Ron Robinsons Beard

That's my problem with it as well. If the majority gave him 1st place votes, it stands to reason that he should be on everyone's top 3. It's going to be funny when Beltran wins it next year.

Me too. Don't take my argument above as me saying that he doesn't deserve the honor. I personally think he very much does. It's just that there's a logical argument that a voter can make saying that he doesn't.

Generally speaking - I would agree 100% with what you are saying. I do think the Brewers would have to be literally blown away with an offer if they were to even entertain trading Hader right now. Especially considering that we are in a win-now mode. However, I also wouldn't rule it out completely. The fact is - relievers are the most volatile position in all of baseball year to year, and we already started to see a few warts with Hader this past season giving up the home run ball at a high clip. And, just look what we got for Thornburg a few years ago when we traded him to the Red Sox, and he wasn't even half the pitcher that Hader is today. So, if a team like the Dodgers gets really desperate this winter and approaches DS with a Lux/Ruiz or Lux/Gonsolin/Rios offer (where we could plug 2-3 holes at the MLB level with quality players), wouldn't you have to consider moving Hader in that situation. Then, go out and use some of that money saved to bring back Pomeranz and maybe another reliever? Honestly, I'm sure they'd think about it but the answer would be no. Why? Lux will probably be a good player, but what is anyone's guess if: the 2020 Brewers + Lux - Hader > 2019 Brewers. The other prospects are even more up in the air as to their ability to be quality players in the short run. I also think, since the Dodgers are one of the teams the Brewers are competing against, a trade where the Dodgers net a valuable major league asset from their competitor without giving up anything from their currently loaded roster, isn't a trade a competing GM is likely going to make. Any deal with the Dodgers for Hader would need to have multiple high-end major league-ready pieces coming back, I imagine. The Brewers' ask for Hader would likely be sky high, as it should be.

You are right. That would just be another band-aid on a severed arm for that franchise.

Is it the responsibility of youth coaches to take steps to protect their players? Of course. But any time you play a sport, there should be some risk of injury that is assumed. It certainly appears that the coach was not in the wrong whatsoever. Yeah, it sucks that the kid snapped his ankle, and that he never fully recovered from the injury. But to me this screams of an over-competitive sports dad that was simply crushed because he'd no longer be able to live vicariously through his athletic son, and needed someone to blame. In my opinion, it was irresponsible of the law firm to take this case, and a travesty of the court system that the case was allowed to drag out this long.

I agree with the first part. As long as you pay your loans back, I don't care if you get a degree in sitting on the couch and watching tv. Fact is, those degrees are less likely to land a good paying job right out of college. I wish kids approached things moreso with the mentality of "what education options will result in a good paying job while maximizing my skill set" versus "what do I wanna be when I grow up!". Adults do a fine job of selling them that dream. I vividly remember having reservations about journalism and this was in the early 2000s. I'm not kidding you when I say that every adult I mentioned this to told me to chase my dreams. My parents, my professors, I even emailed some staff at the JS and they told me to shoot for the stars. Imagine how many people get similar advice. I wound up in business school post-grad and have a solid career. I realized upon graduating when I had no car, and the only journalism job I bothered to interview for offered $9/hr and the "benefit" of "being involved in every aspect of the industry" by letting me help fold the morning paper, that I was not cut out for it. Sold out and went corporate, every day I thank God I'm not a barista. I was in the same boat, but was an idiot and didn't figure it out for a long time. J-school professors gave us all false hopes of being the next Woodward and Bernstein. My first journalism job as an associate editor of a small daily paid $19,000 (!!!) per year in 2004. I worked at that company 8 years, had two promotions, and when I finally got fed up and left I was working roughly 80 hours a week, handling all the IT and web design for the company, on top of my writing and editing responsibilities (I was also managing editor), and was making $30,000 per year. I finally wised up, realized that my Pulitzer dreams were pretty stupid, and got into technical writing, which I thankfully picked up as a minor my junior year in college on the advice of one professor who actually had a realistic view of the world. My current career is MUCH less stress, way better hours, way, way better pay. And my time in college, other than that one professor who pulled me aside and gave me a backup plan, barely prepared me for it.

I don't really think anyone outside of Brewer's fans thinks this though. They were playing to roughly what they were projected to do and most "experts" had them not making the playoffs. It was a really awful rotation all year long. So even if you say that they played to expectations for the majority of the season, that still isn't evidence that he deserved the award. There weren't a lot of "experts" that predicted another 96 wins and a Central title, but a quick cursory Google search for 2019 MLB predictions indicates that pretty much no one thought this team wouldn't be competitive ... anywhere from 88-92 wins, and squarely in the division/Wild Card chase. Playing roughly .500 ball through the end of August would be considered by most underachieving, regardless of what Fangraphs or any of those other projection algorithms said.

