tmwiese55

Sorry I don't mean to nitpick. But if he's not worth 30 mil per year for a team at title contention like we are then why would he be worth that for the Pels? Just to lock themselves into mediocrity and clog up their cap so they can't get any higher level FAs or use their space to take on bad contracts and add picks (like BKN did to rebuild)? I agree I don't want to pay the max to KM, but something in the 20-25 mil ballpark is fine. But in general it makes way more sense for a team to overpay when at title contention than when they're rebuilding. You're better off paying Mid an extra few mil per year than to not have him. Besides the point though, the main thing is with his impending FA and same overpay fears that we have on him that NO wouldn't value him much and we'd have to add in a lot more. Your point about throwing money at good players holds true for MKE as well, first we're small market so have the same points but it's compounded by that we're at title contention window and are capped out (assuming Bledsoe, Brog, Lopez contracts) even if you let him go so you can't replace him other than with Exception deals. So again, you're better of gritting your teeth and giving him the extra few mil per year to keep the team going. See what trades come up down the line once you have player/contract locked in

I think the list AD put out yesterday was PR fluff. An attempt to push the Lakers to increase their offer which happened, PR against the tampering accusations, and for them to throw MKE a bone by including a small market in that tampering discussion. Plus, AD's agent is Bledsoe's agent. You could gut your team for him and be left with Giannis and nothing 15 months from now. And then Giannis is gone under 2 years later. Also, no way Thon has anywhere near the value of those Lakers players. not even close. So, Middleton is a guy we shouldn't pay because he isn't any good yet Pels should build around him? Seems contradictory. Khris is averaging more 3s per game this year than he has in his career and is shooting 2% better than he was last year from 3 while at that higher volume.

I'm sure every team would make Harper/Manny an offer but they view it as a waste of time and insult to him. Sure, Brewers haven't made an offer because they know what they can afford has no chance. It's insulting to them for MKE to call and offer like 6/120 and they know they'll never take it. This would apply to a bunch more teams as well.

No incentive for Shaw to take guaranteed money now? he'll be like 32 when he hits FA and I'm sure he's seeing what's going on in the market and to his friend Moose. If he could put life changing money in the bank right now he should. That said, if i'm the Brewers I don't really see the point of worrying about this when a guy is signed for 4 more years and won't hit FA until his mid 30s. If a guy is hitting FA say around 28/29 there's an incentive to buy him out a couple more years to his early 30s. But I wouldn't be too worried about a guys age 33-35 years. Long story short, Shaw is another guy who's going to get hurt by the current system of control.

Bucks have the best record in the NBA. Why cant they win the whole thing as is? If you add AD you subtract a lot of pieces. I know its hard to accept, but theyre the team to beat in the East. Maybe/ maybe not ready to beat the Warriors yet, but it wouldnt be a huge upset. Then in the next couple years who knows what the Warriors will be. Bucks are there right now. They just toy with teams almost every night. I'm guessing you watch more of these games than I do so I will take your word for some of this. I just think if you have two of the top 5 players in the game on your team, you have a shot to win it all. As good as the Bucks are playing right now, I still wonder if it is more of a hunger thing during an 82 game schedule rather than them just being the best team out there. Time will tell on it. It will be interesting to see them on their path. I'd say that if they traded basically all their guards and huge chunk of their team to get AD it would significantly hurt their chances this year. You'd have two great bigs but your G rotation would probably include Snell and Pat playing 30 mins a game or more. You're just not going to get far in today's NBA with that level of G/wing play. Moreover, AD and Giannis's games really wouldn't fit that well together as they should both be primarily in the lane. Still they're so good they'll be a force. That said, once you have those two it would really shake up future offseasons and you have years and years to fix the G/wing situation to make a title contender/winner. I guess I'd just say you'd probably gut your team too much right now and it would hurt this years chances, but long term yea having 2 top 5 guys you're set up better.

