RobertR

I'll add, paint is cheap. There are much more important things to worry about than the color of a room. Also, the correllary is paint before you move in. That way you only have to move furniture and boxes once. Pay particular attention to the basement. You really want to make sure you don't have water/foundation problems. Those are expensive and no fun. Also, I agree, don't borrow to your limits on the house. You'll have many more expenses than just the house, utilities, food, furniture, maintenance, etc. Robert

It's probably worth pointing out that Suppan isn't the only pitcher struggling. I have my doubts about him straightening himself out, but did anyone catch Wang's line from last night? Brutal. There's a lot of pitchers out there that haven't pitched well that will be given the chance to straighten themselves out, so while I'm concerned I don't fault the Brewers from having a little patience. Even if Suppan is the first starter in the rotation, at the end of the year it will mean that he'll have at most one more start than any other rotation spot. Robert

Turner Classic Movies is celebrating their 15th Anniversary, my favorite channel, and they've put out a list of their 15 most influential movies of all time. Here's the list. The Birth of a Nation (1915) Battleship Potemkin (1925) Metropolis (1927) 42nd Street (1933) It Happened One Night (1934) Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) Gone with the Wind (1939) Stagecoach (1939) Citizen Kane (1941) Bicycle Thieves (1947) Rashomon (1950) The Searchers (1956) Breathless (1959) Psycho (1960) Star Wars (1977) That's a more than respectable list, although there are reasons to quibble. (I've seen all but Birth of a Nation and 42nd Street btw.) I'd suggest that The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari or Nosferatu belong on the list for Horror (or perhaps Whale's Frankenstein). Perhaps you don't need two westerns. Perhaps All Quiet on the Western Front for war. And I'd suggest either Easy Rider or Sex, Lies, and Videotape as representatives of independent cinema. (I'm drawing a line between Influential and Best, fwiw.) 15 is a tough number to work with though for so broad a subject, so I'm only quibbling here. Robert

1. Suppan is very worrying. I'm not bothered by him being the first guy in the rotation. Heck, there's game theory that indicates that sacrificing your #5 against another team's #1, will give you an advantage in the next 4 starts, but his total ineffectiveness, and inability to eat innings can carryover to the bullpen and affect more than just his starts. 2. Kendall looks old. I'm sure he'll pick it up to a degree, but given his history his slow start sends up all sorts of warning signs. 3. Spring training means not a whole lot. We learn this every year, but I'd rather have the lefty option of Lamb than McGehee. Chris Duffy looks like the Chris Duffy that was released by the Pirates, not that I think Gwynn would be any better. 4. Todd Coffey looks promising. The bullpen looks like it will need him. 5. Weeks has obviously looked good. Cutting down that bat waggle certainly looks like a simple solution that could pay big dividends. The team as a whole has looked a bit more patient. We'll see if they can sustain that over the course of a year, but there seems to be some progress underway. 6. Macha isn't really different from the majority of managers. They're a conservative bunch and Macha certainly doesn't look like any type of innovator. The biggest improvement he could make would be pinchhitting for Kendall though. 7. Prince is still Prince in the field. His inability to scoop balls out of the dirt is going to be an issue. Robert

To be fair that was built on a 5-0 August with a 3.00 ERA. A month in which he allowed 8 HRs but got away with it because of a .214 BABIP against. Suppan at this point is completely at the whim of BABIP. He is going to give up his extra base hits but what he can't do is BB guys. If he starts to BB 4 per 9 his career is over as a starter. I don't believe in discarding stats, lucky or not. No doubt that there was some luck involved in that August record and ERA. In general though, I tend to think that things tend to balance out and there's probably stretches during 2008 where we could say Suppan was unlucky. And, lucky or not, Suppan was averaging 6 IP a start and probably had a somewhat reasonable FIP. That's a lot better than we've gotten out of the last month and a half. He's had one decent start out of his last 8 appearances, including the post season, and that's a ratio that has to turn around quickly. Right now, my main concern is that Suppan just doesn't seem to have the stuff to compete at the big league level. And I don't know if it's reasonable to expect it to recover. That's a lot more worrying to me than the fact that he's had two bad outings to start the season. I'm not concerned about Tim Lincecum, for example. Robert

