Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
Brewer Fanatic

MrTPlush

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,438

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

 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 MrTPlush

  1. MrTPlush
    It's relevant because Hamilton agreed to a reduced contract when he was traded. The only reason the player's union allowed it was because he was going to be taking home the same amount of money as he was in LA but Texas would be paying him less because of the difference in state income tax. I would assume trading him again would bring up the same issue. Right so you are saying he has a full no trade clause. That is a financial issue, but that still has nothing to do with the Rangers trying to withhold money that they are supposably getting from the Angels. Two totally different financial issues.
  2. MrTPlush
    He won't be paying California taxes on the portion LA pays. You pay taxes on where it is made not where it is paid from. From what I have read in the past just being a player that plays in a tax free state doesn't mean all his money is tax free. He has different tax rate for all their away games. I'm not even sure why all this tax stuff even matters. That is Hamilton's problem not any teams problem.
  3. MrTPlush
    It depends on the terms of the trade. If the language is that the Angels have to pay the Rangers x amount at a certain point or points in time, then that's that. What the Rangers decide to do with the money is up to them. If the language is that the Angels have to pay the Rangers x amount at a certain point or points, but it can only used to pay for Hamilton's contract, then the Rangers would probably be obligated to forward that money to Hamilton's new team (or have the Angels send it directly, it doesn't matter). I don't understand your second sentence. If the Rangers can do what they wish with the money (which is possible), it's a trade lever. The team trading for Hamilton would probably want the money, but if the money is not contractually connected to Hamilton, the Rangers are not obligated to do anything with it. If Hamilton puts up a .300/.400/.500 line playing full time in the first half for the Rangers, there may well be a team who would trade for Hamilton whether they'd get the money from the Rangers or not, or at least not all of it. It has never happened before(pocketing the money so to speak) and there is probably a good reason for that. Every time a player like Hamilton comes up in trade rumors they are worth the cheaper part. Not $X to $X depending on how much money is sent over. How do we know he isn't getting two checks in the first place? Getting a check from LA is not going to effect any taxes. It will be the same exact amount if Texas were to pay it.
  4. MrTPlush
    I'm picturing fast moving video with Yakety Sax playing, a la Benny Hill. I can see it now. Lucroy fields a bunt and not trusting anyone else to catch the ball, proceeds to chase the batter all the way around the bases, while he somehow tears the skirt off a ball girl who joins the chase and repeatedly whacks him on the head with her handbag. ...what did I just read...
  5. MrTPlush
    I believe the Angels pay the Rangers a yearly sum that then goes to Hamilton. So he only sees one check. If the Rangers were to trade Hamilton to anyone the Angels would then start paying the new team. I am not even sure the Rangers can "pocket" that money. It wouldn't make sense if they could because then no one would trade for him. You are looking into it too far. All you need to know is Hamilton is a $6mil player and that is all the Brewers would pay.
  6. MrTPlush
    I don't think a AAA team would even want Miller Park. I only say that because then you are looking at filling up a tiny sliver of the stadium. It would look really bad and would be a horrible game day atmosphere. Teams prefer to have it so they are able to fill up their stadium to full capacity vs. thousands of extra seats. I don't see such a thing happening. Miller Park is nice now, but by 2040, the earliest they could realistically move, you are talking something that isn't to state of the art.
  7. MrTPlush
    On the subject of uniforms MLB announced their new on the field uniform styles. It has this funky flex tail that looks hideous on pinstripe uniforms etc. This also means the Brewers will no longer have retro throwbacks in that thicker material. It will now be their new technology. Not something you want to be seen wearing untucked as the new tail has no pinstripes...yikes.
  8. MrTPlush
    I'm sorry but I don't think Josh Hamilton even has positive value while many teams have begged for Profar.
  9. MrTPlush
