OnTheBlack

I don't think that's fair. If you look at McCarthy's era, they did pretty damn well with WR'ers and the guys fans liked that didn't end up panning out, it's not like they went somewhere else and did anything. Jeff Janis is the biggest example and I think the issue with him was more his awful route running. Rodgers plays a big role in this. I remember Rodgers throwing to him in the endzone and Rodgers threw a quick out and Janis rounded that route off so much that he was two yards deep. It looked so different from the way Jones, Nelson, Jennings and the like ran that route. As for Trevor Davis, I've heard a lot of praise from the ST's coaches about him, but not so much from him as a receiver. As for Kumerow and MVS, it's tough to blame their lack of success on McCarthy. Along with St. Brown, these guys were raw. The two rookies from last year were extremely talented(St. Brown and MVS) but there again, it's tough for rookies to thrive, especially with Rodgers. I actually thought that McCarthy thrived with his WR'ers. He stuck with so many future studs who struggled BADLY with the drops. The list includes Jones(remember all the drops in the SB run), Nelson(Again, he had two big drops in that SB, but struggled early on with drops), Adams had quite a few drops his 2nd year. But he kept throwing them out there and helped them keep their confidence and they all thrived. I'm really excited about this whole group. Kumerow is a fan favorite and hopefully he'll develop as that reliable possession guy, but in MVS and St. Brown, the later was poised to be a 1st or 2nd day pick after his freshmen year with Kizer as his QB at ND, but Kizer left early and then St. Brown left as a RS Soph, so he's pretty green as well. Two 6'4-6'5 guys who run 4.40's....there's a lot of upside in this group.

They were able to trade it once it became officially theirs. You can't trade a 1st rounder when you owe two future 1sts, but if you own the first for that year, you can trade it. Edit-I don't know that this made sense. Point is, they can trade it. They couldn't trade it before it was officially theirs for this year. It's to protect teams from themselves. But whatever, I don't like the idea of this at all. You NEED young talent. You need building blocks. You need to be able to find Pascal Siakam types(maybe not as good, but young contributors) like the Spurs did to supplement your core. They were among the best at finding serviceable late 1st round picks year after year. IF they do this, they damn sure better buy a 2nd round pick so they can at least try to find a player who can contribute. And Ersan should be an asset. He has a relatively low salary, only one year left on his deal. Absolutely no need to throw in a 1st just to dump him. Only reason I'd be in favor is if we could nab another PG. A vet like Hill, but someone who obviously doesn't cost as much.

I'm gonna guess Luka Samanic. I've seen him a pick or 3 ahead of the Bucks, to the Bucks and a few picks into the 2nd round, but he's pretty consistent. Drafting the way I'd like, best available stretch 4/5 or ball handler probably won't be the best way to go unless someone falls or you get lucky and someone like Porter really hits his ceiling, you should go for BPA. I have seen Windler before as a potential Bucks pick. There's a lot to like. He strikes me as a Shane Battier type. A bit of a tweener...but with Giannis, that's hardly a problem at Forward. Great shooter, very good rebounder, he's supposed to be pretty athletic and almost led Belmont to a 1st round win in the tourney with 35. Of about 6-8 mocks, not one has the Bucks taking Mizzou's Porter. In fact, I've seen mocks where he's not drafted at all, so maybe we can pick him up as a FA and hope. https://www.nba.com/bucks/bucks-2019-mock-draft-roundup

Maybe not in World Cup soccer but it still exists. And it's not simply to screw over women but to make more money by paying them less. Well, I don't know if it's as cartoonist as them huddled in the corner, but it obviously still exists in nearly every industry.

What is the point? I don't disagree but the guy has a 9 game hitting streak, and this refrain is like 3 years more than tired. Keep it up though, I'm sure he's listening. So you agree, but you're mad that I said it for some reason. Ok. I guess I'd kinda be on board with him. What's the point? Ok, so he's no longer an MVP caliber player and should be our #5 hitter, but he's still pretty good towards the end of his career. I think his point was more that it's not exactly a "hot take."

Do we want that? No, we don't. We want to lose this game so that one of our best hitters doesn't get an at bat

I guess really bad if you only look at ERA and don't take ANY other factors into account.

Great background. Always appreciate the more analysis. What's Feliciano's potential look like to you? Could he be a guy who hits .300, 15-20 Hr's and gets on base?

Ahhh...Coulter. I went to a ton of Rattlers games just to watch him play....probably because I watched him Wrestle as a kid(state champ, quit after his Soph season I believe). I'll always believe he could have stuck behind the plate had they given him more time. He was incredibly quick, flexible, strong....but, the clocks ticking on all these guys. Once he moved to the OF, his prospects took a nose dive.