I don't think there's a reasonable alternative yet. I can't say how disappointed I am though with an outing like yesterday's from a veteran pitcher. It's intolerable for that to continue much longer. And really no excuse after having all of the offseason and spring training to be ready. I suspect that there has to be something physically wrong with Suppan, especially considering his velocity. Despite revisionism, Suppan was 10 - 7 with a 4.49 ERA through August 30th last year, and I'd take that type of performance again. What we have now is completely worthless. Putting him on the DL and collecting the insurance looks a whole lot preferable to what we're getting now. Robert

Is it wrong that I found the "Manual Drinking Fountain (For Blacks)" gag on Better Off Ted last night drop dead funny? Robert

A couple of DVD rentals. Vicky Christina Bacelona - Woody Allen's latest. It's slight, but I liked it quite a bit. Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz especially. It's also very nicely shot. There's a slight parable about trying to navigate between relationships totally based on passion vs. ones totally based on practicality and the pitfalls of both. Certainly not up to Woody's classics, but worth seeing, IMO. Rachel Getting Married - Jonathan Demme's best in a long time. Choosing to go with a hand held, you are there, approach I think gave the movie an additional level of intimacy and immediateness that I think the material needs. Anne Hathaway is excellent, but the supporting cast more than holds their own as well. The wedding and after party is fresh and surprising and I think really captures the feeling of an actual wedding and a too long after party. I might go more in depth elsewhere, but a few movies I've seen at preview screenings, and will likely mostly be seen as rentals later. The Great Buck Howard - John Malkovich is great. The rest is a by the numbers movie with no great insight or surprise. Emily Blunt is wasted. Colin Hanks has none of his father's energy at that age. The Pope's Toilet - Pretty solid, neo-realist story of a low tech smuggler of consumer goods trying to run a scheme to take advantage of the Pope's visit to South America in the '80s. Directed by the cinematographer of City of God and it is well shot. Nothing really weighty or inspired, but a solid movie with drama and humor. Lemon Tree - Really terrific Israeli movie that looks at the Palestinean/Israeli conflict, this one involving property rights, law, and security, in microcosm and doesn't come up with easy answers. Fences and walls play a prominent part in the story. Hiam Abbass, who had a prominent role in The Visitor, takes the lead as a Palestinean widow and is really terrific. There's a feminist undercurrent running through the film as well as she, and her Israeli neighbor, both run into conflict with the local patriarchies. I won't spoil too much, but it's one of the best movies I've seen so far this year. Paris 36 - I was very unimpressed and felt like my 2 hours were wasted. There are good parts here, Nora Arnezezeder is quite good and the film has a very polished look to it, but ultimately it fails to have much of a point, it meanders from plot point to plot point without gathering any momentum, and there's no grit or darkness to offset the artifice of the movie so there's never any sense of danger or surprise. It's Amelie without characters you care about. It's Tim Burton without any sense of darkness. It tries to be a serious period drama and a Hollywood musical homage at once, and fails at both. Robert

And, again, it's not like there's any better options out there. Cameron is easily worth $10 million more than Gwynn Jr. and Duffy. I'll take Cameron easily over Bourn and the Fukudome/Johnson platoon. Or Brett Gardner. Or Dewayne Wise. Or Willy Taveras. Or Ryan Spillborghs. Or Ryan Sweeney. Or Franklin Gutierrez. Or Carlos Gomez. It's not like Ellsbury or Crisp are amazingly valuable outside of fantasy leagues due to their SBs. Schafer is going to be better in the future, but how good is he going to be in 2009? Or Maybin? Rowand and Rios don't project to be better any better than Cameron either. Yeah, Cameron doesn't compare to Hamilton, Beltran, and Sizemore. McClouth and Gerut project as better than him as well, offensively at least, although I'm sure the margin shrinks when you factor in defense. But, after that, Cameron's very comparable to pretty much the next tier of centerfielders offensively who all group between 20 and 30 VORP projected by Baseball Prospectus. Yeah they get at those values in different ways, some ways that might fit with the Brewers better than Cameron's skill set, but there's a reason that the Brewers just didn't give him away over the offseason. He's still plenty valuable. And, I don't know why we should look at worst case scenarios rather than probable scenarios like Baseball Prospectus's PECOTA projections which project him as plenty valuable in 2009. The .320 OBP is like the 20% percentile by BP. Robert

