UpandIn

Yeah, that's not cap space though. To create cap space, they'd have to renounce Middleton and Lopez...~40M, Lopez is a little over 20M, Ingles is nearly 8M, Carter has a PO for 2.4M and they need to find a way to keep him. That's obvious already. So yeah, they could create...12M in salary cap space, but you could only sign Lopez and Middleton for either 12M combined or you could use the MLE which would be ~5M then after...but you wouldn't be able to sign probably either player for 12M. Ingles could be re-signed, Carter should be given the tax payers MLE and hope he taxes it(it's insanely early). But we can't renounce Middleton and Lopez, the only way to create cap space, and then re-sign them. Otherwise teams would just renounce all their cap holds, like the Lakers who had LBJ and AD coming up at the same time, renounce them, then sign a player for 25M and then still go back and max out LeBron and AD. That's the purpose of the cap holds.

I'm going to add some caveats that you probably don't need. The question's pretty simple, should we trade whomever we can't extend of these three right now for the most likely best possible return, or do you give it one more run and then see if they can get hot like the Phillies did and ride those two aces and maybe some young players like Frelick, Mitchell...and by the end of next year, Uribe, Gasser, who knows who develops, but see if we can make a run. Or do we just sell high, get 60-80 years of service time, stop top prospects. I put together some proposals that I think are reasonable. I suppose most of these deals could be on the table by the trade deadline as injuries, pitchers going down, teams surprisingly competing, they may offer the same or more, but it's more about this year vs next. So here are what I think are more realistic packages. Do you think we should pull the trigger or not? Burnes=1 top ~25 prospect, 1 top ~75 2 more top ~100. Dodgers have been among the teams talked about the most because they have exactly what type of players we're looking for and they have a need. https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/depth-charts/dodgers This has Miller 40th and Vargas as the 10th rated prospect in the organization(somehow) while Stone is the #90 overall prospect. So a Dodgers trade would be Bobby Miller(27), Miguel Vargas(44), Ryan Pepiot(#74 Gavin Stone(#77) per MLB.com The Dodgers need a true ace. They could spent for him or they could trade for him. Burnes is from the area. I think we need to sweeten this deal with maybe a Ruiz or even a Mitchell, but I believe you get at least ONE ace out of this trio and maybe 2 and a dominant reliever. Miller has the makeup of an ace throwing triple digits at times with a mid 90s sinker, 60 slider, 60 change, 55 curve and while his grade is a 55 for control, his walk rates have been very good. Vargas could stick at 3B with a big arm, but probably a 1B. Hits for a high average and per MLB.com, could win multiple batting titles. Stone's upside could be the best prospect of the group while Bruns may have the best pure stuff, but he hasn't pitched above A+ ball. Sits in the upper 90s, touches 100, needs to work on his delivery to realize his potential. Could be a elite closer, but is only 20 years old. Woodruff ` top ~30, 3 in the top `125 range. For fangraphs rankings and projected lineup(for instance, they have Jobe as the #58 overall prospect) you can look here; https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/depth-charts/tigers The Rangers just graduated several of the top prospects in baseball including a couple cornerstone corner IFers, they signed Javy Beaz, they have young pitchers. They're in a very winnable division and they seem like they need a staff ace and their young players to develop to get them over the hump. Det(#38 Jackson Jobe RHP), Wilmer Flores RHP(#100), Ty Madden(Det #4), Ryan Keidler(Det #7 SS/3B). Willy Adames-1 top ~50, 2 top 150 prospects. (Abel is #20 overall by fangraphs). The Phillies already have about ~170M in payroll commitments, came a couple games away from a WS despite getting very little from their SS. Jean Segura has a 17M Team Option and they're expected to be a team going after a Shortstop this off-season. Willy Adames hitting around Bryce Harper, JT Realmuto, Schwarber, etc...Bryan Scott can move over to 2B which is a black hole as of now. Abel is in AA and has TOR type stuff. McGarry and Miller are both AAA pitchers with big time velo and stuff, but with command issues or other warts keeping them from realizing their potential...which is why they're ranked where they are. Both throw about ~100, they just need to get it over the plate. The Brewers pitching school does as good a job as anyone at helping these guys figure it out. Phillies Mick Abel-RHP(#54), Griff McGarry LHP(Phil #4), Erik Miller(#7) Downside-You probably struggle to win 70 games this next year. Upside, even though you suck, you get to see Frelick, Wiemer, Mitchell, Gasser, Ashby, Peralta, probably all 4 Dodger prospects, all 3 Phillies prospects, probably 1 or 2 of the Tigers prospects, maybe Black maybe, give Hiura another run. Slash the payroll to ~75M and hopefully they can put that back into the team in ~2024-25 when our current group and the pitchers we acquired should be in sync rather than pressing for the last year or the Burnes/Woodruff/Adames years. Push the payroll up to 160 for a few years if we slash it now.

