OnTheBlack

Daniels was definitely not coming back after this year. But what is it that people think Lowry or the rest of the DL can do that Daniels can't? This I don't get. He hasn't fallen off like Cobb. He had one down year, last year, and otherwise he's been healthy and durable and productive. I understand that it was 8 million probably better put towards future considerations and we have DL depth. But he was still their second best DL most likely. And unless you're talking about Gary, Za'Darius Smith, he can do pretty much whatever Dean Lowry or Adams can do. I do think that Daniels is in a really-really good position to succeed this year next to Damon Harrison in a 4-3. I could see him topping his previous career high for sacks. Harrison is such a monster, teams will have to double him, particularly in the run game, and Daniels will be there to clean up.

For 5 million you wouldn't have wanted to bring back Cobb? Sure, he's injury prone and he's not likely to ever have a 1300 yard season again, but that's a helluva value for Cobb. Wanting them gone when they were grossly overpaid is one thing, but wanting them gone just regardless makes little sense to me. Matthews, I wouldn't pay what the Rams paid, but I'd have tried to bring him back. He's also just 28 years old and only 3 years older than Allison, a guy who's been banged up 2 of the 3 seasons he'd played and who is not nearly as good of a fit in the slot as Cobb. I mean, I love St. Brown and MVS, just their physical attributes, but Cobb was a proven slot receiver and he was probably one of the best bargain signings of the off-season and is a perfect fit in Dallas with that OL, Zeke and Cooper. Matthews I just wanted back because of his versatility and again, not at the price the Rams paid. Not that it's too high, but too high for us for protection at multiple positions. But, they're both gone now, as is Mike Daniels and the Packers are doing things differently. I suspect they'll find fewer guys who take hometown discounts, but that's fine. As long as they're aggressive in solving problems like they did on the edge and safety this past off-season. No, I wouldn't. They plateaued long ago and I would rather see kids on the field. Adams plus the rest of the guys who have a couple seasons under the belt should be the crew now. Cobb misses time every year or plays badly banged up. He's a great guy, nice rapport with Rodgers on busted plays, but was the poster child for time to move on. Matthews is the same. They both might still be decent players but I'd rather someone else roll that dice. Fair enough. I don't think either are major losses by any means. But I'm also just not a big fan of Allison or Kumerow. Love MVS and Equanimeous. Both just great talents. And you gotta love that name. Equanimeous. You know he's gonna be calm and clutch in the big moments, right? I mean, it's not his middle name, it's literally his name. But I'm looking at him vs J'Mon Moore of Davis in terms of a roster spot. I get the argument that he'd take attention away from the young guys and stifle their growth. I guess my argument would be just to maintain that depth. There is also that point with WR'ers where they're going and then just fall off a cliff. You saw it with Jordy last year and with Cobb's body, he's an old 28 in the NFL.

25 pages on the Bucks offseason thread and we are on 7 here. My how things have changed in a just a couple of years. Early camp reports seem to indicate D is ahead of the offense, not very surprising. Glad to see both King and Gary practicing out of the chute, King in particular really needs to stay healthy. Really pretty good health across the board. Signed a running back yesterday Corey Grant who backed up in JAx for a few years, fast guy who probably has a good chance to stick. The Bucks thread is basically three guys arguing with each other. Nuh-uh, no it's not! Seriously though, didn't see they grabbed Grant. I guess I don't know that he is, but he seems like he'd be a really nice return man. You'd think they'd want 4 Backs on the roster. WilliamsX2, Jones and Grant. That'd likely mean Davis would be gone. Again, that's assuming he's a return man. -And I just looked and see that he's returned punts. You can find anyone to return kickoffs.

