KeithStone53151

How about not. The NBA has this because teams will intentionally tank to get a number one pick because they know with really high centainty the kind of impact a top pick will give them. If the next Lebron James was hitting the draft the amount of teams tanking for the sole purpose for that pick would be terrifying(if there wasn't a lottery). MLB draft is too fluky. If teams knew better what they were getting I could see this being a problem. Unfortunately the only bonafide superstar everyone knew was going to be huge I can think of in the MLB draft(in recent years) was Bryce Harper. I know that idea is far from likely, just a thought. But if tanking isn't a good strategy in baseball, why are so many teams doing it? Just recently the nationals got Strasburg and Harper, cubs got Bryant, Rizzo, schwarber, Astros got Bergman and correa. Tanking has proved extremely effective, I'm not sure how you can dispute that...

There were only five teams last season who had their starting pitching staffs under a 4 ERA: 1: LAD- 3.39 2: CLE- 3.52 3: ARI- 3.61 4: WAS- 3.63 5: NYY- 3.98 #10: Brewers were at 4.10 So there are what, four or five NL teams with better starting pitching ......and we lost our best pitcher? First off, notice that list includes 5 of the 10 playoff teams. Second off, take the 3-4 best starters from each team and redo the ERA's, that's what pitches in the playoffs. Team starting ERA includes 4 and 5 starters, along with spot starts from guys. The Brewers top 3 starters(including nelson) had a 3.43 ERA. Cubs top 4 was 3.69. Red Sox top 4 was 3.73. Astros top 4 was 3.36. Notice all 4 of these teams weren't even in the top 5, if I ran the calcs for any of them we might see a sub 3 ERA. You need guys pitching in the mid 3s or better in your playoff rotation to have a chance in October.

Salary cap/floor, with significantly increased revenue sharing. Best way to guarantee players X% of the revenues. Players have been opposed to a cap for some reason, I don't know why...and big markets would hate this as they wouldn't have a significant advantage over the small markets anymore. If you stick to a similar system, I like bumping the min salary up to $1 million and draw a hard line in the sand that every player can become a free agent at age 28 or 29 no matter where they are in the team control process. Prevents teams from keeping X player in the minors for longer than they should.

I think the general argument of players/agents right now is wrong. Trying to argue that owners should pony up and meet outlandish asking prices simply because revenues are increasing is a dreadful argument. The cba says youre wrong. The CBA says teams have to meet agents asking prices if revenues increase? Really? I find that hard to believe. Players/agents have a legitimate beef, but trying to strong-arm owners into giving Darvish/Arrieta their reported 6-7 year asking prices that are almost certainly going to be albatross contracts by the end of them isn't going to garner public support. I've seen that you are frustrated that public opinion is almost unanimously against you, maybe regrouping and attacking the injustice differently makes more sense. More money in their primes, less team control, more money for minor leaguers. Those arguments are more likely to garner public support.

What if you had a lottery system for the draft? Not like the NBA, say every team the doesn't make the playoffs goes into a pool and are basically drawn out of a hat. The 84 win team that just missed the playoffs has the same chance at a high pick as the 62 win tanking team. There's no way you can tank for 3-4 years and guarantee a top 5 pick each time. Maybe you get lucky, but you might as well try to compete as there would be no incentive to tank.

Welcome to the board I don't agree with your 130 games rule. Both Yelich and Cain played in over 130 games 3 of the last 4 years, Cain played over 150 last year and Yelich over 150 the last 2 years. We didn't bring those guys in to sit out 30 games if they are healthy...injured is another story. If Santana stays, one of Thames/Santana is going to see a signficant reduction in PT barring injury. Phillips also offers a LH bat and more versatility than Santana. Having him up to start 70-80 games, pinch hit, pinch run, and sub in for defense late in games I would argue adds more value than keeping Santana.

