tmwiese55

Doubt this is on the radar right now. I'd assume they just hope to get him back to what he was before he got hurt last year as a great 1-2 inning guy they can rely on in the middle innings. And if he's doing well at that I don't see why you'd send him down to stretch out, taking him out off the MLB team where he's needed. So if this were to happen I think it would come how Bryse Wilson became a starter. injuries cause need for a fill in and then it just keeps going until you can do 5-7 innings. With the increase in starter depth this year I'd be surprised if its needed though.

Now if Sal also got Lasik surgery we might be onto something. Kidding aside, with how they haven't signed another IF one can't help but think he's going to be in the 3B/2B mix. And maybe a little more strength could be the difference on getting his hitting up a notch. If they had this much confidence in him it would at least make the lack of a vet move of some kind in the IF make sense

Generally true. But batting 8/9 in the lineup for near league min and doing that is or at least should be a lot more tolerable. Especially as he pops out an occasional 2-3 run HR to basically win a game a few times a month. I guess I'm just saying if I'm going to have a poor/weak hitter in one spot I at least hope you get occasionally lucky with the power. As opposed to the other 3 options right now who seem to be very light on power while also being a low chance they'll be all that great at BA/OBP either. I still hope they find a trade instead but if we do nothing else I take Dejong as best we can do. IMO much different than what Hoskins did for a chunk this year in the middle or a year or two back when Adames was doing it in the 4/5 hole. 8/9 in the order for almost no money, well it is what it is. In years past we had 2-3 bad hitters at the bottom of the order and still won.

I'd go with C- too. My gut was D but nudge up due to the fact that due to how generally set the team was going in the offseason that there wouldn't be too many moves to be made. The Williams trade was gonna happen, and the return was generally fine/fair, though I'd have preferred getting the new IF in return or at least someone with more control than Cortes. And really the only other move left to be made was replacing Adames. And they just haven't done it yet, so C/D borderline area. Though I still do expect a Dejong type move. I hope they can unearth Michael Busch equivalent type trade between now and OD, I just don't think it will happen or it would've already though, thus Dejong type

Its probably as simple as he's the best defensive SS on the roster and will also likely be a better defensive SS than anyone else they sign now. Add in that SS is the most important defensive position. No need to overthink it. If we didn't have Willy already he likely would've been up and playing SS the last two years and been gold glove caliber there too. I still doubt its as locked in as that post says and might depend on if/who they sign for another vet infielder. But based on that nugget it means the team likely views Turang as better at SS than Ortiz. Which I would also have said too. But I don't think you could go wrong with either one at SS, depending on who else is possibly signed.

Not sure which system is was, but on MLB network today they had one of those projections up for the AL central and it was Twins 85ish, Royals 81ish, Cleve 80. Who knows, maybe it'll end up close to correct but yea I don't know about those numbers

And the two GMs are buddies, hmm. Yea I get the concerns on if Luka has the work ethic to go to the next level and the talk on that big extension coming. But, it still makes no sense. They do realize AD is just as injuruy prone while bein 7 years older, plus he's also going to demand a max extension soon. So, max extension for an injury prone 26/27 year old or a 32/33 year old?

I'm not an expert, but if not aware the card collecting/trading etc market has had a massive rebirth in the last say 7ish years. So my guess is if someone is willing to pay say 1 mil, they are expecting it to go up. They're doing it in a gambling mindset, not 'baseball keepsake' mindset. Is the 1 mil number too high? IDK, I'm just saying how cards seemed to have disappeared as a 'thing' for like 20 years is over and its back. I suppose its not unlike the daily gambling on crypto, or go back a few years to the NFT boom. For example, I think Justin Herberts rookie 1/1 card sold for like 1.5 mil.

Summary: You: They should do X, Y, Z type of moves. They don't, so they're not trying and lying to us ME: Here are examples of the doing exactly those type of moves over the last few years You: So what, those don't count. They actually should spend more money. Me: Well that's not what you said, so you're now changing. I say nothing about 200-250 mil payroll You: I never said to spend 200 mil. But spend more. Also, not sure where the passive agressive blaming you thing came from, this was my first comment on any of this and it was purely on topic. Though now, rather than refute the actual points and having a real discussion, you're turning into playing victim

So you moved the goalpost. The exact moves you're calling for don't count unless they also do simultaneously do other moves too and the payroll has to go up. Being smart with their limited money is somehow a bad thing.

