WEBVTT - 2018 Waste Management Open Preview and Picks 0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:02.560 I miss a green, for example, I'm already upset. 0:00:02.680 --> 0:00:04.960 When I find my ball in the bunker, I'm really upset. 0:00:05.040 --> 0:00:05.920 And when I find my. 0:00:05.920 --> 0:00:09.000 Ball in a brid egg Friday egg, the dreaded Friday egg, 0:00:09.080 --> 0:00:11.280 Frida Egg Frida egg. 0:00:11.200 --> 0:00:13.440 Bride egg Lie, I'm about ready to run off. 0:00:13.240 --> 0:00:14.160 The golf course. 0:00:40.159 --> 0:00:44.160 All right, Polly and Kyle, We're back for another podcast 0:00:44.200 --> 0:00:48.640 about fantasy golf and this week's waste management open. How 0:00:48.640 --> 0:00:50.920 are you guys doing, Hey. 0:00:50.720 --> 0:00:51.360 Guys, what's up? 0:00:52.560 --> 0:00:54.040 Not too much? How about you? 0:00:56.000 --> 0:01:00.840 I'm reveling in the fact that caddies might be overrated. 0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:08.440 Jason Day capturing the w Unfortunately, his withdrawal from the 0:01:08.959 --> 0:01:12.039 Tuesday Pro or Wednesday Pro am threw me for a 0:01:12.080 --> 0:01:16.720 loop and made me change my pick. Very very sad 0:01:16.760 --> 0:01:18.240 weekend watching him win. 0:01:19.000 --> 0:01:21.440 Hindsight's a little bit twenty twenty right there, right. 0:01:22.640 --> 0:01:25.840 Hey, our listeners know I picked him. 0:01:26.120 --> 0:01:28.399 I don't blame you, though. There was literally probably a 0:01:28.640 --> 0:01:33.840 seventy percent chance he was not going to finish two rounds, 0:01:34.200 --> 0:01:36.600 and obviously the other thirty percent was that he does 0:01:36.640 --> 0:01:40.160 and he wins, and he played great, I mean, three 0:01:40.319 --> 0:01:41.400 incredible rounds. 0:01:41.720 --> 0:01:43.360 Yeah, I think about it after the first day. You 0:01:43.400 --> 0:01:45.080 weren't that mad, though, Andy, right, I mean he was 0:01:45.080 --> 0:01:47.880 a couple over par, right, I think, And you're thinking 0:01:47.920 --> 0:01:49.280 I might have missed the cut and then all of 0:01:49.280 --> 0:01:51.280 a sudden puts together a heck of around on the 0:01:51.280 --> 0:01:53.760 north course on Friday, and all of a sudden backing attention. 0:01:54.320 --> 0:01:58.120 Yeah, I just have been I think the last time 0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:02.480 I picked Jason Day, he withdrew mid tournament. So I've 0:02:02.560 --> 0:02:06.840 just been, you know, foiled by Jason Day and his injuries, 0:02:06.880 --> 0:02:09.840 his flukey injuries for two years. 0:02:09.919 --> 0:02:10.440 Every time he. 0:02:10.440 --> 0:02:13.760 Shoots seventy three to open up at the Farmers, we 0:02:13.800 --> 0:02:15.839 need to hammer him to win because that he did 0:02:15.840 --> 0:02:17.000 that a couple of years ago. Too. 0:02:17.600 --> 0:02:19.280 Well, I think it's another the fourth or fifth year 0:02:19.280 --> 0:02:21.560 in a row you've had somebody that shot even or 0:02:21.600 --> 0:02:22.920 worse in the first round win the event. 0:02:24.600 --> 0:02:27.839 It's it's not good to have the fifty four hole lead, 0:02:27.919 --> 0:02:29.480 for sure. What did you guys think of Tiger? 0:02:31.639 --> 0:02:34.320 I was really impressed go ahead ball. 0:02:34.600 --> 0:02:36.120 I think it was a little surprising the fact that 0:02:36.600 --> 0:02:38.760 going into it we expected his short game to kind 0:02:38.760 --> 0:02:41.639 of be the problem, when in reality his short game 0:02:41.680 --> 0:02:43.120 was pretty good. Now it might have been because the 0:02:43.160 --> 0:02:44.840 rough was long, and he was able to kind of 0:02:45.000 --> 0:02:46.320 get up and down from that, kind of like we 0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:48.959 talked in the pod last week. But surprising me was 0:02:48.960 --> 0:02:51.320 that he was actually more inaccurate off the tea than 0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:52.320 I thought he was going to be. 0:02:54.080 --> 0:02:57.560 Yeah, I thought Thursday he drove it really, really well, 0:02:57.600 --> 0:02:59.799 and I mean he was pummeling his T shots. 