Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

Thurston Fluff

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,676

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 Pick Tracker

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Thurston Fluff

  1. Thurston Fluff
    It's amazing to me that there aren't more high revenue teams with great farms. When you can buy all the best players it creates a road block for all the talent on the farm. Which goes back to my belief that money stifles innovation. Certainly there will be teams like the Dodgers who do both. But for every Dodger franchise doing both there is a Mets team failing upward. I'll stick to my belief that necessity in the mother of invention here. Nothing is going to be 100% effective but there are ways to make it better. Simply having a floor or cap won't do it. But I think if there's going to be one or the other (which is what this the premise of this thread) I think a floor with revenue sharing is better than a cap with or without it. I base that on the idea that if all the teams make the same amount of money they'll be forced to find other ways to win than just buying the best players. I don't think it's an unreasonable belief.
  2. Thurston Fluff
    That's why I get the move. But I question how much it matters given who's starting the next couple days and how many multi inning relievers we have. Mostly I just want the Woodford experiment to end. It's hard to justify holding guys like Gasser accountable yet keep someone else around that isn't. Especially when it's done at the expense of someone who was doing what we expected of him. If you set a standard you should keep that standard IMHO.
  3. Thurston Fluff
    I get why they sent Rodriguez down but would have preferred they ended the Woodford experiment instead.
  4. Thurston Fluff
    Good question. I don't know what they have in the minors as trade chips but even crappy farms have enough for one or two rental relievers. We'll see what happens I guess. They're still in it so I assume they won't be sellers. All I'm saying is if I was looking to shore up my team for a playoff run I'd rather my problem be in relief pitching than starters or offense.
  5. Thurston Fluff
    One of the things few talk about is how the lack of a salary cap boosts innovation. Right now it's the small market teams that are forced to find new ways to win. It's the Brewers, Rays and Guardians of the sport that keeps baseball from stagnating. Without teams like Milwaukee we'd still be in the wait for the three run homer stage of baseball on offense and the only three inning relievers would be end of the roster mop up guys. Stealing bases, and defense would still be afterthoughts. A cap and revenue sharing would eliminate the need to find new ways to win. A floor and revenue sharing would do the opposite. It would prevent some teams from pocketing the profits but also force the big spenders to live within the same budget restraints as all the rest. That, to me at least, seems like a good way to get more teams to find new ways to win.
  6. Thurston Fluff
    I guess the glass half full view is relief pitching is the least costly area to upgrade in season.
  7. Thurston Fluff
    I am for practical reasons. I think it's the only way to get revenue sharing with player approval. If teams share most revenue then the cap will naturally occur. Ideally we'd have a floor and ceiling with an agreement on percentage of revenue going to players. We don't live in an ideal world so taking the practical approach lets do the next best thing.
  8. Thurston Fluff
    The fascinating part to be is how complex the calculations are and how much more complex they need to be to be close to accurate. Something I've always been curious about is how often they update their metrics to compensate for how the game changes. Even something as simple as replacement level changes. If a replacement level player has more value relative to average that they did two years again it changes a lot of calculations about how productive a team is with more replacement level players on it.
  9. Thurston Fluff
    I think the only thing I'd add to the OP is I think fans of teams like the Brewers have much more satisfaction when their team wins. We know our team didn't win by rigging the game. We won by beating teams who rigged the game against us. While there is no metric to gauge satisfaction, I find it hard to believe following a team that defied the odds has to be more satisfying that having to defend winning by privilege. When (and I mean when) the Brewers win we won't have to defend our championship by saying things like "We just played by the rules" or "We're not the only team with a huge payroll".
  10. Thurston Fluff
    The league has caught onto him. Now teams are giving up leads early so he can't beat them.
  11. Thurston Fluff
    I thought he was, my bad. I don't think it matters if the decision is between the two. Beong one year further along makes a difference. It does make me more inclined to want to wait to see what a combo of Bauers and Lockridge can do.
  12. Thurston Fluff
    I'd rather wait for more than a 172 plate appearances before I deemed someone ready. Garrett Mitchell always had good OBP plus good power numbers in the minors in a far larger sample size. Look how that's turning out. I think it's hard to determine how ready he is just by the numbers either way. Like Mitchell and Huira before him it's whether there's a weakness that will get exploited in the majors. I don't know if there is but I think the best way to know if there is would be to let the league he's in now find out. Much like the majors is doing with Mitchell now. Jett Williams at this point seems like a much safer bet. Plus he's already on the 40 man. No need to worry about lockouts or roster space.
  13. Thurston Fluff
    Overall the Brewers are being the Brewers. Exceeding outside expectations and meeting ours. Mitchell may need to be demoted but I seriously doubt it will be Lara taking his place. As has been discussed in another thread putting him on the 40 man would mean he cannot play next season if there's a lockout. He's 21 and hasn't had an OPS of .740 or above for a season in his career. Obviously he's doing much better than that so far this season but given the other options available I just don't think the Brewers are going to take a chance of hampering his long term development for this season when other options are available. Churio is likely going to move to center with a combination of Lockridge, Bauers and some other player (Jett Williams?) covering left. The only thing I think has to shake out is the back end of the bullpen. We have the pieces but I'm not sure they're in the right places yet. I think we might see Patrick officially move to the pen soon to add to the mix.
