UpandIn

I asked you to clarify exactly what you meant, but it sounds like you're saying if they traded 2 of the 3 players, they'd finish up with one of the 3 worst records in the game and be in a "full rebuild" with a top 5 pick? I think that's vastly overstating things. If you just got rid of say Burnes and Adames, got nothing back for them and went with the same lineup you had last year, same pitching staff...which...if those players are good enough to take us from a 95 and 86 win team, it's hard to see how we'd struggle to win more than 60 games. I don't think anyone is suggesting a "full rebuild," over maximizing the players we've got who have enormous value, turning them into prospects who will be arriving with Frelick and company. I also wouldn't tank for picks...particularly now that there is a lottery system. The Brewers could end up with the 5th pick and a significant bonus pool(unlikely as it may be).

Adames is probably going to make ~8-9M this year. Maybe 18 next year. So lets say 27 conservatively. We'd be paying nearly 30M for his 2 FA seasons. I don't see the point of giving him a contract 2 years early if you don't get anything out of it. You could wait until he hit Free Agency and likely sign him at that rate. That is the type of contract you give him IF he puts together the big season you're hoping for, not at this point...IMO.

You weren't. There's nothing easier than winning an argument by arguing points that nobody made. Missed that claim. Whaa? You didn't make this argument even in a snide way and nobody argued otherwise. You're literally just making things up. Where was that argument made? Now...AGAIN, did ANYONE say it wasn't a "challenge?" Because I read.... Maybe he's just not as fatalistic as you are? Also, what does "at least hundreds of millions" mean? Are you arguing it could take billionS? Which would still be hundreds of millions, but as long as this is going to be intellectually dishonest, lets do this. Now, from the MJS; https://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2022/04/14/mark-attanasio-intends-to-maintain-high-level-at-a.html The chasm between "If you think AmFam maintenance is inevitably going to be too costly for MLB to remain financially viable in Milwaukee, enjoy the death knell I guess? Brutal as it may be." And "The AmFam report and its (at least) hundreds of millions of upkeep is minor business, not a challenge?" Is staggering and...to what end? Wait, so you mean to tell me you think YOUR opinion and your take is "fairly accurate?" Yeah, or it's a overly fatalistic interpretation in which you...seem to know more and speak with more authority than the actual experts on the Brewers long term viability in the city. I suppose one person's definition of "fairly accurate" can deviate quite a bit from another's. For instance, Would you say any of your interpretation of the previous post you just quoted was "fairly accurate?" Because I can tell you...objectively speaking, it was not. Also, how nice would it be if this topic stuck to the actual Brewers...OR if the Brewers and the City were already discussing some ways to generate revenue to address the problem beyond the ~100M already ear marked for it? https://www.wuwm.com/2022-06-08/milwaukee-brewers-to-look-at-entertainment-district-idea-ahead-of-major-cost-debate-at-stadium

The whole, "extending Burnes is a pipe dream," is really over the top. It's the same language that was used with Yelich. And I agree, give me the ace pitcher every day of the week. That's what wins you World Series. Even if Adames were to have his breakout season, I laid out the LONG list of elite Shortstops and how few teams are in need of one. I have no doubt a team would want him, but he'd be the clear #5 most valuable SS this year in FA. Last year he'd be...4th at best, probably 5th. I don't think it would with Adames, but...lets move past that. What are "prime years" for a pitcher? A pitcher that has effectively 3 years worth of 200IP seasons thus far? Your early 30s are MAYBE past your prime years if you're a Basketball player. Definitely a RB. But this strange obsession with 30 for baseball players, pitchers in particular. Especially when you haven't overused or abused them. He's thrown fewer innings in his CAREER than deGrom did in his back to back Cy Young seasons and then 2019(before deGrom's '20 season in which he threw 10 more innings than Burnes breakout year). Also, Burnes extension being a pipe dream is only if you're going off the historic FA contract signed by Cole...that was signed as a FA, not the deal signed by deGrom, the better pitcher. 5/130. That's not a pipe dream and that's a fair offer to Burnes.