Yeah I saw that. Not necessarily the worst thing in the world to have an opening to see who emerges early in the free agent pool though. Perez was a flier, not an integral part of my strategy. Robert

Gamel will hit, Salome will hit Yeah, but will they field? If Salome can't catch, he can't play anywhere else. How valuable a hitter is Gamel if he's relegated to first base? I agree that in the best case scenario some of the Brewers top prospects could be underrated and I really like the depth. But, there's flameout potential as well and that has to be factored in. The Brewers top prospect might turn out to be a #8 hitter, for instance. And, basically, the elite organizations have depth and star potential. Tampa, Oakland, Texas, Florida, Atlanta, San Francisco, and Baltimore. The Brewers minor league system isn't in this class. But it's in the mix with the next tier. And it's quite possible that the only difference between the Brewers and the top of the tier they're in may be Matt LaPorta. Frankly, I think which tier an organization is in is a lot more important than hair splitting over rankings. I don't think there's a huge gulf between the Brewers and 3 or 4 teams ranked ahead of them. And, I think it's a definite good sign that the system which has been depleted a bit due to trade and graduation only falls down to #15. Especially since it's been competitive the last few years. They'll restock with a lot of early picks this year and should move back up if they draft well. Robert

Considering how many questions there are surrounding the Brewers' top prospects, Escobar's bat, Gamel's glove, Lawrie's position, Jeffress' control, Salome's body type and defense, Cain's upside, etc. I think BP was right on at #15. There are no 5 star, can't miss prospects in the Brewers' system. At least not yet. They're certainly not an elite organization, although they appear to have good position player depth. A potential star is very valuable, and the jury is still out on the upside of many of the Brewers. Heck, Baseball America has the Brewers with 4 top prospects which is pretty average. Especially considering only one is ranked in the top 25 (Escobar), one is ranked in the group 26 to 50 (Gamel), and two are ranked in the group 76 to 100 (Lawrie and Jeffress). 15 probably isn't too bad considering that the bottom teams (Astros, Nationals) are really bad. The Brewers are neither an elite farm system or a horrendous one. But somewhere in the middle to maybe slightly above average based on depth. Robert

Anyone got insight into the St. Louis closer situation? Or the Cincinatti outfield? I've had my auctions (12 team, 4x4) and took a couple of flyers on Chris Perez $9 and Jonny Gomes $1. I'm unimpressed with my AL auction, which probably means it will work out o.k. I have a top notch group of prospects that should bolster a solid if uninspiring group though with Matt Wieters, David Price, Neftali Feliz, and Rick Porcello. My NL team needs some offensive help, although I have enough SBs. I'm banking on bounceback years from Bill Hall and Khalil Greene. I should have an absolutely dominant pitching staff though with Johan Santana, Brandon Webb, Javier Vazquez, Rich Harden, Brett Myers, Dave Bush, Heath Bell, Cla Meredith, and Chris Perez. (Yeah, I spent $130 on pitching.) I have Dexter Fowler, Madison Bumgarner, and Lorenzo Cain in my minors which I'll probably have to use as tradebait to shore up some deficiencies. Robert

I picked up the Tales of the Black Freighter / Under the Hood DVD this week. I haven't watched either fully yet, but I have some general thoughts. Under the Hood is really well done. It works well in this format as there isn't as much to fit in and it allows the characters and scenes to breath properly. Stephen McHattie really gets more of an opportunity to shine in this extra and he takes advantage of it. More of Carla Gugino too. This really should have been a preview on something like Sci Fi before the movie came out as it is a terrific companion piece. We'll see about Black Freighter out of context. The animation looks good, but there's a specific context where the Black Freighter is designed to work in, with obvious parallels to the larger story, and we'll see how it works. Definitely worth a rental if you have interest in the material. Robert