Yes, but in modern English, we've flipped it. It's etymology is old English saying effectively the same thing, but the way we say it doesn't make sense. "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Well...then keep the damn cake! I only want it if I can eat it! The original version is; "would yee both eat your cake and have your cake?" Now that makes sense. The other way around though? Makes no sense. In Cooks case, this was getting paid a big bonus, saying he didn't want to get traded...and then pouting when the Packers(or whomever) couldn't afford to trade for him(or apparently it was more that they didn't value him as they did offer a 1st for DJ Moore from the Panthers who has a bigger base next year).

Stroud is different than your typical OSU QB...but I'm also not sure he's big enough for the cold in GB. Will Levis is the guy I'd be interested in and is probably more realistic. I think Young/Stroud will be gone in the top 5 picks and...I do think this team will go on a LITTLE bit of a run. He looks like a mix of Andrew Luck, Justin Herbert but less refined than Luck(though who wasn't). I still think we're going to watch #12 under center for another year or two, but if we don't, he's a 6'4 240 QB with athletic ability and a huge arm. The type of guy who could open up the MLF offense quite a bit more...MLF wouldn't have to share his playbook with Rodgers and he could kinda develop his own scheme, incorporate a little more RPO with the QB being part of that R option. Honestly, anything sounds better right now than a Packers team that's not even good enough to get to the post-season and break out hearts.

I don't buy that thumb's healthy. He's holding it constantly and said it was still bothering him. Plus, Bakh was off the injury report for his knee...so, I'm not sure that means it's healthy. BUT I think you're also right that he's fallen back into old habits, throwing off his heels, making simple throws from a poor platform when it's NOT necessary. Just because you CAN make a throw falling backward doesn't mean it should be your go-to. Nobody is talented enough to throw like that consistently. I don't particularly care about the cap hit because we're a non-profit and we can spend 300M a year and still make 100M, so we could stay on the figurative hamster wheel indefinitely(though obviously it's preferable to not be in that situation). Also just about every contender is in bad shape cap wise, all catching up from 2020. But if you're telling me the next Jake Herbert(Will Levis) or Desaun Watson(Bryce Young)...sans the...massage issues, if they're available, I'm good with that too. And if we can't get the QB we think is a difference maker, a franchise QB, at least get the OL ready for when we do. Drafting a QB would mean Rodgers is retiring...I'd think. No way he's gonna come back if we use a top ~15 pick on another QB. So we could take the next BPA and if Love isn't good enough, then we'll likely be picking in the top 10 again in '24. I also really do believe in the pure talent on this team. Jaire, Jenkins, Gary, Watson, Doubs, Quay, Wyatt, Enagbare, Tom, Toure, Myers, Dillon, Kylin Hill(who'll take Aaron Jones role next year I think). Stokes, Slaton, Clark...just too many players who aren't healthy or playing consistent. Bakh is the embodiment of that. You know he's elite when he's on the field. You don't know if he'll be on the field play to play. We tried to mesh the young with the veterans and we are clearly a year away and questions remain about Bakh and company. We can also still trade Rodgers this year. The Cap hit would be minimal and I'm sure there are teams who'd be happy to take him. Maybe Tampa wants a QB and he wants to play with Evans, Godwin and company? Tenn wanted him, Nola. And it'd be an 8M cap hit to trade him and the other team would only have a 15M cap hit(you'd have to figure out the roster bonus, but this contract was structured in a way that Rodgers had autonomy over his career). My feeling is he plays another 2 years. But regardless, you need to keep developing that OL. Detroit has built their team that way. By the time the draft comes around, the Packers will already have made their mind up on Rodgers roster bonus which triggers those massive cap hits in '24 and '25.

