HiAndTight

I'd assume they've already made a pretty strong offer when it was reported it was down between the Braves and Brewers. My guess is they offered more than Wade Davis AAV, but they're not going to screw around with 3-4 years. 2 years max. 40 million for a reliever over 2 years is plenty. If he still has delusions of grandeur about getting 6/100, it's just not gonna happen. The Yanks won't do it, Boston has been clear about moving on, the Braves are notoriously cheap, especially given their income. 2/40 is frankly too much when you look at other deals, but to salvage the pen, I guess it's acceptable.

I wonder how much their factored in Knebel and Jeffress. It wasn't a given Knenbel was going to have TJ, but you kinda saw that coming and with Jeffress....well, you can't feel great about your closer throwing 84 with a shoulder injury. With everything lined up for the Brewers, I guess I just have to trust Stearns to figure that part out.

I don't think that's a problem because I doubt the Giants would even consider this if they got a trade they felt was a good value now. Pitchers value can drop in a BIG hurry. I'm sure Corey Knebel and Jeremy Jeffress would have netted the Brewers a top 15 prospect in baseball a week ago. If you're the Giants, why do you want to wait if you plan on trading for young, controllable players anyway in your rebuild process? Maybe Smith gets hurt again as he has been in SF and the younger pitcher struggles to find the zone. Then you have nothing to trade. You see trades all throughout the season. There's no rule that says teams have to wait until the last minute. You just see more teams waiting to seeif they've comeptitive or not.

I may not have been clear. I like Ray. I don't think he's neccesarily sloted for a 4th OF role. He was a truly elite college prospect. Those guys are rare. And I don't know much about the other guy not named Will Smith(or Tony Watson) either. I just saw the name, saw the FB velocity, his numbers and that scouting reports said he could be a closer. As for Ray, if he can just cut down on the K's, put a few more balls in play and leg them out, he could be a 2-3 WAR player for the Brewers. I just see him as hit or miss and assuming the Brewers are high on the young pitcher mentioned and like his scouting report, I'd be willing to overpay in this case for the two relievers only because of the Brewers situation. I'm sure Ray has more "surplus value," than these two pitchers...as much as I don't like using that to place value on players because I think it's something hardcore fans do more than any actual team. I'd just hate to see the Brewers with a good young starting rotation, a all star catcher, a great lineup and then see their strength from last year turn into their weakness...as is the case with every other Brewers fan.

Well, I'm not feeling optimistic as a Brewers fan, but I sure wouldn't play Doctor and tell him to get a major surgery done if he doesn't need it because of what Taylor Williams dealt with years ago. That's an ENORMOUS undertaking, the rehab. Plus, it's literally life threatening. People die just going under. After now 15 surgeries, I'd say he should see if he actually needs it or if he can recover like he did in Texas before telling them to build me a new ligament throw with. Even if I do think it'll end up there....I mean...Im about 8 years and a whole patients history shy of being qualified to diagnose him.

I actually think we're selling high on Ray. He had a big bounce back year last year. If we wait, he may improve his value. He may also revert back to the sub .700 OPS guy that he's been at every other level he's been at rather than the 801 OPS he posted last year. Plus, with Ray, is his value really going to improve in AAA? He's pretty close to losing most of his value. If he has a so-so year, he becomes less of a prospect and more of a 4th OF candidate. I think the window to trade Ray is closing pretty quickly. In this scenario, at least you get two really talented power relievers. Well, it could go either way. Seems like forever ago, but Ray was a top 5 pick and the preferred pick by many to go 1st overall, and was ranked among the top 30 prospects in baseball at midseason after he was picked. Suppose he leads the PCL in HRs and SBs and bats. 260-.270, all plausible, I could see him recovering most of his initial value. Of course, his value could absolutely go higher. I think getting that BA up and K rate down are the two big things the Brewers and other teams are looking at hoping Ray can do. And I understand...he was basically regarded just a run or two below where Hirura is right now, but as you know, he fell off pretty hard and then bounced back. I like Ray and I don't like the idea of giving up a talented young athlete like him, especially when he could be taking Braun's spot in the next year or two, but I think he's got a big bust potential and while he hasn't regained all the value he once had, he's regained a good amount of it. On the flip side of that argument, what if he gets banged up, and then starts out hitting .200 and striking out 33 pct of the time? Meanwhile what if Inigo Montoya does what a lot of 26 year old flame throwers with plus-plus fastballs do after having a good first year in the big leagues and he starts to dominate....maybe he's not even available at the deadline? 5 years of team control. I guess you'd be putting a ton of faith into him being a consistently dominant high leverage reliever for you though if you're giving up Ray. At the very least, I'm DEFINITELY trying to pry away Will Smith from them. Offer that Phil Bickford guy....see if they bite!