That's a Rodgers problem. I agree that he'd likely do that and I think St. Brown and MVS particularly are really enticing talents, but I think people are undervaluing Cobb a bit. He's a good slot receiver who got paid like a #1 WR'er. I think it can be hard to separate his current value with his previous value. When he was overpaid and the offense was reliant upon him vs now when he'd be relatively cheap and just AN option in the slot. But he's also broken down. After his big break out season he's averaged just 620 yards per year, 4 TD's, and 60 catchers per year. So I don't really think it's that big of a deal, but I'd rather have Cobb right now for cheap than not have him in the same way I'd rather have Daniels. But I don't think either are game changers. Jordy was just done though. That's a different situation. He lost that extra gear he had. Cobb still had it when healthy. But I don't like the logic. That they had to get rid of those guys because Rodgers wouldn't throw it to the young guys. Again, I agree with it, but Rodgers needs to change some things. His time is running short and he's on the verge of having a bit of a stained legacy. Someone with his talent in today's NFL at that position has to win more than one.

I know that was just kinda a throw away line there, but if you were really offered Hader for Tatis, you'd jump on it. What would make for interesting debate, would you do the same for Yelich? And actually, Hader for Gore would be an interesting debate as well. I wouldn't do Hader for Paddack, but he's a really good looking young starting pitcher who's already pitching very well. So...there may be 3 individual players in that deal who are more valuable than Hader. And a 4th in Mejia who was/is an elite catching prospect.

Yes..I said that..go ahead and think its dumb all you want..Im just not selling ANY major contributor to the major league club until Yelich's control is up..just my philosophy..im doing whatever I can to capitalize on that window now..Hader is a big part of that..heck im trying to resign Moose and Grandal as well and make a HUGE offer to Geritt Cole or another top FA pitcher. And besides..how much have those players helped the Padres this year? What's their record again? Do you just inherently say no when it comes to trading away ANY Brewer without even looking at who we're talking about? You're just dismissing the idea of acquiring a guy pitching like an ACE right now, a really good looking young catcher and THEE top left handed hitting prospect in all of baseball. That alone would be more than Hader is worth. But now you throw in Tatis???? It just becomes absolutely comical. That guy is the EXACT type of talent you dream of. No reliever in the game is worth more than a 20 year old phenom who's not a "prospect," because I know that's a dirty word to you, but one of the best players in the league already. A more realistic hypothetical discussion would be if the Pads would trade that package for Hader AND Yelich, not either or. Just....take a breath and go look at the players you're saying "aren't helping," the Padres. 20 year old SS with a .323/.384/.583 slash, 16 HR's, 14 stolen bases. The type of player you build a franchise around. 23 year old starting pitcher with a .85 Whip in 17 STARTS, 2.84 ERA, 99 K's in 95 Innings pitched. The later would probably see his numbers slip with the Brewers, but there's quite a bit of room there for them to slip and still be pretty damn good. The prior is the type of guy you offer a 8/80 type deal to before they play a game. What DO you want from the Brewers? You talk about other people's mental health if the Brewers end up buying, but if this is what you're NOT willing to do and you're expecting more from the Brewers....man, you're not gonna be happy with the Brewers...ever.

Why?? Right now they ABSOLUTELY need a starter. Not saying Thor or someone like that, but they absolutely cannot, CANNOT use the "bullpen" approach, or use Wilkerson etc as Chacin's replacement. Not in the middle of a pennant race. That would be downright negligent. Because not everyone wants the Brewers to be so extraordinary short sighted in their pursuits of building a team that can sustain success. I get where you're coming from. But you're waaaaay out there. At least when it comes to this board in how you're valuing immediate impact and future impact. That type of desperation gets you on the "worst trades of all time list," currently circulating on ESPN.

+1. Woodruff is 26, Davies is 26, Houser is 26, Burnes is 24, and Peralta is 23, and the last two are far from a finished product. Hell, Peralta has had eight starts of 6IP or more with 1 ER or less. Eight. Not time to give up on him as a starter. This is exactly why I'm more in favor of the Brewers re-loading instead of rebuilding. There is still a nice window, but we need more out of our young pitchers. We need to suck it up and give them a sustained chance and to do so without a short leash. I don't blame them for yanking Burnes out of the rotation, but they did it after 4 starts. See what you've got in one of the most talented arms you've developed in a while. Would anyone really be shocked if it clicked for him and he developed into a legit #2? If we're going to actually get to and win a world series, we need the horses to beat the Astros, Yankees, Dodgers. I think we'll have a great pen again next year, but the idea that we can piece together games like we did at the end of last year just doesn't seem sustainable and taking pitchers in and out of roles so often does not seem like a sustainable practice.

