Matt Breen

What kills me is the trade packages people are putting together for Giannis. The one that I've seen bandied about is Giannis for Andrew Wiggins, the Warriors 1st rounder this year (maybe the top pick), Minnesota's 2021 #1 pick (which could easily be a lottery pick next year - but is top 3 protected), and the Warriors #1 pick in 2021. 1. The top pick in this year's draft (assuming the Warriors) would be great to have, but there's no Zion-type player. It's a mediocre class without any superstar level type players coming out. 2. Getting Andrew Wiggins is not a positive. $31M a year for a guy who is a mediocre 3-point shorter and bad defensive player. I love how people suddenly start talking about Andrew Wiggins as if he's an all-star level guy. It's one of the worst contracts in the league. The Wolves basically gave up their 2021 pick to get rid of him. 3. The Warriors #1 pick in the 2021 draft (assuming they got Giannis in a trade) would be near the very end of the round - so it doesn't have a ton of value. Nice to have? Sure. But not a great asset. 4. The Timberwolves 2021 pick would be really intriguing as the the draft class is supposed to be quite strong. A top 10 pick would be really good. The #1 picks are all really good. But none is a sure thing. And adding Wiggins would be awful. The Clippers gave up five 1st rounders and the ability to swap two others (plus two decent players - Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Danilo Gallinari) for two year's of Paul George. Giannis - even one year of him - should net something closer to that (granted, no guarantee where those picks will fall - and many will be toward the end of the round). I'd rather play Giannis another year in Milwaukee and try and win a championship - and let him walk in FA - rather than settle for a mediocre return. You only have so many chances to win a championship - so you have to take them. A bunch of fifth seeded playoff teams don't do much (although the owners might be happy with the money). Plus, if you deal Giannis to the Warriors - they are hands down favorites to win it for a few years. Curry, Thompson, Green, Giannis - that would be really good.

Technically it is July 1. But I think things are kind of fluid right now. Gotta figure out when the season actually begins and so forth. I doubt the season is going to be done on July 1. I'm guessing they'll be done more like September 1. But who knows.

The reopening of the small retail stores is good. Obviously, every store is different, but some small places don't have more than a few people at a time in them for the most part. But it's a good start. There's the free testing spots going up in Madison and Milwaukee. And testing ability is gradually improving. And the Feds are reportedly going to supply the states will more swabs - critical to doing testing. All good - but lots to find out. My guess is that we will see a surge in cases in June as people start to interact more - and move around the states and country more. But the ability to test quickly will be helpful to contain some of these outbreaks. I think we are in for a long slog - with a lot of cases continuing for many months. But I really hope it's shorter than that. People can't be in their homes forever, but we have to be smart now that stuff is starting to open up. The good part is that people are better educated, more prepared, and - hopefully - smarter. Same thing with businesses. We've got a lot of trial and error coming up - and there will likely be some bad moments. But that's going to happen no matter what. Just gotta try do our best.

Sporcle is a blast. My brother and I love doing old Brewer and Packer ones. There's even some pretty good Badger ones (mainly football related). If my son is there, we go toward geography and general knowledge.

The posts by SoCalBrewfan and JackNicholson1974 are very, very good. I worked with the university (not for, but with) in the 2000s - and saw a lot of what they describe. And what's so huge in all of this is the dollars that go into higher education. When I went to school back in the 1980s, the state's support of the university was much higher than it is today. My first semester I paid $499. Times have changed.

