Mr. Brooks

Right, and that reliever still managed a whopping 0.5 WAR. Relievers just don't have enough impact on the game, IMO, to be considered for any type of award.

And running the clock out to end the first half. You have nothing to lose, why would you play so passively? They played to not get blown out, instead of to win, and ironically they still got blown out. And, in regards to Kill's condition. I respect how much he's accomplished in a tough industry with this condition, but when it starts to interfere with your abilities to do your job, it is something that needs to be addressed, IMO.

I am going to try my hand at betting the NFL games. I have never really done much sports betting, so I'm going to start with small amounts until I get a feel for it. If things go well, I may up the amounts. I'll track my bets and results here. All betting is on Carbon Poker. Here are my bets for this week: Phi to WIN over NYG : $20 bet to win $20. I'm picking the winner and not the line here because PHI is a 1.5 underdog at -110, but even money to win. If I bet the line and not the win, I'm giving up money on a pretty unlikely result (an exactly 1 point loss.) NO to COVER -1.5 over CHI : $20 bet to win $18.20. The Bears are at home, and this line is probably about right, but I like Drew Brees' chances to light up this Bears pass D. ARI to COVER +2.5 against CAR : $20 bet to win $19.04 No way are the Panthers good enough to be road favorites, even against the Cards. I probably should just bet the win instead of the line, as that is at +120, but oh well, I saved that for my U/D parlay. DAL to COVER +9 against DEN : $20 bet to win $17.40 Denver is really good, but 9 points on the road against a "capable" team? DAL to WIN over DEN: $5 bet to win $15.00 Obviously Dallas probably won't win, but getting 3:1 I figure I'll take a small stab at it. Denver has to lose some time, even great teams do. I ask myself if they played 4 times, all in Dallas, would the Cowboys win at least 1? I think they would. NYJ to COVER +10 against ATL: $20 bet to win $19 The Jets are on the road, against a talented team, but I just don't think many NFL teams should be double digit favorites, even at home, against many teams. The Jets are not as bad as I thought they would be, their D is pretty good, and the Falcons have been inconsistent, at best. The Falcons will win, but I'll take the Jets to cover. NYJ to WIN over ATL: $5 bet to win $21 Okay, I know I just said above that the Falcons will win, but I can't pass up any NFL team getting better than 4:1 against any other NFL team. DET to COVER +7 against GB: $20 bet to win $19.04 To me this is the most "wrong" line of the day. I should probably bet more. The Packers have some major flaws folks, and their pass D is awful. Bush gives the Lions the balance they haven't had in years past, making Stafford/Megatron even more dangerous. Even in Lambeau, the Pack should not be anywhere near 7 pt favorites against the Lions. BALT to WIN at Miami: $20 bet to win $22. This was the toughest pick of the day for me. But, at the end of the day I just don't buy that the Dolphins are that good, or that the Ravens are that bad. Probably a better bet to pick Balt to cover instead of win, but it's a close enough spread that I'll take the + line for a win instead of the - line to just cover. CIN to COVER +1.5: $20 bet to win $18.20. Let me start by saying I don't like this bet. I think Brady is the best QB of all time, and my gut says never bet against him, at anytime, in any scenario. But, that said, If I'm objective, I don't get how the Bengals are a home dog. Gronk is still out, Thompkins is limited, the Pats backfield is made up right now of guys I've either never heard of, or didn't realize were still in football, and their D, I think is good, but has been up and down. Of course, my luck Brady will go ape crap and make me regret this pick. SEA to COVER -3 over IND: $20 bet to win $20. Another one I don't like. Seattle is not as good on the road, and Andrew Luck is a man (but not 40). But, getting even money I'll take the 'Hawks, if it were a - line it might be different. KC to COVER -3 over TEN: $20 bet to win $17.40. Am I missing something here? The Titans are not good, and now Ryan Fitzpatrick is going to start. Let me repeat that, Ryan Fitzpatrick is going to start. This line could be -8 and I'd still probably bet KC to cover. JAX to COVER +11 against STL: $20 bet to win $17.40. See above about double digit dogs in the NFL. And yes, I realize the Jags are terrible. OAK to COVER +5 against SD: $20 bet to win $19.04. The Chargers D couldn't slow down a JV Powder Puff team, and I think Pryor is the real deal. I not only like OAK to cover, but to win. OAK to WIN over SD: $5 bet to win $9.50. No way should I be getting nearly 2:1 on Oakland over SD, in Oakland. I get that Oakland is not very good, but hello, neither is SD. SF to COVER -5.5 over HOU: $20 bet to win $18.20 This is a tough one to bet, in Houston. But I still believe in the 49ers, and I still believe in Kap. Underdog Parlay, a.k.a. "lottery ticket" I figure I'll do a lotto ticket underdog parlay every week. I'll likely never win one of these, but hey, it's fun to dream, right? Basically I'll parlay every U/D that I think has close to a 50% chance to win, so the # of teams in the parlay will change every week. This week I found 5 teams. All picks are to WIN. DAL over DEN, OAK over SD, PHI over NYG, ARI over CAR, BALT over MIA. $20 bet to win $2074.96 6 point teaser of the week: Basically for this I will follow the "Wong" rule. (Move the spread in any game with a spread of either 1.5 to 2.5 or 7.5 to 8.5) The theory is you cross the line over the "magic numbers" of 7 and 3. Like the parlay, this method will result in a different # of games involved each week, this week it works out to 4 teams. PHI to cover +7.5, ARI to cover +8.5, CIN to cover +7.5, CHI to cover +8.5 $20 bet to win $52. Well, there it is, for week 5. Wish me luck. I have wagered a total of $315.00 to win $2417.38. ($342.42 if you exclude my "lotto ticket", which I probably won't win!) Hopefully I do well, and will continue this next week, if it is a disaster I may just forget about it, LOL, I don't feel like setting money on fire!

