Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

tmwiese55

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,313

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 tmwiese55

  1. tmwiese55
    I think anyone can see the logic in it. Both guys have in house replacements that we just won the division with last year. However, those against it are simply seeing that we're 2 games out and it's very tough to quit when 2 games out. As a team with like 5 total playoff appearances ever there is a value in providing a winning and competitive team. Combine that with since they're rentals you're unlikely to get thaaaat much and you might as well just roll with it. Remember almost no contending teams need a C so that really limites Grandal. Then remember how little we gave up for Moose to get an idea on what we'd get back for him. Also, remember you'd be trading Moose to a contender and what contender is going to give up pitching (what we need)? So it would be a prospect or two back that likely never makes the bigs. An interesting route could've been getting involved in that 3 way for Bauer since Cle wanted MLB ready players and are weak at 2B where Moose could play. Or they could move Ramirez to 2B and let moose play 3B.
  2. tmwiese55
    I could get behind that Alex Wood idea as well. I actually was just looking up his contract details and saw he's a FA. Maybe there is a reliever you can get with him too. I checked Hughes and he has a cheap team option for next year, which presumably we'd like, but if they're planning on contending next year they'd like to keep him. Reds should have money to spend though. They might like the idea of keeping Wood and being the better position to resign him if he finishes well.
  3. tmwiese55
    You do have to give teams credit for trying to win though. Really the Reds should have the best starting pitching in the division. 3-4 proven pen guys. And it's not like they don't have talent on offense. They have a legit shot. And they don't really have any big salary commitments other than Votto so they have flexibility to try more things in the offseason. The point of the team is to win, at some point you have to try to win. I like what they've done, it all makes sense to me. Only issue being they're in a tough division at a time when 3 other teams are also good/going for it, ETA plus as someone else said the whole NL being competitive
  4. tmwiese55
    My quick take, great deal for Cleveland. They needed some offense and got it, quite the haul back for Bauer considering how little Stroman got just a day or two earlier. Reds I also think did fine here, they have a great starting rotation set and have a few good pen guys. Pitching should be great next year to give them a chance. Find some offensive additions in the offseason and they have a shot, quite the opposite situation than they've been the previous 3ish years with good O and no pitching. Padres, seems a bit much to give for one prospect? I'm guessing a 40 man crunch was the issue here for them. Plus Reyes should be a DH or maybe 1B and they can't play him at either. Too bad we couldn't get in on that somehow to get a P away from them, maybe still can.
  5. tmwiese55
    With Grandal likely gone this year I think you'd need him next year. Correct me if I'm wrong of course if somehow they would be losing him in the offseason due to some rules. But, next year you'd be going in with Pina, him, Nottingham as your 3 catchers in the rotation
  6. tmwiese55
    Based on my experience in Dallas, they're real easy to spot. The women all have mini pom-poms and the men all look like Eli Manning, complete with flop haircuts (or conservative parts). I really like the younger women wearing football jerseys as short skirts though...solid look that should catch on everywhere
  7. tmwiese55
    With the extra round of playoffs and Bama being in the playoffs every year (plus a neutral site marquee non conf game) I think they've realized they've tapped out their fan base a bit in regards to travel expenses. I know the UW/Bama game in Dallas wasn't really close to a sellout and I recall last year's national title game had poor demand on tickets and things being sold below face value.
  8. tmwiese55
    I think he is, probably moreso than most pitchers who've been overblown of late such as an Archer and other examples. Heck, plenty of the other guys being thrown around this year as well. He's had 4 seasons in the bigs with no seasons over a 3.2 ERA and had a 3.0 just last year in 25 starts. Throw in that you can see the TOR 'stuff' and yea I think he should be viewed this strongly. This year yes the numbers are down a bit though but throw in the mess of a team he's on and small sample. Also only age 26/27 and controlled for two more years he's the rare legit ace level type pitcher that's available to a team like us since he doesn't have a big contract. Really, the Mets would be foolish to trade him. They need to just clean up their house around him. Him, Degrom, Stroman is like half of what you need to make the playoffs.