Yea I've been saying that for a few weeks. Almost every game is a blowout. While of course that's a good thing, it's really not even needed to watch most of these games. Easy money anytime they're less than a 10 pt fave vs a non elite team though. While I get what you mean how Brogdon will always need to be complimentary guy I also can't get behind selling him while we're a Finals favorite. Of course yea if it's for an upgrade like an AD or Beal then sure. But I can't see another team valuing him that highly knowing they're going to have to be paying 12-15 mil starting next year. While we're at this level now we might as well just give him the 12-15 mil ourselves and keep winning, it won't be easy to get a replacement for league min or in the draft. Plus one has to assume he's an absolute glue guy in the locker room

That is what I thought too. Except based on 2018 that would mean only one team is paying the lux tax. If that were the case I would have guess that he would have said something like "29 teams have room under the lux tax to add payroll." I singled out the most eggregious But yeah 28 teams are under. 20 are wayyyyyyy the hell under. Why arent fans mad? Because almost all fans see that it would be a bad move for their team to be on the hook for this kind of mega contract as aside from the handful of mega markets it would hamstring them from building a winning team around such players/contracts without expecting their owners to take a loss. Basically the fans are smart enough to see the money is better spread out among many players rather than 1 because 1 in MLB doesn't have near the impact one does in NBA. Plus throw in teams not really in a competitive window where it makes no sense and you don't have many left who can pay. Presumably if the years they're demanding came down many more teams would get involved though. I would agree that if I was a fan of a mega market team I'd be a bit annoyed they won't spend the money since they're the only ones who can. But then you think about free market a bit and if those teams realize how few teams can afford this they then realize the demand isn't there and can try to negotiate better than they have in the past with the Pujols and Canos etc. Although that makes me think how dumb was it for the Mets to take on all that Cano salary and trade players for him when they could've just signed Machado? I also would be mad if I was a LAD fan and gave that Pollack contract out instead of paying Harper. But again is it collusion when an injured 31 year still gets a 5ish 60is mil deal or whatever it was. Still, if I know my team is rich I'd rather pay Harper. But on the other hand 60 mil is like 20% of the commitment Harper would be. For actual collusion, yea it wouldn't surprise me if some analytics firm or something of that nature made a presentation at some conference or maybe to a bunch of teams they were hired by to consult and that firm pretty much explained how stupid these contracts are. Maybe that qualifies as collusion IDK but I doubt there's teams calling each other on this stuff or have a specific deal in place. These guys are still getting really large contract offers they're not accepting and a guy like Hosmer got what he did somehow. Also, why is it being treated or presented here in this talk as if the tax threshold is some number all teams can afford to pay and still make a profit? I'd say it's fairly obvious that most teams can't anywhere near that price. Pretty much all the mega markets do have huge payrolls and ones that don't like the White Sox and Phils are right in the middle of this all and trying to sign them. I also feel like you're acting like most of us here are anti players in this discussion so I'd just like to point out that basically everyone in this discussion is acknowledging the players are being screwed in this and that the system should be changed to help them. We're merely pointing out that the current system makes the way they're being treated as clearly the best business and team building paths for teams. Union needs to make a big fuss soon and get it fixed as much as I know it will hurt MKE

Maybe, yes we don't know. I'd guess the breakeven line probably hovers somewhere in the 110-120 area these days. I think a new TV deal comes in soon for MKE so maybe that can go up a bit soon. But we have seen MKE spend extra in go for it years since he's been here, and he just did it for Grandal to push the payroll above what we've seen before. Either way, this person's comment suggested everyone should just be able to go to 200 mil tax level and I think everyone can agree that' just not realistic. Especially remembering contracts for these guys require multi year commitments, say Trout was a FA right now and he was the missing piece and they offered him 50 mil to play this year for us that's way more doable than giving him a 9 year 360 mil deal. As one who often uses the phrase regarding owners, "well its not my money so I don't care" I see where you're coming from but I also understand what's realistic. These rich guys didn't get to this position by willingly losing dozens of millions of dollars per year and I can't just sit here and stomp my feet and say some rich guy should just lose money to make me more entertained/happy. Otherwise, hey just give me like 500K cash then. Once in a while though, I do think it's reasonable to expect some "go for it" moves that might cost them a bit. I mean, why buy the team if you don't try to win

Can you elaborate on that please? We know on a factual basis that the Brewers cannot afford another $40 million in payroll? The consequences would be that the Brewers would lose money? With the value of the Brewers increasing $750 million since Mark bought the team, I would beg to differ. But I am open to the contrary point of view Rephrase as lose money on a yearly basis then might be more accurate. Value increasing is not liquid money in anyone's pocket unless ownership sells off portions of the team. moreover, value of the team can also decrease say if something crazy happened similar to the great depression. Or even smaller things such as MLB just becoming less popular which it generally is among young people so a bad sign long term, or the variable that is TV rights these days. Pro franchises are flush with money now due to the TV rights, but cable is being cut by so many so who knows what ramifications come from it. So basically as general fans on the internet without access to the books it is very fair to assume that if MKE ran out a 150 mil payroll per year they'd lose money yearly (and in this comment he's suggesting going to 200mil). So the options would be to eat a yearly loss, which seems like a lot to ask of an owner consistently. Maybe in a "go for it" mode for a couple years but not over and over. Which it does seem Mark just did with the Grandal move. Or the other option: in order pay one guy 40 mil they could only pay the rest of the team 80ish mil, good luck winning like that. One individual baseball player just doesn't have the impact one star NBA player does. Clear as day when looking at LBJ and Mike Trout. 3rd option, be way smarter with your money. That's what teams are doing.

