HiAndTight

I don't think I've seen it stated any better anywhere on the web with regard to this debate. I have. Houston IS one of the best teams. There's an inference here that they're not. Harden scoring 36+ a game this year was all that more impressive when you look at how many guys went down for Houston and how great they finished the year. But the statement itself is factually incorrect. This Houston team is one of the best teams in the NBA. I think most would agree they're the 2nd best team in the West. So kinda hard to say that the best teams wouldn't "want or need" him to take those shots in the first place. Actually, not hard to say they wouldn't "Need" him to. Golden State would not NEED him to take those shots because they have a team with 5 guys who could very easily be on Team USA. 5 All NBA guys. The worst among them has been a multiple time DPOY. The Houston team that was 11-14 needed Harden to take those tough shots and he did so and they were the best team in the NBA from that point on.

The media always try to do that. Less debate = less clicks. They're trying to keep it a race, but I don't think there is one. Well, the players disagree. They voted for Harden. The guys who actually play the game should be afforded a little credibility. It seems like you're not happy with virtually every person agreeing with you unless they just parrot your own words. Harden's year was historic. 36.5, 6.5/7.5, while being a very efficient scorer and leading his team to the best record in the NBA over the last4 months or whatever it was as his team was decimated by injuries, is impressive. This isn't a media driven debate, this is a player driven debate. Two players had great years. You also seem to talk about Giannis coming into his own and ascending...etc..etc...it's an award for one year. And while we ALL agree with you, you don't seem like you're totally happy until everyone agrees that the mere suggestion that Harden is at all MVP worthy is laughable!

Yeah, my least favorite part of college sports is the sad, pathetic losers who sit here and bash kids because they don't go and play for the school YOU prefer. I always think of that Alabama fan who poisoned the tree at Auburn. Tyler Herro got bashed in quite a few places and now looks like a 1st round draft pick after a year at UK and a really nice 2nd half and tourney. That said, I would hope the Hausers wouldn't allow a few twitter trolls to impact their futures that much.

But can he really help his stock anymore? There doesn't seem to be much room for him to grow. He goes back a year and I think it actually hurts him....unless he plays substantially better.

I think it's the prior. Kuechel is a soft-tossing lefty who gives up a lot of hits and does not get many strikeouts. I personally don't like him at 20 million for one year. Ok, that’s your opinion, although I think most on this board would disagree. You think most people would disagree with what? On how good Kuechel is, or that it's Stearns who doesn't want him at that money rather than Mark A who won't spend the money?

I think it's the prior. Kuechel is a soft-tossing lefty who gives up a lot of hits and does not get many strikeouts. I personally don't like him at 20 million for one year.

Someone on Twitter pulled out this quote from the article and I think it is an interesting topic to explore: "The Dodgers had operating income of $95 million last season, the most in baseball. Such richness is a plus when, as in the case of the Dodgers, the owners are in the process of selling small stakes in the team to limited partners. The new investors will pay more if they believe a dividend is more likely than a capital call." There may be owners out there like Balmer or Cuban who aren't worried about the YTY profitability of the team and only about the appreciation of the team, but there are probably an increasingly number of minority investors that want to see a return on their investment because they want the cash flow every year. Do we know anything about how many minority investors there are in the Brewers? That may give us more of a sense of whether there is an appetite to stomach operating at a loss and going "all-in." If the minority investors are expecting a dividend, they are not going to be too pleased if Mark A says nothing is coming. Well, they don't have to like it. Attanasio is the majority owner. They really don't have any recourse. It would be interesting to see how fans would react if they could actually invest in the team. AS though the stock in Green Bay was a real stock. I wonder how many fans would rather they not sign those free agents so they got a few thousand dollars more from their dividend. Totally different situation comparing working class people to those wealthy enough to purchase even a minority stake into a major league baseball team however.

Propped up suggests that the value isn't legitimate, or that it's being artificially inflated. The values of teams are certainly increased by the fact that there are only 30 of them available and they rarely come up for sale. I'm not sure I can see where this is increasingly being run like a real business. As opposed to when? When have they not?