I get the logic here, but you're saying lets wait and see what issues we have at the trade deadline and address them using one of our biggest trade pieces in Corey Ray. The problem with that is we KNOW what our biggest problem right now is, we're covered just about everywhere else, even catcher, and why wait half a season to address what you know is a problem already? I'd be good with bringing in Melancon and seeing if he can have a bounce back year. But the two guys originally mentioned(3 if you debate Watson vs Smith) are guys who you could instantly plug into the pen, the young guy we control for 5 years and profiles as a elite back of the BP arm with a upper 90's fastball and he's seen success in the big leagues and we all know what Will Smith is capable of. Finally, every team has their 25 man pretty much set right now. At the trade deadline, you'll have more teams selling, but everyone is going to be looking for relievers who can come in and get 10-12 K's per 9 innings. That's usually the most searched for commodity at the deadline. We make this trade now and you're not bidding against other teams who will inevitably suffer injuries. Or a stupid team like Pitt last year who went out and made that awful deal for Archer because they took 5 in a row from us before the deadlinel If we still had Wahl and a guy like Barnes who hadn't already shown he's not a great big league pitcher, I'd be more on board with giving them a shot. But we're likely going to see Wilson in high leverage situations and THAT is not a good thing if you want to be competitive.

I actually think we're selling high on Ray. He had a big bounce back year last year. If we wait, he may improve his value. He may also revert back to the sub .700 OPS guy that he's been at every other level he's been at rather than the 801 OPS he posted last year. Plus, with Ray, is his value really going to improve in AAA? He's pretty close to losing most of his value. If he has a so-so year, he becomes less of a prospect and more of a 4th OF candidate. I think the window to trade Ray is closing pretty quickly. In this scenario, at least you get two really talented power relievers.

No, you don't know. You don't work for the Brewers. Those are the only people that know. You have a theory based on the Forbes and Fangraph numbers. More than theory I would argue, and since I’m not Rick S or Mark A or DS or an employee of their CPA firm your technically correct in saying I don’t know. More than a little rudimentary research with Forbes and fan graphs, but with just those two sites alone even a dummy like me can GUESSTIMATE more accurately than someone who just believes the “party line” that still talks as if the brewers are FINANCIALLY a small market team CURRENTLY in regards to revenue. All I’ve been saying is they could spend more without loss, not that they would. Why would they even get into serious discussion with Kimbrel knowing they need more $ at the deadline, if we’re already stretched as thin as some have said. The thing is, there hasn't been a party line other than Mark A ALWAYS saying that he'd dip into his pocket if they needed to in order to add a player. They've done that already this year and I feel like people are kinda counting the money they saved in payroll in the years they had a very low one when in fact they were investing heavily into other area's of the organization, BUT, the party line is the fans of the Brewers on here talking. We don't know(and no offense, but you don't really know better than any of us what the Brewers can spend and we also have to remember Mark A does not own 100 pct of the team, so he at least has to take into consideration the minority owners when talking about not making money for the year or losing money). But just as a fan, I want Kimbrel. I'm all in on Kimbrel. I am of the belief that the Brewers CAN spend more money. But I sure as hell don't like the idea of signing Kimbrel for more than 12-14 million and we KNOW he's gonna earn more than that, and that's probably not even in the same hemisphere as what he's asking for. Would you REALLY want him for 3 years and 66 million for example? I'm with you on believing they can spend a little more than most on here(probably less than you believe however) but 20 million per is going to eliminate us from getting in on a guy like Cole next year in the event that the Brewers get crazy with Braun coming off and love him enough to pay for an ace(really, what's not to love). Or even just guys like Travis Shaw, Jesus Aguilar, the everyday guys that make this team go. If I find out that the Brewers balked at 1 year and 20 million for example, even throw in a mutual option with a 2million buyout, I'd be dissappointed. Not sure I'd really be upset if they balked at that figure over multiple years, EVEN if they could do that financially, have a little room left over to add guys at the deadline. It's just bleeding too much into the future at that point, and this team...as much as I love them, things go wrong. Maybe they fall off this year and the three young rookie struggle every 5 days, or maybe Jesus hits .240, or Braun has bad luck and Yelich has average luck and Grandal is pressing? Long way of saying, get Kimbrel if it's feasible to do so for now without hurting the teams ability to retain players or acquire players the next couple years. Also, just to play Devils Advocate a bit more, Kimbrel was arguably more unsteady than Jeffress last year in the post-season and is coming off his worst year. You're not guaranteeing you're getting a 1.20 ERA, .85 Whip, 15K/9 reliever, just that you're paying for that.

