Fear The Chorizo

I'd rather get Gausman than Lyles, and I think he will be cheaper than 2yrs 16M Also, there are still a bunch of FA starters on the market, many of which I'd take over Lyles despite the pixie dust he gets every time he becomes a brewer...

You could pretty much say the same thing about Oklahoma - sure they have a few more blowouts but their schedule was weak sauce, too...and honestly they could easily have 3 losses on their record with how they've played the last month. If a Big 12 team makes it, I'm guessing they're going to get a 50 spot hung on them by whoever they play.

But their 3 pt defense sucks...I guess?? Seriously though - this is pretty damn impressive, even if it is just an early December regular season game.

Kinda looking like the pac 12 isnt going to have much of a beef being left out of the cfp again...

part of me hopes this is like the Darvish sweepstakes where the Brewers got involved in the bidding with a decent offer and it was publicly leaked before the Cubs outbid them...then the Brewers would have 1 less team in this group competing to sign a guy like Keuchel, who I'd probably want more. A couple years ago I was hopeful the Brewers would find a way to trade for Madbum despite the weird injuries he kept incurring - now I'm hesitant to see what his numbers would do pitching half his games away from SF's park and instead doing so in Milwaukee....especially for upwards of $20M+ per season He's still good for 200+IP per season if you let him, which carries value in itself.

I'd like to think you're right because I probably value winning your conference (however that's determined) as a precursor to having the opportunity to win the national title, but even though it was a road loss at the horseshoe it was still a thumping that I think the committee would still consider OSU the better team than the badgers. So IMO the Buckeyes would be in over wisconsin in any scenario. Then you'd have to weigh wisconsin getting into the CFP over an undefeated defending national champ in Clemson (not gonna happen), or a 1-loss SEC champ in Georgia (bad 1 loss, but SEC champ, c'mon), or a 1-loss LSU champ that has a better resume than Wisconsin and no bad losses. Oh well, we will never get to see the committee carnage because of that Illini loss. Regardless, if there are a few upsets tomorrow there could be a larger groundswell for expanding the playoff to either 8 teams or 6 teams (with the top 2 getting a bye).

I dont know what it would actually take for Wisconsin to get in, but if a 2 loss non champion georgia were to get in over a 2 loss champion Wisconsin then the whole system is broken. Likewise I dont know what Oklahoma's name recognition would do to benefit Baylor, but we also would have beat a high name in ohio st. Plus have some other good wins despite the extra loss. Georgia isn't the problem. They aren't getting in over us if they lose. The problem is between LSU, OSU, Clemson, Oklahoma/Baylor, and Utah, there are too many 1 or less loss names above us if we lose. Had we not lost to Illinois, we're in with a win. As it is, the Rose Bowl is our ceiling. And to be fair, a team that is a 17 point dog (which we all pretty much agree is reasonable) to another team in the country probably isn't one of your 4 best. Had the Badgers not lost to Illinois, there's a good chance they are sitting at #5 right now in the CFP standings and the Badgers could easily have control of their own CFP destiny. However, it would be an interesting hypothetical to consider that scenario under the following circumstances: #5 WI beats OSU in the big ten title game #4 Georgia finds a way to beat #2 LSU #3 Clemson wins its conference title game Of those 5 teams based on those scenarios, who would the committee leave out? Based on the resumes, it's tough removing OSU and LSU from the CFP unless one of them gets blown out in their conference title game. In this scenario it may lead to a 1-loss WI big ten champ being left out just after they beat OSU for the conference title on a neutral field. Pitchforks out in madison for sure and probably in the big 12 a bit because there would be 2 1-loss SEC teams in over their 1-loss conference champ. In reality, the CFP playoff committee actually has it pretty easy this go-round - Barring a devastating injury to a QB, I think OSU and LSU are both locks for the CFP no matter what happens this weekend. Clemson is in with a win as well - a loss against an inferior opponent in the ACC title game might be enough to bump them if Georgia wins and the Big 12 title winner looks impressive. IMO WI has little/no shot at even climbing into the top 5 of the rankings - even with a win Saturday night.

