.jpg.863dc21c279c8c4e0c6aed852e213144.jpg){kind=logo}
jjgott
-
Posts
1,917 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by jjgott
-
.thumb.jpg.7d4c952653397a33e40c247085cb93cf.jpg)
Not Today!!!!!!!! -
Moooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooose
-
What the heck was Kolten yelling about?
-
I have MLB.tv and got the one team only subscription. Saves a few bucks off of the regular MLB.tv service. Sorry to the other 29 teams but I only care about watching the Crew.
-
If the risk is too great in owning the team, then the owner should sell and invest in something more stable like treasury bonds. Wow, what a ridiculous comment. No less ridiculous than Josh's twitter. How about it's their business and they run it how they want? Because, ya know...its theirs. Not yours, but theirs. They are putting their money at risk to turn a profit, just like every other joe schmo that has extra money to invest. Except for you I guess, you probably take on significant risk and just hope to break even right? They can run it how they want it. But as a fan who wants to win, why would I care about their profit margin? In a perfect world I'd want the team run as a nonprofit and to sign as many good players as possible. I'm just glad you admit they are running the team to earn a profit as opposed to winning championships. What I was getting at is there is close to a zero percent chance teams are running close to a break even point, absent an owner being highly leveraged like Frank McCourt. Teams are profitable before the first pitch is even thrown with all the TV and BAM money. Hell, the Padres just signed Manny to 10 years $300 million a year after signing Hosmer to a $144 million and they have not been relevant since 1998. How could they "afford" it?
-
That's another reason fans typically side with management in sports labor disputes. The fans have no idea how much the owners are making. They do, however, know how much each player makes. One thought I had, what do you all think the bottom line looks like? Do you think there's more than $30 million at the bottom line? The owners have so many millions at risk. I know the franchise values are appreciating like crazy right now, but that might not last forever. They still have a ton at risk and many franchises may not have $30 million in profit in a given year...which is notable because a handful of players/employees would then make more than the owner(s). I know it's easy to say "rich greedy billionaires", but there's so much risk to owning a sports franchise. What if for example, the NFL concussion issue causes interest in football to wane over the next 10-20 years? Those owners could be out hundreds of millions. If the risk is too great in owning the team, then the owner should sell and invest in something more stable like treasury bonds.
-
Bob Nightengale @BNightengale Cubs owner Tom Ricketts on why the Cubs didn't spend more money this offseason on the free-agent market: "Pretty easy. We don’t have any more.''
-
Brewers sign Brett Lawrie? [Latest: Brewers Release Lawrie]
jjgott replied to Lathund's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
The Prodigal Bro has returned! -
I actually don't think MLB is "broken;" not in the sense that it needs radical changes. A lot of the concerns about competitive imbalance are caused by the teams themselves actively not trying to win. Unfortunately for us, our favorite team plays in a division where it appears as though all of the owners are willing to spend $ to try and win the division. You saw last year how even though we won the division, there really were no easy games in the division. I guess the league can do a better job to make sure that national media and licensing rights get distributed in a more equitable fashion, but I do not want to see a hard salary cap. Not only does it hurt the players by artificially suppressing their wages, but it will not serve the purpose of achieving parity. There is no guarantee that there will be an equal distribution of top level talent in a capped environment, it will simply mean the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers could have a roster full of the top guys, all making less than what they should be making. Super teams could still be formed if vets decide to forgo money in order to fit in a few extra pieces. If anything, a salary cap will help teams in the South, West, and any state that does not have a state income tax. Much like the NBA, players, if they are forced to make less money, will just choose the most desirable living situations. In an uncapped world, Milwaukee already has a disadvantage over other cities. I don't think that would change with a salary cap.
