Ron Robinsons Beard

I read a story this morning that advocated for the Packers to trade Josh Jackson and a 2nd or 3rd round pick to the Dolphins for DeVante Parker. That's the kind of deal I could get behind. Parker is a stud, and signed through the 2023 season.

You used Jeffress as an example of an inability to maintain talent or fix players. Jeffress got fewer strikeouts, walked more batters and gave up harder contact after leaving Milwaukee. He then lucked into better results despite that. Doesn't mean it was the wrong decision to let him go, they were right about him. Performance isn't the same thing as results; they are very closely linked, but in a huge-variance sport like Baseball it takes time for those two things to join up. The Brewers probably hadn't changed their evaluation of Brock Holt all that much from the time they signed him to when they released him. They know that a .136 BABIP isn't sustainable, and that given time and at bats his results will improve. But they also know that in a 60-game season they don't have the time for that if they want to make the playoffs. The Nationals picked him up and are a good illustration of the short-season issues. They started 19-31 last year and won the World Series. They had a similar record this year at 50 games, yet were close to being mathematically eliminated from the postseason by that point. It makes player evaluations very different. In a normal 162-game season Brock Holt would still be a Brewer (Or be given a longer leash at the very least), but in a short season where so many others were struggling too (If it's just one guy, you can "hide" him on the bench for a while) they felt they had to try something. The 80 wRC+ he put up on the Nationals is also only really good by comparison to the first half. The difference between him as National and as a Brewer is simply a matter of BABIP, again. He struck out a bit less as a National, but walked less. Plate discipline numbers are essentially the same. Yet, as so often happens in these cases, the balls bounced differently. So, at worst, if the balls would have bounced differently this year, Jeffress would have been similar to Josh Hader. I think in a worst case scenario, matching the output of one of your most reliable bullpen arms is something the Brewers would have preferred to have, rather than trotting out Feyereisen, Rasmussen, Knebel, Wahl, Grimm, etc. At the same time, if you're going to say that Jeffress was lucky this year, you have to point out that he was unlucky last year. GB% dropped to a career low with the Brewers, BABIP spiked, LOB% dropped to a career low with the Brewers, all while battling through a hip injury on his plant leg. And they could have had him for next to no money. Regarding Holt, after being let go 16 games into a 60 game season, they essentially gave his AB's to Jace Peterson. I could understand the trade off if they had someone waiting who had a track record of success at the major league level, or a prospect requiring a shot against better competition, but Peterson was neither of those. Punting on Holt essentially showed that the Brewers were waving the white flag on trying to fix things with him. Rather, they decided to throw more stuff against the wall, hoping something would stick. I know this board like to rag on the guy, but Jace Peterson put up an acceptable .749 OPS, and had an excellent .393 OBP this season. He was the least of the offense's worries.

Right ... it's the human condition. Someone gets sick, and the doctor asks if they have been wearing a mask regularly, a large number of them are going to say yes, rather than admit to being irresponsible.

Yeah, I saw them all worked up. Fumbling in back to back weeks will do that. I'm gonna trust Payton on this one. I think the issue is that if you're going to start Hill, you're going to want to change up the offense quite a bit. A lot more read option, bootlegs, simple stuff. He's got a stronger arm and he's a great athlete. But if you're just bringing him in every once in a while to run a play....you're really not giving him much of a chance to excel. It was 2 years ago that he blocked a punt in a playoff game, got WIDE OPEN and Brees just totally missed him on what should have been a 50+ yard TD pass. Then on the next play HE threw a long TD that was called back. But I really have no clue if he can be an NFL starter of if he's just a luxury who can do a little bit of everything. I think if the Saints truly felt that Hill could be a starter, they wouldn't have signed Teddy Bridgewater last year, or Jameis Winston this year. A good coach may be able to design an offense around him, and he probably has a better, more accurate arm than Tim Tebow had, but I doubt he is ever anything more than a gadget guy. Important to note that he is 30 years old, too, and that athleticism that makes him dangerous also has a short shelf life.

Links? The only thing I could find with the CDC info was this: https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-cdc-study-covid-masks That source is somewhat dubious, though. Also, the author of the story doesn't seem to grasp that the whole concept of wearing a mask is to protect others rather than protect yourself.

That's gonna get the "trade Hader to the Dodgers" people excited.

