KeithStone53151
-
Posts
7,435 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by KeithStone53151
-
Turang I assume will be playing 2b most days. Urias will probably play all 3 infield spots and get priority on playing time over Anderson. I kinda expect Anderson won't start a ton, except maybe early on in RF. It would be pretty silly to include Turang on the roster and not have him playing almost everyday...and against both LH and RH pitching.
-
I feel like Turang making it makes it less likely that Wiemer makes it, unfortunately. Would have been fun seeing Mitchell, Turang, and Wiemer in the lineup everyday. This team doing well beyond 2024 is going to be dependent on these bats putting up a lot of runs...whereas currently it's moreso run prevention and winning low scoring games. Scoring a lot is certainly more fun to watch than grinding out low scoring wins
-
I tend to have a bigger problem with one service holding a very small selection of games hostage then if say 4 services bought up 25% each of the Brewers games. It might be worth paying $10-15/month to each service to get 25% of games plus whatever else they have. This doesn't solve the elderly issue, and that issue shouldn't be as easily cast aside as "aging demographic who cares". But I do tend to agree it's more problematic to have a guy get cable for $100/month(I cut cable at least 5 years ago, is this the cost?) and then have to pay $7/month to get 1-2 games a month that apple holds hostage multiplied by 3 other services doing the same thing. Football, every single packer game gets aired locally. Even if its on amazon or nfl network or whatever, they all get aired locally no matter what. That makes so much more sense than what mlb does.
-
Youtube games are free...for now. If this apple thing is successful, that might change. The current situation for this year is a bit annoying for non-tech savvy people but its workable. It gets more and more annoying though if youtube charges and if other streaming options get involved. I feel like 3-5 years from now you might need to pay for 5-6 services to get all the games. And to Brock's point, it's one thing for you and I to deal with the streaming stuff. I'm such a frugal person, during the world cup qualifiers I kept creating a new email address just to sign up for paramount plus free trial and then cancelled immediately after the game because I didn't want to pay. Even aside from that, signing up for a streaming service and cancelling is like breathing for me...super easy. I'm a bit more sensitive to elderly people having to deal with that stuff than you seem to be. And the demographic that watches baseball leans towards the elderly quite a bit.
-
A lot of the defense of apple TV seems to assume it's just this cluster of games with apple TV. There are also games exclusively on ESPN, Peacock, and Youtube TV...so far......for a game that ratings are declining and viewers are generally losing interest, making your fan base pay for currently 4 streaming services to watch all the games is not good for viewership. And give it time, I'm sure paramount plus, TNT, amazon, etc will get involved on baseball sooner than later. It also comes off really dirty to me that Apple is doing this with games, this reeks of a business model of trying to get elderly people to subscribe to watch a game and forget to unsubscribe(or not be able to figure out how)...and keep paying $7/month in perpetuity.
-
Even if this pick doesn't go straight to the Packers, it's very likely related. The Jets have more draft capital to work with in a trade and for what they want out of the draft for themselves, regardless of whether this specific pick goes to GB or not.
-
Worth noting, it's 4 for the first half. So roughly 4/81. I get it's still a small number but it's slightly more than you're noting. This certainly could be the 0.001 you are referring to. My father in law watches every game, he tapes games on cable when he can't watch live and watches later. He's obviously older, getting him to even figure out how to navigate to the game on apple tv will take some doing...much less explaining he's gotta pay for it. And one subscription service...yes it's $7. But when it's $7/month for maybe 4-5 services that have some games, it's a bit obnoxious. And that seems the trajectory. And people like my father in law are probably their core viewers. Alienating them with these hoops to simply watch a game is not smart. Apple TV money now can't be worth long term decline of the sport.
-
Why is this in blue? On that subject... How ecstatic are Bears fans that their owner won't have to demolish them this year?
-
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/22/apple-to-require-subscription-to-watch-friday-night-baseball-this-year.html There are 4 brewers games in the first half of 2023 airing exclusively on apple TV, and these now require a $7/month subscription to watch. I wonder how long until youtube tv follows suit with their exclusive broadcasts. Peacock and ESPN as well. A large chunk of baseball's viewership is older people who don't want to deal with having 5 apps with 5 monthly subscription fees to watch every brewer game. If these companies have any success, the number of other providers that try to get their foot in the door with a small package of games will only grow. This is a problem...
-
Not exactly a Packers move, but this is certainly relevant to potential compensation for Rodgers...
-
Burnes hires BorasCorp for representation
KeithStone53151 replied to Brock Beauchamp's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
I've always judged the players a bit that sign with Boras. Going to Boras like he did is a clear indication that he's going to test free agency and go for max $ no matter what. That's the Boras way We all knew he was going to test free agency by applying minimal logical thought, but this is the first clear indication he intends to do so in my opinion. -
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/03/22/in-dealing-with-the-packers-its-time-for-the-jets-to-act-like-new-yorkers/ And then there's this take.....
-
I'll raise my hand as being way wrong at the time. There was a lot of star potential in the players we traded. Unfortunately they all went bust, and nobody really could have expected Yelich to go from what he was to a double MVP
-
That seems aggressive, I hope you're right.
-
Why not? 60 million to not put your body at risk...