I keep going back to this like I kept going back to, "it wasn't the part of the shoulder that you normally have wear and tear with so Nelson's recovery should be easier," type of optimistic thinking. The two aren't the same, but you're right, Knebel could be fine and if he's back, Jeffress certainly could be and the Brewers are back on schedule...(sorta, they're gonna be hurting while they go through a hellacious first half). But partially torn UCL that has the normally tight lipped Brewers "concerned" doesn't seem encouraging to me. Worst case scenario is they give him the plasma rich plalet injections and they try to have it recover on it's own and wait 3 months and then he's likely done through 2021. Best case, same thing he's dealt with and a little rest and he'll be back throwing 99 up in the zone and breaking off that nasty 11/5curve.

They definitely have the most talented starting 5...and in a playoff series, you're fine asking your stars to go 44 minutes a game. Toronto though is a much better looking team in my opinion than in years past, not only with Kawhi, but with the young 4 who has emerged this year, Siakam(sp?). I'd be really excited if he was a Buck as he is long, he looks like he can created his shot, play the 3 or 4 and can shoot the 3 and defend. Then add Gasol, one of the leagues best defensive big men, and it's best passing big man for a long stretch. Bigs still concern me given what Horford did to us last year. He seemed to come up with an offensive board(which Gasol is very good at) at the worst possible times and be able to play with his back to the basket and get a good shot off when they really needed a score. I know Lopez has been blocking shots, but can he really be relied upon to play those guys down low? Obviously offensively we can run them off the court, but it could present some problems defensively. Of course after the Bucks brilliant game plan vs Houston, if they can get healthy, I feel good about this team with coach Bud leading them.

I got the same idea about him. I think he's one of those guys that will step away from the game, and the only time you'll hear about him is when he's inducted into the Packers Hall of Fame, and for various reunions every few years. He's smart enough to be a terrific coach, but also smart enough not to stay far away from coaching, if you know what I mean. Would I be correct in assuming you meant smart enough TO stay far away from coaching and the "not" in there was in error? I know Jodry's a family man, but I don't remember how many children he has. For some reason I can picture him in a flannel shirt in a family pic with like 5 kids around him. If I'm reading what you wrote correctly, it seems like you're saying he should stay away from coaching so he doesn't have to spend 100 hours a week at the stadium and away from his kids. I'd like to see him maybe be a part time guy on a NFL Network or ESPN show. Some guys are just almost impossible to not like. Jordy was a great reciever in his prime and I don't think he was a product of Rodgers. His body control was amazing and his ability to go and keep those toes in bounds while catching a ball feet out of bounds was something he could do as well as anyone in the NFL. He was also a great deep threat and route runner, and he was all these things without being a diva. AB or Beckham in GB has been discussed, but things really run smoothly when you have stars like Jordy, Driver, Jones, Jennings for 99 pct of his career. Guys who just perform without complaining. Also, and this is not a call to re-sign him, but he had one of the better SB's for a WR'er all time. 9 catches for 140 yards and that was with two big early drops where he started running before he secured the ball. He could have tacked on another 60 yards. But Rodgers came back to him and he more than made up for any early errors.

