HiAndTight

I agree, McCarthy likely wouldn't have even had Hill active on gamedays had he kept a 3rd QB that year, much less having him on the punt block team, playing QB in a almost wildcat type scheme, playing TE, RB, Gunner and everything else that he does. Of course there's probably only a couple Coaches who would have done that. Again though, do you think you do that with a guy you believe is a viable starting QB if someone goes down? Doesn't diminish the "what could have been's" when watching him play for the Saints though. Incidentally, on that 4th down fake punt on their own 30 down 14-0 vs the Eagles, it was a duo of LB'ers from Kimberly and Wisc Rapids who were his lead blockers. AJ Klein and Vince Biegal. Payton seems to be one of those very rare guys who doesn't get stale. Of course that's not what Saints fans were saying when they had three straight 7 win seasons just a few years ago.

Hill had a terrific preseason, and there was a lot of talk at cutdown time that he'd likely be claimed if cut. He looked substantially better than Hundley and Callahan. I guess I should have prefaced my comment to say that McCarthy didn't see value in hanging onto a 27-year-old rookie on the active roster as his developmental QB. I know that hindsignt is 20/20, but given the dearth of solid backup QB talent in the NFL, that was a clear, clear miss. He did look great that pre-season. And looking at his measurables, he was even more impressive. But keep in mind even in NO, he's not really being groomed at QB. If they really thought he was that impressive, they wouldn't have sent a 3rd rounder to get Teddy Bridgewater when they were already short on draft capital. That said, I thought he was almost a Tebow type QB before he made a throw in the 4th pre-season game(maybe it was the 3rd). He started to take off, then threw a 30 yard strike while running to a WR'er coming open over the middle in the Endzone. That was a helluva impressive play. Really showed off his great arm strength. Prior to that it was primarily his scrambling and running ability that helped him keep drives alive. Still, can't fault the Packers too much for trying to slip him past waivers. People seem to forget how good Hundley had looked in the Pre-season....so good people were talking about the Packers parlaying that into a potential 2nd round pick in the future. I think the bigger problem was that the Packers tried to plug in Hundley, then Kizer into the QB position on a team where the QB had to be nearly flawless in order to win games and just put too much on them. Couple that with a banged up OL when Hundley came in and a porous defense and I don't think many backup's had much of a chance. Boyle looks like he could still develop into something, but I think the backup QB position is a secondary concern. If Rodgers goes down for an extended period of time, they're done anyway. Now if they can shore up an already solid OL even more and get another weapon for him, a quick slot, or a TE like Fant who can be a reliable security blanket for a young QB AND they can get a defense that isn't just terrible...maybe one of these backup's can keep them afloat for a short stretch if Arod misses a couple weeks.

Yes, exactly. I had forgotten about Ramczyk. I know he's been a starter and hasn't been bad, but I really haven't followed the Saints close enough to know just how good he's been. Can you give me an idea? Those drafts are rare, but...what the heck, if the Packers are gonna win another SB, they're gonna need some good luck. Quick turnarounds though are hardly a rare thing in the NFL. How many years was it that the NFC East had a team go worst to 1st? The Saints went through pretty much the same type of relatively "lean years" when Brees was the age Rodgers is now. The Taysom Hill move sucks for the Packers, but man...he's been amazing for the Saints. 3 4th down fakes he's converted, he nearly had a 46 yard TD catch(Brees missed him) and then came back and hit Kamara on a 46 yarder that would have been a TD had it not been called back. Plus the punt blocks he's had. Not sure he'd have been really used as a Packer though... There's a long way to go, but there is more to look forward to on this team than I think most believe. There is no way McCarthy had the creativity needed in oder to find an effective use for Hill. That sucks, but it is what it is. McCarthy didn't see value in hanging on to a 27-year-old rookie as his developmental QB. Speaking of backup QBs, it's time to finally grab a decent one. Enough of the Hundleys and Kizers of the world. Go out and get a guy that stands a chance of moving the offense if Rodgers goes down. I don't think it's even close to being fair to say that Kizer isn't that guy. Not if you're talking about a backup. The guy was likely going to be a 1st round draft pick had he played another year for ND. He went to Cleveleand and looks awful, but so did everyone before the current regime took over. And last year he struggled in short stints, but so did everyone else. Even Rodgers struggled last year....relative expectations. He's got as much talent as anyone they've had in a long time. I'm sure I'm in the minority on this one, but I'd like to see the guy actually be able to stick around and learn an offense and actually develop before getting rid of him.

