OnTheBlack

I think back when the Sid Finch thing was out there were a lot of articles afterward about how it is physically impossible to throw much harder than 105, not sure that was their number but if Hicks was hitting it I will use it. Sort of like how far a golf ball can be hit, yeah a lot more guys are hitting it long now but no one is getting 400 yards unless it rolls down hill. Probably a topic that has been discussed here before. That was my understanding. Until man evolves, there's a limit to hard much stress you're going to be able to put on those ligaments.

Hill was comfortably the team's second-best player in the playoffs. They would have to renounce Mirotic to have any cap space at all. They would have only the room MLE for Lopez or his replacement, which is almost an insulting offer, so they'd probably lose him too. I'm not losing those 3 to over-pay some aging veteran who was never even a superstar in his prime. I'm definitely not doing it for a no-defense cancer like Kyrie. Now that KD tore his Achilles, the only guy I'm doing it for is Kawhi, and he's not walking through that door. Great. The Bucks still aren't paying Hill 19 million next year. You keep saying he was great in the playoffs. I keep agreeing. But you've never actually said that you think they're going to keep him because obviously nobody thinks that. Kyrie? Has ANYONE brought up trying to sign him? LOL...and Kawhi's not walking through that door, but it was a chance KD was? And who suggested we do the part in bold? The suggestion was to use the cap space to sign Hill and Lopez before they signed Middleton and Brogdon. Who are the three players we'd be losing? Oh, and the MLE for Lopez is not really an insult. He signed for roughly 3.3 this year. Not sure why a raise to 9.7 million would be this huge slap in the face, but if that's a slap in the face, please, prey tell, what exactly do you think he WOULD sign in Milwaukee for? And wouldn't that be the point in trying to create cap space? In the event that they want to sign Lopez and Hill? They can try and use the cap space and MLE before they sign their two core FA's in Middleton and Brogdon? That's the only suggestion I've seen. Haven't seen anything about Kyrie(though you'll no doubt tell us how you told all of us we wouldn't sign him with NOBODY arguing that we would). Just answer this, do you believe that the Bucks will waive Hill, yes or no? You keep repeating the same thing while ignoring what's a foregone conclusion to seemingly everyone else, the Bucks aren't paying Hill the 18 Mill that's NOT guaranteed. Do you agree or disagree? You'll manage to tell us how you told us so the whole time either way, I'm just curious what you ACTUALLY think will happen vs what's I guess you want to happen?

[sarcasm]Wow...it's not like you to pat yourself on the back for an argument that never really took place.[/sarcasm] You weren't getting people arguing with you that Giannis WAS the MVP. You were getting people arguing with you for brushing off Harden and dismissing what he was doing by claiming he was inefficient(he wasn't). So yeah, you were disrespecting Harden. Pretty much everyone said Giannis was the MVP....you weren't out on a limb there at all. I think the whole board said the same thing. Nope. I said Giannis was clearly the MVP and it wasn't even close in my eyes, and people said that was unfair to Harden. Wasn't much more to it than that. I even predicted roughly a 75/25 split and people were incredulous. And yes, efficiency was a factor because Giannis is more efficient. Defense is another huge factor. Ball-hogging is an issue. Harden is a manipulator and a quirk of the times. Giannis is an MVP for the ages because of his greatness on both ends. Shame on everyone who gave Harden their first-place vote. Dude, WHO ARE YOU ARGUING WITH? You're bragging about being right in an argument that you're just creating. Harden has finished in the top 2...what, 5 straight years? He wasn't just a "quirk of the times." He's a historically great offensive player. So A-Just about everyone agreed with you that Giannis was the MVP. B-You're CLEARLY disrespecting Harden right there. But again man, do you need to pat yourself on the back THAT badly?

