SeaBass

Eh, I'm not buying that qualification. It's not like he's a gimmick pitcher. He's just a pitcher that hits well enough to play on days he doesn't pitch.

What have the Angels been doing when Ohtani pitches? Can't imagine they use the DH. So we're going to have a pitcher batting for years yet.

I agree, I actually loved that play by Giannis in the moment because Dunleavy was being an absolute goon that game/series but I'm a Bucks fan so I have a bias. The fact remains in a neutral environment that was absolutely a dirty play by Giannis. My overall point is, I don't really care that much about the dirty player label. Everyone has their moments or the potential for a moment and things get heated. As fans we naturally carry grudges against guys that have been antagonistic to our teams but I guess I try to get over some of that stuff. I have players I don't like such as Blake Griffin and Enes Kanter so I'm not perfect by any means. I watched a video on some of the past stuff with Greyson Allen and a lot of that tripping stuff just looks petty and stupid, none of those guys were getting hurt out there. The Caruso thing is worse but I kind of thought that looked more like a hard basketball foul, still with his past you can't help but think it's possible he was just falling back on old habits.

That is a classic and probably the best Hot Ones episode of all time.

Just want to make sure everyone isn't accidentally wearing their homer goggles when passing judgement on guys. Gotta keep things fair and balanced.

The two 2nd round picks via Detroit are: The Pistons are trading the lower pick between Golden State and Cleveland's second-rounder in 2023, and Sacramento's second-rounder in 2024. Also, DDV is a nice role player but I really don't expect losing him to hurt much at all. He's just an Average Joe by NBA standards. Wish him well.

Paul Gutierrez @PGutierrezESPN Announced attendance for 2022 Pro Bowl at #Raiders' @AllegiantStadm: 56,206 It doesn't matter how lame the actual Pro Bowl game is because clearly the NFL is still making oodles of money off it and as long as that's happening it will continue ad infinitum.

I respect your opinion that because he cheated he doesn't belong, I don't agree, but at least it's valid. Him being a douche is not so valid. You're free to dislike him, I dislike him too. And I'm not even saying you can't be happy he's not in because you don't like him. It's just not a valid reason to exclude him from the Hall, there are way too many other douchebags already in that crowd for it to matter. True. Again, this is all part of me not really caring about the Hall of Fame, not specifically Rose but a culmination of similar circumstances. Rose is kind of above his ban, he was an amazingly great player. Will anybody really not remember him because he isn't in the Hall? Of course not. His stats are going to live on forever as testament. Also, by some reports Rose was/is a pretty big douchebag himself. So I really hope you're as ok with him being out of the Hall just as much as you are for Bonds.

If only he could be an excellent blocker while also catching about 100 more balls for 1500 more yards while he's at it.

Like it or not, even marginal WRs have offseason value. Lazard probably isn't a 2, but he's likely a 3 most places. The Packers just paid their aging 3 $5.5 million last year, so I'd think they'll be fine paying Lazard $3.3 with no commitment or bonuses beyond that. It is obviously subjective, but Lazard is probably the best blocking WR in the NFL. He'd probably be classified as a TE for a lot of other teams. One of the arguments being made for Cooper Kupp being MVP was his blocking ability. If Kupp is being recognized even a little bit for his blocking I think that definitively makes him the best blocking WR in the NFL.

There's a part of me that wonders if the Packers speak definitively about keeping Rodgers to the media because they are concerned about fan (and to a lesser extent, media) backlash if they trade him. It seems to me Rodgers is at his most unpopular right now, it hasn't been a great year for him in that respect, and while the Packers would certainly be criticized for trading him I don't think it would be the absolute firestorm that it would have been last season before all the drama started. There are also those that would come back around to hand out a second dose of criticism if Rodgers wins a Super Bowl with another team. Personally I'm torn. I'm leaning pretty heavily towards trading him and get the best return they can because that will help them build for the future. But if they do bring him back I'm still on board for it. I just don't see the path to the Super Bowl getting any easier than it's been the last two seasons with him and we know how that all worked out.

I don't care too much that Barry Bonds didn't make it. I don't care too much that Big Papi did. I think though, what it's showing is that there's a significant enough number of voters who are voting for guys who were nice to the press to make a difference on whether or not these guys make it into the hall or not, and that's a dumb reason to vote for someone or not. If you want to *not* vote for guys who cheated, be consistent with that. If you want to not vote for guys who were strongly considered (but never proven) to be cheaters, be consistent with that. But not voting for Bonds (who was a dink to the press) while voting for Papi, is just silly Exactly. I have never been a fan of Bonds, or Clemens, didn't like them personally. Like you've hinted at, I don't care one bit how them being excluded from the HoF makes them feel. I doubt they care either, I saw a quote from Clemens that he stopped caring about the Hall of Fame 10 years ago. For me, the whole process just feels like a sanctimonious ego stroke by the baseball writers. I don't need their Hall of Fame votes to tell me which players I'm allowed to think were the best of the best. Similarly, I've felt my interest in MVP and other awards voting, in any sport, has been waning too. All these voters give me the impression that they want to be the focus instead of the game being the focus. I hear a growing amount of people say that the MVP should include the post season, sounds like the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life. It's always been a regular season award. If you want a playoffs MVP just create one, I personally felt like the Super Bowl or World Series MVP already had that covered but I guess not.

Yep, the Hall of Fame has pretty much rendered itself meaningless to me. Who cares? Just a popularity contest. The stats will live on and the true greats will be at the top, no voting needed.

