tmwiese55

I'm fine either way, but generally agree with an a post a few back that you need to be won over on this one. Basically, we're content to keep him and go for it with him this year. So to make us change our mind we need to be won over with a great offer. Unlike when Burnes was traded and everyone knew it would happen and we were likely the initiator on some calls.

With the Mets adding all these other infielders have to think Baty would be in any deal with them.

Not sure how Andy Pettite picks up all these votes and is trending towards making the HOF while clearly better players have no chance. Its like voters are more offended if you were the elite of the elite and used. But if you're the next step or two down then its aww shucks you're just trying to keep up. Makes no sense to me how Pudge and Ortiz roll right in with no questions and now it seems Pettite will, but Bonds/Arod are banned. ETA: saw some discussion MLB TV today on the topic. They basically all said he should be in and the reason was essentially "ahh, he seems like such a good guy so I believe when he said he only did once. And second, he played for the yankees so he played in the playoffs every year.". Which is, of course, ignoring that he previously lied and said he only did it once. Until a second round was proven in court, in which he then fessed up to it. Ah, but he's a good guy and wouldn't lie again. But everyone else, they must be liars when they say it was an accident or a one off.

I just go into the year with the division as the attainable goal and something to celebrate or take pride in, however you want to phrase it. Then take the playoffs as a crapshoot bonus and hope for the best. I pretty much do that in all sports at this point since they've expanded the playoff fields so much that winning is such a long shot and only one team can be happy. I guess other than NBA, which generally is the best team that wins. That said, LAD might be gaming the system so hard that MLB is now best team almost always wins too. But, SD and Tor took them to the wire the last two years so its not like they're the Durant Warriors level of unbeatable. And yea, its not lost on me that SD/Tor have big budgets too

The thing with LAD or the 'opening' to beat them in the next few years come in that Betts/Freeman are getting surprisingly old while having big contracts still. Other guys for them will be approaching that too. So, the question will be can they keep spending these ridiculous amounts to pay new guys they buy while also paying the aging guys when the are essentially washed up? As of now, it sure looks they plan on and have the ability to keep paying though so its tough to have much hope. But there has to be a limit at some point.

The weird part is they swallowed their whistles the whole game and let several roughings go that were worse than this one, yet with the 'let them play' mantra. But then called a borderline one at crunch time with the game on the line. Also swallowed their whistles on PI the whole game. They did that 'both ways' and were consistent but it benefitted MIA more since they were doing it more. IU was ahead, in control, and ended up winning in spite of these reffing nitpicks working against them. Still one heck of a game and story for IU. And the athletes on MIA D are ridiculous, I assume several 1st rounders there

I think Saurez is a pipe dream for MKE due to money. And in general I agree with the notion that MKE values D so much that he's likely not on their radar. Brewers have also seemed to break their past mold and are now against home run or bust type guys. But to your point, I'd add that yes he can be passable/ok for this year at 3b while getting some DH and 1B days. Its also possible Vaughn regresses and he shifts to 1B which reduces how much he has to play 3B. In addition, even if Vaughn is generally fine this year, hes almost assuredly gone after this year. So if Saurez was a 2-3 year signing, you just need him to be passable for one year at 3B then transition to 1B

Every upper tier high major program team is spending similar money on a QB as Indiana. No one is saying Cuban and money aren't a factor, its just that there is much more to it than the recent simplistic narrative of "cuban's buying all the best players". The most important money Cuban spent was paying to keep the coaches. I think it was midseason last year when they gave extensions. In addition, you could make an argument one of the most important thing Cignetti did was convince Cuban he was the guy worthy of this investment. Paying players has been legal for several years before Cignetti got there and either Cuban didn't pony up, or he already was and those coaches couldn't win squat with it. Either way, I think this argument largely goes away from here on out. They've risen their profile so much its unlocked the huge alumni base they have now and combine it with Cuban they're likely to be a power going forward and from here on out will no longer be on the middle tier of money ETA: according to google an avg SEC NIL budget is 30-40 mil. It estimates IU at about 14 mil. One would assume OSU is in the same ballpark as the sec

To get the players to agree you'd have to revamp the arbitration system and pay a heck of a lot. They're not going to want to move back FA and make it harder to get big paydays. There's probably is something that could work and it does accomplish some of the goals being discussed here, but they'd have to get paid a lot more in those years of team control than they currently are making in those years. Such a scenario probably would also help the more mid range players too as pay skews too much to top level guys now. That's really the thing I'm surprised the union hasn't tried to address at all recently as money has exploded. Trying to get more to the mid level guys and even minor leaguers, essentially spreading the wealth a bit rather than consolidated to the few guys who get the mega deals. You'd think the players would vote for efforts to do so.