Not necessarily. I think what some of us fans are worried about is whether we are making decisions to improve the team or making decisions in order for Mark A. and the rest of the ownership group to hit their profit margins. Obviously payroll is not everything as the Dodgers can attest to but I'd much rather the team sign good players that give us a 5% better chance to win the WS than try to get by on the cheap and hope whoever we find to fill spots can have a career year for us. Look at what the Red Sox are doing with Mookie Betts. He undoubtedly is a top OF in baseball and would make the Red Sox better next year if he stays, but they are shopping him because they're worried paying him what he's worth will impact the "budget." This is an example of a team actively trying to make their team worse in order to save money. This is the stuff that is maddening as a fan. In the case of the Red Sox, they are looking to trim roughly $30M in money on an already bloated payroll to avoid really significant luxury tax problems because of how long they've remained over the threshold - their 2019 penalty was in the range of $13M. I believe if they don't achieve that this offseason by a certain time they are going to be paying out a much higher amount because the tax percentage over the limit jumps from 30% to 50%. If fans following that team don't understand why they need to slash payroll and why a guy like Betts is likely going to need to get traded since he'll be looking at $27+ Million dollars in arbitration, they're fools. The Red Sox goal could easily be to cut payroll for 2020 so they can resign Betts in 2021 - but if they don't trade him or other expensive players already on their roster now they'll never have enough money to improve their club via free agency until they reset their luxury tax timeline...that's how the current salary structure system is set up in MLB. And the Red Sox are doing this not to regain profitability, they're probably still raking in cash despite their high payrolls because of TV money and being a huge market team. Part of it is because their new management and ownership doesn't like the fact their luxury tax payouts are helping small market teams like Tampa Bay find a way to build rosters that knock the Red Sox out of the playoffs every few years. In effect, their higher payroll is actually benefitting opposing organizations.

I dont want this to go political in any way, but since we are all constantly bombarded with political ads that drive us nuts it got me to thinking... Is there anything to stop a mlb team from fundraising for team payroll from its fanbase? Maybe it's because I love following baseball instead of politics, but to me it would be pretty cool and be money much better spent to have a grassroots fundraising campaign that raises funds for a team if the organization commits to a payroll budget over what their operating revenue can routinely support.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me this a window where they can win now. Yes, and they have been operating at a loss for a few years...but there is also what, 4 months left to increase payroll to the point of where they were the past two? If their payroll is right where it is now on opening day I'd be miffed, but thankfully they still need to find 8 players to fill out their 40 man roster that will likely cost a bit of coin.

Haudricourt in his story in the JS earlier this week said the team finished in the red last season. Which means they did not make a profit. As much as we want them to spend, spend, spend, it doesn't work that way. Owning a baseball team is not a huge for-profit enterprise, but they shouldn't be expected to lose money, either. The naming rights and merchandise sales money are not much ... and those numbers are readily available. And when you drop payroll to gain money back, you end up losing attendance, merchandise sales and the like. With a small market team, it's about trying to find that happy medium. I think Attanasio probably went with the max payroll he was comfortable with last year, and took a hit in his pocketbook because of it. Can he handle that? Of course ... the guy is a billionaire. But he didn't get to be that billionaire by investing in enterprises that continuously lose him money. And no ... he doesn't "owe" any of us fans an increased payroll or superstar players. We as fans aren't owed anything. It is entertainment, and if you are dissatisfied with that entertainment, you have other options to spend your money on. The Brewers are doing a fine job managing within the tight constraints of a constrictive and unfair MLB economic environment. The difference between MLB and the NFL is that the NFL is all about the league and the shield, and MLB is all about the individual teams. Therein lies the difference. The big money teams will never all there to be true parity, so teams like the Brewers have to scrape up every resource they can, think outside the box, and if enough things go right, they might just get a bite at the apple every few years. The team made a profit when the team sucked a few years ago as well. Why? Because the fans supported a bad product based on the promise they would spend money when the time came. You can't look at businesses at that level on annual profit margins. You look at how sustainable the entire organization is. There are literally thousands of successful businesses that end up in the red over several years. Netflix, for example, didn't make a profit for years. I'm not sure if it makes much today. Yet they continue to attract investors. Why? Because it has the potential to make money in the long run. The point isn't that they have to be profitable every year - it's that in order for the Brewers to have 2-4 year windows where their payroll might be able to stretch towards the top half of the league when they are in win-now mode, they need to slash payroll in order to regain profitability and recoup losses/save up profits to put towards future payroll increases. Their market size simply doesn't allow them to carry a $150M payroll consistently if they want the valuation of the team to continue increasing. For those of you saying they could take out loans to pay for more expensive players based on their team's valuation - even if that's true, larger market teams could inevitably do the same damn thing and wind up getting bigger loans.

The brewers likely operated at a loss last season with a payroll less than $140m...that's despite consecutive seasons drawing over 3million fans and making the playoffs in both 2018 and 2019. So I guess you want the franchise to move out of milwaukee??

The goal of the draft pick is to make the Brewers roster right? Seems to me we just accelerated the process and took away the real chance of a bust for nothing, losing out on the slight chance we could have had an all-star type player. How much salary would that draft pick have been added to our draft pool? You can add that amount to what is available for the major league budget right now. Plus the Brewers pick at #20, somewhere in the 50s following the Competitive Balance "A" round, and somewhere in the 90s following the Competitive "B" round....and so on for like 37 more rounds - they can just draft the HOF All Star player they would have picked at #71 with one of these other selections next year.