  9. tmwiese55
    Correct, with our MLB/AAA young pitchers in Peralta/Burnes, Grisham, plus the wild card of Moose/Grandal and how Mets would value them on expirings (tough to say since Mets are unpredictable) it could be the framework to something. Still, I think someone trumps what MKE is willing to do. I'm still doubtful MKE is willing to give up on Burnes, I think they still really think (weird phrasing) he's going to be very good. And I also don't think Mets trade him unless they get blown away
  10. tmwiese55
    I just looked Ahmed's stats closely for the first time and I was disappointed. I knew he'd been doing OK this year but looking at he looks very similar to Arcia as a hitter, but having a good year this year for the first time. Probably shouldn't put toooo much value on him as prior to this he's been hitting just like Arcia really. Is a higher end defender though from what I see. So overall yes sure he's better than Arcia at this moment but probably don't want to go overboard as its the first time he's hit at an acceptable level.
  11. tmwiese55
    First, I hate the needle moving phrase, see it every year, haha. And again, no one is saying he's some ace or anything. But he's better than half our pen right now and you could make a case he'd be the second best guy. Everyone's "needle" definition is different though, it helps the team and should cost nothing. Even if they get the starter we all want they still need at least one addition to the pen, if not two. Probably best case is a legit starter(not a Lyles type), then a higher end pen guy like a Will Smith (before he became unavailable), then a filler type pen guy like Holland. I'd guess they actually get two filler types and no higher end ones.
  12. tmwiese55
    I think it's really this simple for their decision at the time. He had no options, so picking him up meant he's locked onto the MLB roster all year thus killing flexibility they obviously covet. Second, 3.5 mil vs 5-600K for the replacement. They assessed he wouldn't be terribly better than the 500K types they'd cycle through in his spot in the pen. I really think that was the decision and its' tough to blame them for it. It's also tough to really say they were even wrong even with hindsight. Folks are talking like Lyles has been awesome or something, he's been what he always has been. This coming from a guy who was generally happy with Lyles last year and then was kinda surprised when they declined him. I assumed they'd like the power arm and multi inning flexibility. Then I read he was out of options and it all made sense to me especially considering the number of other guys who already would've been locked into MLB pen roles and couldn't be optioned.
  13. tmwiese55
    he was demoted before the game last night. He blew 1 save a few days ago after converting several in a row before it. Then last night in his first game after being demoted he got shelled when the team was already down a bunch. 3.00 ERA to 4.5 in two games. Again, not like I'm saying he's gonna be lights out or anything. But probably immediately steps in as our top 2-4 due to how bad our pen is at the moment.
  14. tmwiese55
    If Arizona opens up shop like it sounds like they will, they just demoted Holland after one bad game. then in his first game after being demoted he laid an egg. You can probably get him for next to nothing. I'm not saying he's gonna be our last year's Knebel. But in the position we're in where we don't really wanna spend a ton he seems like a competent pitcher you can get for nothing prospects.
  15. tmwiese55
    but all talk of Pina previously was how good he was at all that. Then all of a sudden he's not good enough, need Kratzy in there hitting .100. Come this year, and the talk again is how Pina is good at it all. Then Pina is top 3 in gold glove last year. That was the point, that it didn't make sense to be using a known strength of Pina as the reason he was benched. Yes of course he couldn't do every day, but he should've been the big side of the split, not the small side. And no, the media ever really dug into it and put them on the spot as to why while the offense continued to struggle we continued to play a guy who couldn't hit. I actually had a wonder if that ball Pina took to the face had some lingering concussion issues or something so they wanted to limit him. Who knows, it's over now. They still got to game 7 of the NLCS.
  16. tmwiese55
    It was in reference to like two posts earlier discussing Pina's D being better than Grandal. And then just a year ago Pina was benched for D, supposedly, we never got an answer to what was going on.