Yup. And the OL wasn't great, they couldn't get the running game going(but with Zach Tom playing, he's not physical enough to really move guys). A couple weeks ago I took issue with his...behavior on field and some off-field comments(EDIT-I meant to say I thought he'd been much more positive this past week and...walked some of that back a bit). I know he was hopeful at the trade deadline, but the Packers went out and offered a #1 for DJ Moore(thank you Carolina for passing on that) and a #2 for Claypool(not sure why they wouldn't meet the 2nd and 5th Denver was asking for, but maybe it's because that wasn't actually their asking price). But the two picks, 100% on him. Great play by Hutchinson sniffing that out and dropping, but loft that up there. The 1st, he didn't have a throwing lane. Bakhtiari coming back in on that final drive tells me that his knee IS structurally sound....it just hurts. That means it's not going away and I'd guess(pointing out I do not have an MD in front of my name) that his knee is bone on bone and or at least close to it. So the thumb probably hurts causing his throws to be off. He missed that Toure deep ball he'd normally make. There were other 3rd down balls he threw low. They were catchable, but he's just off. The WRers can't stay healthy enough. #1 priority for this team this off-season upon learning what Rodgers plans on doing is go out and use that ~10-12 pick on a guy like Parris Johnson or Broderick Jones. Both guys who are freak athletes who can also play guard. Also, again, fire Joe Barry. The defense wasn't the problem, but it SHOULD be a suffocating, dominant D and it's just...not. It's no the problem, that's very clearly the two highest paid players in AAV on the team, Rodgers and Bakh not playing to their expectations...but this defense was supposed to be Legion of Boom type dominant and it's been, "Rodgers era good." Which is to say, just not terrible.

I agree...but not just to extend the "window" for Rodgers. Do not draft a WRer to put an end to the "The Packers haven't used a 1st on a WRer in...." If I had 5 picks in the 1st round and had a bad team...in a deep OL class, I'd be fine taking 5 OL. And if Bakhtiari comes back next year and his knee is stronger and he can play a full season, WONDERFUL. Then we'll have too much OL depth...which will mean barely enough for us. Parris Johnson is a long, athletic OT. -He's smart and seems like a genuinely good dude working with kids. Broderick Jones -He's not just a good pass rushing LT, he's a big physical mauler who's also good in pass pro vs speed rushers Peter Skoronski -Grandpa played for Lombari's 5 Championship teams. He's a day one starter with flawless technique. -All three of these players can kick inside...particularly Skoronski who has shorter arms and is the worst athlete of the group. So again, IF Bakh or Caleb Jones or Rasheed Walker prove they're SOO much better than this year or just healthier, we have another stud inside. ---Long shot Will Anderson He's the best player in that draft class and could wreck havoc next to Gary. He'd have to fall for some reason...and that reason would likely be QBs and OL. It'd also mean we end up with ~5/6 wins. WRer-Only if there's a guy there who is an absolute beast. A All Pro caliber. We drafted talented WRers this year. They'll develop and we'll draft one or two next year. We can't chase a pick for Rodgers. Again, if that 6'4 kid from TCU, or Addison or Bouttte or Rice from SMU are can't miss prospects, take them. Otherwise, wait and develop one. If you're going to try and pry that window back open for a year or two after this one, in addition to needing to get lucky, you'll need to make the right picks, not draft for need. Plus, in a year from now, you'd hope Doubs, Watson, Toure(who looks actually impressive, though maybe it's just relative to the shite we're comparing him to). They should grow together. Will Levis if he's as good as they say could be an option. Anthony Richardson in the 2nd round could be interesting. Hooker. These are all guys we could trade up for in the 2nd round or take in the 1st if Rodgers retires(or even if he doesn't). I hate that we're talking about the draft at this point, but I still believe this team has Superstar caliber talent all over the roster. This year has just been an unmitigated disaster, but fix the OL, then add to the WR/TE via trade or in the later rounds, but get a player for the next 10 years, not just the next 1 or 2. (I'm also quite certain everyone else hates when this team loses because of my long, inane ranting posts to try and make me think up a way the Packers can still win in the near term).