0:02:59.800 --> 0:03:00.520 You know, it's hard to tell. 0:03:00.680 --> 0:03:03.040 I didn't always know what Hoffman and Reid were hitting 0:03:03.040 --> 0:03:05.960 off the tee, but I mean Tiger was the last 0:03:05.960 --> 0:03:08.040 to play almost every time that first day, and I 0:03:08.040 --> 0:03:10.880 mean piping his T shots. And then obviously the driver 0:03:10.960 --> 0:03:14.080 got away from him the next three days. But the 0:03:14.160 --> 0:03:16.959 short game, I'm not one hundred percent sold on yet 0:03:17.000 --> 0:03:20.560 because he did miss the green three or four times, 0:03:22.000 --> 0:03:24.480 but he did. I mean, granted, he got up and 0:03:24.560 --> 0:03:27.760 down all day long. I mean, scrambling was terrific. So 0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:31.079 I think it's exciting. I think that he's, you know, basically, 0:03:31.360 --> 0:03:33.799 at the very least, an average tour pro, and can 0:03:33.800 --> 0:03:36.200 an average tour pro win a major in a given year, sure, 0:03:36.480 --> 0:03:38.800 So I mean I think it's exciting. I can't wait 0:03:38.840 --> 0:03:41.200 to see and I hope he gets in contention in 0:03:41.240 --> 0:03:41.920 the near future. 0:03:42.400 --> 0:03:44.600 I like that. Justin ray stat that I put in 0:03:44.600 --> 0:03:48.960 the newsletter this morning that had his strokes gained for 0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:52.520 the week was he was essentially what brooks Kopka was 0:03:52.600 --> 0:03:56.280 all last year. So if he plays like if he 0:03:56.360 --> 0:04:00.440 plays like that, he's gonna win some tournaments probably, right. Yeah. 0:04:00.560 --> 0:04:02.480 The only misleading thing a little bit from this past 0:04:02.480 --> 0:04:04.720 week is that they didn't have strokes gain stats in 0:04:04.720 --> 0:04:06.320 the North course, so it is only from the three 0:04:06.400 --> 0:04:08.760 rounds of the South course. So that's just something to 0:04:08.800 --> 0:04:09.920 keep in mind as we kind of go through the 0:04:09.920 --> 0:04:11.040 fantasy for this week as well. 0:04:11.720 --> 0:04:17.280 So going into fantasy runner up, Alex Norn, who has 0:04:17.600 --> 0:04:22.440 no course history here much like the Farmers, is in 0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:24.520 the field again, but you know a bunch of other 0:04:24.560 --> 0:04:27.520 big names. Alex Norn, are you you riding the hot 0:04:27.600 --> 0:04:28.320 hand this week? 0:04:29.360 --> 0:04:31.840 I don't know if this course suits him? His suits 0:04:31.880 --> 0:04:34.120 him that well. The one interesting fact about last week 0:04:34.160 --> 0:04:36.159 is even though he was in the playoff, he actually 0:04:36.200 --> 0:04:39.920 lost strokes gain putting last week at Tori. So that's 0:04:39.960 --> 0:04:41.720 how good he hit the ball in the win last week. 0:04:42.120 --> 0:04:44.400 So the only question is this week heading you know, 0:04:44.440 --> 0:04:47.920 the Phoenix Open, it's typically one by guys that are 0:04:47.960 --> 0:04:50.400 making a lot of mid range birdie putts because you 0:04:50.400 --> 0:04:52.760 know the winner's gonna have twenty about twenty birdies for 0:04:52.800 --> 0:04:53.840 the week probably. 