    I have always liked a Lucroy/Davis package to Texas, but that Hamilton guy is kind of in the way. Heck even a package with Lucroy/Davis/Smith would look really nice for Texas. Probably talking way to many prospects to be throwing around though.
  10. MrTPlush
    I feel like trying to follow a team after they ditch your city is a lot similar to a break up with a significant other. I mean sure you could still be friends, but it is kinda weird. You have been through so much and got so close...just for them to leave you for someone else. Okay....maybe my love for baseball and the Brewers has hit a creepy level...
  11. MrTPlush
    Until pitchers and catchers report I will still stand in the group that expects Lucroy to be traded. After that I think the chance he is a Brewers come opening day dramatically increases. I think Texas pulls it off. They just make too much sense. A lot of times the perfect situation doesn't happen, but I think it might here.
  12. MrTPlush
    He made the title on his post that. Waukesha Sports Cards has one listed for $275. Stating only 50 were made. So somewhere in the $200 is probably about right as I am sure WSC price is overpriced.
  13. MrTPlush
    The point is not all the posters agreed with that notion. I then provided why I thought it would take more than just Peralta. My bad for not tagging the person(s) that disagreed with the original point.
  14. MrTPlush
    Sveumrules literally says in the thread title & OP that the offer would be Peralta+ Oh I missed the part where Sveumrules was the only only person to give their opinion and post.
  15. MrTPlush
    Aren't the semi-promising pitcher that you want and the decent pitching prospects that we have many of, the same thing? If we already have many of them, I'd personally rather go for higher upside at a lower level. I wouldn't really even say they have a higher ceiling. I don't think anyone really knows what they are...they are a total mystery at this point. They could have a higher ceiling, but as it stands I don't think we see anything to support that. Yes we have a good portion of middle of the road pitching prospects, but we have already seen Stearns trade two of them in trades. One to acquire a player directly and one to improve a return. If that is the kind of guy Stearns is those can be very valuable to have. Pitching is ALWAYS in demand.
  16. MrTPlush
    The goal is to develop young players, not to lose games. Losing a lot of games is just a by-product. As others have said, it doesn't do wonders for developing young pitchers with bad (possibly horrendous) defense behind them. Stearns is as aware of these players defensive metrics as we are and yet he is still building the team around them. People get upset at the word "tanking" in how that implies the team is trying to lose. Well you don't need to tell a Chris Carter to strike out and play a bad 1B and you dont need to tell a Hill to be a bad baseball player. They will do that just fine on their own. If you put them out there, you know you are going to get a losing team. Chris Carter was brought in for his slight upside and with a nice first half of the season could be flipped for something useful. Stearns did not go, "Oh wow Chris Carter sucks get him over here." Aaron Hill is not going to start or even play that often. Who says he even makes the team? If he was trying to put bad defense out there why won't he put Santana in CF?
  17. MrTPlush
    I will say this though: McMahon>Peralta Peralta's upside is pretty obvious, his 2014 season. I see quite a bit of downside though. He is inconsistent and his control is highly questionable. He is also coming off a disaster injury riddled season. A top 50 prospect for Peralta right now is crazy talk. The Brewers need him to rebound before they get any serious offer for him.
  18. MrTPlush
    Obviously if one could go back you probably wouldn't do either of these trades. We didn't win a World Series so it was a failure so to speak. Sadly the world doesn't work like that and we can't just redo moves. The way I look at it is their success compared to other similar moves. I don't think people realize the amount of teams try to do the same thing and don't even make the playoffs. Angels traded for Greinke and missed the playoffs. The Padres tried to make a bunch of big time trade moves and they flopped on epic levels. In 2008 CC Sabathia carried the team to the playoffs and in 2011 lead a pitching staff that helped the team go from 77 wins to 96 wins. They did their job. The other thing everyone assumes is that these players would be as great as they are now if the were still in Milwaukee. I don't think it is that simple. Maybe Brantley never breaks out under a Brewers coaching staff. A coaching staff has a huge impact on a young player trying to break out. Would Jake Odorizzi even look that impressive at Miller Park? Tropicana is pretty pitcher friendly. I would be hard pressed to think in the 2012-2015 timeframe if we kept them we would have had a 96win team. That team would have had to rely heavily on what was already in place and through free agency. Our farm system would still have been a joke after they graduated so good luck trading for a Greinke type guy a few years later. In the end I just don't see the guaranteed successes if we kept them, but I do see two of the best teams in Brewers history by trading them.