Sometimes people in here discuss our prospects as if they are going to be 100% success rate. When you mention Meyer, Stewart, and Berrios, please keep in mind that with the average success rate of prospects, especially pitching prospects, that likely gives us one good pitcher, if we are lucky, not 3.

I would really like to see that list of the 7 "core" players who made their debut this year.

This is not 'Nam, there are rules.

Yeah, this is a no brainer. http://bringvictory.com/

Would you, could you, on a boat? I could not, would not, on a boat. I will not, will not, with a goat. I will not try it in the rain. I will not try it on a train. Not in the dark! Not in a tree! Not in a car! You let me be! I do not like it in a box. I do not like it with a fox. I will not try it in a house. I do not like it with a mouse. I do not like it here or there. I do not like it ANYWHERE! I do not like Obamacare! I do not like it, Sam-I-am. You do not like it. SO you say. Try it! Try it! And you may. Try it and you may I say. Sam! If you will let me be, I will try it. You will see. Say! I like Obamacare! I do!! I like it, Sam-I-am! And I would try it in a boat! And I would try it with a goat... And I will try it in the rain. And in the dark. And on a train. And in a car. And in a tree. It is so good so good you see! So I will try it in a box. And I will try it with a fox. And I will try it in a house. And I will try it with a mouse. And I will try it here and there. Say! I will try it ANHYWHERE! I do so like Obamacare! Thank you! Thank you, Sam-I-am

Do you like Obamacare? I do not like it, Sam-I-am. I do not like Obamacare. Would you like it Here or there? I would not like it here or there. I would not like it anywhere. I do not like Obamacare. I do not like it, Sam-I-am Would you like it in a house? Would you like it with a mouse? I do not like it in a house. I do not like it with a mouse. I do not like it here or there. I do not like it anywhere. I do not like Obamacare. I do not like it, Sam-I-am. Would you try it in a box? Would you try it with a fox? Not in a box. Not with a fox. Not in a house. Not with a mouse. I would not try it here or there. I would not try it anywhere. I would not try Obamacare. I do not like it, Sam-I-am. Would you? Could you? in a car? Try it! Try it! Here it is. I woould not , could not, in a car You may like it. You will see. You may like it in a tree? not in a tree. I would not, could not in a tree. Not in a car! You let me be. I do not like it in a box. I do not like it with a fox I do not like it in a house I do mot like it with a mouse I do not like it here or there. I do not like it anywhere. I do not like Obamacare. I do not like it Sam-I-am. A train! A train! A train! A train! Could you, would you on a train? Not on a train! Not in a tree! Not in a car! Sam! Let me be! I would not, could not, in a box. I could not, would not, with a fox. I will not try it with a mouse I will not try it in a house. I will not try it here or there. I will not try it anywhere. I do not like it, Sam-I-am. Say! In the dark? Here in the dark! Would you, could you, in the dark? I would not, could not, in the dark. Would you, could you, in the rain? I would not, could not, in the rain. Not in the dark. Not on a train, Not in a car, Not in a tree. I do not like it, Sam, you see. Not in a house. Not in a box. Not with a mouse. Not with a fox. I will not try it here or there. I do not like it anywhere! You do not like Obamacare? I do not like it, Sam-I-am. Could you, would you, with a goat? I would not, could not. with a goat!