0:04:54.040 --> 0:04:59.760 But I mean, given Deci's success at in Phoenix and 0:04:59.839 --> 0:05:03.680 he he's not known for his putting prowess. When that, 0:05:03.839 --> 0:05:07.240 you know, the great ball strikers really kind of come 0:05:07.279 --> 0:05:09.640 to the top, rise to the top here. 0:05:11.160 --> 0:05:13.040 Potentially. But I mean you're looking kind of at like 0:05:13.080 --> 0:05:15.960 an individual basis there. Decky's actually I think, you know, 0:05:16.120 --> 0:05:18.760 putted pretty decent there in the past. I think his 0:05:18.839 --> 0:05:21.720 last his last three years, he's actually gained strokes putting 0:05:21.920 --> 0:05:24.200 at Phoenix. So that's kind of the reason that he's 0:05:24.240 --> 0:05:26.080 not the reason he's won, but he just had he 0:05:26.080 --> 0:05:27.840 had the lead approach game. He gained I think fourteen 0:05:27.839 --> 0:05:30.720 shots approached the last two years there, and I think 0:05:30.720 --> 0:05:33.040 he's getined I think twenty eight shots his last four 0:05:33.080 --> 0:05:35.880 years there on approach when he's finished top four of 0:05:35.880 --> 0:05:38.240 a year. So that's just kind of you know, insane 0:05:38.240 --> 0:05:39.720 approach game where I don't know if if no one 0:05:39.839 --> 0:05:40.520 is to that level. 0:05:41.160 --> 0:05:44.520 So are the stats you're looking at this week approach 0:05:44.560 --> 0:05:46.880 and putting for the most part or. 0:05:48.720 --> 0:05:51.640 For Phoenix Open I usually don't actually look at that 0:05:51.760 --> 0:05:55.080 many stats. I kind of look based upon It's more 0:05:55.080 --> 0:05:57.040 of a field tournament for me in terms of how 0:05:57.080 --> 0:06:00.120 I think guys games apply to this golf court and 0:06:00.200 --> 0:06:02.520 kind of looking at course history a little bit because 0:06:02.560 --> 0:06:04.600 it's still early in the year, so it's really tough 0:06:04.640 --> 0:06:07.520 to track, you know, what their current stats are, especially 0:06:07.560 --> 0:06:09.680 when you had the strokes gain stats of the career 0:06:09.720 --> 0:06:11.640 build a couple of weeks ago, we only had it 0:06:11.680 --> 0:06:13.800 for the one course. Last week, we only had it 0:06:13.800 --> 0:06:15.680 for three out of four rounds, So there's a little 0:06:15.680 --> 0:06:18.240 bit of, you know, not being entirely sure on some 0:06:18.279 --> 0:06:18.800 of the data. 0:06:21.760 --> 0:06:26.440 So HIDUCKI coming in hasn't finished outside the top four, 0:06:27.160 --> 0:06:29.800 you know, is he Obviously he's going to be a 0:06:29.880 --> 0:06:35.440 chalky pick two time defending champion. Are you riding him 0:06:35.520 --> 0:06:38.560 or are you looking to go contrarian this week? 0:06:39.920 --> 0:06:41.680 It's gonna be pretty hard for me to fade him 0:06:41.680 --> 0:06:44.839 this week just because he's gone he said two wins 0:06:44.839 --> 0:06:47.080 I think, a second and a fourth here, and each 0:06:47.080 --> 0:06:49.200 of those four years he's had at least nineteen birdies 0:06:49.240 --> 0:06:52.400 and hasn't shot over par on this golf course. So 0:06:52.600 --> 0:06:55.640 between that upside and consistency, and the fact that we 0:06:55.680 --> 0:06:57.880 saw a little bit of flashes of the old Hiducky 0:06:57.920 --> 0:07:00.160 this past week at Tori, and of course that he 0:07:00.240 --> 0:07:03.839 traditionally struggles at I'm probably going to be using Hadeki, 0:07:03.880 --> 0:07:05.760 although we do have a lot of other good options at. 0:07:05.640 --> 0:07:08.960 The top, Fowler being one of them. 0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:12.120 Fowler follower is really good course history here. Yeah, and 0:07:12.160 --> 0:07:15.440 I think he may go a touch under owned, even 0:07:15.480 --> 0:07:17.600 though his price is pretty low