paul253

And yet you complain about my speculation? Your allowed to speculate and I’m not? Ok. “It could be literally anything except the one thing that you think it could be”. And you don’t understand why I think you’re being arrogant? Um.....ok. You just defined arrogance while claiming you don’t know why I’m calling you arrogant. The third sentence in a row where your arrogance is clear as day. I mean come on. Nothing works that way? Not one single thing? If I want to trade a player and only one team is interested in said player that team doesn’t have leverage? That never happens? If I have four players who can only play first base and need to trade some other teams don’t have leverage because they know I can’t use four first basemen? That’s not leverage? If I have a player who is only under contract for one more year and has said he won’t re-sign with us thats no different then the same player being under contract for three more seasons? The return will be the same? I’m starting to wonder if you even know what leverage is. Never once did I say we HAD to move Santana. I said that it is obvious that we WANTED to move Santana. And that we currently have four starting caliber every day outfielders, not even counting Broxton and Phillips. Are you really going to disagree with that? Completely different scenarios. Even talking about it is a waste of time. At this point I wonder if you even understand what I’m saying. Who said that we HAVE to trade Santana? Who said that we are going to “give him away”? Not me. What I did say that it is clear that we now have surplus of outfielders. We do. Even you can’t deny that. Can some of them play other positions? Sure. But then we have a surplus of players at other positions. No matter how you slice it we won’t go into the season with Braun Yelich Cain, Santana, Aguilar AND Thames all on the roster. So somebody has to be moved. Clearly we want that to be Santana right? With me so far? So if teams know we WANT to move Santana teams are going to offer less for him. That doesn’t mean we HAVE to take it. That doesn’t mean we will FOR SURE trade him. All it means is that teams, knowing we want to move and might not have a spot for him, will offer less. You can call that dumb all you want but the fact is you’d be idiot not to at least try it. If you’re a car salesmen and a customer comes in says “I really really really want this car” are you immediately going to offer him the best possible deal on that car? You might but I’m sure as heck not going to. Or how about this? Have you ever sold anything? If you have something you really want to get rid of are you not more likely to take a lesser offer for it? Whereas if you have something you don’t really care if you sell in which case you’re not as likely to accept a lesser offer? Don’t lie. And yet we clearly haven’t gotten an offer that we’ve deemed acceptable. Perhaps this “market need” isn’t as strong as you seem to think it is. Yeah maybe he is a “better” player than others available. But if his cost is too high then other teams will pass and go to another option. Happens all the time. I guess we’ll just agree to disagree. If you were my GM and you didn’t take advantage of the fact that the Brewers have two major league players that play the same position and only that position I’d be furious with you. Ultimately his value depends on how many teams want him but all things being equal a team who needs to or wants to move a player MIGHT get less for him. Going back to your example you have to ask yourself this. Would we get the same value in return for Altuve if we didn’t have Hiura ready to replace him? I’d say no because the fact is if we didn’t have Hiura we wouldn’t trade Altuve unless the offer was immense. In other words a team would have to overpay for him. With Hiura who is blocked and wasting away in AAA the team likely wouldn’t want to be as patient and wait for the overpay to come because the longer you wait the less time you have Hiura. I’m sorry if that doesn’t mesh with how you view this universe but it might just be true.

I’m done with you after this postI can’t recall the last poster who has been as arrogant as you. You lament me for lack of proof? Where is yours? Seriously. Every single thing you’ve said is opinion that you try to pass off as fact. As if it couldn’t possibly be anything other than what you think it is. I’m not claiming to know what’s what and I never have. I’m only throwing out possibilities. I don’t understand why you can’t recognize you’re doing the same thing. Why you can’t recognize that there is a chance that.....gasp.....you could be wrong. Yeah maybe. It’s very possible. But believe it or not it’s also possible TB saw our position has changed and we are more motivated to trade Santana due to our recent acquisitions. I mean, I know that’s just soooooo far out there that it couldn’t possibly in a million years be true and that you have proof that what said is true but maybe, just maybe it happened. I’m not sure the last time I’ve come across a poster who is been as a big a.......as you are right now. I mean my lord. I realize this isn’t the political board and we’re not supposed to get personal but others ARE allowed to have opinions. And, I’m not sure you understand this, but all the stuff you are saying is opinion too. You don’t know any more than I do. You get that right? Unless you have some double super secret insider who is giving your hourly updates. If you do, I mean, I apologize dude, but you should be more clear about it. Not be a dick like you’re being now. No kidding they want a max offer. That’s very intuitive of you. The question is why did what they consider a “max offer” all of a sudden change after he Brewers acquired Yelich and Cain? Every one of these things could be true (see how easy it is to admit that someone else might be right, although I find it hilarious that you post this after whining about my “proof” being speculation. Because this isnt speculation at all) It could also be a combination of all three. OR........OR.......it could be that TB saw Milwaukee now has four starting caliber outfielders to play three positions, doesn’t need them all, and may be willing to accept a lower offer, or pay more, to move one. I mean.....that’s like a Bermuda Triangle/Grassy Knoll type theory but it could actually happen. Just like that huh? If we can’t get Archer we just go sign Yu? Do you really think it’s that easy? I think it’s probably more likely that Yu is blowing a kiss to us but hey, I’m not the one living in reality apparently. Shouldn’t you be telling us?