  14. Thurston Fluff
    I sometimes wonder if big market teams feel as much pressure to win the off season as they do the season. They have money to spend and the fans expect it to not only to be spent but spent on names they know. Thus trade for a big name instead of a young player in house who's as likely to succeed as the big name who's best years are probably behind them. Maybe they're still in the late stages of prime but the contract will turn negative in a year or two. But the pressure to appear like you're doing something big instead of just doing the right thing is sometimes hard to resist when you have the money to play with.
  15. Thurston Fluff
    I think Lara not being on the 40 man hurts his chances somewhat. Not just because it'd take up a spot but it would also use up an option when he gets sent back down. Not sure it's worth it for what would probably be a handful of games and maybe a start or two. If Lockridge was gone for the year then it might make more sense.
  16. Thurston Fluff
    I guess I define dominant overpowering pitcher differently than you do. I define it as someone who can dominate and overpower a hitter in the sense that the hitter has little to no chance of hitting the pitch. If all you mean is he throws a lot harder than any pitcher we've had then yes he does. Though Woody and Burnes weren't exactly soft tossers either. If you go by how hard it is to get a hit off him then there isn't as much daylight between them. Why would how hard they throw be the determining factor for dominance though?
  17. Thurston Fluff
    The Brewers history involve Burnes and Woody. Wouldn't the next level from that be all time great like Nolan Ryan? I never said he isn't worthwhile. I said his contract has been a wash so far from what it would have been had he not signed the contract. The contract may end up being better, or worse if he has more health issues, but so far it's been a wash compared to what we would have got had we just went year to year.
  18. Thurston Fluff
    Ashby is making $5.5 million this year. That's not cheap for a reliever who isn't a closer. I'm not saying he isn't worth it nor that he isn't valauble to the team. But his overall contract is a wash because of the shoulder surgery. Pitchers are more prone to injuries which increases the risk for long term contracts. Even team friendly ones. I'm not totally against them. I just think they have to be very friendly and would prefer to do them with position players due to the added injury risk. I didn't say we could get another Miz for pennies on the dollar. I said we can develop starting pitching for pennies on the dollar. That said, is Miz all that much better than Woody or Burnes? Lets wait a while before we declare him the next Nolan Ryan. I don't know if we're all that great at developing position players considering our offense is pretty average and a lot of our current key players weren't developed by us. WE certainly have a better reputation of developing pitching. Finally, I said let someone else pay hundreds of millions for him in his 30's. He's 24 years old now and is in his first year control wise. We have control over him until he's 30. I say trade him at 29 and let someone else pay hundreds of millions to have surgery in his 30's rather than pay him a couple years into his 30's.
  19. Thurston Fluff
    The risk is his first decade could look more like Noah Syndergaard's than De Grom. I don't mind locking up young players to team friendly contracts but I'd prefer they focus on position players. It worked out well for Peralta but it was a wash with Ashby (Nothing against Ashby. He's a great asset but he's not cheap for a reliever and he missed a lot of time.) We're also pretty good at developing pitchers. Why waste limited resources on an area we can replenish for penny on the dollar? There's a lot of risk for pitchers in general. That risk goes up with guys who throw that hard. If he stay healthy I'll be happy watching him pitch for the next five years and get something for him before he hits free agency. Let another team pay hundreds of millions for him to have elbow surgery at 30.
  20. Thurston Fluff
    I was curious if Black was going to be the odd man out. I'm glad he's not. Perkins is a nice luxury to have as the fifth outfielder when the offense is clicking but that's not the case right now.
  21. Thurston Fluff
    He was going to be playing in spring training either way. It could have happened in a regular spring game just as easily.
  22. Thurston Fluff
    There is likely going to be a lockout after the world series. Even if there isn't they won't need a 40 man spot until they need to add players in danger of being being selected in the rule five draft or they want to sign a free agent. Neither of which happens the day after the World Series. They're going to free up some spots for players who's contracts are up. There are also several other players on the 40 man who would be let go before a possible high leverage reliever would. Akil Baddo, Blake Perkins and Gregg Jones are three off the top of my head. The 40 man roster isn't going to be the reason they don't offer arbitration if they think he's going to be productive after he comes back from surgery in normal years let alone one where they'll be waiting to see what happens with an entirely new CBA.
  23. Thurston Fluff
    It isn't a forgone conclusion they won't offer him arbitration even if he does have surgery on his elbow. He's only going to cost a 40 man spot until he can be placed on the 60 day DL and there's no telling what's going to happen after the season is over given the current agreement with the players is up. When all that is sorted out we might have a clearer picture of whether it was a bust or not. Even then, only if he's not on the roster. If he's still here then we'll have to see how well he does to determine if it was a worthwhile trade or not.
  24. Thurston Fluff
    DFA?
  25. Thurston Fluff
    I'm not nearly as good at it as you are but from what I've seen in the quality of defense over the same period has gone up. If there's an inverse effect going on it could be the emphasis on defense is part of the reason for the trend in lower offense. Then again better analysis leads to better positioning, which leads the same defender having better results. I don't know how one could isolate prioritizing player type as a cause. What I do think is happening is teams are starting to prioritize defense more. That alone would presumably have teams drafting and developing a player type that leads to more defense at the possible cost of offense.
×
×
  • Create New...