The 14,800 is not what we are actually testing. Or even can test at this time. Wisconsin actually did about 4,200 tests yesterday. https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/05/06/wisconsin-coronavirus-cases-up-335-testing-ramps-up/5175162002/ That's a record for the state - but we are no where near being able to run nearly 15,000 tests. My wife's organization is listed as having the capacity of testing several thousand people a day - but the reality is that they can only do a few hundred. Sorry for the broken record, but they just can't get the supplies to do the tests. They are ready to do the tests. They have the facilities and the people ready - but they don't have the supplies to actually do the tests. And it's killing them. They are losing a ton of money, and need to start doing more procedures and so forth - but they just can't. Things are getting better - but we have a long way to go. We've got to get a reliable supplies of materials to make it happen. This might have been covered in a previous post. I apologize if it has been. Is one of the main causes for the lack of available testing because there isn't as much manufacturing in the US? I honestly don't know much about the sources of the supplies. There's different kinds of supplies. There's consumable supples - such as swabs. This has been a problem. And then there are the reagents - these are the main ingredients used in any chemical-based test (I'm guessing someone else could explain more about what these are). Also, it's important to know that there are different tests you can run for COVID. So the test run in one lab might require different reagents than the one run in a different lab. This means you can't just focus on developing a few specific items. China has - in the past - been the leading producer of reagents. So I'm guessing (and strictly my guess) that the production of them in the U.S. was limited prior to all of this happening. And ramping up production of them just can't happen overnight. As noted - things are getting better. We do have more tests being done - meaning production is increasing (I'm guessing - again, my guess) that the production is happening internationally - as well as the United States. This is all just my basic knowledge - so someone else might know more, or be able to correct me if I'm off on something.

I never said you did. I was pointing out the reality of 'capacity'. What we can do is an important number. People, including politicians, have used our 'capacity' number in the past without clarifying what that actually means. And my biggest point was that we CAN do the tests - but we need supplies to do them.

The 14,800 is not what we are actually testing. Or even can test at this time. Wisconsin actually did about 4,200 tests yesterday. https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2020/05/06/wisconsin-coronavirus-cases-up-335-testing-ramps-up/5175162002/ That's a record for the state - but we are no where near being able to run nearly 15,000 tests. My wife's organization is listed as having the capacity of testing several thousand people a day - but the reality is that they can only do a few hundred. Sorry for the broken record, but they just can't get the supplies to do the tests. They are ready to do the tests. They have the facilities and the people ready - but they don't have the supplies to actually do the tests. And it's killing them. They are losing a ton of money, and need to start doing more procedures and so forth - but they just can't. Things are getting better - but we have a long way to go. We've got to get a reliable supplies of materials to make it happen.

I love the stuff you post. Thank you. And keep it up.

Unfortunately, many people's multiple sources of data are a post from their crazy aunt on Facebook, an online story put together by a foreign bot, a video by a hyper partisan personality, and a dislike for anything they perceive as being supported by the 'other' side. It is so sad.

Where is the evidence for this? I hear people say it, but no one actually provides real data behind it. Is it just rumors that have started? I mean, some people have said the opposite. That there are a lot more COVID related deaths NOT being reported as COVID deaths. And let's be clear - what is 'anecdotal evidence'? There is a difference between someone saying, "I am a doctor and I have been told to classify any respiratory related death as a COVID death", and someone saying, "I know someone who knows someone who knows someone who says they are being forced to report deaths as COVID related." And a people repeating that there's evidence that medical providers are being pressured to report respiratory deaths as COVID does not make it true. Anymore than people repeating they have heard that COVID deaths are underreported. I honestly don't have an answer to this. I just want to know where is this evidence? Is it really true? Is it just rumors gone amok?

I saw that the U.S. Senate is going to reconvene on Monday, and the capital physician said that they can't test all the senators - only those who exhibit symptoms. And tests will take 1-2 days to come back. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/30/capitol-physician-senators-coronavirus-testing-226980 This is still an issue for most places, including the hospitals. Ideally, we would have rapid testing - but that's pretty rare. My wife said at her organization they can do tests in as quick as 2-3 hours - but that depends on which facility the test is done in. There might not be a lab in that town, and the test have to go elsewhere. Ideally, we'd have tests that could be run on the spot - and we get back results in minutes. But that's just not available to most places - and that will not change in the near future. The most difficult thing right now - with regards to testing - is people understanding the reality of the situation. Politicians are saying stuff that is simply not true or it comes with a caveat such as 'once we have all the supplies available' or something like that. People don't hear the caveat or it's buried later in the statement or they just ignore it. It makes for confusion and frustration on all sides.