I'm not sure what you mean by such a silly question. If your position is that value that isn't just cash is imaginary, than most billionaires wealth is "imaginary." It's ridiculous to call it imaginary. As for the rest of your post, I don't know who you're talking to or what you're talking about as I never argued the value of the team should be reflected in the payroll whatsoever. And I really have no idea what you mean by saying him going into debt, an assumption you are making, that he doesn't have the financial resources to spend more right now, would somehow result in "hundreds of millions" in losses by the time his grandkids sold the team. I don't get what any of this has to do with my reply that the increased value in the team isn't "imaginary" money. It's a real valuation. Are stocks imaginary? Because that piece of paper has no value until you sell...unless of course, you take out a loan against it. Is the increased estimated value of my home that I bought in 2008 "imaginary?" I'd honestly like to know your answer on that, because if it's yes, than most of the wealth in the United States is "imaginary." There is a difference between being able to immediately access your resources and them being imagined.

It's far more than just last year that we've "outperformed" in supporting this team. We're been 1st in spending per fan numerous times. We're 2nd this year. I think Attanasio has acted accordingly. I just think you dismiss how much this fan base has supported the Brewers by saying it was just last year and only because we were winning that we did so.

Keuchel gets to decide, not Boras. It's also just pure conjecture that Boras would try to direct a player toward NYY on a 1 year deal as opposed to the Brewers.

Context is everything. I'll just say that about your rants. Both of those that you quoted at me was to a guy that would give up just about anything for a Giants reliever right now. It does make NO SENSE. But hmm... doesn't sound like we'd be giving up multiple players for Kimbrel. Might be why Stearns is actually intrigued by the idea? Maybe use a better example next time you want to stand on your podium and attack because you're upset at our bullpen. Maybe the better option is to let it continue to play out, let guys establish roles, get JJ back, see if any of your AAA guys can fill holes, fill with guys off the scrap heap like we've done before, and then when those options are exhausted, then you go out and see what the trade market is for guys that are on clubs willing to part ways. By that time, you're more than likely to find teams willing to part ways with players on better terms than what would occur now. Trading, which this thread is about, doesn't happen very often in April and for good reasons. Next time you want to overreact, aim it at someone else please and thank you. Context is very important. Another thing that is important? Winning baseball games. Our pen is a shell of what we thought it was going to be. What's laughable is the notion that it makes zero sense to trade for a BP piece now without having any idea what it'll cost because you want to stand pat and wait to see how things shake out. Not sure if that was your exact quote or not, but it was close. The Brewers are extremely lucky to be at 8-4. If you can make a move now, it makes a lot more sense than waiting until the deadline after the pen has cost you more games to do so. And for what it's worth...which isn't a whole lot, but Jeffress in two AA outings now has given up 6 hits and 5 runs. But even if you're counting on him to come back and pitch like he did last year, which is extremely unlikely, you still have major holes in your pen. And just to keep this straight, who wants to trade "just about anything" for a(as in one) Giants reliever? The thread was about trading Corey Ray for Will Smith and a young guy who's pitching extremely well. Trading a prospect to a rebuilding team for two relievers. If that's who you're refering to, that's hardly "Just about anything," and that's for a dominant lefty with one year left and a potentially dominant young righty with 5 years left.

Barry isn't that interested in the non-revenue sports. It takes a lot for him to get more aggressive with regard to those sports.

I don't know what Cuban does for the City or the area down there. I'm sure he does quite a bit. But you are 100 pct right, we are very lucky to have a billionaire fan owning this team who likes to do little things he doesn't have to, like sponsor the big fireworks show just to make the community happy. The Brewers have been incredibly lucky to start with Selig and then his idiot Son in Law, Daughter and that moron Bando ran the team for a while before Mark A came back and saved us.

You just can’t be serious with some of these takes. I don't think his premise is wrong. We constantly support this team. This year we're second to the Giants in spending per person, but we've been #1 several years. So does the owner "owe" us a genuine effort to win? I believe he does. I just guess I'm not seeing where he's failing to do so. If Kimbrel would take 1 year and 15 million and Mark A refused, MAYBE I'd agree in that scenario. But I have a feeling Attanasio wanted Kimbrel signed as much as anyone on here. But this isn't a one year window. I'm looking at next years team and frankly that team looks like it's lined up to be just as good, provided we're healthy. So instead of a crazy one year "all in," lets make it a "4 year mostly in, but not stupidly all in" type of window.

I'm not sure anything has been "proven." But let me ask, what has Mark A done that suggests he's NOT trying to go all in this year? Is it because Stearns doesn't want to give Kimbrel a 6 year 108 million dollar deal? Or because he hasn't signed Kuechel to a 1 year 18 million dollar deal?