Wow. I realize it’s hard to admit you’re wrong but I think you’re taking this to a new level. My “boast” was that perhaps his value decreased. If you believe what HighHeat19 said that’s exactly what happened. I’m not looking for recognition or anything. But what I am looking for is that posters like you stop being so close minded and shooting down others’ opinions so fast because you disagree with them. Back when we had our little back and forth you essentially stated as fact that Santana’s value wasn’t decreasing and that Stearns wasn’t running out of options to move him. If you don’t want to take Highheats posts as fact then fine. But are you really going to double down on your closed mindedness and call my opinion “nonsensical” when other well informed posters have suggested it is exactly what is happening? Did you actually read what he said? “After the Brewer's acquisition of the OF's, it is known that Tampa upped what they wanted in return (Corbin Burnes) in a package for Archer. ”. So they all of a sudden decided they wanted more for Archer and it had absolutely nothing to do with the Brewers acquiring the additional outfielders? I guess we interpreted his post quite differently. And yes trying and accomplishing are different. But that has nothing to do with the argument. If TB decided they wanted more for Santana then common sense dictates that don’t value him as highly as they did before. At this point I’m guessing Santana stays with the Brewers. Just my gut feeling. I actually wouldn’t mind them trying to move Aguilar or Thames at this point.

You and me both. I was told that even suggesting it was the equivalent of me thinking I’m smarter than David Stearns.

Nobody is buying Braun to 2B. Why would they even suggest it? People gave me all sorts of crap about the possibility that Stearns may have backed himself into a bit of a corner by acquiring too many outfielders. Is this perhaps him acting as though he’s completely fine with what’s he’s got when in reality he’s starting running out of options?

Last year would have been the perfect time to do it. We hadn’t planned on going anywhere. We had young outfielder prospects making their way up. We had absolutely nothing at first base. Yet it didn’t happen then. I have been fairly outspoken on this in the past but I’ll say it again now. It’s absolute crap that one league has a DH and one doesn’t. For like the third or fourth time in recent memory the Brewers are probably going to make moves they wouldn’t have had to make if they had a DH. Additionally Braun would benefit immensely from being about to DH regularly, as would the Brewers as a whole.

For what it’s worth I don’t think anyone is attempting to give him grief. There were just quite a few posts that basically said “Highheat said it’s going to happen so it’s going to happen” and people wanted to point out that what he says isn’t always gospel. I’m sure he’s a big boy and understands that when you come on here and talk about anonymous sources there may be a few skeptics. It’s nothing against him and I have no doubt we all appreciate his input. Anyway, while I’m thrilled with the addiitions of Cain and Yelich I’m concerned about the lack of moves to address both the rotation and the bullpen. I kind of feel like we’re in a weird spot where, on the one hand we are still kinda rebuilding and don’t want to just empty out the farm system but on the other hand are also good enough to compete and have pretty much stated through recent moves that that is our plan. But we still have a huge hole in the rotation and, with respect to some of the proposals here, are not going to fill it simply by trading Santana and a few second class prospects. Pitching will always be more valuable than hitting and while Santana is certainly a good young player you’re simply not going to get established pitchers, or even young ones, with one or two upside for him. I honestly think our best bet would be to trade Santana for prospects, sign either Arrietta or Darvish and sign a reliever. It gives us a chance this year while also keeping the future bright by holding onto the cheap, controllable starters that we FINALLY have. While I’d love a guy like Fulmer I’m just afraid the cost would be too high. Our payroll is still low enough where we can take a chance on one of the better free agent pitchers. And if he ends up taking a nose dive we still have Woodruff, Burnes and Ortiz to fall back on at a very low cost.

