BrewerFan

I'm not giving up that package for a guy who's going to be used out of the pen and then hopefully can stay healthy and has 2 years left...unless they don't feel like Misiorowski can be the future ace we're hoping he'll be. You said protect the guys with the highest upsides in the system...but isn't that Miz? There's risk, but certainly the same is true with the teenagers. He's also just turned 22. I'd make Chourio, Miz, Turang and Ortiz virtually untouchable. Quero would be close. Pratt in that group. Wilken, Black, Boeve, those are guys I'd be more inclined to trade. The extra wild card cuts both ways. We have more opportunities, but there are just fewer sellers.

Yeah, they've used TSMC chips, and Samsung chips and they're now using the H100 chips. They've used a lot of chips in their trial and error(mostly error, but seems like they may finally be getting it right). They do not go for 40K. The B200 chips go for 30K-40K and they do not need that. You keep talking about how it costs money to replace chips...like it doesn't cost money to fill your car up or to replace a head gasket. It cost money to maintain a car. I don't know exactly why you think they'll need these regular replacements when there are plenty of Tesla's that have never needed them, but sure, IF they have to, it'll cost money. And IF the engine in my Tundra goes, that'll cost money. So I guess I shouldn't have bought a Truck? No. I'm not going to do that. But the fact that you're trying so hard to create this hypothetical problem that...doesn't exist is strange. Sure, if you want the FSD software, it's going to be costly. The Cars are pretty damn affordable, but if you want the self-driving technology that they're just not really coming out with, yeah, I guess that'll cost money. And 95% of the Apple products won't support the AI software...so ALMOST everyone who has an Apple Phone or product will have to buy new stuff to be able to use those applications. When did any of this ever become new or somehow limited to cars? New technology comes out, if you want that in an old car, it'll cost money. I'm not understanding how that's a the death knell of EVs? Ok...well, I don't.

Right...they're also still relatively early in on in the new EV movement. The technology, battery storage, everything just keeps getting better. Saying it's NEVER going to replace ICE? That feels like the guy at the patent office who wanted to close down because everything that's been invented already has! My sister has an old Prius with 300K miles on it. Runs great. Beat to absolute hell. They've got where you open the trunk area duck taped on and they have to line it up to open it, but that was from backing into a tree. But...it's still going strong! And they drive it just as often as any other Vehicle. they have a big Ram Diesel and a Highlander, both 4-5 years old.

For the time and miles and the lack of gas...and in 2024? Yeah, that's minimal. And that's only if you want new features. You can still drive the car as it is, you just may not get the stuff they're coming out with. You buy a new Truck, you're probably spending 5-6K in different modifications depending on what you need. A winch, bumper. The point is that cars are expensive. EVs are cheaper and they're going to be getting a LOT cheaper over the next 10-15 years.

That's my feeling. I wouldn't have made those picks, but maybe it only takes two years and he's a...Maxey type player(AJ). Or maybe he is a nobody. I don't know, but an 8th or 9th man vs a kid they thought could be a real playmaker? I get it. They have avenues to acquire other players...very few chances to get a real impact player.

I know I'm in the minority, but I think they look pretty cool. And the space and functionality of them? But this brings us back to why I thought TSLA and Rivian would have been great(but only when Rivian got more desperate and was closer to running out of money). You could add those Rivian vehicles, add some midsize SUVs and that's a pretty nice group of vehicles. But...I digress.

I'm just going off the studies I've seen; https://www.treehugger.com/owning-ev-cheaper-ice-vehicle-study-5198102#:~:text=The study found maintenance costs of battery electric,as you do with an internal combustion vehicle. The thing is, this is still early in the...'Ev Revolution.' As they expand the market and you have more people trained, the battery tech improves, I think this will skew even more towards EV. What an obnoxiously arrogant and condescending statement. Tesla's have regular updates. They're using NVDA Chips, there's no reason you should have to trade in your car every couple years like a cell phone because the hardware isn't compatible, and if the hardware isn't compatible, it's a BIIT cheaper to replace some of the hardware than the entire car. 3K also isn't an "Arm and a leg." It's a Car. A new iPhoneTesla costs ~1500 dollars. But what year Teslas can you not drive or have to be traded or discarded like an old phone in because their hardware doesn't support the update? Not which year Tesla's have hardware that doesn't support the FSD software that they're licensing, which Tesla's can you not drive due to the inability to update the latest software?

EVER? I think people are lacking imagination. 30 years say...cheaper to buy, maintain, you'll likely see "charging" stations replace/supplemented at the gas stations around the country. Apple doesn't have either of those things, but they've got the cache that I could see them marketing it effectively. And you've got a whole generation of people who grew up on Apple Products, I don't think it'd be hard to envision, after they scrapped their own EV Car, to pivot to Rivian. But I take your point, they're starting from scratch. I'd also say I'd bet 15 years ago it'd be really had to envision people saying they could see Tesla succeed in the US as an EV only brand. I think perhaps the timeline and the Gov't mandating this has created more pushback, but the advancements they're making in EVs, I really think the demand for them is just going to grow.