I don't know about anyone else, but my sarcasm detector is going off here. Robert

I'm not really worked up. Especially when you call up The Wolf Man and a Josh Whedon film (who I consider a one trick pony. O.k. maybe two tricks.). C'mon, you can do better than that. I'm not sure how "big budget" some of those are either. But, if the point is that there will be at least some medium sized films coming out from Hollywood this year with ambitions of being more intellectual, then sure, there will be. Heck, toss Shutter Island on that pile. That said, I think some of our familiarity with the material is having us take a large part of what WATCHMEN represents for granted. It's 22 years old to us, for most it's brand new. Snyder's WATCHMEN, in its flawed form, still tells us that superheroes, Hollywood's #1 genre at the moment, are likely to be screwed up individuals, sexually dysfunctional, that power distances one from humanity, has the purported heroes accomplish not much of anything, has the so called villain "win" and perhaps save the world, and does so in a visually dense way that asks the viewer to pay attention and have more than a passing working knowledge of 20th century history. It also has a male character that lets it all hang out, shows some of the consequences of a superhero fight, constructs an alternate history of the world, and has some fun with pop culture. That's a full plate for a blockbuster. Probably too full for Snyder and his more "action-y", sexier adaptation. But, I'm giving Snyder plenty of credit for the attempt and there are, IMO, moments of greatness. I'll toss in Dr. Manhattan on Mars with Phillip Glass playing, a music selection that's a perfect choice among some questionable ones, as an example of what Snyder got absolutely right. And, it could have turned out worse. Should I mail you the Sam Hamm script as proof of that statement? Robert

It's not really a multiplication as much as it is an expansion on existing action beats that perhaps take one or two panels in the original. Oh yeah, turn away now if you want to avoid spoilers. Of course, lingering on the violence more is a change. Moore and Gibbons saved most of their carnage for the climax. Snyder's Sub-QUantum Intrinsic Device (S.QU.I.D.) climax was bloodless. Snyder's ending lost the emotional gut punch of the original ending. In many respects, I almost think he wanted the movie to tilt slightly to Veidt's perspective and make it more of an intellectual issue. No Black Freighter parallel narrative. No gushers of blood. And a Dan and Laurie who are even closer to the line than in the book, and cause more havok. Snyder definitely played the "they get off on the violence" card harder than in the book. (Which kind of makes the Captain Carnage mention have more meaning.) Of course, it's hard to know if those changes are fully intended to further gray up the morality of the "heroes" or if Snyder is merely immature. Perhaps a little of both, but I expect very little happens on a movie set without some consideration. Shifting Dr. Manhattan's "Nothing ever ends" line is inexcusable though. That has much more resonance coming from a god figure who can literally see the future. Robert

I have a hard time calling the film ambitious. The source material certainly is, but when the film has to cut out so much of it for the sake of running time and to jazz up the film for general audiences, that just doesn't fall under my definition of ambition. More like necessity, maybe? They didn't have to make WATCHMEN. I count picking ambitious source material as a plus. How many R-rated, complex, without an easy cathartic ending blockbusters do you expect this year? Are you expecting more out of Harry Potter, Star Trek, Wolverine, G.I. friggin' Joe, Transformers 2, Land of the Lost, Fast and Furious , Terminator Salvation, Angels and Demons, or Night at the Museum 2? I could see arguments for Avatar and Public Enemies. Perhaps even Up. I fully agree that Moore and Gibbons' WATCHMEN is a masterpiece and Zach Snyder's WATCHMEN isn't. I still think it's going to be head and shoulders above most of what we get out of Hollywood this year. This really is a half full or half empty question. Robert