Ok...every pitcher gets hurt, but I think you're exaggerating the risks at this point. TJ generally means one season, not two. Maybe it takes two to get back to 100%, but really, most elite pitchers come back better than they were before. Their arm often gets stronger. I just don't know what you're looking for if not Woodruff. His avg FB velo was 94.8 in 2017. It's 96.4 now. He's a big 6'4 240 ace who can carry that FB velo deep into games, he's reliable. The only real risk for a pitcher is a shoulder injury. His has been fine. And I don't think age has been as much of an issue as usage is. Woodruff is 29 and he's thrown 613 innings. He's a bulldog. As for deGrom, he's averaged roughly 164 innings pitched since he came up in 2016 and nearly 5 WAR PER YEAR despite what I think is a gross exaggeration when you say he "can't stay healthy." He's basically had one injury and he's come all the way back from it. Sign me up for that type of...risk ANY day of the week. Now...Wheeler, who you're holding up as the upside, he's actually pitched fewer innings than deGrom despite coming up at the same time. And he's been worth ~20 fewer WAR. Is the issue really age or is it just that sometimes power arms need TJ or due to maximum effort to have to sit down, skip a couple starts?

I'm with you...to a degree. Adames and Baez are in two totally different leagues when it comes to plate discipline(at least walks). Adames was over 10% last year, 2 of his 3 years in TB before that, he was juust below 10%. Two other years he was at 7.9. That's concerning. Similar K rates, but Adames walks more. He can definitely get wild and swing at too much, but he reigns it back in. Not to say your larger point isn't right, they're guys who go up there looking to hit the ball a mile, but Baez is just...as undisciplined as you can get. On a side note, I just thought I'd look at what Vladimir Guerrero's BB/K rate was 8.1/10.9 Tell me that doesn't show you how the game has changed. Or maybe it's just my perception, but I thought Vlad Sr struck out a lot. Great bad ball hitter(the famous single off the bouncing ball). Anyway, I thought Baez deal was actually fine. 6/140. Not too long, I didn't think he was a great player, but he was exciting, you knew what you'd be getting. I thought the Story deal was a bad one and pointless. Terrible outside of Coors and now Fenway...a haven for RHed hitters and moving from SS. Especially when you compare that with the 10 years 300M that the top SS seek.

I guess maybe it's because those are the players it most impacts. You're less inclined to keep your 10th rated prospect in the Minors than the 10th overall prospect, but still, what a stupid distinction. Mitchell...for example has been top 100. Turang has been top 100. Not sure anyone other than Wiemer, Frelick and Chourio qualify at the moment, but Ashby for example. It wouldn't have shocked me at all if he'd have had a season in which he finished in the top 3 for ROY voting. So no pick for that? So the top 3 finishes...per Sporting News; NL 1-Spencer Strider-Somehow not top 100 despite how he shot through MiLB last year. Spent full season in MLB. 2-Michael Harris-Top 100(didn't get called up until the end of May...but he skilled AAA and hadn't played above HiA to start the year, so he was an outlier...Duvall struggled, he didn't even hit THAT well in AAA and still put up 5.3 WAR). 3-Brendan Donovan-Not top 100 Came up in April 4-Jake McCarthy-Not top 100 Up the last two years 5-Nick Lodolo-Top 100 Up all year Only one of those three are eligible despite Strider being the best pitcher for a 100 win team. And Donovan was a 4 WAR player. AL- 1-Julio Rodriguez -Called up in April, top 3 prospect. 2-Steve Kwan 5.5 WAR -Started the year in Cleveland 3-Adley Rutschman...who sounds like a famous American traitor...he didn't come up until May, he was a top 2-3 party. 4-George Kirby- Top 100, up early May. 5-Jeremy Pena-4.8 WAR. Top 20 by Baseball Prospectus, not top 100 MLB Pipeline, ALCS, WS MVP. So 2 of the 3 in the NL=No comp and a guy worth 5.5 in the AL and the Guardians don't geta comp pick? In the AL, 2 of the top 3 were top 3 prospects who were held back. I guess that's the logic, but I still think it's stupid. Brice Turang has been one of my favorite prospects for a while. I like him more than Mitchell. Mitchell was a top 50 prospect last year and Turang...he's been ranked, but I think Mitchell's chance is far more likely to be ranked next year. On one hand, I get it. It's not like Brice Turang is the type of player you're looking at just thinking, "we need to hold onto this player as long as possible, we don't wanna miss one of his MVP years when he's 29 years old," but teams like the Brewers, the teams who are most inclined to car about the draft pick compensation, they're also just as likely to keep a 22 year old SS who's spent 2 years in AAA down in AAA for the first 30 games of the year so they get him for 7 years. So you want to incentivize having the most worthy players breaking camp on the 26 man, don't limit it to the top 100. It's obviously the MLBPA is REALLY just looking at the players who are most likely to set the markets in the future. The Correa types. The guys who'll be the top paid in MLB, not guys who'll lose out on a few million.