Just to note - this is not true. Mayo has laid off no employees. They said that 30,000 people would have some type of reduced hours or furloughs. They specifically noted that these were not layoffs. Also, there were some pay cuts. Doctors will not be furloughed, but will have a 10% wage reduction. Top executives are taking 20% reductions. All this is still a big deal. No one wants to get reduced hours or be furloughed. The good part - these people will continue to receive health care, and as thing ramp back up, let us hope they will be brought back sooner than later. Also, 60% of Mayo Clinics revenues are from non-essential elective services (such as a hip replacement) - so the critical cases are all being handled. But what is missed is the issues that arise through through simple preventative care - high blood pressure, etc. That kind of thing gets put off, which - without question - compromises the long term care of a patient. On the other hand, if you go into the doctor and catch a virus because people haven't been tested or don't have proper equipment - that kind of defeats the purpose of it all. I will say that when all of this is over (will it ever be over?) - things will change. Jobs will get eliminated. Other jobs will get created. It's the nature of the beast.

I want to link to this article about testing in Wisconsin. We've (and especially myself) been talking about testing in the state - and I've been saying that the numbers thrown out are misleading - as the the numbers often cited are the highest test we can run IF we have all the supplies (swabs, reagents, etc.). This article gives a more detailed understanding of this exact thing. And it's important, because people are saying things like 'we are only running 20% of the tests we are capable of' - as if we have the supplies and people just sitting around waiting to do more tests - but aren't. This is not true. On April 20, the Wisconsin Dept. of Health Services reported we the ability of running 7,608 test - but ran only 1,433 - about 19% of the testing capacity. To test, you need swabs, transport liquid (depending if the test is being shipped somewhere), protective gear, lab machinery and reagent. Without all of those thing, you can't test. And that's why we are only testing at 20% of capacity. Now, those numbers are a week ago, so they are likely better. Maybe even much better. But getting a steady stream of supplies our testing facilities (as well as the places where we conduct the tests) is critical to this process. The quicker this can happen, the quicker our state can get back to something resembling normal. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/24/wisconsin-republican-legislative-leaders/wisconsin-weeks-using-anywhere-near-listed-coronav/

Packers get 'worst draft' award from the Sporting News. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-draft-grades-2020-best-worst-classes/2bs9w101joku1lruu8r1xwt9f Yeah, I get it, drafts aren't won on reviews the day the drafts completes. Just thought I'd share.

Certainly looks that way. As we have no DBs selected, I'll take a guess that we try and resign Tramon Williams for another season. Not to be nostalgic - but Clay Matthews as an ILB would be interesting. All assumes we can afford these guys.

I know a few people who have gotten the virus. Only one was serious - but even then, he never had to be hospitalized. My wife has two friends who have lost family members to the virus, but I personally don't know anyone who has passed away. Sorry for your friend. Just sucks.

He would have been a nice addition if we had had our 4th rounder. Dallas got good value in him that late in the draft.

To me, the biggest criticisms of this draft is that we appear to have reached for players in the 2nd and 3rd round - guys who easily could have been there later. And in doing so, we have ignored some areas of need. But as noted, the team may very well have felt those players would be gone the next time we picked - so they pulled the trigger. But you could argue that we are not going best available player and instead focusing heavily on guys who fit a very specific profile. But there is always a balance in the two approaches. Still lots of holes on this team to fill. WR, OL, LB.

Josiah Deguara. I looked at four 7 round mocks. One had him in the 5th, one in the 6th, one in the 7th, and one not picked. I know nothing about him, so I can't criticize him or praise him in any way.

Dynamic return specialist?

Duvernay wouldn't be a bad pick if available. Not an ideal player - but at this point, none of these guys are. Oops. I jinxed it.

Duvernay wouldn't be a bad pick if available. Not an ideal player - but at this point, none of these guys are.

Doah! You jinxed it.

OT Prince Wegnogho. He's our 3rd round pick as he has the best name in the draft. Or Tyler Biadasz - to mollify all the angry Wisconsin fans.