tmwiese55

Same here, just too much risk for MKE. I think I said throughout this I trusted that whatever Stearns was offering is something we'd be comfortable with, I'd guess that was true and now that it's up to stuff in this area that he's checked out of it.

Many of your are creative and well versed. Seems ya'll may have run your course on Cleveland scenarios. Archer from TB seems like another cost and years controlled guy that would make it worth giving up all the control on Santana. Ideas on what could make sense from both sides there?

Put in your guesses on the numbers, I'm going to say 5/135. Was thinking less before what was posted above from the Twins.

The source on that seems dubious and maybe a bit tied to Kidd from what some are saying. We'll see.

I figured he was closer to getting fired than most thought at this point but still didn't think it would come today. I'm happy with it but don't expect too much to change this year with his assistants taking over for now. Still, maybe they have wanted to try other things and he hasn't allowed, who knows. But I'm pretty sure they can't do worse than what he was doing. Get Jabari back and a big to take over for Thon and see what happens. I do remember when Kidd had his surgery that I thought the offense had way more movement, could have just been my poor eye test and dislike of kid seeping in though, but fingers crossed that they run a real NBA half court offense and tone down the hectic system on D.

Sox stuff pure speculation as far as i know. I think some Crasnick talk of the teams talking but that's it, nothing Abreu. And then it was said the likely trade is with an AL team. So people started throwing around scenarios. They're clearly a rebuilding team and one of their only remaining pieces to deal.

I'm completely with ya on this one. Not sure why people are so enamored with Archer. I must be missing something. I know I'd much rather just sign Darvish, that's for sure. Especially when you add in that the Santana trade likely leads to Cain signing for a big chunk of money. I'd rather just give that money to Darvish and keep Santana and whatever other prospects you have to give up.

I don’t mind it...until they get something “right” and expect some kind of praise etc. There was that guy last year or the year before where his attitude wasn’t worth any information. Oh yea I do remember that, guy was totally pretentious about it all and lectured everyone on how smart he was and how connected he was, how he knew baseball better than anyone on here. Yea, don't need any of that stuff but just dropping bits of info that one feels comfortable I'm all for. I don't even need someone to get anything right to prove themselves, essentially they're just relaying info as they hear it and none of this stuff is set in stone. So I can take it all with a grain of salt.

I just want to say thanks to HH for providing what he can. I know on some boards of this nature these guys get nitpicked, bashed when they're wrong, or accused of being full of it. I've never understood that, I'd want anyone to feel welcome providing whatever info they're comfortable sharing rather than fear of being accused of trolling or just wanting attention.

-- Brinson could get hurt or hit as poorly as he did last year and you get nothing to show for him as well. But yea I'm in agreement on the middle part of what you just said, that's the questionable/murky part of it all and why Stearns gets the big bucks. At least I got you to admit that the value is on our side of this trade That's all I was saying the whole time.

No, not what I'm saying, really. I'm saying Abreu getting hurt is almost as likely as a Thames/Aguilar regression. I'd be way more confident in Abreu producing for sure, but it's not worth trading a top prospect for. I think neither matter because we're a lot more than a Jose Abreu addition away from a good team. We'd better have Darvish or Cobb lined up or we'll be left with choices of: A. Throwing more prospects on an all-in 2018-2019 endeavor, of which I'm not interested in if it blows away the future. or B. Only acquiring Abreu and still likely missing the playoffs. No, it's not because our guys would have equally likely chance to get hurt, if not moreso based on what I said. So that cancels out, you can't just say one side could get hurt. I guess I'm shocked I'm the only one here that thinks one prospect for two years of an AS level consistent 1B isn't a clear win in value. Most of these trades have 3-4 guys going back to the team for the star, one of which in top prospect type category. Everything else I've said I agree on. I'm not sure we're true contenders without other moves so is it really worth bothering with. But I think you're clearly wining the trade so much that you have to do it and figure it out later. And based on what we're hearing here, management does seem to think they're contenders. If it doesn't work out you should be able trade Abreu before he's gone and regain what you lost in value in Brinson, if not more based on historical deals at the deadline. I think the Sox would be stupid to do it and could get much more.

OK, don't do any trades because the guy can get hurt. Sounds good. I'd probably guess the overly jacked guy who nursed a hammy injury all season and fat guy are more likely to get hurt than Abreu, but that's just me. And you just said you disagreed with trading from positions of strength/depth.

Abreu isn't worlds better than the platoon we're currently rolling with. We may have less stability and flexibility going with the platoon, but I'm not giving up our top trade chip for an upgrade that one could argue isn't even that much of an upgrade. OK guys, keep in mind if Brinson gets hurt again this year or does poorly like he did when he was up last year that his trade value crashes quite hard. Or you can add legit ASG level 1B rather than relying on Thames who was kind of just ok after April and banking on Jesus to replicate what he did last year. I guess I'm just not prospect hoarder, these guys flop all the time. That said, i'm totally fine not having a big swing trade like this and just rolling with what we have at 1B and seeing what happens. Without another good pitcher added they don't really have a shot anyway. But if you're going to do it I think we're clearly winning that trade valuewise on paper. I mean, we got way more back for Lucroy. We won 86 games with Jimmy Nelson and Thames/Aguilar putting up Abreu's production on aggregate. We can hang a banner for "we have a $20 million All Star caliber player on our team" when we win 83 this year. I am a fan of Jose Abreu and would take him in the right case...but the Brewers are not one minor tweak away from a World Series. Maybe throw Darvish in there and we can start talking. You're just not factoring in how likely it is to have regression from Thames/Jesus and that it's very unlikely from Abreu. And generally forgetting that our offense was clearly the problem the 2nd half of the year. I get it though, I'm fine to hold tight too ona big trade as I don't think we're really a contender. I'm merely just saying that if they're trading for Abreu and all it costs is Brinson then you won the deal on paper at the time of the trade, and you make the best of it. Heck, if the team doesn't do well you should easily be able to flip Abreu for better package at the deadline. And dealing Brinson specifically you have your next best prospect at the same position (who did better last year and is lefty so would get more ABs anyway) and still have Broxton to do a platoon. As someone just said something of this nature could be tied with another move somehow.