To play devil's advocate, the only reason Counsell had to manage out of his mind in Ssptember was because this team arguably underachieved for the majority of the season. Yeah, September was great, but it's the Manager of the Year award, not the Manager of September award.

He wins it if the Brewers don’t lay an egg in that final Rockies series. Maybe next year.

Me too. I'm not convinced that Mejia is anything special. He might be a step up from Nottingham as a young catching prospect, but I don't think that step is as sizable as one would think. He doesn't have any power to speak of, and from what I've seen, his defense is simply ok.

I don't see much of a match, as the majority of the Padres upper-end prospects are multiple years away from making a major league impact, and I personally wouldn't think about dealing Hader for a package that isn't going to contribute during this 2-3 year window. I know that might be short-sighted, but I think the Brewers are in win-now mode, and a few extra A ballers ins't going to help, unless the plan is to flip those guys down the road. I suppose Taylor Trammell would be nice to have as an eventual Cain contingency plan.

Rogers is a very good reliever, but that guy is much closer to Brent Suter stuff-wise than he is Hader. Picking out a reliever with similar stats doesn't mean they are similar relievers with similar upsides. I'd love to have Rogers, though, and would give up a lot of value for him if the Twins were selling. Honestly, I don't see why you're so hellbent on poo-pooing every trade scenario that involves Hader to the Dodgers. It's the middle of November, and we're in the dead point of the offseason when it comes to player movement. It's fun to talk about what an elite talent like Hader would bring back in a deal, and the Rumors/Proposals area is the perfect place to do that. I don't think anyone is saying that Hader is going to be dealt ... I personally say it has less than a 5% chance of happening. But you never know. I don't know, it's just a cheat code to these situations. Also, yes, Hader is more talented than Rogers...but with his home run issues some might say that Taylor Rogers could be argued as a safer pitcher. Maybe he can't put up a season close to Hader's 2018 season but I would bet on Rogers being a top 10 type reliever. Yes I know it's a fun offseason discussion discussion but it's kinda unrealistic if I can say that I'll start the offseason off by dealing Brent Suter for Trevor Story and then follow it up with Grisham and a prospect for Shane Bieber. That makes the offseason look pretty easy. People throw those types of proposals out in this area all the time. It's like a kid window shopping 3 weeks before Christmas. It is very likely that none of this is going to happen, but the speculation is a blast. The term "realistic" is always subjective as well.

Hader averaged 95.6 on his fastball, Rogers averaged 94.8. I was looking at his Baseball America Scouting report: “At 6-foot-3 and 175 pounds, Rogers is more skinny than projectable, so his stuff isn’t likely to get much better. He’ll touch 90-91 mph with his fastball early in games but usually settles in at 87-88 mph. His curveball and changeup are effective, and he compensates for his lack of a plus pitch with outstanding command of his offerings. He has sound mechanics and repeats them well, though at times he’s around the strike zone too much.” Obviously that must be very outdated. My bad.

Rogers is a very good reliever, but that guy is much closer to Brent Suter stuff-wise than he is Hader. Picking out a reliever with similar stats doesn't mean they are similar relievers with similar upsides. I'd love to have Rogers, though, and would give up a lot of value for him if the Twins were selling. Honestly, I don't see why you're so hellbent on poo-pooing every trade scenario that involves Hader to the Dodgers. It's the middle of November, and we're in the dead point of the offseason when it comes to player movement. It's fun to talk about what an elite talent like Hader would bring back in a deal, and the Rumors/Proposals area is the perfect place to do that. I don't think anyone is saying that Hader is going to be dealt ... I personally say it has less than a 5% chance of happening. But you never know.

Miley? Miley? Miley? Yes, sign a couple of guys to minor league contracts LIKE Gallardo and Miley, two players we signed to minor league deals and one of them ended up being very successful. Miley OK, but Gallardo has been horrible since 2016. He didn't pitch at all in the majors last year. He would be a waste of a spot on any minor lg. roster. Geez! HiandTight was using those names, and the fact that they were signed in early spring 2018, as an example of what the Brewers should be looking to do, i.e. sign a few reclamation-type pitchers in the hope that they can find success again. I don't think he was specifically asking to sign Miley and Gallardo. In this case, we'd be talking about Kevin Gausman types.

Except the Dodgers haven't won 3 of the last 6 World Series, so comparing them to the 2007 Pats doesn't really work. If Brady was still looking for his first ring, I would bet the Pats would have taken a few more drastic personnel choices following their loss to the Giants to ruin their perfect year. There's always risk when dealing assets for a high value player. Hell, the Cubs gave up a boatload for Chapman, but I'd be willing to bet they'd do the same thing again. Again, you make a terrific argument, but I think it is a mistake to dismiss the idea that the Dodgers make a move like that as impossible.

