KeithStone53151

I'm a bit familiar with Greene. His arsenal is sinker, cutter, slider. It's all hard stuff and very very geared towards getting RH hitters out. He would be a good complement to Hader and would probably a better high leverage option than Jeffress. Just be aware that he's probably going to struggle a bit against LH hitters. That said, I think I like the idea of Ashby + Bello type return for him. Depending on the market, they might get a bit more considering the team control...but I can't see them getting up into the Supak/Grisham/Ray/Turang territory.

It is interesting that Stearns and Elias worked so closely together. When Stearns left the Astros organization to come to Milwaukee, Elias was promoted to Stearns’ vacated role. As you mentioned, it is difficult to know whether that means they’ll partner more frequently on future trades, or become more likely to steer clear of doing business together. I would personally view it as bad in bigger trades but good in smaller trades. I don't think Stearns wants to make a big trade unless he feels he's winning the trade, and generally harder to win when you value guys similarly. But smaller trades probably allows for less bickering about value if they view a guy similarly. It will be interesting if the 2 teams end up making any trades.

He has the splits you'd expect. RHB are almost 1000 OPS on the season, LHB a paltry 766. Cain Yelich Braun Moose Perez Grandal Aguilar Arcia P I'm starting to get on board the Perez against lefties train. He's generally looking a lot better this year than last year, especially lately. I also view Grandal as a LHB despite being switch...wanted to split up him and Moose. Later in the game, can PH Shaw for Perez if facing a RHP.

I feel like I'd put odds right now at 40% chicago, 30% Milwaukee, 20% St Louis, and 5% for the other 2. So that poll is a bit surprising. Those odds are based on my personal assumption that Kimbrel is going to be a sub-2 era pitcher. I know many disagree, that's what I'm expecting though. I'll add if the Cubs have even 1 starting pitching injury, we become the favorites. I know they have Montgomery and can technically trade for one...problem is their farm is ugly and they might have to trade from the major league roster. Maybe they could trade their top 5 prospects for Mike Leake or something I guess.

"The women, rightfully, have a chip on their shoulders and if you look at what they've accomplished vs. the men's team and then look at how they are treated by the US soccer federation, it's clear to see why they are touchy about what they see as a double standard." That's the one I took issue with. And revenue is 100% relevant. Saying it isn't is a bit crazy. Also, the $8 million you are referring to...my understanding is that's what the players were paid. Not what the US Federation took in. And that's not their only source of revenue. Every friendly match, every world cup qualifier, sponsorships, etc. It's seriously as simple as dollars and cents. If the men's team generates a ton more revenue than the women's team, there's that much more revenue that can be spent on facilities, training, salaries, etc. What you're talking about is the men's team revenue subsidizing women's facilities, training, salaries, etc. Which frankly, I don't really care either way. In fact, it probably wouldn't be THAT unreasonable to use some revenue from men's to subsidize the women's program to some degree. All I'm saying, is the argument is trash...and in this case, there are acceptable and justifiable reasons for the difference in spending. If blame must be placed, it should go on the millions on millions of people more inclined to tune in to men's world cup than women's world cup. Believe me, if viewership were equal...sponsorships, advertisements, ticket prices, and in turn...revenue...would even out. You can't force people to like/watch equally.

https://www.nbcsports.com/northwest/world-cup/equal-pay-womens-world-cup-players-seriously

I wouldn't say rightfully. The women are paid less primarily because women's soccer generates far less revenue than men's soccer. Success is irrelevant. If women got paid a lower percentage of total revenue generated than percentage for men, that's a better argument in the women's favor(I don't know whether this is true or not, if it is...then I'll agree the women are getting screwed over). Right or wrong, the general public is more interested in men's soccer. It therefore generates more revenue and leads to the men getting paid more. I hate seeing trash like this argument above. You insinuate there are a bunch of rich greedy men in charge of the pay and huddled in the corner talking about how they should screw over the women simply to screw them over. It's not 1960 anymore, that argument is very out of date.