One final thing, did anyone else notice the comical irony of Ted Cruz reading Green Eggs and Ham during his marathon tantrum? You could basically replace the words "Green Eggs and Ham" with "Obamacare", and it would have summed up quite well certain people's stubborn rejection of something that we simply do not KNOW for sure will be a good or bad thing, long term.

And that was a huge part of the problem. Young people who CAN afford insurance, but selfishly go without it, then shift the burden to the rest of us when something catastrophic happens and they wind up in the ER, ICU or life support with a 500k medical bill that they will never pay. You talk about the fairness of forcing people who don't want insurance to buy it. Well, how fair is it that people who can afford insurance would rather pass the cost on to everyone else when something terrible happens?

Well, I won't venture into the religious aspects of the discussion. But I will say that the Republicans are being childish. You don't have to like the law, but the process should be respected. The law was passed by Congress. It was upheld by the Supreme Court. It was upheld by the People when they overwhelmingly re elected President Obama. Again, people don't have to like the law, that is okay. But, respect the process, don't throw a tantrum like a little kid just because you didn't get your way.

Compared to Gardy, Dusty Baker has had remarkable playoff success.

Nathan is not a HOF'er. Average HOF RP JAWS: 34.4 Nathan JAWS: 24.4 RP's do not belong in the HOF, IMO, unless they have a remarkable Mo Rivera type career. Even the best of them (again, aside from Mo), just do not have nearly enough impact on the game, IMO, to belong in the HOF. To me, that would be akin to comparing 4th OF'er stats, and inducting a guy into the HOF because he's was one of the best 4th OF'ers of his era, or a guy was one of the best backup catchers of his era, or a guy was one of the best pinch hitters of his era.

He gave himself a 2 year extension too? Great.

I think the fact the word "surprise" even comes to mind regarding the release of a negative WAR, 31 year old relief pitcher with no upside, on a 96 loss team, speaks volumes to the way this organization is typically run. The fact that he was let go this soon at least gives me a little bit of hope that they ARE in fact committed to doing things different than the way they have done in the past.

Who cares if the bullpen was good? This organization just does not get it. The bullpen has value if you are a playoff caliber team, but even then the value is very small. The WAR of an entire good bullpen might be right around the WAR for one very good good starting pitcher. The value of a good bullpen on a 96 loss team? That is like putting $5k rims on an '86 Ford Escort.

Count me in the Ruesse camp. Gardy has created, or at least allowed, a culture of "i'll play when I want to play" to take over the clubhouse. Say what you want about Ruesse, but there is NOBODY in this market who has more baseball sources than him, and if he says that part of the reason Cuddyer wanted out was because of the culture of "entitlement" that has been created, I believe him. Far too often guys miss far too many games with extremely minor injuries. And on another sub topic that has been brought up in this thread, I really don't understand the statement, "...the worst thing they could do is cave into fan pressure..." LOL, what? Aren't the fans the customers? As a business owner, I have to say that placing such minimal value on customer satisfaction is pretty laughable. I'm trying to picture myself telling a disgruntled customer that I can't really go around appeasing my customers, I'm not sure I'd keep much business if I did so.

Your argument only holds water if Gardy and Anderson are let go. Ryan doesn't get to claim his players underachieved if he is just going to bring back the field staff who is in charge of getting players to play to their capabilities.

