Jump to content
Click here to join us at 4pm Central as we livestream talking Brewers and the World Series! ×
Brewer Fanatic

BuckyBrewer61

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,122

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

News

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks

Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by BuckyBrewer61

  1. BuckyBrewer61
    Yes and yes. Seems that Darvish is only using the Brewers as a bargaining chip, and if that's the case I don't want him here. But I am all for being that chip for him to drive up the Cubs price. I realize I'd probably eat my words, but at this point I'm getting annoyed enough with him that I kind of hope the Cubs sign him just so we can play him and (hopefully) destroy him.
  2. BuckyBrewer61
    I realize this is entirely a PR stunt, but I'm curious - what are the actual roster implications and logistics behind this? I assume if Russell Wilson today announced he is quitting football to play baseball, he is now owned by the Yankees? Is he actually taking up a roster spot on a Yankee minor league affiliate? Or is he on some kind of PUP list? Or do they just have the rights to sign him if he decides to play baseball, much like a draft pick deciding between college and pro ball?
  3. BuckyBrewer61
    I'm kind of amazed that Yelich got such a huge haul from us, yet Santana is just considered a piece for a deal for Archer or the like. The past two years: Domingo Santana .271/.363/.486/.849 Christian Yelich .290/.373/.460/.833 Obviously Santana has big defensive shortcomings, but offensively he's at least comparable to Yelich. If people are going to lowball us for a quality young controllable MLB bat, then get Braun to 1st and keep Santana. Wouldn't bother me one bit.
  4. BuckyBrewer61
    This x1000 I believe he actually does have a source, but even if he doesn't I enjoy the rumors. I hope he keeps posting because I enjoy the content one way or the other, it makes for fun hot stove speculation. But man...it's a niche internet message board that a few hundred people know about. The minimal anonymous internet fame isn't a big deal, nor is a parody account with a handful of followers or a doubtful comment here or there. If these rumors are so sensitive that they are going to be peppered with fishing for ego-stroking and threatening to leave and take the ball home...well I guess I don't care about that either, I'll just ignore it, but it is getting old. Sorry to the other posters, I'm assuming HH19 won't care for this. Mods can feel free to take it down if desired.
  5. BuckyBrewer61
    This way pitchers will never bat, but the strategy and bench depth is still a part of the game. Both sides get what they really want. I'm a fan of this idea...that said, it will never happen. The talking heads would yell about how you can't take out these great hitters blah blah blah. Essentially a similar argument to why pitchers shouldn't hit, and the pervasive trend across all sports - if it doesn't equate to maximum offense, it must be boring and bad, right? The DH is coming to the NL in it's current form, it's just a matter of when.
  6. BuckyBrewer61
    I have always been opposed to the DH in the NL, I love the strategy that the NL requires with pitchers in the lineup - double switches, the question of pulling a starter when his spot in the lineup comes up in the 5th inning with runners on base, etc. I also have always hated the argument that we need the DH because pitchers are bad at hitting. So what? They are playing the field like every other player, they should hit like everyone else too. With that argument, we should have designated fielders too so we only have to watch the best fielders and best hitters. We can let Santana hit and Broxton play defense. Did they let someone else take Shaq's free throws just because he was bad at it? *Deep breath* All that said...after Anderson and Nelson got hurt on offense last year, I'm over it. Just not worth the risk of such devastating injuries. Bring on the DH.
  7. BuckyBrewer61
    My god... Of course, the classic stereotype of "I've seen girls from Milwaukee!" And how terrible it must be to be traded from Miami to Milwaukee (though yes, I get it). Followed by "I've never been to Milwaukee."
  8. BuckyBrewer61
    Seems to me more like they got a good long look at Santana and replaced him with Yelich.
  9. BuckyBrewer61
    Every trade ever made involving MLB talent for prospects goes down this way - if the prospects all live up to their potential, they will be worth more than the MLB talent in the trade. It has to work that way. If the best case scenario is that all the prospects pan out and their collective value only matches that of the MLB player(s), then why bother trading away your established major league talent to take on that risk? Every MLB talent-for-prospects trade is scary because of the potential of the prospects lost. But while there are certainly notable examples of a fleecing, the reality is there aren't a ton of examples out there of teams trading away multiple future stars. Because the vast majority of prospects don't become stars, or even every day MLB players.
