tmwiese55

I can't imagine Beltran make it through this after all the other guys have been fired. Frankly, I'm surprised it's taken this long. But aren't their owners notoriously cheap, so maybe they're wading through the contract details first in case they end up owing him the money or something.

Well, I'd simply say I disagree with your take. Everyone misses a few games. If your opinion is that nobody plays a full season so be it. I don't get the need to bash Yeli to justify Donaldson but carry on. FYI, Trout hasn't played above 140 games in 3 seasons. You can grab anyone and look at their games, almost everyone misses a few games. The issue with JD is that he was at an age where two straight injured years could be a real problem (odds go up every year they get older). He bounced back well last year though, good for him. We'll see if he makes it 4 more. And again, we don't have DH to help with maintenance on him. Also, yes most people do miss something close to 10% of the days when you factor in PTO and sick days. I know I do.

Yup, add in Potter and I think you can chalk up at least two more wins from the games you listed. Possibly more. Also, perhaps the team is meshed better and they beat Ill then, who knows. Potter did play a part in that ILL come back by taking a terrible fadeaway with a ton of time left on the clock when up 6, long rebound led to run out 3 for ILL, whole game changed from that point on.

Yes, he's the only senior. Could maybe see a transfer or two though. I mean, if Trice/Ford continue to lose mins I could see them leaving if they already graduated (so they can play right away). Both have used redshirts already I think.

Yelich has a longer list of injury history and will be 31 moving forward from his current contract. So why is Donaldson's bump in the road and age a concern, but not Yelich's? Yelich's best season to War sits 3rd for Donaldson. OK. So Yelich just played basically 4 straight full seasons outside of missing the last few weeks. Granted, it's lucky timing to have the injury happen at the end so he barely missed time. But that and being age 31 instead of 34 are drastically different, if you don't agree then so be it but it's seems fairly clear to me. Now, how about this scenario. We buyout a couple years of FA from Yeli and he hits FA at age 33. But he essentially is injured the two previous seasons leading up to that age 33/34is FA. You still want to hand him a mega deal? Apparently you do and don't think 33/34 years old isn't a big enough flag, then adding two injury filled seasons prior to aren't flags then I guess you don't think anything is a flag. Sign everyone, big contracts to mid 30s players always turn out great. Who am I kidding. Come on man or woman, Yelich went on the DL for an Oblique injury beginning of 2018 season. Then he had to miss essentially 5games due to his back. Which is what caused him to miss time Again in 2019. A HR Derby in 2019. 14games in 2019 outside of the "few weeks" to end 2019. That is not 4 straight seasons. In 2014 his Back caused him to miss games for Miami. That is an injury history to be concerned about. Oblique or Back. Far more than a Calf Strain. And I have no idea what Yelich will be like returning from the kneecap injury until he's back on the field. Donaldson is a full year removed from the calf strain and played a "full season" of games in 2019. Thinking on a Yelich extension. Buying out ages 32 and 33 uh? So he gets his first chance at FA at age 34 right? That's laughable. Think about that. Testing FA after age 31 is the best chance he's going to get at a mega deal. Vs. this Donaldson deal far from it going in to age 34. It just may be perfect with the timeframe on signing the extension with Miami. Great guarantee and test FA at 31 going to 32. If Milw finds a way to give Yelich an extension it has to be 5years beyond if not 6 currently to even give Yelich the thought to do so. Now, if 2020 he's clearly affected by his injury to knee on top of back needing breaks, he may consider a deal less than 5 years extended. His current value is to test FA or sign a 5year or more extension that exceeds 100mil. -------- Sorry you didn't follow. I didn't say that would happen. I was presenting a hypothetical Yeli FA scenario similar to what JD has going on (you were trying to equate age 31 with 34). I wasn't saying we'd be able to buy out just two years, I agree he'd laugh at that. I was saying, "what if we did and then he hit FA at age 33 after being injured for two straight years". You apparently would still want to pay the guy a ton of money, me and most others would be very hesitant. IDK how that was difficult to follow, but apparently it was. Should I go into those injuries and try to act like those injuries don't matter like you did? No I won't. Yeli played 155, 156, 147 and 130 games this year due to the injury. If you don't think 147-155 is a full season I don't know what to say but it is. And I said he was 'lucky' this one happened so late so he didn't miss many games.