I was so busy traveling for work that I missed a big chunk of the Bucks games. Everytime I talked to my Dad he kept telling me how great this Harris looks, how he's playing really good D, looks like he's got a shot, and is an athletic big man. Not a clue who he was talking about and Wlison didn't even enter my thought process. Got back home, went through the games I'd missed on DVR and realize he was talking about Wilson. I think he STILL gets Tobias Harris confused with him since I complained for a while about that little gem of a trade and he had him on his mind. Anyway, Wilson looks like he's gone through the Giannis off-season. Remember how rail thin he was coming out. Now he's actually got a little bit of girth and after watching him, I agree, his turnaround has been amazing. I knew it was a longshot, but I was hoping Thon would turn into a more athletic, better shooting, but probably less physical version of Capella. Now maybe that'll be Wilson. Still holding out hope Thon can figure it out at some point because we've all seen how good he can be and the energy he brings to the Bucks when he's right. Plus....there aren't a whole lot near 7 footers with his touch, and athletic ability....so it'd be nice to see him get more out of it. Of course he's still plenty young.

I guess if some other team really thinks he's the 2nd-best player on arguably the best regular-season team in the league and pays him accordingly, we'll find out. My money is on him struggling to maintain this if he ever gets the kind of defensive attention guys like Giannis and Khris get. Giannis? Yes, if teams start doubling and tripling Brogdon, I would expect his production to go down. I don't know who has ever hinted that he was on the same level as Giannis. One's is potentially on his way to becoming the best player in the league. There's a reason why we're talking about him MAYBE becoming the 2nd best. I don't get it though. He's shooting and scoring. He's playing very good D. He DOES often defend the other teams best guard. Not sure why we need to look past the contributions of him and pick away at why he's performing so well and excusing it. He's playing great on a team that has had the best record in the NBA, or been right around it. He'll never be defended like LeBron or Giannis or any other HOF talent because he isn't one.

Kidd was terrible. Some people gave him credit for Giannis and Khris improving their skills under him, but improving skills is the most rote part of coaching. They were learning some bad habits about how to play. You can see how Bud coaches spacing and ball movement, and it's amazing. I was thrilled the first time I saw DJ play this year because they were clearly coaching him to set screens constantly and get open behind the arc, and he was buying in. He was lost last year. He's been absolutely terrific. I honestly can't put an upper limit on how good he could be eventually. ETA: Hate to say it, but I think Suki's vitamins get some of the credit too. I know I'm cynical, but we're talking about a trainer who arrived with somewhat of a reputation for pushing those boundaries, and we're seeing results that (indirectly) support a lot of cynicism. If it was nothing more than just having a guy do something over and over again without any viable and helpful coaching, then every coach would do it and so would every organization. That's just not how it works out. You also seem to speak in hyperbole. Kidd was terrible. No, he wasn't. He may not be on the level of Coach Bud, but he was not terrible. And Wilson has looked good. But it's an interesting the contradictions you have with Brogdon and Wilson. Brogdon has thrived, yet you dismiss his 40/50/90 season and chalk it up to everyone else, but with Wilson, you can't put a limit on how good he could eventually be? Brogdon has played far better and been a far more important part of the team this year. Wilson has been a nice surprise as it looked like he couldn't handle the NBA last year. Anyway, I love the coaching upgrade and I can do that without labeling Kidd as "terrible," I love Brogdon and can see what he's doing and what he's doing in key minutes for this team, and I agree, Wilson has made an enormous jump this year. But he's still gonna need to take another couple jumps just as big as the one he took this year for him to be a front line starter on a contender. Thon looked every bit as good as him for long stretches, namely in the playoffs and he's stagnated quite a bit. There seems to be some friction there with him and the coach.