Abreu isn't worlds better than the platoon we're currently rolling with. We may have less stability and flexibility going with the platoon, but I'm not giving up our top trade chip for an upgrade that one could argue isn't even that much of an upgrade. OK guys, keep in mind if Brinson gets hurt again this year or does poorly like he did when he was up last year that his trade value crashes quite hard. Or you can add legit ASG level 1B rather than relying on Thames who was kind of just ok after April and banking on Jesus to replicate what he did last year. I guess I'm just not prospect hoarder, these guys flop all the time. That said, i'm totally fine not having a big swing trade like this and just rolling with what we have at 1B and seeing what happens. Without another good pitcher added they don't really have a shot anyway. But if you're going to do it I think we're clearly winning that trade valuewise on paper. I mean, we got way more back for Lucroy.

AL team with a good P on the market makes Archer the obvious guess.

1 good prospect for a top level hitter that you have for two years. yea, I've seen dramatically more paid for 2 months of a relief pitcher. I actually think CWS turn it down. Moreover, we have Phillips there too to play CF and Brinson has never been healthy.

We know MKE and the White Sox had significant discussion on Quintana. And from that we were told that we wouldn't give up Brinson. Who knows what is true. But if it was what someone posted above of Thames and a prospect for Abreu then I'd be ok with Brinson. If they demand another top level guy like Hader along with it, I probably hold off. But Thames/brinson and lower level flyer, I think I do it.

Any pitcher you look at you'll find bad games. It also came out that he was tipping his pitches and Houston figured it out, easily fixable. Would you want Kershaw on your team, he usually gets beat up in the playoffs?

IDK, I'd much rather have Santana the next 4 years than Cain, especially if you factor in the money. You better get an absolute haul back for Santana if you make a move like this.

There's a difference between "being competitive" if everything goes just right, and competing at the highest level. Does Darvish believe the Brewers can be a legit WS contender in the next couple years, that's the question. That said, there's no guarantees when it come to this. The Brewers aren't in a position to guarantee they can compete at the highest level the way the Dodgers, Cubs, Nats, Yankees, Astros, etc. can. Point being, it will take a bit of a leap of faith no matter what. Very true, the assumption is that the top teams aren't offering legit deals or he wouldn't even be talking to us. Nats/Stros are loaded at pitching. Dodgers would be the easiest thing so there must be a disconnect. Yanks obviously need P but have the tax issue on their hands, they really should be the most obvious landing spot but there must be a disconnect if he's talking to MKE and MN. Then take other seemingly fit teams like Angels, Seattle, TX and it's fair to say MKE has a better shot to win than them. I'd probably call us an MN a wash for winning since the AL central is brutal after Cleveland. But it's AL and cold weather outdoors for the first 6 weeks and in any potential playoffs. I know he's pitched AL majority of his career but pitching in the NL is so much easier as long as you're ok with having to bat. Still, I fully expect him to shop our deal to one of those other teams and they'll beat us by a bit and that will be it.

I would be careful putting Pit as a team on the tank list. If you thought the Brewers were developing and progressing and the start of 2017 (& not tanking), then the Pirates are not tanking. Both moves were logical and they got players for the current MLB roster... You're right, "Tank" wasn't the right word there. More just that they are teams you do not expect to compete for the division the next couple years. I wouldn't say they're trying to lose enough to get top 5 picks or anything. So you should get some extra Ws from them and we should expect to be at least top 3 in the division the next few years so that gets you int he WC conversation most years.

Interesting idea I thought of as we just talked about the team salary this year would be to front load this deal. Give him much more this year and taper it down in future years. Kind of like a signing bonus in football. I'd think the player would like this as a 'perk' in that they get the money in their hands for investing and so forth. With the Brewers payroll being so low this year it would help them out in the future as they try to add other pieces or start paying prospects who pan out. Also would make the contract more easily tradeable if needed down the line.

Wouldn't the Brewers still be well below that, even with signing Darvish? Yup, in Haudricourt's article today on the topic he said the below. So tack on Yu and you're in the 80s somewhere. "The Brewers played last season with an actual player payroll of less than $60 million, the lowest of the 30 clubs. If they make no further additions of note before opening day, they will operate in that same neighborhood in 2018."

Same here, I'm assuming and trusting Stearns that this deal would be more along those lines than a ridiculous 6/140 type thing that is just too big a risk in MKE. And really the current price being that low is the reason why MKE is even involved. Obviously could be wrong but that's my guess.

Being 1 game out of the playoffs with a young team should be enough to be considered competing in coming years. Add in that Cin and Pit are in tank mode and that helps too. The living in MKE portion, yea not so easy to convince him on that end. But I'm assuming the big markets and west coast teams that seemingly would fit him better aren't offering close or he wouldn't even be considering it. I don't know how the Angels aren't in on him. I know they signed the new Japanese guy to pitch, but their starting pitching is still rough and they're cleary in win now mode. I'm sure it's all about the tax for them, so i guess I'm just saying they shouldn't half-arse it, might as well go all-in if you're them.