SeaBass

He didn't just straight out mash for 3 straight weeks. He had a .700 OPS just 5 games ago. Each of the guys they've chosen to keep on the roster for now has had better stretches of success than Hiura just did. Aguilar had an excellent half of baseball last year, and aside from that was solid at best the balance of last year and the prior year. Thames had that great first month in a Brewer uniform and was overall decent at best beyond that. Guys that produce like Thames/Aguilar are not THAT difficult to find. So many examples of mashing 1b coming out of nowhere. Shaw has the most solid track record of the 3, but I honestly cannot handle watching him swing through meatballs down the middle over and over and over anymore. I'll turn the damn game off the first time I see him do it. This move was rushed, it could have waited another couple weeks and didn't have to happen now. To be clear, I'm not advocating for cutting Shaw. He's the last of the 3 we should cut ties with. But he's not ready to start at the MLB level. I mean, yeah. The Brewers are in a roster crunch right now compounded with some guys that are under performing expectations. I personally would have chosen to keep Hiura on the 25 man, I've stated this. However I do understand the team's decision to send him down. I can envision pretty easily a roster without Thames, Aguilar and even Shaw, all 3 gone. I just don't think it's going to happen overnight. Fortunately they don't need to get rid of all 3 guys right now, they only need to figure out how to move one of them. The Brewers are buying time and if it's coming at the cost of waiting a little longer on a promising rookie so be it. I 100% feel that's the correct sacrifice. This will be resolved. This "right now" attitude is just an extremely flawed way of viewing the situation.

Just wondering how you felt about Arcia last year, Santana last year, Anderson last year/ST this year, Davies last year, Knebel for parts of last year, etc. Non-superstar players go through dry spells/turn things around. I can't even tell you if that's going to be Shaw/Aguilar. I understand that maybe they could stash Shaw in AAA instead, but otherwise, the Brewers believe Shaw is closer than what he was the last few years rather than the guy that has struggled/been unlucky for 40 games. If they start chopping guys for bad 40 game stints, they'll get to a point where they are 1 injury away from having to call the corpse of Kendrys Morales to start at 1B. They like to maintain organizational depth. Sometimes that involves tough decisions. We're in an unusual situation where we have a lot of established guys that aren't hitting, and a young elite prospect came up and mashed for 3 weeks. It's not like the other option is throwing Perez in at 2b. If that was the case, I'd be more open to giving Shaw a chance. And my stance on him is more time in AAA to find his swing, or we cut bait with one of the 1b to keep hiura around and let shaw start more at 1b. The best decision is to let him see slightly worse pitching in AAA for a bit and try and figure things out there. The decision yesterday made the team worse in the short run and the long run in my opinion...so I'm really struggling to see how it's a win. He didn't just straight out mash for 3 straight weeks. He had a .700 OPS just 5 games ago. Each of the guys they've chosen to keep on the roster for now has had better stretches of success than Hiura just did.

Silly to assume like it is 100% due to service time. Why did he even come up in the first place if service time was that big of an issue? Why go through all of this and tick off Hiura/the fanbase for a short stint just to dump him back down regardless of stats? I don't buy that argument and don't think a competing team is worried about massive hypotheticals over 4 years from now. That is like making decision due to a top prospect in A+ ball and assuming he will be a force in three years. All signs point to it being about giving Shaw a chance to rebound, thus not making Hiura a part time guy...and also preserving the depth/versatility with the roster. They could have sent a pitcher away, but why do that? So Hiura plays once or twice a week? Stearns never said it was about defense, that is just the excuse people say he could use for the reason. Hiura will be back after Shaw either doesn't hit or hits well enough to push someone off the roster. Unfortunately Thames is the one hitting right now because logistically he makes the most sense to boot off the roster for the lefty Shaw. Sadly for us the RHB Aguilar is stinking up the joint. I also don't think Stearns is a dramatic person and realizes two weeks of Hiura gone is unlikely to be the difference in 5, 3, or even 2 wins. There will be at least a dozen non-moves or moves that will be way costlier than this and people are taking it way too seriously. Sticking with Aguilar or some bullpen arm blowing up constantly is probably five times more costly in the win column. Waiting till the end of July to make trades costs teams wins every single year. Claudio pitching against righties....way more costly. This move is like any other move. There is risk, but a lot of reward too if Shaw starts hitting again. This is very well thought out and expressed. I very much look forward to people completely ignoring it (some already are).