I don't think they have to be on the opening day...but more importantly, I haven't seen any real clarity. In looking, I found this from MLB Trade Rumors; Apparently I was a few minutes late, but I just found the same thing. This seems pointless. So what? Turang's been a top 100. Strider for the Braves, I don't believe he was top 100. What a stupid and kinda pointless limitation to put on it?

I don't really buy the "vague" reportedly they did X and since that didn't happen, this won't. But, hypothetically, what would change? Kolten Wong 1st half(when he struggled with the yips)- 227 .313 .382 .695 Kolten Wong-Second half .281 .372 .490 .862 Seems...pretty straight forward. A bad year vs an ELITE year. Pretty big distinction.

Yes, this you've mentioned multiple times now there are no Kershaw's or Verlander's. I don't know what your point is. Yes, MLB IS better. And yet...every MLB player comes from the minor leagues...and Turang has "taken apart" AAA pitching. As a starter .301 .362 .460 .822 July .326 .438 .535 .973 August .280 .349 .505 .854} Sept .282 .381 .394 .775 (Fewest At Bats). But what more would you like him to do? An elite defender and...he's hit VERY well.

Payroll doesn't win games, teams do. The Royals, Cleveland, Tampa, these teams have gotten to WS. The Braves and Cards spending 20M more Don't know what the Rockies have spent of the D-backs, but I know we were two late Jeremy Jeffress HRs away from beating the Dodgers with Wade Miley and Jhoulys Chacin as our #1 and #2 pitchers. So yeah, add Abreu, Frelick, Turang, Uribe, Gasser, Mitchell for a full year, Ruiz, maybe stay healthy, potential trades. The Dodgers, Braves and Mets were all FAR superior to the Phillies and probably the Pads team that ...yet the Phillies were in there.

Strider? I'll trade Burnes for Strider straight up...see if we can't get him to throw a 2 seamer, find a 3rd pitch and you've got a DOMINANT pitcher. But as far as the Braves farm system...even with I think like 9 of their top 10 prospects being pitchers, it's not great. They've graduated and signed most of their young talent.

They both seem like just perfect fits with this team. Beauchamp seems like he understands his role perfectly. Go out there and defend, cut. When he gets the ball, keep it moving(maybe take an open 3). Carter though, I loved him and he's doing move than I thought. He's getting to the restricted area and using his body to finish a times. He's denying and just hounding people. Take a lot off Jrue's plate. Glad we had him part of last year...we can offer the early bird this year when he inevitably turns down the PO, meanwhile Beauchamp keeps developing. The biggest problem is how we're going to work Ingles, Middleton and Connaughton in the lineup! I mean...not really. They're priorities and now you've got some real trade chips(not Beauchamp though). But Nwora has played alright, Serge is holding it down and looks much more spry. Lopez looks MUCH more athletic this year. And this team isn't even shooting it well.

I guess the argument would be...IF you got hypothetically 4-5 top 100 propsects+5-6 top 150 prospects back for the three, if you then combined them with Frelick, Chourio, Quero, Misiorowski, Black, Mitchell, Wiemer, Gasser...and what appears to be the deepest and best farm system we've had in a while, you'd have a group coming up together that could end up better off. Especially if you're going to lose them for nothing. And I'm not certain what you mean by the "we could trade 1, finish with a draft pick around 15 and not really be set up to win in 3 years because of the weak rebuild move." I'm not sure if you're talking about comp picks or what exactly.