Crazy that Arcia has been better at the plate than Moose

Agree with most, goal differential is HUGE in group stage. Especially in this situation where one team is just dreadful and everyone is going to pound them. And regarding celebrations, if they want to celebrate that's their choice. Celebrating your goals in soccer is extremely common, there was never ever any sort of unwritten rules about celebrating like in baseball...so you can't even point to something like that as a reason to not do it. I find it ridiculous that twitter/media/anyone is giving US team grief for pouring it on for goal differential reasons.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but Mancini is a 27 year old RH 1b that's mediocre at best defensively and is hitting around 900 OPS this year while being a career 801 OPS hitter...and all this playing in a division full of hitter friendly parks. And the O's are going to get a kings ransom for him? Don't we have 3 or 4 threads going about different 1b options that are mostly better than Mancini, albeit with less team control? RH 1b that aren't posting over 900 OPS consistently are not going to get much in trade. If you can find any precedent of a team giving up a kings ransom for a RH 1B only that's been very mediocre aside from a good not great 1st half...I'm open to it.

The Brewers are a bit lucky with their W/L record to be honest, considering run differential. We probably have 2-3 wins more than we should. The bullpen hasn't been THAT good, so you can't simply say "oh bullpens can make up for run differential". That said, this team has so many ways it can improve. All the things you said, and don't forget trades. We can pretty much bank on getting at least 1 reliever from the White Sox. There are a couple other moves that can be considered as well. As much as I want to watch baseball, I think the 2 offdays this week will be nice for the bullpen and guys like Cain. I personally think Cain just needs more rest days mixed in. I get the sense he's a bit dinged up and it's affecting him at the plate.

I think it's moreso that there's a book on him, and he hasn't adapted. Pitchers try different things on hitters, and as soon as a guy finds something that works...scouting is all over it and every other pitcher tries to replicate. Good hitters will figure out the book on themselves and work on plugging that hole in their swing or whatever the issue might be. I personally just don't think aguilar is capable of adapting. That said, from what I hear he's really putting in the work. I'm sure the guys with boots on the ground have a better feel for the progress he's making in the cage and in practice than we do. Hopefully they are confident he can correct whatever the issues are.

I agree, but he seems completely fixed into the 1 or 3 spots of the order. I like to try and predict a realistic lineup...something CC might actually do. If I had my way, Woodruff would be batting 5th or 6th when he starts.

Verlander has reverse splits the last 2 years. 2018 was less drastic, 617 OPS vs RHB and 583 OPS vs LHB. 2019 so far 631 OPS vs RHB and 419 OPS vs LHB. I'm not going to advocate treating him like a LH starter. I'd probably go something like lineup below. Normally against a RH starter, I think you try and get Gamel/Thames in the lineup somewhere. I'm inclined to have Aguilar/Perez fill those spots today though. Cain Yelich Braun Moose Grandal Aguilar Shaw Perez Arcia

How much work should we expect him to see in the College World Series? In college do they generally stick to the start every 5 days routine like MLB, or could they potentially have this guy pitching on 2-3 days rest and throw most if not all games?

Welcome. You missed "screw the Cubs". Also, you could throw in "screw the Cardinals" a second time for good measure...

Someone feel free to temper my expectations for me, but everytime I read something on the Packers I get more and more excited. That's probably pretty natural for any team in the offseason, but I can't help myself. I get the impression from reading up on receivers that McCarthy and Co. were simply dreadful and judging talent at the position and utilizing their resources. It sounds like Trevor Davis is having a really strong camp and is getting a lot of praise from a lot of angles. MVS as well, though that was more expected. I feel like we might see a crazy productive Packers offense this year.

I believe I've seen And That post at least a few times that Grisham could be a better defender, but takes too many bad routes. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that.

I tend to agree with consensus here. Yelich, Hader, Moose, Grandal are all likely...I listed in order or likelihood to get in. Davies has a chance and Arcia might have a chance as a sub if he can boost his OPS over 800 over the next couple weeks(unlikely). I can't see anyone else having a chance at all. I'll add, if Moose was primarily a 3rd baseman...he might not even make the top 5 in voting. The NL is ridiculously stacked with good 3b. At 2b though, much more thin and much easier to make it. Everyone laugh at how comical it is that Almora/Heyward/Schwarber are all in the top 9 for nl allstar OF voting. I'm not sure any of them belong in the top 20. Are any of them more valuable than Ben Gamel?