Agreed. He actually makes a lot of sense going to a Detroit/Baltimore situation. He doesn't have to have a lot of value, just some.

Well, I don't know if it's true or not because just using HR's without giving us anything on OBP doesn't help a ton. We did see the Brewers just let a 40 HR hitter leave because he was going to cost about 10 million. And guys like Cain are always going to be valuable. He got 80 million over 5 years, which I think was a very good contract for the Brewers, in a depressed market. There is something fun about watching Cain though. You watch him...and it doesn't look like he's doing well at the plate. But because of his approach, he's almost always hitting over .280 with a very high OBP. You've seen nights where he's gotten on 3 times without hitting a ball to the OF. I'd bet he could hit 25-30 HR's and see his BA and OBP dro about 80 points, but that would make him much less valuable. I'm not sure if that's true. Teams that have the best analytic minds in the game are signing all home run hitting mashers. Now, that's not to say that they shouldn't have Cains guys like that in there, but launch angle + hitting the home run is still tied to winning in the minds of most GMs. However, the point is that entire teams are mashing the heck out of the ball over the fence. Jarrod Dyson and Tommy La Stella are matching entire seasons worth of home run totals in the first 2 weeks. I'm not sure those guys are trying to hit home runs and I'm not sure Jay Bruce is trying any harder than last year yet he is having a much easier time getting the ball over the fence this year. It has only been a short period, but the home run totals are at 2017 levels (they went back down in 2018).

I don't think we're in agreement on how the valuation of the Brewers should impact the payroll. I don't really think it should change anything, I think their year to year performance should dictate what and how they spend their money. They had a good year last year and they are projecting a much better year this year financially, so they decided to add payroll. That's all I would do. But it's comical how people are guessing and making assumptions about what these billionaires could or would do with their money. Buffett lives in an almost laughably modest home for a guy worth 90 billion(excuse me if I'm a few billion off one way or the other). Meanwhile Jerry Jones buys a Yacht that's like 3 football fields long and has MULTIPLE landing spots for his helicopters. Ted Turner was asked why he was still trying so hard to earn money...why it meant so much to him when he was already a billionaire....the answer was sickening to me personally but telling in general. "It's how we keep score." So for at least SOME the money doesn't actually matter. It's just a way to keep score, to be part of a club, for validation. Your example with art I thought was a great one.

This is just another dumbfounding comment that has absolutely NOTHING in the world to back it up. Literally nothing. So it's just utterly implausible to you that some Russian Oligarch could have bought the Brewers like the guy who bought the Nets and then just spend 200 million a year because...losing 10 or 15 million a year is of little consequence to him? Or lets not even go that far. You REALLY think Attanasio is so special that Cuban for example wouldn't be spending similarly after trying to get into baseball for years? Jesus....even Attasio has shown that he's willing to spend more to sign Kimbrel(we have zero clue exactly how much more, but the very fact that they were talking shows that he's "willing" to spend more money). But you think he's the ONLY wealthy person in the entire world that would spend like that? Wasn't Mike Ilitch spending ridiculous sums of money because he wanted to see the Tigers win another WS before he died? I also want to be clear, I think Mark A has been a great owner, I don't think he "owes" us anything else, he's in this for personal pleasure first and foremost and he's earned that right by becoming successful enough to purchase a Major League Baseball team. But some of these statements about finances and how the value of the Brewers going up means "absolutely nothing" to Mark A or how he's the only person with the financial means to purchase a team who'd be spending as much as we are now....they're.....nonsense. Trying to find a nicer way to put it, but you're just making things up, things that you may believe and then posting them as fact when we know that other people would spend more, at least for stretches. And I don't know this, but I'm just gonna go waaaaaay out on my limb here and guess that the fact that the Brewers are worth 700 to A Billion more than he spent on them MEANS something to him.

That $700 million is imaginary though. It doesn't exist unless you sell the team. What are profits and expenses? That is what matters. It's not imaginary. If they sold the team now, they'd make several times what they purchased it for. That's not just created in someone's imagination. And when you talk about billionaires, about 90 pct of the time their value is "imaginary" in the way you're using it. Hell, Trump includes his names value in how much he's worth. How much he values the number put on his name. That's imaginary. The value of Trump towers vs the actual cash he has is not imaginary. PS-Just using the famous rich President as an example. NOT trying to argue about him in any way at all.