  17. tmwiese55
    My phrase of 'with how little they got we should've just beat it' is not reasonable and is me being upset? While in a discussion using the value set by that trade in another trade for a very comparable player. When imo since Tor took less than they should Ray is gonna cost more than Stroman. Seems rather tepid compared to what goes on around here, haha. I don't see any feet stomping there, people are going more nuts over not keeping Jordan Lyles in the offseason than the one small sentence I said. ETA: If anything the takes of "you don't know how they value guys so can't discuss" seems the more unreasonable one being that we are, you know, on a discussion board designed to do exactly that.
  18. tmwiese55
    thing is with how little the Mets gave up MKE should've just beat that deal. How do we really know that the Mets gave up little, though? Both the pitchers they acquired are very highly thought of. Perhaps the Blue Jays had them ranked even higher? Every team is going to value prospects differently, and none of them are using MLB Pipeline's Top 100 or Organizational Top 30 lists, I'll guarantee you that. Well that goes without saying. I guess we should all preface every prospect discussion with that then or something like "based on our best guesses/estimates". Why even have a board to discuss such topics then if it's off limits since we don't know how they value players. I mean, when you saw what they got were not like "really, that's it?" And then compare that to the packages being talked about for Ray, Syndegaard, etc or even Vasquez from Pit. IDK, seems to me Tor could've done better. But yes, I'm not them so I don't know their thoughts.
  19. tmwiese55
    Still baffling how Pina was benched for Kratz last season with our best guess on justification being defense and pitch calling. And really no one ever asking why
  20. tmwiese55
    Yes Braun is the least of our problems. Basically if you call up a guy from AAA you're hoping you can get .800 ops and you're currently getting that from Braun. He's frustrating that you can see he still has it in him to be a bit better, but it is what it is at this point. I agree with RoCo. If you can get great value for Grisham now you should do it, he was kind of a bust not long ago. I'd be happy to keep him around as you'll need someone in 2021, but if he's the key piece for legit pitching help I do it and would consider it a sell high opportunity. You're at least guaranteeing some kind of MLB production from him then if you trade him. You could've used the same logic on Corey Ray last season at this time to try and cash in on his hot streak.
  21. tmwiese55
    Alabama sells out every game at home no matter who it is. WI sells out any bigger game as well but not crappy directional Michigans types, didn't need to be Bama. VA Tech would've sold out. This is all about the Marquee Matchup and publicity, that's it. Then the name recognition that comes with the lead up to the game. They'll try to use that in recruiting as a we play the best and all that. OTB--great Alabama joke haha
  22. tmwiese55
    thing is with how little the Mets gave up MKE should've just beat that deal.
  23. tmwiese55
    Yes, as I've said as well. But, you need Saban to retire plus you need it to fall apart (no guarantee on either front). Why not just play someone else where you don't have to worry about it. Really anyone besides Bama, OSU (conference so not relevant), and probably Clemson since their coach is so young and just wow with what they have built. Could maybe argue UGA too but don't want to put too much stock in recency bias. Go with anyone else and you don't have to worry about this issue. Again, awesome to actually get a home and home done. Hopefully this starts happening all over CFB
  24. tmwiese55
    You do have to factor in that the Mets are generally fairly dumb and unpredictable. So anything can happen with them.
  25. tmwiese55
    Can be snarky if you want but as you know as I used the 'almost for sure' since of course anything can happen. But yes, at this point I'd say winning at Bama is roughly 5-10% chance and at UW IDK maybe 15ish% chance? Something like that. Schedule almost anyone else and you have a minimum of 40% chance in any game you play vs them. Really the only hope is Saban retires and Bama machine falls apart, obviously that could happen but it's only 6 years out, he might not even have retired by then (He's 67 and in great shape). But basically why poke the bear, just play the next level down where you are on even playing field. Especially in years when your conference schedules are already set as very difficult so you don't have to worry about the SOS Bs being held against them like in 2017. I saw the Bama game up close a few years ago, the size/speed/talent differential was absurd.
×
×
  • Create New...