Yup, I think I posted that a few weeks ago too. Shocking how well it holds up. I just rewatched it again

I think he means that if the tax is at 205 mil or whatever it is, that 20 teams have payrolls at 130 mil or less. which seems about right without looking things up. But it ignores that the Brewers would be one of those teams and obviously they're not in a position to just drop another 40 mil locked in for 8 years and still think they can make a profit and field a good team around that contract due to their financial constraints.

Still hitting his 3s at a high 30s% on high volume. Chatter among Mavs fans is he's been bad though, so I'm curious if he can still play D or if that injury killed his athleticism? I haven't seen enough to comment. Still, have to think I'd be more comfortable with him in the playoffs than Snell/Brown.

Can't follow this logic that was just said: Collusion among player doesn't happen because it's banned in the CBA. While adamant that collusion is 100% happening among owners even though it is also illegal. As said, players straight up say in the media they make decisions to set the market etc. While I agree that technically might not be collusion but it's certainly in the realm of discussion and seem to be taking advice from the union on the issue. But at least moreso than people realizing that paying a 33 year old into his late 30s is a bad idea. Harper and Machado are a bit surprising being that they're 26 but we also don't what kind of ridiculous demands they're making. I mean, it was reported Harper turned down 10/300 wasn't it? Wouldn't say that's nothing. That's collusion to only be offered over a quarter billion and one of the 5ish largest contracts ever? Of course we don't know what else they've turned down but I'd be surprised if they have turned down 6-7 year deals in the 180-200 area. Again, collusion because it's not 350 mil? Again. Essentially, the veterans negotiated their own problem by locking in the young guys at such a low price as their competition. End goal for MLB players should be like NBA, funnel more money to the middle guys rather than having these drastic huge salaries while other paid next to nothing (relatively of course). NBA artificially holds down the true true superstars like LBJ and KD which makes the 3-4 tier people like Middleton, Marcus Smart, etc more money.

If an actual investigation arm of a government or media outlet dug into it I'm confident they'd find plenty of evidence. But again, I'm not here to argue about it. I believe there is more there than you're aware of if you wanted to look but it's not a big deal. We're just idiots on the internet and no one knows for sure. And like I said, they initially guessed his age when entering Australia since there is no records from where he came from so one truly knows. It's more that its fairly clear they can put a timeline together pretty well that makes it almost for sure his handlers cheated. That said, I don't blame them to try and get the money plus there could be legit reason of his family saying the age he was given in Aus was wrong and he was marked as too old the whole time and placed further ahead in school than he should have, which is a fairly innocent reason to do this. But purely from a bball development, specifically body development its impossible to ignore this as an issue. Plenty of guy can bloom late though, especially ones that pick up bball later in life so I wasn't one to automatically rule him out after the draft because of this. But 3-4 years later and nothing has really changed.

Well I'd just say then read up on it a bit more, it's fairly clear something shady was done. Though in hindsight I grant phrasing it as closer to 25 might not be quite right because we don't know what they screwed up when initially guessing his age when he went to Australia, kind of what I said later in the post. Phrased as something like almost for sure that his people doctored things for him to appear younger and go to HS again, yea that's probably ok.