Well, first of all, I'd have gladly given Clay 5 million to come back. He's still clearly worth that much. But nowhere in my post did I even suggest the Packers should have signed him. I pointed out he made one of the biggest plays in Packers history, but it seems to be a play that few really remember, then said it was hard to believe that he had higher offers and then and suggested that maybe he had a higher offer, but with less real(read-guaranteed money in it). Even if that is what I said, I think Clay's career with the Packers amounts to a bit more than one play 9 years ago. That seemed a little unecessarily snide. You're suggesting I'm advocating for signing(and again, didn't even advocate giving Clay the deal) Howard Green because he had a big play 9 years ago(hitting Big Ben as he threw it on the Collins pick). That said, hard to believe he was getting offered more than 2/16.5 with incentives. This was the crux of your post. The "that said" part was only supported by the discussion of that one play 9 years ago. I wasn't being snide, I was simply responding to your post to say that good business decisions aren't based on sentimental memories from years past. If that isn't what you meant, I'm sorry. That is how the post reads. I also would take Clay at $5M if he agreed to play that hybrid MLB/OLB role I discussed in an earlier post. But I added the "+" to generally mean deals over that. So 2 years at $8.25M/year I would avoid for players north of 30. You're reading things that just aren't there. I don't see where it reads that I wanted him back. I mentioned one of the biggest plays in Packers history that I believe tends to get overlooked. I said I thought it was surprising to hear that he got bigger offers than the one he got from the Rams for 2 years and 16.5 million dollars and then speculated that maybe someone offered him a deal with less guaranteed money, but for more total dollars. Nowhere in there did I insinuated that the Packers should have signed Clay Matthews and I certainly didn't do so for the utterly ridicuous reason that he made a big play 9 years ago. That said doesn't have to be supported by anything. It's a throw away line. A transition from one topic to another.

No,I disagree. Ifyou get two relivers from the Giants with great stuff who both can get more than 10 K's per 9 IP, you don't go out and waste money on Kimbrel. Kimbrel is not a good option. We don't want to have to sign Kimbrel. If Knebel came back and they said his elbow was the same as it's been and he's going to resume throwing in 2 weeks, I'd be off of Kimbrel. I'm only on Kimbrel because I don't know that another team is going to throw in the towel before the season even begins and trade us an elite BP arm. If the plan was to build a super-pen, we'd have signed 2-3 guys who were as good or better last year than Kimbrel for what Kimbrel is asking for. I just want to get back to having a good and estasblished pen. Will Smith and Moronta do that for us and in Moronta they get a guy for 5 years. It's not my money, but how it's spent does impact the team I root for. If you're going to sign Kimbrel now just because, even after replacing what you lose in Knebel and Jeffreess, I'd just wait, hold onto that money and take a look at next years FA class and target a certain Astro from UCLA. As for Ray, I doubt Stearns has been grooming him to trade him(I don't even know how you'd do that. I just think he's better, is more highly respected and would appeal to the Giants more, and if you're going to trade your closer and your young SU before the season starts, it is an easier sell to your fanbase that you're getting back a Team USA star, a former top 10 pick, and a guy coming off a big season not far removed from being a top 50 prospect.

He was only down 1.5 MPH from the year before last year and he was actually up from 2016 when he made his debut and he impressed with that big fastball. To me, as long as you have a fastball in the upper 90's, a slider that's got great movement, you've got a chance. So many relievers struggle for a while before the light goes on, they get confidence and then instead of trying to get guys to chase outside of the zone, they just start attacking and going after guys. Jacob Barnes could be just another on a massively long list of power arms that can never locate well enough to succeed. But again, until they go the way of Wily Peralta, Ill hold out hope. Also, the talk of the pen being a weak spot now hurts, but if Freddy Peralta and Corbin Burnes have really added two MPH to their fastballs? I had Freddy as a 3/4, but if he can throw it 95 on a regular basis, he could be a really good #2. I also didn't realize his realease point was so close to the plate relative to most pitchers making his fastball deceptively fast already. It's possible with the 3 young guys, Chacin and about 12 other options for that other role, Davies filling it now, we get through the stretch of tough games, pick up a tanking teams closer and all is fine in Milwaukee once again with Kimbrel.