I mean, can you imagine if they had heeded all the red flags with regard to Jabari and gotten anything of value for that #2 pick, whether before the draft or at any point before he tore his ACL the second time and still had trade value? Oh c'mon. "All the Red Flags" before the draft? You're drastically overstating the negative opinions about Jabari heading into that draft. There was a consensus top 3 and everyone had him in it and some had him atop it, some had him at #3, but you can't blame the Bucks for drafting him OR for not trading him at a 20 year old kid who looked to have bounced back from an ACL tear, had his bounce back and was knocking down a good chunk of the 3's he was shooting. Nobody saw the situation devolving like it did. I'm not saying drafting Embid at the time would have been wise....only with the benefit of hindsight can I say it was a good move. You can't say the inverse is true with Jabari.

Again, no horse in this fight, but the Vikes played 3 games vs pretty sub-par teams after he was fired. So aside from the desperation they were playing with fighting for a playoff spot and all the other intangibles that go into it and you're talking about a really small sample size. Heck, same with Hackett. You're talking about less than a third of the season. Now as a fan I'll just look at the Jags offense getting worse and then blindly assume that means Hackett was better and at the same time ignore LaFleur's poor offense with the Titans because I want to believe that the Packers are going to improve. But logically, I don't care what guys did with their past team. They must have impressed in one way or another in the interview process or have similar philosophies to LeFleur. And hopefully the irrational side of being a Packers fan just wins out.

Thanks, I do remember that now. Don't take offense to my lack of recollection previously, that's just my seeming increasingly short memory these days. I think the media struggles to understand what Green Bay is as an organization, and fails to understand the things they need to do to be successful that other organizations in the NFL do not. If there's criticism about the Titletown District, is there also retroactive criticism about the Lambeau Field Atrium levelled at Bob Harlan? Of course not, because it's one of the better financial decisions the team has made. When the district is done, I think the results will be looked at similarly. That said, isn't that what the President of the team should be focusing the bulk of his time on? If anything, doesn't this seem like a 'want it both ways' arguement? Most don't want Murphy involved in stuff like hiring the coach, but then stuff like this says that he should be focusing more of his time on the football aspect of the organization, rather than the financial side.... isn't that incredibly contradictory? Yeah, I don't think you'd hear anything about TD being dumb if they were winning a bunch of games. It's just low-hanging fruit. "You should spend your time on X instead of a skihill!" It's kinda dumb. It's like the reaction when Obama fills out an NCAA bracket and he shouldn't do that because X is still a problem. Titledown District is a must-have in pro sports today. You can't just be a famous stadium. It's simply not enough anymore. You're exactly right...it is the very definition of low hanging fruit. I do think we could have survived without Titletown District with the revenue sharing and the ticket sales, but why on Earth WOULDN'T we want the team to be more prosperous. There were rumors that the biggest problem with Mack in Oakland was that the Davis family didn't have the capital to put 80-100 million dollars in escrow for his signing bonus. That's not a problem the Packers have or will likely have in the near future and being forward thinking financially hardly seems like a bad idea OR mutually exclusive to winning.

I like Matthews, but I want a little diversity at the position. We're pretty good on the big bodied, 50/50 ball type WR'ers....which is what Matthews is to a degree. Jackson on the other hand does strike me as a great fit. I could see him in bunch sets running quick screens and quick hitters.

I don't think there's any chance that happens. McCarthy's Packer tenure is very similar to Reid's in Philly. Great coach who's time had just run out. McCarthy's gonna get a HC'ing job whenever he wants one in my opinion regardless of the trend towards younger guys. His track record means he'll be given at least one more chance to be a HC. Haven't really seen the College trend pan out though...unless there's guys I'm forgetting. Who has made the jump from right to the NFL. I haven't heard if Kingsbury had gotten the Cards job or not, so if he has, that'd be one. Other than that though...who are the college guys? I also don't think the young coordinator being the "next big thing," is anything new. Heck, it's how we got Holmgren instead of Parcells and then McCarthy. That's been happening forever.

Well...I think some comments he made were an even bigger issue. His sister mainly and them him. He's still upset that during a game vs the Redskins, his last year here some CB said something to him about that and Rodgers made some comment like, "you guys should sign him." He talks about THAT one singular incident being why he's got a bit of a problem with Rodgers. How he was supposed to be there for him and.....whatever. Sounds nonsensical to me and it seems like something Rodgers could have said sarcastically, especially given that it was the Redskins however long ago when they went after every other FA. Not disagreeing with either of the points you made, I agree with both, but I think the comments were an even bigger issue.