They really need at least one starter..at this point I'm on board with Robbie Ray, Zach Wheeler or Mike Minor(or two of 3). As long as you have reasonable expectations. This actually isn't that unreasonable. Especially if the baseline is not even considering a hypothetical trade of Hader(or Yelich for that matter) to the Pads for Tatis, Gore, Paddack and Mejia...

This is a really good, sound idea. I like it because I don't think he costs us a guy we really value and he's been a pretty solid pitcher for a while. He can also swing the bat a little bit.

Yeah, I wouldn't even know where to begin to start on something like this. It's not how the real world works. But there might be 75+ players in baseball I'd trade for him. For instance, I'd trade Tatis for Hiura straight up...and that's factoring IN control. But I know the OP is wildy against a Tatis, Gore, Paddack+ for Hader trade. So I think this is just a "what video game trade can wen make for right now and only right now," type idea.

If this happens, the Bucks will be just fine. I hope it is DDV as he has the most upside. The more I read about Bender, it sounds like he's a pretty competent defender and pretty savvy or high BB IQ guy who they can run the offense through also. Really, if he's able to become a good shooter, if he's able to become a good passing big who play and defend bigs in the post and on the perimeter..if either of these things happen, the Bucks will have hit pretty big. In the short term though, I absolutely agree, someone stepping up as a ball handler and a shooter is more important. And I think DDV is our best shot because I don't see it coming from Brown and I think Connaughton is a really great glue player, but I don't know if he has much upside left. But who knows what'll happen. Nobody has done more with minimum deals this year IMO than Horst, he got Mirotic for a bunch of 2nd round picks....so if it looks like we need another ball handler or someone to step in to help out Hill, Bled, Matthews and company, I have little doubt he does it. I just worry that things will LOOK good, ie, Bledsoe and the need for a ball handler won't arise until it's too late. But that's a little paranoia. Maybe Bledsoe will fulfill his potential next year.

Even when Hill plays with Bledsoe there's still a significant liability. Brogdon was physical and long and far more equipped to guard larger 2's and 3's than Bled or Hill. But I agree, playoffs, depth isn't as important as rotations shrink. That's still a problem. But..Brogdon's gone, so...they've recovered as well as possible.

I thought Horst was Lasry making the decision against the consensus. Or whoever was in charge. Honestly, I haven't really paid attention to that. But that whole process was really embarrassing in any event. I don't think it was unreasonable to be upset with the process at all. We felt like a totally dysfunctional franchise at the time. And...we were. Horst was not the plan.

If they stay healthy, you're absolutely right. I'm just not that impressed with the Sixers. I love the talent they have, but it's about matchup's and last year I was really pulling for them vs the Raptors. Maybe I was wrong, but I'm just not as scared of them unless White or someone breaks out, they're really lacking at guard. Even if they'd brought back JJ they'd be more scary. There's also the fact that I STILL think Giannis has another level he can ascend to whereas I just don't think Embid is going to. Simmons still has a lot of room to grow, but his shot is way behind Giannis' at this point.

I agree, he gave up a deal for a team in Moscow for a partially guaranteed 1st year and non guaranteed second. Had to have a desire to play for bud in hopes of revitalizing his career. Anyway, the depth on the bench is outstanding to the point some pretty darn good players will get DNP’s most nights. Horst is really been impressive. Also, really cool to see players that other teams really wanted come to Milwaukee. I'm sure a lot of teams would have gladly taken a similar chance on Bender. We know that Korver was only looking at contenders and frankly, he would have been more important to Philly and likely had a better chance at success with all their bigs taking up a lot of attention and yet he signs with Milwaukee because of Bud and a shot at a title. Still don't like the loss of Brogdon...and we could have done all these things while still paying him, but we're past that now and Horst has done an awesome job of putting the best possible team together while still keeping an eye on the future and developing some young players. Bender probably won't ever amount to anything. BUT....with little pressure on him, Giannis as a great compliment, just maybe he becomes a star. Somewhere, somehow if the Bucks are going to have this long sustained run where they contend for and hopefully win multiple titles, they'll need another star. This seems to be the perfect player to take a shot on and hope that maybe he puts it all together. At the very least, he should be a versatile defender who might be able to help out defending someone like Gasol better(ie, stepping out to protect the perimeter shot) and he's a smart decision maker and facilitator at the 4 or 5. http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dragan-Bender-62877/ I found this write up pretty interesting and perhaps why some consider him a disappointment thus far. This article pretty much said he wasn't likely to have the immediate impact that Porzingas has had, but that he has a pretty high upside. And to get him so cheap? Hard to ask for much more.

