tmwiese55

And with the MLB emphasis to bring the zone up a bit it could be hurting Davies. From my eyeball test I'd say it has slightly come up, at least I feel like there's been a lot of low pitches I thought would've been called strikes in the past. Maybe they pick and choose when to do it but just my two cents watching a fair amount. He's the type of guy this would affect the most.

Which brings us back to page 1 of the thread. 'We gotta get it done on the field this year...and we can! We got the fighters, we got the gamers, we got the hard workers.' - Ned Yost, 2005

That's the ESPN talking head bs creeping into everything. Who wants it more, who's clutch, who's distracted by something else etc. It's almost always about the actual game, not some mythological unprovable mental thing. Cuban had a takedown of Skip/Stephen A about this after the Mavs beat the Heat. Was pretty much spot on and did it to them live. They were trying to blame LBJ's being mentally weak, choking, etc as the reason. At least I think it was them, might've been someone else on espn.

Get a W today and 2/3 this weekend and I consider us locks for the pennant.

I know Peralta has been rough but seems like it would've made sense to just give him one or two more starts until Guerra is back rather than jockeying guys back and forth. There's an off day next week so could get a skip in there. Who knows though, as Brewers fans we all know how it can go against a minor leaguer making a spot start. Maybe we'll finally be on the good end of one of those gems.

Exactly. I guess the one exception I can think of is juke boxes in bars. At golf though you're hundreds of yards from others and outdoors so sound doesn't travel well, it's not the same at all. That's where the gray area comes in and why it can easily be done without bothering anyone. I think it would be near consensus on anyone blasting Beats speakers super loud like an idiot though.

And to even consider I think we'd have to be several games ahead in the standings nearing the deadline, not just in the race. I still think that's a heck of a lot to give up and probably don't do it, then someone else will trump us.

Well to be fair we don't know how bad of a low ball it was from LAD at the deadline. If all we got was Puig and whichever pitcher was dead money for them and some nobody prospects, then whatever. I'd rather just have Braun.

While true most of the time, it is not an always. Thames is a perfect example of why someone should never be written off if they are willing to continue to work extremely hard at their craft. Not saying Sogard is another guy that we'll catch lightning in a bottle, but you just never know. I generally agree first comments on him being what he is. But you're right, you can get Brady Clark like hot streak that gets you some extra wins. I guess for me it would come to simply who you think is better right now for the next weeks and who has more positional flex and I'd think they'd prefer someone with SS/IF capabilities as a priority, so who do they think is better SS/IF

Well said by adam and swing. I'd add to it that key part of the non-existent market for him is that his nagging injury history is basically making him an AL only option at this point. And if you go through AL contenders there just isn't any of them that need a DH. Could probably argue Bos and TX but both are paying large salaries for others. A year or two down the line maybe that will change, but as of now I don't see how an NL team can take on a 4 year commitment to him.

Urias could be a top 5 pitcher and is a phenom. A basically completely untouchable on the par of people like Strasburg, Harper as they came up. Basically he would not be in any discussion that doesn't include Trout or Harper coming back to them.

Yup, that's the way it should be done. Phone speaker or slightly more that you can hear just around your cart. Like I said, blasting it with a Beats for the world to hear is different and will likely be continued to be frowned up and considered bad etiquette. Just like if you're in an airport or train and someone is playing games with volume on when in close proximity. This situation isn't the same as you're getting at because you're normally hundreds of yards away from other people and they can't hear it. It's not like smoking or playing your games with volume on in the airport or train with people around, you're hundreds of yards from others the vast majority of the time and are outdoors. But keep in mind the person pushing this also said he's annoyed by people using carts. There might be a little 'just relax and enjoy yourself' that needs to go on if that's bothering you. Life's way too short to be ticked off all the time, it's just not worth it. To each their own though. I just started this out innocently saying why courses are allowing it and you just explained to me why it annoys. I know why it annoys you and I generally prefer it not to be there too. Courses are desperate though and don't want to turn anyone off if they don't have to