Travis Shaw is not the only reason Keston Hiura was sent back to AAA. If they really wanted to make room for both guys they could have.

I'm surprised, for sure. Not angry though. Shaw is an established veteran player and Hiura isn't. That's exhibit A for why this move is made. Hiura was called up when Shaw was injured, this makes sense in that context. I'd have rather seen any of several candidates from the pitching staff sent down first though. Barnes and Williams don't feel like vital arms, at least right now. There's a case for Peralta going down and getting more regular work. At the same time I understand sticking to the overall plan of keeping 13 pitchers on the active roster. It sucks, but I don't doubt that Hiura will be back. Maybe sooner than we think.

I think the easy call is sending Barnes or Williams back down. This is as good a time as any to bring Shaw back, Miami is terrible and Pittsburgh is in the bottom 4 in runs scored and worst in the NL in runs allowed. These are the teams we want Shaw to get some at bats against if he's going to get himself going again.

The first one that popped into my head was Wes Helms. Like you, I hope KH changes this. The full history of Brewers (and Pilots) to wear #18... [pre]1. Gus Gil 1969 Seattle Pilots 2. Tom Hausman 1975 Milwaukee Brewers 3. Tom Hausman 1976 Milwaukee Brewers 4. Barry Cort 1977 Milwaukee Brewers 5. Bob Galasso 1979 Milwaukee Brewers 6. Danny Darwin 1985 Milwaukee Brewers 7. Danny Darwin 1986 Milwaukee Brewers 8. Darryl Hamilton 1988 Milwaukee Brewers 9. Jim Olander 1991 Milwaukee Brewers 10. Alex Diaz 1992 Milwaukee Brewers 11. Tom Brunansky 1993 Milwaukee Brewers 12. Tom Brunansky 1994 Milwaukee Brewers 13. Duane Singleton 1994 Milwaukee Brewers 14. Dave Valle 1994 Milwaukee Brewers 15. Duane Singleton 1995 Milwaukee Brewers 16. Todd Dunn 1996 Milwaukee Brewers 17. Kevin Koslofski 1996 Milwaukee Brewers 18. Todd Dunn 1997 Milwaukee Brewers 19. Charlie Greene 1999 Milwaukee Brewers 20. Jose Hernandez 2000 Milwaukee Brewers 21. Jose Hernandez 2001 Milwaukee Brewers 22. Jose Hernandez 2002 Milwaukee Brewers 23. Wes Helms 2003 Milwaukee Brewers 24. Wes Helms 2004 Milwaukee Brewers 25. Wes Helms 2005 Milwaukee Brewers 26. Gabe Gross 2006 Milwaukee Brewers 27. Gabe Gross 2007 Milwaukee Brewers 28. Jason Kendall 2008 Milwaukee Brewers 29. Jason Kendall 2009 Milwaukee Brewers 30. Shaun Marcum 2011 Milwaukee Brewers 31. Shaun Marcum 2012 Milwaukee Brewers 32. Khris Davis 2013 Milwaukee Brewers 33. Khris Davis 2014 Milwaukee Brewers 34. Khris Davis 2015 Milwaukee Brewers 35. Ramon Flores 2016 Milwaukee Brewers 36. Eric Sogard 2017 Milwaukee Brewers 37. Eric Sogard 2018 Milwaukee Brewers 38. Mike Moustakas 2018 Milwaukee Brewers[/pre] I remember being fairly excited when the Brewers got Tom Brunansky back in '93. Boy did he turn out to be terrible.

I don't want what I've said to be construed as rooting against Hiura. I am excited and hopeful he will make a positive impact on the team now and in the future. I am also choosing not to put undue expectations on his shoulders right out of the gate. I'm expecting slow but steady progress filled with ups and downs, not an instant face of the franchise type arrival. I feel like some posters are expecting peak Hiura as soon as he strolls into the clubhouse. When ideally peak Hiura is three or four or more years down the road. Christian Yelich had solid if not spectacular numbers and went supernova in his 6th season. It seems silly to expect overnight success for Hiura. If that makes me a negative Nancy so be it.