I'd agree with this. I don't like moving up unless the value is off the charts and you have pretty fair certainty based on the board and who is ahead of you and their needs that said player won't be available at your spot. I also don't really agree with the sentiment that you "have intel" that a team will take a player. You might have a pretty good idea about which way a team is leaning but if you truly have intel on who they are picking they did not protect their draft board very well. Teams have a little bit more secrecy around their boards than that, and I'd even take it with a grain of salt if they come out after the fact and say they were going to take a certain player. What I meant by intel is that teams use other teams' trade offers against each other all the time on draft day. That's just good business. But you are correct that teams also put out smokescreens and get false intel out there. It is possible that the Packers were duped into giving up a 4th rounder when they didn't need to, but I'd be surprised if that were the case, as the organization has proven pretty adept at maximizing personnel value and not making dumb, rash decisions. The story may eventually come out, or it may not.

I'll mention yet again that NFL football teams do not use the same value system on potential picks as guys like Mel Kiper and Todd McShay do. This idea that Love didn't "fall" to the Packers is a non-starter. All it takes is the Packers feeling Love fell to them. Also, there was talk leading up to the 2005 draft that if Rodgers were to make it past the first few picks of the first round, he very well could fall. That wasn't a huge surprise. This draft will ultimately be judged several years down the road based on how love develops and how successful he is as a starting NFL QB, but ragging on the Packers for taking him, and trading up a few spots to do it, is kind of a strawman argument right now.

Oh man. Tannehill is the safest pick I think, but he's generally a high floor, low ceiling guy. I'd probably go Brees with the idea that the offense will be much more dynamic after Mike Thomas comes back next week. The crappy thing about Brees is that he's on bye next week. Maybe ... maybe he's on bye LOL

Oh man. Tannehill is the safest pick I think, but he's generally a high floor, low ceiling guy. I'd probably go Brees with the idea that the offense will be much more dynamic after Mike Thomas comes back next week.

I remember reading several tidbits indicating that the Patriots were enamored with Deguara, and were trying to grab a second 3rd round pick in order to take him. Of course the Packers took him at #94, but then the Patriots turned around and drafted a very similar player in Dalton Keene after a trade up to #101. By many accounts Deguara was flying up draft boards very late in the process. The scouting services were all over the map on Dillon. I saw anywhere from mid 2nd to mid 4th round on him, so I don't think grabbing him at the extreme end of the 2nd was a major stretch. Regarding Love, I don't think there was any way they make that trade up to get him without some serious verified intel indicating that there was another team making a play to jump ahead of them. The story may come out eventually, but a veteran conservative personnel man like Gute doesn't typically trade up and give up an extra pick willy nilly unless he feels he's in extreme danger of not getting the guy he covets. Now whether taking a QB in the 1st round was the right choice ... I just don't know. It definitely wasn't the right choice if you are looking for immediate payout.

I don't know. Zimmer is an old school, ground-and-pound HC, and Thielen is a legit #1. Spending valuable draft capital on a #2 WR on a team who's game plan every week is to ram Cook and Mattison into the line 40 times seems like a waste to me. I agree on their cap situation They painted themselves into a corner with some terrible contracts, that obnoxious Cousins deal the worst of them. I think the Vikings have probably missed their window. They might flutter around .500 for the next couple years, but they are looking at a full-on rebuild, probably sooner rather than later. But if we aren't careful, they may just Viking their way into Trevor Lawrence next spring.

I hate watching games where I have a strong rooting interest in both teams losing. I loved that the Seahawks looked atrocious in the first half, but it was tempered by the fact that they were losing to the Vikings. That the Seahawks managed to not look like a terrible, lackluster football team for about a 5 minute stretch, and that was enough to win, was extremely annoying, until you realize that it was against the once again paper-champion Vikings. The Vikings are sitting at 1-4, and now with their best player nursing what looks like is going to be a nagging groin strain, that is going to be a rough valley to climb out of. But they are reaping what they sew. They needed to pick an o-lineman or another CB in the first round this year, and they picked a WR, simply because they dumped a perfectly good one for no real reason. They are getting all they deserve.

