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
    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
  2. tmwiese55
    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
  3. tmwiese55
    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.
  4. tmwiese55
    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.
  5. tmwiese55
    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.
  6. tmwiese55
    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.
  7. tmwiese55
    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".
  8. tmwiese55
    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.
  9. tmwiese55
    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
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. tmwiese55
    He's from LA.
  13. 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.
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. 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.
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. 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
  25. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...