If we keep winning, our owner won’t be able to break the lease and move to Miami. Remove a piece of clothing from the Mark Attanasio cutout every time the Brewers win. I'm probably in the minority, but I really expected this team to take a big step back this year. I still bet on them to win over 87 games. It's a running bet I have with a friend who is a HUGE pessimist when it comes to the Brewers. For each win over, I get 50 bucks, for each win under, he gets 10(because we always go for what he thinks is an optimistic number for me, I get odds). I didn't say it at the time, but I expected to lose ~70 bucks this year when Knebel and Jeffress went down. I was real high on Burnes, Nelson and Hirura, thought they'd all have big years, not as high on Grandal(Though this was playoff related and even then mostly defense) and Moose. Just to take my predictions a step further, I thought Aguilar would build on last year, Arcia would bounce back and hit .265 ~18 HR's, but Yelich would be good, but closer to .300/.370/.470....and still I thought this would end up being a 80 win team with a sieve of a BP and a struggling starting rotation outside of Nelson(I thought he'd be back to a #1/2) and Burnes. I thought Davies would lose his spot, Peralta and Woody would be like young but worse versions of Sheets. Great at time and then fall off. I think I can say I was close with regard to Arcia, so far pretty close to Hiura-though that's a very small sample size, and.....I think that's it. I don't think I could have been more wrong about this team. I thought last year was a perfect storm. Miley, Gio, all the other guys who came together....but this team just keeps finding ways to win. They keep navigating from one disaster to another, they overcome losing their most dominant reliever from last year..not their best, but most dominant in Knebel, Jeffres hasn't been close to as good, Aguilar and Shaw have been black holes and Burnes has had an ERA around 10 most of the year. And they're STILL in 1st place after having the toughest schedule to start the year. Now I only admit this after being wrong because I don't want to vocalize my pessimism because I love the crew, but I am SO happy I was so wrong. The amazing thing is this team hasn't really played it's best outside of 4 or 5 guys on the team. I think our Manager and GM have to be one of the top 2-3 duo's in all of baseball. CC was supposed to be about 300 games under .500 at this point and we should just be coming out of our rebuild at this point. Instead we've got a young team again poised to content, a farm system that while not loaded looks to keep pumping out talented role players along with the occasional stud(Hiura now, hopefully Turang next) and there is no reason to expect this to be a short term window. This has to be the best I've felt about the Brewers short and long term prospects since Weeks, Prince and that whole crew was all in the system.

Fixed

Not sure if he's top 10(not saying he isn't, just haven't looked) but man, I'm so glad we traded for him last year and then re-signed him this year. I honestly wasn't a fan of both at the time, but as I said then, gotta trust Stearns. Mouse is having a career year and has been sooo valuable to this team with Shaw and Aguilar struggling. Still hoping we can get one of them going, but even if we don't, Hiura will be back up and our offense looks really nice.

It doesn't amaze me. The adrenaline that comes with pitching when it actually matters can make a huge difference. It's actually pretty easy for me to see how hard it would be to "get up" to pitch every 5 days and be at your best when your team isn't trying to win, ie, in a rebuild like the two mentioned above. I think Bumgarner would be a great addition. I don't think pitchers with his type of pedigree can just be plugged into a formula and place his "surplus" or negative value into dollar amounts. I'm not giving up Burnes for him, but I'd definitely like to see him. And if we're advocating for Bauer, can we really complain about Burmgarner? Is there something that makes him unlikable that I don't know about? Or are we just talking about him yelling a guys who watch their HR's? Because if it's the later, I actually gained more respect for him by saying basically, "well, he can do that, that's fine, but then let me be me and not like that he's doing that." A helluva lot better than Mr. "what do I tell my kids," and then watch him scream and cuss out players on Baseball's biggest stage.

Seems like Brewers fans feel this way every time a veteran comes around. The vast majority declared Hamels and Verlander done and washed up. Often times these veterans get re-invigorated with being on a good team. I was a fan of Hamels. There were peripherals that suggested he was better than some thought. I liked Verlander, but I definitely thought he was on the downside of his career.

Just wanted to add one more thing. I'd like to see the Bucks buy a 2nd round pick this year. Take a shot on a few guys. If they take a guy like Porter, you're taking a big risk and hoping for a big reward given his knee injuries. I like to believe that Horst and this front office know what they're doing and are pretty good at identifying talent and can at least find someone with some upside in the 2nd round. I'd like to see either a guy who can stretch the floor like Lopez or play the point, but whoever it is. Given their limited draft capital in the future, why not see who wants to sell one?