You should probably look at those guys stat lines. They were pretty great a year ago. While you want to insult people that don't believe that Arrieta, Lynn, or Cobb are rotation changes, you really are knocking three guys that are really putting it together. Most fans would dream of having a 24-year-old in Davies put up the stat line he did but since he's basically a middle school student, we dismiss him. What? Lol. I didn't insult anybody. And again, I said their ceilings are about the same. What I said was that those three have zilch as far as a track record of consistent success, which is 100% true. I've looked at their stat lines. The only thing close to an insult is suggesting that I didn't. None of those guys has put together consecutive good seasons and Davies spent a good stretch of last year not just being "meh," but outright miserable. Davies is young and still can improve, heck he's probably more likely to improve than get worse at his age. It's probably slightly more likely that those 2 guys are better this year, but what about 2020 and 2021? I'd put big money on Davies being better those 2 years. Anderson's new found velocity had him post a better season than either of those 2 guys. If he maintains his velocity, he's probably the better pitcher next year and going forward. Velocity is his main question mark. Jimmy really turned a corner last year and his FIP suggests his numbers were worse than they should have been. That said, he's a massive question mark this year with the shoulder. It's probably more likely that those guys are better than Jimmy this year because of the injury, but if Jimmy returns to form he will probably be better than those 2 over the life of their deals. Of those 2, Cobb is the better pitcher in my opinion. Lynn is too fastball heavy for my liking, creates too much risk of regression if he ever loses velocity(which he inevitably will). Cobb has the plus changeup, which generally ages well as changeups in general are so effective. Of the two, I'd take Cobb over Lynn by a longshot...I have 0 interest in Lynn on anything but a 1-2 year deal.

I think the general argument of players/agents right now is wrong. Trying to argue that owners should pony up and meet outlandish asking prices simply because revenues are increasing is a dreadful argument. The general public can see how bad a large chunk of these free agent contracts end, especially the later years. Heck part of the reasons GM's have less money to work with is all the garbage contracts their books are saddled with, but agents like yourself conveniently never mention those. I personally don't want to see Arrieta or Darvish get a 6 or 7 year deal from the Brewers, the later years will be brutal. I'm sure the fans of other teams share a similar sentiment. GM's that mismanage their money/roster will show poor results and get themselves fired, so this isn't something you can narrow down to the ownership level. If you framed your argument for a revamp of the system, trying to get players more money in their primes...that's a much better argument that I can get behind, and I'm sure the general public can as well.

I believe the diamondbacks signed a massive tv deal within the past couple years. Not as big as the big markets, but substantial. I don't necessarily think Martinez would force them to move payroll, but at the same time I can see why Broxton would make a world of sense for them if they brought in Martinez. Heck they could option Broxton for a chunk of the year if needed and have him as a cheap CF option for next year when Pollock leaves. Corbin is probably on par with Chacin from a value standpoint. We should be aiming higher than Corbin as he doesn't really move the needle for our rotation, there's a very reasonable chance that Woodruff posts better numbers than Corbin.

They are rotation changing primarily because they would be replacing Suter/Guerra/Gallardo primarily. I'm not so sure Lynn/Cobb are better than any of Anderson/Davies/pre-injury Nelson. Both have warts/regression/injury issues just like our three. Arrieta/Darvish are certainly better than any of our guys, but that cost.

I think he might fire a hole through Thames glove if he does that. 104 mph throw at that short distance...woof.

I couldn't agree more that there will be a roster crunch. It's hard to handicap anything until Santana gets moved(if that happens). They'll have decisions to make on Aguilar/Broxton/Perez, we might only have room for 1 of those guys. You can add Phillips to that list if Santana doesn't get moved before opening day. You can also add Villar to that list if we bring in Kipnis or Walker.

Look at the weekend games, notably Saturday the 7th. Prices are a bit higher, and when I logged in yesterday they didn't have very good options remaining.

I think that's the assumption, if Santana is traded Phillips is the perfect 4th OF. But either way, Phillips is the only LH of all the OF remaining and can play all 3 positions at a high level defensively- that's what makes him a perfect fit. Well Yelich is LH as well, but otherwise this is spot on. Also it's been noted that Yelich and Cain are GG caliber defenders in LF and CF respectively, and many including myself think Phillips could be an elite defender in RF with his speed/arm/instincts...plus as noted he can play all 3 spots at a high level and has a decent amount of upside with his bat if he can get that k rate down a bit.

The two are a month apart and I was at both games(not anywhere near the action). The first one I was sitting near home plate and it looked so ugly that haudricourt tweeted about it...could see it from the press box and found it substantial enough to tweet about. Keep in mind there are kids and such in that section trying to enjoy the game, and are being subject to this crap. Even your average cub fans that don't partake in stuff like this are generally rude and obnoxious...and the fans as a whole make the games difficult to enjoy. I hate to use Cardinal fans as an example, but I've never had or seen any issues with them...or fans from any other team even pittsburgh and philly. Obviously the dynamic is a bit different, but the point still stands.