Damn, I love that move. I didn't think there was a chance the Bucks would actually go after him. I think it's unlikely he ever becomes much, but he's got that skill set to be that skilled European stretch 4 type. Just really surprised to see him end up here after all the moves we made to add bigs. But good low risk, high reward target.

Maybe we just see it differently. Toronto did a great job of not committing to the double team too early so they could stay in the passing lanes, but Bledsoe was just so incredibly incompetent in that series..and he didn't have a great defender on him. All regular season he attacked the rim and went up strong. In this series...it was like he was trying to make these ridiculous trick shots. But the Bucks were up 2-0...they had big leads in a couple others and went to OT. I don't know what schematic changes we could have made. The series changed when their supporting cast starting hitting their 3's and when they started playing Kawhi on Giannis.

I love the move to bigger, more physical defensive players, but not at the DL position. Many of the elite inside pass rushers are shorter guys who know how to use their exceptional leverage and get under the pads of guards and are strong enough to shed or quick enough to disrupt. Out of the top 11 ranked "interior pass rushers," going into this year, you have Jarrett who's ranked above Clark, Geno Atkins, Aaron Donald(obviously), Jurrell Casey...these are all guys who are smaller. Obviously the JJ Watt body type is preferable, but is the Dean Lowry body type better than Mike Daniels? I don't think so. He's 6'6 but has 30 inch arms. Daniels arms are actually close to average. Not like the monster build of Wilkerson, but not that far off. Couple in the wrestling background(which Clark has as well) and...I think that's a position where shorter guys can thrive. So I hope that wouldn't play into it as much as the depth we have this year. Deon Simon who could surprise, and all the others(Adams, Lowry as everyone mentioned, Keke, Lancaster, Looney...). Anyway, the reason I came back to post yet again in this thread; 11. Kenny Clark, Green Bay Packers I think we could easily see Clark jump into the top 5 this year at 24 years old...assuming he stays healthy. A lot more talent in the defensive fronts.... I can also absolutely see your point on Thompson sticking with guys too long. But while he usually just didn't cut them. He never really gave guys that 3rd contract with the team. Even when he discussed it, ie, Greg Jennings, it felt more compulsory for the Packers to make an offer that wouldn't be accepted. But to your earlier points, guys like Cobb, Matthews...probably not Daniels heading into last year, but the two that left should have been guys the Packers approached about re-working the contract. At least if they were genuinely interested in doing so. Better to just let a guy walk than to insult them like they did with Jordy. Had they treated Jordy like almost any other Packer player in the past, he'd have probably been more vocal about it and it wouldn't have been a good look for the Packers. Jimmy Graham would probably be the other guy this year along with Daniels but we have very little depth at TE. I really like that Toynan, but he's too raw and is probably at least a year away from being a viable threat in the passing game. Lane Taylor could also end up getting cut if they find that Billy Turner can be a starter(I'm just assuming Jenkins starts as you don't really pick a guard at 44 for depth). Can't really see Crosby being cut or being beat out by Finken(though an old friend coached him in HS and guarantees he's going to!) or Tramon or any other vets.