this week. Just because 0:07:17.600 --> 0:07:19.600 he missed the cut last week, people kind of you know, 0:07:19.880 --> 0:07:21.440 get burned by him and may not put him in 0:07:21.440 --> 0:07:23.720 their lineup. They may, you know, choose somebody else. So 0:07:23.960 --> 0:07:26.160 I think he's definitely the out option this week. Yeah. 0:07:26.280 --> 0:07:30.760 It is Folllower's first miss cut since last June, and 0:07:31.760 --> 0:07:34.520 I was looking, I was writing the newsletter this morning 0:07:34.560 --> 0:07:37.960 on the plane that was on. He's He's racked up 0:07:38.080 --> 0:07:42.320 nine top ten finishes in his last fourteen starts. It's 0:07:42.400 --> 0:07:45.800 not not too shabby with him only miss cut coming 0:07:45.880 --> 0:07:46.440 last week. 0:07:47.120 --> 0:07:48.360 Yeah, And it's one of those things like if you're 0:07:48.360 --> 0:07:50.920 looking on a drafting side, you know, he's a leve 0:07:50.960 --> 0:07:54.480 one hundred dollars lesson Manciya'm on one thousand dollars lesson speed. 0:07:54.560 --> 0:07:56.320 So that's that's a lot of our salary savings in 0:07:56.360 --> 0:07:57.080 the drafting side. 0:07:57.840 --> 0:08:00.360 So you got you got five of the top seven 0:08:00.400 --> 0:08:05.040 players in the world outside of Matsuyama Fowler, you got 0:08:05.080 --> 0:08:10.920 Spieth Ram, Justin Thomas also in the field, and then 0:08:11.080 --> 0:08:15.280 I mean there's a really really good field. Who else 0:08:15.360 --> 0:08:18.800 do you like kind of of the bigger names in 0:08:18.840 --> 0:08:19.960 this event. 0:08:20.920 --> 0:08:22.640 Of the bigger names, I would probably I had to 0:08:22.680 --> 0:08:24.800 pick up a third person beside the DECI and follow, 0:08:24.840 --> 0:08:27.800 I would probably go Ram. And I think the reason 0:08:27.800 --> 0:08:30.280 behind that is people kind of saw that he really 0:08:30.320 --> 0:08:33.400 struggled this past weekend and that may kind of push 0:08:33.480 --> 0:08:35.840 him off a little bit. But he's going back to 0:08:35.880 --> 0:08:39.800 Arizona where he went to school, very familiar with desert golf, 0:08:40.320 --> 0:08:42.520 and the fact that the reason, you know, he kind 0:08:42.520 --> 0:08:44.560 of played bad last week was actually on the greens 0:08:44.559 --> 0:08:46.600 in the approach game, he actually led the field and 0:08:46.640 --> 0:08:49.640 strokes gained off the tea last week. I mean, albeit 0:08:49.640 --> 0:08:51.079 it was only for the three US in the south course, 0:08:51.120 --> 0:08:53.560 but still it's pretty amazing considering he finished I don't 0:08:53.559 --> 0:08:54.880 know what thirtieth or something like that. 0:08:55.080 --> 0:08:57.920 For you. Yeah, I saw he lost like six shots 0:08:58.000 --> 0:09:00.520 on the greens the last two rounds, which. 0:09:00.520 --> 0:09:02.560 Yeah, I think you lost something similar to that actually 0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:05.760 approaching the green, which is which is where he's usually 0:09:05.800 --> 0:09:07.720 you know, his best part of his game is usually 0:09:08.000 --> 0:09:09.679 his you know, short mid irons. 0:09:09.760 --> 0:09:14.160 So I think then there's a pretty next clear tier 0:09:14.440 --> 0:09:20.360 where you've got You've got Leishman, Berger, Noorrin, Final Simpson 0:09:20.440 --> 0:09:25.920 who has great course history. JB. Holmes who might get 0:09:26.000 --> 0:09:30.319 booed in it when he gets in sixteen, Gary Woodland, 0:09:30.400 --> 0:09:33.640 Phil and Coocher who do you like from here? 0:09:34.840 --> 0:09:37.360 I would probably go web in this group. So Webb 0:09:37.440 --> 0:09:39.760 has been you know, kind of figured out his potter 0:09:39.920 --> 0:09:42.000 back in the fall season in the beginning of this year, 0:09:42.400 --> 0:09:43.840 and you know, I think you lost in a playoff 0:09:43.840 --> 0:09:46.320 here last year to a decy, So I'd be looking 0:09:46.320 --> 0:09:48.720 for him to continue that success this week most likely. 