Well, agree to disagree. I think moving Hader to the closers role is foolish given what we've seen him to and the value he's added by being able to come in and face the teams best hitters. I agree we need to have a competent pitcher closing games....I don't believe that should be Hader unless it sets up where he is going to face Votto and Gennett in the 8th, he's fresh and he gets through the 8th quickly enough that he can come back out for another inning. That's about the only time he should be a "closer." Also, just posted this, but you should check out fangraphs. Great article about how Anderson could thrive in a BP role now that he can ditch his 2 least effective pitches and just go with his fastball, curve and change.

I think this is probably way more spot on than any of this Kimbrel talk. Will Smith makes a ton of sense. Agreed, but if you're giving up Ray, you'd better be getting back more than one year of control. Get Smith, and that flame throwing young guy who struck out over 10 per 9 IP last year and can crank it up to 100 and you control for 5 years and maybe you've rebuilt your BP. I guess it depends on what the Brewers think of Ray. I think in Brinson they saw a guy who was extremely talented but was going to take a while to develop(I've said I think it'll take 1000-1200 PA's before he starts to produce). Are they more confident about Ray? And how valuable is he compared to two potentially dominant relievers that puts this BP back on solid footing not just this year, but the next few AND keeps you from having to shell out 20 million for a year of Craig Kimbrel.

Exactly. Taylor Williams could be that guy. Think of some of the best closers we've had in the last decade. The Turnbow, Axford types. They weren't guys you were really counting on when they burst onto the scene. Williams has as good of stuff as just about anyone. And you can't afford to take Hader out of the role he's in now. What hurts the most about losing both of those guys is that you could count on one of them to come in and put out a fire earlier in a game....in the 5th or 6th inning and then the other was still there to close after Hader got you 4-5-6 outs.

Stearns has the right to make an incredibly vague statement that could mean almost anything... needs a closer that can be counted on - No they don't. They need quality pitchers that can get outs no matter what the situation. I really thought baseball was going to evolve beyond the "set closer in the 9th" mentality. Dishing out crazy sums of money for guys deemed to be a "closer" has probably led to more bad contracts in baseball than any other position. Yes they do. Just because at one time the closer position was OVER-valued doesn't mean that it's not still important to have someone who can come in and pitch in high leverage situations(end of the game is high leverage) and close out a game. We've seen time and time again that some pitchers just crumble under that pressure. They start aiming, they miss the zone. You DO need a closer. You don't need your best pitcher to be your closer or we'd be talking about Hader closing. But not all outs are the same. The last 3 are harder to get than the other three. It is possible for the closer position to be over-valued and there still to be a need for a team to have a reliable closer at the same time. And I think there have been quite a few more bad contracts given out to starting pitchers who've hardly ever pitched than the closer position.

No, nothing jumps out as looking bad, but the Ump just looks like he's trying to find someone to toss. And then when he goes over to the fan and gives him the signal with his thumb...get over yoursrelf dude. Just say to the security people working you want him gone. You don't need to motion it.

My anger over the Galarraga game subsided when you saw how emotional Jim Joyce got over that call. It was awful, but they make mistakes. I can't recall being angry at the refs in the NCAA Title game. I just remember it being a great game and knowing this was probably our shot. I'm not in any way disagreeing, that just doesn't stand out. But if we're going other sports, how about the officiating crew that did the Rams-Saints game? It's nice for the Packers as there's a chance we end up with a TE ahead of NE because we get to pick at 30 instead of 32, which I absolutely believe we'd be at had they not allowed the most brazen and obvious defensive PI to go uncalled, but to ALSO miss the shot to the head by a defenseless reciever. BOTH of those calls are painfully obvious. The PI in real time doesn't look AS BAD as it does when you get all the other angles...but the blow to the head? C'mon. I don't want to see refs bailing out teams on offense by calling a PI when there's a little handfighting or a jersey tug, but wow. And the thing is it's not like Nickel-Robey even KINDA denied it. He just flat out said he was waiting for the flag and then was so happy when there wasn't one. You seldom see a team get a call that absurd and then openly admit it. Even the obnoxious Seahawks claimed they caught that TD pass that MD Jennings picked off.