Yea, shame on all of us for being excited about one of the best prospects in baseball! I'm just as excited to see what he can do. I'm just not expecting him to be Fred Lynn like it seems a lot of people are.

Good. Now we'll get to see a rookie being an actual rookie and not the savior of baseball he seems to have been unfairly projected to be.

Plenty of teams in contention not on his list. Rays, Twins, Indians and numerous NL teams on the fringes. Diamondbacks, Mets, Padres... his list could ultimately keep him off a team with a better chance at a championship.

My only thought is, would we (our fans) do the same? I think we would for the most part which sucks. Personally, I wanted Braun traded after the scandal, but that's neither here nor there, I get why they stood by him. I get why they stood by Hader too -- to me those things don't compare to what Russell did, all the evidence points to him (Russell) just being a genuinely terrible person, but I'm sure everyone has their own opinions on things. I'd like to think someone like we'd have moved on from Russell and we'd never found out how fans would react, but who knows. We never distanced ourselves from K-Rod under similar circumstances. It's an interesting debate and I don't know the answer. I look at the Chiefs, they moved on from Kareem Hunt and who knows what will happen with Tyreek Hill. But if another team is just going to scoop these players up for virtually nothing, like Cleveland did with Hunt, I would find it difficult to blame any franchise for making the decision to just keep their player and try to weather the bad publicity. It's a difficult road, if the league isn't going to step in and ban a guy for life how do you proceed?

Couldn't agree more. It's just so much wasted energy harboring feelings of envy or anger for people more fortunate than yourself. I'm not sure how anyone can be a fan of sports and then turn around and complain about how much their salaries are. I'm sure this seems obvious but these guys aren't just trying to set up their own life, they're trying to set up their family for generations to come. The smart ones are anyway. There's no shame in that. Most everyone here would do the exact same thing in their position.

Why wait that long when we can anoint Derek Johnson as the saviour that got away & sunk our entire season while calling for Hook's termination in IGT's less than 25% of the way into the season? What you're advocating for doesn't sound like very much fun. The Derek Johnson worship the last few seasons was getting to me a bit. Not that I had a bone to pick with DJ I just thought it was a little much. It was interesting to contrast how everything that went well pitching-wise was attributed to DJ but none of the bad. And when it came to Darnell Coles as hitting coach he was nearly universally blamed for everything that went wrong with the offense but got no credit for any of the good. He's with Arizona now and look at them sitting near the top of the NL (and MLB) in hitting. Not that everything good can be laid at his feet, just like how not everything bad should have been laid at his feet when he was with the Brewers.

That's not what he's saying though. He's saying he's basing it off of the "now". I mean, if Houston offered that then but isn't now I don't see how he can hold other teams to what Houston offered him a few years ago. That makes no sense (Edit: meaning I agree with most posters that's not going to work out for him if that is indeed what he's doing). I think we've heard from enough players that have been going through this process that, in some cases, the teams aren't negotiating price. They're making take it or leave it offers and hoping guys panic and sign. They're playing bully-ball and it's worked for the most part. I think this most recent statement or report coming from Keuchel is him saying, I'm not panicking, you're going to have to negotiate with me if you want me to sign with you. I do not think it means that Keuchel has his price and won't budge from it, he's just not engaging with bully-ball tactics. That's my feeling, I could be wrong.

I really don't care that he's doing what he's doing. It's his life. I just don't buy the "the analytics say I should be getting paid this" argument. Sorry, that's not how a free market works. A free market also entails one party setting a price for selling an asset. If you go into a jewelry store and tell the sales person you're going to buy a $25,000 diamond ring for $19,000 because that's all you're willing to pay I have a feeling you'll be walking out of that store with $19,000 and no diamond ring. If teams don't want to buy his diamond ring for his price then they don't ever get to wear his diamond ring. If teams are fine with that, great. If the player is fine with that, great. Reading between the lines it sounds to me like teams are not negotiating with him on price. They're going to him with their price and not responding to his counter offers.

As far as Marcus Smart's possible return tonight, if it happens I hope the rust is thick and his minutes limited. That's the one guy I was really glad the Bucks might not have to face, great defender and can be a difference maker on offense. He has generally stood out to me as a player the Bucks have trouble with. Really wanted Brogdon to be back around the same time as Smart, and a couple weeks ago it sounded like Smart's return was a lot less likely this series, kind of a bummer he might make it back first.