How could you possibly know this? Seriously. You’re stating it as fact so I want to know how you know this. That’s not what I said. I said what is naive is you thinking other GMs will just believe we’re ok with Ryan Braun flip flopping between first base and the outfield because we can’t get a decent offer for Santana. As I said I’m sure Braun CAN play first. I actually wanted them to move him to first before they signed Thames. But if he is going to play first he’s going to play first. He’s not going to switch between that and the outfield. He’s also going to be given notice that he’s going to play first and get plenty of reps there and not just get thrown out there because we need to find a spot for all of our other outfielders. Yeah he played CF. We didn’t try convincing other GMs that he was now our center fielder and we were perfectly ok with that. Not sure what this has to do with anything I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. And move Ryan Braun to first base. And get rid of Aguilar. You’re acting like all we’re doing is moving Thames from 4th outfielder to 5th outfielders. What you’re proposing has a lot of moving parts, one of which is a pretty major one that’s never been done before. There is literally zero reason to believe Ryan Braun will be playing first base this year. Yet you speak of it as if it’s very realistic possibility. Oh my god dude. I said I’m worried that he’s backing himself into a corner by acquiring too many outfielders. That other teams are now going to see us as desperate to move Santana, which hurts his trade value. It’s an opinion. I didn’t even state it as fact like you do with all of your claims. I said it’s possible. How can you not understand the difference between this and my claiming I’m smarter than Stearns?

Why do you think he was moved off of third base to begin with? Did you see him play third? He was a horrible horrible third basemen. Despite that, you not only think he can handle third but you think he can handle SS just because he said he could? Do a survey here. Find one other person who seriously believes Ryan Braun can play shortstop. Or even third base for that matter. Additionally, I never said he can’t play first base. I’m sure he could. But understand the argument. You’re essentially saying “we will just tell other teams Ryan Braun will play first base in order to make them believe we don’t have a logjam in the outfield”. My argument is that nobody would actually believe you if you said that because it’ll never happen. Yes Ryan Braun CAN play first. Hell Corey Knebel CAN play first too. That doesn’t mean it’s an actual possibility though. That doesn’t mean opposing GMs are stupid enough to accept that excuse. My hangup is you coming on here and literally just proclaiming I am wrong when I say that I think Santana’s trade value has dropped because other teams now know we pretty much have to trade him. As if you could possibly know if that’s true or not. It’s my opinion. Others are allowed to have opinions whether you agree with them or not. If you disagree with them then make an informed argument against it. Don’t just come on here all arrogantly and proclaim that they are wrong and need to “let it go”. On a side note, I’ve never once claimed to be wiser than David Stearns. I have no idea where that accusation is coming from. I’m just stating my opinion that it’s possible he’s backing himself into a corner by acquiring too many every day outfielders. If you disagree fine. But I think your implication we can just tell other teams Ryan Braun is now going to play first base and they’ll just believe us is a little naive. Braun has played in more than 100 games in 10 of the 11 seasons he has been a pro. And the one season he didn’t play 100 games is the season he was suspended. Him playing 80-100 games would not be stunning at all.

I’m not going to argue with you. If you think teams will actually believe that we’re willing to use Ryan Braun as essentially a utility player who is going to play a position that he has never played before then that’s your prerogative. I don’t think anyone would actually believe that because it would never happen but whatever.

Seriously? You’re penciling in Ryan Braun at first base and I’m the one who needs to let it go? There has never been one indication that Ryan Braun CAN play first base or WILL play first base and I’m the one who is wrong? Your little scenario where a guy who has never played first base is now apparently not only willing and able to play first base but also willing to essentially be a utility player flipping between first base and the outfield is such a long shot and an unlikely scenario that opposing GMs would laugh at you if you try to convince them it’s a legitimate possibility. I can just see it now: “No we don’t need to move Santana. We can have Ryan Braun play first base 75-80 games a year and then have him substitute for Cain, because Braun can play centerfield too you know, Santana and Yelich. That’s totally something we can do”. MNBrew. I don’t think your examples are Apple to Apple. The reason we need to move Santana is because right now we have four players for three spots. Let’s face it. Cain Yelich and Braun are all going to start, which means Santana has nowhere to play. Sexson was traded not because he didn’t have anywhere to play but because he was the best player on a bad team and we needed to improve our talent level. Greinke didn’t have to be traded either as I believe back then we still would have gotten a first round pick for him is he left in free agency. The Overbay trade is the closest scenario to thing and we got a back of the rotation starter and a soft tossing lefty prospect who never did anything. Plus, we don’t know if perhaps they would have gotten more had Fielder not been ready. It’s possoble Fielders presence drove down the return. Perhaps. It just seems odd to me given all his other strong offensive numbers and after his breakout year that they are all of a sudden so eager to trade him.