For 5 million you wouldn't have wanted to bring back Cobb? Sure, he's injury prone and he's not likely to ever have a 1300 yard season again, but that's a helluva value for Cobb. Wanting them gone when they were grossly overpaid is one thing, but wanting them gone just regardless makes little sense to me. Matthews, I wouldn't pay what the Rams paid, but I'd have tried to bring him back. He's also just 28 years old and only 3 years older than Allison, a guy who's been banged up 2 of the 3 seasons he'd played and who is not nearly as good of a fit in the slot as Cobb. I mean, I love St. Brown and MVS, just their physical attributes, but Cobb was a proven slot receiver and he was probably one of the best bargain signings of the off-season and is a perfect fit in Dallas with that OL, Zeke and Cooper. Matthews I just wanted back because of his versatility and again, not at the price the Rams paid. Not that it's too high, but too high for us for protection at multiple positions. But, they're both gone now, as is Mike Daniels and the Packers are doing things differently. I suspect they'll find fewer guys who take hometown discounts, but that's fine. As long as they're aggressive in solving problems like they did on the edge and safety this past off-season.

https://russellstreetreport.com/salarycap/nfl-salary-cap-faqs/

I don't believe there is. However much room you have at the end of the year, you carry it over. There were limits to how you could use that cap space in the past, especially regarding signing players during the season to extensions so you wouldn't have to do so in the future. Now I'm pretty sure it's just you roll over whatever space you had. That's how teams end up with 60 or 70 million in cap space.

It helps mitigate the potential future cap hit. You front load the contract, you don't have to pay as big of a signing bonus and if you want to cut a guy in a couple years, you have far less dead cap. This would be ideal with a guy like Martinez who's a good player now, but cannot afford to lose any athletic ability. So you sign him, give him a 10 million dollar signing bonus(For example) and you give him 10 million in the first year. He's paid 20 million over the first two years, the same as what he'd get in a signing bonus(again, just a hypothetical, really have no idea what Blake Martinez is going to get) but you only have half the potential cap hit if he tears an acl and you cut him in year 3.

I disagree. I think it's a cap thing. Clark is going to get a massive contract and they don't have much room left. Daniels had one down year last year and that was because of injury. There was no reason to expect his play wouldn't rebound. They have the depth on the DL that they didn't need him. They wanted to get bigger, they wanted to get more physical and they wanted to get more athletic. Not sure Lowry's the latter, but he's bigger and he can play a 3 technique or a 5. I guess they must feel pretty good about Lancaster though to cut Daniels at this point. I do hope they lock up Clark sooner rather than later. I think with Jarrett getting 4/68, the Packers probably want to get that deal done sooner rather than later. Clark's 23 and every bit as good as Jarrett. Clark would probably be looking at 3 years and at least 45 million with 30 guaranteed....and that'd be a hometown discount.

I'd imagine a while, and really...we're all Brewers fans here. It's kinda like writing your thesis on "why Christian Yelich is good." But if you enjoy writing and you enjoy breaking things down to see just how much your perception matches reality, then I guess it's fun. I looked at some of the numbers and they were really well done and the whole post was really well written, but I really didn't need to I'm guessing kids who are 18 and who've been fans of this team during the 2nd best stretch in it's history would be disappointed. Us older fans? We already know. But still, great post. I guess the ONLY real reason I could give would be the absolutely atrocious leadership from the time Bud took the job as interim commish through when Mark Attansio bought the team. Wendy Selig-Prieb was awful. And hell, just the way Sal Bando ran Molitor out of town and the way he ran the team was just ugly. Just in that transaction, how it wasn't until the last minute that the Brewers made any effort to retain Molly and Bud Selig called at the last minute despite his job at the Commissioner to fix the mess that Bando was the perfect microcosm of the issues the Brewers dealt with during that...what, 10-15 year period. Looking at it now, I feel much better about the Brewers chances to sustain a level of success. They're drafting better, they've got a competent scouting in Latin America, they've made the draft and international signing periods more fair. Teams are trying harder to stay under the luxury tax and the Brewers are spending more. The fundamental gaps are closing. They'll never be all that close and they'll never be equal with teams of the Yankees, Cubs, Dodgers, Red Sox, Angels of the world, but...that's life of a mid-market team. Only the NFL has figured out how to maximize revenues and provide a fair playing field for teams and even then, you can't account for location. If the Rams and Packers are both equally likely to win, where is a FA going to go? But again, ATM, Mark Attanasio, David Stearns, Craig Counsell....that's the best trio we've had in a looong time and they're doing a good job.