This inspired me to check their schedule wondering why they have 5 fewer games. Only 1 rain out so far so they've just had a lot of scheduled days off so far. I suppose that makes sense with the weather but the flip side of that is that they have 5 off days total the last two months. 3 in August, 2 in September (and 18 straight game days between the 2 off days). After the way they faded last season due to so few days off late in the season I can't help but smile.

That is also right before they play Houston and Seattle too I believe so they'll need a DH. That's what I was thinking. That's the Prince Fielder break-in blue print - bring him up to be the DH on the road vs AL teams. If what Lathund said was right, that the Super 2 cutoff has generally been between 37 and 61 days into the season, with 6 off days figured in the 2 game series with the Twins in Minnesota could be his first call up. That would be 60 days into the season and be in an AL park. Could even send him back down after, skipping the 4 game set at Pittsburgh and bring him back again on June 4 at home vs. the Marlins. Edit: Check that, he'd have to be down for 10 days barring injury to someone on the 25 man roster, so they could call him back up for the Houston series June 11. Or skip the Twins series and just wait until June 4 as was first suggested.

Agree on House of Cards, I only watched two or three seasons but that first season was really good.

I really thought season 1 of Homeland on Showtime was amazing television. I stuck around and watched the next few seasons, which were good but decreasingly so year by year. They never matched season 1. Season 1 is worth a stand alone viewing IMO, a self-contained story that doesn't require you to keep watching subsequent seasons. Utterly gripping edge of your seat stuff. I'm also a sucker for LOST, that's a pretty polarizing show though. Some people had issues with how it ended. During its regular airing I remember being a little confused by the ending and what it meant, but I rewatched all 6 seasons a year or so ago and binge watching it really cemented it for me as one of the great shows. The twists and turns and reveals were as good as any show. I wish I could watch it again for the first time.

This is how I feel about the draft. I'm not angry as someone mentioned, just upset how it transpired. The first 5 picks look like they'll contribute this season. The RB maybe as well. The CB/LB picks I'll just assume as Special Teams help at best. I just said the value side in the draft wasn't there. If you take the trade value points it'd go something like this: Gary 1200-Even to -200 Savage 924- Even to -124 Jenkins 460- Even to -60 Sternberger 215- +50 to Even Kiki 31 +35 to Even -88 for 4th round loss. Riley Ridley went to the Bears after what would have been the Packers selection. He was a 3rd round type projection. All told thats -3 to -384 The equivalent of a late 2nd round pick to late 3rd round pick. Which is probably what the value you would have been looking at on trading down from 12 a few spots. Draft Grade C- I'm curious which teams were chomping at the bit to trade up a few spots to 12 or around 12. Because after Pittsburgh traded up to 10 nobody else traded up until... your Green Bay Packers traded up to 21. Logically, if the sweet spot in the draft fell around picks 15 through 18, and many posters here including myself were saying they wanted the Packers to trade back in real time when their 12 pick went on the clock, why under the sun would any team spend extra draft capital to trade up out of those spots?

Yeah I think it's ok to feel underwhelmed with a pick, or to voice an opinion you'd have liked the team to go a different direction but I don't understand the outright anger and defeatist attitude about how a professional sports team chose to go about using their draft picks. We're fans, we don't know much at all about how teams arrive at their decisions, all we have to go by is what they tell us and I'm sure they're not sharing every little nuance that went into their decision making. We also don't have a lot of history with the reorganized front office under the new GM to really know if we're justified in being skeptical or how much to trust them and let things play out. As far as trading up for Savage, it was a bold move. I can only speak for myself when I say that I had been on the replace TT bus for several seasons and moves like this were one of the reasons why. Not that I feel a GM has to make moves to trade up every year but I want a guy that isn't so crippled with fear that a move won't work out that he won't even take the risk. Gute saw the guy he wanted and went and got him. Say what you want but he's putting himself out there and if it doesn't work out he's going to get a lot of heat over it. I like that he's not backing away from making tough decisions just for some extra job security.

Wouldn't mind a trade down here, feeling greedy for picks.

BRef has Santana with a .1 WAR and Gamel with a .2 WAR. I'm calling it, we win the trade.