Ok, but when you're talking about James Jones or even Jordy post-ACL, you're talking about guys who don't get much seperation, OR who need time to run a route and get open. I think that's the last thing that Rodgers needs right now. Rodgers with Jones when he came back from Oakland had to make perfect throws and throw Jones open because he just couldn't get open by himself anymore. It was almsot all backshoulder throws and quick hitters. That's not to say we should or shouldn't sign Brown...I'm kinda torn on that. But it was painful to watch the offense when Jordy went down and then even when he got back, it was almost all on Rodgers. And given the year Rodgers is comiing off of...which was probably his worst year throwing the ball, I just want to see him get some easier throws. Again, doesn't have to be Brown and those guys might be on the team right now. Also, a little off topic, you look at Rodgers when he gets a nicked up....he almost gets better. I think his talent at extending plays is greater than what the results have been the past couple years. When he's been banged up, he's gotten into a rythem, he's clicking right away, he's not passing up the 7 yard completion and bouncing out of the pocket looking for that big play. If there's one change to this offense, I hope that's it. Because when he's getting THAT going and when we're good chunks on 1st and 2nd, that's when those big plays can come. I am a TINY bit concerned about Rodgers being too stubborn to change....though it may extend his career and it may make the team better, great players like he and Favre, they get greedy.

Agreed, not like Rison at all. This would be the biggest personality and...probably biggest talent the Packers have traded for or acquired in the Super Bowl era other than Reggie. Golden Tate would definitely fit this team very well...he's a more logical choice, a much safer one and his yac yards would benefit the offense. I'd really like to see a WR'er with a quick first step who can get open over the middle and runs smooth routes to get Rodgers some easy passes. Someone like Greg Jennings....who I think has been underrated due to his sisters comments. So it definitely doesn't have to be Brown.

Not gonna argue with any aspect of what you said EXCEPT for the fact that fans fall in love with guys like this any time they hit the open market. Guys like this don't hit the open market while still in their prime but every 5 or so years. Brown has been Jerry Rice like. He's not a normal player. Your concerns about blowing up the locker room and all that are very important, especially with a Diva who is already here at a more important position.

It's the A's getting Profar, not the Rays. Whoever it is, remember when he was the top rated prospect in baseball or at least among the top with Trout, Moore and others? I'm just going off memory, but I do remember he was exected to be not just a good player, but a great, cant miss type guy. At his age, and a nice resurgence last year, I would definitely be buying high on Profar if I was either the Rays OR the A's.

And if you're wrong about Aguilar, you sold a power hitting, middle of the order bat for gods know what in return(no clue where the rest of the league would value him at this point). Seems like if you're this big of a fan of Santana, a guy who doesn't have a spot in the lineup, you'd be a bigger fan of Aguilar who does have a spot locked down as of now. I also have zero problem with the Khris Davis trade and don't know why that's even being brought up anymore. People act as if we sold Davis to the Yankees to finance a Broadway show. We've still got a Catching prospect who's relatively highly touted in our farm system while Davis is a DH who is a .247 hitter...year after year after(you get the point). I think you'd be more likely to regret trading Aguilar a year from now than Domingo Santana....but I don't speak in absolutes for the most part, so....

Well that is an incredibly obnoxious statement...especially from someone using OF assists as a measuring stick for the two OF'ers. I can't think of many arguments worse than Assists per innings played for an OF'er to guage who's better. And by the way, OPS+ is more than a "cursory look." That said, the Brewers didn't have a lot of choice here. Santana just didn't look like he fit in. He's probably going to out perform Gamel in Seattle, but if Gamel fits in better with what we need to do, defensive replacement for Braun, LH'ed bat off the bench...you can't really fault Stearns. I doubt he wanted to move Santana and I'm sure if he had more room, he'd have preferred to keep a guy who put up a big year at 24 in 2017...but roster construction is part of his job. Gamel can get on the revolving train from SA to Milwaukee whereas Santana couldn't have. So it's a little disappointing, but....not unexpected.