Maybe. But nobody is going to believe that all of a sudden Ryan Braun is going to be our first basemen just because he says he’s ok playing it. . MAYBE if first base was a black hole like second base but it’s not. We can try to fool people into thinking we’re fine with what we have but everyone knows we want to (need to?) move Santana.

Well at least you are being a dick about it. Of course we need depth but we don’t need 6 players who are capable of starting. Broxton and Phillips aside, everyone knows we aren’t going into the season with Santana Braun Yelich and Cain. It would be a huge waste of talent. I’m sure he has trade options out there. But as MrTPlush was so kind to point out, major league GMs aren’t idiots. So if you were an opposing GM who had some talks about Santana before today, then you see the Brewers acquire Yelich and Cain wouldn’t you as a smart, major league GM all of a sudden see Milwaukee with a surplus of outfielders and use that against them by lowering your offer? I know I would. And yet here we are trying to trade him. Perhaps this is all part of Stearns master plan. After all he is a Harvard Grad who already knows what us pathetic little state college students know, but if Stearns is so interested in trading him maybe he sees something that concerns him. And if he sees it maybe others do as well. Plus, we need pitching. When is the last time a quality major league pitcher was traded for another major league player? Teams add guys like Santana to compete. You don’t compete by trading away quality pitching Obviously we’ll never know all of options that are out there. Or that were out there. I’m just worried that perhaps he’s backing himself into a corner a bit. I’m sorry if that concern is so out of line that I should be ashamed of myself for having it. But sometimes things don’t work out as intended. And sometimes even Harvard grads make mistakes. As I said, if I had an offer out there for Santana before today my offer would change. The Brewers now need to move an outfielder much more than they did yesterday and if I were an opposing GM I would exploit that. But then again I’m sure everyone already knows that.

The problem with what we’ve done so far is that other teams know now that we pretty much HAVE to trade an outfielder. We are not going into next season with Braun Cain Yelich and Santana (not to mention Phillips and Broxton) on the roster unless one of them is playing first base. I think that drives down the return for them. I don’t see any way Santana gets Mejia. Not even close. Nor do I think Santana or Phillips gets us a good starting pitcher. Teams trading for Santana or Phillips are likely in a win now or win soon mode. Teams like that don’t trade good starting pitching. I fear we made a mistake trading our top prospects for an outfielder as opposed to a pitcher. We should have just signed Cain then traded Brinson and some other prospects for pitching.

Sorry if I’m repeating posts but I don’t have time to go through six pages worth of posts. I think we gave up way too much. For a deal involving both Harrison and Brinson I think we should have been targeting pitching, not another outfielder, which is already a position of strength. Plus we sold low on Diaz. More moves have to be coming if this is a win now move because we have done little to address our biggest problem, which is starting pitching.

I think it’s too difficult to tell if they made more money from this or not. Cheaper concessions could very well lead to more people coming to the game or people spending more on other other at the stadium like merchandise. What is not too difficult to tell is fan satisfaction skyrocketed. As I said it’s nice to see a franchise doing something that doesn’t involve squeezing every last penny out of its fan base.

I can get a jumbo hot dog AND a refillable soda at Costco for $1.50. I get it pretty much every time I go. I’m just saying. I’m sick of sports teams squeezing every last penny out of it fans. It’s about time a team did something nice like this. Hopefully it spreads, even if it’s for weekday only games.

That’s just not true. If a minor league hockey team can draw 5,000 fans a night at a decades old arena I don’t see how you can there’s nowhere near the support. It’s tough to see because NHL has never really been an option but I would bet a significant sum of money people here want the NHL.

I’ll help out. But I only have $12.16 to donate to the cause.