Not really though. He averaged ~2.9 PAs per game. Too many games he came in for a late pinch hitting appearance, or as a late defensive replacement. That's great for Peterson. He filled that role very well(late inning PHer) with his ability to draw walks. That's less than ideal for a 23 year old SS who needs regular ABs. The Mariners, Phillies and ChW are all in need of 2B. There were very few viable options in free agency. Jean Segura and a 17M dollar option. Toronto needs a 2B(and they were actually tracking Wong's option on one site I stumbled onto). I think the Brewers end up dealing Wong. I think they viewed him as an asset and rather than pay 2M for him to go away, they may be able to get a viable BP piece, save 10M, put that money toward someone like Jose Abreu and improve their pen. Or not, that's just been my position for a while. I started a thread after his 3HR game and asked that very question. If he finished the year strong, could they pick up his option and then trade him. A lot of it will have to do with where they're going in terms of payroll. I think ~150 is reasonable(though maybe 140 with some room built in if they're truly going to go for it this year). Maybe they start the year with Wong at 2B and keep Turang down to ensure he's not a super 2, see how he produces. I think with the way he finished and the power coming along....not that I actually need to see much more, just see how it plays out, what type of offers you get.

Yes, he really has. And...yes, it's ALSO a situation where the cupboard is relatively bare and he's a former first round pick who has reached AAA. BOTH of those statements are true. I also don't understand why he'd have to hit like Prince Fielder, Ryan Braun...or Jackson Chourio who feels like a "one of these is not like the other," given he's not yet produced above HiA while Turang has performed well at AAA.

I guess these threads kinda all run together, but the idea of Burnes to the O's has been brought up...dozens of times...and for the reasons you say. They are on the brink of competing, and they're loaded with talent. BUT...hypothetically, would YOU trade Jackson Chourio, Sal Frelick, Gasser and Luis Urias for Yordan Alvarez for 2 years(assuming he didn't sign that extension)? And then realize that Baltimore's package is more valuable and that Baltimore's window is WIDE open. It's just started to open up. They've got the youngest position player in baseball in Gunnar Henderson who's already produced, Grayson Rodriguez has stuff that's similar to deGrom, DL Hall looks like he might be a reliever, but IF he can stay healthy and get his control down, he'll either be ace or he'll be a Josh Hader type closer. I could see a trade where we get Westburg, Hall+....but I don't think they'll trade the top pitching prospect in baseball at this point. It just doesn't make sense. It shortens their window. Also, it's as likely as not that they take a step back next year as they incorporate young players into the team....though, they COULD spend 100-130M in salary this off-season and still not be where they were the last time they were competitive.

It's hard to argue with this logic and if they go that way...which I sincerely doubt they will, I'd be good with that. I'd prefer running it back, making some changes. I don't think they're NEARLY as far away as this years team appears and they could definitely turn it around, but if they decide they're chasing their tails, so be it. Once they lost Adams, then didn't have time to re-sign MVS(which I think would have made a big difference, he was just breaking out last year when he started dealing with injuries) they were going to need to rely on rookies/vets with LONG histories of injury. The last 9 games of the season will be very telling. One of the problems going in this direction, we still have no clue what Jordan Love is. Even if he did play this year, he'd still be playing with the same offense that has been so bad that Rodgers has looked pretty mediocre with it. Also, what are you asking for if you trade him? Are you happy to just get out from under that contract or are you looking for a 1st+? I think the talent is on this team and I think we're kinda in that place as a team we were when, coming off a 4 win season, Favre said this was the most talented team he'd been on, but the holes are just too glaring. If you had confidence Bakh could be more reliable and that the WRers would develop, I'd be happy keeping this team together the next 2-3 years(it's really either 2-3 years or it's trade him this year). But if you could get a 1st from the Colts, Titans, Saints...even the Falcons(they're a surprisingly talented team)...it'd be hard to pass that up. And then what the hell do you do with Love? You can't pass up a QB in this class because you have a former 1st. If you think Will Levis is a superstar,, you have to take him, or Stroud or whoever. Even with Rodgers we took Brian Brohm in the 2nd(and he was a projected top 10 pick if he'd come out a year earlier, so a clear sign they were bringing in some type of competition). The good news is the cap could EASILY be 275M by 2024, so the Cap situation isn't really as bad as it looks(it ain't good either though).