Yeah, there has got to be some reason they don't see the value in those comp picks. They are very cheap and very controllable players so maybe the inexact nature of judging future performance for someone who's never played in the minors factors into their calculations. Keith Law thinks trading picks is dumb so it's probably a good idea based on that alone MLB draft is largely a crapshoot once you get past the very top picks every year, plus how much true value is losing 1 comp pick in a draft where you still get ~40 other picks in that same draft? I'd guess the value difference between a ~#70 pick and ~#100 pick (assumed next pick is a full 30 teams later) in terms of future MLB value is negligible.

Taking on Kyle Seager would have negative value to the trade. Seager has a clause in his contract that if he’s traded his 2022 club option for $15M becomes a player option. maybe that would have helped us retain the comp pic to go out and acquire another LOOGY to give multi-inning relief appearances to The $15M player option for Seager isn't really that crippling for that 2022 season...I think there are some perfomance escalators on that year that could increase the amount as well, so if he'd do great for whichever team he heads to over the next two years Seager would likely exercise that option and wind up making closer to $20M in 2022. His ~$18M/year cost for the next two seasons is more than what Moose will be paid per year, but when healthy I think he's a better player than Moose. I was throwing Seager info out earlier in this thread because IMO he'd be a fit for the Brewers without needing to give up much, and his contract is palatable (especially if the Mariners would include some $$ in a trade to cover a portion of it). Either way, glad they appear to have their catching plan put together - now on to figuring some pitching/corner IF questions out!

I think the delay was Stearns waiting for Haudricourt to tweet something like the above and then promptly provide yet another reason for us to ridicule our "well-connected Brewers expert" beat writer... Have people not realized Haudricourt is just a terrible "insider" and pretty clueless on most things? He is too far up the Brewer's rear to be useful in giving relevant information. It's still funny every time a light gets shown on that fact

I think the delay was Stearns waiting for Haudricourt to tweet something like the above and then promptly provide yet another reason for us to ridicule our "well-connected Brewers expert" beat writer...

This, IMO, would be just fine to send over for Mr. Narvaez.

Sure - but the smoke with Narvaez is that he's in the works to be traded to Milwaukee...I've heard nothing official that he's for sure the only player from the Mariners involved with a trade that hasn't been finalized. They might be weighing options of a trade with just Omar, and potentially one that includes other players for a different return package.

Seager hit 23 HR last year in roughly 400 ABs, while playing in Safeco. He missed a bunch of the early part of the season due a torn tendon in his left hand during spring training, then dealt with right hand issues through the AS break. He had a 0.650 OPS during the 1st half while playing in only 40 games, then OPS'd mid 0.800's (influenced heavily by a 1.116 OPS in August) during the final 2 months of the season once he actually regained some health in his hands. He is overpaid, but Seager is more than just a guy at 3B when he's healthy, otherwise Moose is just a guy, too - especially considering what sort of numbers jump he could get playing home games in Milwaukee and not having to also play a bunch of games in Oakland and against Astros-level pitching outside the AL west. His contract makes him a gettable asset for the Brewers assuming they maintain the payroll flexibility they currently have, plus the likely additional money coming off the books with Braun next year. To me it's just interesting there hasn't been an announcement on the prospect(s) heading to Seattle for Omar - might be something bigger being sorted out with more pieces moving and Seager still being there seems like something both Stearns and Seattle would want to discuss.

Not that Philly/Pennsylvania taxes are cheap, but my guess is the modest difference in contract offer between the White Sox and Phillies actually would have Wheeler taking more home playing for the Phillies based on state and local taxes. It could still easily be about the money that Wheeler & family actually see. As a former resident of IL from college to a few years ago, I know that IL sucks.

What if it's for Narvaez + Seager? I agree if Omar is the only player headed back, any pitching going to Seattle should not include Ashby or Small - but if one of those guys gets you a good lefty hitting "catcher" and a good lefty hitting MLB 3B (whose contract Seattle would be happy to also lose for payroll relief) for the next three seasons to fill those current gaping holes on the roster, I might be a bit more on board with it.

In Rosenthal's tweet he said Seattle will be getting at least one minor leaguer in return so I'm not sure why people are speculating Arcia, Peralta or even Burnes. Can they trade Zack Brown prior to rule 5? If so, that is my guess. The fact that Brown is actually rule 5 eligible makes him relatively worthless in terms of prospect value until after the draft - if a team like Seattle wants him that badly they could just draft him instead of trading a good MLB player away. My guess is it's Ashby or Small, or maybe a package that includes an OF prospect and Webb - or some combo of non-40 man prospects the Mariners like, particularly if Omar isn't the only player headed to Milwaukee

I'm hearing that too - but there's also a chance they miss the playoffs altogether with a pretty decent record depending on what the Rams do down the stretch.

I can also see them trying to work out parameters to add Seager to this deal that would help soften the blow of whatever prospect or player(s) are headed to Seattle. Omar + Seager and a good chunk of his remaining contract would fill two obvious roster holes, and it wouldn't surprise me given the state of the Brewers' current 40 man roster that they include prospects not yet on it.