And the year before they had a MAC QB with half their starters from JMU. And I didn't say its not a factor, I said too much is being made out of it like its that simple. Which I guess a comment like you made is doing exactly that, since pretty much every upper tier major conference team is paying a similar amount of money to their QB yet at IU it seemingly took just that to win and look like the most dominant team in years. ETA: and while NIL info isn't totally clear. Quick google comparisons of IU vs OSU/SEC seems to think there is still a significant gap. But, like I said in the original post. He's raised their profile so much that might change going forward due to having a mega donor and enormous alumni base, so what will he do with elite talent plus his elite coaching.

US generally taxes their rich much less than developed countries was mostly the point. And the ability for rich people to cheat them is much easier in USA, however most of his money being more or less straight income as opposed to investments, stocks, etc hurts his ability to cheat that. And of course getting to a non state income tax state would help that even more. If in CA it probably at least gets it close to the ballpark of Japan. Though he might end up getting a bit screwed and getting taxed in both countries. The point was just that he wasn't himself cheating or getting out of anything as he likely ends up paying more with less ability to cheat it, and that it would more be CA/USA getting screwed.

When it happened I think it was stated he would get taxed on where he is when he gets paid. Which will likely be Japan. Yes, I think state of CA would be getting a bit screwed on it, but Ohtani himself likely wouldn't gain that much if at all because Japan actually taxes their rich people. Perhaps he could find a way to help himself by setting himself up in TX or something like that, IDK.

Generally agree. I've been a bit surprised that it seems a done deal that Mendoza is going out this year. Of course the multi year guarantee so a much larger total dollar is likely the big factor. But, what seems like more fun than what he's doing now and he's going to get at least 4-6 mil to do it? And you have a chance to be a part of one of the biggest stories in CFB history. If they lose Monday, he could come back and try to complete this rags to riches story. Even if they win, you have done that story and now can try to repeat it and repeat Heisman to make it even bigger. If they do lose, I'd think you'd really want back to complete the job. If they win, I see going out on high note though but with the transfer they got it seems decided that he's leaving. I suppose another big factor for him and others in his situation would be who you're likely to be drafted by. For him, the options don't seem great. Teams near the top who would pick a QB are Jets and Raiders. No way you want on the Jets. Raiders I guess is neutral. Maybe Cardinals would be ready to move on from Murray, another ok/neutral spot.

Of course their TV contract is ridiculous in itself, but they have to be raking in a ton of money from Japan to be able to afford all this and to keep compounding on it more and more. Great system MLB has in place that no one has any idea on what those numbers are. Along with what everyone else has said and how an actual cap seems impossible, along with more tax the other move that seems at least feasible is to pool all the TV revenue together and share it. Collectively negotiate it all together then split it, or at least like 50% of it has to go to the pool or something like that.

Exactly. There's too much acting like Cuban just bought the best players. This is mostly about coaching, training, identifying unseen talent. And perhaps its Cuban's money that allowed them to pay these coaches the extension they just got and/or the higher level QB transfer they got for this year. But if folks haven't looked into it, the first year Cignetti brought I think 17 players with him from JMU and his coaching staff from JMU, that was obviously a huge chunk of their transfer, 2 and 3 star guys from JMU. I believe 9 of them were starters, so almost half their team was just JMU. The QB last year was a MAC transfer. And then goes into the B1G and beats the crap out of everyone other than OSU. And for WI fans, they have our OL coach from when we had the dominant run team in the country. I didn't track enough after that to know how many JMU players are still left/starting on this team. But they said in the last game they had I think 8 4 star recruits vs Oregon's like 55. And obviously now the profile has been raised so much that he won't have to pull from the scraps anymore so it'll be interesting how it plays out from here. If he gets elite talent with his elite coaching and it works it could be dangerous. But there's also an element of the top top talent is more worried about their money/NFL which makes it harder to build the team aspects and get the buy in needed, so he probably has to try and balance it a bit. Side note, with his Saban connect everyone is lucky Saban didn't handpick him to be his replacement. Him taking over the system and culture Saban had in place with the talent pipeline could've been a juggernaut.

They definitely view him as a starter, after all he started what, 7 playoff games last year? Joking aside, I'd guess they keep him this year and give him a real shot to start. If he can become a starter he's great value at that contract going forward, so I think they'll want to try that first. If that fails and he ends up back in the pen this year, then I generally agree they might look to move him next offseason. I hadn't really thought of it before now, but he'd also someone that could make sense to trade to someone who is also trying to win now but has an mlb bat coming available for whatever reason. IDK for a quick example, someone like Lawler. Those situations can be hard to find because we're trying to win so don't wanna only get prospects, and the same applies in reverse.