0:09:49.520 --> 0:09:51.560 Oh Woodland. Woodland played well last week. 0:09:51.559 --> 0:09:54.520 I know he got off to a rough start yesterday, 0:09:54.559 --> 0:09:56.880 but he seems just seems to be a course that 0:09:56.920 --> 0:09:59.880 would fit him well. 0:10:00.800 --> 0:10:03.480 Possibly. I mean, for some reason he likes playing at 0:10:03.520 --> 0:10:05.280 Toy a lot, just based upon the way the t 0:10:05.440 --> 0:10:07.320 shots set up. So when he was playing at Tory, 0:10:07.800 --> 0:10:09.959 all the holes that are dogged like left rights a 0:10:09.960 --> 0:10:12.280 little bit are holes you have to driver and the 0:10:12.280 --> 0:10:14.040 holes that are working right left you had a layup on. 0:10:14.080 --> 0:10:17.199 So that really suits his game, whereas here he hasn't 0:10:17.200 --> 0:10:19.640 had that much success. He only has one top ten 0:10:19.720 --> 0:10:21.760 finish and in eight starts and has missed two of 0:10:21.760 --> 0:10:22.880 his last three cuts here. 0:10:22.880 --> 0:10:23.880 So that's crazy. 0:10:24.360 --> 0:10:27.120 I wouldn't necessarily pick him as the best option this week. 0:10:29.280 --> 0:10:33.360 It's Austin Cook getting a big, big salary at eighty 0:10:33.400 --> 0:10:38.120 three hundred, highest rookie on the board. Obviously he's played 0:10:38.120 --> 0:10:42.360 really well, but ahead of you know, Ryan Moore, some 0:10:42.440 --> 0:10:47.120 other guys like Chapel Paton Kazaire. What do you think 0:10:47.120 --> 0:10:48.800 about these guys in this area. 0:10:49.400 --> 0:10:52.400 Yeah, I like Austin Cook this week. One of my 0:10:53.040 --> 0:10:55.120 comp players that I do for rookies, I try to 0:10:55.120 --> 0:10:57.680 compare who are they really like on the PGA Tour 0:10:58.120 --> 0:11:00.600 and try to look at what courses that that PJA 0:11:00.640 --> 0:11:02.920 Tour player has played well in the past. So Austin 0:11:02.920 --> 0:11:04.800 Cook reminds me a little bit of Web Simpson in 0:11:04.880 --> 0:11:07.400 terms of very accurate off the tee and you know, 0:11:07.760 --> 0:11:09.920 very very solid with the iron game from you know, 0:11:10.000 --> 0:11:13.439 one seventy five, and if they can catch a hot putter, 0:11:13.880 --> 0:11:16.160 that's when they're they're, you know, getting top five finishes. 0:11:16.200 --> 0:11:20.000 Otherwise they're just a top thirty machine. So I really 0:11:20.040 --> 0:11:22.120 like Austin Cook this week. I'd rather play him than 0:11:22.160 --> 0:11:25.800 than JB. Holmes, is I have. I think he's gonna 0:11:25.800 --> 0:11:26.800 be way over on this week. 0:11:28.600 --> 0:11:31.079 Yeah, he's got good course history here, right, JB. 0:11:31.880 --> 0:11:33.599 Yeah, he's He's one year twice as a couple of 0:11:33.600 --> 0:11:35.920 other high finishes. The only issue I have is that 0:11:36.840 --> 0:11:39.319 he usually does it based on ball striking. And if 0:11:39.320 --> 0:11:41.800 we look at last week at Tory, he gained ten 0:11:41.840 --> 0:11:44.480 and a half shots on the greens putting last week 0:11:44.480 --> 0:11:46.160 at Tory in those three rounds of the soft course, 0:11:46.520 --> 0:11:49.079 and he was only he was less than a shot 0:11:49.240 --> 0:11:51.880 above the above field average in all the parts of 0:11:51.880 --> 0:11:54.640 the game combined. So if he's not hitting the ball 0:11:54.640 --> 0:11:56.960 that great, they may not work out. Weilet Phoenix Open. 0:11:57.280 --> 0:12:00.640 It was weird. I looked up driving distance stats