So big criticism is not trading youth for MLB ready producers who are controlled for years, like the Yelich trade. Ignoring that just two offseasons ago they literally nailed this exact move in Contreras. And a year or two before nailed it in Adames. While also ignoring the key to why they're likely to be good the next chunk of years is a young prospect who panned out, good thing he wasn't traded to 'go for it' to get an overpaid aging vet a few years back, Also ignores, the Moose/Grandal signings to go for it, which is another thing this poster is calling for. They did exactly that. They did exactly that last year in Hoskins as well. So the criticism is "do something, why aren't you trying!!": two offseasons ago nail the Contreras trade. Last year, spend on a big contract in Hoskins. So, they did exactly what is being asked. I'll be really surprised if a 3B/IF move doesn't happen in the next few weeks, its probably all held up until Bregman signs somewhere then the dominoes will fall. They have made trades every deadline to try and help. There is a balance or threading of the needle in a market like MKE and based on results along with feedback from all other MLB teams it seems they are doing very well at it. That said, I generally think a few more Moose/Grandal/Hoskins short term low risk signings is what I'd hope for and think is realistic. Issue is those situations don't always come up where the player needs to do it or is open to it. Just last year, one presented and they did it though. With Bregman still out there I hope they're asking, though I don't expect the player to do it (which you can't blame the FO for).

Sorry, to me this is just a classic thing every generation says about the ones after them. The same thing was said about you by those 20-40 years older than you. Things change. Those young people can point to a laundry list of things the older people have no idea how to do as well. And keep in mind the younger people were brought up in a world created/managed etc by the older generation, so who's really to blame

If the Astros 5-6 year deal that's been on on the table is still there, I don't get why he just wouldn't take it. But yes if he and Boras are being stubborn/greedy and want to risk it on a Chapman/Hoskins style deal then MKE should definitely be involved. It's not like I think he's awesome or the player he was, but its a clear need and a situation similar to the Moose/Grandal contracts that makes a lot of sense to take the risk and 'go for it' even if its a bit more money than you'd like to spend this year. Next year you clear Hoskins and likely Bregman while getting closer to Yelis end, so salary resets a lot next offseason. It would be a one year spike. And if things don't go well and Bregman doesn't opt out, he essentially just takes Hoskins pay. So again likely just a one year spike. For him, MKE is a hitters park, no position change stuff, winning team, not in Canada taxes. Hope for a good healthy year to get a bigger long term deal next offseason from someone else. Still, I really don't see why he wouldn't just take the 150 mil from Houston.

So a number like that basically lets us keep Adames or Burnes. Does that really noticeably change our percent once they reach playoffs? You go into the playoffs with a 5-10% chance regardless. The format and nature of the game really is a big equalizer and in spite of LADs massive advantages they are not unbeatable. What the money does is give a massive massive increase in odds of making the playoffs. Once in things really get evened out quite a bit, though of course its still an advantage to be the better team. In baseball teams at that level are really never more than like 60% chance to win any individual game

Big HOF talk on MLB today. They got into Pettite and how he had a big jump in percent this year, the guys on the show get into how his WAR is similar to CCs and they might have to go back and reconsider him now. Just completely ignoring his PED ties and admission. Its wild to me how it can just be ignored for certain people like him, Papi, Pudge, but an absolute killer for the elite guys like Arod/Bonds

While also ignoring that he's only like 40% owner and not being megarich (relative to sports owners) so he can't just eat hundreds of millions in losses because the other owners matter and he personally can't just eat that loss like a Steve Ballmer can. Few mill, sure, but not tens or hundreds of million per year

CBS headline that Alonso is looking at 3 year deal with opt outs. don't get me wrong, its not like I would 'want' him but if we didn't have Hoskins I'd rather have Alonso at 25 mil instead of him at 18. If that report is true, someone like Pit should be trying to get in on it. Again, its not like I odn't see his flaws but a team like Pitt needs to get some offense around those pitchers while they can so this would seem an area to spend a bit of money while the pitchers are cheap. Not unlike our Moose/Grandall signings. Issue could be that he's only willing to do it with the Mets due to relationship