Some major site, probably was on CBS, a few weeks ago broke down the math on Murray's situation and concluded as long as he's a first rd pick he should go NFL. Essentially just came down to that his rookie deal will be more than he's guaranteed in MLB. While MLB has that big possibility of the guaranteed deals down the line the chances of him ever getting to that point are quite low especially since he needs years in the minors and won't FA until later even if it all does work out(the issue being discussed in this thread). Then throw in that he probably likes football better and doesn't have to spend years in the minors and he's probably going to go this way. Of course you have the head injury issue going against NFL though so who knows how much he factors that in

I would assume that actual collusion would require teams communicating with each other in someway and making agreements in some way. Tough to know if that's the case but I don't it's a given that it's happening, I'd actually guess not. I mean, we're just idiots on the internet right and people like us have been mocking teams for handing out these stupid contracts for years? Didn't all of us laugh at the Pujols, Cano and Votto type deals immediately? How big of a stretch is it for teams to simply realize the same thing? Especially when you factor in business/profits reasons which are a legit reasoning to reduce spending (sorry, we can't blame business owners for maximizing profit) when they do the math and realize spending an extra 25 mil per year generate no extra revenue. Then, add in the stupid nature of the youth/arbitration system that is artificially deflating the salaries of young players thus creating drastically cheaper alternatives to overpaying FAs. Basically you can get 95% of what the FA provides for 1/20th or less of the cost. For example, if say Hernan Perez was being paid 8 mil instead of 2ish mil (guessing numbers here) well then paying Marwin Gonzalez 11-12 makes sense to upgrade from Perez (because it's not thaat much more). But if Perez is 2 mil (or 55K if pre arby like he's been), well then paying Marwin isn't nearly as logical. Long story short, the pay system to the young players needs to be drastically altered in the next CBA. Less years of control and/or higher yearly pay. that's the clear solution, and I know it's bad for the Brewers. Also, get some money floated down to the minors somehow so these guys aren't living below minimum wage.

I've been saying this for years specific to the short passing offense. It was brought up again today by people around me about how Brady's job is so easy to throw all the 5 yd passes and it's been brought up for years in comparing Rodgers/Brady. I've always said back, "why doesn't everyone do it, especially if its so easy?" They've been dinking and dunking for 18 years now(Moss year only exception) and winning more than everyone else. It eliminates sacks, hits on the QB, low risk of INTs. They also never seem to have to pay or draft any OL very high because the ball is out so quickly so it helps in roster construction. Could say that applies to WR too since you can focus on quick guys rather than super talented, tall and fast WR that go high in the draft and get paid big bucks. So you can save money on WR. They're basically moneyballing WR, short shifty guys get paid squat while tall fast guys get paid big time. Very tough to emulate the genius BB is on D though.

Yea maybe another 1 year overpay type move if he's not seeing what he wants/expected in the market. I'm not super high on him due to i think his one really good hitting year was an outlier and I had him in fantasy last year so I watched him be terrible for half of last year. But, he'd be a perfect to this roster at the moment (and clearly best available option) if you don't have to commit a ton of long term money.

Yes, literally based on one ambiguous video. I'll trust the Bucks and the age they have him listed at which is 21 years old. But I think every thing I've seen you talk about the Bucks was how awful they were run. This included the Giannis draft as they got lucky at one point and then it was prior to that. They've got the best record in the NBA and you can't let your blind disdain let you enjoy it without already complaining about the off-season and how much Brodgon is going to get overpaid. I guess if you just decide you're right(Brogdon is going to be overpaid) then no matter what he gets, he can argue he's overpaid. Either way, he's a tradeable asset. That's a face. Wilson is a tradeable asset. Fact. Maker, tradeable asset. I never suggested they could get AD or Walker, but you came in and definitively stated they had absolutely none. Also, the jump in the cap is not going to be like the year Delly and Telly were signed. So I don't know what Brodgon is going to get, but I'm I think I'll at LEAST wait and see before I declare him overpaid. Hell, I'll wait and see how he plays AFTER he signs before I declare the contract he's yet to sign overpaid. I don't know how anyone can think they didn't make horrible personnel decision there for a 3-4 year stretch. All the business type decisions though have been gold. For personnel, starting with the Jabari draft you've seemingly botched every 1st. But now Wilson showing sign of life at least. Still, Jabari Vaughn, Thon. DDV of course too early to say anything. FA signings, Delly, Telly, Monroe. Trade a 1st and second for one year of Vasquez. So in all those years all they did positively was Brogdon, Brown ok for a 2nd, and now you can say Wilson seems OK. That's a ton more bad than good. Then pretty much since the Kidd firing they've done pretty well on all moves. For the comp that since Wilson looked bad but now got good so you can say the same for Thon. Well, for every young guy that looks terrible for years and/or up until age 23ish but then gets good you can find 50 that stay bad. Then remember that it's almost for sure Thon is closer to 25 than he is to 21 and it lowers it even more. I'd guess he's somewhere in between. You can act like this all conspiracy theory, but MLB players have been caught countless times, other NBA and college players from the same type African situation have been caught, Ersan was too, and several others. The evidence is quite damning in Thon's case that something shady went on, imo. It's just that you could probably assume he was placed or estimated older when he was very young and first went to Australia due to how tall he was, so that's why I'd guess somewhere in the middle