Trout got 35+ mil per like 10 years ago. Judge got 40 mil per a year or so before. Again, I see the argument but I don't buy that he was only getting 46. Even if close, the reason it wouldn't be more is because of how much paying one person 60-70 per year hurts your ability to build a team around them. Drumroll, thus why its bs to defer it to keep the number down. The deferral route allowed him to have this high number on paper while allowing the team to win by deferring payments. Without it being allowed, it hurts their ability to build a team around him and/or he has to take a blatantly lowball deal just because thats where he wants to be and to win. Which is fine of course if thats his choice, but the deferral allowed it to be a win win. And its a perk that only the wealthiest teams can afford to risk

While I get the argument being made on the tax I think its still a loophole that should be regulated. Maybe something like only 25% of total deal can be deferred as a framework. A factor in my thinking is that I just don't think its true that Ohtani would've only got 460 mil at 46 annual if there was no deferrals. Guerrero just got 500 at 35ish mil annual. Soto got $765 at 50ish annual. Ohtani is a better hitter than both while also being a top 10 pitcher when healthy. Granted there is nuance like age, injuries, and perhaps just that Ohtani wanted to play for LAD to win titles and took less to do it. But if you'd have told me all Ohtani could get at FA was 10/460 I'd have laughed at it. A top hitter or pitcher at his skills gets 35-40 per year, he's two of them. So that's where you get to 70 mil annually, then he basically said "yea but I wanna win, so pay me later so we can win now". Without that perk they'd have to pay him at least over 60 mil per year or he'd have had to just straight up do a discount to help the owners/team

Another general problem is there isn't enough western teams. One of the midwest groups would have to be in the West. Plus TX teams and KC are in CST. But, yea it probably would still help travel. And with more balanced schedule now its not like those teams would be almost always playing western times when on the road. Like if in the past all their games were their division and rest were in their same league (which in this would be massively western skewed).

I was surprised to see their likely starting RF go in this deal. So, is their plan to play Suzuki in RF full time then? I thought he's expected to be quite bad if not terrible in the OF. Seems an odd choice but I'll take it. That said, I generally like the P they got so not exactly bashing it, but giving up 6-7 years of control guy who seems ready to be a starter in the OF is something I'm ok with

I'm guessing the hiccup for Bader is he's looking to lock in at least 3 years at that yearly value. Teams are balking at that, as I'm sure MKE would. But yea, on a one year I'm happy with him and he seems like a great fit for the clubhouse too. Have to commit to two years and it gets trickier, but I think could still be done. MKE is likely clearing at least Freddy/Woodruff's 30 mil off after next year. Along with some other possible increasing guys nearing end of their control

Anybody do any digging on Austin Hays and have much of an opinion on him? Seems in our price range, RH, hits lefties well I think, no long term commitment. Not awesome or having much experience with needles, but would seem to raise the floor of OF and reduce the need to rely on the guys who are better suited as 4th OFs. Quick glance seems he'd have to be LF so one of Chourio/Frelick becomes primary CF.

Well its not 1 year. Its every year they have players like that. 2-3 years back they had former brewers greats Manny Pina and Jesus Aguilar in that same area. Add fact with that last year they clearly started trying to win again after the few years of tanking for the move and I'd have no reason to think couple hundred K would be a deal breaker. Whereas you have the opinion and what seems like an overreaction to the OAK cheap reputation that since a team is cheap it means they literally never spend any money. In spite of course rules that say they have to spend the money and the fact that even them being cheap they still spend 70-80 million per year, in which a couple hundred grand is nothing (thus why every year they have guys like this that are a bit over min). In general, spending on guys like this is still being cheap in that you're spending 1-2 mil on a guy who likely isn't going to be any good rather than 8-10 mil on someone more reliable (who also likely demands multi year commitment). But yea, you can have the opinion that OAK will never spend above league min, thats fine. And yea I do think they'd rather grab a guy from us who hasn't debuted yet just like you rather than someone with Mitchell's injuries, general mediocreness, and less years of control

Because them liking the player (mitchell) is part of that deal. The point was like everything else about the deal besides Mitchell being a few hundred K than league min.

OK. I don't think the extra few hundred grand would matter if they liked everything else about the deal and if they generally think Mitchell is someone they'd be willing to take a flyer on. I'd support that by the fact OAK paid guys like Urias, Andujar, Urshela, Seth Brown right in that same ballpark or more last year. I'd be confident that if they liked everything else about the trade, the fact he makes a few hundred K more than the alternative isn't much of a factor. If you do, so be it. Couple hundred K though when you have to fill the roster spot anyway, I just don't think matters if everything else checks out. If they just don't like Mitchell for all the other reasons we all can see, that's a whole different discussion. And if they don't like the overall trade value for everyone involved is a different discussion. If he was say another year into Arb so his number is more in the 5 mil ballpark, different discussion. As the OP said, the trade was about everything else. He was looking at Mitchell as a sweetener to try and put it over the top, if they'd prefer a non injured, younger guy with more years of control then they can pick someone else.