and 0:12:01.040 --> 0:12:04.040 JAV Holmes was like, he was like forty seventh in 0:12:04.120 --> 0:12:06.480 driving distance. I don't know what was going on. Was 0:12:06.520 --> 0:12:08.360 he not hitting driver a lot last week? 0:12:09.400 --> 0:12:09.640 No? 0:12:09.720 --> 0:12:11.920 I think the driving distant stats are only based I 0:12:11.920 --> 0:12:14.440 think on two or three T balls if I if 0:12:14.480 --> 0:12:16.320 I'm correct, So that might have been one where if 0:12:16.320 --> 0:12:17.800 he hits in the rough, he's not getting the twenty 0:12:17.880 --> 0:12:18.679 thirty yards a role. 0:12:18.960 --> 0:12:20.120 Yeah, that's true. 0:12:20.440 --> 0:12:23.080 So small sample size you get some weird results sometimes, 0:12:23.679 --> 0:12:25.600 so kind. 0:12:25.400 --> 0:12:28.040 Of getting down more into like where we're looking at 0:12:28.080 --> 0:12:33.520 sleepers in you know, seventy seven hundred and below are 0:12:34.200 --> 0:12:37.199 what are some guys that you've got got marked? Our 0:12:37.200 --> 0:12:40.280 boy JJ Spahn had another I think top ten this week. 0:12:40.360 --> 0:12:44.840 Huh Yeah, I'm liking JJ spawn he played here last year, 0:12:45.040 --> 0:12:47.559 had a top five finish and it was second in 0:12:47.600 --> 0:12:50.200 the field in Birdies are Better, which is obviously great 0:12:50.200 --> 0:12:53.560 for draftings. And the other guy I liked in this 0:12:53.640 --> 0:12:56.320 area is Ali Schneider Jans who earned a lot of people, 0:12:56.440 --> 0:12:59.319 including myself in some lineups last week. But he has 0:12:59.360 --> 0:13:01.800 the upside to where he's a guy that can go 0:13:01.840 --> 0:13:04.560 out and make eight, nine, ten berdies in a round 0:13:04.800 --> 0:13:06.320 and you really wouldn't be surprised. 0:13:07.880 --> 0:13:10.800 That's uh. Yeah. Both those guys seem to play well 0:13:11.040 --> 0:13:13.240 generally on the West Coast as well. 0:13:14.240 --> 0:13:16.280 Yeah, I would agree with that, and especially I think 0:13:16.320 --> 0:13:17.960 it's gonna be a little bit of a shootout this week. 0:13:18.000 --> 0:13:20.320 You know, the winning score, you know, between fifteen to 0:13:20.320 --> 0:13:22.480 twenty under. And we've had a ton of the last 0:13:22.480 --> 0:13:24.920 eleven years here that it's been determined either in a 0:13:24.920 --> 0:13:27.439 playoff or a B one shot. So wouldn't be surprised 0:13:27.440 --> 0:13:29.599 if you get another long playoff. It's just kind of 0:13:29.600 --> 0:13:30.800 a trend we've been having all year. 0:13:31.320 --> 0:13:34.440 Yeah, seriously, it would be be a third straight year 0:13:34.440 --> 0:13:38.040 of cutting into the super Bowl if it If it happens. 0:13:38.880 --> 0:13:41.280 Unless JB is in contention. In that case, it may 0:13:41.280 --> 0:13:43.800 go to Monday. 0:13:45.320 --> 0:13:49.400 He is, he is definitely going to He's going to 0:13:49.480 --> 0:13:51.679 have to live with that for a long time now. 0:13:53.160 --> 0:13:55.160 He's getting well, he's getting his four minutes and ten 0:13:55.200 --> 0:13:56.120 seconds of fame from it. 0:13:56.200 --> 0:14:00.960 So yeah, So then we get down into kind of 0:14:01.040 --> 0:14:06.720 more of the the low priced guys and uh, who 0:14:06.760 --> 0:14:09.400 are the who are the guys there worth taking flyers on? 0:14:10.920 --> 0:14:13.559 What about my boy Michael Kim? 0:14:13.960 --> 0:14:14.840 Uh? 0:14:15.240 --> 0:14:17.200 Still not a fan of Michael Kim, even even after 0:14:17.200 --> 0:14:19.040 a performance last week. I Mean I get it because 0:14:19.080 --> 0:14:21.200 he was a local player there and you know, familiar 0:14:21.240 --> 0:14:23.160 with the course and he a pretty good finish, But 0:14:23.840 --> 0:14:25.520 I don't