Do you know that that is? Because I'd guess it to be an overpay. Keep in mind you have him for 3 years at arby numbers with no long term risk. I'd assume we didn't go past 5 years for Adames so 3 years of that is covered by cheap arbitration, though his last year will be pricy. I'd be fine with buying out 2 years of FA but I'd think what Adames was offered would be too much, if he won't sign for less than that then walk away. Trade him after two more years. Note the caveat that I don't know what adames was offered, just a guess

Biggest takeaway watching that game last night was just how much more physical and hard hitting those two teams Ds are, and that's with Det playing tons of backups due to injury. Generally can give GB credit for enough toughness and physical on O due to how well they run the ball and a good O line, but on D its just not there. That said, I know the D has taken big steps up vs the disasters of years past so all going in the right direction, to get to the next step have to find a way to add the kind of edge/aggressiveness/toughness those teams tend to play with.

Right, certainly a huge advantage there. Who knows of course but MKE really needs another IF and even bumping that to 3/20 is so cheap for MLB. And sure there is the variable on how the bat plays but 3/12 I can't believe someone else wouldn't double that and take the gamble with the money being thrown around for avg players these days. Maybe they did and he still picked LAD though.

Did I read its only 3 years for 12 mil total or am I missing something? Is there rules that limit what he can be paid? Apologies if this has been clarified some other time this postseason. But at that price I'd have been all for topping it, but I assume some rules apply to him so he wasn't a normal FA bid.

I guess my take would be that I expected and kind of wanted a Williams trade. I never fully trusted him like I did typical elite relivers with upper 90s heat plus wipeout slider. Maybe I'm just biased against changeups though. But of course, know he's good. I'm surprised they went the route of getting a starter back in a year when we seem to have strong starter depth already (quite the opposite of last offseason). And especially surprised got someone back who is also a FA. Figured they'd have tried to save the money and targeted cheap control. But I get it, can never really have enough SP and Nester has been solid for a few years now. I also won't be surprised if they reroute him though. And I expected a AAA type IF with a chance to play right away to be brought in at some point, which they did here. But of course I'd prefer someone with more HR potential. So, I get the logic on all of it. While being a little surprised they went this route. Safe to say subsequent moves will likely make this all make more sense though. I still hope another IF is brought in to be the clear starter and this guy takes Monestarios spot or is more of a 'gravy' if he does pan out as opposed to pinning our hopes on him next season.

And that there is next to no other examples at this type of size. Sure its possible and all for people that size, but Altuve is certainly the rarity or the exception. It would be like saying " you know I don't think this 5'6 college basketball player is likely to make it in the NBA" and the response is "yea but Muggsy Bogues did".

Right, Giants are gonna be in a tough spot in 2-3 years paying the left of their infield like 60 mil as they turn into below avg players who hit .210. And to the above post, yes what can they really do with LA in their division. You're a big market so you have to spend but there's nothing you can really do to compete with LA in terms of buying enough players, so if you go that route you're gonna spend a ton of money just to come in 2-3rd place while probably having a large yearly financial loss on your books every year.

Yea we all realize this a long shot due money, the Cardinals, and his no trade. He actually would make a lot of sense for what MKE needs and the contract isn't bonkers if I read it correctly since its only 3 years, but it is a bit complicated with the deferrals and all that so would have to work that out to make sure it isn't brutal. Elite D at the position we most need, we value that D a ton, still an average hitter last year. Was above avg the year before, and had an 890 the year before, so its not an absolute that he can't bounce back a bit this year in a better environment, and due to the contract shouldn't require tons of trade capital, It of course would come down to the contract, prospects but a lot does make sense with it. Financially, you'd have the one year overlap with Hoskins which is tough, but then he's essentially just taking Hoskins spot and that general cheap older vet contract we've been doing for years (usually in the 8 mil world than hoskins though). And who knows, Hoskins could be in the deal to balance the contracts a bit. Still, its not gonna happen and I'd assume they can find a less known person to do similar for much cheaper like they usually do