No....no, you literally cannot do that. You have an opinion. People LOVE to conflate the words "opinion" and "fact" all too often. You've got zero clues what Corey Ray will or will not do in the major leagues unless you've got a magical car that at 88 MPH sends you into the future.

His velocity would be the most important stat to me. You often see guys struggle in the minors. They're not there to win games or even get outs per say, just work on what they need to do. Obviously, you'd hope the two would align, but they don't always. Waaay too many people though seem to think that Jeffress is our savior. He's one guy and you see people are already saying how overused he was last year when he threw about 10-15 more innings than normal. We need to revamp our pen like the Nats did a few years ago when they got Doolittle and Madson. I trust our front office to know our talent well enough that we won't give back a historically good reliever in doing so.

Jeffress wasn't overused. But I agree there is reason for concern. I've been keeping it in, but a lot of reason to believe 8-2 is a bit of a mirage. Run differential hasn't been very flattering. It wasn't last year either, but the pen made that passable. I'm not sure we can expect that again. Jeffress pitched 84 innings last year, 18 more than any previous year. So I would argue he was overused, weakness in shoulder not withstanding. Well, that's about ~10 more than any other year. He's been around 70-72 IP several times in his career, but some of those innings were in the pen. In KC in 2011 he threw 71 Innings. 2012 just under 73.2 IP 2014 he was back up there around 73 again. And this doesn't include early in his career when he threw more innings as a starter. So you're talking about statistically irrelevant data. He threw 76 innings in the regular season last year, a perfectly reasonable number for your ace reliever and certainly not "overused" by Counsell, a term that makes it sound as it Counsell worked him too hard. He's a 31 year old reliever, so it's not like he was some brittle 20 year old who was coming off TJ surgery. And I'd argue that he'd have thrown more innings every year of his career if he was anywhere near as dominant that year as he was for us last year. I think the strong argument, if you actually need one and don't want to just attribute it to a human being doing something that is an unnatural motion for them, was the intensity of those innings down the stretch, and as CHL points out, the 4-5 out saves. He came in often with men on base in high leverage situations. That's very different than when you're the 4th or 5th best reliever as he was at times in Toronto or Texas and you're not pitching in high leverage innings. He was worked down the stretch and in the playoffs. Anyway, I think the bigger point is, that was a career year that wasn't even close to in line with his career norms and we're unlikely to get that again, even before the shoulder issue popped up, lamenting the point that this BP does not look good right now, and it's tough to see a map forward for a big post-season run or even playoff push without adding 1 or 2 really good relievers and then a couple more pretty good ones from somewhere. Can't be 6 IP from the starter, pray nobody blows the lead and then let Hader get the last 8 or 6 outs all year.

That's the big difference between this year and last year. Last year even when Knebel was struggling and then pen as a whole was struggling, there was more reason to believe that they'd come around. This year, I don't know much about Sanchez, but it sounds like he has a live arm, Albers has had really good seasons in his career...but it's tough to have too much confidence in anyone else right now other than Hader being an impact arm. Fields is a fly ball pitcher IIRC who has shoulder issues last year and missed the last couple months, Jeffress has had one appearance in AAA and the box score was bad. I'm hoping that's because he was more worried about getting himself ready than getting outs, but that he hasn't made another appearance is a bit of a concern(though not totally sure why he went more than 1 IP in that outing either). And those counting on Brown to come up and be like Burnes and Woody were last year, that's pretty optimistic. I'm not sure Burnes has the same success in the post-season if you take a few MPH off that fastball. He was really attacking the Dodgers primarily with fastball's up. The whole team was, Burnes, Woodruff, Knebel. But if you go from 98 to 93 those get a lot easier to square up on(or at the very least fight off). We came into the season with the HOPES that Wahl would join a dominant trio in Knebel, Jeffress, and Hader to be 4 big time power arms in the back of the pen. Now Hader, our most valuable asset is relegated mostly to save situations rather than getting the other teams best hitters out in the biggest spots and he just had an 8 out save. As for our record thus far, there is no doubt it's better than we've played or shown. I'm grateful. We're 8-3 and could easily be 3-8. But to me, those are just stolen wins. The Cards seemed to get those constantly when they were a good team. We're a good team right now and Stearns is not likely to just sit by and watch this team that he's built fall by the wayside because we're light on arms in the back of the pen. Not loving the current pen, but still trusting Stearns.