Jump to content
Harrison v. Sale: Which former Red Sox southpaw will take home the win today? Come join our game thread and find out! ×
Brewer Fanatic

tmwiese55

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,078

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

News

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks

Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by tmwiese55

  1. tmwiese55
    Yea it would, these guys are normal humans with lives and families too. Not just robots to play baseball. Seems he's married to a local person too so both their families are probably both there and likely have kids and maybe planning on more. And LA is a great place to live/be, especially if you're rich like him.
  2. tmwiese55
    I don't know about this, seems pretty safe and solid with how well Haase did last year. Not sure I'd want the roster saddled with carrying 3 catchers for all next year, since I'm pretty sure none of these guys could get sent back and forth. I guess I can talk myself into them wanting to rest Contreras more at DH, but assuming Yelich is back and needing to be DH a ton I'm not sure I see it. Getting a 3rd catcher who has options I can totally see.
  3. tmwiese55
    He's from LA.
  4. tmwiese55
    Fair. But could probably argue now is the time to spend on someone like Burnes and/or another SP (assuming 6-7 years at most) due to all those guys still being so cheap on their rookie deals. The Catcher and SS are coming due in the next 3-4 years, but you have this window while they're all cheap. You're not wrong in that assume a 6-7 year deal for Burnes there will be a couple years of overlap with him and C/SS new contracts, but it should be minimal and perhaps you can structure Burnes as front heavy now and have it go down later. I would probably look at this as a reason to hold off on Santander though, age 30. Your offense should be plenty good with all those young guys so don't need to force having 25 mil tied up in a 35 year old guy falling apart at the time you need that money for others. So O'neil makes a lot of sense as an alternate due to only 3 years.
  5. tmwiese55
    Right, which is probably technically true as the current system allows for teams to spend so much they lose money on a yearly basis. A cap system would be like the NFL sharing the known money. However, there is probably an argument an NFL/NBA type system would be better for the overall union members as it would spread the wealth around instead of it being so top heavy for the few who get the lottery ticket like Soto while so many other toil away from ages 18-32 making minor league pay, then league min/arby until they're too old to get a big pay day. NBA is the best example of that, they've held down the elite elite guys salaries so all the 3-4th tiers and role players can still get set for life contracts. There's probably a debate among the players on this
  6. tmwiese55
    I think when I've looked into this in the past with a "why don't 3/4 of the teams vote together to change this" type perspective the reason I found isn't that the teams wouldn't do it, it is that they also need the players union to do it, and they won't. So the small market teams don't bother with it knowing the Union will block it. So avoiding the fight/strike issues of it
  7. tmwiese55
    Wouldn't say I'm one totally attached to prospects. But I'd also say I think we're not desperate enough to get pitching or that we don't continue to find it much cheaper so I don't see the need to give up possible top top guys like Pratt for 2 years of someone like Crochet. Already had TJ, so only has one year track record, have to manage workload, gone in under 2 years. Now for some past bigger proven arms like a Burnes, Snell etc when they were being shopped I get it. Its not like I'm saying he isn't good, just that I don't think we're in that dire of need of pitching to have to 'overpay' or however you want to phrase it. Someone like Bal should be all over a guy like him, tons of talent to trade and desperate for pitching.
  8. tmwiese55
    Well right, that's kind of the discussion. Will they spend to keep some of the ala Houston or act like a MKE/TB type? Along with just the general will the 6ish year window allotted by the tanking win a title or not? If it does, the tankjob was worth it, if not you probably would've preferred to just be consistently mid level the whole time. Really no matter the results it won't prove anything as much of it is just playoff rolls of the dice. Royals route worked even with only 2-3 rolls of the dice. Ours hasn't in spite of like 10 now. Tanks in the Royals route have worked, and both Cubs/Houston/Nats routes have worked. And of course, several other tanks/losing teams just continue to lose like Pitt
  9. tmwiese55
    That's the debate. Will it pay off with a World Series or not? It has worked really well for Houston, Cubs, etc. But of course other teams perpetually are bad. They are built for it if they can get a bit of pitching help to come up or buy while their stars are still cheap, like they did with Burnes. The key for them and new owners is will they actually pay up to keep their own guys or let them all walk. They have to find a way to keep some, it seems finding a middle ground like Houston did is probably the best way
  10. tmwiese55
    Yup. And yes as HC he'd be less involved but his hire would've kept the same system that started with Aranda and carried on through him with the elite LB play getting such great pass rush and has led to the NFL being covered in LBs from UW dominating. Sure he could've botched the hire but the plan/idea would've been to keep running the same system that had produced the best non-SEC defense in the country the previous 7ish years.
  11. tmwiese55
    Michigan just won the national title last year with a modern version of physical tough running focused offense. It doesn't have to only be pure spread passing, there is plenty of mixing and physical play that can even if its not run from the I formation with two TEs. In hindsight, keeping Leonhard in order to keep the elite D and getting an O coordinator in that style or mindset would've been the best move. But we are where we are, so need to get the right O coordinator this time, actually start coaching/developing football with focus on line play. And I have no idea why they didn't do all they could to keep the D system we had in place the previous 6-7 years, but tweaks have to be made to actually get some attack and pressure again. Or else they're gone in under two years and UW is going to look like the teams we've been making jokes about the last 20 years.
  12. tmwiese55
    I'm not one who is too confident in Burnes' next contract, but I think I'd rather have Burnes even if for 7 years rather than Snell at this price. With the big unknown variable being Burnes' willingness to do all the contract shenanigans which could sway things quite a bit.
  13. tmwiese55
    Yea who knows, maybe there is something there. But I don't see why CWS would want Bohm in their situation. He has two years left then FA and they're awful.
