline.

They will need them because their roster is very meh even with Machado. I think at least three of them are supposed to be up this year. Larger point being that they should be very competitive in due time. And they won't have to pay any of those guys for like 4-5 years. By then Hosmer will be nearing the end of his contract, Myers will be off his too. Those are probably the only 3 legit contracts they have on the books.

Yea if anything this shows he's had offers the whole time and was holding out for every last penny and/or a better situation to come up. Makes you think back that maybe years ago during the years of ridiculous contracts if agents could've played hardball and got even more.

He's a generational talent, but also comes off as lazy and entitled. Those are the types that get their huge money and go into coast-mode. Perhaps coast-mode for him is still All-Star-type numbers. It's just my personal feeling, which could very well be wrong. perhaps I just don't like the guy, and am letting that bias seep in. How many generational talents are there at one time? There are 2 infielders (Altuve, Donaldson) over the last 6 years that have better WAR than Manny... So 3 players at a time are generational talent? Yea if you actually look at Manny's hitting stats and ignore the hype he's not thaaaat good/ridiculous. Of course a good player/hitter considering he can play 3B/SS but his offensive stat lines haven't been uncommon. Heck, his 2017 was actually bad.

Wow, can't believe he got this much. I guess that kills the collusion argument huh

Yup, like I said I'm fine with it too and not complaining. The OP basing it off OBP (acting like 30-40 points of OBP isn't significant) and automatically discarding DD like it was just not even remotely logical to consider seemed off though. That extra 8 mil could be valuable later but yes at this point we just trust Stearns and hope for the best. Have to remember he's not perfect though and mistakes can happen

Who's available that fits that description and can play 2B or 3B and is willing to sign a one year contract for $10M or less? Before anyone says Dietrich, his lifetime OBP is a marginally better .335 and his defense is horrible. Moose is at least a plus defender. Marginally better? 335 vs 307 isn't marginally better, it's a wide gap. Also, look vs RHP and it's 312 to 348. That's a big difference. Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with this and don't really have a complaint but I didn't think this was accurate and I could've totally seen the logic of Deitrich instead and then you have that 8 mil for an in season move if needed. I'd guess their logic was that DD didn't play much IF last year so not so sure on him handling 2B, plus he's just never been good at D. Combine that with that they know Moose and his locker room aspects, known commodity so to speak. So I get all that. However, how do we know how Moose will do at 2B and there could be value in that DD has played a lot of OF lately too so some more flexibility. All in all, from afar I think I'd have gone DD and saved the 8 mil to help elsewhere at the deadline. But I also don't have access to the behind the scenes locker room stuff, we know they value Moose there and maybe DD is not known in that way behind the scenes in baseball, who knows. The fact that Derek Dietrich signed a minor league deal with a team who already has established stars at 2B and 3B tells me everything I need to know about how Dietrich is valued in the league. Well you can take that approach, but how many under the radar guys have overperformed. For example, one could've said "the fact that Scooter got cut tells me all I need to know about how good Scooter is". Or, "the fact that Wade Miley signed a minor league deal tells me all I need to know about Wade Miley." Or, "the fact that Jesus Aguilar never got to the bigs and was cut/waived tells me all I need to know". Can go on and on. I was speaking specifically just to the locker room stuff that we know basically nothing about.

Who's available that fits that description and can play 2B or 3B and is willing to sign a one year contract for $10M or less? Before anyone says Dietrich, his lifetime OBP is a marginally better .335 and his defense is horrible. Moose is at least a plus defender. Marginally better? 335 vs 307 isn't marginally better, it's a wide gap. Also, look vs RHP and it's 312 to 348. That's a big difference. Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with this and don't really have a complaint but I didn't think this was accurate and I could've totally seen the logic of Deitrich instead and then you have that 8 mil for an in season move if needed. I'd guess their logic was that DD didn't play much IF last year so not so sure on him handling 2B, plus he's just never been good at D. Combine that with that they know Moose and his locker room aspects, known commodity so to speak. So I get all that. However, how do we know how Moose will do at 2B and there could be value in that DD has played a lot of OF lately too so some more flexibility. All in all, from afar I think I'd have gone DD and saved the 8 mil to help elsewhere at the deadline. But I also don't have access to the behind the scenes locker room stuff, we know they value Moose there and maybe DD is not known in that way behind the scenes in baseball, who knows.

One thought I had, what do you all think the bottom line looks like? Do you think there's more than $30 million at the bottom line? The owners have so many millions at risk. I know the franchise values are appreciating like crazy right now, but that might not last forever. They still have a ton at risk and many franchises may not have $30 million in profit in a given year...which is notable because a handful of players/employees would then make more than the owner(s). I know it's easy to say "rich greedy billionaires", but there's so much risk to owning a sports franchise. What if for example, the NFL concussion issue causes interest in football to wane over the next 10-20 years? Those owners could be out hundreds of millions. If the risk is too great in owning the team, then the owner should sell and invest in something more stable like treasury bonds. Or they can run it properly like a business and not willingly lose dozens of millions per year, which is what they're doing.

Victor Oladipo is prime example. Who would've said he was overweight previously? Sheds like 15 LBS and he's a whole different player.

And why don't they? Because they handed out a terrible 8/184 mil contract that's giving them next to nothing. Then throw in over 100+ mil on Darvish that got them nothing so far. At least his was only 5 years (if I remember correctly). Gee, I wonder why teams don't want to do that anymore?

you're wrong!! Addressing world hunger, climate change and other global issues are more important.

So basically what Counsell said here is what I said the whole offseason. You simply can't do what was done in Sept/Oct all season due to the roster limitations. My guess it will look very similar to last year, normal 5 man rotation with some flex when off days and schedule allow. And the Brewers will continue to yank earlier than most regardless of pitch count by factoring in times through the order more heavily. First sign of issue that 3rd time, they're likely out. Very similar to last year. For the 5.2. Anyone have a quick answer to how that compares to rest of league? IDK, which way I'd predict on it. I do think they'll keep pushing this early yank. however, our starters last year vs this year were seemingly far weaker, on paper at least. If guys like Nelson/Burnes step in and do what we expect you'd think the average would go up as you wouldn't have like 15-20 Suter starts, won't have the 4-5 inning planned Miley starts, etc. But, that depends if they actually do what we hope or if injuries show up again and they have to piece it together like last year.