Well...overall, the good news; 1-We'll get a new DC in 2023 Edit-I meant DC, not GM. 2-We'll get a top 10-15 pick most likely. Someone more likely to be a difference maker in year 1. 3-Rodgers is almost certainly coming back....that may not belong in this group based on his current play, but I still believe it's positive. 4-We drafted what LOOKS like 3 very good young WRers in Watson, Doubs and Toure. We should be in position to get a franchise LT or another immediate impact WRer next year in the 1st round. 5-Quay, Wyatt, Tom, Enagbare...they're all very nice rookies and should get better(along with the aforementioned rookies). 6-The price on Jenkins extension is dropping significantly. The Bad -Salary cap -Still no clue if Jordan Love is good. -Watching this team is just painful. Not painful in the same way it's been the last few years painful...like when you're getting a filling and the Dentist hits a nerve and you DON'T expect it, it's more like...knowing your tooth and nerves aren't numbed and having to KNOW that sharp pain is coming. -This team has enough young talent combined with veteran talent that there is reason to believe they could turn it around without TOO many moves this off-season. -JOE BARRY WILL NOT BE BACK IN GREEN BAY. The last one is absolutely not "THEE" problem. In fact, with literally any other Packers led offense, this defense would be good enough to get the Packers to 10+ wins. Still, a good defensive coordinator puts his players in positions to look their best. The least you can expect a Defensive coordinator to do is has success as long as you have talent. This offense is shite, particularly with the injury issues. This defense is elite 1-18, starters and depth. They play 2 schemes. Press man or cover 4 where they drop the safeties. nothing interesting. Nothing unique. Nothing unexpected(just the opposite). 2023 could be better...at least I hope it is, because a couple years are gonna be rough...particularly if Rodgers leaves and we run out the clock on Love.

I don't think it was that we didn't need a RB or a TE. We needed both. We didn't need a QB, but as the old saying goes, that's the best time to draft one. The problem with this team is NOT the 1st 3 rounds in the 2020 draft. I mean, had they traded up for Jefferson, it could have been a solution, but Tee Higgins or Chase Claypool isn't solving our problems. Jordan Love....I still have no clue how good he is, but if Rodgers comes back next year(and I think his ego is too big to retire on a 6-11 team) then we'll likely never find out.

I wouldn't be surprised if this team ends up 9-8...but if I had to bet on it, I'd guess top 10 pick. And if I'm picking in the top 10, it's not going to be a WRer just to get a WRer. In the first round it's going to be an impact OT, Edge or if there's some different maker, a Kyle Pitts unique player available, some random player who's too good to pass up. If Quentin Johnston is the BPA among a handful of positions, all the better. Hell, I might take a QB. Bakhtiari is still a great LT...when he's playing. It's been 2 years. He can't play every possession. Ergo, he can't be a franchise LT. I'll keep him one more year if his knee continues to get stronger since you'll only save 6M. I'd also ask him to take a pay cut next year. Cut his base salary. It's kinda the least he can do given he's played very little since signing a ~94M extension(Thank you again Bill O'Brien). I think as bad as this team is right now, they're closer to being competitive than it appears. Let Tom add some weight Watson and Doubs aren't going to be #1 and #2 WRers this year, but could be big contributors next year. Sit Watson the next couple weeks, try and get him back healthy, His talent is...SO obvious, but he is like a china doll right now. 2 concussions...maybe IR and then let him come back and get into a rhythm. Either way, next pat on the head is going to give him another concussion and I'm not being funny. 2 in 2 weeks is scary from a fan perspective. It should scare him and the organization more for his personnel well being. MAYBE give Rodgers some time off as that thumb is obviously making him less effective(which they won't do) and I guess take a look at Love(though he'd still be playing with the same OL and the same terrible receiving core, so what are we really gonna learn). Gotta say...I am glad Carolina turned down the 1st for Moore and the Steelers took the Bears 2 for Claypool. I wish the trade deadline was ONE week later. See if you could dump Savage for a 5th or 6th. Jarran Reed is a nice interior player. Um....Adrian Amos I guess(though I suspect we'll try and re-sign him...we take a big cap hit if we don't sign him before the end of the season with his void years accelerating). Oh, and don't touch Odell Beckham. Let him go to a team that has a chance. Unless you rip off 4 in a row...that ain't you.

They're required to list the job. They can't just name him HC. They need to list it and take applicants for...I don't know, 14 days or something. Makes sense in most areas of the University. It's kinda silly with regard to sports. So I don't think he'll officially be named HC until The end of Feb? Maybe it's March.