I don't have much of an issue with that. The loss of Harper hurts, but he wasn't as good as his 19 year old OF counterpart last year Juan Soto who figures to be better. And while the Phillies definitely added some talent, the Nats picked up another ace to go with Scherzer and Strausburg in Patric Corbin. You've got young studs like the aforementioned Soto, Robles starting in CF, Rendon who has been a near MVP caliber player, Trea Turner is a stud SS. In fact, Harper was about 9th on that team in WAR last year at 1.9. I could see them being like the Mariners after ARod left(except that ARod was a lot better the year before he left than Bryce was). Maybe now without the pressure of counting down ow long you have Harper left, they move on and finally make it past the Divisional Round. Of course Philly looks pretty good as well and added as much talented this past off-season as just about any team has in recent seasons.

I don't see Anderson with a huge chip on his shoulder as a bad thing at all. The guy has proven to be a very good pitcher when he's on. With basically three rookies in the rotation, and a pitcher in Davies who is just as much of an inconsistency and probably more of an injury risk, I think we'll see Anderson making starts probably sooner than later. Agreed. Anderson has been one of my biggest bounce back candidates. He is more than capable of being a low end #3 pitcher. In 2017, his fastball was up a bit, that curve was tough and he was pitching like a good 3. I wonder if Davies was given the spot just because he's younger and more likely to be around after this year. There couldn't have been much seperating the two. Anderson at his best has been better. Davies has been a little more consistent, but Anderson has much higher upside I would think. Perhaps they think his fastball/Curve combo will improve in the pen. I actually just went over to fangraphs to compare his FB velocity from 2017(I DEFINITELY don't recall him hitting 98 on any radar gun that year, though he did according to this article...his fastest pitch) andfound a pretty good article on how he may be able to adjust to pitching in the pen that much better this year if he scraps his sinker and slider and goes with his fastball which they suggest may be around 95-96 out of the pen with curve and his change. Maybe he'll be a big surprise this year. Who knows, given what happened last year, I wouldn't be shocked to see Chase Anderson and Zach Brown pitching high leverage innings for us come October.

I think he's a really nice breakout candidate. He missed two years, came back last year, earned a role on the team, though was up and down. But his command should be coming back now that he's finally got a healthy off-season to train and a full ST'ing. Also, still holding out hope for Jacob Barnes. He's got the stuff to be dominant. Still, really concerning that we went from looking at Jeffress, Knebel, and Wahl to finish up games to having names like Claudio, Wilson and Fields being tossed around. Claudio is a proven major leaguer who was in the mix since the end of the Winter Meetings. Wahl has much less MLB experience and was definitely a wild card going into ST, albeit a wild card with a potentially higher ceiling. That said, Wahl was never a serious candidate to close games until he'd built up a track record that proved he belonged in that kind of role. I was rooting for him to be a factor, too, and I'm bummed he's out for the year, but he was hardly a sure thing. No, you're obviously right about that. I guess I was more looking at it as a embarassment of riches and him being a guy who could, at some point this year, be counted on to pitch in high leverage innings based on his stuff. But I really just threw his name in there because he was one of the big three relievers we were counting on who have gone down with serious injuries. And as of right now, he's the only one we have any idea about with regards to when they'll pitch again. Wahl could concievably make it back this year while the other two could be pitching on May 1st, or could be going under the knife and starting the Jimmy Nelson-esque rehab time frame.

Well, I'd just take 2018 1st half Taylor Williams vs. 2018 2nd half Taylor Williams. The former version could do little wrong. The more recent version did less and less right to the point where he could hardly get through an outing without getting into major trouble. Hopefully that's the result of fatigue. Not from IP per say, but from 2 years of rehab, then spending so much time in extended ST'ing, the minors, all to get that arm ready. Speaking of which, I haven't heard anything about his rehab buddy Kirby lately. Any good news on that front that anyone knows of? Or news at all?