Yeah, the "whodunit" aspect caught me slightly off guard too. Although it's obvious in retrospect. They even drop a clue on the first page, which Snyder smuggled in a different part of the movie. Heck, take the "Fearful Symmetry" chapter and note who's literally right in the middle of everything. It still worked, and I think that's partly because of the medium. As a mystery there's a decided lack of viable suspects, but there was still time to bring out someone in the last couple of issues. Other than a government conspiracy involving Nixon, the only other viable theory I've ever heard involved Hooded Justice. If you have the book handy, you can page to Chapter 12 by the newstand. Note the ad on the back of the comic and what it says. Also note that the Utopia theater is damaged to the point where nowhere is Utopia spelled out fully. Robert

The credits above are one of the things I absolutely adore about the movie. And illustrates some of it's strengths and weaknesses. And it absolutely expects the audience to keep up with it without handholding. The credits sequence alone expects you to know your 20th century history, know the famous Life magazine VJ Day photo,?spot a reference to the Last Supper by DaVinci, know you Kennedy assassination theories, spot a reflection in the moon landing, know who Andy Warhol and Truman Capote are, know what Studio 54 was along with who the Village People, Bowie, and Jagger, and know that Nixon could only serve two terms,?along with pick up on the alternate history with superheroes. Oh, and note Bob Dylan is singing. ? The rest of movie has much the same level of density. There is stuff tucked into all sorts of corners of the frame. And, it wants to define at least six characters, tell a good mystery that telescopes into something more, have some kickass fight scenes, some philosophical musings, and subvert many of the tropes of superhero stories. While set in an alternate 80s on the edge of Cold War annihilation. ? It's not very friendly to the general audience. And even within the ground rules it sets, it's hardly perfect. But I expect no more ambitious a blockbuster to be released this year. And what it pulls off?successfully is quite an accomplishment in my mind. Robert

Just got back in. Take these comments as coming from a long time fan of the material. Overall, I really liked the movie. I thought it looked great, I enjoyed most of the performances, most of the major themes make the transition fine, there's some wit up on the screen, I enjoyed the period touches and soundtrack (and was greatly amused by a Muzak version of "Everybody Wants to Rule the World"). I especially enjoyed when Snyder was able to break away from the graphic novel for an embellished opening credits (which you can view here) and a very clever sequence with a swinging rest room door, that I could see fitting right into the graphic novel. It does struggle with the running time though. The story has been editted to an inch of its life. They fit in a surprising amount of plot, but I think they lose some of the humanity in the process. The Doomsday Clock ticking down doesn't have the same feeling of dread. And much of the humanity of the work has been lost. The repetition, visual and verbal, of people holding on to each other in the face of Armageddon. The humanity of Laurie's backstory. And, probably most of all, the common people that congregate around the newstand has been lost and makes the stakes more intellectual than emotional. The longer director's cut is almost certainly going to be better. It's not the masterpiece that the comics are, the linear forward movement of a film working against it in many respects, but it's a more than respectable attempt. Robert

Yeah, I'm too old for midnight showings, not to mention work. Especially for 2 hour 40+ minute movies with a philosophical ending. I'm looking forward to the 3:30 am comments though. Robert

Under the fantasy tab, you can definitely download the PECOTA projections in a spreadsheet. Robert

The Brewers may have to summon catcher Martin Maldonado, who had been reassigned to the minor league camp. And this is a problem because....? It's backup catcher, a none too serious injury, and Spring Training. Robert

Yeah, I'd put Sabathia, Sutton, Lee, and Braun on the "not here long enough" list. Pete Vuckovich might be the worst pitcher to ever win a Cy Young, which he did mainly due to great run support. Good pitcher, but he wasn't better at his peak than Sheets and Higuera. Arguably Bosio and Caldwell too. Or the partial years turned in by D'Amico and Eldred. The best starting pitcher list should start with Higuera, Sheets, and Caldwell. Gantner really only has longevity and a good glove for his case. Vina was probably better on average, although lacking the durability and longevity. Cirillo certainly has a much better case for being among the top 8 or 9 position players in club history. Catcher is definitely the weakest position in club history. Porter, Simmons, Surhoff, Matheny, and Nilsson are pretty much it and none were great while in Milwaukee. There's probably a good case to be made that Jose Valentin is the third greatest SS in team history, after Yount and Hardy. Robert