-
One additional note, Adams decided last year that he wanted to go to the raiders and that deal seemed to come together pretty quick. Small sample, but I'm inclined to believe if one side is being unreasonable...it's the jets. Their front office isn't exactly a beacon of success.
-
The more I read up on this, what a weird situation this is from a leverage standpoint. Packers fans seen to think the Packers have all the leverage because Rodgers announced his intent and the jets have been signing all his buddies. Jets fans think the jets have the leverage because there are no other teams in on Rodgers. Its kinda tough to know. At the moment it seems to me the Packers have more leverage, but if they want 2023 draft comp they need to finalize a deal sooner than later. And of course it gets weird if Rodgers shows up to Packers off season and pre season stuff if this really drags out. I do wonder how far apart the sides really are. It seems pretty stupid if the jets are offering a second and the Packers want a first to not meet in the middle with the Packers getting the first but sending something else back. Who knows if those comp reports are accurate. The best case for both teams is a quick/fair resolution.
-
You're completely correct if he's primarily financially motivated AND he's bad and would be bad in any circumstance. If he has desire to be great, it kinda sucks as that's 3 prime years he's not accumulating counting stats. And who knows what impact not playing for at least 2 of the years will have on his development. Side note, football really isn't my sport. I appreciate all the opinions on the Rodgers situation. I was very curious how strong our position is with him and what we might get back in compensation. Sounds like most think we have a pretty strong negotiating position, I hope you all are right. We need to get him out the door immediately, I wanted to trade him last year as he doesn't seem motivated to win. He seems all about Rodgers and kinda in coast mode. No matter the sport, some guys stop caring when they get a big enough contract or generally get enough money. Rodgers has gotten weird in general but I just don't think he's doing the right things to get ready to be a top 5 QB this year.
-
Interesting stuff on Rodriguez. One thing off the bat, in not really sure he's throwing a slider based on this data alone, those seem like they could easily be mislabeled cutters thrown a bit slower. 6 different pitches is a lot for any pitchers to actually use in game, much less such a young pitcher. Lance Lynn and Corey kluber are always the guys that come to mind for me as successful MLB pitchers that rely heavily on multiple different types of hard pitches. That cutter looks really well located. Such a young pitcher being able to bust a guy up inside and backdoor the cutter effectively is very impressive. A lot to like for sure, incremental improvements are probably enough to make the show as his arsenal seems good enough already. Significant improvements on one of his off speed pitches, significant bump in velo, and/or becoming a plus command guy could get him into that #2/3 starter profile...in my opinion.
- 4 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- carlos f rodriguez
- sal frelick
- (and 3 more)
-
Sigh... no extension buzz anywhere
KeithStone53151 replied to Brock Beauchamp's topic in Milwaukee Brewers Talk
This was going to be my comment. Brewers are one of the best teams at keeping that stuff in house. Nobody heard a peep before Peralta and Ashby inked extensions. I'm sure they are discussing where they deem it appropriate, but it takes 2 sides to make a deal. -
Cubs fans should be higher, Cardinals fans should rank much lower on well behaved. I've never had a bad interaction with a Cardinals fan. Small sample of course, but they generally are more knowledgeable and not pricks...and they don't cheer wildly at 250 foot fly balls.
-
I agree completely with this. That said, I don't think the Brewers will extend any of Woodruff, Burnes, or Adames. It seems most think one of Adames/Woodruff will get extended, I just don't. Pure opinion, based on nothing but my opinion. We'll see.
-
I might literally puke when I say this, but pending the teams in the 16-20 range...they might be a touch low. They've spent to add some good players, and they've gotten better at making something out of nothing with bullpen arms. You can squint and see a 6 or 7 seed...especially considering the Brewers could start slow, trade good players, and be worse than the Cubs on paper by August. 21 would probably be the right spot if they traded divisional places with the diamondbacks or nationals...but their odds are probably slightly better in the central.
- 5 replies
-
- 2
-
-
-
- adley rutschman
- stephen strasburg
- (and 1 more)
-
With the contracts some of these mega stars are getting with less than 1 year service time, I think the days of signing premium talents to contracts like what Albies got are more or less gone. We can certainly try. I mean, Peralta bit against the advice of his agent and that's already a W even if Peralta's arm falls off tomorrow. Based on Peralta/Ashby, I think it's safe to say the Brewers are having these discussions with players where they deem it appropriate/strategic. But there's high risk, and the player needs to be willing to accept the team friendly deal...some guys like Mookie Betts simply are willing to bet on themselves. But man I never thought Hiura would bust like he seemingly has to this point after that rookie year. Imagine if we had extended Hiura and signed him to like 7/70 and owed something like 55 million over the next 4+ years? Its tough building a competitive roster with half the resources of the big guys, we really can't ever miss on big contracts and have significant dead money on the books and still compete. As soon as that happens, we're back in the days of having Suppan/Wolf/Garza/etc eating 10% of the payroll with poor results.
-
Not to get too off topic. To those wanting to extend frelick/mitchell/chourio/etc, imagine if we had extended hiura to even a $70-80 million dollar extension before he hit the majors? That would have been very bad. Imagine if Ashby has a Thornburg-esque shoulder problem and is basically toast? It's not like all these deals work out as intended, there's a ton of risk in signing a guy to an extension before he's seen much time at MLB. A ton of reward as well obviously.