5/130 He's not deGrom, he's not a FA. No player options until MAYBE the final year. We're committing to him in case of injury, not in case he pitches really well. He gets 130M guaranteed and he gets to hit the market again at age 33. 6/200 is basically giving a player with 2 years left ~43M a year 2 years before he hits FA. I don't doubt he'd be able to get that as a FA, but he's not one. 5/130 GTD 10 SB 10-'23 20-'24 25-'25 25-'26 25-'27 40-'28 (Mutual Option 5 buyout) I'm also not deferring payment unless it's at the same price. The deferred money lowers the value of the contract. If you're waiting 15 years to pay some of it out, you should be paying at least 150. So 37.5 the last 3 years. That just isn't the best way to keep your books clean and it's not necessary. The Brewers can push their payroll into the ~150 range with the new TV money. If Burnes passes I'm going to Woodruff and offering 5/110. If neither sign, I'm not actively trading them, but I'm taking offers. The final thing I'm not doing is...signing any checks of having any say in the matters, so who knows. But I think Mark A will make an aggressive offer. I'm gonna guess he comes in around the Luis Castillo deal, maybe a bit over and Burnes turns it down. But I hope I'm wrong.

5/130 He's not deGrom, he's not a FA. No player options until MAYBE the final year. We're committing to him in case of injury, not in case he pitches really well. He gets 130M guaranteed and he gets to hit the market again at age 33. 6/200 is basically giving a player with 2 years left ~43M a year 2 years before he hits FA. I don't doubt he'd be able to get that as a FA, but he's not one. 5/130 GTD 10 SB 10-'23 20-'24 25-'25 25-'26 25-'27 40-'28 (Mutual Option 5 buyout) I'm also not deferring payment unless it's at the same price. The deferred money lowers the value of the contract. If you're waiting 15 years to pay some of it out, you should be paying at least 150. So 37.5 the last 3 years. That just isn't the best way to keep your books clean and it's not necessary. The Brewers can push their payroll into the ~150 range with the new TV money. If Burnes passes I'm going to Woodruff and offering 5/110. If neither sign, I'm not actively trading them, but I'm taking offers. The final thing I'm not doing is...signing any checks of having any say in the matters, so who knows. But I think Mark A will make an aggressive offer. I'm gonna guess he comes in around the Luis Castillo deal, maybe a bit over and Burnes turns it down. But I hope I'm wrong.

Well, that's why I'm saying they'd need a bunch of prospects to really hit. 3-4 months can change a lot. Guys like Joyce, Madden, Neto, O'Hoppe, they could be interesting. The Angels seem like they've been drafting for need for a while now, but this last class actually looks pretty interesting. But yes, their system does look like trash compared to the teams we're talking about. I'd also venture to guess we're going to be very disappointed in the return. Especially the longer we wait. The Luis Castillo deal will likely be closer to the return than a...Grayson Rodriguez, Westburg/Holliday+ return.

I really wish we could add a 0 to Mark Attanasio's net worth....and then double that. Imagine a 300M payroll? This is stupid money for a closer, but...ya just knew Cohen was going to pay it. What other team do you think would pay 100M for a closer? Even a...insanely good one?

I really wish we could add a 0 to Mark Attanasio's net worth....and then double that. Imagine a 300M payroll? This is stupid money for a closer, but...ya just knew Cohen was going to pay it. What other team do you think would pay 100M for a closer? Even a...insanely good one?

Honestly...the only reason I haven't cancelled my subscription is laziness. Nobody covers the Brewers...so they use Will Sammon because he used to and kinda knows. Jim Bowden is employed there(that really is in and of itself reason enough). Keith Law is empl....just swap his name out in the last sentence. It used to actually be insightful.

Honestly...the only reason I haven't cancelled my subscription is laziness. Nobody covers the Brewers...so they use Will Sammon because he used to and kinda knows. Jim Bowden is employed there(that really is in and of itself reason enough). Keith Law is empl....just swap his name out in the last sentence. It used to actually be insightful.