The NHL has too often made the mistake of putting teams in cities that don’t support hockey. Atlanta for instance. Who have thought that the Atlanta market couldn’t support an NHL franchise? The issue wasn’t market size. It was fan interest. Milwaukee HAS fan interest. There is no way a minor league team could survive here forty years without fan interest. Like I said i think if someone steps up and bids for a team Milwaukee would be anperfect fit. They don’t need more hockey teams down south or out west. I can perhaps see Quebec City getting a team ahead of us or maybe Seattle since they appear to REALLY want one. But just watch. If someone makes an effort to get a team the people in this city will go nuts.

I think that argument is overrated. I’m sorry but Milwaukee is not filled with Blackhawks and Wild fans. I believe Milwaukee is now “Wild territory”, at least I assume it is since we get their games on regional TV. Which is funny because St Paul is like six hours away. We may as well be St Louis Blues territory. Chicago and MN would not lose fans if Milwaukee got a team and if that’s the argument preventing it then something is seriously wrong wit the NHL. A team in Milwaukee would fit right in the Central Division, which just happens to be the only division with seven teams. I honestly think if someone in Milwaukee showed serious interest we’d be a shoe in. New arena. Great hockey tradition. Perfect location which requires no realignment.

Quite honestly the Admirals are better off at the Cell. No point in playing in an arena that’s 2/3 empty. The US Cellular arena is perfect for them. Regarding this whole “territorial rights” in he NHL. What a load of crap that is to me. Why do teams have “rights” over other large cities? Every sport Milwaukee has a team in (MLB, NBA, AHL, major CBB) Chicago has a team. If both cities can have teams in all those other sports and both still draw well enough why is the NHL any different. Chicago wouldn’t be affected one bit by Milwaukee getting a team. Heck it might even help them by giving them a close rival.

Well agree to disagree. First of all the Admirals have averaged over 5,000 every year since 2004-2005. But I don’t think minor league attendance is indicative of how a professional team would draw. You’ll obviously have a lot more fans of a professional team because professional teams are much easier to follow and the quality of play is increased. If you look at the NBA how many people go to a Bucks game JUST to see Lebron or Curry? Or JUST go to see a specific team? That’ll happen with the NHL too. But second, people need to understand that how big a city is doesn’t necessarily translate with attendance. Look at some of the teams I’m he bottom half of attendance. New York Islanders. Phoenix. Denver. Miami. San Jose. Look at some of the cities in the top half. Buffalo. Tampa. Minnesota. Calgary. Edmonton. Pittsburgh. Hell look at the Packers attendance. I think attendance is driven much more by interest in he team and success than the size of the city. If the team is good attendance will be good. If not it’ll probably look something like the Bucks. Looking at the NHL I think it’s clear several teams need to be moved. Carolina is not even filling 70% of its arena. Arizona is way down there too. Those two franchises SHOULD be moved. Additionally the need to expand I believe to even out the conferences. I hold out zero hope that Milwaukee will ever get a team. My one far out there theory is that maybe the new Bucks owners made the arena hockey ready with the idea of testing out attendance of an NHL exhibition game (like the Petits did) to gauge interest. I don’t see why they’d make the arena hockey ready just for the hope of landing a Frozen Four once or twice a decade. Maybe, just maybe, they’ll see the idea of an NHL franchise here as a solid investment and look to buy an existing franchise or grab an expansion spot. God knows they have enough money between them. On a side note, anyone with access to the Milwaukee business journal that can sum up this article and tells us what it says in the topic of the NHL? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2017/11/16/feigin-no-bucks-plans-for-nhl-team-or-streetcar.amp.html

I have no doubt Milwaukee would support an NHL team. I think the competition from the Wave and UWM is overstated. The Admirals would be gone. And the Packers only play 8 home games a year. Really the NHL would only be competing with the Bucks and to a lesser extent Marquette. Yeah the Bucks attendance hasn’t been great but if you think about it it’s an NBA team that hasn’t really had a consistency winner since the mid 80s and who are playing in an outdated hockey arena. I think you’d see a lot of support from Waukesha and Ozaukee Counties.

Another problem with the preason polls is that teams get credit for “top 25 wins” over teams that have no business being in the top 25. Michigan, Tennessee, Florida and Florida St all come to mind as preason top 25 teams who had horrible seasons. Alabama’s wins over Florida St and Tennessee were not good wins.