think it's going to trendslate over here to 0:14:25.640 --> 0:14:31.080 uh to uh to Phoenix here. M hm. But one 0:14:31.080 --> 0:14:32.680 guy that I kind of mentioned a little bit last 0:14:32.680 --> 0:14:34.320 week in the pod was kind of talking about Ratief 0:14:34.320 --> 0:14:36.600 Hoosen a little bit, so interesting enough he actually left 0:14:36.640 --> 0:14:39.520 the field and Strokes came to approach last week the 0:14:39.560 --> 0:14:41.520 goose and the Goose is a lie? 0:14:41.920 --> 0:14:47.280 What about what about the go Ted Potter here? What 0:14:47.400 --> 0:14:49.600 about the Goose and Ted Potter bringing it in the 0:14:49.600 --> 0:14:50.560 first round? 0:14:51.400 --> 0:14:53.520 And that's what we get for calling him out on here. 0:14:53.560 --> 0:14:55.680 They obviously obviously had to hear that and give him 0:14:55.680 --> 0:14:56.560 a little bit of inspiration. 0:14:57.880 --> 0:14:59.640 So so you like Goose this week. 0:15:00.600 --> 0:15:02.440 I'm not saying I love him, but I think he's 0:15:02.720 --> 0:15:04.720 definitely an option because I think no one's gonna play him. 0:15:04.720 --> 0:15:06.200 He's gonna be a guy that's going to be one 0:15:06.320 --> 0:15:09.040 or two percent owned at seventy three hundred because guys 0:15:09.080 --> 0:15:12.240 are gonna take you know, Bud Cawley or Molinari or 0:15:12.400 --> 0:15:16.680 Brio or Luke List. They're gonna take those guys over whosin. 0:15:16.720 --> 0:15:19.000 So if you want a guy that's gone for a tournament, 0:15:19.400 --> 0:15:20.400 he's not a bad option. 0:15:21.920 --> 0:15:24.600 You know, I didn't see I didn't see his name, 0:15:25.320 --> 0:15:28.800 which is probably a bad, bad sign. But what happened 0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:30.560 to Andrew Landry last week? 0:15:31.200 --> 0:15:33.240 Yeah, he missed the cut by I think four or 0:15:33.280 --> 0:15:34.440 five shots, so. 0:15:36.880 --> 0:15:41.040 I got a good thing. I didn't make any bets exactly. Yeah, 0:15:41.080 --> 0:15:45.840 So down here, I mean co crack, he hits, he 0:15:45.960 --> 0:15:47.960 mashes the ball. Seems like this could be a place 0:15:48.000 --> 0:15:48.800 he could play well. 0:15:51.040 --> 0:15:53.160 Possibly. The only thing is I don't know if it's 0:15:53.160 --> 0:15:56.080 necessarily a bomber's golf course, and he hasn't had that 0:15:56.160 --> 0:15:57.960 much success. I mean, I'm just go get Guys like 0:15:58.040 --> 0:16:00.520 JB and Bubba play well in the past. But Coprax 0:16:00.560 --> 0:16:02.600 missed forward his last six cuts of his course, So 0:16:03.400 --> 0:16:06.000 I understand he's been playing well, you know better of late, 0:16:06.080 --> 0:16:08.600 but I still hesitant unplaying guy in that range. I 0:16:08.640 --> 0:16:10.920 think there's a lot better options that have had you know, 0:16:11.040 --> 0:16:14.120 better success to his course in the past. Kind of 0:16:14.160 --> 0:16:15.960 maybe like maybe like a Kevin Now or even like 0:16:15.960 --> 0:16:16.720 a Martin Laird. 0:16:17.280 --> 0:16:19.840 Yeah, it's on the hearing. 0:16:21.960 --> 0:16:23.960 I'd probably be more likely to go to a guy 0:16:24.040 --> 0:16:26.560 that maybe is like Peter Yulein, who's getting you know, 0:16:26.600 --> 0:16:29.800 getting away from POINTA greens and background Bermuda greens and 0:16:29.880 --> 0:16:32.240 you know, he's a guy who's you know, he's top 0:16:32.360 --> 0:16:34.160 seventy in the world or something like that, and you 0:16:34.160 --> 0:16:36.440 know he's down at sixty eight hundred, which is pretty 0:16:36.480 --> 0:16:37.240 cheap in my opinion. 