-
[sarcasm]I'll give up my Beef n' Cheddar when you pry it from my cold dead hands.[/sarcasm]
-
You are correct that it's hard to define what "underspend" means, but I think things are out of whack when owners don't need to care about fan attendance; they are guaranteed $60+ million simply by being one of the 30 teams to divide up the national and local TV money. I guess it could get so bad that the league votes to force the sale of the team, but I don't see that happening if it hasn't already happened. What I was getting at with the draft pick compensation is that there has to be more of a reward for "winning." While we are fortunate that we have an owner in Mark A. that seems to care about winning championships, there is no disincentive for an owner to just run a team like any business ensuring a YOY profit margin, results be damned. And as 3and2Fastball says, owners have made far more money in recent years with the sale of BAM and increases in TV money. No matter what ownership tells you, they can afford ANY player they want if they value what that player brings to the team more than they value annual profits.
-
This is a big component of the "collusion." I can't remember where I saw this one article, but it said teams make around $60 million from national and local TV revenue. Teams get an equal share of national TV rights, regardless whether they are shown on national broadcasts or not. There is currently no disincentive for a greedy owner to field a team that has no chance of winning but is profitable to the ownership. You can say you'll alienate the fanbase, but an owner could theoretically still turn a profit with attendance under 20k per game. Therefore, if the players want teams to shell out the $$$ in FA, they need to work with the league to make the owners feel a need to spend $ on veterans vs. trying their luck with their minor leaguers. Draft picks or bonus $ could be tied to making the playoffs or conversely picks or revenue sharing could be taken away from teams that chronically underspend. I don't think the players have much leverage on trying to get the vets more $. I think that ship has sailed with the greater use of analytics to model how players will perform as they age. I think the MLBPA needs to get the minimum salaries raised and have an arbitration process based on player comparisons vs. an adversarial process between the team and the player. It may also make sense to bring the minor leaguers into the union and get player raises there. I think all baseball players in affiliated ball should have some labor protections.
-
Should this be in the Offseason Archived Media Thread ? https://www.soompi.com/article/1295655wpp/major-league-baseball-player-surprises-appearance-king-mask-singer
-
It would be nice to have a competent backup QB again. I've had enough of the Hundley/Kizer/Callahan types.
-
[sarcasm]Tanking for a high draft pick next year. Savvy.[/sarcasm]
-
Lou Palsmo #1
-
Our Super-Pen will be without QTC who will be out all of 2019 with Tommy John surgery: @Haudricourt Big development from #Brewers farm system: LHP Quintin Torres-Costa, who had big year for @skysox, has undergone Tommy John surgery and will miss all of next season. Was one of players eligible for Rule 5 draft this winter. Injured in final series of year.
-
I heard he was falling asleep at meetings. Does this look like a guy who would fall asleep at meetings?
-
David Stearns must do's for the offseason
jjgott replied to brewmann04's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
One thing I like about DS is it's not his MO to let someone have a job because they are owed it. I mean, he went out and got two OFs when we had like 5 waiting in the wings. I think if DS feels like he can upgrade a position, he will do so and will deal with the consequences later. -
I have this feeling too. Most everyone knew in 2011 that it was pretty much over with Fielder leaving after the season and Greinke having only one year left on his deal. Now we have Cain for the next 3 years, the NL MVP for a few more years on a ridiculously cheap contract, and a stable of young pitchers set to enter our rotation with the most dominant reliever in baseball in the bullpen. I have full faith in DS and CC to continue to manage our roster in a way that maximizes our potential. I look forward to having a team enter the season with expectations and with the knowledge that they are the defending division champs and should not feel inferior to the Cubs or Cardinals. Hot Stove can't get here fast enough!
-
This. And if we do end up losing it wasn't to a division rival with a turd for a manager and even bigger turds on the roster.
-
This! I hope the crowd stays and cheers on the Brewers until an hour after the game. These guys deserve it, whatever happens! [sarcasm]I thought we were supposed to boo them off the field?[/sarcasm]
-
Damn, that stings
.thumb.jpg.7d4c952653397a33e40c247085cb93cf.jpg){kind=logo}