  14. tmwiese55
    I thought a different insider thing that said we'd have liked him if Hoskins opted out seems a bit more accurate. I don't see how he fits here at all while having Hoskins on the roster, especially if its not for league min which it won't be. Maybe they're trying to trade Hoskins though if someone will take the contract hoping for a buy low. Goldy at like 8 mil vs Hoskins at 18, I get that.
  15. tmwiese55
    I also struggle too get too worked up or optimistic about all the recruiting hype when there is so much decommitting and transferring. We'll see how many guys actually play for us. At some point, actually coaching the players up and coaching football has to be done. But like I said in my other longer post, its only year two and next year is a lost cause so he should still have plenty of time to show he can do it though. But week after week of fumbles, botched kick catching, personal fouls, brutal pics, bad coaching mistakes. (this week stupid coaching directly gave Neb 3 pts at end of half). But overall, there just seems to be no basic discipline and focus like was the staple of the previous 30 years. That is the most basic thing of being a good coach and its not being done, at all
  16. tmwiese55
    I've commented to friends on this too. To me there is no reason for it other than following a trend, looking cool or that you're too good for it, etc type stuff. Its only a matter of time until someone gets all their teeth knocked out on live tv, at which point they'll have to legislate it by giving penalties or fines for not wearing them. They should just crack down on it this offseason before its too late. I remember I made a comment on this during the UW/USC game similar to what I just said. Maybe 8 plays later USC WR takes a shot in the mouth and has to leave the game, standing on the sideline with a towel stopping his lips from bleeding. He was probably inches away from losing all his teeth.
  17. tmwiese55
    If you didn't already have Hoskins I could see it. Or simply put, him at 3 mil or Hoskins at 17, I'd probably take him. But with current roster I don't see it, you have Black to take the Bauers role already and he's LH so it makes more sense and is cheaper. If I recall, he's below avg at D too so don't really see it as a cheap Dejong type guy to play 3B either
  18. tmwiese55
    Yea the playoffs and ineptitude is there, but have to note they're in the same division as the Pats. So division titles are tough to come by the last 25 years. Also, as much as I like watching Rodgers struggle and be mediocre unless there is some contract/financial reason or that they think its his crap attitude that is tricking down to the team he shouldn't be benched(based on just play). He's at 17/7 so on pace to finish the year in the 25 td/10int world. I assume yards per play and that are very light though. Still, he's being the definition of mediocre, not like he's been awful. I think I saw something recently that next year he's down to 23 mil for that season. Again, based on pure gameplay alone you're probably best to keep him at that number. If the attitude stuff, further contract demands, or that you just want a full on rebuild then sure. But a mid level mediocre QB these days at 23 mil isn't bad. I could've misread that info though as the NFL cap is so messed up.
  19. tmwiese55
    That was the dumbest thing to me the whole time from Rodgers pespective. Say, he demanded a move to a good team that just needed a QB it would've made sense. Back then SF, maybe Den, maybe TB type teams. Basically, do the same move Brady did. But after all those spots had filled and your option was one of the 2-3 worst run teams in the NFL, what were you thinking to leave GB.
  20. tmwiese55
    I'd still be pretty discouraged for next year. If you or anyone haven't looked at the schedule yet, its brutal again and it will be a surprise to make a bowl. As much as it is impossible to not think things have been going about as bad as possible since the coaching change, you basically have to give him through '26 before making a decision. The schedules this year and next are hopeless so can't freak out and fire due to it, but if progress isn't clear in '26 that should be it. Also, it wouldn't surprise me knowing that schedule next year if Fickell pulls an Anderson and pre-emptively leaves for a lower level school if the right opportunity presents itself this offseason. I don't think he will because if he waits and gets fired he still gets the money and can take a new job then, but it wouldn't surprise me Still too early to fully judge, but the 'fire everyone and blow it up' camp of a few years ago are somewhat seeing the risk firsthand right now. IMO, the hindsight move would probably have been to keep Leonhard as HC so that you maintained that awesome D they had the PC era, but tell him he has to shake things up on O with his OC hire to modernize things a bit.
  21. tmwiese55
    Same, I don't think I'd want to go past 4 years. The only compromise type thing I can think of would be something shorter like that but he has an opt out after like year 2 so he could try to trick someone else into giving him a 5-6 year deal at age 32. So like rather than get an extra 2 years locked in now, he'd have the chance to get 4 more down the line
  22. tmwiese55
    Info points for any discussion. has about 6/223 left on his deal and turns 34 during next season. LAD would probably just take the contract off their hands. Or NYY too if they lose Soto.
  23. tmwiese55
    Someone in another thread said how LAA were going to increase payroll this year and my first thought was "Why?". Well this looks like that person was correct. And the Angels will continue to be the Angels and continue to lose. Odds that Soler is traded at the deadline?
  24. tmwiese55
    At his age I think you'd just be better off giving Adames the extra 1-2 years of extra cost over him instead. Not that I'd want to do either. Sure if they kick in money and prospects you have to listen. But if they're kicking in money it defeats the point. Plus, I really can't see TX punting on trying to win just a year after the WS while also having Seager and Degrom, etc. paid and trying to win with them
  25. tmwiese55
    I did expect they'd sneak into the 25 this week. Though I'm still very skeptical they're actually legit and truly deserve it. NW and Rutgers don't suck though, they're just not anything special, but those are fine wins. Generally speaking I still don't think UW is actually good, but 3 good weeks in a row helps with some cautious optimism they can be competitive this weekend. Guess we'll see, either way its much better to be in the spot than if they'd lost 2 of the last 3. Solid progress from how it looked after USC collapse. Actually running the ball again helps, who would've thought. And of course, the D looking similar to pre coaching change has been huge, we'll see if it holds up the next few weeks.
×
×
  • Create New...