0:16:39.080 --> 0:16:42.160 Yeah, you get down into this sixty eight hundred range 0:16:42.200 --> 0:16:46.440 and I mean you got I mean seven thousand, you 0:16:46.560 --> 0:16:50.280 got Grayson, Murray and Bryson de Chambeau. Grayson went to 0:16:50.360 --> 0:16:54.640 ASU for a short stint and you know he's played 0:16:54.680 --> 0:16:56.760 pretty decent. Is is he a guy you got your 0:16:56.760 --> 0:16:57.080 eye on? 0:16:59.560 --> 0:17:01.720 He does make a lot of birdies. The only thing 0:17:01.760 --> 0:17:04.000 I'm afraid of on this course is that it's really 0:17:04.080 --> 0:17:07.120 easy to make a large number, and Grayson is definitely 0:17:07.119 --> 0:17:08.960 known for that. We've seen a lot of guys hit 0:17:09.000 --> 0:17:11.560 in the desert here, make double or triples or pipe 0:17:11.600 --> 0:17:13.639 one O B or pipe one in the water on 0:17:13.680 --> 0:17:16.280 the on some of the par fives. So I'd probably 0:17:16.320 --> 0:17:19.200 steer away from from Grayson just because I think guys 0:17:19.200 --> 0:17:20.760 are going to kind of click his name based upon 0:17:20.840 --> 0:17:22.400 you know, they've seen him a little bit on TV 0:17:22.600 --> 0:17:23.919 over the past couple of months. 0:17:24.359 --> 0:17:28.120 I'm excited to see Grayson in the sixteenth to hear 0:17:28.200 --> 0:17:32.520 what what what people are saying see see how he reacts. 0:17:33.760 --> 0:17:36.800 Yeah, they could definitely make some interesting pairings going into 0:17:36.800 --> 0:17:38.639 the going into the sixteenth hole if they wanted to, 0:17:38.840 --> 0:17:40.359 you know, put some put some of the guys together 0:17:40.359 --> 0:17:41.679 and make it interesting for some fans. 0:17:41.760 --> 0:17:46.840 So mm hm, I mean so down here, anybody else 0:17:46.880 --> 0:17:49.800 that catches your eye at the very bottom. 0:17:50.320 --> 0:17:52.679 I mean, you got Chustin Hadley, who continues to be 0:17:52.800 --> 0:17:55.119 under his underpriced last week, under price this week. He 0:17:55.200 --> 0:17:57.840 is one of the highest birdie rates out there and 0:17:57.920 --> 0:17:59.960 you know, solid t t to green game and you know, 0:18:00.440 --> 0:18:02.800 almost one in the fall and a couple other high 0:18:02.840 --> 0:18:05.200 finishes and he's only sixty nine hundred. So I think 0:18:05.480 --> 0:18:08.280 I'd probably be using him in some tournaments based upon 0:18:08.320 --> 0:18:08.879 those facts. 0:18:10.560 --> 0:18:12.800 Not a JJ Henry fan, huh. 0:18:13.080 --> 0:18:15.200 Not a JJ Henry. I'd rather go with a guy 0:18:15.240 --> 0:18:17.920 like Will McGirk, who has had you know, pretty decent 0:18:18.000 --> 0:18:20.720 course history here. I think he said, you know, five 0:18:20.760 --> 0:18:23.560 straight top thirty five inches here. I believe. So he's 0:18:24.000 --> 0:18:25.200 the guy that may go a little bit under the 0:18:25.240 --> 0:18:28.439 radar because people don't, you know, don't picture him as 0:18:28.440 --> 0:18:30.480 a guy with a lot of high finishes at this 0:18:30.560 --> 0:18:33.320 track because they never were top tens. But they're guys 0:18:33.320 --> 0:18:35.560 that make the cut for you and finish good enough 0:18:35.560 --> 0:18:36.520 to kind of help your lineup. 0:18:37.200 --> 0:18:41.000 Wyndham Clark could be an interesting play. He played really 0:18:41.000 --> 0:18:44.520 well on the web the week before he was in. 0:18:44.840 --> 0:18:46.920 I think he was the lead fifty four hole leader 0:18:47.000 --> 0:18:49.720 before he finished. He finished in the top ten, though, 0:18:51.040 --> 0:18:53.280 but he'd be an interesting guy. He makes a ton 0:18:53.280 --> 0:18:56.240 of birdies, hits it long great potter too. 0:18:56.359 --> 0:18:58.240 Yeah, and that's one of the things down in this 0:18:58.280 --> 0:19:00.399 price range. You're you're looking to hit a guy that 0:19:00.400 --> 0:19:03.000