I know this wasn't directed to me, but it's pretty easy to like pretty much all these guys. It's like hearing about the young guys on the Packers early in Training Camp. You usually focus in on the positives. But assuming he is as good as Middleton, he won't be in the near future. It'll take him...3-4 years? And that's assuming he ends up reaching his potential. Personally, I've come around to Jontay Porter, a big who can shoot, has great hands and a high upside. The type of big you could run the offense through with his passing and shooting ability for stretches. And an almost ideal guy to play next to Giannis in the future. https://www.nbadraft.net/players/jontay-porter But you could win a title next year. Especially with KD being out. I just can't see how you can justify drawing a line at 28 million or 25 million with Middleton and then paying George Hill 19 million this year. I'd love to see everyone brought back, but if for instance, Louis King is the guy we pick and he works out as well as you hope, he likely won't hit his stride until Middleton would be finishing up his contract. So sure, I like the VERY little I've now seen and know of Louis, but not over Middleton. There is just too much at stake to risk in my opinion to count on 19 year old rookies or guys who played in just a handful of games last year to step in and replace your most consistent and reliable player outside of Giannis. I think there's TOO much recency bias. If we were going off the 2018 post-season, Mirotic would be the guy we couldn't afford to lose and we'd be talking about Hill choking. Now Hill has a long history of being a good post-season performer and Mirotic doesn't, but I think it's causing us to underrate Middleton. Keep in mind, he was the guy who was primarily on Kawhi(and did about as good of a job as you could ask for) and Kawhi was on him(arguably the best on ball defender of this era). So he wasn't great in the post-season, but years of being a very good #2 help. Giannis can't drag a team of 3rd and 4th options to a championship. So Middleton isn't the ideal option, but he's the only one we have. For the rest, we just have to hope guys work on their game and improve and if we lose Hill, we have to hope that we can find someone else to replace him.

First of all, he is not like Glenn Robinson. You take exception when people only talk about one side of the ball, and that's what you're doing here. Robinson was a much worse ball handler and wasn't NEARLY as capable a defender. And nobody said you had to be 6'8 to be a SF, but I think the point was you can't replace Middleton with guys who've done nothing in the NBA, or with 6'4 guards, especially when one of this teams biggest assets is the length we've got. With regard to Mirotic, I really loved the trade, but you're citing his playoff performance from last year, but he's gone deep in the playoffs 4 times, but has been bad 3 out of those 4 times. And since we're talking about replacing guys, you actually DO have someone similar to Mirotic who can step in and replace him, someone you can count on getting better in DJ Wilson. A guy we actually saw play this year and someone who may end up being more suited for the playoffs given his ability to close out on shooters and get back. I'd agree, the two guys you cannot afford to lose are Middleton and Brogdon. I also see no reason and nothing in Middleton's history to suggest he's not going to play as hard when he gets paid. Hill was a nice player for us in the post-season, but you can find PG's with playoff experience. I can't justify the Bucks losing their only other All-Star who's in his prime for an aging backup PG and a guy in Mirotic who they actually do have an in house replacement for.

Didn't see what the coach had to say about it. This is a non-issue. I feel like Twitter's similar to wealth. The top 1 pct on twitter make up most posts and drive more nonsensical issues than the bottom 99 pct(or twitter users) and if something is trending on twitter, the news will follow. When you use goal differential as a tie breaker, don't expect teams to try and not score more goals. Didn't we see one of the most shocking soccer game results this past year when Liverpool had to win by 4 to win? It's not like it's the same thing, but the point is, if Bareclona would have scored more goals prior to that, it would have been even more incredible. And how many times do you get a chance to score a goal in a world cup? Kinda hard to blame these women for not...I guess missing the goals?

Why in the world would the Brewers make the unfathomably idiotic move of trading Davies? He's been their best pitcher, and is cost controlled for several more seasons. You don't ever give up solid cost-controlled pitching. EVER. I don't care you you think you have in your rotation has the potential to be better. Davies has been dang near the best starter in baseball this year. For a guy who keeps on harping that the Brewers need to bring up Wilkerson despite his below-average "stuff", it makes no sense to me that you want to deal off a guy with a very similar arsenal of pitches, but is actually doing it at the highest level. I think you would arguably do it if you could get a massive return for him. You certainly wouldn't do it if you believed we should be all every year so that Uecker can call a World Series that the Brewers are in. He's the exact type of reliable and effective starter most teams crave in their rotation. Especially with SO many guys who are huge question marks(Burnes, Peralta, Nelson...Rassmussen is still a LOOONG way away from being a part of this rotation).