I do the same thing, I've gone to some of these Cubs games and seen numerous fights...some with pretty ugly results. There's just something wrong with people that live in that area(we call them FIBs for a reason), I'd rather sell my tickets to those games to subsidize my 20 pack. I also know a guy who works for the Brewers who said the exact same thing, they would prefer someone buy a 20 pack and sell 6-8 games as it is still good for the Brewers. Also, logic says they wouldn't provide a link and make selling on stubhub as seamless as they do if they looked down upon the practice. This WI only idea should at least give more WI people a chance to purchase that are actually going to attend, and should force more Cubs fans to pay more and buy from 3rd party sites. I don't understand how forcing Cubs fans to pay more to come to Miller Park is a bad thing, it doesn't matter who gets the money. As the above poster noted, I would never sell tickets to meaningful September games. Last September I attended the Cubs home games I had instead of selling, which reinforced for the umpteenth time my opinion about Cubs fans...but I at least felt like I did my small part in keeping some Cubs fans out for the meaningful games.

And about 3/4 of the league's teams as they'd finally be on a somewhat level playing field.

Mr. Heat is gone for good. Again. Maybe? I don't know that Darvish doesn't want to play for a MW team, or small market team, etc. As I said earlier, my guess is his agent realizes the Brewers are offering X, only a matter of time before one of the big boys tops that offer. So it's worth waiting, no downside. There has to come a point where Darvish won't even be ready for opening day and therefore contract offers will actually drop. And I think it's been thoroughly noted at this point that a variety of factors are resulting in the "big boys" not partaking in the spending spree. Maybe that changes if/when a SP goes down and needs Tommy John at some point in spring training. Honestly the longer this goes on, the worse the players will look.

I completely agree. That's not a hard and fast rule, elite players still see sizeable returns(see chapman). I could definitely see targeting a rental high end SP if there's a need and the cost is right...my guess is Hamels of the Rangers as I expect the Rangers to fall out of contention by the deadline this year. On a side, this deadline I forsee being tricky as teams will try to stay under the luxury tax, so trying to trade a guy with 2.5 months of a $10-20 million salary might be impossible to some teams. I think we'll have a distinct advantage because of this, we don't have a line we can't cross and I think Mark A will be willing to add those types of costs if we look like a playoff-bound club.

Go Kodi GO!!!! Yikes, this is a depressing list. FWIW, you are far more likely to draft the wrong one than the right one. The nature of pitching. Look no further than Brady Aiken or Mark Appel...who were both higher picks than anybody listed above. Stearns may feel going for hitters and trading for the pitchers we need is a more effective strategy. Right or wrong, that seems to be his operating strategy.

Welcome to the board. Absolutely fair point. I highly doubt Darvish would flat decline the offer and not encourage future discussion. Even if we aren't his first or second or fifth choice of destination, a number exists that would convince him to come to Milwaukee...you can take that to the bank. Also, at the very least, encouraging us to increase our offer likely would only force other teams to increase their offers. There's no benefit for him to completely shut us out...even if there isn't a realistic chance that he'd come to Milwaukee.

https://www.fanragsports.com/inside-baseball-mlb-notes-what-is-red-soxs-backup-plan/ Heyman notes we are one of multiple clubs to make a 9 figure offer...

I honestly cant believe those morons to the South think they would land Darvish for anything less than $100 mil. Well, they are morons. https://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=6 It's absolutely true, go see for yourself. Click on the darvish thread and read through. Cubs fans seem to think it's every players dream to take a significantly under market contract to play for their beloved Cubbies. Their level of delusion is quite something.

Add to that the 5 years of team control yelich has. I don't think our team is going to change significantly after this offseason for the next 3 years, we have commitments/team control of most key guys for at least 3 years...many as high as 5 years. I wouldn't be surprised if he's hoping for a 3-4 year window with this group and do a big cycle of aging talent for young talent(prospects) with an ideal goal of a 1-2 year retool.

They desperately need a SP???????????? Lester/Hendricks/Quintana/Chatwood/Montgomery Far from a need............. Well first off, Chatwood is a big question mark and Montgomery probably can't handle a full season starter workload. Second, they have basically 0 depth in case of injury. Maybe they return Eddie Butler and his less than 5 k/9, but who would come after that? I honestly don't know who their 7th starter would be, mlb.com depth charts lists drew smyly who probably won't be ready until the all star break or even later. 3 of their 5 starters listed have significant injury history, so they'll probably need to have more than 1 SP option in AAA. At the absolute bare minimum, the Cubs need to find a somewhat established guy or 3 that will take a minor league deal with spring training invite and convince this guy to stick around in the minors for at least a few months. That's probably what Matt Garza is looking at if he wants to pitch again. I'm sure there will be plenty of those types to go around, and Chicago will be a popular place for those types of pitchers to sign considering all factors.