Horst also had nothing to do with Giannis. Of course I see the argument but when you're at 58 wins you obviously have next to no room for improvement for regular season wins. And of course, as I said it's a regular season award so it's fine and it make sense. But, the Kawhi trade was for postseason and he made a great deal on it for what he gave up. Stole him with eyes on playoffs only, not regular season. Then sat him a ton of games, which hurt the record you bring up. Then the Gasol trade which was also for postseason and done so late in the year it doesn't affect regular season record. Their GM also fired their coach and brought in a new coach this year who won 58 games, so also a good hire. Then combine it with all the past moves he's made that led to this team and I think he deserved. I assume he's won one or two in the past though, so whatever it's fine and not a big deal. I mean, the Bucks probably gave up more to acquire Hill, Mirotic than Tor gave up to aquire Kawhi/Gasol. I actually saw a tweet that laid it out that way and it shocked me. Again, it's fine. Not an egregious mistake and certainly debatable since it's voted at end of regular season. But that's where I'd have voted. Of course one could argue that all awards could be voted after postseason, which I'd generally disagree with as everyone would get too Ringzzz obsessed and be skewed by recency bias. But if there is one that could be argued shouldn't be voted til after postseason I'd say it's executive. Horst did a great job this year. But this should have gone to Ujiri. The voting on this one should DEFINITELY be done after the season since the job is to build a championship team, not the best regular season team. He took a HUGE risk and traded away a perennial all-star who actually wanted to stay in Canada for a great player who almost everyone just assumed was going to be there for just one year(and he may still be here just for one year). He added Gasol in season which was huge, he saw Siakam years ago in Africa and followed him through college and stole him in the 1st round as he keeps finding young talent. But the trade for Kawhi should have won it for him. There's just so much on the line there. I thought Coach of the year could have gone to any of the three guys...the only thing that Doc did wrong was not lose enough after they traded away Harris. They even pushed a healthy Warriors team to 6 while "rebuilding." Malone did an awesome job and was more under the radar than us without the bigger name superstar. Giannis could have won DPOY. I think as good as George was, it was really a two man race. There were three that should have been pretty obvious, MVP, 6th Man, and Executive of the Year. In fact, I was kinda surprised that Trae Young didn't close the gap on the ROY voting with his second half, but withe Doncic going ~21/8/6 as a 19 year old was pretty impressive. I thought that was the dumbest possible trade the Hawks could have made last year. I still think it was dumb, just not historically dumb like I'd thought originally.

You COULD do it if you had an agreement with Brogdon and Middleton and you could just get them to hold off. I think it's unlikely they pursue Mirotic very much given their cap situation.....and if they did, it'd likely be because they had an idea going into it that he's looking more in the 8-10 per year range as opposed to the 12-13+ that has been thrown out. Who else would they lose that they wouldn't otherwise? Unless you're still counting Hill, who's it's pretty much a given will be waived. Who else would they be losing?

[sarcasm]Wow...it's not like you to pat yourself on the back for an argument that never really took place.[/sarcasm] You weren't getting people arguing with you that Giannis WAS the MVP. You were getting people arguing with you for brushing off Harden and dismissing what he was doing by claiming he was inefficient(he wasn't). So yeah, you were disrespecting Harden. Pretty much everyone said Giannis was the MVP....you weren't out on a limb there at all. I think the whole board said the same thing.