I've said this before, but I had professors tell me I needed to be more succinct. It never really caught on! I really do go back and read some posts and realize I babble at times or...just repeat things. Anyway, I love Walker and I think he's going to be an Pro-Bowl LBer...and this was specifically supposed to be a strength of his coming out. I haven't gone back and watched the last few games(because...why subject yourself to that misery)...but I noticed this particularly when they have him on that blind, boring blitz where they just send him on a straight blitz out of their nickel D. One that...never works and he gets swallowed up by the OG. I thought he'd played some really good games...the Washington game where he ran down Gibson a couple times. But he's also definitely got some holds in his game. He was just a one year starter. He'll get there. He and Wyatt.

Ok...when you misrepresent what I say, I guess it's not the end of it. 1-I didn't "imply" it was just a "Mandela effect." I said Rodgers had BARELY mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers," and when they drafted Rodgers, they KNEW Favre was coming back. Thompson even made the statement to the effect that it would have been easier if he was in his 10th year and had more "capital" was the word he used IIRC because it was risky taking a player who wouldn't have an impact on the teams record the next couple years. I also said Favre had "barely mentioned it," and...as your link points out, that was also accurate; Favre ALSO said at this time that he'd planned to play a "couple more years," if his body allowed it. It's also common knowledge(at least I thought it was) that Aaron Rodgers wasn't even on the Packers radar where they were picking. They weren't targeting a QB, they picked one because they thought he was the BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE. This was the very start of the Favre retirement saga, it wasn't started by Favre, it was motivated by his wife's illness, it was brought up by Donald Driver and then Ahman Green mentioned it. I didn't actually infer it was a Mandela like situation...but I suppose that IS more accurate than the Packers went and drafted a QB because Favre had been talking about retirement and they weren't sure where he stood.