Seriously when are the Cubs going to have an injury at starting pitching? For years, they keep getting by with 5 SP and absolutely zero depth at the position. Montgomery can step in and be mediocre at best. Beyond that, they have nothing there. They'd bring up some nobody from AAA who'd for sure be bad, because their farm is worse trash than ours right now...especially for pitching. As much as it sucks that the Cubs don't really have any hitters struggling, it just is what it is. Their lineup is good. Especially Rizzo this year, he looks insanely good at the plate. Contreras, Baez, and Bote will probably regress a bit as BABIP will catch up to them a bit...but not THAT much, and the rest of their lineup has numbers about where you'd expect given their talent level.

Agree that most of the aforementioned teams have better minor league talent, and could improve at the deadline if they chose too, the problem is their major league teams are far weaker than us or the teams they are chasing. The Mets and Nats are far inferior to the Braves and Phillies. The pirates pitching injuries and lack of depth give them no chance, the cards could contend for the wild card especially if they buy at the deadline. While in the west, the Dbacks are playing over their talent slightly, and have no chance, while the Rockies if they can somehow play better on the road will become a serious wild card threat. So in reality, only 2 of those teams have a realistic chance at the playoffs and at best they would be a wild card team, and I’d put the odds of the cards at less than 50% and the Rockies at less than 40%. The Brewers, if they win the central, will have done so with the toughest schedule of all, with the Twins being their “rivalry” team, to go with arguably the toughest interleague teams top to bottom, as well as their division being the best top to bottom. You're severely downplaying the talent on the Nationals. That roster is stacked, what team has pitching that can match up to Scherzer/Stras/Corbin. A ton of impact talent in their lineup. Every team in the NL should be afraid if the Nats can get above 500 and then add 2 really good relievers. And as much as some of those teams don't match up with the Brewers/Dodgers/Cubs/Phillies/Braves, they aren't THAT far off. And any team can get hot over stretches. The Brewers on paper last year were not as good as the Cubs. The Brewers played in October while the Cubs went home. Say one of the above 7-8 teams gets hot over the next couple months and is 3-5 games back in their division...and then adds 2 impact talents at their weakest positions. Maybe that's enough for them to be equal or better.

I personally think you're a bit low on the value of batting average. A single is significantly more valuable than a walk. The 2 lines you put down, in my opinion are pretty close to similar value. The single scores a guy from 2nd, or moves a guy from 1st to 3rd. All that said, not sure I want to extend Moose. Hiura should be the everyday 2b now, but will definitely be there very soon. We have Shaw at 3b, and while he's not as good in my opinion...he's under team control and will be cheaper. And team control/value is the only way we have a chance to compete long term. We can plug the occasional hole with someone like Moose/Grandal, but that might not be the best use of very limited resources. I simply think Moose is going to play his way into a 3/42 type deal this offseason...and I don't know that that's the best use of payroll. Pitching needs to be addressed at some point.

Mets, Nats, Pirates, Cards, Rockies, Dbacks, Padres. All those teams are a good week of baseball from being very close to us in the standings. I can understand feeling like you have a 4-5 game lead on most of those teams, but that's a lot of teams that are very reasonably close to us...and most of them have much better minor league talent than us and can easily add if they can go on a bit of a run up to the deadline. This isn't like the AL whereas the 5 playoff teams have pretty much been known since the first month of the season.

I tend to agree with this. It's so easy to say "he's good, we can't let him get away, just pay him". Despite record spending, we can't forget the Brewers are a small market team with restrictions. We need to draft/develop and roll primarily talented players with team control to be competitive. We can't sign a good player to a long term deal at every position, heck even the Cubs can't afford to spend $10-15 million per player. If the pitching develops as hoped and we are able to plug many other holes with guys in the minors...maybe Moose fits the budget. I don't think that's likely though. I think expecting the Brewers to sign him to a 2-3 year deal for $12-15 million per year next offseason would not be wise and would be setting yourself up for disappointment.

Yeah tend to agree, score matters. Probably 5 or 6 runs would be the threshold where it starts to become lame. 0-3 runs it is 100% reasonable to bunt your way one, that game isn't even close to over.