They're the Yankees....of course they "throw money at the problem." Your tone suggests that's a bad thing, OR similar to how they operated before. There HAS definitely been a fundamental shift in their philosophy. They're developing and holding onto more of their premier young talent. That doesn't mean that one of the most valuable Sports franchises in the world is going to sit out of Free Agency or not sign players. Machado is a great fit in New York. They're not likely signing Harper IMO(I would say it's about 100-1). I don't see a Texirea redux from them....especially since it doesn't appear that Harper is going to one of their main competitors. But they have cut their payroll relatively speaking and become a more build from within, supplement from outside type organization whereas in the past, it was just trade your top prospects to get a guy to help you right now. That said, I don't see any hyprocrisy in anything Yankees related here. Not sure where the title is coming from.

One thing I'll note about this, if you buy into this valuation: while the Brewers are 22nd overall, have 3.1x more value than the worst farm system, and the best farm system has 3.4x more value than the Brewers. They seem to be quite middle-ish. And I will go to war over the Brewers' depth being undervalued. And I'll be the guy right next to you that William Wallace hits in the head with a rock in Braveheart. We have a flashy young near can't miss star...but beyond that we don't have those impressive complimentary pieces that a good farm system is supposed to have...according to the rankings. We could if Tiruang has a really good first year, but it seems like our pitchers start to get respect a bit late. Ray needs to really perform again this year as well as improve his BA and cut down on the K's if he's going to regain the favor he once had. Plus we have some really intriguing young LA players that could start to make their mark on a full season squad next year.

The same would be true if he didn't have a no trade clause. Nah, one of the powerhouse teams that is struggling with their pen would take a chance hoping he can put it back together if he struggles with them early on.

So not just out of their price range, but so far out that you feel the need to accentuate that by using 3 A's? But in short...no, he's not our of our price range. He was well within it. If David Stearns thought he was the missing piece, there is zero doubt in my mind they'd be willing to pay this. You really think if...say Hader was a free agent, they would say, "no, 9 million per year is waaay out of our range?" Of course not. I'm not sure where these things come from. The deal Patrick Corbin signed wasn't "out of their range," much less waaay out. It's just a matter of the risk. They certainly can't absorb bad contracts like other teams. They can't make huge mistakes. 2 years and 25 million for a pitcher like Andrew Miller....very little risk, a ton(better version of Josh Hader arguably) upside. The Brewers draw well, they have an owner that's willing to spend. They CAN afford to sign Free Agents and it's a pet peeve when people take it SO far and act is if they can't afford anyone of substance one year after signing Cain and being in the Darvish sweepstakes. I don't know if the Brewers were interested, if they were if they didn't like the medicals, if they were but he wasn't...there are a lot of unknowns. What isn't...is that they can afford to sign a pitcher of his caliber to this type of deal and they can ESPECIALLY afford to sign one to a deal that averages 9 million per year. I mean....Cleveland did, right? So...why wouldn't we be able to? No team in all of baseball has fans who spend more per capita on their team. This is probably about 2.5 paragraphs longer than it needed to be....but like I said, it's a pet peeve when we just dismiss reality and act like our team is poor and can't pay anyone. You are so, so right. The only ones putting budgetary restrictions on this team are fans. Attanasio has shown that he's willing to spend on the right pieces. Just because Stearns smartly attaches a value to every player he has interest in, and doesn't exceed that, doesn't mean that the team is cheap or has no money to spend. The lack of fiscal responsibility is how you get in the situation the Mariners are in, and the Diamondbacks to a lesser extent. Of course, if we are still sitting here with the same holes in the lineup and pitching staff come March, I'll probably think a bit differently. Exactly. We can absolutely spend the money. We just CANNOT afford to spend the money on the wrong guy. And as a fan it's really easy to look at his numbers, remember his electric post-season and say, "he's a stud, sign him." Luckily, teams do a little more investigative research into players than that. And again, players have to WANT to come here. LoCain almost certainly could have gotten what the Brewers paid him elsewhere. He wanted to come back(lucky for us, but I'm pretty sure people would have said there's no way we can pay two OF'ers ~20 million dollars a year) before that signing. Now I don't want to end this by disagreeing with you...but I kinda will. If they still have the same holes(that we percieve to be holes) to start the year next year, I don't think it'll be because of an unwillingness to spend. I think it'll be because they simply aren't interested in the pitchers who are interested in them. Two things I would like to see though; 1-Jeremey Jeffress shipped out for a couple of really good prospects. Not Vlad Jr type ridiculous proposals, but two guys in the 60-125 range at least. I think his value is high, I think DJ helped him become the pitcher he is and I think he's a prime candidate to regress big time. 2-I'd like to see them go after another dominant reliever. A Britton maybe...a guy from the left side to compliment Knebel in the back of that pen. Without the Rockies spending 110 million on 3 relievers contracts(though we wouldn't be able to afford one of the best for 9 million) it seems like the market for them has cooled a bit.