That's not true at all. When stars want out, they often go for trade packages of expiring contracts, solid veterans, picks, and/or non-blue-chip prospects. Look at the KG to Boston deal, Melo to Knicks deal, Kawhi to Raptors deal, George to OKC deal, or even the Kyrie to Boston deal. Some times a potentially good pick changed hands in those deals and others like them, but the Bucks have an asset at least worth that in Brogdon. They have young guys like Wilson, Brown, Pat C, and DDV, all of whom showed promise and contributed to a 60-win team. They have expiring contracts in Hill, Leuer, and Ersan. And they could have good veterans like Bledsoe, Khris, Brogdon, and Mirotic, all of whom have trade value, whether it be directly to a team looking to trade a star without rebuilding or to a 3rd team which would send more assets and/or cap relief their way. For example, suppose Paul George or Damian Lillard wants out. With their contracts, most of the trade proposals would probably be comparable to a package the Bucks could put together with, say, Brogdon, Bledsoe or Khris, Pat C, Wilson, and an expiring contract. Sure it is. You cannot even bring up the gift Danny Ainge's old teammate gave him when they traded for KG. That trade was a joke. But even in that trade, was KG a top 5 player? Probably. But even while McHale gave Danny Ainge a huge gift..and they still got back a whole lot more than what the Bucks could offer right now. They gave up two 1st round picks, Al Jefferson who was 22 years old and put up 16/11 the year before he was traded(then put up 21/11, 23/11 at ages 23 and 24), 21 year old Sebastian Telfair who was a highly touted young player, Gerald Green was 22 years old and valuable young asset. Even Ryan Gomes was just 24 years old and a good looking young player. The only guy who fits is Theo Ratliff who was thrown in to make the deal work. But the Bucks couldn't make a deal like that. They don't have those types of assets. Kawhi was traded for a perennial all-star and only because he forced his way out of SA on what was considered by just about everyone to be a one year deal. In order for the Bucks to make a deal like that work, all those players you listed would have to improve pretty dramatically because Brogdon isn't going to be that huge asset much longer as he'll be paid far closer to his worth. Hopefully DDV, Wilson, Pat C and Brown end up improving significantly on what they've been...there's certainly time. But as it stands now, even the trade that people joke about(the KG to Boston trade) we wouldn't be able to do much with. The closest of the trades you mentioned would be what Indy got for Paul George, but again, with Kawhi, it looked like a given that he was going to leave for LA(and Kawhi still may). But Oladipo didn't have as much value at the time as he does now..he really broke out and Sabonis was a valuable young asset, but not crazy valuable. The thing these all pretty much have in common is that you're talking about superstars forcing their way out and almost always multiple 1st going back. I disagree with the level of talent you believe we could get and the level of talent I believe we could get. If you're talking about trading Middleton for a guy like George or Lillard if they're forcing their way out(I know, just examples of the types of talent you're talking about) but what's in it for Portland or OKC? Yeah, we'll be able to match salary, but we won't be able to provide the draft picks they want and at least as of now, the type of young talent they want. I think we're more in the Melo FROM the Knicks/Chris Paul territory right now than we are the Paul George/Dam Lillard group. We need our young guys to show a LOT more than they have thus far to go after a star on the level you're talking about. Otherwise, most of the teams that would be trading AWAY the star would get a worse player back, not much young talent, no firsts and we'd only be able to match salaries. If Lillard leaves Portland, they're probably rebuilding. If George were to demand out, OKC would get a TON more than they gave up for him. I hope you end up being right though...hopefully Wilson and the rest of the young guys will show more promise moving forward and Horst can keep finding some young talent and Bud can develop them like SA did, but we're a long way off from having much in the way of desirable assets.

This is kinda funny to me. Remember this type of nonsense before the ASB last year? We lost 5 in a row to a middling Pirates team? My god...this 8-8 stretch...how will we ever come back from that! But it's not even that horrible losing streak, it's hole we've dug ourselves! We're a whole .5 games out of the division as opposed to....(well, I guess we were .5 games back 16 games ago, but still, this half of a game is much worse!). Also, can people please explain to me why our window is so tiny? Seems to me like we've got a nice 3-4 year window and there is plenty to like in our farm system unless you don't look any further than team rankings. What have we "stripped" out of it? We've graduated quite a few guys. Guys who look very good despite not being all that highly rated(Woodruff, Burnes, Peralta among others). I get the frustration with Hiura. I argued with people before the season that he'd hit right out of the gate and be a stud. He was. But it's hardly a shock that the Brewers didn't want to give up on a guy who'd put up ~8.5 WAR over the previous two seasons. I'd honestly rather they give guys who performed that well for them a little extra rope than be extremely reactionary. Shaw hasn't started to hit and as such, he'll likely be calling SA home in the near future, but we didn't cost ourselves the 2019 Pennant. Calm down and think about it a bit more rationally. We're fine.

I have no recollection of him playing the outfield like Eric Thames ... Santana is on pace for an all-star season ... Gamel will never be on pace for that, I predict. I was just curious as to his WAR and saw this article about his defense on fangraphs...

Zavalos 9 IP 2H 0ER 11K's today. So lets ignore all defense and the other player in the trade.

I don't know, but I finally used the "Foe" feature Well this is pretty much exactly what the in game threads are like as well.

Keep as many guys as possible and be ready for a consolidation trade if a star becomes available. You gotta have good players on matching contracts, a big expiring contract or two, and some young guys that a team trading away its star would want to take a chance on. Yet another reason to keep Hill and not waive/stretch Leuer's contract. You can't guarantee there will be a Kawhi, Paul George, or Anthony Davis available in a trade, but it seems there's a guy or two like that (or at least close) almost every year lately. You also have to have a number of cheap young assets. The Bucks could match salaries with those guys, but they don't have much of anything that teams would want in terms of young players or draft picks. The best you'd be able to do in the near future making a trade for a star player would be trading for a Chris Paul like player, an older player that a team is looking to move on from and even then I don't see who we'd have that they'd want. Hill's value in a trade was last year. That would have been when we could have turned around and traded him for a better player with a few years left on his deal. I see no avenue for the Bucks to acquire a player a couple tiers below those players, much less a couple of top 5 players in the NBA.