Well, I consider a tank job intentionally losing or making your team worse and I could see you argue you're doing that here, I'd argue you'd be worse for a year, but unlike any other? I'd view it as a team just kinda taking a step back and re-loading so that the prospects they are acquiring match-up with the prospects they've already got in-house. You already know you can't re-sign all 3 players...so I'd focus on Woodruff and then supplement Woody, Peralta, Ashby, Gasser with those 4 pitchers. I'd insist on Stone back(which would just make the Dodgers even less likely to do it). I also think you're being a bit hyperbolic on how bad they'd be. I think that'd be a team that'd be in the .500 range, with a realistic range of 75-85 wins(and I think capable of much more if Vargas hits right away and those pitchers come in and contribute, even if just out of the BP) and then by '24 I think they'd be absolutely stacked and a better version of this years Cleveland team. Young, they'd have a whole staff of flame throwers, a lot of young position prospects. And again, obviously I'm talking about just that Dodgers trade. Stone, Pepiot, Miller, Grove, Bruns...you're kinda recreating Woody and Burnes coming in as long relievers, but again, you'd have a better TOR with the actual Woodruff, Peralta and whoever emerges as the next starters. But these are all the reasons I don't think the Dodgers would do it. Give up 36 years of team control of VERY talented prospects on one of the top farm systems(or 42 depending on if you go with Buehler or another prospect). And you're really just losing likely a year of team control since we know we're not going to go with Burnes, Woody and Adames and get nothing back for them. Attendance would take a hit, fans would be upset, but winning solves all that and ultimately, this is the type of trade I, again, don't think would be offered, but I don't think you could afford to turn down if you're the Brewers.

I think deGrom gets the shorter contract because he wants the shorter deal. Maybe he'll get a 5/200 with a PO after the 2nd year. I don't know. Verlander on the other hand, I think he'll want the longer deal and he's showing no signs of regression. It also falls in line with pitchers getting shorter deals with higher AAV. New TV money coming in(not NFL type money, but more) and I don't think Verlander has trouble getting ~40AAV and 3 years. Now if deGrom wants a longer deal, I'm sure he'll get it. Beyond those top 2, I think Rodon is pretty accurate and then I think Bowden is...well, typical Bowden. Diaz is looking for 100M and I think he'll get it. He'll set the record for a reliever I would think and being on the Mets already, I think it's just that much more of a given. Maybe he comes in short of 100. I don't think you can get Senga 3/72. That seems like too much, but for a FA pitcher without a posting fee...and one who throws 100 with a plus-plus splitter(apparently, obviously I've just seen a couple pitches from Twitter). BUT-If you think that is ridiculous(which I'd understand, but disagree with). Did you see Keith Law's top 50 Free Agent list? Carlos Correa. Ok, 28 year old franchise SS, played and played well in several post-seasons. Trea Turner #2...alright. Makes sense. He's older, relies on speed, not the defender. #3 Dansby Swanson... If you just read his top 3, you'd think he forgot about that guy in NY who just put up one of the top offensive seasons in MLB HISTORY. Lots of nonsense after that.

I think deGrom gets the shorter contract because he wants the shorter deal. Maybe he'll get a 5/200 with a PO after the 2nd year. I don't know. Verlander on the other hand, I think he'll want the longer deal and he's showing no signs of regression. It also falls in line with pitchers getting shorter deals with higher AAV. New TV money coming in(not NFL type money, but more) and I don't think Verlander has trouble getting ~40AAV and 3 years. Now if deGrom wants a longer deal, I'm sure he'll get it. Beyond those top 2, I think Rodon is pretty accurate and then I think Bowden is...well, typical Bowden. Diaz is looking for 100M and I think he'll get it. He'll set the record for a reliever I would think and being on the Mets already, I think it's just that much more of a given. Maybe he comes in short of 100. I don't think you can get Senga 3/72. That seems like too much, but for a FA pitcher without a posting fee...and one who throws 100 with a plus-plus splitter(apparently, obviously I've just seen a couple pitches from Twitter). BUT-If you think that is ridiculous(which I'd understand, but disagree with). Did you see Keith Law's top 50 Free Agent list? Carlos Correa. Ok, 28 year old franchise SS, played and played well in several post-seasons. Trea Turner #2...alright. Makes sense. He's older, relies on speed, not the defender. #3 Dansby Swanson... If you just read his top 3, you'd think he forgot about that guy in NY who just put up one of the top offensive seasons in MLB HISTORY. Lots of nonsense after that.

Sure am.

I like Mitchell, but I'm not as bullish on him....but fair enough. That's 4 pitchers, 3 who are MLB ready, a corner IFer who should hit for average and power, and a young pitcher who could very easily be a closer by '24...or an ace. He does have a upper 90s FB and 2 other plus pitches.

And what deal do you think is going to be better than;

I don' think it is. I think it's going to be very close to years and AAV.