Same here. I don't really care who it is. It's nearly impossible for even the best evaluators to guess how these guys are going to turn out. Just pick and try to develop as many guys with high ceilings as you can and hope every once in a while, someone hits that ceiling.

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?" Also, just curious who all these guys are or were who were so much better than Ray who was grossly overrated at the time of the draft? Should we have taken Shane Bieber with the 5th pick overall, pretty much the only guy who's produced at the big league level from that class in the first 5 or 6 rounds? Ok, back to the topic-TRENT GRISHAM.

Blows past Ray and Lutz to easily be our #1 outfield prospect. Hoping he’s promoted soon to AAA, to see if he can maintain his dominance up a level. Yup. It still blows my mind that people thought Ray was a good prospect. Lutz is still a great prospect though, he's just too young yet, just like Grisham was. Ray, on the other hand, will be 25 in a few months. When will Grisham go to AAA? After the break? Why exactly does it blow your mind that people THOUGHT Corey Ray was a good prospect? He was unquestionably a good prospect. He had/has all the talent needed to be a very good player. Athletic and toolsy OF'ers with a hit tool that's lagging behind are boom or bust type guys, but that's hardly rare and that's kinda what being a prospect is. Of Ray's class, the entire 1st round thus far has produced.....wait for it....-.6 WAR. So it's not like his class is killing it while he's turned into an old man. What's more, Grisham being a good prospect has nothing to do with people "thinking" that Ray WAS a good prospect. This post makes very little sense to me and seems rather disjointed. One has very little to do with the other. Though if you want to compare them, lets wait until Grisham's entire season at AA is done. Ray put up a pretty big year last year at AA and while he was at the ripe old age of 23 when he did that(as opposed to the young 22 year old Grisham) it was still pretty impressive. I have one dog in this, and that's the Brewers. So I love seeing a kid with tools like Grisham has putting them together. I see very little reason to dog Ray though while he's dealing with injuries in San Antonio.

Actually, I disagreed with one thing. I don't think Kawhi is staying in Toronto either way. I say that with as much knowledge of his thinking on the matter that you have(unless you actually have some insight). And after they cheered that KD injury like they were cheering a game winning shot, I can't WAIT for that city to lose Kawhi and be relegated to a mediocre franchise for the next 5-6 years. So much for Canada being so classy. It took the American athletes to try and shut them the hell up(which they finally did). I would SO love to see Golden State find a way to run off 3 straight here to shut those clowns up.

Agreed with every point made. It is easy to say the Bucks were the better team, but the fact remains they were in OT and the series was that close to being over. A bad call on Giannis(not a terrible call, but a bad call) and that allows the Raps to say in the series and then overcome some big Bucks leads the next few games. But that the Raptors played great defense isn't a shock. They're a great team. But I do think the Bucks were better. VanVleet going 12 of 15 or whatever it was in his last 15 or so shots was the difference for them offensively and the Bucks tightening up and not hitting FT's hurt us. And that we'll be back for years to come doesn't take the sting out of the fact that we should be there now. But that is also a coping mechanism like the one you pointed to. What I do like about seeing Toronto win and the Bucks pushing them is it dispels this narrative that you have to have a "super-team" in order to win. You don't. You need a superstar and the right supporting cast. We had that. Hopefully we find a way to take that next step next year.

Exactly. The NBA financial landscape is completely different from baseball. Except for the most egregiously high payrolls, you're not so much limited by being a small market as you are by what salary cap exceptions are available to you and whether you have a roster worth maximizing them. This team won 60 games and has a ton of exceptions to play with. A lot of people are talking about whom to prioritize, and I get it, but I still say they should just pay a buttload of tax and keep everyone who wants to stay. I do think some of them will be overpaid, but I don't think any of them will be awful contracts unless they get hurt. It's just concerning when you hear how teams like the Warriors are worried about going too far into the luxury tax and how it stopped and OKC dynasty and how just about every team not run by a Russian Oligarch has said the same. It really sets the Bucks owners up to justify not wanting to go too deep into it. Especially when you look at another 20 million being added to the cap in the future with Giannis hopefully signing onto a extension next summer. Just playing devils advocate here. If you're taking a view that we have a 6 year window(Giannis and then assuming one SuperMax deal as anything too far out is too hard to imagine) that's where they'd be able(and where I've been arguing) that they won't sign Hill. They'd be saying we're trying to build a sustainable contender. But winning a title with an international superstar is going to create immeasurable benefits to the city and team. Just a quick correction, when I was talking about tradable assets and Mirotic, I meant signing him with that 3rd year option of 15 million with only 1 million guaranteed(like Hill's this year). That would be a pretty nice trade asset.