The rest of this season shouldn't be about trying to squeak into the playoffs. It should be just about letting the young guys play and getting a better idea of where you are next year. Kylin Hill needs carries. I honestly wouldn't be opposed to putting AJ Dillon on the trade block, though I don't think you get more than a 4th for him and probably a 5th. We'll get a 5th for MVS. Never been happier that the Packers were actually aggressive in pursuing a trade and a team turned it down. That 1st round pick for DJ Moore would be looking like a nightmare right now(if it's true it was offered and was turned down). As for relying on young guys, yeah, we will...but most teams do with young depth. QB-It all starts with Rodgers. If he doesn't come back, then you just purge the older players who cost like Amos. RB-Kylin Hill needs to get a lot of carries the rest of this year. I think this is a need. Dillon has one more year. Jones could be restructured...I guess. He's been worth every penny we paid, but you can't keep him at 20M cap hit. WRer-I think Doubs, Watson are are nice starting point. Lazard is more important to us than other teams. Gotta see if Toure really has the potential to be that slippery deep threat. For the love of God, do NOT play Watson this week. It's no longer about getting him ready for December/Jan football, it's about getting him ready for 2023. 2 concussions, even if one was minor, he's a kid. Don't throw him back out there. Cobb is back on the minimum....but only because he goes to the Kentucky Derby with Rodgers. Watkins is washed. Rodgers might actually be a nice player, but Rodgers(12) doesn't like him or the staff doesn't trust him, so he's gone. TE-Lewis will be back. He's cheap, you could probably play him at LT for a game if you needed to and get by he's such a great blocker(little hyperbole, but not much, he's still that good). Tonyan if he's cheap. Deguara is likely back. OL-I think Bakh is back. I've already made my argument why. You only save 6M cutting him, the following year you save ~20M. Tom I think will be a good player next year. Other than that, you pretty much have the entire OL under contract. Nijman is still a RFA for another year. So that's an obvious move. Caleb Jones and Rasheed Walker both looked great in camp and like they could be good players...but they were also UDFA/7th round picks because they couldn't keep their bodies in shape. Jenkins's play the last half of the year will dictate if the Packers bring him back. DL-Clark, Slaton, Wyatt, Ford are all back. Slayton and Heflin are back. Reed has been fine, Lowry has not been as good as last year. No brainer to let Lowry walk. Reed would be fine for another cheap deal. Edge-Preston, Enagbare, Gary- Enagbare has been a really nice rookie. He could be a really nice rotational piece. This is why I'd consider a big edge rusher like Murphy from Clemson. Another 6'6 275 LB edge with athleticism. Gary is a budding superstar, but his ascension hit a big snag. Preston is a good starter, but he's nothing special. MLBer-We're set here. Walker is going to be a stud, I think he's just a tick slow processing at the moment. Campbell, Carpenter will end up getting snaps here, Barnes has...I think one more year and McDuffie has looked really good. CB-We HAVE to figure out what is going on with Stokes. We also have to re-sign Nixon. Jaire is a cornerstone player and Douglas is a very good CB and he's paid like a #3/4 CB. So we have our CBs figured out, just have to hope Stokes isn't following in Savage's path. S-Savage has just not been good. He's not been good for a starting Safety, much less the expectations. Amos is as reliable as they get. If you're keeping Rodgers, you keep Amos, if not, you go with Rudy Ford and see what you have with Abram(I don't think it's much). STs-You're getting this figured out. Just stay out of Rich Bisaccia's way. The salary cap. The Packers have 45 players under contract(not including Amos, Tonyan...players with void years obviously). When they roll over the cap space they have this year ~9M, they a couple million over next years cap ranking about 20th in the NFL. The Cap is always kinda meaningless year to year, though the long term implications always come home when you get THIS far over it. The Saints are 60+M over the cap again next year. We're not in Saints territory and with the cap probably going higher than the estimates and even OTC which shows conservative estimates has it at 265 in 2024. So it'll still be an issue, but one they can work around. But they need the picks they made this year to be the right choice and they need to have a good draft next year. And there are still so many questions...the biggest the two top paid players in Bakh and Rodgers. Is Bakh getting healthier or is this it? Again, if this is it, fine, he's still very valuable. But you need to make the LT of the future a top priority(really either way it needs to be...though maybe Tom is if he gets a little bigger). Do you have the defensive players or is it your scheme? The three young UGA players are going to determine a LOT.

Does it? Sounds pretty much exactly like what I said;