I know the common golf etiquette and I agree it's outside of it and all. It's just that times have changed, young people are used to having technology everywhere and listening to music everywhere off their phones and with earphones. They're going to be outside for 4 hours relaxing and want some music on, I don't think it's that absurd of a thing. It's just that it's customary not to do it at golf courses just out of tradition really. Years from now it'll just be more and more common unless you're at a snooty country club place. Couldn't a reasonable person also understand and not be oblivious that other people like to listen to music while they play. Keeping in mind that 95% of people there are not what would be considered serious competitive golfers, they're just there to have a good time. Again, I didn't mean to say you're wrong or anything. You can be bugged by whatever you want and this makes sense to me as to why you are, especially if they have a Beats speaker out there that you can hear holes away instead of just kind of at a normal volume you can't hear 15-20 yards from their cart. I didn't mean it to be an argument, I was just pointing out why the courses aren't cracking down on it and I totally understand it. They're trying to make the place less stuffy and restrictive so young people will start coming out. I'd argue making it not cost $80 or more just to play a normal mediocre course would go a lot further than this though, as even like you said it's pretty rare and vast majority sill abide by the old customs

My take is that he's the only one that could even be discussed due to control and modest cost, and I still lean towards not bothering. Plus I'm sure a true contender would trump our offer anyway. Any other more traditional rental type high profile people would be an automatic no for me. Remember the Twins 2-3 years ago that were way better than they should have been, but management knew it was a fluke and they had no shot even if they snuck in the playoffs so they didn't make any moves and kept the long game going. I wouldn't say ours is exactly a fluke as I think the O is legit, but overall that's where we're at right now.

Should get plenty of ABs for Braun and giving Thames days off vs lefties (though Thames seems to have no issues with lefties so far). Let's just say I agree I'd rather him in at 1B and Thames in LF than to have Franklin out there.

Maybe 07 season as a comp, they started out really well and then blew it to the Cubs I believe and didn't make the playoffs. Team was very young and their first taste of being good leading to the solid years coming afterwards that we had. Hopefully that's the case here too but it ends with a WS win instead of NLCS

Kind of been leaning more and more toward Thornwell from South Car in the 2nd round. Feel like you could probably let Snell go and he could step in pretty much right away as a 3 and D guy, kind of be this year's Brogdon

Like I said, I generally agree that I prefer it without. I've also never seen anyone going over the line with it imo. You guys have to realize ya'll making a bit of the old man 'get off my lawn type' or 'back in my day' type of argument here right? If you're going to the cheaper public courses this is going to be way it is as they're trying to appeal to a wider demo because most courses are really struggling financially, if you're that serious about your golf and concentration you'll have to go up a level or two of classiness where it's not allowed. And this is a what's bugging you, so it's your right to be bugged by whatever you want. I was just trying to put some context into why it is what it is. I could even make a bugging me about the old school taking it way too serious golfers bugging me. Walking, taking forever to choose clubs or line up putts etc and then giving attitude if/when you ask to play through like I'm some kind of jerk (and no I don't play music or overdrink there). But I have the libertarian attitude of to each their own do whatever you want, so I don't really care about that just like I don't care if someone else is getting buzzed up and playing music. As long as they're not being dangerous to me in anyway like hitting balls into you or something.

But why are people who prefer to listen to music subjected to your preference to not have music on the golf course, it works both ways. The closing of golf courses is already happening. Just google it and read up on how down the numbers are, of course some will always exist but there will continue to be a contraction for awhile. I don't know if I said 'all' but if I did of course I didn't mean it literally. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/12/golf-clubs-future-young-players-dress-code-social-media https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2014/05/23/how-a-declining-middle-class-is-killing-golf/#2fdc2d8d77c1 ETA: I get this is a what's bugging you, so I get that it's opinion based and you're more than able to have it. i'm not trying to say you're wrong, heck overall I agree with you but I'm really easy going so it would never bother me anyway on the course. Just saying I get why it's being allowed now.