Rather than continue off topic in the Tubby Out thread, I'll start a new one. Once again, those of you with faith in coach Kill, wake me up when he can do anything in the Big 10. How many years does he get a free pass, while continuing to get curb stomped by any quality Big 10 team we play, before people realize that he is basically Tim Brewster, but with a cupcake non conference schedule? Sure, he's a better person than Brewster, so please don't think that I'm comparing them in that regard, but results wise, it's more of the same. This isn't Northern, Southern, Eastern, or Western Illinois, this is the Big Ten. If you need any further proof that Jerry Kill is in way over his head competing in MAJOR college football, simply read his comments regarding the QB "controversy" (I put controversy in quotes, because IMO it shouldn't even be a "controversy", Phillip Nelson shouldn't even take a snap unless it's garbage time). Jerry Kill literally said that you can't bench a player if he plays bad, because that sets a poor example for team chemistry. So, to interpret Kill's own words, if you want a coach that will tell his players, "good game boys, you got dominated in every phase, but you tried hard, now lets all go get ice cream", then he's your man. Unfortunately, that's not good enough for me, I'm sorry but this isn't Pop Warner, results matter.

Really? Tell me which teams in the Central had more talent than those teams? Those teams had a ton of talent. How many rosters over the last 30 years or so have had a batting champ, MVP, Cy Young, and all star closer all on the same roster? If you think I'm saying that players don't need effort you are misunderstanding me. I would think that when it comes to PROFESSIONAL sports, the effort level is implied.

Well, Terry Ryan disagrees with the underlined, according to the quote of his that I posted.

Not unless you clicked on anything you were redirected to. Typically viruses and spyware are like vampires, they can't come in unless they are invited.

I will try to make this a weekly occurrence. Here are my 5 predictions for today's game. 1) Time to ponder a change at QB? Frazier and Co. will have a very hard time defending Ponder as the starting QB after today's game. The Browns are not a very good team, but they do have a solid defense, and I just don't think Ponder is the guy. 2) AD unleashed. Peterson is too talented to be stopped like he has been. The overall numbers look okay, but not up to Peterson's standards, especially when you take into account that 78 yards came on the first play of the season. He's pissed off with the way he's played so far, and an angry and motivated AP is a scary thought for any defense, even one as good as Cleveland's. He will put up big numbers today. 3) Phase 3 will be the key. I think this game will be closer than many think. No, the Browns are not a good team to start with, and now they are on their 3rd string QB and have brought in Willis McGahee at RB to replace traded Trent Richardson. But, the offensive style that Musgrave employs, along with our passive, bend but don't break Tampa 2 defense, virtually ensures that even the least talented team we play is going to be able to eat clock and keep games close. Therefore I think today's game will be decided by the special teams. Whoever wins that battle will likely win. The Vikings will need some big kicks by Walsh, and much better coverage than last week against. 4) The TE/RB passing game will continue to be our kryptonite. The Vikings have historically been susceptible to being destroyed by opposing TE's and RB's in the passing game in this Tampa 2 defense. That trend has continued this year, last week we were picked apart by Bennett and Forte, and in week 1 it was Reggie Bush. Pettitgrew was also open all day in week 1, but luckily for us Stafford doesn't trust him, so he didn't kill us. I'm not sure the Browns have any weapons out of the backfield in the passing game on the Bush/Forte level, but Jordan Cameron will have a monster day against our D. 5) Hey, a win is a win, right? I think the Vikes get out with a win today. They are the more talented team, and are at home. But, I'm not sure it's a win that has us feeling very good. It will be an "ugly" win, and will be close. 24-20 is my prediction. Thoughts?

Regarding his post game comments, I took less from his piranha comment, and more from his description of the A's players "getting after it". I am getting so tired of these "Gardyisms". For as long as he's been around baseball, it is shocking to me that Gardy still thinks it's "getting after it", and not talent that wins games. This is part of the philosophy that has to go! This meek, passive belief that there is something special about our organization that will allow us to win with a bunch of untalented players, simply because they try hard and "get after it". The division titles came because we had talented rosters. Hunter, Cuddyer, Kubel, Santana, Liriano, Mauer, Morneau, Nathan, etc. Those guys performed because they are good players, not because they "got after it" and "battled their tails off".