That's fair. I do think we're very much so overlooking the DH aspects here. Just think how often 37 year olds play well in the post PED era, it's darn rare now. Then factor in him having to play D every year as he gets older. Give us the DH and I think they could've done this, without it I get the hesitation. And again, teams with tons more money and the DH (like say TX) also didn't value him this high. For this current year, yea take away Garcia's 10 mil and give that to JD plus 10-12 more is very smart and makes sense. If he's injured or just done after two more years though MKE is basically done as well as 20-25 mil clunker on our books is a killer.

So what exactly do you want to do with our excess payroll money every year? You're going to have to take some shots knowing that they're not going to work out great on the back end. May as well do them when you've made the playoffs two years in a row and have never won a World Series and have an MVP caliber player to build around. Good post, that's the dilemma they're in as management really. The 1 year deals they pulled off last year won't be too common. I'd guess deals in the vein of what Garcia got will be what they'll look at a bunch. Some for more money and 2-3 year type deals (since 1 years seem rare) if the opportunities come up. I'd guess this years market just blew them away and they're hoping next year teams will have blown their budgets and therefor we can swoop in and get a guy or two next year in the same Moose/Grandal mold of situations. Can't 'bank' on that though. In more general team building big pic as opposed to the right now that so many are obsessed with would be to home grow your own players and then spend your money on buying out their first few years of FA. Take what ATL did with their young stars as an example. Take Woodruff as an example of a guy like that, obviously Keston. If the new C does well he could be one that makes sense too. And of course, as I've mentioned, they might be looking at the "excess payroll" already spent if they sign Yelich. If they lose him, he gets hurt, tails off, etc and that contract doesn't come to reality though they should have money to play with. And I still would assume the Cain type contracts will happen as well, older and legit deals but not crazy contract either. Basically, the 2nd and 3rd tier FAs I'm sure will still be in play and at some point a deal will work out. Keep in mind Cain was 31 when they signed him, not 34.

Well, Braun is not a great comparable as he had 5 years remaining on his deal at the time he signed an additional 5/105. That was simply a really early extension, nothing to do with free agency. Cain was fantastic in 2018 and serviceable in 2019. Serviceable is probably all we can expect going forward, but I don't think he's going to end up as a bad value at 5/80. The reality is most of the value of these is going to be in early years, but if you give Donaldson 4/92 and he is a 6 WAR player for 2 years you are going to have 2 really good shots to finally break through and win a World Series. I don't think anyone expects Donaldson to perform at his current level for 4 years but that really isn't the point. Everyone knows you're going to pay for these on the back end. Of course the way Braun was signed was at all the same, never said it was. The example of a mid 30s player regressing before our eyes and not living up to a large contract is still very relevant. Main point, out of one side of the mouth fans are complaining about these two aging players' bad contract. out the other, they want to sign another aging player for even more money than either of them are being paid and at an older age. Of course it could turn out fine, could is the operative word. 'Likely' is a whole other one. It's just very tough to take that risk (especially if in the back of your head you're trying to plan for a Yeli 25-30 mil deal if things go well with him the next couple years).

Yelich has a longer list of injury history and will be 31 moving forward from his current contract. So why is Donaldson's bump in the road and age a concern, but not Yelich's? Yelich's best season to War sits 3rd for Donaldson. OK. So Yelich just played basically 4 straight full seasons outside of missing the last few weeks. Granted, it's lucky timing to have the injury happen at the end so he barely missed time. But that and being age 31 instead of 34 are drastically different, if you don't agree then so be it but it's seems fairly clear to me. Now, how about this scenario. We buyout a couple years of FA from Yeli and he hits FA at age 33. But he essentially is injured the two previous seasons leading up to that age 33/34is FA. You still want to hand him a mega deal? Apparently you do and don't think 33/34 years old isn't a big enough flag, then adding two injury filled seasons prior to aren't flags then I guess you don't think anything is a flag. Sign everyone, big contracts to mid 30s players always turn out great. Who am I kidding.