That was a MUCH weaker draft class with Alex Smith and then Aaron Rodgers. Saying he is "NOT the prospect," is revisionist history. "Lacked arm strength, athletic ability, poor mechanics, system QB, Tedford QB." The failures of Joey Harrington, Akili Smith, Kyle Boller Love was in a draft class with Joe Burrow, the consensus #1 pick, Tua...remember the "tank for Tua," campaign. And then Justin Herbert and the Chargers didn't settle on Herbert over Love until shortly before the draft. Also, in the Rodgers draft, per Rodgers, if the Packers hadn't taken him, he wouldn't have been the 2nd QB drafted as Jason Campbell was preferred by Washington and Seattle. This "Love is not the prospect Aaron Rodgers was. Not close," is both revisionist history and it also undermines the foundation of your original argument. For the purpose of your ORIGINAL point, that they drafted positions they didn't need.] Your memory also doesn't seem very strong on the reaction of the pick at the time and his performances in his first two years(pretty much up until he got into the Dallas game when Packers fans started to think they might have something. The fact that he ended up on IR 2 of his first 3 years with injuries despite hardly ANY playing time...didn't engender much confidence either. But yes, it's MUCH easier to say "he wasn't as good," when one player hasn't played and the other went on to have a historic NFL career. Another misnomar. Favre had barely mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers. In fact, I don't know if he brought it up unprompted at all. Donald Driver said in 2006 after the loss to Minnesota in the Randy Moss moon game that he thought Favre was done. HE came out and said that, not Favre and that was after Rodgers. The retirement talk has also undergone revisionist history. Once Love got there, Favre with his own personal locker room started to hem and haw and then it became STRONGLY tied to him due to the 2008 retirement/comebck, then the Jets retirement, then the Vikings 2 seasons. He was NOT "holding the Packers hostage" before they drafted Aaron Rodgers. He ALSO said(similar to Rodgers) in 2004 that he wanted to play until at least 40. So there was no real such speculation that Favre was going to retire after 2004(I guess we're going a year before the player was drafted unless you mean 2020). Huh? How did the collective bargaining agreement change the scenario? It actually made MORE sense with the 5th year option to move up and draft a QB early. The CBA at the time made it make LESS sense to draft a QB and sit them as there was no rookie wage scale...but that was ultimately irrelevant as the picks in the 20s didn't get the massive Sam Bradford type deals. I'm genuinely curious how the CBA plays into this at all in your argument in this scenario. Rodgers made more relative to the cap than Love has on his rookie deal, so that...just doesn't make any sense. So...after watching Rodgers win an MVP in back to back year, you're "fully confident" that if the Packers had any confidence, the team that had lost in the playoffs two previous years to the Super Bowl Champ and had been in the NFCCG 2 of the last 3 years, THEY would have gone with their young QB? I...don't believe you really believe that. If Rodgers was in SF and the Packers were in the position they are today, but with THAT team, with Deebo, Kittle, McCaffery, Trent Williams, that defense, and he was playing at an MVP level, the decision to draft Love would be a complete afterthought OTHER than to blame that choice on the decision to trade Favre. You don't trade a back to back MVP because you have "any confidence" in a 23 year old QB at that point. In hindsight, sure, that probably would have been better, but it is...absurd to throw this out there like it was obvious. This fan base would have revolted if they'd willingly(meaning he wasn't forcing it) traded Aaron Rodgers after last season. One more point. The Packers had little intention of drafting Rodgers. Just like with Love, they believed he'd be gone well before their pick(and particularly in that QB draft class). So this idea that the Rodgers pick was calculated because of Favre's talk about retirement...which again, hadn't actually started yet aside from Driver throwing it out there as his own personal opinion, it holds no weight. I REALLY don't think you remember just how awful Rodgers looked when he played his first 2 1/2 years(whenever the Dallas game was in year 3). I do kinda think it's funny how legends grow. This idea that everyone knew how great Rodgers was his first two years, how he was this can't miss prospect because the 49ers didn't immediately announce who they were going to draft(though the overwhelming consensus was always Alex Smith). I'd suggest going back and looking at actual scouting reports from Aaron Rodgers coming out(and no, not just one that's positive and then showing me, I'm suggesting you do it to spark your own memory). Or the reports on Rodgers after the first couple pre-seasons. Now...I'll let you get the last word in. I don't really care at this point and what's happened has happened, so going back and relitigating it seems pointless. Hypotheticals are one thing, harping on a moves made a few years ago...seems pointless.

