Udder Stuff

Man, this two post per day pace is quite the grind....  It's just a lucky thing that I've got nothing to do and all day to do it...

Ryder Cup Ruminations - OK, Shack again gets the lede, by boldly going where no man should tread:

Poll: Should Jim Furyk Revisit A Tiger-Phil Ryder Cup Pairing?

No, next question please.  Seriously, what are you thinking?  Actually, Geoff takes the con position:

While Eamon Lynch at Golfweek joins the choir of Phil Mickelson dissenters in saying Lefty should be left off the 2018 Ryder Cup team, we all know he's going to be on the

team because of his match play prowess and ability to elevate the game of a younger playing partner (see Bradley, Fowler, Kisner).

Given the unsuccessful 2004 Ryder Cup pairing by Captain Hal Sutton, the idea seems implausible, yet they each may play just 18 a day in Paris and could make for a natural pairing. I say no way, Jaime Diaz in today's Alternate Shot said yes it should happen.

You'll have to click through to watch that Morning Drive video, but how do I get a piece of Shack's press?

At the risk of taking this far too seriously, I'm a tad surprised that there was no clarification of which format was under consideration.  Neither of these guys should be out there in foursomes, and they'd each benefit from a more consistent partner in best ball.

Alan Shipnuck had no shortage of Ryder Cup-related queries in his mailbag as well:

When Bryson contends, he inspires me to practice, play, experiment. When Jordan contends (holing putts from everywhere) I want to put the clubs away. When Tiger contends, I just want to watch. What inspires you? -@JeffSanchezPGA 

This is quite a thought-provoking question. I love watching DJ, et al do their thing but I’m most inspired by the gritty grinders – the Brian Gays and Kevin Nas of the world, who can’t overpower a course and instead have to rely on guile and precision. I know I can’t smash a 250 yard 5-iron like Koepka – that’s an entirely different game. But if I was more dedicated I could sort of replicate what Zach Johnson does, so that’s why I enjoy watching such masters. Although I should add that thanks to Bryson I’m now playing a single-length set of Edel irons so clearly I know the mania of which you speak.

Good question and answer, though while I agree with him on the appeal of watching the grinders, I find it interesting that he picked two of the most unwatchable of the genus-species.   Zack, for sure, Kevin Na, not with a gun to my head....

Is Bryson underrated? #AskAlan -@PurdeuMatt05 

I think he’s both under- and overrated. Three wins in the span of 13 months at the age of 24 is pretty special. But there is so much noise around Bryson – much of warranted, admittedly – that his actual accomplishments have largely gotten lost, which makes him underrated. On the other hand, he receives way more attention than Brooks Koepka, which would makDeChambeau very overrated. So even in this way Bryson remains enigmatic.

It is prett special, and it also happens to be the same total number of wins that that other guy has....  Of course Bryson gets more ink than the average bear, he's the weirdest cat out there.

Please tell me Tony is in the Ryder Cup, yeah? -@NoRealSports 

At this point, it’s hard to imagine Finau has not locked up his spot. I’ve felt all along that Cap. Furyk would want as many hardened veterans as possible to take into a hostile environment, but while Zach Johnson has been solid Finau has been borderline-spectacular. No other Ryder Cup veteran has done anything this summer to warrant consideration. This U.S. team is so deep Furyk now has the luxury of picking specialists, much like USA Basketball selecting a defensive stopper to fill a specific need. Finau could be a monster in fourballs — just pair him with a steady partner and turn him loose.

I agree with his logic, but beg to differ on the conclusion.  Who exactly are those four steady partners he needs for fourballs, and are there enough to also cover foursomes?  I assume that Furyk will do as suggested yesterday, and take Tiger, Phil and Bryson next week, leaving him another event before that last selection.  Which segues nicely into this:

If Spieth-Reed and Tiger-Bryson are “locks” to be pairings, what are a couple other American duos you’d like to see? -@ScottMichaux 

Tiger and Phil, of course! I’ve been saying for months it’s gonna happen, despite Furyk’s protestations. I still believe it will. How about a pairing of the Bash Brothers, Brooks and Dustin? I wouldn’t want to be the poor Euros who have to handle all that virility and machismo. I also want to see Tiger-PReed, because that will be extra saucy. And a Jordan-JT combo could also be great, given their chemistry. This U.S. team is so stacked there are almost too many possibilities.

Hmmm.... lets' start by challenging the assumption that the Spieth-Reed team will remain intact.  Remember their match in Austin, when Reed spoke of his back hurting after the prior Ryder Cup?  Facing facts, Jordan's game is at a strange juncture, especially problematic for alternate shot, and I'll be quite surprised if he plays all five sessions.

I'd be shocked if The Bash Brothers aren't paired in best ball, but I don't see Tiger with Reed.  Although, now that he's eschewing red on Sundays, perhaps rapprochement is possible....

I guess this fits here as well:

So you think Brooks’s success will cause Dustin to try harder and could that actually hurt Dustin’s game? #askalan -Sam (@swilliams8) 

Dustin is already trying quite hard – the guy grinds in the gym, on the range and even at the dinner table. But no doubt DJ’s pride is hurting. He’s always been the swami/big brother in that relationship and now quite suddenly he has been utterly eclipsed by his protégé. Dustin’s and Brooks’s lives are so incestuous: same swing coach, trainer and management firm. If any strain does develop in their relationship it will get very complicated very fast. Hopefully Dustin does some soul-searching and figures out what Brooks has found that allows him to shine on the biggest stages, because that is the missing piece in Johnson’s career. It would be awesome if DJ picks off another major or two next year and turns a friendship into an epic rivalry.

Well, DJ isn't known for doing "complicated", so I'm not staying up nights on this issue.