First Bold: just turned 34 and will be entire 2020 season. 2nd Bold/italic: 2018 and the injuries would be a reason why. Maybe JD didn't want to sign a contract longer than 1year with a prove it season to build on his FA value. 3rd Bold/Italic/Underline: He has 2 years with injury history. 2017 a Calf strain. 2018 a Deadarm IL stint and then calf strain returning. 2 is fewer than a few years. This isn't a Ryan Braun type injury history where thumb/back/intercoastals/groin etc as alarms to further injury concerns. This isn't a collection from 3 or 5 years ago to go with the injuries in 2018. This is a Calf strain. And deadarm to start a season after returning from said calf strain initial injury. He's a year removed from the strained calf. That is not an injury that I'd be concerned with being a constant nagging injury for him and returning. Pretty much the next injury he will incur to keep him out of games, will be the first time this injury happened to him. 62% of his career self is all that needs to be accomplished to make the value of the contract. He can miss some major time and be worth every penny to this contract. Okey dokey. You don't think a guy being injured for a couple straight years around age 32ish is a reason for concern and that 34 is not old (for a baseball player). Carry on.

Yea, I'm not on the bashing Cain contract train like some are. But I was pointing it out as something that has been complained about. And that's why I brought it back to the simplicity of that everyone would agree he would not get the remainder if he was on the open market. It's an example right in our face as to why 4-5 deals are very risky for us. One could also easily say for 2019 that you don't have to pay 17 mil for 4 years for high quality D with blah batting. Personally, I think his hitting bounces back just fine next year and we'll get through 3 years of that deal OK, then we'll see from there.

If anything, you'd think having two prime examples of that on the roster would make people realize the hesitation management has on wading into those waters. But, I guess not so for everyone. Also, have to believe they're at least trying to concoct a way to resign Yelich so have to at least try to plan for that down the line.

It's actually crazy to think how close they are to undefeated in conference. At the very least, just flip that ILL game and they're at 5-1. For how blah the team is that's crazy. And I guess for all the Gard bashers, after 6 games in the B1G they've been in every single one until the end. Chances are that's not the case on Friday vs MSU but considering how things looked at 5-5 overall it's kind of impressive.

And we're two years into the Cain deal and many here who are looking to get out of it and think it's a bad deal. At the very least, I think all would agree he would not get the 3/50ish left on his deal if we a a FA right now. Yet, out of the other side of our mouth we want to do that again and again out of impatience.

The missed opportunity would've been last offseason to get either him or Moose on affordable multi year deals when they were a year younger. Say instead of 1/25 he got from ATL you'd have gotten him to take 3/60, something like that. Same for Moose on a smaller scale. I'd guess multiple teams tried that though and both decided 1 year gambles were their best moves.

Other GMs didn't do it because he's 34 and they expect a decline. It's that simple. For a guy who's supposedly such a lock, why were no teams willing to go beyond 1 year for him last year. He's getting old and has been hurt off and on for a few years before staying healthy last year. There is a huge chance normal regression starts combined with increase injury based type regression at his age. Having the DH really helps mitigate some of that risk, and that's something MKE doesn't have. This one has all the makings of a can't win for the team if you're MKE. Don't sign him and gt ripped on now for being cheap. Do sign him, get ripped on 2-3 years from now when you're paying a 37 year old 25 mil to not be good. Something like, "How dumb could you be to pay a 34 year old 25 mil into his age 37/38 seasons, haven't you seen how this turns out all over the league over and over". Either way, the know it all fans will have been right. IMO, the not having the DH is a very very important aspect of this for the Brewers or any NL team. and yet another example of how dumb it is to have different rules for each league.

I would agree the DL was good this year and did their jobs. In 2018 it was a trainwreck with injuries and that killed the D. But with everyone back and generally healthy this year they did well, and they don't lose anyone (I think, could be wrong).

Lack of perspective from fans. The only reason we are (potentially - I still think they could add a significant 3B) looking at at a payroll decrease from 2019 is because we were gifted an amazing signing by Stearns when he went out and got Grandal one a one-year deal. That was a unique signing, and it got us to the playoffs. Can't have something like that happen every year. Yea but now that you spent it you have to do it again or you're a cheapskate. I still say let's give that money to Sogard, seems like a good dude. Better he has it than some billionaire. It couldn't possibly make sense to hold it for the future opportunity that comes up. you have to spend it now!!! We need a 3B, 1 yr 30 mil for Arod to come out of retirement, hopefully he's been juicing since he's not tested now, you have to try to win!!!