I've been making this argument for a while now, but I don't think we've seen as much SS talent as we have in MLB in a VERY long time. There are just SO many teams who either have established SS stars, elite young SS prospects...a guy like Carlos Correa would NORMALLY have no trouble getting 300M. Trea Turner would have been locked up. And then Dansby Swanson was the 3rd rated FA overall(behind Aaron Judge because...Jim Bowden exists, but still, he IS a very good SS). And then you have Xander Boegarts who's going to be a FA. I just went by real quick and did a team by team on their SS situation without really getting too far into just the likelihood of a team spending money, but...I deleted it on accident. Literally how ALMOST every team either has an elite SS, a young SS or a couple like Oakland who aren't going to be in the bidding anyway. I'll do a recap. ALE-NYY(Volpe(5), Peraza~45), Balt(Henderson(2), Holliday(13), TB Franco and prospects, Tor, Bichette+a top 50 prospects ALC-Minn looks like they'll try and re-sign Correa, even if unlikely, they have two top SS prospects. Cleveland-Loaded farm system, 26 year old SS ChW-Tim Anderson+Their top prospect KC-Bobby Witt Jr ALW-Oak-didn't bother looking. Hou-a 25 year old coming off a ~5 WAR season who was just ALCS MVP and WS MVP...and expenses elsewhere. LAA-The first team I think could invest, but they also have Ohtani, Trout, Rendon and no pitching. Seattle-JP Crawford Texas-Just signed Seager and Seimen NLE- ATL-Trying to re-sign Dansby, but they have 5 stud position players locked up and their #1 prospect Vaughn played 2B last year when Albies was out. Miami, Philly-Both could spend on a SS. NYM-Lindor NLC- Pitt-Cruz is a core piece, plus a SS with a 70 hit tool and another top ~70 prospect who is a plus defender. And they don't spend money and if they do, it won't be on a SS. STL-They've got Edman and a top 50 prospect with a 80 arm and a 60 grade defensively who's in AA and a top ~50. ChC-Their best player, Nico Hoener Cincy-4 of their top 5 prospects are SS and they're all rated in the top 70 including the guy they got for Castillo. So the 14th and the 17th best prospects are SS's who are close. Brewers-I wouldn't even include Turang if this was any other team because he's not rated, so it's a superficial "rating," but it speaks to what teams would be inclined to spend on a SS rather than other positions. NLW-AZ-#12 prospect is a SS, Lawlar, the #2 pick a couple years ago and he's in AA. SFG-They have Crawford who's 35 and then Luciano(16) who has a cannon but might not stick at SS. LAD-They will likely sign one of the 4 SSs IMO, probably Turner, but they have Lux and if not, they're in play. SDP-They have Kim who put up 5.1 WAR this year, Jake Crownenworth who held down SS when Tatis got injured and Tatis could always move back to SS...PLUS their top prospect, also SS. Col-They have a 21 year old SS with a 60 arm and a 70 field already up at the MLB level. So...obviously there aren't "too many" good Shortstops and teams can always move players off the position, but looking back at least year, there wasn't the demand for SS that people were expecting. Seager took the Rangers deal first, but Correa had to settle for a 3 year deal with a PO so he could get back into FA. Story and Baez were looking for 200M+ and didn't come close. The Red Sox offered to add 20M and one more year to Xander Boegart's deal...which he apparently found insulting. All these talented young SSs and I think there are 4-5 teams at most who will spend for them and that's assuming the Twins and Marlins are going to behave uncharacteristically and spend big. Both teams are rumored to be all in on Correa, but beyond that, where do the other 3 go? I think in addition to pitchers getting shorter deals with massive AAV, I think Shortstops are going to struggle to get paid what we'd have expected. Just a couple trends I think we're going to see. Of course, another way to look at it, if you can play SS, you can usually play 3rd(even if you haven't played it since 2013). I don't know what that means, but if we go into this off-season and say...Dansby Swanson gets ~25 per year over 6 years and Correa and Turner end up closer to 200 than 300(more Turner, I expect Correa to cash in)...that could impact what Willy Adames is willing to sign for. All this to say, I'd hold the line at 6/90 with 2 option years at ~25M and a 8M buyout. Guarantee him 6/98. And I'd only do that after Burnes and Woodruff turned down deals. But I definitely wouldn't use two deals that just one year in look very bad for players who'd vastly out-performed Adames...though I do understand the rationale. It DOES seem like he COULD be headed for 6-7 WAR seasons at his peak. If the defense comes and his BA/OBP rebounds, then that's an MVP candidate. But I wouldn't just trust that.

Then shouldn't the starting point be the production of the players who are being compared to him for salary purposes include their best years rather than ignoring them and including their worst years while including Adames best years? If we're talking about both current and future value, do you think that's a large enough sample size to compare Baez, Story and Adames? It's like comparing the last 3 years and saying Mike Trout and George Springer are comparable because Trout has 9.9 WAR from 2020-2022 and Springer has 8.6. Stats tell the story you want them to tell when presented in a certain way.