2 years and 14 million(I had to look it up). But that's close enough given the enormous gulf between the two. Salaries are just down in the FA market the last couple years. Remember when a 500 million dollar deal was almost expected this off-season and then next with 3 players worthy? Right now would anyone be surprised if they didn't crack 270? Anyway, I had a bit of a fantastical hope that the Brewers would EITHER go all in and sign Corbin this year, splurging while they had some money and then when their younger guys started to get more expensive, they'd have Braun coming off the books, and then after that, I figured, lets make our strenth a...super strength so to speak by going after Andrew Miller and being able to throw two extremely dominant lefties out there 3-4 times a week combined without burning either one out too much. But Stearns knows what he's doing and even if he was interested, as much as it disgusted me to say this, St Louis is a far bigger FA destination than Milwaukee...and we already have a Andrew Miller. All that said, he was injured last year, but still posted over 11 K's per 9 and had an FIP of 3.59.....so while that's definitely a down year, I think it's telling of just how good this guy is that people were disapointed with just really good instead of great from him. His BABIP against was 80-100 points lower the previous three years when he was dominating as well(which I know if factored into FIP). That kinda tells me from the outside that he just had a bad start to the season, one thing led to another and it was a bit of a lost year. That term "shoulder impingement" however would cause a great deal of consternation if I was the Brewers GM.

So not just out of their price range, but so far out that you feel the need to accentuate that by using 3 A's? But in short...no, he's not our of our price range. He was well within it. If David Stearns thought he was the missing piece, there is zero doubt in my mind they'd be willing to pay this. You really think if...say Hader was a free agent, they would say, "no, 9 million per year is waaay out of our range?" Of course not. I'm not sure where these things come from. The deal Patrick Corbin signed wasn't "out of their range," much less waaay out. It's just a matter of the risk. They certainly can't absorb bad contracts like other teams. They can't make huge mistakes. 2 years and 25 million for a pitcher like Andrew Miller....very little risk, a ton(better version of Josh Hader arguably) upside. The Brewers draw well, they have an owner that's willing to spend. They CAN afford to sign Free Agents and it's a pet peeve when people take it SO far and act is if they can't afford anyone of substance one year after signing Cain and being in the Darvish sweepstakes. I don't know if the Brewers were interested, if they were if they didn't like the medicals, if they were but he wasn't...there are a lot of unknowns. What isn't...is that they can afford to sign a pitcher of his caliber to this type of deal and they can ESPECIALLY afford to sign one to a deal that averages 9 million per year. I mean....Cleveland did, right? So...why wouldn't we be able to? No team in all of baseball has fans who spend more per capita on their team. This is probably about 2.5 paragraphs longer than it needed to be....but like I said, it's a pet peeve when we just dismiss reality and act like our team is poor and can't pay anyone.

2018 splits would indicate that he was golden through the order the first time (pitch count 1-25 .200 BA / 1st Plate appearance .208 BA) but struggled in the middle. The 6 times he went into the 7th inning, he got killed. His 1.121 WHIP and his 3.8 WAR seems to indicate that little needs to be changed. Suter had a better WHIP and about the same ERA (4.44 to Minor's 4.18) but his WAR was .5 The stat that jumped out at me (and honestly I don't know if this is just a truism) is Minor's stats when hitters went to right field. Opposite field RHB .306 OPS and Pulled LHB .636 OPS means when the ball went elsewhere the batters were Willie Mays. Aside from 6 outings in which he appeared in the 7th inning being a tiny sample size, it's not really the middle of the game. If you get 6 strong, great. Not sure where Suter figures in to this though. He's not an option for next year and if he were, he's not a guy I'd freel great about getting the ball every 5th day.