Yup, that's what I was trying to avoid with what I said. Didn't want to make it sound 'head and shoulders' because clearly any could win. And you never know on luck, injuries, variance etc. It's nothing like a Cleveland in the Central type thing. They have issues just like all the others do too. Just that if one had to wager all their money and spoke honestly I don't know how you don't go with them. And I know it's Brewers board so should expect it that way but quick run through without counting it sure seemed they weren't being picked by many. This division is so deep though it could get really weird and make all the teams neck and neck. Could be an interesting year.

I should've phrased differently. I didn't mean to comment directly on Shaq as I don't care what he thinks, he's basically an idiot and thinks Jason Kidd is a good coach. I was commenting on the overall logic of not worrying about the 3 ball and focusing on strengths and kind of working inside out. I wrote it putting words in his mouth of what he should be saying to make such a point rather than his dumb, 'you just don't need it' point. Basically, every team wants him out there shooting low efficient shots than rampaging the lane for himself and creating wide open shots for his teammates. If he floats around out there his guy will sag off and you can't run a real offense so he needs to just keep attacking. Of course he should keep working on shooting, but just getting better and better in the lane should happen too and it's way easier to do for him. You're a touch off saying his form is good, his hands/release are fine which is why he's an ok FT shooter. But everything from there down is broke and needs to be re-done. It's all herky jerky and like a catapult. He has a long way to go to get a good shot. I don't know what to say if you think Thon is good and value 6ish good games over 200 games. It's just small sample that you're overvaluing because 'playoffs'. The guy plays super hard, no one can knock the guys energy and hustle. A guy like that can have spurts here and there just catching people off guard, which he does. But that's pretty much it and his ceiling, backup hustle big. His hands are small and terrible so he can't catch, he has no coordination/dexterity so he's super stiff out there. he's rail thin and can't bang down low. He's tall, tries hard, and can hit an open 3 when left completely uncovered and has all day. That's it. Consistent PT, he played all last year and rated out as one of the 5ish worst players in the whole league. I probably should alter 3 years a bit though as I forgot he's signed for next already. Someone else will give a shot after that and then he'll be done in the NBA. So might make 3 but no way more than 5. Yea I'm sure you were saying Wilson would be good back in October. I wouldn't say I hated on him compared to most, I remember at the draft when everyone bashed and I just said who the heck knows, picks that late are flyers anyway. But yea get to Oct/nov this year and the guy still wasn't even being allowed to play and how could anyone think he'd be doing this? I wasn't screaming anywhere that he sucked but I never thought he'd be doing this now. Basically no non injured 1st rd pick has played less mins than him so we saw literally nothing positive of him. Then you remember he's 23 already and it didn't look good. Turns out these coaches are good and got to him. Same good coaches seem to think Thon is a lost cause.

Basically Brogdon is their only controllable asset they could trade. As said, picks are too far out and years of missed picks in a row kills them. Snell's contract makes him just a guy. So yea, not much room for improvement

I don't see the need. If this info is accurate and you have this year and three more you'll have him through our window if he's good and up until he's 31/32. Too bad for him but being a later riser to MLB he's the type to get hurt by the current system. But with the volatility of relief pitching and potential major injuries I don't see the need or advantage to lock anything in from the Brewers perspective unless it's really team friendly and he just wants the stability of putting a large chunk in the bank.

While I generally agree with the notion that the Cubs have botched what should have been a basically dominant window here for a while. I also think they're being underrated in this thread overall for this season. Essentially I think they should be the clear favorite. Not in the sense of say how the Indians were in the AL Central last year or anything. The division is just too deep for that level of confidence. Just that I think it's obvious to me if you had to put all your money on one team right now from these teams they'd be the one you'd go with. That's not saying its a lock as all 3 could easily win. But we seem to be forgetting we only tied them last year and they played great pretty much the whole second half as well. Yelich just went out of his mind for us. They're a really good deep team and Bryant should be back to his old self. There's a lot that could go wrong for them too just like everyone else. But I'm sure once the over/unders and odds come out they'll be the favorite. Before you say, yes I know that's not a pure indiciation because they factor betting in but it's still a good gauge.