  19. MrTPlush
    Don't forget his biggest move in stepping down because he knew it was best for the organization. Attanasio most likely would have stuck with him if Melvin was willing. He saw the Brewers going into a rebuild, saw he wasn't going to be around to finish it, and decided to pass it on for someone who could see it start to end.
  20. MrTPlush
    Guerrieri being the biggest value in another year Lucroy alone wouldn't even get Guerrieri you would need to give up someone like Arcia to get him. If Zunino develops for the Brewers that will be 2 players who would rank in the top 25 of any prospect list. Two thoughts: If it was that simple I don't think the Rays would trade him now. Zunino has a long way to go and only has 4 years of control. Exactly the player we shouldn't be acquiring. Little interest in him.
  21. MrTPlush
    We have so many because we can. Why not have them? It is just depth and some of them will be dropped or in the minors by the time opening day comes around. Injuries in spring training happen so maybe we need Young for a couple weeks to start out you never know.
  22. MrTPlush
    That looks like an awful deal for the Brewers...really awful. Looks like you are going for need and not value.
  23. MrTPlush
    Stearns has made some interesting moves to date. I am fine with them, but I can see how some may question them. Trading Lind for three not so promising lottery tickets that could eventually have upside was a daring move. Obviously I didn't see the offers he got, but I imagine he could have gotten at least a semi-promising pitcher that might fit into a bullpen someday. Less risk but also less ceiling in that scenario. Stearns has also traded two decent pitching prospects since taking over. I am fine because it looks like we have many of those types already in the system, but if either of those guys turns out to be a solid #4 starter or better and he might look bad. He also traded Jason Rogers. Is he just a back up and solid pinch hitter or did we just traded away a guy who might be an average starter? Like I said I like the moves in the present and I support what he is doing, but I can see where some might question him a bit. These trades are like any other trades. It might take years for us to really gauge how they worked out. All I think Stearns is trying to do right now is move out the aging talent that he doesn't think fits with the teams long term goal for younger players.
  24. MrTPlush
    Agreed. Where Stearns will show his mettle will be in the the draft and international. Stearns actually inherited something far more valuable, an owner willing to let him "Operation Astros" our team. I dont think Melvin had that. IF the goal was to improve the 2016 Brewers, he has done a remarkably bad job. Since it wasnt, his skills wont be known for years. I don't think we will truly know what Doug Melvin would have done at the helm of another rebuild. Not sure the Brewers would have kept him if he was willing to(sounded like they might have), but Melvin made it clear he wants to retire soon and didn't want to do half a rebuild. Figured to hand over the reigns now so the new guy could do it his own way start to end. Probably a good thing as I think Attanasio would have stuck with Melvin if he wanted to come back. Secretly saved us from himself. Not that I don't think Melvin could have gotten us in a good direction, but I think there were many people better for the job including Stearns.
  25. MrTPlush
    I actually agree with Robert. I don't think Stearns has done much of anything this offseason. People are giving him way to much credit for what he has done. Outside of Diaz he has acquired many role players at best, nothing at worst, and maybe a sliver of hope they could be something more. He really hasn't made any shockingly impressive moves that I wouldn't expect another half decent GM to do. All his moves are predictable that any half sane person would do. That is fine though. Really all we need him to do is nothing stupid. He inherited a Top 10 farm system, 5 Top 100 players, lots of valuable MLB players to trade away, and what will likely be multiple years of top of the draft picks. It really doesn't take a total genius to run a rebuilding team. The real test for him is when we aren't rebuilding and how he will put the team over the top. Then keep them over the top as long as possible
×
×
  • Create New...