I still think it's a possibility if that's the way the Brewers want to proceed. And if that's the way the Brewers want to proceed, we'll start seeing him in shorter outings. I say that because his struggles pretty much started after the Brewers pushed him to 75 pitches. If the Brewers' intent is to keep him on track as a starter, we won't see him in Milwaukee. If they think he can be a starter then it's probably better that they rule out the idea of him pitching out of the pen for the Brewers this year entirely. He's too talented and with 2 TJ injuries, it probably doesn't make much sense to have him working out of the pen this year, his first year back after back to back TJ surgeries and then go back to starting next year.

Question for the room that I am honestly curious to hear the answer to... Would you trade Josh Hader right now if it meant the return would be the exact three players the Pirates sent to the Rays for Chris Archer last year (Austin Meadows, Tyler Glasnow, and top 100 prospect Shane Baz)? Note: This is just a hypothetical for survey purposes, not something that I am proposing is actually a possibility. I would. Not because I believe Meadows is that good, but because I really like Glasnow. I still just can't wrap my head around what the heck the Pirates were thinking. I guess we can't bash the Rays for their absurd asking prices in the future because there's always someone dumb enough to meet it! I also get some of the shine had come off Meadows and Glasnow at the time of the trade, but you weren't exactly selling high on Archer. I also hate seeing Hader used solely as a closer.

Exactly. They don't really have to add much talent. Giannis will probably get even better and it'll be year 2 in Bud's system with the same group. DJ Wilson, DDV, Streling Brown, Pat C...these guys have all shown flashes. George Hill if they can find a way to bring him back at a reasonable price. The most important thing will be Giannis taking another step with his shot and then we have to see if they can play better in a tight playoff series.

Then Henry or Feliciano will have to be moved up. They're already splitting time in Carolina. I'd assume it'd be Feliciano, but could be wrong. But a log jam at catcher. Not exactly a big problem.

That's pretty exciting as it looks like he could line up perfectly with a need at the big league level. I also hadn't noticed that Phil Bickford was back on the mound. Kinda a strange line in the few games he's been back. A .435 BAA, striking a lot of guys out. Gotta think this year is his last shot to show the Brewers something. Cody Ponce keeps throwing well. Obviously he's viewed as a reliever moving forward. Wouldn't be shocked to see him moved up with an outside shot at pitching in Milwaukee yet this year. Surprised he didn't crack the Brewers top 30 on MLB pipeline as he's got good stuff, good K rates... Rasmussen struggled a bit again tonight. Looks like it's going to take a minute or him to get adjusted to AA. And Brice Turang again, just keeps raking atop the Rattlers lineup.

I'm curious, have you ever gotten a chance to watch either play? Or are you just watching their box scores and evaluating them?

People harp on age way too much. 24 for one player does not equal 24 for another. MiLB Ball>College Ball Why do you think Latin players make it to the MLB level so fast? They get to sign contracts at 16 and have world class coaches and facilities. The average college guy is probably getting a stint at A-Ball or A+ if aggressive. Mind you half that season is gone before even signing. Arcia was in AAA when his class was graduating college, Wily Peralta was getting a taste of AA, Freddy Peralta was dominating AA, and Hernan Perez already had an MLB at-bat. The listed players aren't even that good...they weren't mega talents. These guys are in better baseball experiences before 18 than most college players have. Same goes for the 18 year olds skipping college, better baseball level in the MiLB. 23 year old Corey Ray is probably pretty comparable to 22 year old Trent Grisham. This is a great point. And the learning curve is that much steeper with guys whose hit tools are lagging behind the rest of their tools. I'm not a particular fan of any of these guys over the other. Right now Grisham looks like he's the guy who's figuring it all out and he has passed guys and become the Brewers top OF prospect. I'm just thrilled with that. Grisham's success or lackthereof does not in any way impact Rays(unless they're both at the same level which they now are, but Ray of course is injured).