Gotcha, yea that's a very reasonable way to look at it. I suppose the other direction would be to trade our prospects to fix the pitching. The route you're talking, we know we have position players but need some youth pitching to pan out. So now we trade our proven position players whom we control for 6ish years for most, for more pitching prospects. Now we need the pitchers in minors and the hitters in minors to pan out. The way I'm saying your lineup is covered and you only need luck on pitching, rather than both. Those are the options, no clear answer that I'm willing to argue about as they could reasonably go any way. But I get what you're saying. Deep down I think we'd have more fear a guy like Broxton isn't legit this good since we've such horrible down times from him. So if you can cash out knowing Brinson is right behind, yea I see the logic. Or take Santana, if he keeps going along a 260/360 type line with decent power but blah D. Maybe you decide to cash out and swing for the fences on the next guy since you can't move him 1B anymore because of Thames. I get all that, but if the teams in contention i don't see how you pull those moves. If they're individually doing the same thing but team is losing due to pitching being awful, then it makes it a heck of a lot easier to justify.

Which is exactly why there's plenty of guys to sell. Santana, Villar, Broxton, Thames, Shaw, Pina. If these guys keep hitting they have tremendous value. Window is not here yet, what we have right now is fool's gold. This rotation is horrible, and the bullpen not much better. it's nowhere near as simple as just plugging in Woodruff and Hader. People ask all the time how long will the rebuild take? Impossible to know, but that time will be when they have a legit rotation. But hey, that's how I feel today. Strange things happen in sports, and come the end of July let's see what's shaking. I'm open -minded about making any move at all, but as of today...SELL SELL SELL. I don't know if you read the rest of my post, but we're trying to win starting next year or at least the year after. If they're good, why would you dump them just to hope the next batch is good. I suppose you did say it's fools gold, so you don't think they're legitimately good. But besides Pina all the guys listed are in prime age and weren't late bloomers (think McGehee, Brady Clark types that you expect to crash back to reality) so you could expect them to be legit players. And if I remember right Pina has been hitting well for a couple years in the minors now, so who knows maybe he just needed a chance. I agree this is fools gold in that the pitching is so bad that it's eventually going to catch up to us. But I don't see any reason to think these hitters aren't legit players. So we trade them all, and hope the next batch in AA/AAA is as good as them. Well, let's say the first guy up is Brinson and he does well to finish this year and is good into next years deadline, do we trade him? You have to win at some point and not just keep thinking the grass is always greener.

Besides Braun and Garza I really don't think there's anything left to sell. All other guys are young and/or under years and years of control. Theoretically even if this year comes back to reality a bit like it should and we're out of it as expected, you're probably still looking at a goal of .500 or better next year (which keeps you in the playoff discussion a long time) and then hopefully winning the following year. All these guys could still be on that team for almost no cost so why dump them if you think they're good. At some point you have to win. Only if you think it's a fluke, which is probably the responsible way to look at relievers so a guy like Knebel would make sense to flip while he's hot.

According to spotrac the last two years are club options too. So you even have protection if he blows out his arm. Yea, still probably not worth it considering how much you'd have to give up for him. Still, probably the only one that would make sense as you'd have to be giving a similar package for someone else with less control. Probably best not to tinker with a big move, maybe a low profile middle relief pickup or something like that is really all we should do for "go for it" type trades. That's us thinking clearly right now of course, all of a sudden get to mid-July and somehow they're in 1st or just out and maybe we change our minds.

Isn't Quintana signed until 2020 at a mere 10ish per year? 3.5 years and only through age 31. Overall i generally agree not to mortgage any legit future pieces for this year, Quintana might be the only exception due to his control/age and relatively cheap salary. Maybe i missed something in the contract and they're player options or something.

I have a two tv setup in the living room so I pretty much 'watch' nearly every weeknight game on the 2nd TV while watching whatever else on the main that needs volume, like the ton of quality TV out there these day, NBA playoffs, etc. If I'm out doing something and I miss the weekend games so be it but usually can keep an eye on it if at a bar/restaurant, and I can't stay up all night for west coasters.