He's actually got a point. Drayton has to go because he made already bad special teams, horrific. BUT, the Packers stopped dedicating roster spots to special teams aces and it has proven unwise. They've been using the bottom of the roster for developmental players on offense and defense first and foremost. Now is that an philosophical shift or have they tried to identify a couple ST aces and whiffed? I suppose the latter is possible but it doesn't seem like they're trying. Other teams carry 2-3 players who are really only emergency options on offense / defense whose primary role is either as a returner or a gunner on return coverage. Usually 1 returner and 1-2 return coverage specialists. The Patriots have had Matthew Slater on their roster as a special teams ace since 2008, making 10 Pro Bowls as a ST ace. I had to look up his listed position because I don't think I've ever seen him utilized outside of special teams. (He's a WR, btw). The Packers USED to carry players like this as well. Travis Jervey was a terrible RB but he was around for one thing in the mid to late 90's - to blow up kickoff and punt returns, and he made the Pro Bowl for it in 1998. Desmond Howard wasn't much of a WR but he tilted the field for the Packers as a returner. Jarrett Bush gave fans fits as a dime corner but he was kept around for 9 seasons because of his special teams proficiency. And then as an emergency fill in after Woodson got hurt in Super Bowl XLV, Bush made a key INT in the win. Jeff Janis turned out to be useful on the occasional Hail Mary, but he was making the roster for 4 straight years because he was one hell of a gunner. Note; Bush's last season as a Packer was 2014 and Janis's 2017. Who has been their ST ace since? And how bad have they been since? You know the answers. Changing out the ST coordinator annually is only going to make marginal impact. They've floated between ranking in the mid 20's to dead last in recent seasons. Drayton couldn't even get his guys to carry out basic functions so he clearly has to go. But the best special teams coach on the planet is going to struggle to to break out of the bottom third with rotating bottom roster pieces who have no real special teams acumen. Excellent post. I've been thinking this same thing for a few years now and haven't really gotten around to actually posting it but I think this all started with Ted Thompson later in his tenure. Now, just because this shift in philosophy, if that's what it is, has happened it doesn't mean it's an inherently bad thing. I think it just makes what happened this season much more likely to occur. This season really felt like a confluence of bad circumstances that tilted to a craptastic level that I think is actually incredibly improbable, where all facets of the special teams were terrible all at the same time. By all means they should fire Drayton but I just think the players they had formed an all time worst unit. The kicking, long snapping, blocking, tackling and returning were all bad.

I agree with most of what you're saying. I do care about his trade value, I don't need it to be a crazy return just a solid one. Let's just say if it's only a 2nd round pick that would be pretty disappointing. But I don't have any animosity towards him, it just seems everything is pointing to a natural parting of ways. Also, as a friend I've been texting with points out, Rodgers has been taking a lot of hits to his reputation, if he pulled those kind of shenanigans he'd be a lightning rod for even more criticism. I think he still cares about his legacy and what people think of him.

I realize everyone is still hashing out the loss this weekend but I've been thinking about Rodgers' future a lot. A thought has occurred to me that Rodgers, if he wants to go nuclear on the Packers, could retire, prevent them from exacting immediate draft capital from the team they'd trade him to, then once the Packers set their roster he could unretire. If the Packers are blindsided by this they probably wouldn't be able to fit his contract under the cap and would be force to trade him for peanuts or just outright release him. Alternatively, if the Packers do see this as a possibility they'd need to keep their cap low in case he does that so they could fit him in. Am I crazy to think this? This feels like it could be a potential nightmare. I'm really hoping that the positive things he's been saying about the improved relationship with the Packers front office means he gives them an honest chance to get good value for him in a trade without making things difficult. And of course that's if things go the trade route with him in the first place.

So the demise of Matt Stafford was a little premature.

Brady, the anti-Rodgers. His teams just seem to be charmed by good fortune more often than not.

Do either of these teams want to win this game?

Matt Stafford might just get to a Super Bowl. Who'd of thunk.

You're right on this point and it's one of the ways Rodgers' trade value can be supressed is if he comments or leaks to the media that he'll only accept a trade to one specific destination. Then his value goes down a bit and the Packers won't have much choice. The retirement card is up his sleeve too.

Zero chance he is traded within the division. Below zero, if that is even possible. I hope you are right that they get a big package back for him. I fear they won't, though. I don't think they'll get an insane package for him but two 1st rounders doesn't feel insane. It could be one first and a couple other high round picks instead. The reports of three 1sts and a couple 2nds and players is bonkers I don't see anything like that happening.

He finished 2nd his last year, and Rodgers hasn't won it this year yet. He's better than Favre was, and the return will be better, but I think you're going to be disappointed. The only way the Packers don't get a great return is if there's only one buyer. There's going to be more than one buyer.

Nobody more than a casual fan believes anything about Lambeau mystique. Their pretty record was padded by not making the playoffs for 25 years and the fact that when they used to make it, they were Lombardi's Kings. Once they were decent but nothing special they lost a whole bunch of games. It's meaningless. Honestly they've probably been a better indoor team for some time now. Sure but let's not pretend SF came out and whooped their butts or played some type of inspiring game. I think 100% of posters on this board expected the Packers offense to actually show up tonight but they were M.I.A. after the first possession. They allowed an NFL playoff team to stay close until a backbreaking play turned the tide.

Does beating ourselves count?