Counterpoint, as long as we are talking hypotheticals - Dealing Lux or Seager isn't going to cost that team future division titles. They are stacked offensively with young talent. But those 8 playoff innings from Josh Hader may very well be the difference between a World Series title, and blowing the NLCS. But perhaps they are completely happy cakewalking to an NL West title every year, and that's it? As noted in the other thread, the Dodgers' entire veteran infield will be gone soon. Seager may or could be part of the next wave, but Lux is necessary. Seager is still very young and therefore very valuable. Anyone can be "the difference." It is just a basic fan thing to say, "well they lost because of a bullpen malfunction, better trade everything for a perceived good reliever." Like I said, if the Dodgers are really that concerned about their bullpen (it was great in the regular season), go out and sign the best guy on the market this year and trade some bags of baseballs for 4 Daniel Hudsons at the deadline. The Dodgers will continue to churn out a deep, dominant system that they can supplement with loads of cash. If they win the division 5 more times, odds are, they'll finally break through (see: Nats). This is counter intuitive to that process. And how many World Series titles has their process won them so far? I'm not saying you aren't on to something. Heck, the Dodgers may continue to operate business as usual. They will continue to make billions whether they win a title or not. But they may just have to reach into that deep farm system and use some of those guys as currency at some point to improve a weakness. Because the "sign and expensive reliever and deal for "ehh" guys at the deadline" approach just hasn't worked. Do I think they will trade for Hader this offseason. No, not really. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't make a lot of sense for them.

Counterpoint, as long as we are talking hypotheticals - Dealing Lux or Seager isn't going to cost that team future division titles. They are stacked offensively with young talent. But those 8 playoff innings from Josh Hader may very well be the difference between a World Series title, and blowing the NLCS. But perhaps they are completely happy cakewalking to an NL West title every year, and that's it?

Yes, and I saw a team in Carolina that scored 16 points. And shot themselves in the foot on offense multiple times. They weren't the offensive juggernaut you seem to be implying here. And no, McCaffrey didn't get in, and that was not disputable. Yeah, they looked because it was the right thing to do, but the video only confirmed that the call was right. That was nowhere close to a 50-50 call. If the Packers would have gone for it on 4th down, I would have understood. They punted, and I understood. I personally would have punted there as well, and made the Panthers go the length of the field down 8.

Had the Panthers scored (and they missed by inches maybe), odds were very good they would get the 2 pointer, then win the toss and march right down the field in OT and score a winning TD without Rodgers ever seeing the field again. By punting the game was taken out of your Hall of Famer's hands and put entirely on the defense and the toss of a coin. That's exactly what happened in that Eagles game in 2003 and was the beginning of the end of Mike Sherman's tenure. How long did it take Carolina to get the ball back to where the Packers had it? 2 plays? This Packer defense has shown it's very vulnerable. Very good odds? L O L I've seen plenty of false narratives on the Packers floating around, but this one is right up there with the most outlandish of them. So scoring on 4th down with 4 seconds left, getting the 2-pointer that they missed earlier, then winning the toss and marching down and scoring a TD in OT was good odds? On what planet? I mean, the Packers winning the toss in OT is already 50/50.

Special teams return and coverage units in general have been a longtime roster weakness for the Packers - seems like they are among the teams who put no value on having quality gunners/coverage guys who have been around the league, many of whom are the critical blockers when setting up punt returns. They try to cycle through young WRs and DBs who aren't at the top of their depth charts. Because of that those units suffer. For awhile I feel like the focus of special teams was not to turn the ball over and get it back in the hands of Rodgers - that's ok, but it sure would be nice to at least have that unit be an advantage in flipping field position - we saw how much of an impact they had against the Bears on opening night mainly due to the punter, but adding a competent return game would be a revelation. Special teams coverage units are basically an afterthought now that just about every kick results in a touchback - will be interesting to see how that changes now that weather is going to impact how far kickoffs travel in some stadiums heading towards the postseason. In general, improving team speed improves your special teams units - while the Packers have gotten faster in places I think they still have a generally slow roster, particularly when it comes to reserve LBs and DBs that typically make up most of the special teams lineups on kickoff/punt downs. The Packers had a top-notch gunner and solid kick-off returner and all around great special teams player in Jeff Janis, but decided against resigning him last year because he wasn't progressing as a receiver. He's now 28 years old, which should be the prime of his career. He's running a tire shop in Michigan. In contrast, the Patriots have employed Matthew Slater for 11 seasons and counting. I was hoping that by spending drat capital on a long snapper and a punter last year, that Gute would take special teams seriously and devote actual talent to that area. Instead, it's still being treated as a way for #32-45 on the roster to see snaps.

It's going to be funny when the NFC East champ goes 8-8. Still gonna get more hype than the rest of the conference.

Vikings needed that win to keep pace with the Packers. Lose this one, and the Packers road to the North crown is MUCH easier. Packers still hold the upper hand, but have to keep the foot on the gas.

Really a piss poor series of plays there. Coaching is important in this league.

Dak is making it look pretty easy against what is supposed to be a solid defense in Minnesota's tonight.