  10. BuckyBrewer61
    Anyone with insight into Kipnis? I don't really know much outside of his stats. Past 5 years - stats are really good for 3 of them and pretty bad for 2 of them (including last year).
  11. BuckyBrewer61
    Arguably the best team in Brewers history had Yuni B at SS, Casey McGehee at 3rd (until we traded for Hairston), and Mark Kotsay as our 4th OF. I'm not a Villar fan, but also don't want to empty out the farm. Not every single position on the field needs to be a star to contend.
  12. BuckyBrewer61
    I agree with everyone saying that Phillips is not an option to trade away. He is the PERFECT 4th (3.5th?) outfielder for this team, and was really good last September once he got settled in - .308/.390/.462/.851 with great defense. Granted that was with an unsustainable BABIP of .438 If we are planning to compete immediately, trading Phillips just doesn't make sense. It's not that he's an untouchable talent, but even with our newfound surplus of MLB outfielders I'm not eager to give up two of them. Suddenly we have Braun as our 3rd OF and Broxton as our 4th, meaning lots of AB's for Keon. I'm still holding onto a sliver of hope that Keon puts it all together, and if he does watch out...but I'm not banking on it. I hate the idea of trading away Burnes or Peralta, but I get it. For me though, if we are trading Santana then Phillips is staying.
  13. BuckyBrewer61
    Any internet message board has knuckleheads, it's easy to be one under the anonymity of the internet. Thankfully BF.net has very few...but not zero. Don't listen to the naysayers, the vast majority of us are eagerly awaiting your every post as the primary flame to our hot stove. Keep it up, and don't worry about the annoying posts that have, and inevitably will continue to occasionally come.
  14. BuckyBrewer61
    Sorry, couldn't help it
  15. BuckyBrewer61
    Agreed on this. I tell them Burnes is off the table. The offer is Santana, Ortiz, and a lower rated prospect. Take it or leave it. I have a feeling this is roughly what was offered and perhaps loosely agreed upon, and now TB wants more after the Yelich trade. And it appears Stearns has (appropriately IMO) said no, and isn't budging.
  16. BuckyBrewer61
    To realistic, market-value deals? 1. Darvish 2. Darvish 3. Darvish Not interested in Greinke (age) and Arrieta (age plus numbers already declining past 2 years...also, Cubs). If had to I'd take Greinke > Arrieta.
  17. BuckyBrewer61
    Yeah, hard to believe any team planning to compete would ever trade away good, controlled starting pitching - I don't care how much lineup help is needed. Maybe if Archer had 1 year left on his deal and they were aiming to bolster their team for many years to come, but with 4 years left it just doesn't make sense to me.
  18. BuckyBrewer61
    I just don't understand why TB would have any interest in Santana at all in this scenario. Why bother asking for an MLB guy that you'll have for the years that you just traded away your ace for? If I'm trading away Archer I want prospects on prospects, and really good ones. Cleveland for Mejia/Salazar makes a lot more sense to me, though I would love to get Archer.
  19. BuckyBrewer61
    That said, I'm sure it's been discussed elsewhere on the board but maybe someone can explain to me here - we all talk about Santana for Archer, but why would Tampa trade a TOR MLB starter for another MLB player with essentially the same years of control? Either they are trying to compete at the MLB level now and over the next few years, or not...right? Seems like if they are trying to trade a good, young, controllable starter that it would be for prospects.
  20. BuckyBrewer61
    And that other piece would be Burnes or Ortiz or both. I don't want Archer that bad. I'd do Santana plus Ortiz for Archer. I am far from a minor league expert, but Ortiz just doesn't excite me. And similar to Yelich and Brinson - Archer is pretty much Ortiz's best case scenario, and we'd have him controlled on a very reasonable contract for 4 years.
  21. BuckyBrewer61
    Not even close. If Archer is coming to Milwaukee, Santana plus likely at least one top 100 prospect are going to Tampa Bay.
  22. BuckyBrewer61
    Not only this, but we have 5 years of Yelich after coming off two .800+ OPS seasons in a pitchers' park, rather than 6 years of Brinson starting with the inevitable growing pains of figuring out major league pitching and MAYBE becoming a Yelich-level player for the last 3-4 years of his team control.
  23. BuckyBrewer61
    To me this just screams same old Brewers - Suppan, Wolf, Garza, Lohse - aging veteran free agent cashing in on a good year or two who’s numbers are already in decline. I had hoped years of watching these guys fall apart finally taught Mark A to resist the temptation Please, no.
  24. BuckyBrewer61
    Agreed, Neshek has had 4 years of being very good. I know he's old but he seems unhittable whenever we face him, and the numbers are pretty darn good too. Do people just get scared because of his delivery? Sign me up
  25. BuckyBrewer61
    Seconded - I would buy a Cecil Cooper jersey in this design in a heartbeat
×
×
  • Create New...