 What Happens in Vegas... - OK, so I buried the lede above.  Tiger and Phil will not be paired in Paris for one obvious reason, that being $24.99.  As the old joke has it, business is business.

Jason Sobel has a vision for the Battle in the Desert, a vision that's been clouded with the recent news:

As I’ve written previously, I’m all-in for the impending Tiger Woods-Phil Mickelson match in Las Vegas during Thanksgiving weekend. 

Well, I was all-in. 

Now I’m just mostly in, based on the latest news to be leaked about the event.

It’s not the money that has me pulling back. I’d never begrudge anyone the potential for a hefty paycheck, even if it’s a couple of insanely rich dudes going after $9 million.

Some have suggested it would mean more if they were playing for their own money; I think there should be — and maybe it just hasn’t been announced yet — a charitable component to the proceedings. 

None of that would keep me from being fully invested in the fate of this match, though. It’s the idea of this being a reported $24.99 pay-per-view event that really rubs me the wrong way.

All of us, Jason.

The vision is a betting extravaganza, including:

“Buy” some mulligans 

We’ve all done it in the annual scramble to support the local Little League team: Plunk down an extra $20, then gratuitously keep putting those 10-footers until one of ‘em finally drops for birdie. Well, even if mullies were $10K for these guys, they wouldn’t flinch. So we need a different method of payment. 

Here’s the idea: For each shot they want a redo, Tiger or Phil must look into the camera and speak in glowing terms about the other player for 30 seconds. 

I mean, like, really pour it on. And the complimented player must approve that the terms were glowing enough, or else, well, the other guy will have to take a mulligan on his mulligan take. 

Let’s limit this to one time per side, out of fear of it turning into some sort of love-fest out there.

Yanno, I find myself longing for the good old days when these guys rightfully hated each other.  The PPV price point was obviously the last straw, but I'm finding myself hoping that it blows up in their faces....

Udder Alan - he had more good stuff, including this gem:

What would be the response (from you, the public, the press, and the PGA) if Finau somehow wins the FedEx Cup without winning a single tournament all year? #AskAlan -Bud (@tombagjr) 

I would consider it the greatest thing ever, because it would highlight how kooky the points system has been all along. Clearly this doomsday scenario haunts the dreams of various Tour executives, which is why we’re getting yet another tweak to the points race.

On the other hand, remember when that tree fell in the forest?

And this, which I could have included in the prior sub-post:

#AskAlan Count me out for pay-per-view on Phil vs. Tiger. But being in the gallery could be fun. How many fans* will be in? *non agent, sponsor, media, etc. -Alex (@alwilly13) 

Not many! Because that entails paying for more buses to bring in fans to a remote location, food vendors to feed them, bathrooms, etc., and that just cuts into the almighty bottom line. This is purely a television show and all the organizers want are a few hundred warm bodies to ring each green so it doesn’t look too barren on TV. They’ll get those numbers from the minions in your asterisk.

C'mon, who wants to deal with all those pesky civilians when the guys are demontrating how they keep it real.

How do you square Tiger’s diplomacy when asked about his relationship with Trump with the racism he has faced playing what has historically been an all- white sport? -Andrew (@BordrWallflower) 

To borrow from one of our greatest philosophers, it is what it is.

Huh?  I don't even pretend to understand what one thing has to do with the other, but has anyone ever asked Tiger how he could play golf with Obama?

Stat So? -  Shane Ryan and Mark Broadie combine forces to generate this interesting analysis:

Which players step up the most at majors? New stat answers an old question

An interesting premise, I'll grant you.  The idea was triggered by a Jason Sobel item that used finish order, but with Broadie crunching the numbers we'll obviously use strokes gained.  After all, he invented the metric and literally wrote the book on it.

The astute reader will have sense the "but" on the horizon, as the results, excluding Brooks and Jordan, are not at all what we'd have expected:

Seriously, Victor Dubuisson?  So, before diving in, I thought you might enjoy the bottom twenty:

I do encourage you to focus on the years the data cover, as it excludes majors won by McDowell, Bradley and Watson (the first of his two Masters).

Here is the authors' rousing coda:

SG/Major Outperformance answers a very old question, but more than that, it shines a light on what we’ve seen but only half understood with our own eyes. Yes, Jordan Spieth (0.79) has an extra gear in majors, even when he’s struggling. Yes, Jon Rahm (-0.86) has failed to contain his emotions and find a measure of stability in the biggest events. Yes, Alex Noren (-0.74) seems to light it up every week before disappearing four times per year. Yes, there was something a bit magical about the brief emergence of Victor Dubuisson (0.83). 

The fascinating examples don’t end there. As Rickie Fowler (0.55) enters his 30s without a major, isn’t it more tragic that he’s defined by the lack of a title at tournaments where he excels? Doesn’t it shine a harsh light on players who lack the length to score big at modern major courses (Graeme McDowell, -0.31) or who have lost their putting touch with the years (Keegan Bradley, -0.36)? Like other great stats, SG Major Outperformance tells new stories while adding color to old ones. It’s a number that transcends numbers.

Hmmm, was it really the years that caused Keegs to lose his putting touch?  Are you guys sure there wasn't some sort of external event.... Eh, never mind.

But how should we react when such a rigorous analysis yields such garbage results?  I'm not sure what in their methodology undermined it, but I had actually hoped it would identify guys that have the game to win majors, but hadn't yet broken through.  There's a couple of those, Fowler, Xander and Finau most notably, but when they're buried amid Steve Stricker and Robert Streb, it's more likely that it's just statistical noise perhaps from a small sample size.

Broadie has done great work in this field, but this isn't worthy of his reputation.

See you tomorrow, but I'm imposing a one-post limit.