That's a bogus argument. We have absolutely no idea where Love sat on the the Packers' draft value board. That's the only board that counts ... not anything guys like Todd McShay or Mel Kiper put out. If the Packers had Love as a Top 10 talent, and then got him at #26, then he fell to them. It's obvious that the Packers really liked him coming into the draft, and IMO insinuating that Gute is lying to the fanbase about Love's value is flat out wrong. I think you’ll find my comments regarding Love on this board have been very measured. I was attempting to explain why fans have reacted differently to drafting Rodgers vs. Love. You can’t deny that Rodgers falling to #24 felt like a gift, whereas trading up for Love at #26 felt more like a reach. I’m a big BPA guy. If BG felt Love was a screaming value, then I’m glad he drafted him. Love’s talent was not obvious to me, but that’s irrelevant. I think when it comes to the Packers and their recent drafting tendencies, the best course of action is to take draft values and mock drafts and throw them out the window. The Packers have proven that they are going to do what they are going to do, and aren't beholden to any draft value gurus or to what any portion of the fanbase wants them to do. I really dig that about Gute. His goal is to build the best team, and set the team up for future success, not to make the fanbase happy. For instance, watching that Seahawks/Vikings game last night, you can see that, even though he didn't get a ton of targets, Justin Jefferson is a dynamic talent. But at the same time, the Vikings are 1-4 because their secondary is a train wreck and their offensive line is below average pass blocking wise. But at least they have a shiny, new WR to help them go 6-10 this year.

It was bumped because the Packers are 4-0 and on their bye week, and a large contingent of this fanbase isn't happy unless they are actively complaining about something.

That's a bogus argument. We have absolutely no idea where Love sat on the the Packers' draft value board. That's the only board that counts ... not anything guys like Todd McShay or Mel Kiper put out. If the Packers had Love as a Top 10 talent, and then got him at #26, then he fell to them. It's obvious that the Packers really liked him coming into the draft, and IMO insinuating that Gute is lying to the fanbase about Love's value is flat out wrong.

I don't know ... I'm all for the Seahawks employing another terrible defender in their swiss-cheese secondary.

Nobody is going to trade for Manny Pina. He's had some memorable hits/homers for the Brewers over the years, but they've been trying to replace him for 2 seasons. Additionally, Pina will turn 34 next year, not an age where the majority of catchers continue to thrive. Meanwhile Narvaez is 28 and Nottingham is 25. Finally, Pina will seek a raise from his 1.8 million dollar salary in 2020. On a team that is likely to proceed as if "strapped for cash" he's likely to be non-tendered. Given they gave up a low-level prospect and the 64th overall pick in the draft to get Narvaez, its unlikely they option him to the minors. Similar deal with Nottingham. He has has close to 600 games in the minors, its time to see if the wind up with anything from the Khris Davis trade. Also, Nottingham is seemingly the personal catcher of Burnes bolstering his chances for a roster spot in 2021. Even if Pina is offered arbitration, they'd likely release him before breaking camp and his salary becoming guaranteed. Plus Nottingham will be out of options next year. It's put up or shut up time for him.

If Stearns was going to desperately offload Hader, wouldn't last offseason been the time to do it? Certainly not all of Stearns' moves have been stellar, but I don't think he's had one yet (other than arguably the Schoop deal) that comes anywhere close to a desperation move.

3,132 new cases reported today. Meanwhile, there are current lawsuits to get the current safety mandates thrown out. Seems a little tone-deaf, doesn't it? Sheesh.

Hanging on to one of the top relief pitchers in baseball is certainly not a terrible consolation prize.

Have you actually compared the two orders? Even a cursory review of them plainly indicates that Milwaukee's is substantially more restrictive.

Brandon Marsh is the exact type of player that David Stearns covets. Tall, powerful, left-handed hitter who is a solid defender in CF or the corners. He's a very exciting prospect. I think any potential Hader deal has to start with him. Good point on Marsh. He probably would be a guy that DS would covet, and I'm sure would need to be the headliner coming back in any type of deal with the Angels. I just wasn't sure if we'd target another OF though with all of our needs right now at the corner IF and C positions? I get that. But who knows what Cain we will get back next year, and even if he is still productive, he's on the back nine. Also, I'm willing to give Garcia another shot, but he certainly didn't portray himself as a building block.

The Braun portion of my post was more in jest, even though I think we all know that if Braun did come back next year, his role would likely be larger than the skinny side of a DH platoon. But I do think they can probably find a right-handing hitting DH option much cheaper. My main point was more that Dan Vogelbach should not be looked at as a full time DH option moving forward.

Brandon Marsh is the exact type of player that David Stearns covets. Tall, powerful, left-handed hitter who is a solid defender in CF or the corners. He's a very exciting prospect. I think any potential Hader deal has to start with him.