Lack of perspective from fans. The only reason we are (potentially - I still think they could add a significant 3B) looking at at a payroll decrease from 2019 is because we were gifted an amazing signing by Stearns when he went out and got Grandal one a one-year deal. That was a unique signing, and it got us to the playoffs. Can't have something like that happen every year. Yea but now that you spent it you have to do it again or you're a cheapskate. I still say let's give that money to Sogard, seems like a good dude. Better he has it than some billionaire. It couldn't possibly make sense to hold it for the future opportunity that comes up. you have to spend it now!!! We need a 3B, 1 yr 30 mil for Arod to come out of retirement, hopefully he's been juicing since he's not tested now, you have to try to win!!!

Problem is there were really only three good options at 3B FA market and we couldn't afford them. Cheapest one being 4/65ish mil who is 32 years old. I just don't know what people really expect sometimes. Pretty much all the rest are questions and no guarantees. Can't just pluck a guy out of thin air.

Problem is there were really only three good options at 3B FA market and we couldn't afford them. Cheapest one being 4/65ish mil who is 32 years old. I just don't know what people really expect sometimes. Pretty much all the rest are questions and no guarantees. Can't just pluck a guy out of thin air.

Last paragraph is well said IMO. I pretty much agree there and think that's fair for everyone to think. To add to the overall post and convo a bit though. We wouldn't be drastically dropping payroll this year if we hadn't drastically increased it last year. Tough way to phrase that I'm struggling with, but so would it have been better to have not spend it last year that way there's no decrease. In a way one is kind of using one of their best examples of not being cheap (dropping 30+ mil on two FAs in the same offseason) as a way to prove they're now being cheap. hope that makes sense or at least you see what I'm getting at. I'd guess they kind of have a baseline in that 100ish mil area and then obvious flex for the right contracts and opportunities. Safe short deals, sure. multi year deals to old guys that risk year to flex, not so much

Last paragraph is well said IMO. I pretty much agree there and think that's fair for everyone to think. To add to the overall post and convo a bit though. We wouldn't be drastically dropping payroll this year if we hadn't drastically increased it last year. Tough way to phrase that I'm struggling with, but so would it have been better to have not spend it last year that way there's no decrease. In a way one is kind of using one of their best examples of not being cheap (dropping 30+ mil on two FAs in the same offseason) as a way to prove they're now being cheap. hope that makes sense or at least you see what I'm getting at. I'd guess they kind of have a baseline in that 100ish mil area and then obvious flex for the right contracts and opportunities. Safe short deals, sure. multi year deals to old guys that risk year to flex, not so much

Well, I said 'right now'. But still, the owners just made a fortune on those WS and are slashing payroll after and taking all the money rather than trying to win more!! Think how much those franchise values are and have gone up!!! But in seriousness, these are two for the four richest teams and they're blatantly cheaping out for personal profit. Dodgers even just cut about 100 mil off their payroll, all while trying to compete (supposedly, cheapskates). Our guy has one of the lowest revenues and just spent the most the team has ever spent and is being called cheap for not spending more. Snap, nailed it imo. More restrained "go for its" like we did in 2018 than blow everything and suck for 7 years style.

Yea, considering the results the last 3 years shouldn't we be doing that? Also, yet again, just last year they had their highest payroll and paid two big FA signings, year before gave out the biggest contract in team history and one of the largest in all of FA that year while also trading for another 40ish mil contract or whatever was left on Yeli, have added significant payroll at each deadline. The "they're cheap" track record just isn't there Hindsight, the mistakes might've been not finding a way to get Moose and Grandal on 2-3 year deals last year. But, these guys don't seem dumb to me with the results they've been getting. You'd think we tried to do that but those guys wanted the flex in order to get what they got just now. Wish there was a middle ground that would've worked but have to think we did all we could there. ETA: I saw someone on twitter after Thames signing ripping on the team for being cheap and not keeping him along the lines "3 mil, yea we can't afford that". It was media person of some kind too, can't remember who. Essentially the ownership spent a few million extra to try and upgrade Thames and yet were still ripped on for being cheap. People just love to complain.