I don't follow why you'd have to "replace the car like a smartphone?" All I've seen is that the cost of maintenance for an EV is ~40-50% less than an ICE. I don't know about the Cybertrucks...or that it'd be good measure as they're relatively new, but I need you to explain that to me. With the amount of tech in the car, it seems more likely you'll have to take your car in for the new updates if anything, but...trading them in like an Iphone, I don't understand that.

Doesn't seem like an honest question when you're answering part of it with (hint-they're not). I also don't get the "pricing themselves out," or the "smartphones on wheels." They're cheaper to maintain and cheaper to power. The infrastructure needs to change and yes, obviously they need to improve the battery pricing and they need to manufacture on a larger scale to bring the prices down, but you'll have a hard time being a nicer vehicle than the Tesla Model Y for the price. We're also effectively in the bottom of the 2nd inning with EVs, so I'm not sure why you'd say they're NEVER going to be a replacement for ICE? I don't know how you could ever say that EVs won't replace ICEs. I can see how you'd say they won't in the next 10 years, but it's pretty much inevitable, particularly if you can you go to the sodium-ion batteries rather than lithium, just another way to make it cheaper. We're not close to that, and 2034 was always ambitious, but it's coming.

I did not know that...they're certainly big and have a lot of storage. But I do wonder if that'd preclude AAPL from jumping in. How much does AMZN even see AAPL as a rival? I should know this. I know AWS is a huge part of AMZNs business and AAPL has their own cloud storage, but would they stop using Rivian if Apple would hve been the company that would have partnered with them?have

I don't know what's going on with Musk, but I think the Musk that was running TSLA before...is one of the great CEOs and if they settle the compensation issue, which seems to be settled...I'd buy back in(I may either way given the drop and the potential for growth). I have other issues with Musk and questions, but he did an AMAZING job of pushing TSLA to the forefront. With regard to Riviana, that truck may be the coolest vehicles I've driven. I don't understand his reluctance to use Lidar sensors. That seems to be the Goldstar, but I believe it's August 8th, they're going to unveil the autonomous taxis? That's a company that could 3x, 4x, 5x the next 5 years. More growth than my main holding, NVDA(which is awesome, but I'm HIGHLY skeptical of the projections some have on them moving forward, the growth HAS to slow unless the AI revolution is going to be even bigger than expected...and it's expected to be big). So I'd have to take money out of TSM, GOOGL, AMZN, AAPL(which is about to blow up as 95% of their devices will not support their AI Apps, so they're about to go through a growth period). I can't really speak in any informed manner on any other EVs. I've driven a TSLA, but only for a test drive. That's pretty much it. The Rivian and a TSLA and I need/want a truck. I don't know how bad the Cybertruck is, I haven't driven it. I don't mind the aesthetics like others do and haven't done the research to see what the problems may be. When I buy an EV, I'll be far more informed. Just speaking for myself, when I drive my Truck, I'm driving up to Northern Wisconsin(350 Miles) to my Cabin or our families and I'm taking an ATV and a SXS. When I get up there, there are very limited options for charging. I'm ~15 miles away from even a Gas Station. I could get a charging station in there, but EV trucks, I just haven't found one that I like. The newer Tundra's, I guess I wouldn't say they're real "affordable," but relatively speaking...they are. The top-of-the-line, loaded Tundra Hybrids are like driving a luxury SUV and with the rebates and they're just REALLY trying hard to move them, I was able to get some things added, like the Tonneau cover and a few other smaller things. The main thing is the resale price. I thought it was BS, but 5-year Tacoma is 87% and for a Tundra it's 81%. I swore I'd never buy new, but a 2-year-old Capstone('22 is when they started making them I believe) were nearly the same price when you added the other benefits. The warranties are also among the best in the market. For someone who drove kinda beaters for my 20s and much of my 30s trying to pay off investment properties or save to invest, it's the first nice vehicle I've owned. I think I'll consider an EV car in 2-3 years. A Tesla Model Y perhaps? Something that is cheap just for driving to work, or home. I'll see how it goes, but I did plan for putting in a couple of home chargers for the future as I've got little doubt by the time I'm ~50, EVs will be close to, if not half the market(not buying they'll stop making the ICE by then, but it's a target). Or, the bZ4X, but I want to wait for them to work out the bugs first. It's also just more expensive than I'd like to go. So, we'll see. EVs are the future though. Oh, and I wonder if the reason Volkswagen partnered with Rivian was due to the whole emissions issues they had? That was a big issue for them obviously. That just kinda popped into my head.

Yeah...but consider this. The Angels are stupid. So...there's that.

I'd REALLY hate to trade Misiorowski...you'd get a good idea of what the organization thinks. We're in a bit of a tough spot with Quero out for the year, Gasser, Chourio up, Turang, Ortiz are both firmly planted in the Bigs. They have a really good farm system, but will some of these guys be valued as we think they should? Lara, Yophery, Pratt, Bitonti... I'd be more inclined to part with the likes of Wilken, Black...maybe Frelick. But it'd have to be Misi or it'd have to probably be 4-5 players of their choice? I don't know, he's dominant, so it'd be a trade I'd love, but I wouldn't want to make it. If Miz hits his ceiling, you've traded away one helluva pitcher that you'll have for ~7 years of team control.