Ok, so it was random and even more pointless. And you weren't agreeing with another posters statement. That statement said Grisham was now our best OF prospect over Ray AND Lutz(more on him in a second). You then were somehow shocked that Ray was ever considered a good prospect. Not that you agreed Grisham had surpassed him, merely that he was ever highly regarded. But we're going to use BA and K's to rank how good a prospect is. Yet Tristen Lutz is still a "great" prospect. What did he do last year in A ball? 139 K's, .245 BA. So did I just pretty much sum up Tristen Lutz and his potential as a "prospect?" Ok, back to the topic-TRENT GRISHAM. Interesting that you completely ignore that Lutz was a 19 year old in A ball, yet he was still better than Ray was when he was at the same level after playing 3 years of college baseball. What's amazing about Grisham, is that to properly compare him to Ray at the same age, Grisham would need to play in AA again next year. That won't be happening. Grisham has 8 homes since May 24th. What an amazing run. As others have mentioned, he also is doing it with his usual ultra patient approach. I didn't ignore it, I was simply trying to point out how stupid it is to disregard a prospect, a CF prospect for that matter who had an OPS over 800, hit 27 Hr's, stole 37 bases by using batting average and K's. But to THEN go and say that another OF is not a good prospect, but a GREAT one when he too struck out a lot and hit for a lot BA. Second, Lutz was better at Low A than Ray was? Ray didn't play in Appleton. He skipped low A(unless you're counting the 3 games he played there...which honestly would not surprise me at this point). Your logic is all over the place. Ray was about a year younger than average last year for his league. Lutz was 2.4 years younger. Both struck out a lot and hit for low averages. Ray did it at a higher level and put up a OPS of .801 vs .742. But again, your manner of evaluation seems to change depending on which player you're arguing for or against.

I really hope the Bucks have their eyes on someone. I realize my own ignorance, so I'm not upset they didn't sign a guy that I'd just read about and thought would be a good fit, but player development is going to be huge for the Bucks. Several of the guys listed as the best available have already signed two way deals. Just give me someone so that I can read the strengths portion of their profile, ignore the weaknesses part and dream about Bucks! C'mon!

With Snell gone, if they renounce Mirotic, they could sign Lopez to a pretty healthy contract given the low holds on Brogdon and relatively low hold on Middleton+not having a 1st round pick. They could be 20 million below the cap technically and as such, sign Lopez pretty easily. The perfect off-season for the Bucks would be Lopez 3 years 27 million using cap space, Beverly/Hill/Rubio/Rondo in that order on a full MLE, Middleton signed to the 5 year deal they're apparently close on(maybe even have already agreed to) and then you have Brogdon. Maybe you try to beat other teams to the punch and try to sign him for...lets say 4/50? I think he could get 60 on the open market, but he's a prefect fit here. I don't think Bol would have been Maker other than just both being tall and skinny, but I'd have been willing to risk that IF they hadn't traded the pick. The two ways, they could do two if they got rid of Colson, so I'd really like to see them go with Hinton if they really think that highly of him and then a big who has shooting potential and still the potential to be a rim protector. Again, so few 2nd round picks end up ever doing anything so even fewer UDFA's are likely to, but I'd at least like to take that shot.

I figured you'd have been a fan of Porter had there been any clue he'd fall to 30. Bol Bol seems like too much of a longshot to ever have a sustained NBA career, but not a bad get in the middle of the 2nd round.

Neither Porter nor Hinton have been selected. How hard would it be to sell either on coming to Milwaukee? Porter is a perfect fit, he just needs to get healthy and work on his body. Both are easier said than done, but he has big time NBA talent. I only saw what you posted about Hinton, but that was pretty damn high praise and the Bucks having worked him out would feel like favorites. They have one slot open for a 2 way player...so who do you give it to? Chances are neither move the needle in 3-4 years, but you have to try to find talent anywhere you can. Will throw in one more option, Naz Reid, a 6'10 255 big from LSU who was part of the whole recruiting scandal. Again, great passer, soft hands, potential to be a good stretch 4/5. Apparently struggled under the stress from the whole investigation. Not exactly Ja Morant types, but guys who could become rotation players. Guys who could come in and defend or at least get a hand in someone like Gasol's face. Reid has a 7'5 wingspan. Big body. I think I'm a bit paranoid because Giannis is SO special and so talented, the worst case scenario is he ends up in a situation like LeBron was in both times at the end in Cleveland. I'm hoping with Coach Bud we can follow the Spurs model a bit better.

Yeah, but if you'd have thought Bol Bol, Kevin Porter and a few others would still be there, would your top 3 have been different? I'll predict they won't buy a pick, but I'm hoping you're right, especially if they think Hinton could be as good as some suggested.