I'm sure you're right, but the only thing I know he's invested in is QBTS...which I threw a few bucks into in a totally speculative move. I just said Apple as they were working on an EV and scrapped it and I thought that could be a match or TSLA as they're already the leaders. I think an equally big issue is the charging. Most automakers have come to an agreement with TSLA to use their ports and battery tech IIRC save for TM. Not sure what Toyota is going to do. I love their vehicles, especially their new Tundra's, but...unless their tech is better than TSLA. It'll be interesting to watch how things evolve and grow in the next decade.

Yeah, I definitely think this is a good topic to bring up! This board can definitely force the FO to sign him and these discussions about Bauer don't invariably lead to some ugly arguments, so screw it, just pour that gasoline on the fire! Sure, they'll have to outbid all the teams beating down his doors to sign him, but we get to argue about it more.

Murphy did a great job at securing the Packers on the business side, the draft, maybe the SB, Titletown District. I didn't like how he became more involved in the personnel decisions and the coordinator decisions. I'd like to go back to the Harlan way of handling the team. Gute has earned that. Give him complete autonomy. It's not really worth going into, but I have to wonder if Fashanu is a Packer right now if not for Murphy talking about how much we wanted to trade Rodgers, but on balance, his regime was successful. As for the retirement announcement, I thought there was an age at which they stepped down? I just remember it being announced this time last year that he'd be out in 2025. Packers are in a great place...whatever issues you may have with him. So...hard to really complain too much.

It's obviously not going to happen, but IF you got Misiorowski up and if he could have an impact for 2-3 innings at a time, you get Williams back, you add Jensen...it'd really make up for the lack of SPing. Get 3-4 from a guy like Hall, 2-3 from Miz, then Megill, Jensen, Hudson, Williams? Not the worst way to get through a game...but yeah, the cost is not what you want to pay for an area that's already a strength. Wish Uribe was healthy(and more mature). I thought he would break out this year...but it's not to be.

I'd like a defensive big now. Oso would be interested. Good passer. Guessing he'll go before the Bucks pick, but...this looks...interesting;

I'd prefer taking a guy they believe has a ton of upside over an older player who will be the 8th guy off the bench, or even AJJ...because you know they won't play him in the playoffs anyway. MAYBE they got the guy who'll be a 25 PPG scorer when Giannis is 32 and the next star. Probably not, but this is the type of pick I wanted a few years ago. Primo from the Spurs was one kid I loved...though, SA did as well, which is why he went about 20 picks earlier than projected. Obviously...I didn't...project that he would be such a dirtbag, but that's not what I'm talking about. Just shooting for a big-time impact player. Primo was on LAC last I heard. I wonder if he's going to get another shot. He had massive talent, but he was young and had some issues.

History would strongly, strongly suggest it won't. The best team seldom seems to win it. The Braves who were under .500 and then got hot(I believe they still ended ~7 games behind us) or the Dodgers last year, the Nats. There is too much luck involved. This feels very much like the "Brewers are cheap and never sign any good FAs" crowd before they signed Hoskins while ignoring the LoCain, Mouse, Grandal signings(among others).

You're kidding, right? THAT is what you're talking about? The "gaslighting," is because the owner has said their goal is to win a championship. That somehow morphed in your head so they're "gaslighting" the fanbase and some promise about making big moves to compete with the larger market teams? I don't really know how to even respond to this seriously at this point. You're effectively saying that Aaron Rodgers "lied" or was "gaslighting" the fans when HE said he wanted to win another Super Bowl and that was his primary goal...or for that matter, really any player. You understand their plan to win is to be continually competitive and due to the high variation and luck involved in baseball...such as Soto getting a hit vs Hader and the ball going under Grisham's glove, the disproportionate number of extremely hard-hit balls last year vs AZ that were LD outs vs the bloopers they turned into runs on their way to a World Series appearance). You seem to be using "gaslighting," in the wrong context. Not sure how else to put it, it just sounds kinda ridiculous. But ok, so he said his goal is to win a WS(the same as every owner, GM, player, manager). I've also asked repeatedly what this move that he's "refusing" to do would be...but I'm not even sure I want the answer to that after I got this answer. It's really simple. They're trying to win by being good every year. Simply put, that gives you the best chance to win. The teams that really "went for it," were the CC team and then the Grinke/Marcum team and they didn't have all that much more to show for it, but they were both certainly worse following those respective seasons and had no chance to win a Title the following years.

Right...but you don't want to actually show me or give me an example, because...just no, right?

Ok...I guess I got confused when you were saying the Front Office was "gaslighting" everyone and they'd actually said they were going to make these moves like the large market teams. If the sum total of your point is, "I want them to win," then I'm not sure anyone's arguing. It seems to be, 'I want them to win...and I don't care what that means for the future, I want them to make a trade to win right now,' and that was the take I had a problem with for a multitude of reasons, namely, that's how you end up back as a 60-70 win team and you don't guarantee yourself anything.

I'll try again as there may have been too many questions.